The purpose of this blog is to expose the truths of NYSED, NYS OCFS, Niagara County Department of Social Services, City of North Tonawanda School District, and numerous other agencies in order to facilitate change where needed to protect the rights of youth in education and the rights of parents to the care, education and upbringing of their children. In 2010 this blog was expanded to present relevant information from state and national news.
"America's Sweetheart', Miss Anita Waistline, is one of five nominees for Best Female Newcomer who were selected by overall community involvement.
Mike Mangus, Miss Anita Waistline
North Tonawanda, New York – ‘America’s Sweetheart’, Miss Anita Waistline, has been nominated for the 2nd Annual Buffalo Creative Black Tie Awards, a fundraiser for Reign 19 of the Imperial Court of Buffalo.
A female illusionist, also known as Mike Mangus, Miss Waistline is extremely happy about the nomination. “I am very excited about the nomination and look forward to the continued support of my fans”, she said.
One of New York’s youngest Drag Queens, she has been performing as a female illusionist for a little over two years in several clubs throughout New York State and Southern Ontario including, Club Marcella, Illusions, Adonia’s, Pure, Sky Bar, and The Embassy in Hamilton. Her creative expression ranges from glamorous to androgynous. She is listed with The Drag Queen Registry (a world-wide directory of Drag Queens),has her sights set on Provincetown, MA and, of course, the 2011 Buffalo Creative Black Tie Awards.
Communities on both sides of the US/Canadian border will be able to continue their support for their favorite nominee by casting ballots that are available at bars in Buffalo, NY, Jamestown, NY, Erie, PA, and in Hamilton and St. Catharines, ON. The cost of the ballot is $1.00, and is available until January 2, 2011.
The event, hosted by Imperial Crown Prince XX, Jeramie Rutland, is scheduled for Sunday, January 9th, 2011 at Club Marcella, located at 622 Main Street, Buffalo NY.
Author of "Exhibit" Alleges Fraud and Obstruction of Rule of Law by NY State's Top Judge, Jonathan Lippman.
On March 23, 2010, Human Rights Advocate and Survivor, Miriam Snyder, requested certified copies of (among others) New York State Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman's Official Bond and Undertaking and Oath of Office as noticed in this Scribd. "Exhibit: Jonathan Lippman Defraud[s] the US,...". The request was made pursuant to Public Officers Law, Article 2. It states, in part: "A judicial officer of the Unified Court System should file his or her oath or affirmation with the New York State Department of State (if he or she is a "state officer") or with the office specified by Public Officers Law Section 10 (if he or she is a "local officer") and, in addition, must file a copy of his or her oath or affirmation with the Office of Court Administration."
According to the "Exhibit" a Certified copy of the Oath of Office as NYS Judge was not produced for Lippman. An April 1, 2010 response to Snyder's request from Shawn Kerby, Assistant Deputy Counsel for the State of New York Unified Court System, reveals a copy (allegedly non-certified) of the Oath was forwarded to Snyder (See, Scribd. "Exhibit", p 2).
In the latest development, the Court has decided on the letter motion, keeping the documents sealed without prejudice.
Defendants and NYS OCFS are seeking to hide their misconduct from the public by forcing Plaintiff, Anntwanisha Thompson, to file documents "off-the-books" in the matter of Thompson v. Johnson, et al, a civil action filed by Elmer Robert Keach III, who represents the family of Darryl Thompson.
Darryl Thompson, a 15 year old from the Bronx, died in November 2006 after being restrained by two aides at the state-run Tryon Residential Center in Johnstown. An autopsy conducted by Medical Examiner, Dr. Michael Sikirica, ruled Thompson's death a homicide, yet a Fulton County grand jury declined to indict the two aides involved (John P. Johnson and Robert Murphy).
A letter motion, pursuant to the Court's direction, was filed earlier this month by Keach to The Honorable Andrew T. Baker, federal judge for the US District Court for the Northern District of New York to request the unsealing of all documents submitted to the Court. It states, in part, "...the Plaintiff's efforts to learn the truth about her son's death were used against her, in that in order to gain information about how Darryl died, the Plaintiff was forced to agree to a restrictive protective order that required court sealing. The Plaintiff specifically requested that she be provided with an opportunity to revisit the sealing provisions of the order at the appropriate time, and she does so by this letter motion."
Thompson suggests that all documents submitted to the US District Court for the Northern District of New York are judicial documents. To that end, NYS OCFS forcing "off-the-books" litigation not only does not serve the interests of justice, it also precludes the public from being able to access documents upon which the US District Court for the Northern District of New York will make its decisions.
Thompson also requested to take the depositions of Jeffrey Delorme and Robert Hoefs due to the uncertainty amongst the Defendants as to who was present during Thompson's restraint and death. While not Defendants in this action, the depositions of Delorme and Hoefs are said to be "...highly relevant to this litigation..." They are represented by the New York State Attorney General's office, who has refused to allow them to be deposed.
It should be noted well that my son, Michael, was never truant or unlawfully detained from school. Michael was under the care of, not one but two, medical professionals who never released their demand for home-instruction.
In New York State it is a Class A Misdemeanor to file a false report with CPS. Principal James V. Fisher and City of North Tonawanda School District Child Associate Rosemary Fox were well-aware of the circumstances surrounding Michael's absence from school, yet they made the false reports to CPS. In effect, they circulated information known to be false and misused a state agency.
In light of all of the facts, several state agencies, including NYS OCFS, refused to let me file charges against North Tonawanda High School Principal James V. Fisher for filing a false report. In fact, NYS OCFS found 'no wrong-doing' by Principal Fisher. Given this, I did not attempt to bring any charges against Rosemary Fox. Ms. Fox filed the second false report the following school year (2006-2007).
Last month NYS OCFS released a 'Policy Brief' prepared by the Vera Institute of Justice.
To this end, Chief Judge Honorable Jonathan Lippman, who denied my Motion for Permission for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Appeals at a session of the Court, held at Court of Appeals Hall in the City of Albany on the second day of September, 2010, has recently received "kudos" for his crackdown on foreclosure practices. It's unfortunate that Judge Lippman does not follow the same procedures in his own Court.
The hypocrisy: "We can't have the process being a fraud," New York State ChiefJudgeJonathanLippman said in announcing the new procedure. "It has to be real and based on credible information."
RELEASE: October 25, 2010 -- The New York State Office of Children and Family Services (OCFS) today released “Getting Teenagers Back to School: Rethinking New York State’s Response to Chronic Absence,” a policy brief researched and written for the agency by the Vera Institute of Justice in partnership with Casey Family Programs.
"What their brief does not begin to explore is false filings of educational neglect charges, and why there are no investigations into this aspect. " ~ Rhonda Mangus, North Tonawanda , NY
Chief Judge Lippman’s decision to deny the motion for leave to appeal to the court of appeals presents a classic example of distorted conception of the facts and of the law upon all papers submitted thereon.
Assistant Solicitor General Zainab Chaudhry, of Counsel for Andrew M. Cuomo, current Attorney General of the State of New York, admits in her Memorandum In Opposition To Motion For Leave To Appeal (p 3) that, “Motions seeking such error correction rarely warrant leave by this Court.” Chaudhry goes on to say, “Further, the Appellate Division properly applied those legal principles to the facts of this case and found that substantial evidence in the record supported OCFS’ determination.”
However, a fair contextual reading of this case compels a contrary conclusion. The facts of this case show that substantial evidence in the record did not support Niagara County Department of Social Services caseworker Robin Stroud’s determination, nor NYS OCFS’ final determination. Respondents, in fact, failed to prove that Appellant committed maltreatment under Social Services Law Section 422 and 97-LCM-58. Appellant’s son was never truant or unlawfully detained from school, the two categories of unexcused absences in New York State Education Law, and Appellant’s son was under the care of medical professionals who did not release their demand for home-instruction.
The apparent rationale of the Courts is that Respondents’ need not comply with Social Services Law Section 422, 97-LCM-58, or due process rights when addressing matters of alleged child neglect. It presents clear error and plain injustice that, again, will encourage continued abuse of power, and give ‘carte blanche’ to school authorities and social services agencies who seek to deprive parents of their right to protect their children against hate and violence at school.
Further, Judge Lippman’s decision seriously undermines the efficacy of the laws in any related, pending or future litigation, the rights of parents to the care, education, and upbringing of their children, the authority of medical professional opinion and/or plan of care for its pediatric patents, and parent rights to due process before the law.
Ref. Court of Appeals Motion No. 2010-674, Appellate Division Docket No.: TP09-01245, Niagara County Index No. 136504
Author’s Note: I am not a lawyer and nothing contained herein or elsewhere on this website should be construed as legal advice.
It should also be noted well here that the Appellate Division, Fourth Department Decision related to whether or not Appellant’s due process rights were violated is also grossly misrepresented in its entirety. The question before the Court was:
Whether the Administrative Law Judge violated the Appellant’s due process rights when [she] failed to advise and obtain, on the record, an intelligent or understanding waiver of the Appellant right to be afforded the opportunity of Counsel?
Clearly, the question has nothing to do with Appellant seeking assigned counsel.
Celebrate National Parents' Day Sunday, July 25, 2010. US Code Section 135 recognizes Parents' Day. Celebrated the 4th Sunday of July each year — All private citizens, organizations, and Federal, State, and local governmental and legislative entities are encouraged to recognize Parents’ Day through proclamations, activities, and educational efforts in furtherance of recognizing, uplifting, and supporting the role of parents in bringing up their children.
The least-noticed cases sometimes say the most about the institution and our system of justice. They can also say the most about the rights of a mother to the care, education, and upbringing of her children, and the opinions of medical professionals, whose primary concern is that of the safety, health and welfare of children in education.
Last month, a ruling on a little-noticed NYS Supreme Court caserepresents a shameful chapter in NYS Supreme Court history that could have wide-ranging implications for mothers and medical professionals whose primary concern is that of the safety, health, and welfare of the child in education.
“ (1) Did Petitioner establish that the Appellant committed the alleged maltreatment, by a fair preponderance of the evidence pursuant to New York State Social Services Law Section 422? Answer: No
(2) Whether the Administrative Law Judge violated the Appellant’s Due Process Rights when they failed to advise and obtain, on the record, an intelligent or understanding waiver of the Appellant right to be afforded the opportunity of counsel? Answer: Yes”
What is clear in its Decision,Justices' Hurlbutt, Smith, Fahey, and Carniunanimously and completely not only ignore the QUESTIONS PRESENTED, they also ignore SUPPORTINGEVIDENCE that establishes there is no basis for an indicated report of ‘Educational Neglect’ against this Author, including SUPPORTING EVIDENCE “…that there was, not one but two, doctor’s orders to keep the child out of school.” The record is complete with medical references to keep the child from attending school.”Appellant’s Exhibit 3 and 4.“At no time was the child kept out of school by the Appellant where there was no doctor’s directive or instruction to do so. Simply, there is no evidence introduced by NDSS that either Doctor removed their demand for home schooling and cleared or certified the child to return to school.”
In this case,SUPPORTING EVIDENCE clearly establishes that this motherdid not maltreat her child. Yet, the Justices effectively construct a Memorandum and Orderthat portrays, erroneously,“…that respondent’s determination that respondent Niagara County Department of Social Services established by a fair preponderance of the evidence at the fair hearing that petitioner maltreated the subject child is supported by substantial evidence.”
NYS Senator Montgomery's Bill Number S5974 - An act to amend the social services law in relation to reports of educational neglect by school districts (6/2009)
Author’s Note: Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General of the State of New York, for Respondent’s New York State Office of Child and Family Services; Andrew D. Bing, Deputy Solicitor General and Zainab A. Chaudhry Assistant Solicitor General, of counsel; Jean Greinert, Administrative Law Judge; Richard E. Davidson, Bureau of Special Hearings NYS OCFS; Caseworker Robin Stroud, Niagara County Department of Social Services, North Tonawanda, NY; and Thomas W. Scirto, attorney for Niagara County Department of Social Services; Laura Wagner, of Counsel.