Friday, January 3, 2014

welcome Manor Criminal Intent By a host of LeSueurCountyOfficialsImagine this was your hild the lengths they arewillingto goto kill atrauma Survivor by raping the former torturevictim ofherchildrenbecause county officials think they are entitledtosellingchildren ofthe poor to their rich family members they usetaxpayerdollars tocomplete the task


http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/newrules/coa/jcpredraft.pdf
http://www.hg.org/article.asp?id=7983

According to the law based on the conduct of le sueur county the children should be removed from their care and placed in protective custody
"Chips," as it is called, stands for a Child in Need of Help or Protection. It is codified under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 260C. Such cases can be initiated by the county or an individual and may result in the removal of a child from the family home. As a result, aggressive representation is necessary.
(8) has been placed for adoption or care in violation of law; 

"Child in need of protection or services" means a child who is in need of protection or services because the child:

2012 Minnesota Statutes

SUBD. 15.EMOTIONAL MALTREATMENT.


"Emotional maltreatment" means the consistent, deliberate infliction of mental harm on a child by a person OR NOT A PERSON BUT (JUDGE M MICHAEL BAXTER)responsible for the child's care, that has an observable, sustained, and adverse effect on the child's physical, mental, or emotional development. "Emotional maltreatment" 
________________________________________________________________


Weekend fun for the Harris children with babysitters Le Sueur County Attorney and wife. At the same time his office is terminating the mothers rights. Not to worry Brent is not doing it personally he Sent in his Newest Employee Megan Gaudette The former employee of the judge who is terminating the mothers rights. During the May 2012 hearing Ms Bracken writes...Not sure how but there is an obvious relationship between Judge M Michael Baxter and Gaudette he allowed Gaudette to do all the ruling
Megan Gaudette Steps down when it is learned that her new boss is doing weekend daycare for his family members,, The same people who are also caring for the Harris children. the people who want to purchase the Harris Children by means of forced adoption.
The Creepy part Gaudette shows up to watch the termination that is how obsessed she is with the sale   
http://www.southernminn.com/le_center_leader/news/article_e5fca3bf-40ca-5412-9e80-65b2c8238dcc.html

 The County Attorney is also  related to couple who placed an order with the same judge swearing every one one in please see link.
 Baxter terminated the mothers rights by raping her of any due process and depriving her of her rights. He always made sure That the county Attorneys family members had nice places to wait before each hearing and that the mothers interruptions such as children's birthdays  never imposed on  the Dobmeier's family time with Eugenie Harris children. 
He also never went over the evidence of the hearing and signed off on what the county wanted . Cari Krenik was aware of rights being terminated before judge ruled.....

there is a group photo of the county Attorney and the County commissioner who hung up on a concerned caller who asked for an investigation of LS County  Human services conduct.  Also seated in the group photo in the link below is the county Attorney. 
How High Up Does this go? 
Court transcripts were also altered as well. 
http://www.southernminn.com/le_sueur_news_herald/news/article_f130fab7-02a2-5417-8243-03aa2729f2e1.html

http://www.southernminn.com/le_sueur_news_herald/news/article_f130fab7-02a2-5417-8243-03aa2729f2e1.html

Here is a link of the judge who terminated her parental rights swearing new board member in

That is how deep this rape goes to take her children..
What if these were your kids and the County officials committed crimes against you like they did this mom 

Schroer breaks and enters in to the private residence of Ms Harris on September 21, 2012 and violently removes three children causing mental breakdowns of all three children.  According to Sally Schroer's own documentation.  
Le Sueur County Child Protection workers are not obligated to remain law abiding (Darrell Pettis Le Sueur County Commissioner) 
  

Wait a minute Victor Atherton you are not the least bit concerned that Tri City United Elementary school is advocating that parents endanger the lives of children? If this is maltreatment, as you say it is explain why it is only maltreatment for Eugenie Harris? which occurred  based on information from the local schools. why it is not Maltreatment for the school who told this mother it is acceptable. They are telling parents of children  ages 4, 5,  and 6 to walk to school unattended. Ultimately placing children in imminent danger.  Does anyone else see a problem with the system.

Did the school get Criminally charged ? They are endangering children..
Actually according to these notes Mr Atherton  told the family it was fine for kids this age to make a 20 minute walk to school unattended but it was child endangerment for the 15 minutes  at the park

It is my understanding once she was given information that made no damn sense it never happened again because it was a misunderstanding.  
Do they really think this stuff up spin it in there head and decide its correct 

 I would assume you took the school down first, gave them a brochure and then educated the mother about what is appropriate. The park incident would have to be a second incident of public neglect?  That scenario makes sense. That being said I am sure you are aware that if the school was not charged that means sir, you are a bigot! In the America I live in, the law does not discriminate who it applies to like it does in Le Sueur  County.  Even those people who walk all over town and make themselves seen are equal to people with Cars


Also forgive my ignorance sir but humor my simple mind for just a minute.   The case worker, she had a warrant Or maybe consent Or possibly proof of exigent circumstance? I only ask because there are procedures an officer or case worker must follow when they conduct
 a search. 
If she did not have one of those three things I listed sir, and she was in that home; shouldn't the case worker be criminally charged? She did break not only state law but federal law . The mother was criminally charged for being to poor to have a phone with three sick kids. The case worker was not charged for breaking a state and federal law. 

The school was not charged for child endangerment  the mother was based on information the school gave her. Is that correct. 

I am not seeing sufficient evidence that convinces me of anything. Well I take that back I am seeing a pattern. No question there. Its called watch me make up shit as I go along to target specific groups of people. 

Is it true after your case worker  made two illegal entrances in to the private residence that she was found in the home a 3rd time. Yet still she has not been criminally charged ?

 SCHROER CLAIMS THE 3RD ILLEGAL ENTRANCE IN TO THE HOME WAS A MISUNDERSTANDING

SHE DID NOT KNOW SHE COULD NOT JUST WALK IN TO A PRIVATE RESIDENCE

STATE AND FEDERAL LAW BROKEN 3 DAMN TIMES did THEY THROW THE BOOK AT HER!!!

GENIE WAS CRIMINALLY CHARGED 1 TIME FOR A MISUNDERSTANDING FOR BELIEVING AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL WOULD NOT ENDANGER CHILDREN, WHEN ACCORDING TO   VICTOR ATHERTON THEY WERE ENDANGERING CHILDREN BUT WITH A SPECIAL PASS FROM THE COUNTY  http://www.tcu2905us.new.rschooltoday.com/page/4182
  Sally Schroer was not charged for breaking state and federal law 3 TIMES? UNLAWFUL REMOVAL OF CHILDREN DUE TO NO SUPPORTING EVIDENCE THAT THEY WERE IN IMMINENT DANGER
Nope she was not.
She and Victor Atherton took kids over a single incident of poverty with no imminent danger and called it
Mn state Guidelines 
Maltreatment..
IV. Neglect Defined [M.S. 626.556, subd. 2 (f) (1)-(9)] 
Neglect means “the failure by a person responsible for a child’s care to supply a child with 
necessary food, clothing, shelter, health, medical, or other care required for the child’s 
physical or mental health when reasonably able to do so.” [M.S. 626.556, subd. 2 (f) (1)] 

At times, conditions such as poverty create circumstances in which a child may be neglected 
due to the parent(s)’ lack of financial resources. Under these circumstances, counties work to 
assist parent(s) in correcting the conditions of neglect, and to meet the protective needs of 
their children, but do not determine the parents’ behavior as neglectful. 13 
https://edocs.dhs.state.mn.us/lfserver/Public/DHS-5144-ENG 


 Mn HS Manuel


FACTOR 3 Severity, and/or frequency of neglect, condition of the home
Family Strengths
No Risk
Home is clean with no apparent safety or health hazards
All food and medical needs are met on a continuing basis
Low Risk No discernible effect on child
Isolated incident
The child knows emergency procedures and is able to initiate them
when necessary

Moderate Risk Caretaker is suspected of failing to meet the child’s minimum
medical, food, clothing, and/or shelter needs
Unconfirmed history or pattern of leaving child unsupervised
Trash and garbage in uncovered containers, and overflowing
Rodent and animal droppings
Open spoiled food observed
High Risk Caretaker is unable/unwilling to meet the child’s minimum medical,
food, clothing, shelter needs for reasons other than poverty
Confirmed history or pattern of leaving the child
unsupervised/unprotected for excessive periods of time
Home in dangerous condition i.e. leaking roof, exposed wiring, no
heat, broken windows, gaping holes
Child has sustained injury or illness that required medical treatment

due to the condition of the home

http://www.dhs.state.mn.us/main/idcplg?IdcService=GET_FILE&RevisionSelectionMethod=LatestReleased&Rendition=Primary&allowInterrupt=1&noSaveAs=1&dDocName=dhs_id_018788



 and MN state law all seem to be consistent. Poverty related neglect can not be determined as maltreatment..  victor so this applies to every one in the state of minnesota but Eugenie Harris?
Like the laws of LeCenter only a few people are held accountable and the reDERSTANDINGst maybe people who do not arrive at the courthouse on foot laws and maltreatment is not determined or they are not charged with. 


 How the hell does a brochure help with three sick kids and no money for a phone. Also being new in town with a limited support circle. The one person she could reach out to also has children. Genie was worried her children might  possibly infect her neighbors children.





Victor hands the case over to Schroer a women who is violent towards children and has a history of abusing adults who have been tortured. The women caused all three kids and the mother to have mental break downs and were sleeping outside in the winter. While she provided services to the Dobmeier's the mother should have been doing.

Schroer cut housing in November 

when the county attorneys family members ask the worker to get rid of the mother so they can keep her children. Schroer cuts the support service she had listed in the case plan for reunification. She continues to send case plans with the listed services through January. The finding of facts for the December 2012 court hearing does not mention a discontinuance of services. The landlord tells her in January 2013 she needs to be out. The caseworker stopped helping you in mid November 2012 

Below is just one note of how she helps the mother find housing.
I assume she is helping her by supplying packing cartons?



Sally Schroer making a  wise crack due to cutting services to prevent the mother from continuing to complete  her case plan. This is the beginning of criminal intent to harm Eugenie Harris and her three children. 
Schroer made it impossible for her to prevent homelessness. She sent monthly notices that stated the above services are in place until a review hearing takes place . No hearings take place making a change in the services ever.


HUMAN SERVICE MANUAL 
LISTING SCHROERS JOB RESPONSIBILITIES  

Family preservation services: 

typically are services designed to


help families alleviate crises that might lead to out-of-home

 placement of children; maintain the

safety of children in their own homes; support families 

preparing to reunify ; and assist


families in obtaining services and other supports necessary

to address their multiple needs in a

culturally sensitive manner.

Housing services: Services or activities designed to

 assist individuals or families in locating, obtaining or

 retaining suitable housing.


SALLY SCHROER TESTIMONY 



Link that will allow everyone to see what the woman's responsibilities were

Once she has the mother sent away 


Portion of sally SCHROERS written order  to Terminate parental rights. What is being described is the participation of mother before Schroer starts cutting services. Then mother was forced in to homelessness. Schroer has Tony and Melissa DOBMEIER foster care providers step in and do the parent child therapy and never involves the mother again. 

Attachment 


Termination of parental rights written by Sally Schroer 

This is the baby screaming after a year of parental alienation an absolute devastating form of abuse for these formerly once well adjusted children to have to eperience

Schroer has attachment set up like this. 

TONY AND MELISSA DOBMEIER 
PARENT CHILD THERAPY
TIME SPENT 164 HOURS A WEEK
ENVIRONMENT THEIR HOME
RESPONSIBILITIES ALL PARENTING

MOTHER 
TIME SPENT  4 HOURS A WEEK
ENVIRONMENT COURTHOUSE CONFERENCE ROOM
RESPONSIBILITIES BRING SNACK


THE CHILDREN ARE WILLING TO COME AND GO AND ARE RELIEVED TO RETURN TO FOSTER HOME SCHROER WRITES IN THE TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS

IN THE SAME DOCUMENT TONY AND MELISSA DOBMEIER SEEM TO THINK OTHERWISE..TEACHERS AGREE WITH FOSTER CARE PEOPLE CHILDREN ARE NOT JUST FINE GOING BACK TO THE FOSTER CARE GIVERS HOME.

MS BRACKEN HAS PROVIDED ME WITH VIDEO and AUDIO TAPES OF THE CHILDREN AT THE END OF VISITS BOTH HAVE A BABY SCREAMING AND A MOTHER HAVING TO FORCE HER IN TO HER CAR SEAT. A 5 YEAR OLD BEGGING HIS MOTHER. PLEASE I DONT WANT TO GO,, MOMMY PLEASE JUST A LITTLE LONGER.

THE OLDEST SCREAMING AND CRYING.

OTHER VISITS WERE JUST RECORDED AND THE PATTERN OF BEHAVIOR WHEN ENDING A VISIT DOES NOT CHANGE. THERE ARE THREE TORMENTED CHILDREN AT THE END OF EVERY VISIT. IT RIPS YOUR HEART OUT TO LISTEN TO THIS TORTURE OF CHILDREN....

I AM A GUY AND A FATHER AND I COULD NOT EMOTIONALLY HANDLE LISTENING TO THE PAIN THOSE THREE CHILDREN ARE IN AT THE END OF EVERY VISIT.

Through out Schroer's notes mom still does not have access to a phone. The Caseworker is making comment after comment as to the use of different phone numbers . 

Once Ms Bracken gets involved she has a stable phone number and it changes one time when the service had to be renewed. 
This during the time that Le Sueur county was financially responsible for her. She also has a stable address. 

She obtained schooling and and current state ID 
Ms Bracken provided all the transportation and the county told her  Bracken was bad for her and they do not want to deal with her 

Mom sets up welcome manor and Schroer wont send kids these are four of her notes confirming I went through again and can add two more
I said I would not support the kids being there during the primary phase which is about 30 to 45 days I said I would be open to visitation during that time but probably not overnight.


I told Genie that the kids will not be going with her to welcome manor She did not seem surprised to hear this.I let her know that the kids could visit her but i will not support the staying there with her.I told her that welcome manor did not have any opening for kids right now

 Notes: April 11, 2013 
Phone Call Welcome Manor
Bracken A -  I was just calling to verify that you did or did not have beds for Eugenie Harris's Children.
Employee Rita We did  have beds for mom and all three children. 
Bracken A - Thank you
I would not Support the children joining her at welcome manor
I will not support for the children to join her at welcome manor

TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS 
NOTE  WHAT SCHROER WRITES 
posted below
Schroer writes the children will join her there ? 


Below are the recommendations for the next phase of genies case plan note what sally schroer does and says. Imagine these were your children. What schroer does is cost the taxpayers more money when no one can figure out why Genie is in a halfway house and without her children. The judge also does not understand so emergency hearing is called


CASE WORKER ASSISTED BY HEAD OF HUMAN SERVICE COUNTY AND ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEYS AS WELL AS THE GUARDIAN AD LITEM HEAD OF HUMAN SERVICES SUE RYNDA AND JUDGE BAXTER WHO COMMITTED STATE AND FEDERAL  FELONY CRIMES AGAINST EUGENIE HARRIS TO SELL HER CHILDREN TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEYS CHILDLESS RELATIVES TONY DOBMEIER AND MELISSA DOBMEIER.

THEY ARE WORRIED  THE FAMILY MAY HURT THE UNSTABLE COUPLE TRYING TO PURCHASE THE CHILDREN WHO WERE REMOVED UNDER FRAUDULENT ALLEGATIONS.
THE AMOUNT OF CRIMINAL ACTIVITY   TO ABUSE AND SELL KIDS BY LE SUEUR COUNTY TO PREDATORS COULD CAUSE THE FAMILY TO HURT THE CRIMINALS 
Below is how schroer writes or describes welcome manor in the order to terminate mom rights

This document below is what the county uses for an argument that they did provide parenting classes to the mother her rights have been terminated and she is in an appeal look what the county sends to the appellate court so the county attorneys family members get to keep her kids. that's right what they will stoop to so they can rape a parent of her children I will be posting a new page exposing Krenik pulling the same garbage on Tuesday 

T


Irene Christenson do you swear to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth: Irene I do
Lawyer: do the children get upset when they have to leave their mother ? 
Irene Christenson: No Never they never get upset.

The mother has a legal right to get information about her children. It is not up to Sally Schroer to green light if she gets that information because the law has determined that she is entitled to it as a parent of the child.


She was denied order forms for school pictures. 





Tony and Melissa Dobmeier purchase school pictures of someone elses children?  yea they do and that is how disturbed they are. Sally Schroer Documents hiding the children's school pictures from Eugenie Harris the mother of the three children. 
More lines are crossed by this game playing couple who see to suffer fro delusional disorder syndrome 

 FAMILY DAY ! 
NOTE: who attends the four year old childs family day. Le Sueur County Attorneys family member Melisa Dobmeier is there in a parent role?

The mother is robbed of doing family day with her son because some baby buying nut job is role playing with her son and forcing the little guy to participate

A MOTHER BANNED FROM ENROLLING CHILD FOR HEAD START 
The school bans  a mother trying to sign up her child for head start in the event she is spy sent by Genie trying to get information on her child. Information she is legally entitled to. Only this teachers intent is to prevent Genie who again has a  legal right to document her four year old's injury to his face. this is the second time the four year old has had his face busted open since being placed in foster care.
 the child is currently receiving psycho therapy to cope with the symptoms of abuse that began as a result of being removed from his mother and forced to live with strangers The strangers  call his mommy a crack head and tell him how they are getting rid of her so they can keep him. 
The other attempted to have the child's injury documented but Schroer violated the mothers parental legal rights and illegally asked the teacher to not allow it so she had time to photograph and photo shop the injury. The mother also should have been at the doctor appointment but was again illegally stopped by schroer however what was noted was the woman then followed up the abuse with a perjured document to the judge 



Direct intent: a person has direct intent when they intend a particular consequence of their act.
Oblique intent: a person has oblique intent when the event is a natural consequence of a voluntary act and they foresee it as such. The 'natural consequence' definition was replaced in R v Woollinwith the 'virtually certain' test. A person is now held to intend a consequence (obliquely) when that consequence is a virtually certain consequence of their action, and they knew it to be a virtually certain consequence. The first leg of this test has been condemned as unnecessary:[2] a person should be held as intending a consequence if (s)he believed it to be a virtually certain consequence, regardless of whether it was in fact virtually certain.
This has two applications:
  1. When a person is planning to achieve a given consequence, there may be several intermediate steps that have to be taken before the full result as desired is achieved. (cut housing assistance) (refuse to discuss custody transfer) It is not open to the accused to pick and choose which of these steps are or are not intended. The accused is taken to intend to accomplish all outcomes necessary to fulfill the overall plan. (Refuse to send children to welcome manor and newyork mills) (withholds information about using back ground check to break law) For example, if A wishes to claim on B's life insurance policy, and so shoots at B who is sitting in a bus, the bullet may have to pass through a window. Thus, even though A may not have desired B's death, it was an inevitable precondition to a claim. Similarly, he may never consciously have considered the damage to the window, but both the murder and the damage under the Criminal Damage Act 1971 are intended. This is distinguishing between the direct intention, which is the main aim of the plan—and the oblique intention, which covers all intermediate steps. More generally, someone directly intends a consequence when their purpose or aim is to cause it, even though they believe the likelihood of success is remote. In R v Dadson, for example, the defendant shot at a man he wrongly believed was out of range. In R v Mohan (1975) 2 All ER 193, the court held that direct intention means, "aim or purpose"—"a decision to bring about, insofar as it lies within the accused's power, the commission of the offence..no matter whether the accused desired that consequence of his act or not."
  2. Sometimes, by accident, a plan miscarries and the accused achieves one or more unintended consequence. In this situation, the accused is taken to have intended all of the additional consequences that flow naturally from the original plan. This is tested as matters of causation and concurrence, i.e. whether the given consequences were reasonably foreseeable, there is nonovus actus interveniens and the relevant mens rea elements were formed before all of the actus reus components were completed.





SO WENT DOWN TO TALK TO A LOCAL INVESTIGATOR I SHOWED HIM WHERE SCHROER DOCUMENTED 3 TIMES SHE WOULD NOT SEND THE KIDS TO WELCOME MANOR AND THEN I PRESENTED HIM WITH THE ORDER OF TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS WHERE SALLY SCHROER LIED AND SAID KIDS WERE GOING

THE REPLACEMENT ATTORNEY FOR LE SUEUR COUNTY USES THE LIE IN THE APPEAL AGAINST THE MOTHER. SO I SHOW THAT TO THE LOCAL INVESTIGATOR AND HE SAID YOU GOT HER!!! THAT IS CRIMINAL INTENT TO HARM.

The test of intention[edit]

HE BELIEVES KRENIK Also can be charged with child endangerment her actions are 100% criminal.   can I get a little woot woot !!!!!!!

WEN I PRODUCED THE BACK GROUND CHECK BRACKEN GAVE ME AND THE DOCUMENTATION IN SALLY SCHROER'S REPORT THAT C BRACKEN IS NOT ALLOWED ON HER PROPERTY OR NEAR HER THEY WERE IN THE PROCESS OF PUTTING A NO CONTACT ORDER ON HIM AND PRIOR TO THAT THEY HAD NO CONTACT WITH HIM FOR FOUR YEARS
EUGENIE HARRIS TESTIMONY ALSO STATES HE WILL NOT BE ALLOWED ON THE PROPERTY OF MS BRACKEN SHE WANTS TO KEEP THE KIDS SAFE.

THEN I GAVE THEM THE FINDING OF FACTS AND THE REASON BRACKEN WAS RULED OUT

THE INVESTIGATOR SAID THIS IS AND SHOULD BE CONSIDERED PREMEDITATED INTENT TO COMMIT A CRIME AGAINST MISS HARRIS AND THE THREE CHILDREN.

HOW LONG HAVE THEY BEEN SEPARATED HE ASKED, I SAID SINCE SEPTEMBER OF LAST YEAR. THAT WILL NOT HELP HER IN A COURT OF LAW THE OFFICER SAID.

WHY ARE DANGEROUS PEOPLE WORKING IN THE HELPING FIELD ? THEY CLEARLY ARE NOT AWARE OF THEIR OWN PROBLEMATIC MENTAL HEALTH

BOTH THESE CASE WORKERS ARE COMMITTING A CRIME AS THEY ARE ATTEMPTING TO UNLAWFULLY SPLIT UP A FAMILY BY BREAKING THE LAW THEY SHOULD BOTH DO PRISON TIME BECAUSE THEY ARE A THREAT TO SOCIETY

I AM CALLING ONE MORE COUNTY DEPARTMENT AND SUBMITTING THE SAME DOCUMENTS FOR BOTH WOMEN THAT WAY WE CAN BE SURE THAT IF THE SELLING OF THESE CHILDREN ACTUALLY TRANSPIRES THERE WILL BE PRISON TIME FOR THE LADIES.

THE OFFICER SAID THEY SHOULD HAVE NEVER USED THAT IN THE APPEAL BECAUSE THAT CONFIRMS THAT A CRIME IS TAKING PLACE.

KRENIK DID COMMIT A CRIME WHEN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILDREN WERE NOT A PRIORITY BECAUSE SHE HAD TO LIE AND IT RESULTED IN ON GOING ABUSE OF SMALL CHILDREN