Wednesday, August 14, 2013

Preserving cultural identity in the face of institutionalized white supremacy: Another Home-going -- Pt. 1c -- A jackbooted, "Mission Accomplished"

With the backing and support from a host of supporters, Mr. Brown dug in his heels, trying to fight off the jackboots trying to take his daughter away from him.  Together with the Native American Fund, he immediately filed a request to the U.S. Supreme Court for a postponement of the S.C. Supreme Court ruling -- at least  until a "best interests of the child" hearing, covering the time Veronica has lived with him, could be held.

But after learning two disturbing pieces of information from Suzette Brewer's afore-linked piece (Suzette, thanks so much  for your in-depth reporting on his case -- without your tenacity, the "other side of this story" would have never seen the light of day!),  I could see the under-belly of power and privilege beginning to rear its corruptible head.  I learned that:
1) Chief Justice John Roberts, an adoptive parent himself who sided with the majority against Brown, oversees emergency petitions for the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, which includes South Carolina.

2) Sources in Washington have pointed out that Alvino McGill's role in Adoptive Couple is more than that of a spokesperson for Christy Maldonado. As it turns out, Chief Justice Roberts and former solicitor general Ted Olson, both of whom sided with the Capobiancos, attended Ms. Alvino McGill's 2006 wedding to Matthew McGill who, coincidentally, was a clerk for John Roberts in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. Therefore, given the cozy nature and small world influence in the Capitol's legal circles, observers say it was no surprise when Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl was granted petition of certiorari in January. (emphasis mine)

“Dusten Brown never had a chance,” said the source. “His biggest sin was that he got on the wrong side of the billion dollar U.S. adoption industry and he was winning. [The Supreme Court] knew this when they took cert on this case, otherwise, why would they bother with a custody dispute that should have been nipped in the bud four years ago?... But it is a system that was stacked against him from the beginning.
Come on people, there are obviously no coincidences here.  And while the first is not a good sign for Mr. Brown (Roberts wouldn't be the only "Supreme" making the final decision)  -- the second is quite simply foreboding.  I don't know about you, but it's clear as day to me -- that plenty in this milk ain't clean (pun intended)!   If you don't see it, it's because you don't want to. But let me help you.  No sooner had the  Capobiancos filed their answer to Mr. Brown's request, did this happen: Challenge to child’s adoption fails.

Yep, in no time flat, the Roberts-led court, in their hubris, issued this 3-sentence decision:

The application for stay of judgment presented to The Chief
Justice and by him referred to the Court is denied. The motion of the Guardian ad Litem for leave to file a response with exhibits under seal with redacted copies for the public record is granted.

Justice Ginsburg and Justice Sotomayor would grant the application for stay.
As I told you in Pt. 1b, Mr. Brown is again deployed for 30 days of National Guard training as of July 23.  However, on Sunday, August 4, the Capobiancos were supposed to have had a court-ordered visit with Mr. Brown and his child (apparently scheduled before the final ruling came down).  Understandably, because he was working out of town in Iowa, he didn't show up.

In preparation for his training duty, Mr. Brown had signed over his rights to his wife and parents, anticipating, I'm certain, either the Oklahoma courts would block the physical transfer of the child to South Carolina (he and his family have until August 23 to request a hearing which is two days after his training is over) or, that their already scheduled hearing in tribal court on September 3 would result in a successful challenge to South Carolina's jurisdiction over a case involving a Cherokee child.

Well, according to this piece in the Charleston CityPaper -- by Monday morning, the "mob" had begun circling their wagons in earnest around their white woman's tears:
A Charleston judge on Monday ordered the immediate transfer of 3-year-old Veronica to her adoptive parents and called for action from state and federal authorities after the girl’s birth father failed to appear for a court-ordered visit the day before.

The decree by Family Court Judge Daniel Martin suspended a transition plan intended to gradually re-introduce the toddler to Matt and Melanie Capobianco of James Island. It also requests assistance from Dusten Brown’s commanding officer as he finishes a 30-day training mission with the Army National Guard ... (emphasis mine)
Though I'm hearing faint strains of "urging for calm" in his last sentence below, on the first, I wholeheartedly agree:
As much as we here in Charleston fail to recognize it, for the Cherokee Nation this is a racial issue and the recent court orders bring up memories of decades upon decades of mistreatment at the hands of the white man. Here's hoping that outrage doesn't manifest in some truly horrible manner. (emphasis mine)
Quiet as it's kept, according to Mike Overall at Tulsa World:
Before a South Carolina judge demanded that she be returned "immediately," Baby Veronica's biological father, Dusten Brown, offered to share custody with her adoptive parents...Brown said the offer would have let Veronica spend summers and holidays in Charleston, where she lived with Matt and Melanie Capobianco for the first two years of her life.
The rest of the time, she would have stayed with her biological family in Nowata, an hour north of Tulsa. (emphasis mine)
Smelling blood in the water, the sharks Capobiancos bare their very well-funded, politically connected teeth and declined, saying:
"After all this time, the begging and the pleading we did, we never got to see her," Melanie Capobianco said Wednesday in an interview with Charleston's Post and Courier.

"Now that we were at the point where they knew the adoption would go through, they offered this as if they've been thoughtful and considerate to us all along."
"Pssst, Hey Melanie -- they had no reason, whatsoever to be "thoughtful and considerate to you all along."  First, you conspired with the birth mother and The Christian NightLife Adoption agency to BUY his child; then, you hired a PR firm, to make him look like an unfit parent when you couldn't keep her, even though he's been fighting for her since she was four months-old; then, you called in your white-privileged favors to doggedly pursue him in the courts (and either arranged for, if not paid for, Ms. Maldonado to do the same) -- all over a child that carries his DNA, not yours!  Do you see where I'm going here?

No? Well let me help you. That you are barren is most regrettable -- but that does not give you a right to this man's flesh and blood, particularly since he wants, and is taking care of his child.  Your fight is with Ms. Maldonado.  Sue her for lying misrepresentation!  Oh, I forgot.   Aside from the fact you've spent all this money to facilitate this "sale" -- you were in on the lie too!  Kinda bars you from any recovery on that end, I would think.  But who knows?  You do, after all, have quite the cadre of judicial and legislative henchmen in your pocket on your side!  Stranger things have happened!"

So, in order to not look unreasonable (though they've been nothing but unreasonable over this man's child from day one) here's their counter-offer:
"But the Capobiancos said they' re still committed to allowing the Browns to play a role in the girl's life - if they honor the adoption order."

The Browns are skeptical, saying the adoptive parents have never offered joint custody or visitation rights in a way that would be legally binding, the Browns said.
The arrogance of these people just "makes me wanna holler, throw up both my hands!"  Interesting to watch the flexing though, now that the ball's mainly in their court, no?  If I were the Browns, I'd be skeptical too.

Below, Mr. Brown's parents and wife explain their skepticism with emotions that run the gamut (and no, before anybody throws up the "she's white too" strawman -- she is not counted as one of "their" white women because first of all, she's a "race traitor" who stooped to marry "one of them."  Secondly, she's speaking up against them,  for "the enemy" (You can pretend these dynamics aren't in play here, but I won't):

"Civility, in the face of such intellectual dishonesty, is counterproductive in the defense of liberty ... for it grants the dishonesty the false appearance of legitimacy"
I cannot,  for the life of me, remember to whom that quote should be attributed, but I've never forgotten it.  But t's so apropos for this situation though, because I am just undone, and so tired of the way this society talks out of both sides of its mouth, with both conversations painting the "hunter" as some, "White Knight," riding in to save the day -- they are not.  They are opportunists -- always coveting what is not theirs and always misappropriating what they cannot create (and yes, Mrs. Capobianco, I'm talking about you there).

On the one hand, in 1978, the ubiquitous "they," in a weak defense of their barbaric inhumanity said:
We know that your children have been disproportionately taken from you  (with the willing assistance of Christian, church folk) -- not only because, as Bill Means of AIM stated, "because there was a very, shall we say, stereotypical image that Indian children were neither black nor white, therefore, they were most desirable," but because the Missus couldn't create an heir for the Mister" -- but it got out of hand. So, after all we've taken from you, and all you've given us, the least we can do, is leave you your children."
Now, post-1978, they say:
"Yeah, we know we initially said you have a right to your children (as if they, according to the laws of the universe, have a right to grant such a thing in the first place.  Oops!  Forgot their made-up, white supremacist, "Manifest Destiny" madness!) --  but what we meant was -- only when and how we say so.
"And since you chose not to follow those parameters,  Mr. Brown, we intend to put the full weight and force of our state and federal, politically connected, well-funded power on your neck to make you remember who's actually running things -- even though you're a member of a "sovereign" Nation.  I'm tellin' you folks, you just can't make this stuff up! -- Baby Veronica's biological father faces arrest after failing to return her to South Carolina 'immediately':
Nearly 500 miles from his daughter, Baby Veronica's biological father could be arrested Sunday morning when he reports back to duty at a military base in Johnston, Iowa.

The warrant came from even farther away - 1,100 miles east in Charleston, S.C., where a Family Court judge is trying to force Veronica's return to her adoptive parents.

Officials issued an arrest warrant Friday after Dusten Brown failed to meet the judge's order to bring his 3-year-old daughter to South Carolina "immediately."

He lives in Nowata, an hour north of Tulsa, but was in Johnston, Iowa, for a month of training with his Oklahoma National Guard unit.

He was off duty Saturday, spending the day at a hotel with his wife, Robin Brown. But commanders told him they can't prevent local authorities from taking him into custody when he returns to the base, she said.

A South Carolina official described the warrant as "checkmate," likely to end an epic custody battle that started when Veronica was 4 months old.
And wasting no time at all -- the jackboots landed.  Now, they knew exactly where he was and what he was doing.  So aside from flexing, their obvious intent is to not only humiliate him (even as he's serving this damned country on duty!), but to put his income in jeopardy.  It appears too, that Judge Martin's request for "assistance from Dusten Brown’s commanding officer" was heard loud and clear and, given the snide "checkmate" comment, I think we can all agree with Robin Brown -- for the Capobiancos, it's all about winning."  I don't know about you, but I sure feel that heel grinding deeper into his neck.

A brief aside:
Commenter D. Hammond - Phoenix, AR posted this comment on the above-linked piece:

The presiding SC judge who issued this order is Daniel Martin. He is a reputable higher court judge who specializes in family law. If you remember, the Native American Rights Fund filed a civil suit last week naming Judge Martin as defendant. The suit says that Martin denied Veronica a "best interest" hearing. I wonder if Martin is strong arming because he is angry with NARF and the Cherokee Nation for challenging his power.

And Sandy Macauley - Tahlequah responded:
He should remove himself from this case since he is a named defendant in the NARF case
Just some points to ponder...

And yesterday, adding insult to injury, the Capobiancos and their cadre grind the heel even deeper, breaking skin this time with this -- Matt Capobianco says Veronica "has been kidnapped," vows to fly to Oklahoma without law enforcement action:
A weekend of high tension surrounding the custody fight over Baby Veronica culminated in a Monday press conference called by Matt and Melanie Capobianco, vowing that without action from state and federal law enforcement, Matt would board a plane and pick up the three-year old that a Charleston County court has said belongs with his family...

...In front of a neighborhood gazebo near the Capobiancos house this morning, Matt and Melanie issued a plea to law enforcement involved in the case, asking "Where are you?" wiping away tears as they explained their anxiety over the girl's safety, saying their daughter "has been kidnapped." In an interview with the South Carolina Radio Network, Melanie said, "We've tried to work so hard to make this a smooth transition," saying that she thought the Browns were "using our kindness against us." Via an emailed statement this morning, the Capobiancos' spokesperson Jessica Munday called it "outrageous that nothing is being done to bring this child home to her legal parents" after two and a half days, "Where's the Amber Alert?" she said. Though the Capobiancos say they are reluctant to take matters into their own hands, Matt Capobianco said today that he would fly to Oklahoma himself, lamenting efforts to abide by legal channels throughout the process over the past two years, telling his daughter, "Veronica, little stinker, daddy's coming."
People, please go to that link and watch that video -- it is quite the performance.  It turned my stomach so badly,  I just couldn't post it.

I won't editorialize on it too much, but I just have to point to a few things that stick out for me.  Replete with the obligatory crocodile tears, and  melodramatic flourish, they turn this latest development into a "kidnapping" (classic, "paint the Other" as dangerous brute behavior -- the child's with her family!); then they start with finger-shaking at the "authorities" for waiting so long to bring the child back (it'd been two days); then, rolling out the, "we fear for her safety" apparition again, they throw out the veiled threat that, "if anything happens to her there will be enough responsibility to go around"; then they trot out their PR person who keeps the false, "he abandoned her" meme going strong while she calls for, of all things, an Amber Alert!  Family, this absolutely reeks of white privilege run amok.

And on Monday morning, they got what they wanted -- Baby Veronica case: Dusten Brown turns himself in, refuses extradition:
The father of a Cherokee Indian girl at the center of an adoption dispute turned
Mugshot from Sequoyah Sheriff's Office
himself in to authorities Monday but refused extradition to South Carolina, further complicating a case that raises questions about jurisdictions and a federal law meant to keep members of Native American tribes together.

Dusten Brown, a member of the Cherokee Nation, was charged over the weekend with custodial interference after failing to appear at a court-ordered meeting in South Carolina, where the adoptive parents live. He turned himself in about 10 a.m. Monday in Sequoyah County in far eastern Oklahoma and paid bond, Sheriff Ron Lockhart said.

But Brown refused extradition without a governor's warrant from South Carolina.
This is "in the best interests of the child?"  This is the country for which Mr. Brown dons that uniform he's wearing.  {smdh}.  Check out the video below and see these two families side-by-side.  Listen to the very Deep South narrative floating on the surface of it all ("a little-known Federal law??" -- Please).

Mr. Brown, hold fast young man. I salute you for your fight and I stand in solidarity with you and your family.  That little "mirror" named Veronica that you hold in your arms is yours, no matter the "things" they can give her.  When all is said and done and your daughter revisits her life, laid bare on the internet -- she'll swell with pride knowing her Daddy did everything he knew how to do to keep her in his life.  And the Capobiancos won't be able to dispute any of it. And since he refused extradition without a governor's warrant, according to this, Governor Nikki Haley (she, the child of Sikh immigrants born in Bamberg, SC) immediately drew one up and overnighted it to Oklahoma!

This man is battling so many of their "friends in high places" -- I don't know how he's not buckled under the pressure. {smdh}  Stay tuned folks -- the wheels are spinning fast and furiously on this case and I want to make sure as many "voices" as possible are heard as it develops.

Continued: Preserving cultural identity in the face of institutionalized white supremacy: Another Home-going -- Pt. 1d -- This human and sovereign rights violation is not about Veronica at all

- Cherokee official: Baby Veronica's biological father surrenders to authorities
- Charleston County Sheriff’s Office: Working to extradite Dusten Brown, searching for Veronica
- Adoptive couple wants feds to bring girl to SC
- Judge in SC finalizes Cherokee girl’s adoption in national case; American Indian groups sue


Amenta said...

Deb I finally saw this on internet MSM in the form of Yahoo news and ABC.COM. Story is totally slanted in the favor of the Capobiancos (Whiteheads.) Sadly, it appears Mr. Brown (Brown vs Whiteheads hummmm?) is floating in the world without proper guidance or he refuses proper guidance from his elders. We know their courts are wicked, we do have some redress in them, but we must be knowledgeable of their statutes to avoid their courts since they do not operate in law.

It appears the motion that got this whole thing moving (from what I have read, including your thorough posts, (which by the way should be posted on BLACK AGENDA REPORT or even on THE AFROSPEAR)is that Mr. Brown signed over ALL PARENTAL RIGHTS. From there all the "whiteheads" including the Capobiancos were given standing. Hopefully he will overcome this and win his child back. And hopefully he will become wiser in the process of life in this British legal system under the guise of the U.S. This legal system says very clearly and loudly that ignorance of the "law" is no excuse.


Deb said...

Amenta..."It appears the motion that got this whole thing moving (from what I have read, including your thorough posts, (which by the way should be posted on BLACK AGENDA REPORT or even on THE AFROSPEAR)is that Mr. Brown signed over ALL PARENTAL RIGHTS."

I appreciate your sentiment. I'm merely satisfied in believing that the series may well be posted here in perpetuity, so that regardless of the outcome, Veronica will have some facts to consider when she no doubt peruses her life on the internet when she gets older.

The fact is, as you pointed out in the beginning, the story is, and has always been slanted in favor of the Capobiancos -- thy hired a PR firm to ensure it.

Dusten was in the military, preparing to deploy to Iraq, when he agreed "to give up his rights to Veronica to his estranged ex-fiancée." They keep trying to twist that part of the story or keep it hidden. My husband and I were once, both on active-duty in the Navy (different languages, same specialty) and we BOTHhad to sign over our parental rights to a non-military person (in our case, my mother), in the event that he would be assigned sea-duty and/or I would be assigned to an unaccompanied OUTCONUS (outside the continental U.S.) tour of duty (women couldn't go out on ships/subs when I was in as they do now). This actually happened upon my re-enlistment, but I decided to get out instead because of the way my babies often reacted when Dad came back from other sea-duty tours -- they didn't know who the hayell he was! Their getting reacquainted was always a process, one I didn't want to have happen to me. When I got out, HE had to sign his parental rights OVER TO ME -- even though we were married. It is normal military procedure and common knowledge among those who have been in. He confirms as much in his side of the story here:

M. Brown has plenty of legal guidance, both from participants of "their" legal system as well as the Cherokee Nation. The problem is, and has been -- the lies, treachery and white supremacist manipulation of the system, from the SC Supreme Court to the US Supreme Court (in an attempt to gut the Indian Child Welfare Act) -- all of whom involved have political and financial ties in one way or another to the Capobiancos.

"We know their courts are wicked, we do have some redress in them, but we must be knowledgeable of their statutes to avoid their courts since they do not operate in law. "

True talk: as depressing as it is to admit, we have little, if any redress in them Brother, only if we're lucky enough to be hyper-vigilant and able to document every step of their iniquity along the way (believe me, I know from whence I speak) -- it's an exasperating, but necessary way to live for us, "Others" The Cherokee Nation Court should have had jurisdiction over this from the start. But all of them on the other side, from the birth mother, to her lawyer (hired by the Capobiancos), to the adoption agency, to the Capobiancos and their attorney falsified documents and lied -- which why the SC Family Court awarded Mr. Brown custody in the first place. But then of course, the big white privilege and white supremacy guns stepped in, overturning them. The case hasn't gone back there since. They did the right thing and have consequently been elbowed out.

The more I learn about this country (and I AM constantly learning still!), the less I want to be here, really. What's even more depressing is the fact that the more we, "Others" overcome and supposedly "advance," the more we become just like them -- for the money and perceived power that brings. {smdh}

Amenta said...

From what I am reading and understood prior is that giving up Legal Custody or Legal Guardianship is all the military required. Not the terminating of all parental rights. These legal terms are not one and the same. I know my niece had to turn over legal guardianship to my sister but she did not have to terminate her parental rights. I am not sure why they make you and your husband turn over parental rights? I am not sure how one could turn over parental rights once they have been previously terminated. This is why I felt maybe Mr. Brown was initially misguided in terminating his parental rights vs. turning over legal custody or legal guardianship.

Deb said...

Amenta..."From what I am reading and understood prior is that giving up Legal Custody or Legal Guardianship is all the military required."

No signing over parental rights, which he, in any case, did not do as it cannot be accomplished merely by accepting service of a document, nor by text as the birth mother alleges -- is not the same as giving up legal custody, I misspoke. However, relinquishing legal custody, even temporarily, can and does, pave the way for a termination of parental rights if initiated (as was the case here).

From what I know from my own personal experience, the relinquishing of legal custody to someone had to be accompanied by a form indicating your Family Care Plan, which detailed all the who, what, when, where and whys of your deployment as it related to your dependent child/children if you are a dual-service couple, which we were. And as long as that was our status, the plan for my mother, had to be updated annually. Once I got out,he had to institute a new plan naming me, instead of my mother as the legal custodian of the children, which had to be updated annually until they reached majority because he was primarily responsible for us as his dependents.

Because, outside of the ICWA, child custody cases are a state affair and the laws vary from state to state, service members always run the risk of losing their children if they are not knowledgeable of the laws which apply. Under the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act of 2003 (formerly known as the Soldiers’ and Sailors’ Civil Relief Act of 1940), a military member on active duty can obtain an automatic "stay" of ninety days or postponement of court or administrative proceedings if your military service materially affects your ability to proceed in the case when you request this protection in writing. Mr. Brown's child was 4 months old by the time he was able to fight back because the birth mother and faux adoptive parents ducked him, both before the birth and after, when they spirited the child to SC.

Mr. Brown never terminated his parental rights, he gave the birth mother legal custody of his yet to be born child, ironically -- so that they'd be well taken care of. This was baby-selling pure and simple -- it's not new, especially with Native Americans, nor is it history (as there is another case involving SC and the Shawnee of Oklahoma going on right now).

There's a wonderfully, comprehensive podcast on the August 23, 2013, The Nightwolf Show here: Do listen to it and maybe you'll understand the specifics of the case outside of the MSM's bullshit.

Crystal said...

Also I had a question on the judge that issued the warrant and terminted the transistion plan to immediatly transfer custody.I did see articales in the charleston newspaper post and courier where this judge was ranked as one of the lowest if not the lowest by the bar and that over 300 attorneys gave him bad reviews stating he lacked any knowledge of the law, it also stated that the district attorney stated he was careful as to what cases he brought up in front of this judge and tried to only take " victemless crimes" yet he is in a position to rule on a childs life and future?,51021

Deb said...

@ Crystal...Welcome! I'd read that about him too. That's all I know about him though. But I'll bet if we follow the crumbs from his Family Court perch, the trail would lead right back to Melanie Capobianco with her Masters degree and PhD in Developmental Psychology, who develops therapy programs for children with behavior problems and their families (not to mention the cash they have and can throw around in political circles). It'd be interesting to find out how many cases she'sconsulted on in his court. Just sayin'...

Thanks for stopping in!

Amenta said...

Wow Deb, based on what you said this is a REAL miscarriage of justice against this man. What do the Capobianco's have to give them sooooo much leverage????

These judges and police are totally out of control.

Deb said...

Amenta...Money and political connections -- and it's not only them, it's the adoption agency (the same one involved in this case, the new case and many others), the guardian ad litem (with connections to Justice Roberts, an adoptive parent himself who should have recused himself from this case) and their lawyers as well. They're all in cahoots and nobody's investigating any of them.

This isn't only child trafficking, it's an assault on the sovereignty of the Cherokee Nation as well as ICWA.

Deb said...

Amenta...Just read this --thought you'd be interested: -- it's ain't just Native Americans, Brother.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...