Aviso de queja relacionada con 2022-0959

OF
GIN
LOSTED
OFFICE OF
POLICE OVERSIGHT
FOUNDED
NOTICE OF COMPLAINT
October 28, 2022
ICMS #: 2022-0959
On October 24, 2022, the OPO received an email complaint.
The complainant alleges: This email is being sent to make whoever oversees the Child
Abuse detectives aware of the following:
1) the delay in interviewing those who report,
2) negligence in not accepting supplemental information
3) negligence in not using/contacting persons know to be collateral witnesses
4) lack of protection of children after initial report is made.
5) total lack of concern for the privacy of the reporter/outcry witness
6) seemingly inappropriate contact of law enforcement with the alleged perpetrators
It makes me SO frustrated as a citizen of the city of Austin to have to keep contacting various
oversight committees and supervisors etc. It seems that not one thing that I have initially
reported using the mechanisms currently in place, as it relates to child or personal safety,
have been taken care of using proper procedures the first time around. Everything from a
child welfare check to investigation of child abuse is done with a cavalier, lack of
thoroughness that not only makes me frustrated but adds to a growing feeling of being
unsafe and uncared for by law enforcement.
the attached handwritten document is a timeline of the various actions taken by me and the
corresponding action/inaction on behalf of law enforcement.
My greatest concerns are for two aspects of the process of reporting child abuse.
OF
CITY
SUBTOTAL
OFFICE OF
POLICE OVERSIGHT
FOUNDED
NOTICE OF COMPLAINT
#1 when a person calls CPS CPS keeps their identity under extreme lock and key. Even
when the reporter may be an abusive ex spouse or perhaps narcissistic family member
who
wants to punish the loving parent. the identity is protected even when they make numerous
calls reporting false claims. HOWEVER, when a person reports child abuse directly to the
police, or our case through NCMEC who reports to police, nothing is done to protect the
reporter,
Not only did the alleged perpetrator know that I reported on behalf of our children, but
thanks to the updates from Detective
,
he knew what going on as much if not
more than I did. Our children's father was even personally called by Detective
to let
hime know there would not be an investigation. This was horrifying.
So now, the alleged perpetrator had a head start of information and knew that he was "off
the hook." when I called to question Detective
about that and let him know
that the boys and I were being treated about it, he did not even do me the courtesy of calling
me back.
#2 that the rules of law regarding he said/she said apply even when we are talking about
children reporting child abuse at the hands of an adult. How can it be that after numerous
outcries and two reports to law enforcement, the burden is actually on the child victim
to
prove they are telling the truth and not on the adult alleged perpetrator to prove they are
innocent.
I understand the idea of innocent until proven guilty, but that statement is taken to an
extreme where without anal fissures that occurred yesterday a child cannot get help for the
abuse they are suffering from at the hands of adult. when children must spend alone,
unregulated time around the person about whom they have outcried, for law enforcement
to take months to investigate is unforgivable.
Lastly, Detective
said that our children didn't "really outcry. but that
the older
child, did say some weird things about thinking he dad is doing some things to hime when
he is asleep."
Now, perhaps that might be weird if your dad was a banker or fisherman or jewelry maker,
but not when your dad does the tings that their dad does for a living. Detective
knew
OF
CHILL
OFFICE OF
POLICE OVERSIGHT
FOUNDED
NOTICE OF COMPLAINT
what the alleged perpetrator does for a living because I told him, and provided proof,
afterwards.
I didn't tell Detective
before, nor did I tell Det.
about the abuse during our marriage
etc.
I told him after the interview. What I told home should have warranted an investigation
because it gave a reason why the boys potentially might not know exact details.
Their dad makes INSTRUCTIONAL ASMR videos. (ASMR stands for Autonomous
Sensory Meridian Response) ASMR is often referred to as SLEEP HYPNOSIS. if the boys
don't exactly remember things from their sleep, their dad may have a way he is getting
away with that. Their dad makes SO many of these videos that he shares 3 bank accounts
with the woman,
with whom he makes them.
Their dad also provably listens to Binaural Beats with them, a fact which I had documented
from exchanges on Our Family Wizard parenting app.
Binaural Beats are used for hypnosis and deep memory erasure etc and go by the nickname
"digital drugs" since 2009.
Detective
did seem to think these things were relevant.
On the iPod that their dad let the boys use, (which I had proof of it's belonging to him) that
he had put games on, their were hundreds of entries saved in the search data for Safari and
Bing that were for various porn sites, many of which were YOUNG TWINK PORN. I
would assume that you all know what a Twink is??????
It is a young, white, hairless, male that looks like a boy
Literally any other fetish in the world might be acceptable, but that one!!! This is not only
relevant, it is something that cannot be ignored. And yet it was.
OF
GINE
CUSTOM
OFFICE OF
POLICE OVERSIGHT
NOTICE OF COMPLAINT
No one asked for a medical exam. Nor did they ask if there was physical evidence that
might be documented by pediatrician records. No one asked to talk to collateral witnesses
even though I told Detective
and the interviewer that the boys had told other people
about some of the things they had told me.
Nothing was done. There was no investigation. The detectives, or whomever made the
decision, chose to believe the alleged perpetrator over digging deeper into the stories of the
2 boys and the outcry witness.
And by the way, the first time the boys came in to the C.C.P. was two years ago. The
forensic interview was 5 months after the report I made on behalf of our youngest boy the
report said that "our 4 year old son said his paternal grandfather was taking him in to the
closet and making him be quiet while he stuck his finger in his butt."
That in and of it self is in my mind not acceptable by a place where protecting children is
supposed to be their business. And to top it off, the boys father, who was protecting the
perpetrator because it was his own dad, was allowed to bring them into the interview. And
the report says the boys didn't talk! They were likely threatened the entire way there about
what would happen if they did.
If I seem angry, I am I have been in a position to deny custody and be in contempt of
court to protect the children from further abuse and retaliation. When Really, I did my job
by helping them tell their story. The APD child abuse team failed to do their job and now
the boys are in danger and I am going to court, I the loving parent. to try and defend my
decisions to withhold my small children from alone time with their alleged perpetrator.
Does that sound fair to you? Shouldn't someone have to stand up and say that the
department failed in this case?
I am forced to follow the letter of the law or else be in contempt, and yet the persons in law
enforcement we are as citizens supposed to put our trust in don't do their jobs. That is not
good enough for children!!!!!
OF
CITY
OFFICE OF
POLICE OVERSIGHT
FOUNDED
NOTICE OF COMPLAINT
Thank you for listening.
I assure you I am not too mad. I am appropriately upset after two plus years of this ordeal.
This notice of complaint is a request for Internal Affairs to initiate an investigation to
determine if the employee conduct is within compliance of APD policy, Civil Service
Rules, and Municipal Civil Service Rules.