position pretty patient worship i represent richard likes them and he had the fortune or misfortune of having children with two different women both already been found to be unfit in separate through an off court proceedings and so the allegation leaves the children with just at that time they still are still was not the world's most whoppers of thought let me be honest and i like to think that the process the integrated assessments followed by the service plan process did great things for richard clarke's i believe it you would find that he was hostile with authority figures didn't have much education to either work long hours or spent a lot of time looking for meaning fairly menial jobs and the second lady betty had a child with had a conviction for killing her own child and at that point in time he didn't believe it he didn't believe that she was responsible for her son's desk and he also minimized his role of one point in time in an inadequate supervision case with one of the other children so eat process as they evaluate him decides that he needs cognitive behavioral therapy the hostility needs to go as a parent you need to be able to work with authority figures which is not terribly surprising to us but it was to him in any event he has the children keeps the children for about ten months and this is before the counseling really took effect he's not nice to his caseworker he's leaving the kids in daycare for a long time and he takes the oldest child off limits he didn't think she needed it found unfit at a at a at a permanency hearing and the kids are placed in foster care children are placed in a succession of foster care or placed under one was going to work was not going to work the six seven year old girl she's not they don't they give notice to the department a doctor that sets up the what i will ask you to consider is the best interest issue later on in any event  so she was asked this question if you're an alcoholic and you do alcohol treatment and you don't have a drink for twenty years you can do it again now if you have to mess with violence and problems and you go ahead and you do your d v treatment and no indication of sexual dysfunction or leaning toward sexual offending no diagnosis of pedophilia there was a diagnosis of child abuse because the abuse of the child on most twenty years before he decided that richard needed sex offender could work he hasn't had an offense in twenty years he had one offense in twenty years he had a speeding ticket in the next twenty years but he had no other traffic violations no missed manners no  take on test were not completed first they were eventually completed he concluded that richard needed sex offender treatment and he did back completely went to some sessions he told his case worker that some of the stories make him sick and then  repeated in class in front of the other sex offenders that guy says some of these stories make him sick that's what richard testified to when the sex offender evaluated was asked that question he said i don't remember if i s by the way the department was made to drive forty five minutes one way to get the sex offender treatment there was a place in town that they decided they would pick that one and because he didn't do better treatment he did make reasonable progress we're now for the case worker testifies again and the question was asked the children have been placed separately now was the parent one of the little child didn't want the other child so we've now placed the order to child with one that is not  empathy and she taught him trial safety and she knew what he was taking in counseling and so she tried to determine if you've been in counseling and jennifer slater said he was doing wonderfully she had more than a hundred  hours to visit this lady at some time to his family and she said these kids are bonded to richard and these kids are partly from each other so course we ask the caseworker well what did you do to try to preserve this placement of the two kids that we have done anything to preserve this placement what's what what does best interest mean well let's go back to the definition of best interest and i tried to do that at the terminations hearing and when you look at  so the foster parent testified and she said i just wasn't trained to handle that under really child it's best bench it's a little kids best interest appeared here doesn't live with us that was her conclusion now the guardian sibling business and when asked about the sibling back she said i don't understand why the suppliers i've grown very accustomed to very competent process unfortunately didn't have one one of the reasons richard did well he's was because he was well trained by his counsellor and by his ability and worker and there were some behavioral problems with the older child and the light went on and he said you know my kid really likes the disney princesses and he calls out the fines it is the princess calendar and he then starts using that as a behavioral chart you get stickers when you go ahead and you're a good kid at school and when you're a good kid visit but because you get into sex offender treatment there really is no chance of permanency and i find that he must be terminated they were a little more toward the other side of the equation with the younger child but once again it would be different if there was any chance that richard was a threat to his children especially in a sexual sense d c i best never said there was a it twenty years later so the question we'll let you made some arguments or present some evidence but what are we looking at and what we're looking at is the passage of time without a similar incident twenty years the circumstances of the crime he was a young into into confessing he ended up despite the fact that he did confess there was a trial he was found guilty it's clear that he successfully completes probation and does treatment you know i don't know if this is a good analogy but i take people to springfield all the time to down the streets of the secretary of state because they have one or two or three more too many new wives and if their wealth really what they must test for five two years i don't drink i have a sponsor i that since my heart i can tell you that these people do those things and then sometimes tell me but i still don't believe i have a problem i just decided i'm not going to drink and have i done all these other things sure i'm not sure if that's a good respondent father's progress was stuck at its providers to visitation and that wasn't going to go any farther until he could demonstrate they didn't know he was a denier having offended which puts him in a totally different category of being amenable to treatment because that's that is the big thing if a person is not in denial the problem like it's like being a sex offender or being an alcoholic it makes it impossible for them to get successfully treated and that was perhaps the key fact that may not have been known at the time that he he claims that he's already successfully continue treatment they get there's no twenty years part or his fifteen year old you or about they had no qualms about it all right put the kids with him for ten months no problems whatsoever they do to other factors having nothing to do with the juvenile conviction twenty years before they say now we've got to take the kids from you and put them in foster care and now they may come up with another condition to get the kids back you've got to go back to sex offender treatment we i don't understand why or how the department can leave the kids with him pretend months knowing everything there was to know about that offense and the treatment he had for the defense and then when they he tries to get them back into now it doesn't make any sense but it would make more sense if we pieced together that chronology and we understand there is a step missing that your honor has not has not mentioned which is the offender treatment that essentially he's trying to say even though he had only penetrated very young children twenty years ago in a forcible manner that that would violate due process for the cour primarily for the reason he's in tonight well maybe but if you look through his the evaluation and dr sears testimony and if there is nothing on the other side if the defense hasn't gotten its own expert to say that he doesn't need treatment if he went through his own evaluation through a different psychologist and got a different psychologists who disagreed but even then the trial court would have at least some evidentiary basis and if this court  been twenty years and we don't know that with the trial court points out we don't know the extent of his prior treatment because there's no documentation you know there's this new thing called the sex offender management board and treatment has evolved since twenty years those that violate due process then according to the response either to him to make him go through treatment so i think it has to be deconstructed at each point in time it's a decision to require him to get an evaluation violet to process at that point in time person from getting their children the trial court here recently logically emphasized the severe nature of these allegations and the fact that now the respondent has very young children of similar ages of the ages that he had fit is his lack of cooperation with the order of sex offender treatment and that was necessary and by failing to do that he has not fully complied with the direct directives that could be and were validly impose it now but if it's been proved beyond a reasonable doubt and chocolate doesn't have to leave his current niall's today it's our situation where just because somebody made an allegation against him now now he has this burden of getting it case the benefit of termination was that she could become free for adoption even though she was currently in and talk to home and the reluctance was to move her again that because she had been moved before so they didn't want to on this truly move her to an adoptive home until she became free with termination the siblings to become apart and so if it's a lesson a special interest room in that particular foster family and it's not in paris it's best interest or less he says best interests for them to reside together then that's not a grounds for overturning the address the fact of his young age at the time is good friends and all of the rich are involved there that he was placed on probation or to treatment and successfully completed probation that wasn't addressed so we have one little step where she said he might need it and we've his numbers are eventually he's a hundred percent likely to commit a sex offense because the numbers only go up over time despite the fact is that the numbers he cited were it's five percent likely he will reoffend within five years of a percent in ten years suggest it includes a sibling bond it does not include inexperience force for parents who refuse to be trained or a caseworker who refuses to give them training that's my humble suggestion and you know for those of us that worked in the system every day the integrity of the rules are important because if a parent doesn't follow their service parts of the letter we all know what happens they get terminated  of manipulating the system when the kid said these people don't want me to weeks later she was out she's the kids accuse them in the system we have lost her parents that don't want her we have a process that doesn't have a clue