Thursday, June 23, 2005
Takoya Criner
On June 16 Takoya Criner was sentenced to life in prison for a murder in Florida he claims he did not commit.
Now no one is saying Takoya is an angel. The victim in this case happened to be the son of a police officer. This son of a police officer was involved in the same dangerous activities as Criner was.
Florida has some bull dog prosecutors who fast track their cases. The Public Defenders claim to be so overworked they don't even have time to talk to their clients before appearing in court to represent them.
We'd like to know more about just what happened in the Criner case.
Monday, June 13, 2005
Steven Truscott: 46 years and still waiting!
woods where Lynne Harper's body was found, originally uploaded by Sheila Steele Photo by Bent Romnes.
If you click on the picture above, you will be taken to Bent Romnes' account of how he re-visited the scene of Lynne Harper's murder and was almost eaten alive by mosquitos. 
Steve Truscott was on CBC this week-end and spoke along with other wrongfully convicted persons.
I'm sure we all keep thinking that any day the Ontario Justice department will announce that they are or are not going to order Mr. Truscott a new trial as ordered by Federal Justice Minister Irwin Cotler.
Apparently it is not going to happen unless we keep up the pressure.
Please use this blog to add comments and help keep the story in the public eye.
Tuesday, June 07, 2005
Nancy Golin
This morning I received e-mail from the parents of Nancy Golin. It included the news articles I have copied below and directed me to their website.
This is yet another example of how heartless bureaucrats can cause immense damage when they make a mistake and how that damage becomes compounded as they try to cover it up.
From the Napa Sentinel
Arrogant hospital intern sets off a chain of events that destroys a family, daughter
by Harry V. Martin
She is but a pawn in the hands of the State, a large attorney firm, and care home providers. They control her life through psychiatric drugs which leave her mostly in a lethargic condition. Her parents have fought to regain her custody for years and now they have been restricted to one short visit a month. Such a visit brings pain to the eyes of Nancy who wonders why they won’t take her home and why they leave her in this place.
Nancy’s life changed when an arrogant intern doctor at Stanford University Hospital made the wrong call. This intern took it upon herself to declare that the parents of Nancy were “over medicating” the young woman for her seizures. She reduced the amount of medication Nancy was receiving only to start her seizures again. A neurologist had prescribed the exact dosage that the parents of Nancy had been administrating. A neurologist at Stanford University Hospital interceded and restored the proper dosage to Nancy which stopped the seizures. Nancy went home with her parents and that should have been the end of it.
But the intern, ignoring the Hospital’s neurologist and Nancy’s personal neurologist, notified Adult Protective Services and filed a complaint against Nancy’s parents, stating they were over medicating her and therefore were abusing her.
Adult Protective Services made five or six calls on the parents of Nancy, investigating the allegations of the intern. Then things became silent. Adult Protective Services knew or should have known that Nancy’s private neurologist and the neurologist at Stanford University Hospital acknowledged that the dosage Nancy was being given by her parents was correct and necessary. At this point the files should have been closed – and that is exactly what Nancy’s parents thought. But not so! The Adult Protective Services’ files were not corrected to reflect the reports of two neurologists
Over a year later Police arrived with an Adult Protective Services agent and whisked Nancy away; placing her in a psychiatric ward for “her protection”. Under the law her placement was illegal. The psychiatric ward reduced Nancy’s Phenobarbital seizure medication to the same lower levels as the intern had recommended – a dosage vetoed by the Stanford neurologist; the seizure began again.
While this is all going on the District Attorney’s office files charges against the parents for abuse of Nancy for over medicating. The District Attorney’s file show no mention of the neurologists reports contradicting the allegation. Nancy was never allowed to go home again. The Stanford neurologist’s interceded but it didn’t matter because they had to hold onto Nancy after that because of the injuries they did. They had other things they tried to pull, like the burn injury to the top of Nancy’s foot which Stanford doctors, themselves, had caused five months earlier by a misplaced IV that they then refused to treat, then called this a neglected foot injury of unknown origin after it had already been treated and healed. Despite all that, the District Attorney Office continued the criminal case against the parents for 14 months before it was dropped.
The reason the District Attorney’s Office kept the criminal charges of abuse and neglect so long was to allow the State of California to secretly apply for and obtain a temporary conservatorship over Nancy. As long as the parents were under criminal charges, they were not eligible to fight the conservatorship. Even when the State went to court over the conservatorship they told the judge that they could not find the parents. The parents were visiting Nancy every week at the care facility. In fact the District Attorney’s Office had the couple arrested on felony abuse charges. The District Attorney’s Office offered to drop the charges down to a misdemeanor and a slap on the wrist. The parents refused the offer. The parents rejected any lesser charge for fear that a plea bargain would mean they would never see their daughter again.
When one judge ruled favorably for the parents, the State went shopping for a new judge. The new judge ignored the expert testimony of the neurologist in favor of written memos from the State. The law does require more credence in court for live witnesses as opposed to written memos. The Public Defender’s Office represented Nancy. Because the conservatorship was awarded to the State, the parents were denied by the court to the discovery process. The parents were stripped of any legal rights in relationship to their daughter. The Court even reduced the amount of time the parents would have for visitation rights. Nancy saw her parents less and less and felt deserted.
The drugs they were giving to Nancy began to eat away at her esophagus. “They’re killing her, she can’t swallow,” the parents complained. The esophagus problem continued, however, until the parents suspect that Nancy has throat cancer. The parents have not been allowed to see Nancy’s medical records. Nancy had a precancerous condition two years ago which was left untreated by her State conservators.
The parents have gone to State and Federal Courts – including the United States Supreme Court, but the Federal Courts have rejected the case on the basis they don’t have jurisdiction. The State has paid $2 million dollars in Court to keep Nancy. The parents have had no way of amassing such a sum and have, at times, represented themselves in Court.
The parents’ visitation rights were reduced to one hour per month. When the parents are allowed to visit, Nancy keeps asking to go home and doesn’t understand why she cannot. Many times on their visits the parents would find Nancy in a comatose status.
But there is much more behind this case as to why the State, Courts and others want Nancy – and victims like her.
Autistic woman held by bureaucratic stranglehold treated under veil of secrecy
by Harry V. Martin
Apparently bent out of shape, the intern called Adult Protective Services and reported that the parents were abusing Nancy by over-dosing her, in contrast to both Nancy’s neurologist and the Stanford Hospital neurologist. Adult Protective Services did an extensive investigation. But they failed to note that the two neurologists sided with the parents that they had provided an adequate dosage to her.
Adult Protective Services provided their reports – minus any confirmation from either neurologist that the parents were following proper medication procedures. From that point on, Nancy’s life and that of her parents turned into an abyss of hell.
The parents fought the system and each time they had their visiting rights reduced until it finally came down to one small visit a month. Nancy could never understand why she was being “abandoned” by her parents. Many times on their visits the parents would find Nancy in a comatose state. She was being given psychiatric drugs which countered her anti-seizure medication.
Donna Crowder, a nurse who has reporting responsibilities, went to visit Nancy in the care home that the State of California placed Nancy in. The nurse was not allowed entry into the home and when she spotted Nancy, Nancy was rushed back into her room. The nurse asked to speak with the administrator. The 17-year-old girl placed in charge of the facility said she did not know who the administrator was or how to make contact. Then she admitted that her parents were the administrators and they were in the Philippines. “I was very unhappy as a nurse, who works with medical and mental clients at what I heard and observed at this group home as it really appeared that this home was covering up,” Crowder said. “I came home and was so disturbed by what I considered abuse, that I called the State ombudsman.”
At the care facility Nancy has suffered lower esophageal injuries, hernias, broken collarbone, dislocated shoulder and neurological injuries. It is also suspect that Nancy has developed cancer of the esophagus from the psychiatric drugs she was being administered.
The nurse, who tried to visit Nancy and was refused, felt that Nancy was being abused. But the real abuse surfaced just last week when Nancy was rushed to a Mt. View hospital. Nancy’s family was not provided any information, but, in fact, they were escorted out by security guards on instructions from Nancy’s State-appointed conservator. Nancy looked half dead with an IV and main lines in her neck and scrapes and lumps all over her face. She was vomiting blood and chunks of her esophagus due to the ruptured esophageal injuries caused by the drugs the care home had been administrating. The Hospital reported the abuse of Nancy by the care home to Adult Protective Services, not knowing that Adult Protective Services and the regional center have never investigated the care home.
The parents were finally allowed 10 minutes to visit their daughter. But apparently the nurse that allowed such a visit got into a lot of trouble. The next day, when the father of Nancy called the hospital to inquire of Nancy’s condition he was told that Nancy wasn’t there. In fact, the hospital told others, including Crowder, that Nancy has never been in the hospital. The nurse on the fourth floor of the hospital where Nancy was located the night before said that the patient had asked for privacy and that no information be released. Nancy is autistic and doesn’t speak. The condition and whereabouts of Nancy are not known by the parents at this time, even though they do have visitation rights to see their daughter.
Even more interesting after investigating the case of Nancy, documents show that the Regional Center had been receiving Nancy’s SSI (Social Security) claims 10 months before Nancy was placed in a psychiatric ward at Stanford University Hospital and two years before they receive conservatorship over Nancy.
The family has spent their life savings trying to free Nancy
Update, June 26, 2004
Last Wednesday, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
decided that Nancy Golin's civil rights case was
frivolous and should be thrown out. A person under
state conservatorship apparently does not have any
rights to sue their conservators no matter what the
state does to them, and the state can prevent justice
from being done, merely by casting her relatives in a
witch hunt thereby making them ineligible to represent
a helpless handicapped individual. This means that
Nancy is stuck in an abusive group home for the rest
of her life and can't even see her parents or other
visitors. And there's nothing that can be done about
it. It is hard to imagine showing a more appalling set
of circumstances to a court, and then their turning
their backs on it.
Here is the decision, where they merely glossed over
all the important issues. We were denied oral
argument because we were representing ourselves and no
lawyers wanted to sue the state. If we had had oral
arguments they could not have glossed over all the
issues this way. We are seeking legal assistance to
help us petition for a rehearing en banc so that we
can bring forward these issues. This could have been
a landmark case that could have helped many people but
the Court decided not to step up to this challenge,
believing that they could bury this case in a ditch
somewhere without anyone noticing. Media attention is
sorely needed. Please post this.
