Anonymous wrote:Go to wjla.com

Has a video from today

The dude is wearing a face mask and hat so you can't see him. They walked out with lawyers.

Anonymous wrote:Today is dooms say for the couple as they will appear in court today. News 4 also reported that their kids are still with child a family services.


Where did you see this? I don't see anything new on the internet.

Anonymous wrote:Today is dooms say for the couple as they will appear in court today. News 4 also reported that their kids are still with child a family services.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I apparently know this couple. One of my husbands friends. fWIW they always seemed very responsible. My mind is blown right now.

Oh! Tell us more

They are just boring normal people. My husband sees him a bunch- same line of work. I've only met her a few times. Just standard DC nerds. He and DH talked tonight, he says they have the kids? I wasn't following this thread but as soon as DH started to tell me I said 'omg yes I know- there is a 50 page DCUM thread!' I really can't believe they did this. They have never seemed like boozers to me. Really kind of boring people. Never in a million years would I think they'd do this.

They have the kids? Seriously?

DH swears he was told this. He was also blindsighted and was just calling to talk about something else. Neither of us were following the story until now. He could have heard wrong

So is the FB link posted correct? I know the mom and kids on that page but no one has confirmed that is definitely the mother.

Yes!

Anonymous wrote:Tomorrow they go to court...right?

Anonymous wrote:Any update or new news on this??? Anyone else here know the couple personally? What's going in?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Doubt you'd feel this way if they were poor, or black!

Why do people keep saying this? NP here who is also glad the children are not in foster care, and no, I would not feel differently if the family were poor or black. I don't think children should be removed uless there is an immediate danger to their safety. I don't think that is the case here.

Different PP. I've never said that, but I understand the sentiment.

While you may think that way, the majority of people, if they had heard that poor black parents had done something completely irresponsible and negligent like this for a purely optional and unnecessary reason, would be ready to take the kids away and throw the book at them.

Say you had a black couple who had two kids. One parent works part-time at a minimum wage job and the other is a stay-at-home parent collecting public money and they struggle to get by. They can't afford a sitter, but they decide to go to a party at a friend's house Friday night, leave their kids in an old jalopy of a car out on the street while they went in, had a few beers and sat around socializing with friends. They fully intended to check on the kids every 10-15 minutes, but were talking and forgot and it was an hour before they went out to check on the kids. In the meantime, one of the neighbors sees this car sitting there with two kids, one of whom has no shoes on, the other who is crying and this neighbor opts to call 911 and the police come. One parent comes out to check on the kids and finds the police at his car about to break in the window and the parent asks what the problem is.

You're telling me that you think that the public is going to be supportive and want these parents to get their children back from CPS? You may think so, but I bet that 90% of the public will only wonder why it took so long to take the kids out of such a negligent household and that CPS wasn't doing their best to protect these children.

There's a difference between "being supportive" and wanting kids to be placed in foster care. Obviously no one is "supportive" of anyone, rich or poor, neglecting their kids. But anyone who cheers when a child is placed in foster care is either being glib or is simply ignorant.