Psychiatric Drug Facts via :

“Most psychiatric drugs can cause withdrawal reactions, sometimes including life-threatening emotional and physical withdrawal problems… Withdrawal from psychiatric drugs should be done carefully under experienced clinical supervision.” Dr. Peter Breggin

Sep 14, 2012

Keeping Up Appearances in Washington State

My son's civil rights were NOT effectively effectively preserved as Mr. Tony Sparber, the State's erstwhile "investigator" reported. Mr. Sparber and an un-named co-investigator read photocopies of all the court documents and accepted them at face value; this is the totality of what was done to "investigate" the felony crimes I had reported. Mr. Sparber reports that based on this "investigation" he can conclude that my son's rights were effectively, legally preserved. The only thing Mr. Sparber's report effectively demonstrates is his own and the unnamed co-investigator's ignorance about precisely what effectively preserves a person's individual rights; and what is required to conduct an bona-fide fact-finding investigation.

When the factual basis of evidence used in a Court of Law must be verified; a fact finding investigation is conducted. The State of Washington had, and still has, a legal duty to investigate the criminal complaint I filed on my son's behalf. Thus far, the State has only attempted to appear to take civil rights complaints seriously.  It is a superficial appearance, since no actual investigations are conducted, felony crimes committed by mental health professionals acting Under Color of Law are not prosecuted, nor is any corrective action taken. There appears to be no interest in the fact that perjury and fraud were committed; I suspect this is because the State of Washington is legally liable for the damages caused by the illegal conduct of those acting on the State's behalf as it's agents.

The mental health professionals who committed perjury and fraud, were aided and abetted their crimes by Officers of the Court who also were acting Under Color of Law for the State of Washington. Specifically, Nancy Sherman and Jeffery Jennings committed perjury and forgery, i.e. fraud. Deputy Prosecutor, Dan Polage, was aware the testimony offered by these so-called professionals was suspect since I had spoken to him at length; and he had in his possession a copy of the document forged by Nancy Sherman, which was an Affidavit Sherman claimed was filled out and signed by me. Assigned Counsel for the my son, Jennifer Lesmez, was also aware that I was disputing the validity of the document, she also had a copy of Sherman's fraudulent affidavit.  In spite of the fact that my elder son and I spoke with Ms. Lesmez numerous times, she did not challenge it's validity; in fact, Ms. Lesmez mounted no defense for her client whatsoever. The State is liable, and simply wants to deny any and all culpability for my son's Individual Rights being violated by a Designated Mental Health Professional who abused the authority granted to her by the State of Washington, abused the Police Powers granted to Designated Mental Health Professionals and illegally detained my son Under Color of Law, acting as the State of Washington's agent. These are Federal Crimes that I promptly reported; and I am not fooled by the the good ol' "cover your ass" approach the State has chosen to take. In reality, the State has failed utterly to keep up appearances...

DBHR employees know exactly what protections I allege were not afforded my son. DBHR staff and AG staff held their 1st big meeting  August 12, 2010 to discuss the crimes I had reported.

It is less than ethical to  have an employee of the Division of Behavioral Health and Recovery conduct an investigation when DBHR has a Conflict of Interest. DBHR is liable; and it has an ethical legal duty that has been willfully and purposely denied and avoided.  DBHR's duty is to conduct a criminal investigation when crimes are alleged to have occurred when a person is detained under the Involuntary Treatment statute. This duty was initially denied when I first reported that my son's civil rights had been violated to the DBHR complaint manager, Ron Moorhead.  Mr. Moorhead claimed that DBHR could do nothing since the Superior Court had granted the Court Order. He in fact denied the State had any duty whatsoever.

The State's duty that Mr. Moorhead denied is this section of the Revised Code of Washington:

RCW 71.05.520
Protection of rights — Staff.

The department of social and health services shall have the responsibility to determine whether all rights of individuals recognized and guaranteed by the provisions of this chapter and the Constitutions of the state of Washington and the United States are in fact protected and effectively secured. To this end, the department shall assign appropriate staff who shall from time to time as may be necessary have authority to examine records, inspect facilities, attend proceedings, and do whatever is necessary to monitor, evaluate, and assure adherence to such rights. Such persons shall also recommend such additional safeguards or procedures as may be appropriate to secure individual rights set forth in this chapter and as guaranteed by the state and federal Constitutions.
[1973 1st ex.s. c 142 § 57.]

The criminal complaint I filed on my son's behalf is valid---felony crimes were committed by agents of the State.  It's easy to see that the State of Washington's Division of Behavioral Health and Recovery uses the "cover your ass" method when dealing with such complaints. I say this because DBHR sent a social worker who apparently was ignorant to exactly how individual rights are effectively preserved through Due Process and by adhering to not only the letter, but the spirit of the law. Rules of Evidence and Standard Court procedures must be followed, Proper Notice served, and Proof of Service filed with the Court and Effective Assistance of Counsel, provided. The investigator was apparently unaware that these are the protections which my comlaint alleges were not afforded my son.

What Tony Sparber, and his unnamed co-investigator did in conducting this farce of an investigation at the behest of DBHR; was examine the electronic record of the Court documents. That's it. The sole basis for Mr. Sparber concluding that my son's civil rights were not violated, is Mr. Sparber's acceptance of the electronic record at face value. No investigation was conducted to determine the factual basis of the facts alleged that were used as "evidence." In spite of his failure to investigate, Tony Sparber concludes my son's individual rights were effectively preserved. He states in effect, the entire chain of events set in motion by Nancy Sherman conformed with Washington State's Involuntary Treatment Law.  Tony Sparber's conclusion is based solely upon his acceptance of electronic copies of Court Documents, and he fails to even mention that all of the original Yakima County Superior Court file had been illegally shredded by Nancy Sherman's employer, Central Washington Comprehensive Mental Health. This "investigation" was nothing more than an attempt to cover the State's ass; it is plain to see that it utterly fails to do even that.

The testimony offered by Nancy Sherman and Jeffrey Jennings did not comply with the Rules of Evidence, neither of their attestations are factually correct; neither of them used any "first-hand" information, both refered to Isaac's "parents" and both alleged that his parents are afraid of him. Isaac has not even seen his father since he was 12 years old. The court forms clearly state, "Under Penalty of Perjury" the evidence given by the attestor must be information that is known "first hand" to be true.  In Ms. Sherman's case, she made stuff up and did not report accurately what she did know first-hand, ie.  her statement that Isaac was accompanied his brother to the crisis center, when he in fact was accompaied by both his brother and myself.  Nancy Sherman also attested that she filed an Affidavit with the Court Clerk in support of her petition; she further attested that the Affidavit was my swarn statement, but I had never filled out an affidavit, of this, I am absolutely certain.  Over the last decade I have in fact acted as my own attorney numerous times, so I am familiar with Washington State Court forms, and the requirements of the Court when filing an affidavit. The affidavit Nancy Sherman attests to having filed with the Court in support of her petition is in fact, NOT part of the Court's record. The only occasion I have ever had to speak with Nancy Sherman was in person on the day she maligned and slandered my son in order to have him detained illegally when he was sought to be hospitalized, and his brother and myself accompanied him to be of supportive.   Jeffrey Jennings simply used Nancy Sherman's fabrications on his petition alleging Involuntary Treatment was required. This psychiatrist had no "first-hand" information, nor did he seek any information about Isaac or what had led to his crisis.  In fact, he refused to return numerous phone messages left both at the hospital and his office at CWCMH while he unethically "treated" my son, and did not contact any of Isaac's medical providers. this is entirely unethical to treat a patient without even attempting to confer with his doctor, therapist prescriber or in home care provider. Jennings also failed to coordinate discharge planning with Isaac's treatment team, and he recorded in Isaac's hospital chart that he was releasing Isaac because I wanted him to---this is a strange thing for him to have entered into Isaac's medical record; there is no basis in fact for the statement. I had not spoke to Jeffrey Jennnings even one time in the eight days he was Isaac's "attending physician" as I have previously stated.

If Central Washington Comprehensive Mental Health had not violated the Washington State Superior Court record keeping procedures, the authenticity of the "Affidavit" Nancy Sherman attested was attached to her petition, could be verified. However, CWCMH did violate this law, and the entire  Court Record was shredded. Why is this pertinent fact is not even mentioned at all by the investigator?

Mr. Sparber's acceptance of the electronic record at face value does not verify the veracity of any of the evidence used in the Court proceedings. In reality, his report does nothing but reiterate the factual inaccuracies and false statements used as evidence against my son. The fact of the matter is, beyond Isaac's name, birth date, and the fact that he lives with me, his mother, little if anything else on Nancy Sherman's and Jeffrey Jennings' petitions is true; much of what was used as "evidence" against my son is fiction; it is perjury, offering perjured testimony is a felony punishable by up to ten years in prison.  Tony Sparber did not attempt to verify the factual basis of any of the testimony offered to the Court; yet he concluded that my son's rights were effectively preserved.

Apparently, even Isaac's court appointed Assigned Counsel, Jennifer Lesmez seemed to have no idea what effectively preserves individual rights, and put on no defense whatsoever for her client.  The fact of the matter is my son can barely read, and when he is in distress he does whatever he believes will make a person stop bothering him.  I have, as is well-documented by both CWCMH and ALTC, taken care of the business side of Isaac's care since he was a minor. Since he cannot read, and has been treated in ways he has described using the terms "traumatizing" and "torture he does not trust mental health professionals so he often simply tunes out whatever is said by them, and says whatever he believes will make them leave him alone. Additionally, if asked to sign something, when he is not in distress, Isaac tells people, "not until my mom or my brother reads it first."  Ms. Lesmez testified that Isaac had been read his rights, understood those rights, and had signed papers stipulating to the necessity of a Court Order.  Later that morning when he was released, he had no idea that he had an attorney, or what her name was and was shocked to be told that there had been a Court Hearing, let alone more than one. He had NO IDEA that he had been Involuntarily Committed, or that the woman who, he says, "was bothering me so I signed what she wanted me to, so she would leave me alone" was his Court appointed advocate.

Jeffrey Jennings recorded in the hospital chart on August 5, 2010, the day before my son was released, that he was going to release him the following day---no one informed me---there was no discharge planning as Washington State Administrative Code declares must be done for all ALTC clients.  No one informed me his discharge was going to take place, or that another Court hearing was to be held.  Jennings recorded in Isaac's hospital chart that he was releasing my son because I was demanding his release.  Jennings puposely mis-states the facts. I was questioning WHY IN THE HELL he was under a Court Order when he wanted to go to the hospital, and was cooperative with being admitted and not once tried to leave, taking medications as prescribed, as he has always done. Jennings records on Isaac's medical record that the basis for his "medical decision" to release my son is in effect because I coerced him to do so---he doesn't describe how I could have done this without ever speaking to him about Isaac, or why Jennings filed a petition attesting for the necessity of a Cour Order.

It is ludicrous when you think about it: this guy is a psychiatrist who in effect, entered into my son's medical record that he was releasing his patient because a person whom he had never spoken to had coerced him to do so. I never met him, until after Isaac had been released. I didn't know what he looked like, and had not spoken to him, because he refused to return multiple phone messages. Yet, this psychiatrist entered that he was releasing a patient because the patient's mother had coerced him. Four days earlier, he had attested in a Court of Law under penalty of perjury, that the very same patient "threatened parents & staff" although he gave no details of the alleged threats, and that the patient had, "smashed a big screen TV" when he had no first hand knowledge of what had led to Isaac having a  crisis.

here is the "smashed" bigscreen tv:

Apparently, Tony Sparber, and his unnamed co-investigator never read Encyclopedia Brown or the Hardy Boys---if they had, they would have had some idea of what an actual investigation requires.  Mr. Moorhead, as the compaint manager, should know that investigations of comlaints should be timely; and once conducted, and the report is written, informing parties should not be delayed for an entire month.

Here is the State's Report:

via Buckle up, Bitches
 Mental Health Reporting from U of W School of Social Work 

No comments:


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

FAIR USE NOTICE: This may contain copyrighted
(C) material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. This material is distributed without profit.