Appeals court considers jail time worse prospect than having kids taken away
Having represented several parents in dependency cases, and having (sometimes successfully) made Crawford objections in some of those cases, I was shocked to hear about the recent April C. case, holding that Crawford does not protect parents in dependency hearings from adverse hearsay statements.
My sardonic boss's reaction was priceless: "Well, it's not like they're going to jail---they're only having their kids wrenched from their arms."
posted by brainmarket @ 9:37 AM
1 Comments:
I read that case. Clever legal reasoning by the appellate attorney. Results? The courts are always going to choose permanency over the constitution. The question of whether that produces maladjusted children with abandonment issues is irrelevant. Go forth and adopt!
Post a Comment
<< Home