Clear Full Forecast

Jury Rules Child's Death Was Homicide

By 250 News

Saturday, November 03, 2007 09:22 PM

       Prince George, B.C. - The Coroner’s jury in the death of  Savannah Hall,  has ruled the 3 year old’s death was  homicide.

The official  document says she died of  an "hypoxic Ischemic Brain Injury due to or as a consequence of a Cerebral Edema, due to  or as a consequence of suffocation."

In other words, the Jury did not accept the theory  that Savannah  had a  seizure, which  caused her to  vomit,  aspirate,  which cut off the  oyxgen to her brain, resulting in the  swelling of the brain .

In  making a classification on  death, the jury  had to make a choice between accidental, natural, suicide,  undetermined, or homicide.

The jury also made 26 recommendations, which  call for major changes within the Ministry of Children and Family Development, but  there are recommendations for  all who had  contact with  the child  through her life,  or   in  their attempts to save her life.

  1. The Ministry of Children and Family Development (MCFD) improve their procedures relating to the recording and sharing of all information, relating to both substantiated and unsubstantiated allegations whch may  relate to the safety and welfare of children in care.
  2. MCFD should develop and implement a single document  equivalent to the "Child Services Snapshot" which  records all agetations against a foster home.
  3. MCFD should require that foster parents be reained in First Aid and CPR.
  4. MCFD should revise and clarify the Standards for Foster homes as it relates to the use of both mechanical and physical retraints.  These standards should specifically require the approval of a physician prior to their non-emergent use.
  5. MCFD should revise the Supervised CIsit and Transportation Record so as to require the signature of the visting natural parent and that a copy of the record is provided to the natural parent.
  6. MCFD should require immediate  notification to the appliciable police agency of all serious incidents inveolving physicial injury to children in care.
  7. MCFD should require that it be notified of all physician visits mae by children in care
  8. MCFD should ensure the availability of social workers to promptly respond to and investigate allegations involving  potential harm  to a child in care in those situations in which the childès assigned social worker is unavailable.
  9. MCFD should ensure that foster parents are provided with all available information regarding a child’s history within 72 hours of placement.
  10. MCFD policies should require that all resources providing services to children in care immediately report to the MCFD and MCFD investigate, unusual periods of absence from the resource.
  11. MCFD policies shouldrequire that after hours social workers have access to information relating to the proposed foster home,  Such information to include : number of children presently in care, the level of care provided  by  the foster home, and the history of allegations made against that foster home.
  12. MCFD information management  systems should track all allegations made against a foster jhome, including those relationg to both  Quality of Care, and  Abuse or Neglect.
  13. MCFD policies  should require  a medical  assessment  before placing a special needs child in care.
  14. MCFD policies should require that  all social workers involved in the care of children in a foster home be provided with a copy of the Annual  Review of that foster home.
  15. MCFD policies should require that all allegations of QUality  of Care and Abuse or Neglect be independently reviewed by workers that  are not involved in the management of the foster home, or the care of children placed within that home.
  16. MCFD policies should  require that Guardianship workers visit each child in care on their caseload not less than twice yearly.
  17. MCFD policies should require that the resource social worker review with each foster parent, at least once evey five years, the then applicable Standards for Foster Homes.
  18. The BC Ambulance Service (BCAS should modify the form of its Crew Report to allow for extra room  for the recording narrative.
  19. BCAS should  emphasize the requirement and  importance  of full charting of the Crew Report by all attendants.
  20. The  City of Prince George Fire Department should require a full recording on its Fire Rescue and Safety Report of all significant scene circumstances when  responding to calls involving personal injury.
  21. The Child Development Centre (CDC) should revise its procedures to improve reporting and communication with the MCFD regarding children in care
  22. CDC should require notification to the MCFD of any unexplained absence of longer than two days of any child in care
  23. CDC should  require the reporting to the MCFD of any observations of suspicious bruises on children in care
  24. The College of Physicians  and Surgeons  should recommend to its members that they deliver to the MCFD copies of Consultation Reports relating to patients who are children in care.
  25. The College of Physicians and Surgeons should recommend to its members that the patient history regarding children in care be taken  from other  health professionals and MCFD workers in addition to the history obtained from foster parents.
  26. The Ministry of Health  should investigate the development of a website which  provides a central repository for medical information regarding children in care.

The jury delivered   the recommendations  after 9 hours of deliberation which followed  10 days of testimony from  nearly 30 witnesses.


Previous Story - Next Story



Return to Home
NetBistro

Comments

Item eight is key here. Look at the press release from the British Columbia Association of Social Workers regarding the MCFD and you can plainly see that the number of available social workers per caseload simply means that it is impossible to make sure all children are protected. Despite the government's favorite tactic of claiming it has rehired two hundred workers, the staffing levels are still below what was in place before the Liberals decimated the number of employee's in 2001. This government has been so interested in promoting their corporate bosses, the MCFD is in a state of emergency and the fault lies in stupid moves like cutting the corporate tax rates, leaving no money for necessary social services. Shame on you Gordo, and all your puppets. Hope you all can sleep well knowing the part you have played in the deaths of children.
I don't so much blame the government or the social workers for this one. Played a part, yes. To blame, I don't think so.
This is some jury! 26 detailed recommendations from people just picked off the street?
Looks to me that the cost to implement all 26 suggestions isn't going to allow anymore money to be spent on hiring anymore baby sitters without cutting services someplace else, or else requiring a general tax hike that would strip the economy and send us back to the NDP days. No one works for free.
Can some one explain the difference between this here case and your every day run of the mill abortion? I don't get it how one can be completely normal and the other is completely abhorrent to society?
Weird Question Chader!! Wow, did u even process a thought before u wrote that or did your mind get time warped during the one hour exchange last night? So which is normal and which is abhorrent in your opinion? I don't see the "normal" choice. Nonetheless, there should be a headline coming soon "Foster mother Patricia Keene arrested for homicide" Homicide?? They are going to have to explain that verdict, and then what, inquest or trial.
Chadermando has an interesting point. I think one gets attached to one's pets is the difference, and everyone gets upset when we loose a family pet because they are so cute.
The subject is simply too loaded with emotional blackmail that prevents rational discussing and realist appraisal of the situation. If my pet looked like a human, how much should society pay to keep it alive?
To further muddy the situation there has always been, and will always be, a large segment of the population has no know limit of pity that everyone has to chip in and pay for.
It's nice living in the petroleum age and wallowing in the money.
Usually an inquest is a tool to determine if there is enough evidence to charge someone with a crime. Pisspulper is probably right in the assumption that their will be charges laid in the coming weeks. USUALLY it doesn't take long. From the Citizen "A coroner's jury does not find criminal responsibility. A finding of homicide in the context of a coroner's inquest means that, whatever the context, some intentional action by someone caused a death.
Now the courts etc, just need to determine who that someone is.

I bet you all know who I think is responsible.
My guess is NO charges for anyone,but I would love to be dead wrong.
Considering the 6 year time factor,the abundance of people who just can't remember, including the foster mother,the workers who dropped the ball at the MCFD,and I just don't believe it will happen.
Too many people would have stuff on them.
It SHOULD,because there are far too many questions that have not been answered.
And now they will NEVER be answered.
Watch this die in a fileroom somewhere!
The useless and pointless effort of it all makes me sick.
Almost as if it was done to shut everyone up.
Elaine, The above shows exactly why we need an article on the BCASW press release. As long as no one sees what tells the truth, ignorance of the reality is allowed to continue and children will continue to die as a result of improper funding and stupid tax cuts like we saw last week from Harper that only serve to help the wealthy and decimate our society's needs for infrastructure and humanity.
"Can some one explain the difference between this here case and your every day run of the mill abortion? I don't get it how one can be completely normal and the other is completely abhorrent to society?"

I'll have a go at it.

An aborted fetus, is essetnially a non-sentient being. It has the potential of living without the support system it has available to it.

The case in questions is the death of a child that had developed the ability to think, to realize and understand it was suffering, for whatever reason.

Now, if you were completely against killing of a living being, including a fetus, I would have to say I cannot speak against it. But you would have to tell me that you would be against captial punishment and acts of war that cause deaths.
I left out an important word. I meant to say, it does NOT have the potential of living without the support system it has available to it.
The results of the investigation are available in a document called "JUDGEMENT OF INQUIRY" and it is or will be available by request from the Office of the Chief Coroner.
Gee,I can't wait...
This report also contains the findings of the autopsy report and the roles of other agencies involved.
The jury recommendations are included in the "Judgement" and also in the document "Verdict at Coroners Inquest".
The actual autopsy report itself is only available to designated parties.
Why is this?
But again,the 5 person jury can only find the FACTS of the case,not who is at FAULT. I fail to see what the point is if nobody monitors any recommendations made by the jury, and those same recommendations are not binding?
We need to ask ourselves...do we really think anyone is listening?
The jury can find the facts of the case. Problem is, there is a risk that they are wrong. It is still the facts as they find them to be, which, by some percentage of probability may be the facts or may be close to the facts.

The only real fact is that the jury found them to be the facts. Of that we can be close to 100% certain if we believe in the news reporting. However, since we were not at the hearing, and we were not on the jury, even that has a percentage of risk associatied with it, be it ever so miniscule.

So, now that someone has said there was a homicide, someone might pick it up to see who may have been the killer and whether it was accidental homicide or intentional homicide.

I am not familiar with this case. Perhaps this has already been investigated for that.
Pose the following question:
You're walking down a deserted street with your wife and two small

children. Suddenly, a dangerous looking man with a huge knife comes around the corner, locks eyes with you, screams obscenities, raises the knife, and charges. You are carrying a Glock 40, and you are an expert shot. You have mere seconds before he reaches you and your family.

What do you do?

CANADIAN POLICE OFFICERS
Answer: (Immediate thought processes)

Is the knife a ceremonial kirpan?
Does he prefer to communicate in English or French?
Will this negatively impact my chances of promotion?
Is this just his way of telling me that he pays my wages, and wants my job?
Would this be an appropriate time to hug him and sing Koombaya?
Will the media do a profile of him and how he was loved by everyone including his dog?
Is the alleged "client" a member of the NDP or an Environmental Group?
Is he just a squeegee kid / pan handler trying to make a living on the mean streets?
Is he a member of a gang that is just "misunderstood" by society?
Is he a recent illegal immigrant to this country, and just doesn't know how to approach the police?
Is he recently released on parole and hasn't been properly integrated back into the community?
Is he a victim of fetal alcohol syndrome, and just doesn't understand what he is doing?
Is he a member of the Muslim community or other visible minority group?
Warn and Charter him as he approaches.


Oops, he got the kids.
As much as I hate to say it,there IS certian amount of truth to that Yama!
Welcome to Canada!
"You're walking down a deserted street with your wife and two small children. Suddenly, a dangerous looking man with a huge knife comes around the corner, locks eyes with you, screams obscenities, raises the knife, and charges. You are carrying a Glock 40, and you are an expert shot. You have mere seconds before he reaches you and your family."

I am sorry. I am not quite understanding how the police officer comes into play. Is the "husband" an police officer in an off duty situation?
As to the questions:

1. Is the knife a ceremonial kirpan? Not if he is charging with it. Especially not if he is not wearing a turban.

2. Does he prefer to communicate in English or French? "STOP' is understood in both languages, therefore moot.

3. Will this negatively impact my chances of promotion?

If he is not a police officer, iot would not cross his mind. If he is, it would not cross his mind either.

4. Is this just his way of telling me that he pays my wages, and wants my job?

Stupid ... hou are fishing for rational questions to flash trhough your mind. This is not one of the rational ones .. you are just adding nonsensical fillers.

5. Would this be an appropriate time to hug him and sing Koombaya?

ditto.

6. Will the media do a profile of him and how he was loved by everyone including his dog?

ditto

7. Is the alleged "client" a member of the NDP or an Environmental Group?

all the more reason ot shoot????

8. Is he just a squeegee kid / pan handler trying to make a living on the mean streets?

looking for a filler ... don't make a living by killing mommies and babies .. try cab drivers instead ...

9. Is he a member of a gang that is just "misunderstood" by society?

And this matters how?

10. Is he a recent illegal immigrant to this country, and just doesn't know how to approach the police?

looking for a filler ....

11. Is he recently released on parole and hasn't been properly integrated back into the community?

nothing that can be determined in a matter fo seconds so ruled out.

12. Is he a victim of fetal alcohol syndrome, and just doesn't understand what he is doing?

ditto.

13. Is he a member of the Muslim community or other visible minority group?

Easy to tell if it is visible!!!! amnd it matters how..????

14. Warn and Charter him as he approaches.

Definitely warn him ..... charter as a step further down in the sequence.

Now for the real response other than the assinine post by YDPC ...

"You are carrying a Glock 40, and you are an expert shot. the man ..... raises the knife, and charges."

Since you are an expert shot, shoot him in the leg and disable him. He is just carrying a knife, not a gun ....

Where did this fictitious RCMP guy get his training anyway? On the internet from the sounds of it. Or one of those flunkie rednecks they send to remote outposts like Houston and Vanderhoof where they can play "me big chief".
What's with the cop side anyhow? Jibberish.
Petroleum age? I don't see the relevance. Tax cuts? Throwing money at any situation hardly makes the outcome better. Glock 40? And you're allow to carry one of those on your evening stroll. Fetus, yikes, that's a touchy subject. Is it me or is everyone off subject here? For the record, I DO NOT accuse nor find Patricia Keene guilty of anything. I just question "Homicide". There must be an accomplice!!
Section #222 Canadian Criminal Code (1) A person commits homicide when, directly or indirectly, by any means, he/she causes the death of a human being.

(2) Homicide is culpable or not culpable

(3) Homicide that is not culpable is not an offence.

(4) Culpable homicide is murder or manslaughter or infanticide.

(5) A person commits culpable homicide when he causes the death of a human being,
(a) by means of an unlawful act.
(b) by criminal negligence,
(c) by causing that human being,by threats or fear of violence or by deception, to do anything that causes death; or
(d) by wilfully frightening that human being, in the case of a child or sick person.

I suggest that what we are dealing with here is a case of (not culpable) homicide, and therefore no charges would be forthcoming.

Inquests are established to determine the cause of death, and their recommendations are not legally binding, and as a result they are seldom carried out. In this case it would be politically wise for the Government to implement some of the recommendations.
Good info Palopu, and you can bet I will be watching this one to see what the government actually does,if anything!
Owl says "..Now for the real response other than the assinine post by YDPC ..."

You took too long and your kids died.

That's why the RCMP only hire mid level IQ people. It was a trick question to watch smart people die. You failed. Better stay out of downtown and stick with your computer.

Everyone has some valuable strengths and weaknesses, but nice try Owl. Oh and you spelt asinine wrong.... HeeHee!
By the way Owl, would you vote for me if I run for council?
Too bad parental responsibility doesn't make the list. It seems to me that the child's mother picked a very convenient time to get involved.
I have been thinking the same thing Tiemens1 for the entire time this case has been made public. Foster parenting is a bandaide for the real problem of poor parenting before and after the child is even born. The real responsibility of children is with their parents not the government. Abortion? How about passing a basic test before being permitted to conceive?

As for the foster parent in this case, I can't imagine the horror her life has been for a long, long time - especially when she was trying to do as she was advised by professionals.
Good logic "chickenbus",no argument here!
It irks me to no end to see the parents in these types of cases stand up on TV and act all full of woe and sorrow.
They probably are,but it's a bit late!
They should in fact hardly be able to look in the damn mirror when they are actually the major part of the probem right from the begining!
Where is the damn responsility!!!
We need some new laws regarding parenting A.S.A.P!
"By the way Owl, would you vote for me if I run for council?"

It is a useless question since I could say no, but vote for you anyway, or I could say yes and not vote for you.

It is sort of like those questions on survays "Would you pay $100 per year to an organization to support wildlife habitat improvement in the urban/wildland interface?" You could answer yes. The real vote comes when you open your wallet and pay $100 to the organization. A lot of people say they would do something, but in the end don't do it.

So, knowing you and how you are at meetings dealing with land use and various interests and really not speaking up too much, I would have to say no, I would not vote for you because you tend to be single simple issues directed while Council deals with a myriad of issues you really do not appear to think through.

But, putting you into a slate of say 12, you may actually be a better choice than 4 or more of the others.

;-)
I so agree with the posters about the natural mother. I don't believe that MCFD takes away children that aren't at risk. Savannah obviously from what I've read was in a very dangerous situation with her own mother who apparently didn't care enough about herself or her daughter to remedy the situation. If the child had died with her natural mother we'd all be screaming about where was MCFD. It irks me no end to see the mother and family crying to the TV cameras about how the child was yanked from them and they never saw her. Give me a break! They weren't there and if they would have been that child might be alive today. The buck stops at square #1. And that ain't the foster mother.
I so agree with the posters about the natural mother. I don't believe that MCFD takes away children that aren't at risk. Savannah obviously from what I've read was in a very dangerous situation with her own mother who apparently didn't care enough about herself or her daughter to remedy the situation. If the child had died with her natural mother we'd all be screaming about where was MCFD. It irks me no end to see the mother and family crying to the TV cameras about how the child was yanked from them and they never saw her. Give me a break! They weren't there and if they would have been that child might be alive today. The buck stops at square #1. And that ain't the foster mother.
From what I understand about the case, so bang on abouttown ....
At the end of the day, Savanaugh was placed for her safety, regardless of what her mom had to say, in MCFD's care. The bottom line, she died in MCFD's care.

Homicide? Maybe by criminal neglience.

I wonder about the recommendations of sending more information to MCFD. It seems that right now, from what they are saying, they cannot evaluate the information they have. Gosh, the intelligence the US had before 9/11 shows that having all the information in the world means little if a) there is too much to process, and b) what is there is not relevant, so the important bits get filtered out. Perhaps the reputation of the foster family postponed investigations
of complaints there, and not coming to conclusions on these allegations means just that. it is "I heard that..." and not figuring out where the allegation came to, or how it came about, and whether or not it is relevant, and leaving this undone, does little to support the foster parents. No wonder there is not enough.

The one recommendations from this inquest of sending physician reports to MCFD has the same concern for me. Social workers cannot read or keep up to the reports they get now. And, that means essentially the medical file becomes part of the MCFD file. Medical has higher levels of privacy than MCFD's information, so that is my first concern. Second, is the belief that social workers have that doctors "should do more to protect children in care?" What exactly, would that be the doctor phoning foster parents to make appointments to see the kids first? You see, someone has to alert a doctor of a problem...for most of us, it is me the patient or me the parent of the patient. This split of legal responsibility for children, where the legal signer of authority for the child, the social worker, and the foster parent, who does the day to day stuff, is where communications break down, especially in medical follow up.

So, sending in consult reports are useless addition of information that the social workers cannot use. To properly advocate for medical needs, someone with an understanding of medical information who can talk to the pros in the health field will help. Which is my concern about getting Ministry of Health to do the depository of medical information...that sounds like a database, which so what...it exists, but who uses it, and why, and what decisions are made? Would users necessarily get better information, or more confused?

I have a suggestion. MCFD should employ doctors or nurses with the role of medical consultation, advocacy, for children in care. Their jobs would be to get and compile medical history information, talk to doctors, talk to foster parents and support them for medical issues, and make sure social workers know what is the status of health for kids in care. They would function somewhat like a medical advisor would for WCB. Their imput is important, and would help if kids are in care for service provision, such as a residential treatment program for children. At least then, those kids in care under special needs agreements would be cared for better. And, these advisors could assist the social worker teams. Have an advisor attached to each team. This medical advisor could also have the authority to make decisions if questions about medical care for children in care come up...such as go to doctor, or medical or give initial follow up suggestions. They could be responsible for medical follow up, and questions around the use of harness, restraints, or special medical equipment could go to them. They could train a foster parent in managing a diabetic child, quickly, and arrange foster parent training at the diabetic education centre at the hospital for the foster parents. This would also assist in getting those systems to work together better.