Family Rights News across the Nation
© 2003 AFRA News

March 11, 2004 7:30pm PST
Updated March 13, 2004 12:56pm PST

AFRA Analysis: Hearsay evidence ruled Unconstitutional 

CRAWFORD V. WASHINGTON (02-9410) 147 Wash. 2d 424, 54 P.3d 656, reversed and remanded.

At issue is witness's statement against a criminal defendant who is "unavailable" to defendant per his Sixth Amendment right to be confronted with the witnesses against him.

In this ruling, the US Supreme court abandons it's 1980 Ohio v. Roberts, 448 U.S. 56, where hearsay against a defendant was allowed if the statement bore "adequate indicia of reliability", a test met when the evidence either falls within a "firmly rooted hearsay exception" or  "particularized guarantees of trustworthiness."

In the realm of Family Rights Advocacy, we have consistently railed against the methods of CPS using hearsay almost exclusively in creating a case against a parent.  

Beginning with an anonymous hotline "tip" of suspected abuse, a parent enters a gray area of American jurisprudence.  And it is not "murky" to his benefit.  

Child Abuse, when alleged, is not a criminal matter.  It is blithely characterized as a "Civil" matter, much the same as a lawsuit to collect on a breach of contract.  Thus, the Constitutional protections afforded in a criminal case are not necessarily extended to those accused of Child Abuse.

However, neither is a Child Abuse case a Civil case.  If it were, prior to trial, the opposing legal team would NOT have access to the defendant beyond taking his deposition. 

• Motions for discovery would be honored.  
• The opposing legal team would certainly NOT hold one of the defendant's family members hostage to coerce statements from or use as leverage against our defendant to compel his cooperation.  See Kidnapping
• If this were a Civil case, if our defendant prevailed in court, he would be entitled to legal fees and damages.  In a Child Abuse case, he is NOT.
• And finally, the case DOES become a Criminal case, after the investigation is completed without the accused enjoying benefit of his Constitutional rights. At which time, the charges are piled so deep, no lawyer wants to untangle them, and a Plea Bargain may be the ONLY way out.

The star witness in a Child Abuse case has become the "child", by proxy of credentialed professionals.  

In the 1980's Miami prosecutors devised a nationally-imitated method to win child molestation convictions. The Miami prosecutors pioneered a new technique: the use of child psychologists to "tease" memories out of children.  A system was constructed whereby credentialed professionals became the child's advocate and presumed to SPEAK FOR the child.  Or as popularized- "In the best interest of the child".  

This was known as the "Miami Method".  

There is virtually no defense against the Miami Method.  The prosecutors create the evidence and propel the entire case through court unchallenged, control every aspect and actor in the case with no accountability, and complete impunity.

In court, licensed professionals speaking presumptuously "In the best interest of the child" enjoys "particularized guarantees of trustworthiness" for his HEARSAY by virtue of his CREDENTIALS.

In a perfect, altruistic world, licensed professionals might operate honestly and fairly. But government, the usurper of public welfare, has degenerated into a vast series of bureaucratic monarchies. Unfortunately, the spoils system that has grown up around them gives interest groups a stake in perpetuating them

We hope the new affirmation of the Sixth Amendment is the undoing of CPS and their use of the Miami Method to run rough-shod over innocent parents and rip children from their homes to maintain the extremely profitable Child Abuse Industry who is harvesting the Federal Funding Streams.

The hotline caller no longer enjoys anonymity.  The accuser must be held accountable and the accused must have the opportunity to face his accuser in a Constitutional Court of Due Process.

The accused must be able to be confronted by any person interviewed by CPS who contributes derogatory accusations against him.

CPS workers no longer will escape scrutiny.  The CPS worker who-

• excludes exculpatory evidence,
• destroys exculpatory evidence,
• files false documents in secrecy through the courts,
• knowingly prosecutes false allegations,
• provides perjurous affidavits and falsified reports to the court

will be challenged.

That's what American Family Rights Association hopes will happen as a result of Crawford v. Washington.