Proximate Cause

DSHS was challenged 

Cause-in-fact is determined by the “but for” test: But for the action, the result would not have happened.  Charlie and Braden would not have been killed by Joshua Powell but for the action of DSHS allowing supervised visitation in the house Joshua Powell rented and prepared for the murders, (contrary to their DSHS own guidance/negligence). Joshua Powell is dead but he couldn’t have killed with out the help of DSHS negligence. (which shows proximate cause)

DSHS nor the State’s attorneys acknowledged their errors, despite each of their employees that testified demonstrated a total dis-regard for the new definition of domestic violence, and DSHS’s responsibility to follow the new guidelines which where developed to reduce Familicide. (parents killing children) Failing to put Child Safety 1st over reunification (at all costs) continues to be the accepted Practice at DSHS.

The state continues to ignore the safety of children. Oakley Carlson age 5 was taken from her Foster Parents and returned to her Father and Mother (one who was fresh out of Drug Rehab the other fresh out of prison), while removing the Carlson’s newest baby citing the mother was unfit. Yet Oakley was returned to them.

Oakley has not been seen for a year, her parents are facing charges for abandonment, and refuse to assist police in finding Oakley. Proximate cause of Oakley’s disappearance would be DSHS Placing Oakely Carlson in a home with unfit parents. Same old DSHS.

DSHS was challenged

Not because of the negligence verdict, that was proven thoroughly. But the State decided to ask for a separate Jury trial to establish a different award (money), Judge Rumbaugh said the Jury was “subconsciously compromised due to the horrendous facts of the case and incapable of deciding a reasonable award.

So Judge Rumbaugh based on his personal opinion and “experience over the years” arbitrarily decided to reduce the award because he (Judge Rumbaugh) felt it was too high. So now the State attorneys have appealed the judges decision to change the award. So our case is currently waiting on the appeals court process.

But for the action, the result would not have happened

• - Chuck Cox

Failing to put Child Safety 1st

The new definition of domestic violence

DSHS nor the State’s attorneys acknowledged their errors, despite each of their employees that testified demonstrated a total dis-regard for the new definition of domestic violence, and DSHS’s responsibility to follow the new guidelines which where developed to reduce Familicide. (parents killing children) Failing to put Child Safety 1st over reunification (at all costs) continues to be the accepted Practice at DSHS.