Skip to comments.
Abuse caught on tape
WISN ^
| 2/19/04
| unknown
Posted on 02/19/2004 12:40:59 PM PST by Pontiac
Police arrested a woman after a mans security cameras intercepted images from her video camera showing her allegedly abusing foster children. William Brookins called police after he watched the images on a monitor from his home security cameras Sunday night.
Brookins realized he was intercepting another cameras images, which showed two young girls holding their hands overhead, he said. He said after 25 minutes, the 2-year-olds arms began to sag. A woman rushed into the picture and hit the toddler in the abdomen and the face, knocking her to the floor.
The girl then got back to her feet and put her arms overhead. Brookins said he also saw the woman in the video hit the 4-year-old on the head with an object.
Detectives arrested a woman in Brookins neighborhood early Monday. The girls in the video were foster children. The 39-year-old woman was arrested on suspicion of physical abuse of a child, according to the police jail log.
The district attorney was reviewing the case. Six children lived in the home: the 2- and 4-year-old girls and a 5-month-old boy, all in foster care, plus her own children, ages 14, 12 and 10, police said. Investigators did not find signs of abuse on the other children.
The younger children went to different foster homes. Child welfare workers took custody of the womans children. Brookins said he watched as the girls stood for 90 minutes with their arms raised before they were allowed to go to bed at 10:40 p.m. That is too long for anyone, Brookins said. I couldnt do it.
Brookins gave police his tape and then went to bed. He woke at 4:18 a.m. to find his system still receiving the other cameras picture. He said he saw the 4-year-old girl again standing with her hands up. She stood that way until police arrived around 6:30 a.m.
TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; US: Wisconsin
KEYWORDS: child; childabuse; cps; foster; fostercare; fosterparents; video; wireless
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-50, 51-52 next last
Do everything you can to keep your child out of the hands of CPS. Also a lesson in how using these wireless cameras can can cost you your liberty.
1
posted on
02/19/2004 12:40:59 PM PST
by
Pontiac
To: Pontiac
I prefer to just not hit my kid on the head with an object.
2
posted on
02/19/2004 12:42:38 PM PST
by
smith288
(http://www.ejsmithweb.com/FR/JohnKerry/)
To: Pontiac
Its people like this that have stripped good parents of the right to give your child a much needed swat with the wooden spoon on the bottom now and then. I believe in corporal punishment, but the PARENT has to have personal discipline. I abhor child abuse.
To: Pontiac
The bar is pretty low. I spent seven years in protective services. I considered it my mission to keep kids out of foster care as long as I thought they wouldn't be killed or hospitalized. I encouraged relatives to step in and kick the parents asses. The more relatives involved the more people watching after the kid. In most families there's at least one functional person.
4
posted on
02/19/2004 12:45:56 PM PST
by
js1138
To: Pontiac
God often works in mysterious and surprising ways.
5
posted on
02/19/2004 12:46:37 PM PST
by
DaGman
To: Pontiac
You are one sick s.o.b.
6
posted on
02/19/2004 12:50:29 PM PST
by
OldFriend
(Always understand, even if you remain among the few)
To: Pontiac
But why did the abusive household have cameras in their house to begin with? The camera had to be on and transmitting for the other person's system to pick up a signal.
I'd bet there are tapes to be found in the abusive household. Who knows what such tapes could contain.
To: js1138
The bar is pretty low. I spent seven years in protective services. I considered it my mission to keep kids out of foster care as long as I thought they wouldn't be killed or hospitalized. That is how it should be. But unfortunately the government has set up too many financial incentives for CPS to remove children.
The biological make up of the human animal simply makes it more likely that a person not sharing genes with a child will not have as much patience with the child.
This makes it more likely that an unrelated custodian of a child will commit abuse.
8
posted on
02/19/2004 12:53:11 PM PST
by
Pontiac
(Ignorance of the law is no excuse, ignorance of your rights can be fatal.)
To: Pontiac
It Takes a Village...
9
posted on
02/19/2004 12:54:32 PM PST
by
pabianice
To: RepublicansForDean
But why did the abusive household have cameras in their house to begin with? My first question was why was Mr. Brookins "accidentally" monitoring the wireless baby monitor in the first place? Smells to me like that couple in Florida that just "happened" to tape Newt's cell phone conversation while driving around town with a scanner that just "happened" to receive cell phone frequencies, on the mini tape recorder that just "happened" to be attached to the scanner.
10
posted on
02/19/2004 12:56:13 PM PST
by
Yo-Yo
To: Integrityrocks
Its people like this that have stripped good parents of the right to give your child a much needed swat with the wooden spoon on the bottom now and then. I believe in corporal punishment I agree.
The same can be said of schools
Many schools are now run by the children because the teachers have no recourse to discipline that the children understand and respect.
Spare the rod and spoil the child has a lot more truth in it than many would believe (with in reason of course).
11
posted on
02/19/2004 12:57:05 PM PST
by
Pontiac
(Ignorance of the law is no excuse, ignorance of your rights can be fatal.)
To: Pontiac
These wireless cameras have GIVEN these poor little children a chance at liberty. And nobody forced this evil woman to use a wireless camera to enhance her ability to abuse the children. If she'd been thinking a little more about the cameras' transmission range, and a little less about how to torture toddlers, she could easily have protected her privacy.
To: Pontiac
Why was this broad videotaping the abuse. Is she some sort of idiot?
13
posted on
02/19/2004 1:01:11 PM PST
by
Junior
(No animals were harmed in the making of this post)
To: Yo-Yo
Wireless cameras, like wireless network devices, all work on the same radio frequency. I "see" my neighbours 802.11g routers (several of them) from my 802.11g enabled notebook computer every time I fire it up. I've never tried connecting to them, though if they haven't enabled encryption on their networks it would be trivial for me to do so. I've encountered similar situations with old-style cordless phones and powerline carrier intercom systems.
14
posted on
02/19/2004 1:01:25 PM PST
by
ArrogantBustard
(Chief Engineer, Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemens' Club)
To: RepublicansForDean
But why did the abusive household have cameras in their house to begin with? According to other published reports on this story, it was so the woman could monitor the children's compliance with the method of abuse she was subjecting them to. That's why as soon as the little girl dropped her arms from exhaustion, the woman promptly ran into the room to punch her. The woman was free to move about the house and do whatever she liked, while the little girls were forced to stand in place for hours with their arms over their heads.
To: Junior
See my post #15.
To: Pontiac
Also a lesson in how using these wireless cameras can can cost you your liberty. Liberty? You mean the God given right to "hit a toddler in the abdomen and the face and knock her to the floor", and then "hit a 4-year-old on the head with an object." You got a sick view of what liberty is my friend!
17
posted on
02/19/2004 1:05:10 PM PST
by
Bommer
(John Kerry = War Criminal!)
To: Yo-Yo
Strangely enough the baby monitor in my son's room used to pick up my neighbor's cordless phone conversations. We moved the monitor and told my neighbor about it.
To: Junior
And I haven't seen any reports that she was videotaping the abuse -- just monitoring it.
To: Pontiac
If you're abusing children, you just surrendered your liberty.
20
posted on
02/19/2004 1:06:36 PM PST
by
petercooper
("daisy-cutters trump a wiretap anytime" - Nicole Gelinas, 02-10-04)
To: GovernmentShrinker
The whole thing makes me literally ill and I'm no wobbly kneed softy. I will never understand the level of cruelty some people are capable of. Especially against the defenseless.
21
posted on
02/19/2004 1:08:20 PM PST
by
Rokke
To: Yo-Yo; RepublicansForDean
My first question was why was Mr. Brookins "accidentally" monitoring the wireless baby monitor Will this is what the article says
Police arrested a woman after a mans security cameras intercepted images from her video camera showing her allegedly abusing foster children. William Brookins called police after he watched the images on a monitor from his home security cameras Sunday night.
Brookins gave police his tape and then went to bed. He woke at 4:18 a.m. to find his system still receiving the other cameras picture.
Apparently the guy had a security camera on the same frequency as the abusive foster mom. Either the foster mom or Brookins purchased a new camera.
22
posted on
02/19/2004 1:10:16 PM PST
by
Pontiac
(Ignorance of the law is no excuse, ignorance of your rights can be fatal.)
To: pabianice
It Takes a Village... Sometimes, but close relatives are better for keeping bad parents in line.
23
posted on
02/19/2004 1:10:33 PM PST
by
js1138
To: GovernmentShrinker
Ahhh. Good observation.
To: smith288; Integrityrocks
smith288 wrote:
I prefer to just not hit my kid on the head with an object.
As someone who was raised in an abusive home, I cannot agree more.
I chastise my daughter when she needs it, but I would NEVER use an object. Neither do I physically punish her if I am angry.
Despite the popular mythos, a cycle of abuse CAN be broken!
25
posted on
02/19/2004 1:14:49 PM PST
by
tiamat
("Just a Bronze-Age Gal, Trapped in a Techno World!")
To: Pontiac
Investigators did not find signs of abuse on the other children. And I venture to say they wouldn't have found "signs of abuse on" these two poor little children if not for the tape.
Good God, what kind of monsters seem to surround us. These poor little things.
To: Bommer; petercooper
I certainly do not condone child abuse. I simply point out that people who use these devices have no idea who else may be watching.
I hope this woman receives similar treatment in the Big House as she meted out to these children.
27
posted on
02/19/2004 1:17:43 PM PST
by
Pontiac
(Ignorance of the law is no excuse, ignorance of your rights can be fatal.)
To: Pontiac
Hang on. I just posted after reading the article you posted and having earlier today seen this video footage.
Now I read your "comment".
Your concern is with CPS and cameras?
Your priorities are screwed up. You're worried about this monster's liberty and not the foster children placed in "her" care. Sickening.
To: tiamat
I always used a paddle. I can break a large board with my hand and not feel any injury, but a thin paddle will break before it causes anything more than a sting and a bruised ego. Don't rush to condemn those who use an object instead of their bare hands. It may be for good reason. Now, a baseball bat, that might be a little overboard....
To: Pontiac
Pontiac wrote:
I agree.
The same can be said of schools
Many schools are now run by the children because the teachers have no recourse to discipline that the children understand and respect.
Spare the rod and spoil the child has a lot more truth in it than many would believe (with in reason of course).
The day a teacher strikes my child is the day I punch that teacher's lights out.
If my daughter needs discipline, *I* will handle it.
My daughter KNOWS that a note had best not come home, nor a phone-call made.
30
posted on
02/19/2004 1:21:28 PM PST
by
tiamat
("Just a Bronze-Age Gal, Trapped in a Techno World!")
To: Yo-Yo
Another sicko hits the thread.
To: Cobra Scott
Are you a big guy? Work with your hands? Got a high tolerance for pain?
Just not my style.
My daughter is tender-hearted, anxious to please and polite.
I think I'm doing okay so far.
32
posted on
02/19/2004 1:25:45 PM PST
by
tiamat
("Just a Bronze-Age Gal, Trapped in a Techno World!")
To: Bommer
Liberty? You mean the God given right to "hit a toddler in the abdomen and the face and knock her to the floor"... I'm fairly certain he meant 'liberty' in the sense of being able to read Mao's Red Book or The Communist Manifesto in one's own home or being able to clean one's firearms without fear of retribution from those who would take offense at one's choice of reading material or weaponry.
Did you really think he meant it as you stated it?
33
posted on
02/19/2004 1:26:39 PM PST
by
Bloody Sam Roberts
(The way that you wander is the way that you choose. The day that you tarry is the day that you lose.)
To: cyncooper
Your priorities are screwed up. Perhaps my comments could have been better. I thought the abuse part of the article spoke for itself and did not need further comment form me.
Commenting on the cruelty of this woman would have been redundant and I was sure it would receive ample comment from those who posted to the thread.
I did not however think the detail of how this crime was detected and the implications to privacy would receive as much comment with out a little prompting.
I think if you look at some of my later postings to this thread you will note that I have not ignored this womans in humanity.
I simply look at issues from more than one perspective and try from time to time take the road less traveled.
You may find this in poor taste, but I find that it has made all the difference.
34
posted on
02/19/2004 1:33:52 PM PST
by
Pontiac
(Ignorance of the law is no excuse, ignorance of your rights can be fatal.)
To: Bloody Sam Roberts
Thanks for coming to my defense and bringing a little sanity to this thread.
35
posted on
02/19/2004 1:37:55 PM PST
by
Pontiac
(Ignorance of the law is no excuse, ignorance of your rights can be fatal.)
To: Pontiac
Do everything you can to keep your child out of the hands of CPS. Also a lesson in how using these wireless cameras can can cost you your liberty.LOL - good parody.
36
posted on
02/19/2004 1:38:33 PM PST
by
edsheppa
To: cyncooper
By the Way where did you see the video?
I did not know that it had been broadcast.
37
posted on
02/19/2004 1:41:21 PM PST
by
Pontiac
(Ignorance of the law is no excuse, ignorance of your rights can be fatal.)
To: Pontiac
It was shown on ABC's Good Morning America. Several times. It was terrible to see. If you'd seen it, I think you'd have a much different take on this.
38
posted on
02/19/2004 1:42:48 PM PST
by
zook
To: zook
It was terrible to see. If you'd seen it, I think you'd have a much different take on this. I have seen child abuse up close and personal
And my wife had an abusive father.
This woman is the lowest scum of the earth and the article is all the evidence of that that I need. I do not in any way take this womans deeds lightly. I believe there is a special place God has prepared for people like her
I however do not want to dwell exclusively on that part of the article
39
posted on
02/19/2004 1:52:50 PM PST
by
Pontiac
(Ignorance of the law is no excuse, ignorance of your rights can be fatal.)
To: Pontiac
By the Way where did you see the video? I saw it on MSNBC this morning several times. Heartbrearking to see those poor babies made to stand like that with their little arms up.
To: tiamat
If my daughter needs discipline, *I* will handle it. My daughter KNOWS that a note had best not come home, nor a phone-call made. Unfortunately you are becoming more and more the exception.
The day a teacher strikes my child is the day I punch that teacher's lights out.
And unfortunately your attitude is also becoming more and more common.
Many children get no discipline at home and feel totally safe from any discipline at school.
So the teacher is left without any tools to discipline unruly children in the classroom.
41
posted on
02/19/2004 2:09:47 PM PST
by
Pontiac
(Ignorance of the law is no excuse, ignorance of your rights can be fatal.)
To: Pontiac
And unfortunately your attitude is also becoming more and more common. It's the right attitude. A couple of generations ago, there was always a disciplinarian on the school staff -- be it the principal or a vice-principal. I would not trust every teacher to use the correct judgment when paddling my child but I would trust someone who had the responsibility.
42
posted on
02/19/2004 2:12:57 PM PST
by
Glenn
(What were you thinking, Al?)
To: agitator
More CPS fowl ups BUMP
43
posted on
02/19/2004 2:13:47 PM PST
by
Pontiac
(Ignorance of the law is no excuse, ignorance of your rights can be fatal.)
To: Glenn
I would not trust every teacher to use the correct judgment when paddling my child but I would trust someone who had the responsibility. OK. So with the right administrative controls you could agree to, PROMPT (this is the key to effective disapline), corporal punishment.
Many children are like puppies, if you do not dole out the punishment promptly the point of the discipline is lost
44
posted on
02/19/2004 2:19:22 PM PST
by
Pontiac
(Ignorance of the law is no excuse, ignorance of your rights can be fatal.)
To: Pontiac
If Orrin Hatch hears about this, Brookins is toast. Never mind what the bad guys did, the real issue is that Mr. Brookins did not avert his eyes immediately when he realized that he was witnessing a crime.
|
45
posted on
02/19/2004 2:20:14 PM PST
by
Nick Danger
(Spotted owl tastes like chicken)
To: Pontiac
I stand by what I said.
*I* love my daughter. If she needs discipline, I will and can provide it.
She and the school know it, too.
46
posted on
02/19/2004 2:23:55 PM PST
by
tiamat
("Just a Bronze-Age Gal, Trapped in a Techno World!")
To: Nick Danger
Good one. But no memos in this article. Just tapes. Maybe we need a good Nixon or LBJ tangent here.
47
posted on
02/19/2004 2:26:23 PM PST
by
Pontiac
(Ignorance of the law is no excuse, ignorance of your rights can be fatal.)
To: tiamat
Unfortunately not every child is as will behaved as your daughter.
And schools must make rules and policy for all children not each individual child.
So because there are too many parents like you, children are given suspensions for minor infractions that in our schooldays would have earned a few wacks.
Because one tool was taken away. The remaining tools have to be used more frequently. And perhaps not as well
48
posted on
02/19/2004 2:34:18 PM PST
by
Pontiac
(Ignorance of the law is no excuse, ignorance of your rights can be fatal.)
To: Pontiac
Pontiac wrote:
So because there are too many parents like you, children are given suspensions for minor infractions that in our schooldays would have earned a few wacks.
Nice.
"Parents like me", huh?
Do you have kids?
I believe in personal responsabilty and I police my OWN problems, thank you very much.
I NEVER got whacked at school, either.
49
posted on
02/19/2004 2:44:34 PM PST
by
tiamat
("Just a Bronze-Age Gal, Trapped in a Techno World!")
To: tiamat
As a matter of fact I have two (16 and 12).
They have ADHS and personally I would prefer that my son receive a couple of whacks on the bottom than be suspended for something as minor as visiting a website that features Blond Jokes (this is no joke).
WE punish him at home as well, but this has no baring on the policies at school.
50
posted on
02/19/2004 2:57:15 PM PST
by
Pontiac
(Ignorance of the law is no excuse, ignorance of your rights can be fatal.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-50, 51-52 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson