CPS or CYA?

You are probably aware that Child Protective Services is a mess.  Reps Adams and Paton have single handedly managed to expose the weaknesses in the agency--generally over the objections of those whose job it is to protect children. 

They are holding hearings on Tuesday and Tucson Prosecutor Barbara LaWall isn't happy that the hearings are going to be public.  (You will recall from yesterday's post that LaWall has plenty of time on her hands since she's refusing to prosecute the Employer Sanctions Law.)

I thought that you might be interested in the email exchange between LaWall and Rep. Adams. 

First, this story provides some background.

A legislative committee chairman on Monday rejected a prosecutor's last-minute request to shelve a planned public hearing on Child Protective Services' dealings with Tucson families which had children die, allegedly at the hands of parents.

Here's the email exchange. 

The Hon. Kirk Adams
Chairman, Committee on Government
Az. House of Representatives

Dear Chairman Adams:

Last week I was contacted by Ms. Carolyn Atwater on behalf of the House Committee on Government. She sought my input regarding the CPS hearing scheduled for Tuesday, September 25th. I am very appreciative that my input as the Pima County Attorney was sought. After sharing my specific concerns with Ms. Atwater, I felt it would be important to put them in writing and share them with you personally, as well as with the other members of your committee.

I am pleased that your committee and the legislature are considering the effectiveness of CPS and studying how it might better protect the most vulnerable children in our state. As a prosecutor, and as one who operates a victim advocacy program, I share your concern for and commitment to our children and to their protection.

It is my understanding that your committee will be looking at CPS' operations broadly, and that it also will be focusing upon two specific cases involving alleged homicides of children who had been under CPS' jurisdiction in Pima County. Those two cases are ones in which my Office is handling homicide prosecutions.

As County Attorney, my primary duties in connection with these homicide cases are protecting the integrity of our prosecutions, protecting the rights of the victims as well as the accused, protecting the evidence, and avoiding pre-trial publicity and a potential change of venue.

I am highly concerned about the legislature holding a public hearing where specific details may be discussed involving these two serious criminal cases that have yet to be brought to trial. Any public discussion regarding details of the defendants' conduct or other specific facts that may be the subject of testimony at the trials in these cases could cause substantial harm to our criminal prosecutions. For this reason, I strongly urge you and the members of your committee to hear testimony regarding pending criminal cases in a confidential, non-public hearing, with the transcript to be made public only after the conclusion of the criminal trials.

The Arizona Supreme Court's Rules of Professional Conduct (Ethics Rules) prohibit prosecutors from giving out any information or making any statements likely to have a material prejudicial effect on pending criminal proceedings. Prosecutors may not discuss information that may be inadmissible as evidence in a trial or that would risk prejudicing an impartial trial.

We are prohibited from making statements about the character, credibility, reputation or criminal record of an accused or a witness, or the identity of a witness, or the expected testimony of a party or witness. We are also prohibited from making any public statements about the existence or contents of any confession, admission, or statements given by a defendant, or on a refusal to make a statement.

The Ethics Rules also prevent prosecutors from sharing prior to trial any information about forensic examinations, including the performance or results of any such examinations or tests or the refusal or failure of any person to submit to an examination or test, or the identity or nature of any physical evidence expected to be presented at the trial.

The Rules go on to direct us as prosecutors to exercise reasonable care to prevent investigators, law enforcement personnel, employees or other persons assisting or associated with the prosecutor in a criminal case from making any statements that the prosecutor would be prohibited from making.

It is evident that much of what criminal prosecutors are strictly forbidden from discussing in public will be the subject of inquiry to the witnesses you have called to testify at your hearing on Tuesday. As a result, in accordance with my ethical duties as a prosecutor, I must discourage witnesses who are investigators or who may be assisting our prosecutions from revealing the above types of information in a public forum prior to trial.

I am copying this letter to the police and CPS employees who are associated with the prosecution of this case to caution them regarding their public testimony before your committee and to remind them of our ethical obligations to ensure fair trials.

In order that your committee may achieve its goal of learning all the facts at this point in time, prior to the two criminal cases going to trial, I strongly urge that your committee hear any testimony regarding the facts of the pending criminal cases in a confidential, non-public forum.

I also urge that the testimony before your committee made in open, public session be restricted to, and focused on, how best CPS can protect our children, and what we can do to assist and help CPS to fulfill its duties and obligations for the protection of our most vulnerable victims.

Your cooperation will help ensure that we will be able to bring wrongdoers to justice through a fair trial process. Once the trials have concluded you could make all the testimony public. I appreciate your consideration.

Sincerely,

Barbara LaWall
Pima County Attorney

Here's Representative Adams' response. 

Dear Ms. LaWall:

I have reviewed your email to me expressing your concern over the propriety of the House Government Committee to hold hearings to discuss possible statutory changes to the laws regulating Arizona's Child Protective Services.  These committee hearings will focus on two recent CPS cases that tragically resulted in the deaths of three children whose lives CPS was entrusted to protect.

As I read your email at this very late date, I do not share your opinion that these legislative hearings will affect the pending criminal prosecution of the people who killed Brandon Williams and Ariana Payne.  As you know, Tyler Payne is still missing and presumed dead.

Ms. Carolyn Atwater, contacted your office on September 6, 2007, almost three weeks ago, to discuss the hearings.  Ms. Atwater placed a second call to your office on September 11, 2007.  During that call Ms. Atwater informed you of the Committee's intent to hold hearings on programmatic changes to CPS.  At that time, you offered proposals to improve the function of CPS  such as a locally run hotline.  Furthermore, I, along with my Vice-chairman, Representative Jonathan Paton, announced these committee hearings back in June.  Since then, dozens of stories have been written about these tragedies.  In fact, months ago, a court ordered the release of the records in these two cases to Tucson's Daily Star finding that the public need for information outweighed any privacy concerns.  Interestingly, you, as the Pima County Attorney, did not oppose the release of the records during the court hearing.  It is these redacted materials -- that have already been made public and have been the subject of several newspaper articles -- that will be discussed.  Most importantly, CPS, after consultation with their attorney, agreed to discuss these cases in public.  I hope that this last hour communication is not simply an effort to discourage inquiry of CPS.  For these reasons, I am at a loss to explain your cautionary email that you sent less than twenty-four hours before the hearing. 

I understand that you and those in your office who are participating in the prosecution of these cases may be unable to come before the Committee and answer questions.  I hope you have had the opportunity to review the agenda for the hearing.  As you will see, the CPS personnel identified to testify before the committee are not witnesses.  They have had no direct communications with the children or parents.  These persons are CPS managers, supervisors and directors. The committee agenda provides notice to the public that it may go into executive session to discuss confidential matters.  I have consulted with House attorneys on this matter.  I find that since this material has already been released to the public, there is little or no reason why a legislative committee would not hold public hearings on the matter.  These cases illustrate how CPS acts to protect children and they also highlight the need for CPS reform.  In fact, I believe that it is in the public's best interest to shed the bright light of public scrutiny on these cases.  Arizona's most vulnerable children must be protected.  I know you share that concern.

I hope this response addresses your concerns about tomorrow's hearing so we can move forward together to advocate for the protection of Arizona's children.

So, I will hold the committee hearing as planned - in public.

Sincerely,
Kirk Adams
Chairman, House Government Committee

Comments

[John]

Let's not ever forget the lengths to which Pete Hershberger has struggled to keep these hearings from being made public. Add to that his history of financial interests in a business involved with CPS and we have the makings of a real mess.

[Logical1]

Since defecting from the state of incompetent government, I rarely comment here, since I am now an outsider. But CPS deserves an outsider's comments.

In order for CPS to protect our children, it MUST be rebuilt from top to bottom. An entire changeover at the management level is the only hope these children have. CPS has had problems for years. At the core of these problems is the philosophy that CPS needs to keep families together at all cost. This includes letting kids stay with a mother who shacks up with some guy who beats her and/or her child(ren). When it comes to children, there needs to be a one strike and you are out policy.

I'm not saying a spanking in public is a strike, but bruises, broken bones and many hospital strips are.

[Travis]

A few years ago, the Joint Legislative Committee that had oversight of the Division of Children & Family Services held a committee meeting on CPS. It was hours long and the parade of parents who had been falsely accused was too long and the list of children who did not get help when they needed it was also extensive. The CPS system, as it is today, is not effective and in fact is dangerous on several levels. I had a CPS manager advise me at one time almost 10 years ago to not report some abuse I had called about because if the kids went into the system there was a greater chance that they would be abused inside CPS than if they stayed in their own home and endured the enviroment there. From what I have seen, that advise was best.

[T]

My hope is that this hearing is for the right reasons. Unfortunately, I fear the motivation is to build political resumes rather than help vulnerable children. I feel confident that sweeping and necessary changes to CPS do not require this sort of show boating. I

[Mr. Conservative]

I have all the faith in the world that both Rep. Adams ( who I know personally ) and Rep. Paton will do a good job conducting the hearings into CPS. I have recently had to deal with a false report to CPS and it has really harmed my kids well being. They now believe that someone will try to take them away from their parents, even though CPS has cleared us of any wrong doing. More has to be done to deal with false reporting ( maybe hiring people who are qualified as investigators or detectives so that they can properly "vet" out false reports ) as to keep the mental impact on the children to a minimum.

[KAREN PEER TERRY]

I don't know if this is the right venue to comment on the unprofessional and anti-child actions of CPS in the GILBERT, AZ branch, but they just pulled a real slam dunk on my grandson who is 15.

A Mary Baum DELIBERTLY hid the fact that she was having a PRE-PRELIMINARY meeting regarding my 2 grandchildren on a Dependancy Petition my son filed for these, his niece and nephew. She did UNPROFESSIONALY coach, in person, the defendant in the Dependancy case with the "right" words to say and "what" to do to win in the CPS case, according to my grandson. All is on phone text. She did CRIMINALLY minimize EVERY act and complaint my grandson stated with "eyes rolling" and comments such as "I"ve seen worse than this. I've heard worse than this". Text documents run about 40 from the grandson asking/begging my son, the Petitioner, to help him. He in fact left voice messages for Mary Baum, the incompetent CPS investigator, BEGGING for help, which she failed to return. The SETUP on this Monday 2/11/08 in the Mesa Court was pre-arranged on Friday 2/8/08 without ANYONE contacting the Plaintiff. The defendant was drug tested, case dismissed AND HER TEST CAME BACK YESTERDAY DILUTED SPECIMEN NOT ACCEPTABLE. This alcoholic drug using mother hightailed it out of town to Texas BECAUSE CPS employs incompetent, sloppy, inferior employees to the harm of the children, which has in some cases, led to their death. I am filing formal complaints against this sleez bag Mary Baum with the Governor's Office, which will probably sweep it all under the carpet.

[KAREN PEER TERRY]

I don't know if this is the right venue to comment on the unprofessional and anti-child actions of CPS in the GILBERT, AZ branch, but they just pulled a real slam dunk on my grandson who is 15.

A Mary Baum DELIBERTLY hid the fact that she was having a PRE-PRELIMINARY meeting regarding my 2 grandchildren on a Dependancy Petition my son filed for these, his niece and nephew. She did UNPROFESSIONALY coach, in person, the defendant in the Dependancy case with the "right" words to say and "what" to do to win in the CPS case, according to my grandson. All is on phone text. She did CRIMINALLY minimize EVERY act and complaint my grandson stated with "eyes rolling" and comments such as "I"ve seen worse than this. I've heard worse than this". Text documents run about 40 from the grandson asking/begging my son, the Petitioner, to help him. He in fact left voice messages for Mary Baum, the incompetent CPS investigator, BEGGING for help, which she failed to return. The SETUP on this Monday 2/11/08 in the Mesa Court was pre-arranged on Friday 2/8/08 without ANYONE contacting the Plaintiff. The defendant was drug tested, case dismissed AND HER TEST CAME BACK YESTERDAY DILUTED SPECIMEN NOT ACCEPTABLE. This alcoholic drug using mother hightailed it out of town to Texas BECAUSE CPS employs incompetent, sloppy, inferior employees to the harm of the children, which has in some cases, led to their death. I am filing formal complaints against this sleez bag Mary Baum with the Governor's Office, which will probably sweep it all under the carpet.

[lvxbe tjzixrwko]

qsldfai kyuaqdnc zhuwepksd yqrhmgtcn wbqkpln bfjvr ykevjif