"Did Annette Monson get fired for this? These text messages are so damning to their manipulation of the situation!"
"Did Annette Monson get fired for this? These text messages are so damning to their manipulation of the situation!"
"Did she (Annette Monson) get fired for this? These text messages are so damning to their manipulation of the situation!"
Here is a screenshot of this video comment below:
 |
| Accurate comment on video entitled "CPS "Imagined Evidence": Text Messages Unmasked. Craft of Annette Monson and Susan Manning Destroyed" |
I replied to this comment saying, "There is very little if any accountability within CPS / DCFS from the caseworkers to the higher-ups. The only way they will be held accountable is by "We the People" exercising Free Speech exposure."
"The word destroys their craft." In the name of Jesus Christ, Amen.
Watch this video entitled, "CPS "Imagined Evidence": Text Messages Unmasked, Craft of Annette Monson and Susan Manning Destroyed" here below:
As shown in the video, here below is a screenshot, that you can click on the image to enlarge, of one insane sample of text messages exchanged between Utah CPS caseworker, Annette Monson and Susan Manning, aka Brook, Carter, Moon, Flint, Greener dated April 28, 2022:
(See "Beware of Susan Manning: A Warning to Other Parents and Families")
CPS / DCFS tried to keep these text messages hidden. It wasn't until almost 1 year later AFTER ALL ALLEGATIONS WERE DISMISSED, that we finally got these text messages because we kept challenging CPS / DCFS to release them to us.
The first thing that jumps out to me is Annette Monson NEVER ASKS ONE QUESTION. She just automatically gulps down whatever Susan Manning claims, no matter how absurd. An actual investigator should be ASKING QUESTIONS in order to find out the TRUTH.
Notice the text message from Annette Monson to Susan Manning which reads the following:
"If Hailee can get out of the home and let the police know she doesn't feel safe going home, it would raise the level of danger. That would help. Annette"
Annette Monson should at the very least get fired for this text message exchange with Susan Manning alone due to the following 8 key pieces of information contained in just this text exchange which prove Annette Monson either knew what she was doing was completely wrong or should have known:
Annette Monson should at the very least get fired for this exchange alone because any type of real investigator should easily be able to know the following truths from this exchange and act accordingly to the truth and not act according to lies, assumptions and imaginations which causes families great harm and trauma:TRUTH #1:
First, Susan Manning is lying because Susan Manning desperately falsely claims,
1. "I don't think she can get out"
2. "we no longer have any way of getting her."
3. "She is trapped."
9:16 AMNotice the very first text message is Susan Manning to Annette Monson at 9:16 AM saying, "Can't switch Friday as Aubrie (18-year-older teenager / step-daughter) is cooking and Hailee (16-year-old) only serves. Susan"
Susan Manning is referring to the pizza restaurant that both sisters work at together, which restaurant, their step-dad was the one who got them their jobs at this restaurant.
The night before on April 27, 2022 the 16-year-old sister asks the 18-year-old, in a text message at 9:16 PM "When will they (CPS) come?"
18-year-old replies saying, "I don't know (idk) grandma (Susan Manning) wants us to switch shifts so she can talk to you sooner"
16-year-old: "i feel like i overreacted but I know i didn't"
18-year-old: "oh wait we can't because (bc) i'm cooking friday"
See screenshot of this text message here:
The whole manufactured false narrative that Susan Manning was falsely claiming to CPS caseworker Annette Monson was that, the 16-year-old teenager that, Susan Manning was grooming, was "isolated".
Susan Manning's so-called evidence of "isolation" was the fact that the sisters were being homeschooled. Somehow not going to public school but doing school at home with your 6 brothers and sisters and mom and step-dad, now constitutes being "isolated". Let me rephrase that, the only way being homeschooled would constitute being "isolated" is by Annette Monson (CPS) MAKING ASSUMPTIONS (more on that later).
However, this 16-year-old teenager / step-daughter that Susan Manning was grooming did the following activities out in the open, in public and to the world at CHURCH, WORK, GYM, FRIENDS and SCHOOL:
1. Teenagers went to church every Sunday,
2. went to all of the young women church activities every week,
3. worked together at the pizza restaurant regularly multiple times a week,
4. went to the gym regularly to workout with both teenage sisters together and their friends, (See text message below showing they go to the gym saying, "hunter was at the gym while me and addie were there and we talked for like 40 minutes of how stupid tim is lmaoo")
5. also the 16-year-old spent about 6 out of 7 days a week hanging out with her friend(s).
6. We homeschooled the 16-year-old and she was even registered through My Tech High, an online school system, who could have also been contacted and it would have been seen that the 16-year-old was submitting her weekly school logs and reports and doing her assignments each day.
Therefore, any type of real investigator should know that because Susan Manning is having a conversation with Annette Monson on planning to talk to the teenager(s) at their work, that neither teenager was isolated, neither teenager was "TRAPPED" etc.
Because if the desperate false claim of "SHE IS TRAPPED" were true, how is the 16-year-old going to work multiple times a week?
Was there ever a single time that she suddenly stopped showing up for work? NO!
It is ridiculous that Annette Monson (CPS) enables psychopaths and pathological liars like Susan Manning to LIE by not providing any pushback or applying any scrutiny to the obvious LIES by Susan Manning.
And since Susan Manning is actively talking to Annette Monson about planning to talk to them at their work, that they're clearly NOT "TRAPPED" and therefore since the actual evidence PROVES THAT NO ONE IS TRAPPED that Susan Manning is clearly lying because she is trying to get Annette Monson to give Susan permission to kidnap the vulnerable 16-year-old teenager / step-daughter that Susan Manning is grooming.
Because if Susan Manning can get the green light from Annette Monson and CPS to kidnap the groomed teenager, then Susan Manning can always falsely claim she is not to blame because Annette Monson and CPS told her to kidnap the 16-year-old.
Susan Manning has a history of kidnapping, including her own daughter 3 times growing up, including on her daughter's (now ex-daughter) 16TH birthday. (See this kidnapping history at "Beware of Susan Manning: A Warning to Other Parents and Families")
TRUTH #2:
Second, Annette Monson failed to apply any scrutiny to the desperate claims Susan Manning was making.
Real
investigators would apply scrutiny to the claims being made in order to
figure out what is true because if the claims are true, they will hold
up to scrutiny. If they are not true, the claims will fall apart.
Any type of real investigator should be able to apply scrutiny to anything that they are told by all sides, not just gulp down and accept any allegation as true or fact WITHOUT any actual verifiable evidence backing up the absurd claim.
Annette Monson, who at this time in April 2022 had been a caseworker so far for 17 years! So after 17 years Annette Monson still hasn't figured out that you need a little thing called EVIDENCE before you can act in one direction or the other?
10:21 AM:
In this April 28 morning text message exchange with Annette Monson, Susan Manning claimed at 10:21 AM that the parents had now taken the cell phone of the 16-year-old and were going through her phone.
The previous message at 9:16 AM Susan Manning was simply informing Annette Monson that the teenager sisters could not switch shifts at their work at the pizza restaurant.
Now minutes later AFTER the groomed 16-year-old has had her smartphone taken away, Susan Manning is desperate to get the 16-year-old out of the house.
The question that any real investigator of 17 years should be asking at this point is WHY?
WHY was Susan Manning calm BEFORE the smartphone was taken, and then AFTER the smartphone is taken she is absolutely desperate to get the groomed teenager?
What changed other than the phone being taken?
Could it be that perhaps there is PROOF that Susan Manning is grooming and manipulating vulnerable teenagers on that phone?
Could it be there are text messages, and other evidence on this phone that would PROVE Susan Manning is knowingly making false claims and causing harm to these vulnerable teenagers?
Shouldn't any real investigator of 17 years be asking these obvious questions in order to get the answers on who is telling the truth and who is lying?
TRUTH #3:
Third, real investigators should always be wary of the possibility of being weaponized against the innocent, and act accordingly to avoid being weaponized and thus traumatizing, abusing and harming the innocent.
The weaponization of CPS against the innocent is not a rare thing. The weaponization of CPS happens all the time. Therefore shouldn't a CPS caseworker be aware that whenever someone calls to make allegations that there could be the possibility that the accuser could be trying to weaponize CPS against those they are accusing in order to harass, abuse and gain power or control over those they are accusing?
On Monday May 23, 2022, we met with Annette Monson's supervisor, Dave Stevens, who later concluded "Susan Manning LIED ABOUT EVERYTHING" and that "THERE WASN'T EVEN A SLIVER OF TRUTH." (See: Beware of Susan Manning: A Warning to Other Parents and Families) At that meeting with CPS supervisor Dave Stevens, I asked Annette Monson if she realized that people make false allegations in order to weaponize CPS against others?
To which Annette Monson replied, "Yes, but that only happens in divorce cases."
So why exactly is the possibility of CPS being weaponized against others "only happens in divorce cases" Annette?
And you're an "investigator" at this point for 17 years and these are the claims you're making after 17 years that you expect us to believe Annette?
So Annette Monson dismissed any possibility that Susan Manning could be trying to weaponize CPS because this was not a divorce case and according to Annette Monson weaponization of CPS "only happens in divorce cases."
As one example of a
false statement by Annette Monson, she told authorities more than
once that step-dad did not give permission for his wife to talk to CPS in an attempt to incorrectly portray the step-dad as some type of controlling husband. That statement of Annette is
FALSE.
Here is the exact word-for-word transcript
according to our fresh memories of how the appearance of Annette
Monson happened at our front door on Thursday April 27, 2022. We
wrote down the exchange within minutes as it was fresh in our
heads:
My wife goes to answer it and it's CPS.
“Hello, my name is Annette Monson, I'm with DCFS. Can I come in?”
Wife: “No”.
Annette: “No?”
Wife: “No.”
Annette: “OK, I have a report between Hailee and Tim and I'd like to interview them.”
My wife sat there and stared at Annette Monson for a number of seconds because my wife was very confused since the 16-year-old and her step-dad had a really strong and close relationship.
Annette Monson also asked while my wife was staring at her, “Do you have a problem if I talk to them?” in an accusatory tone.
Then my wife asked, “What is this about?”
Annette: “We want to talk to the kids first.”
Wife: “I'm going to go talk to my husband and you can wait here.” And my wife shut the door.
My wife comes back out to the backyard and tells me it's that Annette Monson lady from CPS and Annette asked to talk to our 16-year-old. At that moment I ask my wife if she can help me pick up the gazebo directions which are blowing away.
Then my wife tells me she just said she was going to talk to her husband.
My wife and I agree that we will tell Annette we will not talk to her because Annette refuses to tell us what this is about and we want to record everything and make sure an attorney is present before we talk to CPS due to the fact that Annette is not trustworthy and has a history of making false statements. And I keep putting together the gazebo.
So then my wife opens the door just an inch and says to Annette, “um yeah, we don't want you to talk to our kids.”
Annette says, “can I at least see the kids to verify that they are ok?”
Wife: “No thanks.” Shut the door and locked it.
Then my wife tries to get a hold of our then 18-year-old daughter / step-daughter, and when my wife finally does get a hold of the 18-year-old, she says she doesn't know about anyone calling CPS and suggests maybe it was our "crazy neighbors" next door who are always yelling for hours on end. But we have the text messages proving the 18-year-old is lying and she did know.
I then call the police, I talk to Officer Justin Aagard of the Ephraim police and tell him I want to file a report for record-keeping purposes explaining why we are not going to talk to CPS without an attorney present because we know Annette Monson is not trustworthy and she constantly makes false statements. We want to make sure we have an attorney present and we want to video-record every second. I let Aagard know we are open and willing to speak while simultaneously making sure there is no funny business going on and our rights are not going to be violated.
I also ask Aagard to call CPS and let them know we are going to get an attorney so we can have one present at any interaction with CPS to make sure we aren't having our rights violated and to document everything.
My wife calls both her "mom" (now former mom), Susan Manning and Susan's 6th husband, Michael Brook and it goes to voicemail which is very rare. Usually at least one of them will answer.
My wife called Susan Manning again later that night and Susan then answered saying weirdly, “Hello”.
Wife: “Did you call DCFS on us?”
Susan: “Whaaaaattt?”
Wife: “Did you call DCFS on us?”
Susan: “Well, … uh... I just asked someone for advice.”
Wife: “Who?”
Susan: “If they called DCFS, I'm not going to tell you.”
Wife: “Your bishop?”
Susan: “I'm not going to tell you. What did they say?”
Wife: “I'm not going to tell you. We're done. Don't ever come here, call, give presents, we're done.”
And my wife hung up.
The next morning on April 28, 2022 I then called CPS caseworker Annette Monson at 9:21 AM and I ask Annette Monson what the specific allegations are to which she is required to tell me by law and she refuses to tell me.
TWICE we asked Annette Monson for some information and TWICE she refused. The first was the night before on April 27, 2022 when she refused to tell us what was going on when we asked her. The second being the phone call on the morning of April 28, 2022 at 9:21 AM when she refused to tell me what the specific allegations were, which she is required to do by law.
When you ask a police officer for their name and badge number, they have to verbally tell you by law. When you ask a police officer why they are arresting you, they have to tell you. When you ask a police officer what the probable cause is they have to tell you. Or if you ask a police officer if you are free to go or if you're being detained, they have to let you know. So police are required by law to give us information upon request, why does CPS and Annette Monson not give us information upon request? If CPS wants to talk to us so bad without an attorney present, then CPS has to be willing to give us some information upon request. Does CPS have different standards of providing info than police?
I think this is a valid fact to highlight because Susan Manning falsely told Annette Monson in a text message at 10:21 am on the morning of April 28, 2022 quote “I don't think she can get out and we no longer have any way of getting her. She is trapped.” So if the groomed 16-year-old was “TRAPPED” and had no way of getting out, why would we be calling and reaching out to Annette Monson at 9:21 AM asking Annette what the specific allegations are against us if we had “TRAPPED” the 16-year-old? We are obviously showing we are willing to talk once we get some more information and once we get an attorney or else we wouldn't be calling the cell phone of Annette Monson asking for more information.
And I already called Officer Aagard the evening before saying I would talk to CPS once we got an attorney so we could have an attorney present. Again showing we are willing to talk but we also want to make sure there is no funny business going on.
TRUTH #4:
Fourth, Annette Monson only attempted to speak with the vulnerable 16-year-old one time the prior evening.
It's not like Annette Monson tried to talk to the 16-year-old countless times over the course of many weeks and months. Or that the teenager stopped showing up for work, or stopped appearing at church, or stopped going to young women activities, or stopped going to the gym or stopped hanging out with friends. NONE of those things ever stopped happening.
There was ABSOLUTELY ZERO EVIDENCE THAT the 16-year-old was "TRAPPED" so there was ABSOLUTELY ZERO REASON to suggest to Susan Manning a way to "RAISE THE LEVEL OF DANGER."
In fact, when you read the text message exchange closely, Annette Monson suggested to Susan Manning on how to "RAISE THE LEVEL OF DANGER" BEFORE Susan Manning even made the easily proven false claim of the 16-year-old being "TRAPPED".
Annette Monson first suggested to Susan how to "RAISE THE LEVEL OF DANGER" and then the NEXT message from Susan Manning was her desperate false claim that the vulnerable teenager was "TRAPPED" AFTER Annette Monson gave permission to Susan Manning to kidnap and cause immense trauma to BOTH the 16-year-old herself and her entire family.
TRUTH #5:
Fifth, WHY
did Susan Manning suddenly become so desperate to get the 16-year-old,
not before the teenager's phone was taken, but only AFTER her phone was
taken by her parents? What was on that phone that Susan Manning was so worried about?
TRUTH #6:
Sixth, Annette
Monson knew Susan Manning was making not credible claims in her April
28th text message exchange.
 |
| CPS Annette Monson testifying that Susan Manning is not credible. Watch here: https://youtu.be/_Gn7NTKR4NA |
TRUTH #7:
Seventh, Annette Monson should be questioning how Susan Manning would have known the teenager's phone was taken away?
Annette Monson should have known again something was not adding up here and thus she should have been asking more questions such as the following:
Question 1: How would Susan Manning know the cell phone of the 16-year-old was taken by her parents in the first place? Who told Susan Manning this? Deductive reasoning would conclude most likely the teenager would have told Susan Manning her phone was taken. And if that was the case, how is the teenager telling Susan Manning this?
Something is not adding up here.
The answer is that the 16-year-old had 3 cell phones, one with limited permission from her parents and two that she kept secret and hidden from her parents, that she did not have permission to have. And this teenager also had access to a family computer for doing her school assignments from home.
Even though Annette Monson would not have known at this point that the teenager had 3 smartphones, she should still be asking the question of how would Susan Manning know the cell phone was taken? And why not simply ask Susan Manning how she knows the phone was taken? And why not simply ask why Susan Manning is now claiming the teenager is "TRAPPED"?
Because if Susan Manning was being told by the teenager that one of her phones was taken, Susan would have known the teenager had more phones since Susan would have been receiving more communication from additional phones from the teenager she was grooming.
Thus Susan Manning is lying again by omission by acting like the teenager cannot communicate, while knowing all along the teenager is actively talking to Susan Manning whenever she wants.
This is all more evidence that Susan Manning is a pathological liar and that Annette Monson should have been figuring this out if she was actually investigating to find out the truth, rather than to blindly go after someone without any actual evidence to support such biased actions against an innocent family.
And later, below you'll see some Snapchat messages between the two teenage sisters the following day on April 29, 2022. These messages were sent from the additional secret phones of the 16-year-old.
Question 2 (Previously discussed at Truth 5): How does having a phone taken away equate to being "TRAPPED"? Susan Manning only desperately claimed the 16 year-old was "TRAPPED" AFTER her phone was claimed to have been taken away, NOT before.
Question 3 (Previously discussed at Truth 5): Why is Susan Manning so desperate to convince Annette Monson that the teenager is suddenly "TRAPPED" only AFTER her phone was supposedly taken?
TRUTH #8:
Annette Monson NEVER asked Susan Manning any questions. She proceeds to blurt out on how to "RAISE THE DANGER LEVEL" before ever asking a single question.
Any real investigator, especially after 17 years, should be ASKING QUESTIONS if you really care about finding out the TRUTH, rather than pushing your pre-conceived false agenda.
SUMMARIZING THESE 8 TRUTHS:
Summarizing, any real investigator would be able to figure out and know the following 8 TRUTHS from just this one text message exchange between Susan Manning and Annette Monson:
Truth 1: Susan Manning was clearly lying saying the 16-year-old was "TRAPPED" while minutes before talking about planning to go to talk to the 16-year-old at the pizza restaurant.
Truth 2: Annette Monson failed to apply any scrutiny to the desperate claims Susan Manning was making.
Real investigators would apply scrutiny to the claims being made in order to figure out what is true because if the claims are true, they will hold up to scrutiny. If they are not true, the claims will fall apart.
Truth 3: Real investigators should always be wary of the possibility of being weaponized, and act accordingly to avoid traumatizing, abusing and harming the innocent.
Truth 4: Annette Monson only attempted to speak with the vulnerable 16-year-old one time.
Truth 5: Why did Susan Manning suddenly become so desperate to get the 16-year-old, not before the teenager's phone was taken, but only AFTER her phone was taken by her parents? What was on that phone that Susan Manning was so worried about?
See some of what was on that phone by watching the video, "CPS "Imagined Evidence": Text Messages Unmasked, Craft of Annette Monson and Susan Manning Destroyed"
Truth 6: Annette Monson knew Susan Manning was making not credible claims in her April 28th text message exchange. How do we know Annette Monson knew Susan Manning was not credible? Because Annette Monson said she knew Susan Manning was not credible during her under oath testimony with our attorney.
(See the 04:28 minute mark of the video "CPS "Imagined Evidence": Text Messages Unmasked, Craft of Annette Monson and Susan Manning Destroyed" "It was more an assumption that there was probably some exaggeration with that (April 28th text messages)")
Truth 7: Annette Monson should be questioning how Susan Manning would have known the teenager's phone was taken away?
Truth 8: Annette Monson should be ASKING QUESTIONS instead of gulping down everything Susan Manning absurdly claimed.
CONCLUSION:
Annette Monson and CPS enabled or rather caused the abuse of the 16-year-old and the entire family when Annette Monson and CPS gave permission to Susan Manning to kidnap, as the following April 29, 2022 Snapchat messages from the 16-year-old to her older sister demonstrate the harm that was caused to them from that permission given to Susan Manning from CPS:
April 29, 2022 Snapchat messages the day after Susan Manning kidnapped the 16-year-old - 1 of 4:
Vulnerable teenagers (ages 18, 16) that Susan Manning is grooming, asking "why would grandma do this right now? (rn)” Grandma is Susan Manning.
April 29, 2022 Snapchat messages 2 of 4:
Conversation continued at top asking "why would grandma (Susan Manning) do this right now? (rn)"Then saying they did not want CPS "to be involved" and "CPS does nothing but cause more drama"
Followed by teenager age 18 "DADDY" stating her mental health is:
"back down completely"
Because of what Susan Manning is doing, ie:
"why would grandma do this right now? (rn)"
April 29, 2022 Snapchat Messages 3 of 4:
(conversation expanded / continued from 2 of 4)
April 29, 2022 Snapchat Messages 4 of 4:
Conversation continued with the vulnerable 16-year-old saying,
"well because i started the drama today i ran off
i should've just stayed home"
The 16-year-old "ran-off" into the arms / car of Susan Manning because she was being manipulated and groomed by Susan. Susan
orchestrated the kidnapping of this teenager on April 28, 2022 in a very similar manner to how Susan
Manning kidnapped her own daughter (the mother of this 16-year-old) 27 years before, when Susan's own daughter was also 16 years old. (See: "Beware of Susan Manning: A Warning to Other Parents and Families")
This 16-year-old was afraid of being found out and getting in trouble
because she knew she had been lying to her parents and she knew her parents were
now discovering her lies all clearly documented on her phone.
And this pre-planned next chapter of kidnapping 27 years later by Susan Manning is why Susan felt
the need to get Annette Monson's permission this time around in order to avoid getting in trouble due to her prior history of kidnapping. (See: "Beware of Susan Manning: A Warning to Other Parents and Families") Because Susan knew if she could claim Annette Monson told her to get the 16-year-old out of the house, then Susan Manning could put the blame on someone else (CPS) for her own actions. Susan needed to create plausible deniability by inducing Annette Monson to do the bidding of Susan Manning.
Annette Monson did Susan's bidding when Monson knowingly and wrongfully gave
that permission by texting Susan on April 28, 2022, "If
Hailee can get out of the home and let the police know she doesn't feel
safe going home, IT WOULD RAISE THE LEVEL OF DANGER. THAT WOULD HELP. Annette".
To read a timeline and history of Susan Manning's kidnappings and how she operates, including her prior kidnapping(s) of her ex-daughter 27 years prior when her ex-daughter was also 16 years old, go to: "Beware of Susan Manning: A Warning to Other Parents and Families"
 |
| Annette Monson failing to actually investigate, "I never really stopped to think about that." Watch here: https://youtu.be/_Gn7NTKR4NA |
 |
| Annette Monson failing to actually investigate, "I wasn't focused on that." Watch here: https://youtu.be/_Gn7NTKR4NA |
 |
| Annette Monson failing to actually investigate, "I wasn't paying attention to that." Watch here: https://youtu.be/_Gn7NTKR4NA |
After the allegations were DISMISSED, I called Annette Monson to complain on July 19, 2022 in a 12 minute 14 second phone call.
Annette Monson admitted on the phone twice that she "made assumptions" And Monson also said she "imagined" evidence that never existed but she hoped might exist.
Twice Annette Monson said, "I GUESS I MADE ASSUMPTIONS". Followed by, "I IMAGINED" there might be evidence that she hoped would exist. ("I" is referring to herself, Annette Monson.)
So based off of Monson's "assumptions" and "imagination", she thought it was a good idea to text Susan Manning a strategy to "RAISE THE DANGER LEVEL" when she texted a known non-credible accuser, Susan Manning on April 28, 2022 at 10:21 AM "If Hailee can get out of the home and let the police know she doesn't feel safe going home, it would raise the level of danger. That would help. Annette"
According to the 8 TRUTHS highlighted in the
summary above, any real investigator who supposedly had been a CPS
caseworker for 17 years at that point would never have strategized with a
known false accuser on how to "RAISE THE DANGER LEVEL. THAT WOULD HELP".
As this clearly unethical strategization given to a known false
accuser, Susan Manning, certainly did NOT help. Instead it only severely
ESCALATED the situation rather than to deescalate by giving Susan
Manning permission to kidnap and create a look-over-there
smoke-and-mirrors distraction in an attempt to conceal or hide the
grooming and abuse of Susan Manning against an innocent family at the
expense of the 16-year-old that Susan was kidnapping. This severe
escalation was totally preventable. All Annette Monson had to do was
reemphasize that she was working on getting a subpoena.
Although since Annette Monson had NO EVIDENCE, that would make it
difficult to get a subpoena without lying to authorities or creating a
dramatic smoke-and-mirrors guise posing as false evidence. And
this preventable escalation caused in turn, completely preventable
trauma, abuse and harm to the vulnerable teenager as well to the entire
family. If Annette Monson acted appropriately in accordance to the 8
TRUTHS that she should have known and that she did know, according to
her own words in her under oath testimony where she testified that she
knew Susan Manning to not be credible and that she knew Susan Manning
was lying and/or exaggerating in those April 28th text messages between
Annette and Susan, none of this preventable trauma, abuse and harm that
resulted when Susan Manning kidnapped the 16-year-old that morning would
have ever happened. And if Annette Monson didn't know, then she is
incompetent and still cannot properly do the job of a CPS caseworker
after 17 years without causing completely preventable trauma,
abuse and harm. Therefore Annette Monson should be fired in either
scenario of knowing, which she did, according to her own words, or not
knowing, which she should have known after being a CPS caseworker for 17
years.
Returning to the original question that was asked which was, "Did Annette Monson get fired for this? These text messages are so damning to their manipulation of the situation!". The answer is Annette Monson should be fired and CPS should be held accountable because of the 8
TRUTHS from just
the one April 28th text message exchange between Annette Monson and
Susan Manning that proves Annette Monson knew or should have known the
permission that Monson gave to Susan Manning to "RAISE THE LEVEL OF
DANGER. THAT WOULD HELP", was wrong and caused serious trauma and harm to all family
members involved.
MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD:
To make a complaint against CPS and/or against CPS caseworker Annette Monson contact the following:
Manti, Utah DCFS Office:
55 S. Main St.
Manti, Utah, 84642
Office Phone: 435-835-0780
DCFS former Supervisor Angie Morrill
DCFS Supervisor Dave Stevens
Cell Phone: 435-609-9284
dastevens@utah.gov
And contact Shawnee Ellis, the boss of Dave Stevens, to file a complaint against Annette Monson as well.
Shawnee Ellis
Office Phone: 801-538-4300
Shawnee's Supervisor
Morgan Keller
Office Phone: 801-702-1104
Shala Reynolds (Attorney General)
Phone: 385-985-7760
ARTICLE: CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS MEAN NOTHING IN FAMILY COURT
READ HERE
"Every
American is supposed to be protected by the Constitution, yet when it
comes to family courts and Child Protective Services (CPS) — which
operate under different names in different states, such as DCYF, DFS,
DCF, and DHHS — those rights cease to exist. Parents lose their
children without due process, without fair trials, and without proper
legal representation. The system operates on state statutes, many of
which blatantly violate constitutional rights, yet no one challenges
them. The courts back them without question, and attorneys refuse to
fight back.CPS doesn’t operate under the same legal standards as criminal courts. In a criminal case, you’re innocent until proven guilty. In CPS cases, you’re guilty until proven innocent — if you even get a chance to prove yourself at all."
Comments
Post a Comment