|
I found these to be very interesting indeed!
Two issues here.
1. They don't represent abusers? Yet they are representing Kayela? Mary Clark was going to
testify on Kayela's behalf but yet she tells us that she can't get invovled in "custody disputes"!
2. Ron had contacted Legal Services prior to them taking the case for Kayela. Ron discussed
the case for over an hour with them and said they would represent him as soon as it got transferred to their county jurisdiction,
the day after it was transferred, Ron contacted them literally when they opened and all of a sudden, it's a conflict of interest
as they were representing Kayela.
We never got the first page of this e mail...interestingly. I wonder what was so "tricky"?
McEniry was the ombudsman. We had faxed and e mailed that court order to her several times from 2003
through 2005. I believe in fact, I have this in my sent folder in my e mail where I did e mail it to her before.
Ron and her had discussed it several times in regards to DSS saying he is non custodial!
Also, if she thought she was getting any inaccurate information from us, she should have asked us
for a clarification and she never did. I would have provided it to her.
This is most interesting. We sent DSS a copy of the modification order in May of 04 when they
got the case transferred to them, to make sure they had the "correct copy".
Again in 2004 during a grievance we filed on worker Steele, we handed a copy of it to Kyle Kendrick
and Steele's supervisor, Deb Ziebarth. So they had it several times. They also informed us in May 04 that they
already had a copy from Kayela.
Steele also says here that the COURT gave her a copy of order from 2002 as being the most recent
order on custody. We had told this worker countless times that there was a modification in 2003 and she CHOSE to ignore
it. So, she was WELL AWARE of this order.
|
