It is available here.
In that plan, I found, with astonishment, a description of "collaboration" between "OCA" (that is, New York Office of Court Administration) and "OCFS" (that is, New York State Office of Children and Family Services).
The plan states that there are teams engaged in that "collaboration", there are 3 levels of that collaboration, with respective teams, and that the team members meet and "collaborate" frequently.
Here is the description of the "teams" and "levels of collaboration" in the NYS OCFS' 2015-2019 plan:
Why did I consider this "collaboration" a problem?
Those who have child neglect cases pending against them, just ask your attorneys, or a court clerk, to disclose whether your judge - or the judge who assigned your judge - a member on one of these "collaborative teams", and you will immediately see my point.
The problem is the potential for ex parte communication and case-fixing.
Your attorney or you yourself (if you are an ex parte party) will not be invited into these "teams".
These teams, according to the "plan", existed for years - and the team members developed such a familiarity with one another that they can now quickly and easily call or e-mail each other to "solve problems", which would include deciding a particular case in a particular way, without explanation to the parties or their attorneys.
And that is a monumental problem, ladies and gentlemen.
Case-fixing in state court is a federal crime. This month, federal authorities indicted several state employees for fixing court cases in state court.
New York State Office of Children and Family Services, in an official document, acknowledged existence of a structure, with an elaborate 3-level hierarchy, existing for years, consisting of Family Court judges and executives and employees of social services on all levels who regularly meet with one another, and who developed such a familiarity with each other that they can simply pick up a phone or shoot an e-mail to one another to have a "problem solved" - which very well can mean a court case of child abuse or neglect fixed.
Think about it.
Your presiding judge in a Family Court child neglect or abuse case receives a phone call from another "team member", social worker, a witness in the case, saying - judge, let's solve this problem, we want this case decided this way. The judge says - "no problem".
You will never know why the judge made this or that decision, because judicial deliberations are secret, but you will never know that judicial deliberations were actually with the ex parte participation of your opponent in litigation, the Department of Social Services.
The California indictment for case-fixing involved money paid for that case-fixing.
I do not know whether money is passing hands in the 3-level "collaborative teams", but it presents an appearance of case-fixing all the same, and money is involved in such cases nevertheless - federal money for foster care, for budgets of Departments of social services.
The more the judge - member of the "collaborative team" - decide cases in favor of social services, the more children he or she places in foster care, the more children the judge orders adopted out of foster care, the more children are adjudicated as abused or neglected and ordered to receive costly "services" - the more money departments of social services will get.
On May 16, 2016 I asked NYS Office of Family and Children's Service (OCFS), through a FOIL request, to provide me with records reflecting the lists of members in these teams, from 2009 to 2016, meeting schedules and minutes of those meetings.
By law, OCFS had 5 business days to respond.
Nevertheless, it took its sweet time, responded to me only on June 21, 2016 and took 90 days more to prepare the records for release.
90 days from June 21, 2016 came and passed, and OCFS did not respond.
I have sent a reminder and threatened OCFS with a lawsuit.
OCFS then responded with 7 pages of members of collaborative teams as of 6/17/14, I will post documents provided to me separately.
Yet, the list does not provide a breakdown by the 3 levels described in the OCFS 2015-2019 plan, nor did OCFS provide to me list of team members for years:
2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2015 and 2016.
Nor did OCFS provide to me meeting schedules or minutes.
So, I reminded OCFS that they did not fully comply with my FOIL request and clearly stated to them that I believe they are either lying to me in their response to my FOIL request, or to the public in their 2015-2019 plan, or to both.
It is very clear, based on the elaborate and detailed description of the 3 levels of collaboration that this secret out-of-court COURT-PROSECUTION joint organization exists for years, both the court administration and OCFS are very proud of it. It is very clear that, until I showed interest in the details of these teams, OCFS did not consider existence or operation of this secret organization as being anything improper, and only stonewalled me when I asked for list of members, and when it finally hit lawyers for OCFS that what OCFS describes is a criminal organization within the meaning of RICO.
Yet, I do have a vested interest to get down to the bottom of how this secret court-prosecution joint organization operates, and I will vigorously pursue this organization by available legal means.
Since case-fixing resulted in California in a federal indictment, and since OCFS does not want to voluntarily provide records that would shed light on the operation of the case-fixing cartel in child neglect and abuse cases in New York, I will turn the case to federal authorities, with a demand to turn the case over for the investigation of a federal grand jury.
If that is not done, there are legal remedies available to private complainants to force the feds to turn a case for investigation of a federal grand jury, and I am fully prepared to do that.
Yet, at this time, remedies are available to parents-respondents in child neglect and abuse proceedings.
There is a number of remedies available to get this information through a pending court case, such as:
- asking through written discovery, notices to produce and interrogatories whether the presiding judge participates in such ex parte "collaborative team" with petitioning Department of Social services, or its officers and employees;
- calling the presiding judge to a deposition to testify under oath as to the judge's participation in such teams (only that will need to be done pro se, no attorney will agree to do that deposition, for fear of losing his or her license - remember, your attorney's license is in the hands of the same case-fixing judge);
- subpoenaing the records of such teams;
- calling people listed as members of such teams from the list OCFS disclosed, here, to depositions to testify about other members;
- filing RICO lawsuits against the State of New York, Family Court and individual judges and Departments of Social Services.
A party in a child neglect or abuse proceeding has a right to know whether the presiding judge is a member of the case-fixing organization, and especially when the New York State Office of Children and Family Services acknowledged existence of such an organization, but refuses to release its records, even the lists of members.
