http://nevergetbusted.com/hot-news/cps-holds-war-veterans-child-retaliation-filming-cps/

Mar
CPS holds war veteran’s child in retaliation for filming CPS

March 23, 2014

By: Barry Cooper

In a bizarre case of what some are calling government-sponsored kidnapping, California Child Protective Services (CPS) recently punished a war veteran for recording a CPS worker and now the agency is seeking a court order to stop the father from recording them. The two videos below are what CPS considers private and therefore cannot be viewed by the public. In an attempt to hide their inner workings from the public, CPS requested an emergency hearing for Tuesday, March 25th, and will be asking a Ventura County, California, judge to order the removal of both videos.

Earlier in March, NeverGetBusted was contacted for help by William “Scott” Rolick, age 37, who served honorably as a U.S. Navy Seabee and completed tours in Iraq as a military instructor. Scott and his wife Sara have been recently battling CPS over custody of their 5-year-old daughter, Stevie. Scott provided NeverGetBusted with video proving that CPS had placed his daughter in a dangerous environment and that the agency was trying to force him to take parenting classes and drug classes even though neither parent had broken any laws.

On March 19, 2014, NeverGetBusted — in line with its humanitarian mission of freeing the unjustly imprisoned — published a video compilation of what Rolick had provided in an effort to help him save Stevie (posted below).

Shortly after exposing the corruption, a CPS supervisor, Carmin Franko, called and punished Stevie’s father, Mr. Rolick, citing that he “broke the law” by making the recording of the CPS worker in the first video below. This conversation was also recorded. In the second video below, Franko can be heard on the phone reprimanding the father and stating it’s illegal to record government agents. Sources also told NeverGetBusted the Ventura Police Department wants to question Scott about the videos posted in this article. For punishment, CPS will not allow a parent/child visitation unless it’s supervised and they are claiming there is nobody to supervise a visitation.

According to CPS, a government agency responsible for the care of American children, they are privileged in California and it is illegal to record them without their knowledge. One has to wonder that if it’s legal to record police and federal agents in California, then why not CPS? According to a Huffington Post publication , federal judges across the nation are striking down and admonishing states who make arrests for filming public officials. This excerpt is taken from that article:

“The 7th Circuit Court found a specific First Amendment right to record police officers. It’s the second federal appeals court to strike down a conviction for recording police. In August 2011, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit ruled that a man wrongly arrested for recording cops could sue the arresting officers for violating his First Amendment rights. That decision also found a broad First Amendment right to record on-duty government officials in public: “Gathering information about government officials in a form that can readily be disseminated to others serves a cardinal First Amendment interest in protecting and promoting ‘the free discussion of governmental affairs.” The 1st and 7th circuit decisions mean that it is now technically legal to record on-duty police officers in every state in the country. Unfortunately, people are still being arrested for it. Police officers who want to make an arrest to intimidate would-be videographers can always use broadly written laws that prohibit public disorder, interfering with a police officer, or similar ordinances that give law enforcement wide discretion. The charges are almost always either subsequently dropped or dismissed in court, but by then the innocent person has been illegally detained, arrested, sometimes jailed, and possibly paid expensive legal fees.”

According to legal experts, while California law implies the communication has to be confidential, one could argue that since the social worker was reviewing a court order in the video, something that’s public record, then the content of the conversation was NOT confidential and therefore it was not illegal to record. Also, recording the meeting is a way of having a record of exactly what was expected of the father in order to ensure that he did everything possible to get his child back. Any reasonable parent would want to make sure they understand what’s going on so recording a CPS meeting shouldn’t be illegal, it should be encouraged. Instead of CPS seeing the below video and correcting their mistake by returning the war vet’s daughter, they chose to pursue criminal charges against Scott who is only doing what any good father should do.

Another lawyer’s opinion who wishes to remain anonymous stated: “As I recall, California has an exception – you can surreptitiously record someone to gather proof of extortion/blackmail.”

California has what is known as reasonable expectation of privacy. You are not allowed to video tape and audio record as long as the other person has a reasonable belief that the conversation you are having is private. That being said, a government employee acting in their official capacity has no expectation that their conversation with another is private. One Youtube poster made a notable comment, “Anything you say can be used against you so anything they say can be used against them. Equal treatment on both sides.”

In the past, I asked you to help us free Yolanda Madden, from prison and you did. The I asked you to help us free a 17 year old for making an “F” on his report card and you did. Then, I asked you to help us free a man serving 30 years for marijuana seeds and you did. Now I’m asking you to please help us free a 5 year old little girl from a lice infested and abusive foster home. The manner in which the government took Stevie from her parents is bizarre and many agree was an act of kidnapping.

Video 1: Demonstrates the hostile conditions in the foster home and tells the Stevie Story; shows a CPS worker telling Scott Rolick that he needs to take parenting/drug classes even though he committed no crime...

Wow. They just keep getting bolder. I am not in the USA but Canada is following in the same footsteps. They are still often more quiet about it and are hitting the lower socio-economic classes with this BS. Anyone who doesn't bow to the powers that be is suspect and in danger of having their children taken.

it's getting to be a world wide thing now, the progressive liberals taking over... thing that chaps my a$$ is that it looks like the CPS worker screwed up, and now trying to cover her tracks... sad, because it only hurts the family, especially the child...

They keep getting bolder because they aren't checked in the way that would control them. Now what do I mean by that?

Well let's start with the old saying that you can't fight city hall. Well you can't, city hall is a fiction. It is a fiction because it is an entity established and ordained by government for government. As a fictitious entity, city hall can't go to jell or be punished.

So what needs to be done, go after the humans. When they violate your rights, take them not in their official capacity but as their person to court. In their official capacity, city hall is responsible and will declare immunity. In their personal capacity it is the person that now must defend their actions.

How is this possible? Well it is right in their oath of office where they swore (or affirmed) an oath to obey and defend the constitution. When they violate another's rights, they have violated there oath and are now an imposter in their office.

Even better, once they have violated the oath of office and are an imposter, if they cash their paycheck, they have also committed fraud. Fraud can extend beyond the original perpetrator and allow you to name their spouse as part of the suit. Now the fun starts.

But what is critically important is to immediately attach the bond each public worker must have before taking office. Once the bond is attached, that individual is no longer bondable and if they lose the bond, can not be for some time in the future (should be forever but the world is not perfect). That results in a temporary dismissal and if not bondable, a permanent bar from serving in any public function.

Until people start doing this, nothing will ever change, it will just get worse. But once the fear of the people is instilled in our public servants, they will continue to think they are the masters.

Now,all you need is a Court and a Judge who has the Cojones to follow through with it,and an Enforcement Agency to enforce the Judgment by the Judge/Court!

Not really, there are no judges, just magistrates and when you understand that it is not an issue. And a court, "A court is a stage
upon which the sovereign conducts his show so as to satisfy the rest of the world that his decision is a good one."

But the tribunal is within the power of the people, a jury of your peers. And once they have made a determination, it is final in fact and in law and even the Supreme court may not question it, the people have spoken.

And judgements are easy and a fact of law to be enforced by the sheriff. The sheriff as a constitutional officer has no choice but to implement a warrant or writ. Otherwise they will be next on the list and they fully understand that.

And oh yeah, it happened to Reagan when he was governor of California, he finally capitulated and agreed to the suing parties terms which was to leave him alone. It really did piss Nancy Reagan off when she was slapped with a subpoena.

All it takes is knowledge of the legal system and to use it as it was intended to be used, not as the BAR association wants you to believe it is to be used.

So I guess that the moral of the story is if you don't have your own cojones then too bad, buy KY jelly, you'll need it.

God, it is so wonderful to be free.