Help support alternative media by visiting our advertisers

CPS Gets Heavy-Handed In Montana

Citizens are being threatened with jail for openly questioning Child Protective Services

CPS Gets Heavy-Handed In Montana

CPS Gets Heavy-Handed In Montana

By Tim Ravndal

In Montana, transparency within many government programs continue to be locked behind the doors of the system in control.  Family health is considered to be under a threat based on programs within the Department of Public Health & Human Services (DPHHS).

Child Protective Services (CPS) is a department within DPHHS that is in place to intervene in the family home when there are any allegations of child abuse or neglect.

Redoubt News has been covering this story and it appears there are even more problems within the system than we could expose or confirm.  There lies the problem getting the full story to the people.  When government uses the deference given them by the courts we often find a brick wall between the truth and government operations.

Vietnam Veteran J. Walton of Great Falls Montana brought a sliver of light to the problem highlighting his journey to protect his grandchildren.  Multiple meetings with CPS resulted in his cry for help.  CPS removed the children from their home and refused to disclose their location to Mr. Walton.  After multiple attempts to work within the system, Mr. Walton found he was prohibited from helping these children.

Mr. Walton took to social media to expose alleged abuse of family rights including the safety of his grandchild, who was placed in a dangerous atmosphere.  It was not long before Mr. Walton was called in to the courtroom in Great Falls Montana, where a gag order was placed on him by the judge.  Mr. Walton, fighting for his family and his personal rights, kept working for transparency and justice but was charged and thrown in jail.

Mr. Walton got out of jail with the gag order in place and was told to remain silent.  The charges and control came from CPS appointed officials responsible within the department who were opposed to disclosure of their identity.  They claimed that their right to privacy under Montana law and the Constitution of Montana was being violated.   The provisions of law used are in place to protect the rights of the citizens…not the rights of government that are delineated and defined.

Mr. Walton continues to seek justice even though the threat of going back to jail for exercising his rights is being held over his head.

Last week a peaceful demonstration against the DPHHS and CPS actions was held in Great Falls.  We asked him if he was under threat for attending the event and he said he was and had to be cautious in making any public statements.  This Vietnam Veteran showed a tear in his eye due to the distress caused by his inability to hug and care for his grandchildren.

The demonstration in Great Falls was led by Destiny Swan-Field, who is also seeing the heavy hand of government regarding her child.  Swan-Field showed a tremendous amount of courage and stood up to a threat from CPS to silence her.  An employee of CPS was in the crowd of demonstration participants taking pictures of all who were in attendance.

 “A full day of Peaceful Demonstration/Protest followed by an evening Public Open Forum to expose corruption/collusion and illegal conduct by DPHHS/CPS Employees and government workers along with the need for Reform in our Family Court Systems in Montana.

To meet the common goal of participants to demand change, reform and accountability from these government workers, judges, county attorneys, and all government state and city entities.

To demand our state representatives start to listen to our concerns and our experiences/grievances with the way DPHHS/CPS and the Montana family and justice court system has been operating thus far, openly violating Unites States of America citizens and their constitutional civil rights and liberties!”

“Since planning the protest and posting on social media and going on Northwest Liberty news I have now been charged with Unauthorized Dissemination of Records.” ~ Destiny gave this summary of the event from her perspective.

It was not long before we learned that a threatening letter was sent to Destiny by a lawyer working for CPS.  The letter makes the claim that privacy of government is being violated.  The letter openly gives threat of jail if the demonstrations continue.

View Fullscreen

The right of the people to redress grievances was placed into the bill of rights when the Constitutional Republic was formed but is now being challenged in Montana. Children and women that are turning up missing from the multiple reservations in Montana is stated to be reaching alarming levels.  Because the reservations are sovereign to the United States, access to information or details is not available to Montana citizens.

Georgia Miller has had a similar tragic encounter with CPS and has started a group for citizens to unite and be heard.

The following video clips are testimony given at the demonstration in Great Falls Montana.

The views, opinions, or positions expressed by the authors and those providing comments are theirs alone, and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, positions of Redoubt News. Social Media, including Facebook, has greatly diminished distribution of our stories to our readers’ newsfeeds and is instead promoting Main Stream Media sources. This is called ‘Shadow-banning’. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you. Please support our coverage of your rights. Donate here: Paypal.me/RedoubtNews

 

 

10 Comments on CPS Gets Heavy-Handed In Montana

  1. “The right of the people to redress grievances was placed into the bill of rights when the Constitutional Republic was formed but is now being challenged in Montana.”

    The rights of the people are inalienable, so the rights of the people cannot be “placed” by people claiming to be forming a so-called “Constitutional Republic.”

    If people are duped by this fraud, as is happing all over the world, people are then investing in their own demise at the hands of the deceivers.

    “Farther, though it be said here, that the king hath given and granted these liberties, yet it must not be understood that they were meer emanations of Royal favour, or new bounties granted, which the people could not justly challenge, or had not a right unto before; for as lord Coke in divers places asserts, and as is well known to every gentleman professing the law, this charter is, for the most part, only declaratory of the principal grounds of the fundamental laws and liberties of England. Not any new freedom is hereby granted, but a restitution of such as the subject lawfully had before, and to free them from the usurpations and incroachments of every power whatever. It is worthy observation, that this charter often mentions sua jura, their rights, and libertates suas, their liberties, which shews they were before intitled to and possessed them, and that those rights and liberties were by this charter not granted as before unknown, but confirmed, and that in the stile of liberties and privileges long before well known.”
    Source:
    English Liberties, Or The Free-Born Subject’s Inheritance: Containing Magna Charta,
    The Habeas Corpus Act, And Several Other Statutes, Henry Care
    Boston: Printed by J. Franklin, for N. Buttolph, B. Eliot, and D. Henchman, 1721

    “By the late sixteenth century, and especially with the accession of the Stuarts, the court of chancery was closely associated with the royal prerogative and became the target of opposition. Equity was therefore disadvantageously contrasted with common law in an era when “ancient law” took on revolutionary constitutional overtones. The struggle between the two systems of law became explicit in Glandville’s case, the 1616 litigation, jurisdiction over which sought by Chancellor Ellsmere, who enjoined suitors from proceeding at law, and by Chief Justice Coke, who prohibited the same litigants from proceeding in equity, and in which James I finally intervened on the side of chancery. The common lawyers of the early Stuart period strongly objected to the prerogative character of equital law, but they also attacked particular abuses: the use of chancery jobs as royal patronage, the delay and expense of chancery proceedings, and the increasing formalism of equity litigation. At bottom, of course, they anticipated Selden, who sneered that “Equity is according to the conscience of him that is Chancellor, and as that is larger or narrower, so is equity. ‘Tis all one as if they should make the standard for measure a Chancellor’s foot.””
    Source:
    Perspectives in American History, Law in American History, Fleming and Bailyn

    The ancient law is the law of the land, as the people themselves, not the government, decide any fact at issue in any conflict involving disputes over authority.

    Every attempt to usurp the ancient law involves deception, the threat of violence, and executions of torturous, terrifying, and horrid violence against the innocent by the guilty.

    “Affairs were in this situation when on the 28th of September last a resolution was proposed to the assembly by a member of the house who had been also a member of the federal convention, for calling a state convention, to be elected within ten days for the purpose of examining and adopting the proposed constitution of the United States, though at this time the house had not received it from Congress. This attempt was opposed by a minority, who after offering every argument in their power to prevent the precipitate measure, without effect, absented themselves from the house as the only alternative left them, to prevent the measure taking place previous to their constituents being acquainted with the business- That violence and outrage which had been so often threatened was now practised; some of the members were seized the next day by a mob collected for the purpose, and forcibly dragged to the house, and there detained by force whilst the quorum of the legislature, so formed, compleated their resolution.” We shall dwell no longer on this subject, the people of Pennsylvania have been already acquainted therewith. “We would only further observe that every member of the legislature, previously to taking his seat, by solemn oath or affirmation, declares, “that he will not do or consent to any act or thing whatever that shall have a tendency to lessen or abridge their rights and privileges, as declared in the constitution of this state.” And that constitution which they are so solemnly sworn to support cannot legally be altered but by a recommendation of the council of censors, who alone are authorised to propose alterations and amendments, and even these must be published at least six months, for the consideration of the people.- The proposed system of government for the United States, if adopted, will alter and may annihilate the constitution of Pennsylvania; and therefore the legislature had no authority whatever to recommend the calling a convention for that purpose. This proceeding could not be considered as binding on the people of this commonwealth. The house was formed by violence, some of the members composing it were detained there by force, which alone would have vitiated any proceedings, to which they were otherwise competent; but had the legislature been legally formed, this business was absolutely without their power.”
    Source: The Dissent of the Minority of the Pennsylvania Convention, Pennsylvania Packet (December 18, 1787)

    “The judiciary of the United States is so constructed and extended, as to absorb and destroy the judiciaries of the several states; thereby rendering laws as tedious, intricate, and expensive, and justice as unattainable by a great part of the community, as in England; and enabling the rich to oppress and ruin the poor.”
    Source:
    George Mason, Objections to This Constitution of Government, September 1787

    Your Nation-State, with that Summary Justice System of Extortion, is a lie that is wearing very thin, a lie that was, and will always be, self-confessing: a self-evident falsehood in the face of a self-evident truth.

    “Trial by the country, and no taxation without consent, were the two pillars of English liberty, (when England had any liberty,) and the first principles of the Common Law. They mutually sustain each other; and neither can stand without the other. Without both, no people have any guaranty for their freedom; with both, no people can be otherwise than free.”
    Lysander Spooner, Essay on The Trial by Jury

  2. Where is the authority delegated to CREATE an agency such as the CPS? Where in the US Constitution, the supreme LAW of this land (even though many in government ignore it because we the people as the Militia do not enforce is as is required (US Constitution, Amendment 1, Section 8, Clause 15) is this color of law found? Anyone who knows, please post it here. Contract law is strong, and the US Constitution is the supreme CONTRACT for all who serve within our governments – state and federal.

    • We continue to seek that foundation that you reference. In Montana the problem we see is a disregard of the citizens request for transparency. When we look into why that is the case, we see the web of deception is wide and far. Follow the money! 🙁

  3. What you are not being told is that the State of Montana is a foreign for profit corporation operating in the jurisdiction of the sea commerce
    CPS is a for profit private corporation
    The birth certifcate is a bond issued to the state when the child was born making them a bonded slave and property of the state
    It all pertains to the falsified birth records created when the baby was born and the mother signing the baby over as a ward of the state
    (link removed)
    Watch his other videos as well then visit (link removed) and read everything
    We are all wards of the state through birth certificate fraud and identity theft
    A case going on right now in Wisconsin
    (link removed)
    They have trafficked everyone in this nation and all other nations in to the international jurisdiction of the see under the Vatican and Queen of England
    All has to do with undisclosed contract law

Comments are closed.