After four days of testimony last week, the bizarre closed-door trial of Nick and Carrie Nowatney is scheduled to resume next Friday, April 14. State Attorney Kirk Zuelch is spending thousands and thousands of taxpayer dollars to try to prosecute this young Army couple, simply because they won't plead guilty to abusing their children.
Last week, several medical experts testified for the state that they suspected child abuse because both children— Natalie, 3, and Nathan, 1— had suffered forearm fractures within a year. But a medical expert for the defense pointed out that forearm fractures, while quite common among young children, are quite uncommon in child abuse cases. Shouldn't the state experts have known that? Did they know it and just forget to mention it?
"Abused children commonly suffer fractures to the ribs, spine, collarbone and bones in the shoulder— not in the forearm," testified Dr. Harry Smith, one of the nation's top experts in radiology and nuclear medicine. Dr. Smith was selected by the U.S. Government to testify in the infamous Rodney King beating case.
Since neither child showed fractures in any of the "classical" locations, "the probability of child abuse based on the radiological and scintigraphic findings is low to a degree of radiological certainty," Dr. Smith said.
Earlier, a state medical expert witness had testified that he suspected that Natalie may have suffered a second fracture because he saw a "hot spot" reading on a nuclear bone scan that he couldn't explain.
Dr. Smith explained it for him. Smith pointed out that the bones in young children are growing rapidly— and that the outside layer of bone in children is not as tightly "wrapped" as in adults. This is where growth is taking place and these areas show up as "hot spots" on bone scans
He suggested that any experienced radiologist should know that. Do you think it's possible that the state's witness did know it— but sort of "forgot" while he was testifying?
Another medical expert for the defense chastised the local office of the State Dept. of Children & Families (DCF) officials for the overall handling of this case.
"The initial appropriate concern for the possibility of child abuse quickly gave way to an overly aggressive effort to prove the suspicions true, without attending to the lack of supporting evidence," said Dr. Thomas McNish, principal consultant at the Biodynamic Research Corp. in San Antonio.
"Based on reasonable medical and biomechanical certainty, Nathan Nowatney's proximal left radius fracture more likely than not occurred accidentally during the fall from the sofa, as described by his father," Dr. McNish testified.
Dr. Walter Lambert, the state's key medical expert, had told DCF officials last October that he thought Natalie's broken arm was accidental. He confirmed that opinion in testimony last week.
Next week, the defense is expected to call as a witness a psychologist who evaluated the Nowatneys at the insistence of the DCF. But, reportedly, her evaluation turned out to be so favorable to the Nowatneys that Assistant State Attorney Janine Gedmin reportedly no longer wants her as a witness. Instead, the Nowatneys will call her to support their case.
The defense is also expected to ask the Nowatneys' neighbors, members of their church and Nick's fellow soldiers— people who see the kids often— to testify. This is important. Child abuse does not occur in a vacuum. And anyone who knows the Nowatneys will testify that they are loving, caring parents.
Surely, State Attorney Zuelch and the hapless bureaucrats over at the DCF now know that they made a mistake. Even if we give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that they once really thought they had a case, that illusion surely was shattered last week. Their expert witnesses were literally decimated. The blue ribbon experts who testified for the Nowatneys— without pay, incidentally— made the state witnesses look like first year medical students.
If Assistant State Attorney Gedmin wasn't embarrassed as she watched her "case" collapse, she should have been. And she knows that it's not going to get any better next week. She has rested her case; the Nowatneys are just beginning to present testimony.
This scandal began last Sept. 4, when DCF officials showed up at the Nowatneys' home at the Naval Air Station here and took the children. Nathan was still breastfeeding. No matter. They took him anyway.
At that time, the Nowatneys say, they were told that all they had to do to get their kids back was to admit to child abuse and agree to accept a menu of DCF "services." These services might include various types of counseling, classes in various aspects of parenting, family budgeting and periodic in-home visits by state social workers.
"But we didn't do anything wrong," the Nowatneys said.
"No matter," DCF officials said. "Either admit guilt and accept our services— or you can go to court to try to get your kids back. And that could take months and cost you plenty."
We think the Nowatneys are heroes. But they are quick to admit that they were afraid. And they desperately wanted their children back.
"But we couldn't say that we did something that we didn't do," Nick said.
"Okay," DCF officials said— maybe not in words, but in attitude and action. "Watch this." And for the next five months they shuffled the Nowatney kids between three different foster homes up and down the Keys.
At one time, while he was in state-sanctioned foster care, Nathan developed a diaper rash so serious that it was blistering. Diaper rash is caused by neglect. One foster parent also tried to feed 10-month-old Nathan a cheeseburger.
"No matter," the attitude of the DCF seemed to be. "If you had pled guilty in the beginning, you would have already had your kids back."
Even when both the Army and the Navy completed separate investigations and found no evidence of child abuse, the DFC still refused to return the kids.
Even when the doctors who attended to the kids' broken arms said they saw no evidence of child abuse, the DCF refused to return the kids.
Even when full-body x-rays of both children found no evidence of child abuse, the DCF refused to return the kids.
Even when both parents took polygraph tests indicating innocence, the DCF refused to return the kids.
Meanwhile, dozens of other parents who had also lost their children to the DCF were getting their kids back within a few days— simply by admitting guilt and accepting the state-decreed services. Some of these parents are alcoholic. Some are drug-addicted. Some do beat their children. No matter. What seems to be the DCF's top priority is that those accused admit guilt and accept the DCF-provided services.
But the Nowatneys— non-drinking, non-smoking, drug free and church-going— couldn't get their kids back for almost 200 days because they wouldn't plead guilty to a bogus charge and because they wouldn't roll over and allow the state unlimited intrusion into their lives.
When the Nowatneys asked that Carrie's sister, who lives in their hometown of Emden, Ill., be approved as a foster parent so that the children could at least live with relatives until the trial, it took the DCF officials here two months to process the paperwork.
Finally, last month, Judge Mark Jones signed an order allowing the Nowatney kids to move back in with their parents at the Naval Air Station. DCF representatives are allowed to visit periodically— but only with a military escort, according to the agreement between the military and the civilian community. That's a good policy. That should keep the DCF people honest.
What this story has evolved into is a story about government out of control. There is a huge bureaucracy that's been built up under the guise of protecting children. But to perpetuate itself, this bureaucracy has to keep taking people's kids and putting them in state-paid foster homes. Then, there's another large group of state employees paid to provide the "services" that parents have to agree to accept in order to get their children back.
In essence, this network is a "child abuse industry", populated by people whose livelihoods depend on encouraging child abuse allegations, prosecuting those allegations, coercing accused parents into admitting guilt and, then, providing "services."
What about the quality of those "services"? A former DCF employee told us that she used to teach the parenting classes.
"Did they send you to a seminar somewhere to learn how to do that?" we asked.
She laughed. "No, they just gave me a book and told me to do it."
At presstime, we learned about an attorney in Tallahassee who is preparing to file a class action lawsuit against the DCF. She says there may be thousands of cases across Florida in which children have been "wrongfully taken" from their parents.
In a previous editorial, we compared the out-of-control parasites over at the DCF to a pack of rabid dogs running wild in the street. We hope you won't think that comparison understated. In any event, we think it's about time that somebody leashes up that bunch of bullies and hoses them down. Enough is enough!
Certainly, nobody questions the need for protecting children in danger. But holding infants hostage to extort a guilty plea from the innocent should be considered a criminal act. And those who knowingly do it, even under the color of law, should be indicted and jailed! Of course, that can never happen, at least not right now— because the State Attorney's Office is a key player in the local child abuse industry.
Stay tuned.
NOTE: If you're outraged, you can help the Nowatneys in their fight against the DCF. While State Attorney Zuelch has millions of taxpayer dollars to spend to try to save face, the Nowatneys have been exhausted financially. To help, a legal defense fund has been set up. It's called the "Mama, Am I still In Foster Care?" fund— because that's what little Natalie always asked her mother every time she saw her during those long months when she was being forced by the DCF to live with strangers.
To contribute, drop your check by our office at 422 Fleming or mail it to PO Box 567, Key West FL 33041. Questions: Call Dennis Reeves Cooper, 292-2108.