BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: Kim C
Date: 10 Oct 02 - 01:53 PM

I am pretty sure a grown person could raise a bruise on a small child with a forceful slap.

I think someone already said that even if there are no physical marks, children still suffer from abuse. My mother didn't hit me, but she did hurt me emotionally, by the way she treated me, by the things she said. So don't anyone ever say to ME, the child must not be hurt very badly because she doesn't have any bruises.

Now... that being said... some of the media bits Larry posted are indeed ugly and unfair. What kind of a mother lets a 4-year-old out of her sight?

All of them.

Kids are fast. Unless you have them leashed to your body, they'll go chasing something shiny in the blink of an eye. I don't have any kids and even I know that.

But let's consider. Here's a woman who has an alias, four drivers licenses, and outstanding arrest warrants. If I remember right, you're not supposed to do that stuff...

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: SharonA
Date: 10 Oct 02 - 12:16 PM

Larry, as you well know, I am not a Quaker, so please don't address me as a "Friend" (with a capital F) because I don't want other people to mistakenly think that I am a Quaker. If you wish to address me as a friend, with a small f, that's okay with me! Lecturing me on how Friends admonish Friends is irrelevant since I'm not a Friend. But, as a friend (I hope), I'm questioning from the outside where Quaker loyalties lie in cases of child abuse. I couldn't find anything in Faith and Practice that addresses it directly but I see an emphasis, in the raising of one's own children within the Quaker community, on leading by example, on non-violence, and on resolving disputes by gathering together and listening to each family member's side of the argument. It just angers me to read what I see as a belittling statement by you of all people to the effect that Martha Toogood's word doesn't count.

And I'm saying this in a public forum because you made the statement in a public forum.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: Ron Olesko
Date: 10 Oct 02 - 11:41 AM

Bullfrog, I guess Larry can speak for himself (obviously!!) but the point I was making was about the insinuation that Larry did not care about the welfare of the child, I think he has been clear that he is worrying about her welfare.   He is pushing his other points, but not at the child's expense.   

Yes, I agree with you that Larry pre-judged the State of Indiana and the judicial system in some of the statements he made.   Again, I don't think ANYONE on this forum, including Larry, has enough facts to make the decision.

Ron

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: Bullfrog Jones
Date: 10 Oct 02 - 11:31 AM

Ron, you're right, there are two separate issues. That's what people have been saying here again and again. There is the issue of a mother accused of beating her child and the issue of the mother and child being members of the travelling community. Most of us don't connect the two issues. Time and time again posters to these threads have said that they weren't aware of the Toogoods' ethnic background until they read it in Larry's post. Larry is telling us that the mother won't get a fair trial because she is a traveller. Not hasn't had a fair trial, won't get a fair trial. That's pre-judging. He told us, way back that the authorities would tear the child from the heart of her community and give her to a non-travelling family. They didn't. She's with her grandmother. That was pre-judging. Ron, you said He (Larry)has an agenda (and there is nothing wrong with that) but I don't think he is pushing it at the expense of the child.   Yet now he appears to be telling us that the testimony of the child should be discounted. Why? Because it doesn't fit in with his agenda?
As McGrath says, it's up to the court to make judgements on the evidence presented. Then the arguments can really begin!

BJ

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: Grab
Date: 10 Oct 02 - 11:29 AM

Getting away from Alice's comments...

According to Aine's posting, after temporary placement with an emergency foster care family the child is now being cared for by her grandmother. After checking, the courts are satisfied that she is safe from abuse with her grandparents. They merely did the normal thing for any child abuse case, and even the Indian Child Welfare act couldn't fault them on any of that.

So after the normal process of the courts: the mother is freed on a low bail bond; the child is safe and with her family; the courts have separated the mother from the child and are applying to maintain that separation until the mother has demonstrated she is no longer a danger to her child; the mother is getting anger management classes so that she can take her normal place in the family; and weekly visits by the mother are allowed so that there's no permanent separation between mother and child.

Doesn't sound much like discrimination to me. Sounds like a classic, well-oiled example of exactly how a child abuse case should be run, all the 'i's dotted and 't's crossed, ensuring that the child's safety is secured short-term, that the family stays together medium-term, and that the abuser gets help so she can resume her place in the family long-term. Job done, and I think all the ppl on the state team for this should be proud of themselves. Sorry Larry, but for all your claims of how Traveller-related cases "normally" go, this has gone 100% by the book.

Graham.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: InOBU
Date: 10 Oct 02 - 11:18 AM

Sharon, my dear Friend: Faith and Practice does not always define who the victem is and what those rights are, what is being done to that child by the State of Indiana makes that a child a victem. This is not only my opinion, but the opinion of every expert on the effects of removing children from cultural isolates and outplacing them in the host community. As of yesterday, the judge in this case also agrees with me. As to the evidence of a doctor who examine the child against the words of a four year old, separated for a month by the state, asked again and again, where there marks? I'd go with the Doctors. I doupt that the four year old set up two mirrors in some room while on the road to New Jersy to check out her back... not likely, about as likely as the State of Indiana meant that an open fist was some Karate stance described by our brother Wolfgang, rather than the oximoron that is presented... As to lecturing me on my faith... that is best done in conversation, not writing and in a spirt of Friendly caring, not to make percived points in what looks to me like an arguement, somethings Friends don't (or try) not to do on matters (one reason I decided not to be a litigator...)
Larry

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: Ron Olesko
Date: 10 Oct 02 - 11:12 AM

Sharon, I don't (and have never) disagree with anything that you are saying in your last paragraph, except the part about HARD evidence. As much as people want to think so, this isn't a smoking gun. You cannot see how tightly her hands are around the child, you can't see her "fist", and you can't see the effect on the child.   What you see is a woman that APPEARS to be going berserk. Ever watch a movie with a fight scene? When I see a wrestler get hit over the head with a metal chair, why isn't that assault and battery? The HARD EVIDENCE is telling me that I've seen a crime committed. Of course that is actors and this is real life, but that is an example of how the eye can be deceived. Film and video are a series of still pictures which the mind INTERPRETS as motion. By nature it is a deception of reality. You cannot be 100% certain of what you are seeing.

No, I'm not saying the video was doctored in any way.

While she has admitted striking the child, she has not (at least in any interview that I read) claimed that her blows were severe enough to inflict damage. She admitted to being a mother who let her emotions take over and did things that she shouldn't have, but her intent was never to hurt the child.   That may seem like a contradiction, but it really isn't if you examine the situation.

I am not as certain as you are about what I am seeing on the videotape. Again, I'm not saying you are wrong - but there is an uncertainty that must be questioned. In this country you are innocent until proven guilty. It seems that in this case and in many others people are rushing to judgement.

Sharon, I agee with you when you say that abuse takes many forms. I am not saying that Toogood is innocent. All I have been saying is that she deserves a fair hearing and presentation of evidence. The child needs to be examined for ALL the abuse you mentioned. If there is harm then it needs to be dealt with in a manner that will end the abuse and give the child a normal life (if any of us can define normal).

All I say, again and again, is that we can't rush to judgement on EITHER side. Everyone seems to be losing sight of the child's welfare and making decisions on what THEY think is best.

Ron

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: SharonA
Date: 10 Oct 02 - 10:52 AM

Ron Olesko says, "...the connection of her hands to the child CANNOT be seen on the tape..." At one point in the tape, before Martha moves to the back seat of the SUV, Madelyn's hand can clearly be seen holding and shaking the child.

In addition, one can see by the movement of Madelyne's body the force she used with each blow (whether slap or punch, it's still a blow). Some have theorized that she was hitting the seat and not the child, but that is contradicted by Madelyne's own statements.

Ron also says, "IF she is an abuser then the child should be removed.   HOWEVER, there is no HARD evidence to that effect..." The videotape is, in fact, hard evidence that she abused her child that day. If by "an abuser" Ron means a habitual abuser, then additional hard evidence is needed... which is why Madelyne's past behavior and the home environment in which she's been raising Martha – and the Traveler connection is part and parcel of that environment – are being investigated before Martha is returned to Madelyne's custody! Let's not forget, too, that abuse takes many forms, so even if there is no further evidence that Madelyne physically struck her daughter, there may or may not be hard evidence that Martha was abused in other ways (such as verbally, emotionally or psychologically).

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Oct 02 - 10:12 AM

Why is it the job of people posting here to make judgements anyway? Once the court has decided, if anyone disagrees with what it decides, that's maybe the time to make judgements. The child is in a safe place, the processes of sorting out happened is under way.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: Ron Olesko
Date: 10 Oct 02 - 09:35 AM

Bullfrog Jones said "The only person pre-judging the case is Larry."

Again, that is not true.   Yes, Larry appears to have some preconceived notions (or perhaps information that we don't have) that seems to come across rather strong. He is not the only one. I still feel that you and others are focusing on Larry's committment to the cause of the Travelers and ignoring his committment to the welfare of the child. They ARE two separate threads.

Once again, I have to say that NONE of us can use that videotape as ABSOLUTE evidence in this case. The child is only seen briefly and the connection of her hands to the child CANNOT be seen on the tape. Yes, it surely looks like she is giving the child a savage beating - and if that is the case she should be punished to the full extent of the law. IF she is an abuser then the child should be removed.   HOWEVER, there is no HARD evidence to that effect, just as there is no HARD evidence that prejudice played any role in this case. None of us are privy to ALL the evidence in this case so our opinions are merely that - opinions.

Most of us (yes, I'm including myself) have been using this forum to air out our own views on child abuse, Travelers, the justice system, the media and each other. As the saying goes, opinions are like a**holes, we all have one.   This forum has become frighteningly similar to the talk radio shows with one-sided political agendas. Most people are UNWILLING to take a look at the other sides view.

Maybe mirrors should be attached to computers.

Ron

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: SharonA
Date: 10 Oct 02 - 09:14 AM

Larry: All it takes to see a mark on a person's own back is to look in two mirrors, one mirror in front of the person and one behind. In addition to Martha' s statement that she had a mark on her back, there is Madelyne Toogood's OWN statement in the interview she did with CNN (that I linked in my earlier post on this thread) that she struck Martha "in the middle of her back" during the incident in the Kohl's parking lot in addition to the other abuse she inflicted on her daughter. Of course, she also claimed in that statement that there was never a mark on Martha. Obviously, you believe the word of the perpetrator of the abuse and not the word of the victim. Funny thing, but my copy of Faith and Practice says that one of the ways Quakers are known to serve the community is through victim support services.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: InOBU
Date: 10 Oct 02 - 08:06 AM

Dear Wolfgang... if that is in deed the case, anyone who can see that amount of detail in the video tape has better eyes than anyone else I have met. No, I think they mean a slap... which is why there was not mark - even on the child's back in spite of her attempts to be helpful. Cheers (prost!) Larry

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: Wolfgang
Date: 10 Oct 02 - 07:51 AM

An 'open fist' as opposed to a closed fist or a flat hand is a position of the hand in which the thumb touches the fingertips. The shape of the hand in this position is still that of a fist but with the thumb and the fingers forming a circle. Hitting with an open fist is harder than with a flat hand but less hard than with a closed fist.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: InOBU
Date: 10 Oct 02 - 07:12 AM

SOUTH BEND, Ind. -- The state is seeking indefinite custody of a four-year-old girl whose mother is accused of felony battery after a video camera caught her hitting the child.
According to authorities, Martha Toogood -- the girl in the video -- told them her mother, Madelyne Toogood, hit her with an open fist and pulled on her pigtails on Sept. 13, in the parking lot outside a Kohl's department store Mishawaka.
Doctors who examined the girl eight days later said they did not see any bruises or marks on her.
The petition filed by authorities claims Martha said there was a mark earlier from where her mother had hit her on her back.
The state Office of Family and Children said the girl was caused physical and emotional distress because of what her mother did to her.
A hearing on the petition seeking indefinite custody is scheduled for Wednesday.
... Please note two very important things. First the element of "new speak." The writer says "hit her with an open fist." I speak a number of languages, English being my first language, and I don't know what an open fist is. An open fist is a hand, to be hit ... not with a fist but the open hand, is a slap. It takes a real effort to raise a bruise with a slap. The second issue, is that the child now says there was a bruise on her back. Let's think about this. Children make terrible witnesses, as studies have shown, as they try to please the adult questioner. Here she is asked again and again, where there marks that the Doctors did not see. So she now says yes, on my back. She chooses a place she cannot see, so she can please the questioner, while not telling what she knows to be a lie. She knows there is not mark she has seen, so it must be on her back where she cannot see it.

Anti Traveller Bias in the press...
New York Post Andrea PeyserTOO BAD, TOOGOOD - YOU'RE A LOUSY EXCUSE FOR A PARENT
By ANDREA PEYSER
I'M GUILTY - NO, INNOCENT!
Madelyne Toogood, with hubby John, admitted smacking around her 4-year-old daughter - then pleaded not guilty in an Indiana court yesterday.
- AP


September 24, 2002 -- MOTHER of the Year Madelyne Toogood has three small children, four driver's licenses, and two names to chose from - depending upon the state in which she parks her trailer.
But Mommie Dearest has not one permanent address.
The country now is as familiar with Toogood's parenting skills as it is with the danger of Hurricane Isidore. This past weekend, the savage in blue jeans was all over TV, furiously whacking her small daughter about the head, a scene caught on surveillance videotape.
As horrifying as it was to watch, I could not look away.
She had to be stopped.
By the time Toogood surrendered to authorities Saturday - after running to two states and dying her hair brown - she'd morphed into the most despised human this side of Saddam Hussein. She also presented a self-serving story.
Toogood says her child, Martha, made her angry by wandering off in a store, forcing management to page her - twice.
What kind of a mother lets a 4-year-old out of her sight?
This train wreck of a mom is one of the so-called "Irish Travelers" - nomadic misfits of which I'd never before heard. Travelers wander with the seasons, looking for work in home repair. Previously, they drew the attention of authorities only for scamming customers.
Toogood is charged in Texas with skipping out on a traffic ticket and stealing goods from a department store.
About the beating she inflicted on Martha, she told an interviewer: "I shouldn't have did it." And, "Don't raise your hand to a child, it ain't worth it."
Ain't it the truth?
The truth is that Toogood's appalling attitude toward child-rearing is not so different from the thinking of many who see children as personal property to be raised as they see fit.
Little Martha Toogood is now in the care of strangers, while her brothers, ages 5 and 6, are with relatives. I feel for a child ripped from her parents. But this travesty of a family can't continue.
By foisting a bizarre, authority-shunning way of life on kids, the Travelers put them in danger. Toogood and her kind should be kept miles from children. Unless they agree to settle down in a place where they can be watched.
Until then, I thank God for videotape.

The article above was in the New York Post. Anyone who does not see the prejudice in it, I can't help you, sorry. This is only one of about 60 examples sent to me by Travellers around the country.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: InOBU
Date: 10 Oct 02 - 07:02 AM

Dateline did a pre interview with me. In their previous story about Travellers they interviewed Judge Peeler, who I met, who had nothing but good to say about Travellers. The NBC reporters said to him, "don't you have anything bad to say about Travellers", he said no, so they cut him out of the story. When they could not get me to say they were a people who had a culture of crime, they decided not to put me on camera. So, yes, watch Dateline and you will see anti-Taveller bias in all its glory or horror depending on your point of view. As to my being responcible for the racialisation of this case, I am going to put together a few before and after quotes. Be back in a mo... Larry

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: Bullfrog Jones
Date: 10 Oct 02 - 04:12 AM

Apart from one little posting earli in the first thread I've been keeping out of this, but after Ron and Aine's vitriolic attack on Alice I had to go back and re-read her posts convinced that I must have missed something. But no, she merely reiterates what a lot of sensible and fair-minded people have stated again and again and again in these threads. Ron says Alice, I am equally shocked that you can't separate the two issues. I am the first to admit (and my notes in this posting will back it up) that I too feel that the focus was being shifted from the child to the issue of Traveler discrimination.    I still feel that some people have tried to do that. Ron, the only person doing that is Larry. The only person pre-judging the case is Larry. The only person to get it totally wrong about the eventual placement of the child is Larry. I don't doubt Larry's commitment to the cause -- it's clearly wholehearted and sincere, but it is blinding him to the realities of the case, which SharonA and NicoleC have spelled out simply and eloquently againin the threads above. Aine says that not knowing Larry personally is a handicap, but suffering from that handicap simply means is that our reactions are based on what he says rather than who he is.

BJ

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: greg stephens
Date: 10 Oct 02 - 02:55 AM

We McGrath typo: It is a shame that elves sometimes remove things which get commented on, as it leaves the somments floating contextless. "spare the road and spoil the child" should havebeen immortalised as an Oscar Wildish great,not deleted by some cleaner-up.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: Coyote Breath
Date: 10 Oct 02 - 12:48 AM

InOBU; by now you are aware of the upcoming dateline "special" on Ms Toogood and the Travellers (the mysterious "secret society" according to the promo). Well, I'm glad that you started this thread. As you might recall I stated that I didn't have an awareness of Traveller discrimination in the US. After seeing the Dateline promo I am completely in agreement with you that there is discrimination and it is nasty! I am not sure what night this is supposed to air (probably Friday) I intend to watch and will try to tape it. (I must admit I'm not absolutely sure it is Dateline, I'll pay better attention to the promo this Thursday, but I was watching NBC only on Wednesday evening so it most likely IS Dateline).

CB

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Oct 02 - 12:32 AM

As a child in the 50's I distinctly recall when the "King of the North American Gypsies" died at his home in the neighboring town. It was a strange looking home with sphinx models at the walk way and a neon sign saying fortunes told. Rumor said that limosines of the rich and famous pulled in through the back alley.

All hell broke loose.

I have searched on-line newspapers from the era, but there is nothing of record for that period of time.

There was a gigantic encampment in the large city park. Hundreds upon hundreds - of entire - large families - in strange long length dresses and baggy pants desended upon the community. The city was swamped for sanitary facilities. Shop owners were extra vigilent. Parents made sure their children were in before dark and children were told not to talk to strangers. But the MUSIC!!! Strange, wonderful, decadent brass and violins and drums all playing together in wild joyful abandonment.

We drove by several times to stare at them in the park and avoided them in public. I still have some plaster of paris santa faces painted by children younger than me.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: Áine
Date: 09 Oct 02 - 07:10 PM

Dear 'Wondering Alice',

I am Larry's friend and sister-traveller, and I assure you that he holds the interests of Martha Toogood firmly in his heart, and wants nothing but the best for her and her family. I realize that since you do not know him personally, you have to go by what you've read here on this forum. Even given that handicap, I find it incredible that you have formed such a mean-spirited opinion of him.   My final and definitive comment on your posts above is that you are totally and inexorably wrong.

I totally agree with catspaw when he says, "Congrats to the Judge, the caseworker and supervisor for doing their job, and mostly to a little girl who is where she should be at this time."

And I also totally agree with Ron when he says, "He has an agenda (and there is nothing wrong with that) but I don't think he is pushing it at the expense of the child.   There are two issues and both are being clouded together. If Larry is guilty of anything it is not communicating his case to the satisfaction of some people here on Mudcat." AND "If you take the time to read Larry's OTHER postings, he is concerned about what happens to that child.   The thrust of his issue was on placing the child in a home where she will receive proper care and be in an environment that supports her heritage."

Judge Nemeth has made his decision based on facts to which we are not privy, and I want to point out that he is not the same judge who will be adjudicating the felony charges filed against Ms. Toogood. Her case will probably not come up before the criminal court until after the first of next year. Therefore, discussing the criminal case will not get us anywhere, except to an exhaustive re-hashing of opinions that have already been expressed here.

I would only encourage those of you who have not previously known of the Irish Travellers (and the other travelling people of the United States and the rest of the world) to take this opportunity to learn about them, their history, cultures, and their collective struggle to survive against seemingly insurmountable prejudice, oppression, and genocide. In the three parts of this thread alone there are links to several informational sites on the Internet, many of which have even further resources to offer in the form of bibliographies and ongoing research contacts.

Well, the road is out for me on this one, and may I suggest that we all adjourn to happier subjects like BS: QE2's Dropped The Puck-It's HOCKEY TIME! -- and if you haven't ever heard of hockey, well then, all I have to say to you is 'there's none so blind as those who can't see the puck on the ice!' ;-)

All the best to all of you, Áine

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 09 Oct 02 - 06:50 PM

I'm sorry Wandering Alice that you are reading your thoughts in Larry's words.

Again, Larry took a stand that is radically different from most of our views.   It is not a position that people won't even stop to consider.   He does not feel that what was viewed in the video was abuse, and he may be right. He may not. That is the point that most people are missing.

It is one thing to disagree with Larry. I too feel that he has interpreted points without looking to consider the other side. I also feel that IF she is guilty of a crime she should be punished ACCORDING TO THE LAW. There is no excuse for savagly beating a child. However none of us are in a position to determine the extent of that beating from watching that particular video.

I do feel that it wrong to put words in his mouth that weren't there - and I'm referring to your earlier comment about him not having the interest of the child in heart. If you read his comment, and I mean read ALL of his comments, I don't think you can draw that conclusion.

Ron

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 09 Oct 02 - 06:41 PM

Either a friendly elf has nipped in remarkably fast and corrected a spelling mistake there, or Greg's eyes are playing up.

But I wish I had said that, and said it intentionally too, because it's a great bit of word-play - and it sums up one of my main worries about all this, which has been set at rest by the cutting Áine gave us about court sensibly allowing the granny to have the child to live with her, while things are sorted out.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: greg stephens
Date: 09 Oct 02 - 06:26 PM

I would normally not comment upon peoples typographical errors, I think it's a bit school-masterly and patronising: but McGrath's "spare the road and and spoil the child", while discussing how Travellers and Gypsies bring up their children, is a classic of our time.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 09 Oct 02 - 06:20 PM

InOBU didn't say "all of you" - he said "a lot of you". (And that was referring to people in general, not just to those who said they hadn't ever been beaten.) And from my knowledge of people it's quite right to say that a lot of parents still smack their children and sometimes a lot more than just smack them - and yet mostly these aren't "bad parents", any more than a mother (or father) who is a rotten cook is a "bad parent". Just not too good at coping with a difficult job.

In previous generations (20, 30, 40 years ago) kids were hit more often and more severely than they are today. In fact isn't very long at all since the assumption in mainstream society was that it was only feckless and irresponsible parents who were unwilling to chastise their children when they misbehaved. Neglecting their moral duty as parents - "Spare the rod and spoil the child."

Ironically, in the light of this thread, it was one of the criticisms levied against Gypsies and Trfavellers that they failed to discipline their children properly.

'road' to 'rod' fixed by mudelf ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: greg stephens
Date: 09 Oct 02 - 06:02 PM

I find all this ethnic grouping stuff a bit confusing. How many can you be in?Only one, or lots? Are you necessarily in the same group as your parents (and what if they are different)? Who defines it, you or people discussing your case? Likewise" abuse": I've had the odd whack but I'm not sure I'd have wanted to dragged off to somewhere else.Having read all this, I find it all a bit strange. Time for self-examination: and I'm with McGrath...keep them stones in your pocket till you're sure.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: GUEST,Wondering Alice
Date: 09 Oct 02 - 05:56 PM

Ron Olesko, let's look at exactly what Larry Onobu has said.

"Most anyone who can look me in the eye and say their mom did not once loose it and swat you as Madlyne Toogood did her
daughter (leaving no mark by the way...) well a lot of you would be not telling the truth."

Larry Inobu's direct implication is that most of us who claim that our mother's did not beat us the way that Madlyne Toogood beat her child are liars.

Larry Inobu directly says "there was no abuse" in this case and that the "fact is, that she is being prociscuted for the crime of being an Irish Traveller in the United States."

I'm sorry Ron Olesko that you cannot read Larry Inobu's agenda in his own words.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: Ron Olesko
Date: 09 Oct 02 - 05:44 PM

Alice, I am equally shocked that you can't separate the two issues. I am the first to admit (and my notes in this posting will back it up) that I too feel that the focus was being shifted from the child to the issue of Traveler discrimination.    I still feel that some people have tried to do that.

I take issue with ANYONE who tries to turn words around, which is why I also took issue with your posting against Larry.    To say that Larry is not concerned with the child is plain wrong, even in the post that you copied he is not ignoring the child. I do believe that his focus is for the welfare of this child.   Larry took the unpopular position of saying that the child wasn't abused. I don't know if he is right or wrong.

What Larry did, and continues to do, is take another view of what happened. Most of us were shocked by what we saw on the videotape. Most of us have a hard time accepting the POSSIBILITY that we did not see the whole picture of what happened.

If you take the time to read Larry's OTHER postings, he is concerned about what happens to that child.   The thrust of his issue was on placing the child in a home where she will receive proper care and be in an environment that supports her heritage.

I'm not saying that Larry is correct. I'm saying that there are two sides and none of us no the whole story. We aren't the judge and jury here.

Let's not resort to name calling and character assasination. We become no better than the criminals in that case.

Ron

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: GUEST,Wondering Alice
Date: 09 Oct 02 - 05:22 PM

Ron Olesko, here is the post with which Larry Inobu began the discussion of this case at Mudcat Cafe. The points that he made in this post, were repeated in his later postings. I'm shocked that you can read this post and then tell me that Larry Inobu's agenda is not at the expense of the child.

Subject: Traveller Discrimination in the USA
From: InOBU
Date: 23 Sep 02 - 11:27 PM
In The Mudcat Shop: Liberty , O Mar

Most anyone who can look me in the eye and say their mom did not once loose it and swat you as Madlyne Toogood did her
daughter (leaving no mark by the way...) well a lot of you would be not telling the truth. Fact is, that she is being prociscuted
for the crime of being an Irish Traveller in the United States, under the feet of the Statue of Liberty after the welcome to the
poor, hungry and tiered, there is a wee sign that says no dogs or Gypsies... and it is still bloody there. Call your local press and
ask why in a reported child abuse case, where there was no abuse, is the news interviewing cops from fraud units? It is
because after the crime of driving while Black, the next most prosicuted crime, is the crime of a Rom, or Pave or Romanichale
breathing the air of a free nation. Larry

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: Ron Olesko
Date: 09 Oct 02 - 04:40 PM

Guest- I don't think that is a fair thing to say about Larry.   He has an agenda (and there is nothing wrong with that) but I don't think he is pushing it at the expense of the child.   There are two issues and both are being clouded together. If Larry is guilty of anything it is not communicating his case to the satisfaction of some people here on Mudcat.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: GUEST,Wondering Alice
Date: 09 Oct 02 - 04:03 PM

I've seen reports about this case on CNN, CBS, NBC and ABC and I've read about it in the Boston Globe and USA Today.

Now I'm not saying I've seen every report that these outlets have had, but the only place that I've seen any reference to this mother's ethnic group is at Mudcat Cafe. In fairness to the media, they've been treating it as a normal child abuse case (in which they happen to have some incriminating video footage).

If it were not for Larry Inobu, I would not even know her ethnic group. Larry Inobu has an agenda and it's not the protection of that poor little girl.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: Ron Olesko
Date: 09 Oct 02 - 03:51 PM

I guess the system can work and the cries of prejudice weren't a factor - it was just the justice system working methodically.   All that and the press didn't even mention that she was a Traveler. Just shows that we sometimes speak too soon and hopefully we learn something from this.

Ron

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: catspaw49
Date: 09 Oct 02 - 03:46 PM

Congrats to the Judge, the caseworker and supervisor for doing their job, and mostly to a little girl who is where she should be at this time.

(Weekly or bi-weekly visits are the norm at this stage BTW)

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: Áine
Date: 09 Oct 02 - 03:29 PM

Just saw this from the Associated Press:

Beaten Girl Placed With Grandmother

The Associated Press
Wednesday, October 9, 2002; 2:15 PM

SOUTH BEND, Ind. –– The grandmother of a 4-year-old girl who was repeatedly struck by her mother in a store parking lot was named as the girl's foster parent Wednesday.

Judge Peter J. Nemeth ordered that Martha Toogood be placed in the care of Mary Agnes Gorman. The girl's parents will still be limited to one weekly supervised visit with her.

Martha was put in state custody after her mother, Madelyne Gorman Toogood, was charged with felony battery of a child. A surveillance camera taped the woman striking her daughter in a store parking lot in Mishawaka.

Toogood, 25, remains free on $7,000 bond. She smiled in court when the judge announced his decision, and her attorney, Fred Hains, said she and her husband, John, were pleased.

"I think these people will cooperate and eventually the child will be reunited with the parents," Hains said.

© 2002 The Associated Press

Maith thú, a shem!

Le grá is mise Áine

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: GUEST,McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Oct 02 - 05:53 PM

"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" seems an appropriate suggestion in this whole situation.

Only trouble is, I suspect there are some people around who would take that as an invitation to start throwing stones.

I posted that a couple of thread renewals back, and I thought that second paragraph was maybe a bit strong. Now it seems it was pretty spot on.

Somehow there do seem to be a lot of stonethrowers around, rushing to judgement. If some people feel that InOBU has made some wrong assumptions, albeit on the basis of rather more information than most of us have), fair enough. People disageee about things like this. But why all the anger and the indignation?

Everyone here is agreed, I hope and believe, that child abuse is wrong, that discrimination against people because of their ethnic status is wrong, and that in anything that is done the best interests of the child should come first. The rest is details, contingent details - important, yes. But there's no disagreement on the principles, just on how best to apply them.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: SharonA
Date: 08 Oct 02 - 05:29 PM

Larry: Concerning the theft charge against Toogood in Texas, you are correct that she has not been proven guilty in a court of law and is therefore legally innocent; however, the fact of the matter is that she and her accomplice were seen leaving the store with stolen goods and were caught with the goods just outside the Kohl's store, according to the report I'd read. If she'd stayed in town and faced the charges, how would she have been found "not guilty" except on a technicality?

As to the four licenses, I have seen it reported as the finding of Mr. Joe Livingston, a senior agent with the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division, who is researching the Toogood case. Doesn't an investigative discovery carry stronger weight than an allegation?

And as to Madelyne Toogood's abuse of her daughter Martha, I have to say that I am very tired of seeing you downplay it as nothing more than "a mother slapping a child and leaving no bruise" when Toogood herself has made statements to the effect that she not only slapped the child but shook her, pulled her hair, knocked her on the forehead and – according to the CNN interview that I linked above – struck her in her back. There's no medical examination that I know of that was done within one or two days of the incident caught on videotape, but I have read more than one statement from officials to the effect that it's possible that bruising could have healed by the time Martha was examined. But some of the abuse inflicted that day, such as the hair-pulling and the shaking, would not leave bruising in any case yet is nevertheless child abuse! Now, you or Bennett Zurofsky would have to tell me whether hair-pulling and shaking falls under the legal definition of battery, but aren't the various methods she used to strike her child considered battery (repeated slapping, knocking the forehead, striking the back)?

I don't know about anyone else on this thread, but I don't necessarily "want to lock up every parent that slaps their child", including Toogood. I read today on the SouthBendTribune.com site that Toogood is taking parenting and anger-management classes, so it seems she is cooperating with authorities in that respect. I made a statement back in Part 2 of this discussion to the effect that I didn't feel she should get any of her kids back until she learned to manage her anger; if she can put into practice the things she's learning in her classes, then I feel she should have her daughter returned to her eventually, with close supervision early on and with regular visits from child-protective services to be sure that she's not backsliding into old habits of anger non-management. As to long-term custody arrangements in the meantime, I read that authorities are considering the option of releasing Martha into the custody of Toogood's mother.

Frankly, though, I think that the fact that you know Madelyne Toogood's family and community, and have worked for a dozen years on cases of out-adoption of Travelers, is coloring your perception of this particular case. It just seems that you're trying so hard to tie this case in with your experience that you don't want to see it from anyone else's perspective. Just because you know the Toogood family doesn't mean that any morally or legally wrong thing that a family member does should be glossed over. Just because your parent struck you with a belt when you were a kid doesn't make that action okay; sorry, but I don't think your parent should have struck you any more than I think Toogood should have struck Martha. As the child-advocacy slogan goes, it shouldn't hurt to be a kid.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: NicoleC
Date: 08 Oct 02 - 05:00 PM

"I don't agree that a parent who slaps her child without raising a bruse should go to jail."

I totally agree, Larry.

"I will not accept that Traveller children should be out adopted"

Since this hasn't happened yet, why insist that it will? The child is in temporary custody in a place that CPS was certain was safe for her. If acceptable caretakers can be found among her family (*IF* Ms. Toogood loses custody, which also hasn't happened yet), then of course that should be the first consideration. And it will be, unless CPS in that neck of woods acts entirely differently from everywhere else.

I've yet to see a single item of evidence which points to prejudice among the people actually handling the case. I have seen a lot of half-truths and mischaracterizations of events in this thread, like the purse episode. And the more half-truths I see, the less it is possible to take any of the claims of bias -- in this case -- seriously.

How can we scream prejudice over events that haven't happened yet? There's a difference between being vigilant -- which is probably called for since prejudice can always be a factor -- and assuming it WILL happen and complaining ahead of time. Why then the repeated accusations that those who do not think that prejudice is the determining factor in this case are either racist or blind? You are unlikely to find allies by slinging stones at the people most likely to be persuaded -- i.e. those that bother to think about and discuss the issue.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: Nerd
Date: 08 Oct 02 - 04:22 PM

Larry,

Just to Support some of what you say:   I agree that a child should not be permanently removed from parents based solely on what we saw on that tape. I have already stated this, and also that the system needs to work on this case so we can see what happens. THEN we can judge if injustice has been done. But you seem to be saying she should not even be tried for any of her alleged crimes! We can't say if a trial was unjust until after the trial. Those who try to prevent the trial from happening at all, when there is obviously a good deal of evidence, are (if not paid lawyers) knee-jerk advocates for the accused. The rest of the country, I think, wants to see the outcome before we make judgments about the fairness of the case.

You seem to be saying that the system should not be allowed to proceed because you're already sure of the outcome. So if some people here are accusing her of crimes that she's merely on the lam for and not convicted of, you are equally guilty of condemning the Indiana authorities without waiting to see what will happen.

By the way, there is a big difference between what you said (that travellers plead guilty rather than stand trial) and the reality in her case (she fled).

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: Ron Olesko
Date: 08 Oct 02 - 04:13 PM

Larry said - "Show me a single case where a mother slaping a child and leaving no bruse leads to a felony charge, one instance, anywhere in the US."

Can you show us a case where it led to an aquittal? Again I go to the analogy of firing a gun and missing. You would still be charged with attempted murder.   When you have witnesses to a beating (in this case the tape) isn't the potential for harm the determining factor?

I agree with you Larry that every parent who slaps a child is not automatically headed for jail.   The disagreement, or rather question, that many of us have is this - did we see a slap or did we see a beating? I don't think any of us, including Larry, can honestly answer that.

She will have her day in court and then we will see what happens.

Ron

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: InOBU
Date: 08 Oct 02 - 03:44 PM

spacing problems above... she is only accused of having four licences, this is not a fact it is an aligation.
Now, if we have nomadic people in the US, are you telling me that the law cannot find a way to accomodate their rights? Nomadism is not rootlessness, it is a culture that has evolved an ecconomy tied to ancient traditions of moving about, often due to forced migration. ... Larry

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: InOBU
Date: 08 Oct 02 - 03:40 PM

has four driver's lshe hasn't yet been convicted or acquitted of the theft charge against her
So someone not convicted is guilty?

licenses in four different states -
not a fact, an aligation.
Show me a single case where a mother slaping a child and leaving no bruse leads to a felony charge, one instance, anywhere in the US.
As to the surity of my convictions, I know the family, I know community, I know the forensic evidence in the case, and many of you have never laid eyes on a Traveller or even heard of the community before two weeks ago, according you what you have said here. I have worked for over a dozen years on cases involving the out adoption of Indians Roma and now Travellers. I stand on acedemic credientals, field work, and experience. Yes, I am rather sure of my convictions. When you ask me to move my opinon towards yours, I will not accept that Traveller children should be out adopted, and I don't agree that a parent who slaps her child without raising a bruse should go to jail. I am just not that hard hearted. I would agrue with that parent that they need to get a grip and not do that, lock em up, no. Take their kids away, no. I got hit with a belt when I was a kid, and had good well meaning parents. I am completely sure that it would not have been in my best interest to lock up my father and give me away to strangers. If you want to lock up every parent that slaps their child, go ahead, but don't blaime me for opposing you.
Larry

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: SharonA
Date: 08 Oct 02 - 03:29 PM

Seriously, Larry, the way Nicole characterizes your post of 08 Oct 02 - 07:16 AM is the way it sounds to me, too. Your argument is so full of holes that it's all holes and no argument! For instance, saying that Toogood' shouldn't be considered a thief because you put no faith in jury convictions of Travelers makes absolutely no sense because she hasn't yet been convicted or acquitted of the theft charge against her in Texas. There's a warrant out for her arrest on that charge (and another warrant on the unpaid-traffic-ticket charge), but she left town rather than face those charges. That fact, plus the fact that she has four driver's licenses in four different states, plus the fact that she left Indiana with the child she abused to escape arrest after her sister was arrested for not revealing Madelyn's whereabouts, plus the fact that she altered her own and Martha's appearance while out of the state of Indiana, plus the fact that she gave false addresses to authorities in Indiana after her arrest for felony battery, are sufficient reason for the state to consider her a flight risk regardless of her cultural orientation. Saying that she shouldn't be considered a flight risk because some other Travelers have been held on high bail or no bail at all for minor offenses makes no sense because (a) the facts I just stated indicate that she – and not any other Traveler but she – may be considered a flight risk, and (b) the charge against her in Indiana is a felony charge.

A lot of people here have already refuted the things you've said in this morning's post, but you keep repeating them anyway. You accuse others here of being unwilling to take a single step in anyone's shoes but their own, yet you seem unwilling to give any real consideration to anyone's point of view but your own. Why should we move if you won't?

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: Nerd
Date: 08 Oct 02 - 03:22 PM

MTed: I've been the first to say on this thread (perhaps literally the first) that this sort of abuse occurs throughout our culture, not JUST among one group. And I'd agree that our rage at her is partly rage that this behavior does exist among us.

But the "efforts to portray her as a transient, petty criminal?" She IS a transient, and it seems very likely that she is a petty criminal as well. The news media are merely reporting what's there. What else do you expect them to do? If she were a corporate executive, they'd report that, and if she was the PTA president they'd report that too. If she was a waitress...not so much. Because they ARE driven by "what makes a good story," but they are ALSO limited by the facts of the case.

Also, I don't think anyone else out there in the world is focusing on her being a traveller to make it feel or look like this only occurs on the margins either. It is WE on this forum who are focusing on the fact that she's a traveller, largely because of Larry's advocacy for the community! The major media used travellers as a "hook" because it was an unusual community people didn't know about--a "good story"--then dropped it. USA Today did one story on travellers and pretty much ignored her ethnicity the rest of the time.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: M.Ted
Date: 08 Oct 02 - 02:55 PM

Thanks for reading my post, and taking the time to think about what I had to say, Kevin--

As to the rest of you, some seem concerned about examining the facts, and some want to be prosecutor, judge, jury, and executioner--If you don't know who you are, don't worry, the rest of of us do--

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: NicoleC
Date: 08 Oct 02 - 01:07 PM

Lemmee get this straight:

Ms. Toogood is not a criminal, she's been wrongfully convicted in the past because she's a Traveller.

She shouldn't be treated as a flight risk -- even though it's an inherent part of her culture and she already has a history of it, Because she's a Traveller, she should get special treatment.

It's not her fault she hit the kid, because she was mad at someone else. It's the store's fault she abused her daughter.

It's the store's fault she can't control her anger.

The store should not implement it's normal security procedures, because she's a Traveller and it might hurt her feelings.

And anyone who doesn't think that "poor Ms. Toogood" is the victim instead of the child is racist and a bigot.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: SharonA
Date: 08 Oct 02 - 11:47 AM

Gee. Larry, you're not making an "assault" on "who we are", now are ya? *G*

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: InOBU
Date: 08 Oct 02 - 08:55 AM

Forget walking a mile in someones shoes, some folks on Mudcat cannot take a single step. Larry

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: catspaw49
Date: 08 Oct 02 - 08:31 AM

We are looking at an entire series of issues in this case. I can't speak to most of them, having neither the particulars, the knowledge, or the background and experience needed to make any kind of substantive statement. There are two issues here where I do feel I am as qualified and knowledgeable as most and do have that particular expertise. I have addressed both in previous posts.

On the issue of the abuse itself, that level of abuse occurs hundreds of times a day across the U.S. This doesn't make it right by any means but in most cases like this one, the abusive parent is generally sentenced to something, but jail isn't often a part of it. When a parent admits their need and is willing to adhere to a strictly managed case plan, a three month agreement as to treatment and whatever else is mandated is entered and then the case is reviewed at the three month or six month time and matter of the child(ren) is determined at that time. For many of you I know this sounds lenient, but I have seen it work well as I have also seen it fail miserably. Perhaps you need to understand that under any Temporary Custody agreement a parent's rights to the decisions made in the rearing of the child(ren) are not relinquished. In the overwhelming majority, the rights of the parents are used to keep the parent involved, even get them more involved, in the parenting process. Folks, foster parents cannot even get the kid a haircut without the permission of the parent(s).

The other issue here is the placement of the child which I have addressed extensively in previous posts. Emergency placement is just that......placement in an emergency, and should last no longer than two weeks at which point a suitable longer term placement should have been found. As I have said before, relative placement is always the first option and offers the best and least traumatic situation for the child. I am fearful here that Indiana is not looking in that direction for other reasons. I don't know. What I do know is that this is a case needing a CASA if I ever saw one.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: wysiwyg
Date: 08 Oct 02 - 07:56 AM

Larry, discrimination is about abuse via power. The one lacking most power that day was the child. The one most abusing superior power was the mother. And-- beating a child is not a civil right.

If Mommies can't be expected to keep a grip in the face of discrimination, tell me-- how the heck did all those slaves make it this far? And if they SHOULD not be expected to keep a grip-- oh my, I need to stock up on ammo, because here come all the people my great-great-greats wronged, and all the ones I unawarely insulted.

OK....... so say a black man has spent the day out and around taking care of business, and everywhere he goes he gets spat on, called a nigger, invited to leave stores, pulled over by cops and searched, roughly, maybe hit... all with no reason... and he goes home and kicks his dog, and it's caught on tape. Is he a victim, or a bad guy? Now say he goes upstairs to tuck the little darling into bed and the little darling smarts off, and he smacks the little darling. Who is the victim, and of whom?

In other words, does discrimination suck and make a person act (sometimes) like an a**hole? Sure. Does it victimize people? Of course. But does our society excuse the behaviors that result, or not?

Does this wash?: "Mommy only hit you all those times because someone was really mean to her because of who we are." Further, "Mommy should have gotten away with hitting you all those times, and she would have if the bad people who don't like us had not had a camera running." Is that the kind of enculturation that leads to a responsible life?

Discrimination sucks. Actually, though, many of us here live with it every day. (I think I'll go find someone to punch out, someone smaller since I'm not too strong.) But you can't beat a child on videotape and expect nothing to happen, anymore than a cop can beat a black man (or a Traveller should it occur), on videotape, and expect nothing to happen!

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: InOBU
Date: 08 Oct 02 - 07:16 AM

Hi Mick:

My deep inner thoughts are very clear on this case. I have worked for years with Native Americans who have suffered the same abuse as Madalyne's daughter, being forcable removed from their people and having their self immage destroyed. We all forgive our parents their transgressions as part of growing up, we are raised by humans. When we are slapped by our folks in our lives, and it is not a pattern or does not cause injury, we forgive as we grow. What we do not recover from - and the evidence is clear, is long term assaults on who we are. Indiana seems to be comming around to this point, and over the past weeks we have been doing better and better.

If this goes to a full trial exculpatory evidence can come out, and it will. As to profiling by the store there is also more to be said about this, soon. I understand folk being impatient, but trials take time and patience.

I will try and get you all a site for yesterdays piece in the South Bend press which adds much light to my point.

As to Madalynne being a "thief" as she was called, I have two responces. First, from the way that Travellers have been policed, I would not put much faith in convictions. I don't know a Traveller who has gone to trial, for two reasons. First, they believe, and not without reiforcement from the prejudice we see here, that juries will judge them not as Americans, but as Travellers. Second, as being a "flight risk", huge bail is set, often around $50,000, or being held on minor charges without bail until trial. So, Travellers plead guilty and pay reparations again and again to things they have not done. This linked to the view by police that they are not a culture but a criminal cult, colors the way investigations of them is carried out. So, is conviction proof to me that Madalynne is a thief? I don't know, does that have anything to do with her as a mother? Over a million folks are in jail in the US today, how many more have been in jail? What would we do if we took all their children away, or do you only want to take away the children of groups you discriminate against as "Gypsies".

All the best,

Larry

PS I have not completely ignored exculpatory evidence... all the forensic evidence shows the child was niether seriously hit, or ever was in the past ... for the umpteenth time, check the various doctor's statememnts on both sides.

line breaks added by mudelf ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in the US 3
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Oct 02 - 06:41 PM

Sometimes people say really acute things here thta can get missed in the rush - and I think what MTed said here was one of those times:

I think that the wide spread anger and outrage at Ms Toogood is really outrage at being reminded that child abuse exists, and the efforts to portray her as a transient, petty criminal are really efforts to make abuse look like it only occurs in the margins of society.

A lot of people would really like to think that things like that only happen on the margins, and that it isn't "people just like us" who do it. The same way they'd sooner think the same about other types of violence and abuse that goes on in families.

But it's not true. Just because people don't go in for shopliftig or stuff like that doesn't make them any less likely to hit their children, and vice versa.