Update on Detroit Child-Snatcher Case

Email Print
FacebookTwitterShare

“Authorities have determined there is no emergency need for [13-year-old Ariana Godboldo] … to be on medication, after the girl’s mother was accused of medically neglecting her by not giving her a psychotropic drug,” reports the Detroit Free Press. “Though officials said Wednesday that there was no immediate need to give the girl medication, Michigan Assistant Attorney General David Law said he may reintroduce the issue later if the need arises.”

Assistant Commissar for Official Persecution Law is not referring to any “need” on the part of Ariana, but rather the needs of the criminals who abducted her and assaulted her mother: The “facts” can always be altered in the service of their interests.

This official determination has validated Maryanne’s refusal to poison her daughter with Risperdal — but that doesn’t matter, either: She is scheduled to go on trial June 8 for the supposed offense of refusing to permit her daughter to be seized at gunpoint and forcibly injected with a drug the state now admits did her no good.

The CPS gave itself permission to kidnap Ariana because of “medical neglect” — yet during the time the physically handicapped girl has been imprisoned at a CPS-run facility, she has not been “medicated,” and shows no ill effects as a result of that supposed “neglect.”

Just how long “should it take to release a child to the custody of relatives?” asks Michigan Live columnist Darrell Dawsey. “From all appearances, she probably should’ve never been taken away from her family in the first place, as there were relatives willing to take her in even as the standoff was unfolding. The mother has been released from police custody. Relatives are begging for the court to let this child come live with them. And even through all this drama, and without CPS’s vaunted drug treatment plan, the child is doing OK. Unless I’m missing something, the call to free this little girl should have been answered a while ago.”

What Mr. Dawsey is missing is the fact that this has never had anything to do with the best interests of Ariana or her family: It was an exercise in vindicating the State’s supposed ownership of every child, as well as its purported authority to seize them at will and, if necessary, to kill any parent who resists. (See Karen DeCoster’s LRC blog on this issue.)

 

10:23 pm on April 14, 2011