Side topic of the story that worries me is the interaction of the power of the hospital if the DA didn’t file anything and it does coincide with insurance. SSM is a considerable political donor. I would be interested to see if the flow of money had any impact on decision making. I can hardly get any of my medical records myself from them.
Thank you for bringing that up. That's an interesting point. Political donations creating a fast lane for overriding parents within MH treatment. Worth researching. It was bewildering to see records showing SSM discharged a child from one level of care and admitted him to another without a parent's consent or a court order. Then they held him despite the revocation of parental consent. It suggests the pattern of overriding parents via the DA's office may be so common and assumed that no one bothers to verify the order is in place.
Always be sure to do research on people running for public office. Not everyone running for public office is as clean and pure as the wind driven snow as he or shoe would like you to believe. Stories like this are vital to the ability of people to make informed decisions at the voting booth.
I would like to make one final statement, there is alot of mudding of the water about what and what is not legal reguarding juvenile reports and the distribution thereof.
Police reports and Juvenile Criminal Proceedings/ ODHS reports are three completley different documents each regulated differently. I would ask every person reading these post and or responding to do your own research. Also know there is a big difference in a Dept. Policy and State Law.
I would like to make one final statement, there is alot of mudding of the water about what and what is not legal reguarding juvenile reports and the distribution thereof.
Police reports and Juvenile Criminal Proceedings/ ODHS reports are three completley different documents each regulated differently. I would ask every person reading these post and or responding to do your own research. Also know there is a big difference in a Dept. Policy and State Law.
Department policy of any public agency should be based upon federal, state and local law. I think you're getting confused by systems and platform. It's about the nature of juvenile information and protections under the law. DHS has the KIDS system to store such info with strict controls on who can access. OJA keeps their juvenile info protected from misuse in JOLTS. Law enforcement collects such juvenile info within police reports and evidence which must be protected and cannot be misused outside of the scope of that public agency.
I would like to make one final statement, there is alot of mudding of the water about what and what is not legal reguarding juvenile reports and the distribution thereof.
Police reports and Juvenile Criminal Proceedings/ ODHS reports are three completley different documents each regulated differently. I would ask every person reading these post and or responding to do your own research. Also know there is a big difference in a Dept. Policy and State Law.
This reporter has apparently NOT requested the offical police report from the sheriffs office which I obtained through the open records act, which is legal as long as the juvenile is redacted.
Why is everything the mother says in the article considered fact without verification? I agree she FEELS wronged and her FEELINGS are hurt but “ FACTS DO NOT CARE ABOUT FEELINGS?”
It would be refreshing if reporters did a complete investigation before reporting and also put the full context of statements not just the parts that slant the story.. But I guess that would be true journalism.
This publication shares your commitment to factual reporting. As stated in the article, Lewis provided a large binder full of documents, communications and medical records related to her experience. It is 100s of pages and multiple recordings that meticulously record what happened to her son. While it is not possible to include all of the actual documents within the limitations of this platform, the article accurately summarizes the events based on the evidence provided. In contrast, the Pott Co Sheriff's Office provided no evidence beyond their belief that public officials can distribute the personal information of individuals as long as that official wrote the document. That is in direct contradiction to state laws protecting the privacy of citizens, especially minors. If there is any specific point with the article that you believe is inaccurate, we encourage you to communicate with the publication so we can correct or redact to ensure accuracy. Our email is connect@v1sut.com. Thank you for reading.
Facts and evidence are things that can be corroborated not an individuals account of the events. Retired after 30+ years of law enforcement, I have conducted many investigations to include internal affairs. I agree with the mother that things could have possibly been handled differently (feeling), but there is nothing in the police report or any other official document that shows unlawful wrong doing by Scott Hawkins (Fact). We may not like the system and I do not and have not always agreed with the system but we must try to change the system not the individuals who are sworn enforce the rules set by the system or tear down others to obtain status in order to change the system. In every offical document I have obtained, the only thing I have not reviewed is the actual police interview video which I am working to obtain, I can find no factual evidence that anything illegal was conducted by Scott Hawkins or the Sheriffs Office. I cannot speak to OJA or the court system because I am not aware of their current internal policies. Can you please post the state statue that prohibits law enforcement agencies from releasing redacted juvenile reports?
My question is, is it normal for a Sheriff's deputy to hand deliver a redacted juvenile report? Outside of official duty,while campaigning for political office? It's said that nothing can be found in the report of illegal actions. Well, let me ask. Would you write a bad report of yourself?
The statute is linked and partially quoted within the article. More study of that larger body of law will clear this up for you. This set of statutes is why juvenile criminal records and documentation are housed within the state's very separate JOLTS system that is accessible only to public agencies directly involved with youth in the execution of their duties and only within the approved scope of their positions. State and local agencies should all have policies to ensure employees do not stray outside of law in this area. For example, if you are an OKDHS worker, all case and personal information involving juveniles and their families must be kept under two levels of security (i.e. a locked file cabinet within a locked office). Other workers not assigned to a case should never have access to that information in any form, digital, printed or verbal (that would be outside of the scope of their work and illegal). OJA has similar policies, and law enforcement is subject to the same laws. The JOLTS system has a clear warning on its sign-in page concerning misuse or public distribution of any information concerning a juvenile. As a retired Pott Co Sheriff's officer, you seem to believe anyone with a badge has unlimited access and rights to use a citizen's personal and case info as he/she pleases. That understanding suggests a generational training issue within that agency. Attorneys for your former employer will likely request that you remove your comments from this site. Your desire to access and/or release a video of an interview with a juvenile outside of the scope of any work is misguided. If the sheriff's department provides or allows you access to such a video, they would be breaking the law. The recent case in your community in which Judge McDaniel was forced to reverse and SEAL an order involving an unlawful VPO against a 9-year-old is an example of your district court's similar lack of understanding involving these statutes. McDaniel had to SEAL the record because the subject was a minor. The record was unlawfully placed on oscn.net as publicly available information. The spirit of this law allows for children to make some largely expected mistakes before reaching the age of majority without those missteps following them for life. Why would a police officer have the right to distribute that information at a public townhall meeting? With all due respect for your service, you appear to have significant conflicts of interest in this case.
Juvenile criminal proceedings are not the same as a police report. And a dept policy is not the same as a state statute. JOLTS is not a police report. In fact if the juvenile had actually been charged with 3 felonies as the mother stated in an online video, which was not factual, that is obviously a different situation..Again Im simply asking you to show the state statute that states it is illegal to obtain a copy of and or distribute a redacted police report involving a juvenile. If it is illegal then current 16 yr and hall of fame Sheriff Mike Booth has some questions to answer because HE not
Scott Hawkins is responsible for what information is released from his office.
You'll have to let me know when you obtain that video. Maybe we can watch it together!!
You clearly have more pull with the department than I do.
It took Hawkins 9 months to even release the report to me. Which I'm sure is also lawful. At this point I'm sure your open records request will be granted before mine. It seems the department likes to pick and chose who gets what information.
Side topic of the story that worries me is the interaction of the power of the hospital if the DA didn’t file anything and it does coincide with insurance. SSM is a considerable political donor. I would be interested to see if the flow of money had any impact on decision making. I can hardly get any of my medical records myself from them.
Thank you for bringing that up. That's an interesting point. Political donations creating a fast lane for overriding parents within MH treatment. Worth researching. It was bewildering to see records showing SSM discharged a child from one level of care and admitted him to another without a parent's consent or a court order. Then they held him despite the revocation of parental consent. It suggests the pattern of overriding parents via the DA's office may be so common and assumed that no one bothers to verify the order is in place.
Always be sure to do research on people running for public office. Not everyone running for public office is as clean and pure as the wind driven snow as he or shoe would like you to believe. Stories like this are vital to the ability of people to make informed decisions at the voting booth.
I would like to make one final statement, there is alot of mudding of the water about what and what is not legal reguarding juvenile reports and the distribution thereof.
Police reports and Juvenile Criminal Proceedings/ ODHS reports are three completley different documents each regulated differently. I would ask every person reading these post and or responding to do your own research. Also know there is a big difference in a Dept. Policy and State Law.
I would like to make one final statement, there is alot of mudding of the water about what and what is not legal reguarding juvenile reports and the distribution thereof.
Police reports and Juvenile Criminal Proceedings/ ODHS reports are three completley different documents each regulated differently. I would ask every person reading these post and or responding to do your own research. Also know there is a big difference in a Dept. Policy and State Law.
Department policy of any public agency should be based upon federal, state and local law. I think you're getting confused by systems and platform. It's about the nature of juvenile information and protections under the law. DHS has the KIDS system to store such info with strict controls on who can access. OJA keeps their juvenile info protected from misuse in JOLTS. Law enforcement collects such juvenile info within police reports and evidence which must be protected and cannot be misused outside of the scope of that public agency.
I would like to make one final statement, there is alot of mudding of the water about what and what is not legal reguarding juvenile reports and the distribution thereof.
Police reports and Juvenile Criminal Proceedings/ ODHS reports are three completley different documents each regulated differently. I would ask every person reading these post and or responding to do your own research. Also know there is a big difference in a Dept. Policy and State Law.
This is why media is not trusted in America.
This reporter has apparently NOT requested the offical police report from the sheriffs office which I obtained through the open records act, which is legal as long as the juvenile is redacted.
Why is everything the mother says in the article considered fact without verification? I agree she FEELS wronged and her FEELINGS are hurt but “ FACTS DO NOT CARE ABOUT FEELINGS?”
It would be refreshing if reporters did a complete investigation before reporting and also put the full context of statements not just the parts that slant the story.. But I guess that would be true journalism.
This publication shares your commitment to factual reporting. As stated in the article, Lewis provided a large binder full of documents, communications and medical records related to her experience. It is 100s of pages and multiple recordings that meticulously record what happened to her son. While it is not possible to include all of the actual documents within the limitations of this platform, the article accurately summarizes the events based on the evidence provided. In contrast, the Pott Co Sheriff's Office provided no evidence beyond their belief that public officials can distribute the personal information of individuals as long as that official wrote the document. That is in direct contradiction to state laws protecting the privacy of citizens, especially minors. If there is any specific point with the article that you believe is inaccurate, we encourage you to communicate with the publication so we can correct or redact to ensure accuracy. Our email is connect@v1sut.com. Thank you for reading.
Facts and evidence are things that can be corroborated not an individuals account of the events. Retired after 30+ years of law enforcement, I have conducted many investigations to include internal affairs. I agree with the mother that things could have possibly been handled differently (feeling), but there is nothing in the police report or any other official document that shows unlawful wrong doing by Scott Hawkins (Fact). We may not like the system and I do not and have not always agreed with the system but we must try to change the system not the individuals who are sworn enforce the rules set by the system or tear down others to obtain status in order to change the system. In every offical document I have obtained, the only thing I have not reviewed is the actual police interview video which I am working to obtain, I can find no factual evidence that anything illegal was conducted by Scott Hawkins or the Sheriffs Office. I cannot speak to OJA or the court system because I am not aware of their current internal policies. Can you please post the state statue that prohibits law enforcement agencies from releasing redacted juvenile reports?
My question is, is it normal for a Sheriff's deputy to hand deliver a redacted juvenile report? Outside of official duty,while campaigning for political office? It's said that nothing can be found in the report of illegal actions. Well, let me ask. Would you write a bad report of yourself?
The statute is linked and partially quoted within the article. More study of that larger body of law will clear this up for you. This set of statutes is why juvenile criminal records and documentation are housed within the state's very separate JOLTS system that is accessible only to public agencies directly involved with youth in the execution of their duties and only within the approved scope of their positions. State and local agencies should all have policies to ensure employees do not stray outside of law in this area. For example, if you are an OKDHS worker, all case and personal information involving juveniles and their families must be kept under two levels of security (i.e. a locked file cabinet within a locked office). Other workers not assigned to a case should never have access to that information in any form, digital, printed or verbal (that would be outside of the scope of their work and illegal). OJA has similar policies, and law enforcement is subject to the same laws. The JOLTS system has a clear warning on its sign-in page concerning misuse or public distribution of any information concerning a juvenile. As a retired Pott Co Sheriff's officer, you seem to believe anyone with a badge has unlimited access and rights to use a citizen's personal and case info as he/she pleases. That understanding suggests a generational training issue within that agency. Attorneys for your former employer will likely request that you remove your comments from this site. Your desire to access and/or release a video of an interview with a juvenile outside of the scope of any work is misguided. If the sheriff's department provides or allows you access to such a video, they would be breaking the law. The recent case in your community in which Judge McDaniel was forced to reverse and SEAL an order involving an unlawful VPO against a 9-year-old is an example of your district court's similar lack of understanding involving these statutes. McDaniel had to SEAL the record because the subject was a minor. The record was unlawfully placed on oscn.net as publicly available information. The spirit of this law allows for children to make some largely expected mistakes before reaching the age of majority without those missteps following them for life. Why would a police officer have the right to distribute that information at a public townhall meeting? With all due respect for your service, you appear to have significant conflicts of interest in this case.
Juvenile criminal proceedings are not the same as a police report. And a dept policy is not the same as a state statute. JOLTS is not a police report. In fact if the juvenile had actually been charged with 3 felonies as the mother stated in an online video, which was not factual, that is obviously a different situation..Again Im simply asking you to show the state statute that states it is illegal to obtain a copy of and or distribute a redacted police report involving a juvenile. If it is illegal then current 16 yr and hall of fame Sheriff Mike Booth has some questions to answer because HE not
Scott Hawkins is responsible for what information is released from his office.
While your trying to get your hands on videos you should get your hands on the video from February that you have referenced here.
I think your buddy is not being truthful with you.
As someone who claimed to only go off of facts it appears you are lacking some.
That is what Im trying to obtain and if I am wrong I will be on this site apologizing to eveyone.
You'll have to let me know when you obtain that video. Maybe we can watch it together!!
You clearly have more pull with the department than I do.
It took Hawkins 9 months to even release the report to me. Which I'm sure is also lawful. At this point I'm sure your open records request will be granted before mine. It seems the department likes to pick and chose who gets what information.
Mr Patten,
Why don't you tell us all what the FACTS are. It's my understanding you have alot of them!!