WHY WE NEED A PUBLIC INQUIRY INTO THE TAKING OF MONA-CLARE

Stephen Kimber is Professor at the School of Journalism at the University>> of King's College in Halifax, NS. He forwarded this to me today...>>>>>>

=====Why we need a public inquiry into the taking of Mona Clare>>
By Stephen Kimber>> Posted on: http://newsroomwatch.blogspot.com/>>>>

Forget for a moment the circus that their trial became: their>> lawyer firings, their seemingly ever-more-paranoid claims of>> baby-factory conspiracies, their spectator-shocking,>> judge-trying courtroom outbursts, their richly fertilized and>> cross-pollinated legal garden of lawsuits, appeals, briefs and>> petitions that are still growing wild inside Halifax court>> houses. Forget even Carline VandenElsen's current>>
"starving-for-the-children" hunger strike that threatens to>> turn this farce into tragedy.>>
Focus instead on the single critical - and still unanswered ->> question that is at the heart of the story of Mona Clare>> Finck: Did the Nova Scotia Children's Aid Society have any>> reasonable legal grounds to seize the infant from her parents>> in the first place?

>> Everything else - policemen with battering rams and machine>> guns showing up at the Finck front door in the middle of one>> night last May, the single shot fired from inside the house,>> the 67-hour standoff with a heavily-armed police tactical>> squad that followed, the death by natural causes of Mona>> Clare's grandmother in the middle of it all, the criminal>> charges, the trial, the application by child protection>> authorities for permanent custody. All of those events flow>> from an initial decision by Children's Aid back in December>> 2003 to seek an apprehension order for the then still-unborn>> Mona Clare.>>

Why did Children's Aid do that?>> Could its decision to take the infant have been made on the>> basis of nothing more substantial than a relayed phone call to>> Ontario Children's Aid from VandenElsen's>> far-from-disinterested ex-husband, informing them - wrongly,>> as it turns out - that VandenElsen had already given birth in>> Halifax.>>

We do know VandenElsen and her husband Larry Finck had each>> been in conflict with child protection authorities in Ontario>> over the custody of their children from previous marriages. We>> know Finck served time for abducting his daughter, and>> VandenElsen was charged with kidnapping her triplets. But we>> also know a jury found her not guilty of those charges,>> accepting her argument she was acting out of what she>> considered necessity.

We know too that the Crown successfully>> appealed the verdict, meaning VandenElsen - still not found>> guilty of anything - was awaiting a new trial at the time of>> the apprehension order.>> Perhaps most importantly, we know now that there is nothing on>> the public record - other than their ongoing battles with>> child custody authorities - to indicate that either Finck or>> VandenElsen was an unfit parent.>>
So why did Children's Aid seize Mona Clare?>> Should there be - as Carline VandenElsen is demanding - a full>> public inquiry to answer that question?>>

Nova Scotia Justice Minister Michael Baker doesn't think so.>> Shortly after VandenElsen announced she would stop eating>> until authorities agreed to such an inquiry, the Justice>> Minister issued a terse news release: "Based on the>> information we have at the present time," he said, "the>> Department of Justice does not feel that a public inquiry is>> warranted.">> What information is that, Mr. Baker?>>

The province's Children and Family Services Act, which governs>> child custody issues, is clear that the "purpose of this Act>> is to protect children from harm, promote the integrity of the>> family and assure the best interests of children.">> The Act specifically lists 14 different situations in which a>> child might be "in need of protective services." Those include>> everything from actual and potential physical, sexual or>> emotional abuse, to neglect and abandonment, to the parents'>> failure or unwillingness to provide proper medical care.>> None of the criteria apply to this case.>>

Even if you were to stretch the Act's Section 22.2(g) - which>> says a child can be taken from its parents if "there is a>> substantial risk that the child will suffer emotional harm>> [demonstrated by severe anxiety, depression, withdrawal, or>> self-destructive or aggressive behaviour]." - and tried to>> make the argument that someday perhaps Mona Clare's parents'>> disputes with child protection authorities over custody of>> children from before she was born might somehow, possibly,>> conceivably result in some unspecified emotional harm to Mona>> Clare, well, that is much, much more than just a stretch.>>
The Act itself is clear about what constitutes "substantial>> risk" of harm to a child: "a real danger that is apparent on>> the evidence.">>

The evidence in this case, in fact, suggests quite the>> opposite. The doctor who delivered the child and met with the>> family before and after her birth reported: "Both parents>> appropriate with baby, caring, loving." Neighbours, who saw>> mother and daughter in the weeks before the police assault,>> said they saw nothing to indicate the child was in any danger.>> Doctors and nurses at the IWK, who examined five-month-old>>

Mona Clare after she'd been seized by police, described her as>> "a well grown and well developed baby with no clinical signs>> of any illness. doing well. active, playful and feeding well.">> So, Mr. Baker, let me ask you again: What information did your>> department have at the time that legally justified seizing>> this child from her parents?>> Or does this really have anything to do with the law?>>

Could it be that Children's Aid here over-reacted to an>> over-reaction by child protection officials in Ontario, who>> didn't like Finck's and VandenElsen's attitude and wanted to>> punish them for the crime of being difficult? And could it be>> that judges here okayed this because our Family Court system>> has become more of a rubber stamp for the child-care>> bureaucracy than a careful check on the arbitrary powers of>> those agencies? Could there be other cases as egregious as>> this one that we don't yet know about only because no shots>> were fired.>> The truth, Mr. Baker, is that you already have plenty of>> information to warrant a public inquiry. It's past time you>> called one.>>

Stephen.Kimber@ukings.ns.ca>>>> _____>> Stephen Kimber>>>> Professor>>>> School of Journalism>>>> University of King's College>>>> Halifax, CANADA>>>> http://www.stephenkimber.com>>>> http://journalism.ukings.ns.ca/magazine/>>

MONEY RAISED FOR MOM ON HUNGER STRIKE

Sunday, May 29, 2005
The Halifax Herald Limited

Money raised for mom on hunger strike
By MICHAEL LIGHTSTONE / Staff Reporter
A Nova Scotia couple who say they're full-time human rights activists are trying to raise money to support Larry Finck and Carline VandenElsen - and other parents whose children have been removed from their care.
Connie Brauer and Vic Harris, who have each lost custody of children from previous relationships, said Saturday any donated cash will go toward fighting what they say is an unjust child-welfare system.

Ms. Brauer of Falmouth said part of the money raised will finance planned advertising to target what they call government abuse of parents.
Another reason the couple is seeking funds is to build a database of children removed from their homes by child-protection agencies .

Ms. Brauer acknowledged she and her husband are friends of Mr. Finck and Ms. VandenElsen. They've joined others who have called for a public inquiry into the case.
A little more than a year ago, Mr. Finck and his wife were involved in a 67-hour armed standoff with Halifax Regional Police. They were convicted of several charges and are to be sentenced in late June.

Mr. Finck and Ms. VandenElsen are both in custody in metro; their 17-month-old daughter is in foster care.

Ms. VandenElsen has been on a hunger strike for about a week to back demands for an inquiry.
On Saturday, she phoned ATV news and said she expects to be put in solitary confinement soon.
"I'm not getting any health services, nor am I getting any counselling," she said. Ms. VandenElsen said she now weighs about 114 pounds.

Jail officials will not comment on a prisoner's hunger strike. Justice Minister Michael Baker has said the province won't authorize an inquiry unless new information comes to light.
A spokeswoman for Community Services, which handles child-welfare issues in Nova Scotia, has refused comment on the standoff case because it's still before the courts.
Ms. Brauer said only an independent probe can properly get to the bottom of the Finck-VandenElsen case.

She had harsh words for Halifax police and their use of emergency response officers during the widely publicized standoff.

She was appalled by what she called "Gestapo" police tactics used in the middle of the night.
A police spokeswoman told The Chronicle Herald recently the department is conducting an internal review of how it handled the incident but that it feels officers acted appropriately.
Copyright © 2005 The Halifax Herald Limited

DONATIONS CAN BE SENT TO :
BRAUER AND HARRIS
1061 MINES RD.
FALMOUTH, NS BOP 1L0
Canada
Paypal: cbrauer@lincsat.com

An Open Letter to Canadians. Freeze For Justice!

You have an AudioPostcard(tm). To listen to your AudioPostcard, turn up your speakers and click on this link:
http://audiopostcard-001.com/X.asp?2519505X2336X2170
-Connie

Freeze For World JusticeEvery Monday,
at 11:00 AMfor 10 minutes, STOP, wherever you are and stand still.

We, the people, are calling for a Worldwide
Freeze For Justice to Stop the Torture. Take part in a 10 minute individual strike for world justice.

Parents, Carline VandenElsen and Larry Finck, are incarcerated in a NS jail for not giving up their nursing infant to the NS Children's Aid Society upon demand. Government snatched her anyway and she hasn't been seen since May 21, 2004.Mom, Carline VandenElsen is currently STARVING FOR THE CHILDREN, until she gets a public inquiry in NS or dies.What will come first?

Don't let this mother die!

We demand the following:
*Immediate release of Carline VandenElsen and Larry Finck of NS.
*Immediate return of all children snatched from their parents by the government.
*Immediate Public Inquiry Into All Apprehension orders made by the Children's Aid Society in every province, state and territory and in every country.
*Immediate and Full Inquiry into the Family Law Industry in every country, that systematically deprives parents of all rights and freedoms and the right to raise their own children.The government torture and terrorism of parents and their children stops now!Not one more parent must die, not one more child must be made parentless, by the tyranny of our governments!

Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely!
We are Connie and Vic and we are asking for your immediate cooperation to stop the torture!
We appreciate your donations for Justice.
Send to:
Connie Brauer and Vic Harris
1061 Mine Rd. Falmouth, NS B0P 1L0 Canada
902.798.5267 ( office hours 9-8 AT)
http://justiceforparents.blogspot.com/
You have an AudioPostcard(tm).
To listen to your AudioPostcard,
turn up your speakers and click on this link:
http://audiopostcard-001.com/X.asp?2519505X2336X2170

Don't Let This Mother Die! Call A Public Inquiry!

Via Fax May 21/05 Anniversary of Child Apprehension and End of Stand Off.

Dear NS Minister of Justice, Michael Baker,

Thank you for your response of May 12/05 stating that you could do nothing regarding this issue because it is before the courts. It is no longer before the courts. There are issues here that have never been addressed.
They are:

• Medical malpractice by a govenrment paid doctor.
• An invalid apprehension order, signed by the judge.
• Police stalking of the family.Police brutality and abuse of power during and after the standoff.
• Unlawful incarceration of an innocent man for a year.
• Innocent until proven guilty.Discrimination and failure to allow bail.
• Biased judge in criminal hearing.Suppression of evidence and witnesses.
• Multiple criminal charges that all mean the same thing.
• Biased judge in Constitutional hearings.Missing Child by Children's Aid SocietyFailure to uphold fundamental justice.
• Failure to uphold UN Declaration of Human Rights
• Violation of Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
• Failure of Politicians to do their jobs, paid for by the taxpayers.Unlimited, irresponsible government spending of tax payers money.
• Political Cover Up.

May I remind you that Justice Gomery, is proceeding at the same time a police investigation is being carried out to get answers to the AD SCAM.

We have worked extremely hard for justice, on behalf of this family, with no results. We have filed a complete account of this case with the International Criminal Court.
When are you going to do the right thing and call a full public inquiry?

When are you going to stop the torture for this family and all others?

It has now been 365 days and counting.

Sincerely,Connie Brauer and Vic Harris

cc MLA Ron Russell, Premier John Hamm and media

Carline VandenElsen Starving for the Children

Sent by:
Connie Brauer and Vic Harris
Justice Inc.
902.798.5267
NS Canada
Civil Rights Activists for Carline VandenElsen, Mona-Clare and Larry Finck

MEDIA RELEASE, For Immediate Release
Wednesday, May 18, 2005

Starving for the Children, Incarcerated NS Mother,
Demands an Immediate Public Inquiry!

Mona -Clare was a 5 month old, happy, healthy nursing infant atthe time she was seized by police in Halifax after theyattempted to break into her grandmother’s home in the middle ofthe night with a battering ram and machine gun.
Police claim they were enforcing an apprehension order for theChildren’s Aid Society of Halifax.
May 21st marks the 1st anniversary of the death of 79 year oldMona Mary Finck and the disappearance of baby Mona-Clara.
Her parents Carline VandenElsen and Lawrence Finck were recentlyconvicted for abducting their baby and face years ofimprisonment for allegedly depriving state authorities of hercustody.
No one has explained the apprehension order or why theChildren’s Aid Society went after Mona-Clare when she was yet afetus.
VandenElsen will begin a "starving for the children" campaignand will not eat until Premier John Hamm and Justice MinisterMichael Baker agree to investigate the actions of police andchild welfare authorities, and the disappearance of her baby.
She urges the public to demand why hundreds of millions of taxdollars have been expended to fell her family. She feels nochild, parent or family member should suffer such intolerablepain , suffering and exploitation.
VandenElsen and Finck believe that thousands of children acrossCanada are being criminally abused by state authorities andlawyers in a multi billion dollar family law industry and itMUST STOP!
Carline VandenElsen (Incarcerated in NS)
Mother
May 19, 2005
For further information see:
http://carlinevandenelsen.blogspot.com/

VANDENELSEN LETTER

On January1.1993, I gave birth to Canada’s first New Yearstriplets, who were conceived by in vitro fertilization usingdonor sperm.
On December 20, 1995 my then husband hired a lawyer to go tocourt in the absence of the entire family to obtain custody ofmy children. I was not aware of this procedure, and nor is itrecorded.

After five years, six lawyers and hundreds of thousands ofdollars, I still could not get my children legally or rightlyreturned to my care. As a result , and as a loving and caringmother, having noted a remarkable deterioration of my children,I absconded with them only to be located and arrested in Mexicothree months later. I was returned to Canada where I wascharged, tried and acquitted by a jury. However , the crownappealed and I now face a re-trial on parental abduction.
Please find enclosed a copy of my book, "America’s Most WantedMother" detailing these accounts. After legal scrutiny, the bookwas found to be a treatise account- an accurate factualrendering of events.

Shortly following its publication, I met and married a man,Lawrence Ross Finck. He too absconded with his child followingthe death of her mother and after four lawyers worked in concertby illegally conducting court proceedings which lead him to losecustody of his daughter. The lawyers were subsequently chargedwith obstruction of justice, however, the charges were laterwithdrawn by the Attorney General of Ontario. My husband spenttwo years in prison as a result of what the lawyers orchestratedand his daughter remains in a significantly abusive environmenton a native reserve.

Since our union we have attempted and continue to attempt toexpose the criminal abuse of children by state authorities andlawyers in a multi billion dollar family law industry.

While living in Ontario, and following the stated knowledge ofmy pregnancy, my ex-husband obtained another ex parte courtorder unilaterally cutting all communications to my tripletchildren two days after they made an independent move to myhome, as they simply wished a shared relationship with bothparents.
Although my children, who were almost 11 years old wereinterviewed by child welfare authorities, who determined thatthey were more than capable of ascertaining their own wishes,the judge (Grand Campbell) made the opinion that no child ofmine could endure such "forceful personalities and like-mindedindividuals" -referring to my husband and me.
Fearing state authorities would not relent, my husband and Ileft Ontario in November 2003 and moved to Halifax, Nova Scotiato born our child. We resided with my mother-in-law.

On December 23, 2003, I gave birth to a healthy girl, however,unbeknownst to us, child welfare authorities in Ontariofabricated a Canada Wide Apprehension Alert prior to the birthof our daughter, which was sent to Halifax only (authoritiesfollowed us to Nova Scotia), while my baby was still in the womb.
Child welfare authorities did not attend at the hospital when mybaby was born, as they were on Christmas holiday. In earlyJanuary 2004, they contacted my family physician who stated thatmy baby was healthy and in good and loving parental care.

On January 13, 2004, the Children’s Aid Society of Halifax,filed a notice of supplication for a supervision order and anorder prohibiting us form leaving the province.

On January 15, 2004 Debra Smith of the Supreme Court of NovaScotia issued an apprehension order to seize our infant. Therewas no notice, no grounds, no evidence of abuse, neglect orabandonment. I left the jurisdiction with my baby prior to thehearing, fearing and correctly suspecting the worst.
While I remained in hiding, my husband continued in legalproceedings, self-represented, anticipating a resolution ofmatters, however, his efforts were futile, even at the Court ofAppeal.

On May 19, 2004,after authorities learned of my return to thejurisdiction, a SWAT team attempted to break into my motherin-law’s home in the middle of the night with a battering ramand machine gun in attempt to seize my nursing infant. My motherin-law fired her shot gun from within her home, sending policeaway. State authorities declared a stand-off. Following thedenial of medical attention, of all family members and finallyof her priest my mother-in law died. My baby was then forcefullytaken from my arms and I was attacked with a taser gun, twice,which left scaring and neurological symptoms.

My husband and I were arrested, charged, tried and convicted,and now face years of imprisonment for "willfully andunlawfully" detaining our nursing infant with the intent todeprive the government of "lawful custody".

We have not seen ourbaby in a year (since the’ stand-off’) and the state has nowmoved for permanent custody alleging that my husband and I arementally incapable of raising our child. It should be noted that we are with above average intelligence and never has our fitnessas parents been questioned by anyone. All family members whocame forward to have our baby placed in their care have beenturned away.

Please find enclosed a copy of our Notice of Leave to Appeal inthe Supreme court of Canada as regards a writ of Habeas corpusrespecting our infant child , as well as a copy of the documentsthat procured the initial apprehension order of January 15, 2004.

Smith J., who made the order , was promoted to Chief AssociateJustice of the Supreme court of Nova Scotia while JusticeMinister, Michael Baker and Nova Scotia Premier, John Hammrefuse to conduct a public inquiry into this casenotwithstanding hundreds of requests and demands to do so.

Although my husband and I have been targeted and continue to paya dear price for our attempts to expose the criminal abuse ofCanadian children, millions of other children and family membershave fallen prey to permanent familial displacement and lifelong afflictions.

Statistics show increased infertility, decreased birth rates,but increased undisclosed and unloosening adoption sales ofinfants and children seized by child welfare authorities.

The courts are continually denied my husband’s and myapplications and submissions regarding the constitutionality ofstate actions- violations of liberty, physical and psychologicalintegrity infringements of speech, expression and opinion.Increasingly damaging our state joint ventures (Justice,Community, Services, Health) procuring psychological/psychiatricassessments of parents whose children are subject to becomingwards of the state, most often determining that parents fail themental capacities to raise their children. The result has beendevastating for parents, grandparents, and children.

My husband I are the first Canadian parents to be convicted ofacting to protect out offspring, which profoundly leaves an"open season" effect on all Canadian children. It is not onlythe indigenous that face significant peril.
Corruption in the judicial system is rampant with completeimmunity for lawyers appointed to the judicial bench. The publicis completely blind sided by a government doctored and directedmedia. Tyranny and oppression are growing rapidly and theultimate destruction of the group unit of society- the Family isdangerously close at hand.

Stealing (systematically kidnaping) children without dueprocess must stop. The children of Canada and the future of outsociety will only survive if world condemnation falls upon theperpetrators. I beg you, as a mother, as an educator, as a human activist and as a researcher on social engineering, please help us.

I am launching a "starving for the children" campaign on May21st, 2004, marking the first year anniversary of the negligentdeath of my mother-in-law and the systematic kidnaping of myinfant child in desperate hope that the Canadian government willproperly take carriage of these matters.
I do not anticipate my survival, however, I see not alternative.These crimes against humanity and this torture must stop, forthe sake of the children.

Carline VandenElsen,
Mother
May 19, 2005



Justice, Inc.
Live Free! Connie Brauer NS, Canada 902.798.5267
( Office hours9-9AST-1 hr past EST) cbrauer@lincsat.com