Skip to comments."Oath Keeper Baby" granddad backs CPS (DCYF)
Posted on 10/13/2010 1:13:53 PM PDT by citizenredstater9271
Liberty activist supports government's decision to take his grandchild from his son on grounds that he considers this option safer for the baby. Also I just received an e-mail from Kevin Noyes who is acting as a PR aide to Baby Cheyenne's parents. He says they have just seen her on visitation and that they are expressing specific concerns regarding her physical condition. I have an e-mail in DCYF, the child protective division to try and get a response. The number listed on their website is now listed as disconnected. Concord Family Division, a court branch, has professionally returned my calls twice and consented to audio recording. But they have not provided me any useful info.
Before editing this section of the interview in, I spoke with this man's son by phone. He confirmed that he does want to have authorities intervene if the interviewee shows up at the Oath Keeper rally in Dover NH.
Both son and biological father are hurling relevant (and maybe some not so relevant) accusations against each other faster than I can corroborate them, so this is what I can air so far. The rest will have to be set aside or await corroboration.
The grandad who you just saw confirms that he has a 1999 simple assault conviction in relation to a coflict with the son he is accusing here.
Also I just received an e-mail from Kevin Noyes who is acting as a PR aide to Baby Cheyenne's parents. He says they have just seen her on visitation and that they are expressing specific concerns regarding her physical condition.
I have an e-mail in to DCYF, the child protective division to try and get a response. The number listed on their website is now listed as disconnected. Concord Family Division, a court branch, has professionally returned my calls twice and consented to audio recording. But they have not provided me much useful info. Also I'm uploding many details now to RidleyReport. Podomatic.com that won't fit here - go there to hear more.
When the guy she is living with has such a history of child and spousal abuse that she already lost two children in this way, what did she think was going to happen with a third? Grandpa might simply want his grandchildren to live. Their invocation of the Oathkeepers seems more staged than anything, especially since it appears to have been “added” to the document.
The gov. has NO RIGHT to take our children away.
Just what is your suggestion? Best case scenario is a solid family member from the mother’s side come forward (if one exists). There are clearly problems with Irish. If Oathkeepers had not been mentioned, how outraged would you be? This type of thing goes on each and every day in this nation. What if the child was murdered at some point or sexually abused later? The screams from people would be deafening after finding out the guy had such a background.
This would not even be an issue with anyone here if Oathkeepers had not been mentioned. When this whole story first broke it stunk and the stench continues. Oathkeepers has been used. The guy (Irish) registered with OK...and it was made clear he is not a dues paying member. I’m also a member of Oathkeepers in that I registered with them. Doesn’t mean anything except that I agree with them and support (wholeheartedly) their stance. When this story first broke it was insinuated that the baby was taken because of Oathkeepers which does not appear to be the case from the history of this couple.
A lot of freepers saw the difference in the "type". There was a thread that was pulled that had a statement from CPS or whoever they are that said that was not in the original papers. I never heard anymore. Have you?
Not since then. I guess the media won’t make a big deal out of it until they can maximize the egg in the face.
That sounds about right.
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.