Child finds meth in mom's jacket, tur...

Child finds meth in mom's jacket, turns over to authorities

There are 60 comments on the Chico Enterprise-Record story from Sep 24, 2009, titled Child finds meth in mom's jacket, turns over to authorities. In it, Chico Enterprise-Record reports that:

The discovery of methamphetamine inside a jacket led to the eventual arrest Tuesday of two adults in Richvale.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Chico Enterprise-Record.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Joe_Public

Sacramento, CA

#47 Sep 25, 2009
The saddest part is, after she does 6 months, they'll give her kid right back to her. In Califukya, the Family Law courts favor a drugged out, lowlife, welfare loser Mother over a father who missed a child support payment because he was in the hospital for 2 weeks. There is no justice, PERIOD, and for that, you can thank a Dum-o-crat!
Joe_Public

Sacramento, CA

#48 Sep 25, 2009
Joe Sixpack wrote:
Why do hillbilly tweekers have kids? Why would they want to do that to vulnerable children? Unreal.
So they can collect welfare to pay for their drug habit. Duh!
methprevention

Oroville, CA

#49 Sep 25, 2009
Joe_Public wrote:
The saddest part is, after she does 6 months, they'll give her kid right back to her. In Califukya, the Family Law courts favor a drugged out, lowlife, welfare loser Mother over a father who missed a child support payment because he was in the hospital for 2 weeks. There is no justice, PERIOD, and for that, you can thank a Dum-o-crat!
As sad as it is to say in every aspect of the child's best interest returning them to a drug addicted parent is better than all other scenarios. It's not the druggie who the system is considering in the decision but rather the child. A child has unconditional love for their parent, to bad you can't say the same for the addicted parent.
Max II

Anchorage, AK

#50 Sep 25, 2009
Joe_Public wrote:
The saddest part is, after she does 6 months, they'll give her kid right back to her. In Califukya, the Family Law courts favor a drugged out, lowlife, welfare loser Mother over a father who missed a child support payment because he was in the hospital for 2 weeks. There is no justice, PERIOD, and for that, you can thank a Dum-o-crat!
CPS stinks and has way too much power. They don't even think that they have to abide by rules and regulations. State Law says they are supposed to try and place child with family. Plumas county doesn't do this neither does Glenn Co. We have been fighting system for 2 years to get a child out of the system, we have 3 family members that have been approved for 2 years and they still keep him with the foster parent. Even though it has been proven that she abuses children, sleeps with the 10 year old boy etc. But she is friends with the faggot social worker and he finds all complaints against her inconclusive. CPS system stinks and needs to have a lot of their power stripped from them.
Good Lord

Chico, CA

#51 Sep 25, 2009
methprevention wrote:
<quoted text>As sad as it is to say in every aspect of the child's best interest returning them to a drug addicted parent is better than all other scenarios.
Really?!?! Returning a kid to a house with a bunch of tweakers WITH GUNS is better for the kid?!?!?
How do you figure? Did you read the article about the tweakers that shot that guy in the head (it's on the homepage of today's {Friday's})? It is POSSIBLE that some of these kids go on to live with RESPONSIBLE family members. Hell, even kids that go into foster care or group homes at least have a possible opportunity to live with a sense of right and wrong and can typically be held accountable for their actions and school performance. Even if their lives are difficult, they at least stand a fighting chance of not becoming their parents. The same CANNOT BE SAID for the homes of tweakers.

That statement is LUDICROUS.
Good Lord

Chico, CA

#52 Sep 25, 2009
The above should read "today's {Friday's} ER?"
methprevention

Oroville, CA

#53 Sep 25, 2009
Yes really. No I did not say returning them to a house full of tweakers with guns is better for the child, YOU DID. Good Lord once again you have failed to understand what you read. Of course the child will only be placed back with the parent after they have begun the road to recovery and met probation stipulations. Once the addicted parent is meeting their probation requirements only then are they considered eligible to get their children back. The professionals who determine the parameters regarding drug endangered children understand the importance of maintaining the parent child bond if at all possible, in the child's best interest. One last note I agree the statement you typed "Returning a kid to a house with a bunch of tweakers WITH GUNS is better for the kid?!?!?" is LUDICROUS.
methprevention

Oroville, CA

#54 Sep 25, 2009
Good Lord wrote:
<quoted text>
Really?!?! Returning a kid to a house with a bunch of tweakers WITH GUNS is better for the kid?!?!?
How do you figure? Did you read the article about the tweakers that shot that guy in the head (it's on the homepage of today's {Friday's})? It is POSSIBLE that some of these kids go on to live with RESPONSIBLE family members. Hell, even kids that go into foster care or group homes at least have a possible opportunity to live with a sense of right and wrong and can typically be held accountable for their actions and school performance. Even if their lives are difficult, they at least stand a fighting chance of not becoming their parents. The same CANNOT BE SAID for the homes of tweakers.
That statement is LUDICROUS.
Yes really. No I did not say returning them to a house full of tweakers with guns is better for the child, YOU DID. Good Lord once again you have failed to understand what you read. Of course the child will only be placed back with the parent after they have begun the road to recovery and met probation stipulations. Once the addicted parent is meeting their probation requirements only then are they considered eligible to get their children back. The professionals who determine the parameters regarding drug endangered children understand the importance of maintaining the parent child bond if at all possible, in the child's best interest. One last note I agree the statement you typed "Returning a kid to a house with a bunch of tweakers WITH GUNS is better for the kid?!?!?" is LUDICROUS.
brendafrombiggs

Oroville, CA

#55 Sep 25, 2009
As if any of us have the answer, here is a question. Where should this child be? With the mother, who put him in serious harms way? With CPS who blindly follow written rules to the tee, without the basic knowledge or ability to do what is best for him?

Maybe the start of finding an answer would be to stop this cycle as soon as possible, in the most proactive way possible. Does anyone think this child is going to turn just "fine" with people who take him merely for the few extra bucks they get a month? And how do you think he feels when all good meaning people call his mother scum, or trash, or evil? Do you think because he did what did, turn her in,(and who is to say he actually did turn her in, maybe just pulled that packet out of his pocket and the teacher recoginized it. There is another point to ponder, how did the teacher know what it was?) that he doesn't love, care and need his mother? These people need help, not comdemnation.
brendafrombiggs

Oroville, CA

#56 Sep 25, 2009
Oh, and one more thing. The gun is a non issue. These people live in the country, in Butte County. How many people out there do you think do NOT have guns? I agree a parolee should not have a gun. That is common sence and the law. But where did it say the gun was loaded and laying around for anyone to have access too. I don't remember reading that.
sadly

United States

#57 Sep 25, 2009
Good Grief wrote:
Sad story,.. BUT getting busted,..(by your own kid no less) might be the best thing that ever happend to this family. I understand that we're all human and therefore we ALL make mistakes and do stupid things (this was a BIG STUPID one) BUT,.. my hope is that this kid learns that although this isnt going to be easy on him having to go to foster care, its probably a lot better than what he was living with. The parolee goes back to prison where he belongs, mom is forced to pull her head out of her **** and be the parent she's supposed to be and life goes on. I'm sure this took a lot of courage for this kid,.. he's old enough to know that this stuff ruins lives and that although he should have never been put in this position in the first place,.. it's what needed to be done for himself as well as his mom. I'm proud of him :)
unfortunatly this man was arrested in my naiborhood 18 months ago we thought for sure he would be going a way for ahile but here he is agian out of jail and up to his old stuff agian hopefully they will keep him this time
Biggs

Chico, CA

#58 Sep 25, 2009
As if any of us have the answer, here is a question. Where should this child be? With the mother, who put him in serious harms way? With CPS who blindly follow written rules to the tee, without the basic knowledge or ability to do what is best for him?

CPS follows the LAW because it is the law. It is there to protect the child and if you read the child welfare laws, CPS is mandated to work on family reunification if all possible. When a social worker does not follow the law and the child is in harms way or dies, the social worker is responsible and will be prosecuted by the law. We are all accountable and are expected to be law abiding citizens.
proud native

Chico, CA

#59 Sep 27, 2009
meth prevention wrote:
The point is condemnation of using addicts while possibly self gratifying is complete horn blowing. Stating and restating how damaging the child and what scum the mother and boyfriend accomplishes very little, it's to late, the damage is done, and now in rides the Calvary to preach big winded condemnation. It will happen again and again while you moan how terrible the using scum addict parents are and still that accomplish nothing. What have you or your community done personally to prevent this from happening to the next child? Think about it, this is not an isolated case. It's happening right now within blocks of your home, undetected. Now what is your solution? Is that coherent enough for you?
I use addicts all the time..are you condemming me? Where or where did you go to school???
You must be stoned if you think anything you said in any of your wanderings has made any sense.
Max II

Anchorage, AK

#60 Sep 28, 2009
Biggs wrote:
As if any of us have the answer, here is a question. Where should this child be? With the mother, who put him in serious harms way? With CPS who blindly follow written rules to the tee, without the basic knowledge or ability to do what is best for him?
CPS follows the LAW because it is the law. It is there to protect the child and if you read the child welfare laws, CPS is mandated to work on family reunification if all possible. When a social worker does not follow the law and the child is in harms way or dies, the social worker is responsible and will be prosecuted by the law. We are all accountable and are expected to be law abiding citizens.
CPS does not follow the law. They are also mandated to try and place the child with family if possible and they do not. I have been fighting the system for over 2 years trying to get my nephew. Go to fightingcps.com or massoutrage.com and you will see how the CPS really works.
Good Lord

Chico, CA

#61 Sep 28, 2009
methprevention wrote:
<quoted text> Yes really. No I did not say returning them to a house full of tweakers with guns is better for the child, YOU DID. Good Lord once again you have failed to understand what you read. Of course the child will only be placed back with the parent after they have begun the road to recovery and met probation stipulations. Once the addicted parent is meeting their probation requirements only then are they considered eligible to get their children back. The professionals who determine the parameters regarding drug endangered children understand the importance of maintaining the parent child bond if at all possible, in the child's best interest. One last note I agree the statement you typed "Returning a kid to a house with a bunch of tweakers WITH GUNS is better for the kid?!?!?" is LUDICROUS.
No...I didn't "fail to understand" what I read. YOU failed to incorporate your hindsighted thoughts into your previous post. You never said anything about rehabbing the parents--until AFTER I called you out on your ridiculous post. You said that the best place for the kid would be with his drug addicted parents. You questioning MY critical reading skills is laughable, at best. You are notorious on this forum for your incoherent posts. Once again, nice try.
methprevention

Oroville, CA

#62 Sep 28, 2009
Good Lord wrote:
<quoted text>
No...I didn't "fail to understand" what I read. YOU failed to incorporate your hindsighted thoughts into your previous post. You never said anything about rehabbing the parents--until AFTER I called you out on your ridiculous post. You said that the best place for the kid would be with his drug addicted parents. You questioning MY critical reading skills is laughable, at best. You are notorious on this forum for your incoherent posts. Once again, nice try.
What you seem to fail to recognize is once and addict always an addict, addicts are ether clean or using. Me stating returning the children to their addicted parents does not mean they are using, genius. If someone does not understand my posts,it simply shows you and they no very little about substance abuse addiction, prevention and treatment.
Good Lord

Chico, CA

#63 Sep 29, 2009
methprevention wrote:
<quoted text> What you seem to fail to recognize is once and addict always an addict, addicts are ether clean or using. Me stating returning the children to their addicted parents does not mean they are using, genius. If someone does not understand my posts,it simply shows you and they no very little about substance abuse addiction, prevention and treatment.
Yeah...that or you don't know how to articulate what you truly mean. Get off it, man. You're a terrible writer and that's the end of that.
methprevention

Oroville, CA

#64 Sep 30, 2009
Good Lord wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah...that or you don't know how to articulate what you truly mean. Get off it, man. You're a terrible writer and that's the end of that.
I beg to differ, you're inability to grasp the true meaning of a composition is not a reflection of my writing but rather your lack of of your ability to comprehend and that's the end of that. You do know they have night classes and a bus schedule in Chico?
True Story

Chico, CA

#65 Sep 30, 2009
methprevention wrote:
<quoted text>I beg to differ, you're inability to grasp the true meaning of a composition is not a reflection of my writing but rather your lack of of your ability to comprehend and that's the end of that. You do know they have night classes and a bus schedule in Chico?
Whoa! Look at Captain Thesaurus over here! Who wrote that for you? That must've taken all night. If only you could go back over all your unintelligible ramblings and make them half as coherent as this post.

“Strength lies in differences, ”

Since: Nov 08

Chico, California

#66 Sep 30, 2009
True Story wrote:
<quoted text>
Whoa! Look at Captain Thesaurus over here! Who wrote that for you? That must've taken all night. If only you could go back over all your unintelligible ramblings and make them half as coherent as this post.
Yay Grammar fight!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Richvale Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Faux Global Warming (Nov '14) 40 min GRANDPA NICOLAI 858
America, a plutocratic country 44 min GRANDPA NICOLAI 49
Why are there so many rules? 49 min GRANDPA NICOLAI 10
Unemployment FALLS TO LOWEST LEVEL in 7 years. 51 min GRANDPA NICOLAI 102
How Many Threads 55 min GRANDPA NICOLAI 6
Cincinnati campus police officer charged with m... 58 min GRANDPA NICOLAI 5
BOEING CEO Set to Receive $ 3.9 Million Per Yea... 1 hr GRANDPA NICOLAI 44
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Richvale Mortgages