A Shattered Existence

Louis and Elena Piccone were one day living an idyllic life when the retaliation of a legal opponent put in motion the machinery of the Massachusetts Department of Social Services, an incompetent, corrupt and vindictive local Police force and a court system not quite up to the the task, resulting in the arrest, and incarceration in solitary confinement of Louis and the scattering of his family across the globe. The story includes professional misconduct, lies, procedural errors, incompetence, denial of civil and constitutional rights and just plain bureaucratic inertia that resulted in damage to this family and young children.

Idyllic Life

Louis Piccone: ivy league graduate, attorney, young father, happy husband, proud homeowner settled with his young wife and three young children in Dalton, Massachusetts because his career with General Electric brought him to the community with the promise of Norman Rockwell’s ideal of small town America.  His devoted wife Elena, graduate of a prestigious Moscow University, daughter of the Russian diplomatic corps, successful business woman, loving mother settled into a

happy life in her adopted community of the Berkshires by conducting her numerous errands in her beloved Jeep Liberty as any mother of three young children aged 3,5 and 7. Three happy, healthy, well adjusted, remarkable, well cared for children in the full enjoyment of the innocence of an early small town childhood who will hopefully make significant positive contributions to our world.  Little did this happy family know that their happiness would soon be shattered by a cabal of vengeful, sadistic social workers, bullying, overzealous police and vindictive judicial system – the underbelly of small town politics and corruption in the Berkshire Mountains of Massachusetts.

Retaliation - Four Days

After leaving General Electric, Louis established a thriving law practice representing small businesses and individuals in their legal matters.  One such client was a daycare center called Little Sprouts daycare that used to care for the Piccone children .  Little Sprouts was new to the community, rapidly growing by catering to the community of GE families at the expense of the more established local daycare called Bear Care Daycare in

Dalton, MA who began seeing a significant loss of business.  Little Sprouts was harassed and eventually shut down by the Department of Early Education and Care (EEC).  The owner of Little Sprouts suspected foul play and asked Louis to represent her against EEC so she could have her license re-instated and re-open the business.  Within 4 days of informing EEC that he would be filing suit against them in federal court for improperly closing Little Sprouts, A sister agency, the Department of Social Services (DSS) filed charges of child abuse against Louis, showed up at his house late at night with armed police and stated their intention of placing his children in foster care.  Four days … could there be any explanation for their sudden and unjustified allegations other than retaliation for his initiation of a federal law suit?  Could there be any reason to begin an investigation into allegations of child abuse with the stated intention of seizing the children other than leverage to prevent a law suit that would expose their professional misconduct?  DSS is a state agency with a reputation for heavy handed tactics by their local Berkshire office.  Were there EEC or DSS motives in shutting down Bear Care that were improper and could be traced to relationships between individuals at Bear Care and EEC or DSS and that would be exposed under the scrutiny of a federal law suit?  Were EEC and DSS just pissed off that a stranger in the community with a foreign wife was not knuckling under their infamous bullying tactics and wanted to teach him a lesson for others to see?

The Accusation

The accusation against Louis was made by several daycare workers at Bear Care Daycare in Dalton, Massachusetts who claim they overheard Louis’ 3 year old son say that his father abused him.  The core of the accusation is an 8 word statement made by a difficult to understand 3 year old.  THAT’s IT.  Hearsay by daycare workers.  The daycare workers provide no corroborating evidence to support the abuse charges.  The daycare workers claim that the child used language that is not in his vocabulary to make the charges against his father.  The daycare workers claim that the child refers to his father by a nickname that the child has never used in reference to his father or anyone else.  It is based upon this flimsy evidence alone that DSS, Dalton Police Chief John W. Bartels and Judge Paul Perachi have issued orders to remove the children from their family, place them in foster care, submit them to medieval suggestive interview techniques that have been discredited by most experts in the field, initiated kidnapping and contempt charges against the parents, conducted illegal interrogations and searches in at least two other states and placed Louis in solitary confinement after surrendering himself voluntarily to the authorities. (The photo above is a Christmas decoration from the Piccone kitchen window that has not been removed because of the children’s inability to return to their home)

Evidence to the Contrary

Evidence that refutes the statements of the daycare workers is abundant, but won’t be considered by Judge Perachi until the children are produced under the spectre of foster care.  None of the children show ph

ysical signs of abuse as testified by the police who visited the home on that first late night visit.  The pediatician’s report from the exams the next morning report no signs of physical or sexual abuse.  The three year old child was examined by the Chief of Pediatrics at a prominent Medical Center in Boston and his report states no evidence of sexual abuse.  Numerous family members are prepared to testify to the happiness of the home and health and well being of the children.

Judge Perachi’s Catch 22

Judge Perachi refuses to hear any evidence in the parent’s defense until the children are produced.  Judge Perachi refuses to specify who will be caring for the children while the parents conduct their defense against the charges until the children are produced.  Judge Perachi refuses to deter DSS and the Police from their rabid pursuit of the children for foster care.  Judge Perachi refuses to certify extended family members as suitable guardians for the children until the children are produced.  Judge Perachi refuses to require recorded interviews of the children if they are produced.  Judge Perachi refuses to require third party experts to interview the children rather than DSS staff who have a vested interest in producing evidence to substantiate their professional misconduct. 

Massachusetts DSS: Modus Operandi

The Department of Social Services in Massachusetts has a long and sordid history of overzealous persecution of innocent families.  Ask any expert in the Commonwealth and they will be able to tell you of stories of overreaction, abuse of power, professional misconduct, lack of due process and myriad families and children who have suffered as a consequence.  There is a cottage industry of professionals and attorneys which has sprung up in response to the needs of the families victimized by DSS.  The Berkshire Division of Massachusetts DSS has a reputation for being particularly provincial and dogmatic in their bullying of families.

What is the usual sequence of events for a DSS campaign against a family?  First, an accusation is made.  No evidence is required - simply the statement of anyone against a parent stating abuse or neglect - this gets the machine mobilized.  Second, a DSS caseworker shows up demanding an interview and examination of the child.  A DSS worker conducts the interview of the child utilizing interview techniques that have been discredited throughout the world as being suggestive and even abusive to the children being interviewed.  The interview techniques allow the DSS worker to suggest certain actions or events to the child which the child then attributes to their parent. The results of the interviews are then used to tender charges against the parent and remand the children to the custody of DSS (foster care).  The parents are tried with the interview evidence. In this process, there is a very cozy relationship between DSS, the Police and the court.  DSS functions as prosecutor, investigator, interviewer and maintains the custodial possession and primary influence over the children.  For more information about the abuses of Massachusetts DSS, visit www.MassOutrage.com and other resources on our Related Links page.  (The photo above is the Piccone’s dead Christmas tree in their family room on  March 10 which has not been removed because the mother and children cannot return from Russia and the father has been in jail).

First Reaction

As a person who tends to be idealistic in his view of the world and as an attorney who has spent his career ensuring that justice is applied for his clients, Louis’ first response to the charges was full cooperation with DSS and voluntary extra measures.  He voluntarily removed himself from his wife and children and checked into a local hotel that first late night.  His wife Elena had the children examined by their pediatrician the very next morning and the doctors findings were negative for any sort of abuse or neglect.  He stated his agreement for DSS interviews of the children providing that the interviews would be recorded and conducted in the presence of an attorney for the children and performed by an independent expert that was not an employee or agent of DSS.   Certain statements by DSS began seeding doubts into Louis’ expectations of justice: Heather Nietsche, the social worker who appeared at his house with the police that first night said “I’m going to be raising your children”, “DSS doesn’t do video” then laughed and quickly exited the scrutiny of video tape when video recording of her visit was initiated.  Why would a social worker who was supposedly there to investigate whether charges were true or not and conduct an impartial investigation into the truth be resistant to recommendations that would protect the children and ensure an impartial investigation that revealed the true facts.  Why, before any interviews or investigation into the charges would Heather Nitsche be telegraphing her intent to seize his children and place them in the care of DSS?  None of these false charges have been claimed against Elena, wouldn’t the children stay in the care of their mother pending any investigation of Louis?  No worries though, because certainly when the matter was discussed in the light of day and once the children were interviewed, everyone would realize this was all a misunderstanding and it would all go away.  After all, Louis knew he had never abused his children and innocence is the ultimate defense, right?

Elena decides to bring the children to visit their grandmother in NY because of her recent skin cancer treatment and to allow Louis to use the home for his response to the allegations.  His law office is in the home where he keeps his computer and law books, and they’ve volunteered to keep him separated from the children, so she decides to travel to the grandparents.

Expectation of Justice

Louis expected that the process would be conducted justly and with the goal of achieving justice for the accused as well as preserving the health and well being of his children.  He assumed that there would be a presumption of innocence, one of the foundations of the American justic

e system - it was the opposite - there was a presumption that he was guilty of the most volatile of allegations and there was no demand by the judge for substantiation of the charges or consideration of evidence to the contrary.  He expected that DSS and the court would have a duty to the health and well being to the children and keep them with their mother while he was defending himself.  Indeed, DSS did instruct Elena to care for the children while Louis voluntarily removed himself indicating that they had no concerns about Elena.  Several days later, however, DSS filed even more obviously unsubstantiated charges against the mother, thus eliminating her as a possible guardian for the young children.  What new evidence or information did DSS discover to justify their suddenly new charges against Elena?  Louis expected that DSS or the court would then reach out to extended family - the children have two living sets of grandparents and 7 aunts and uncles who could be assigned guardianship while the parents were defending themselves against the charges.  They have 13 cousins with whom they are very friendly and comfortable.  DSS never inquired whether there was extended family who could care for the children and the court denied any consideration of alternatives to foster care until the children were produced into this hostile process. 

Finally, Louis expected that DSS and the court would investigate equally all charges of child abuse, yet there has been no investigation into charges by the same Piccone child who DSS claims to be such a strong witness that daycare workers at Bear Care daycare in Dalton, MA routinely made a game of forcing him to urinate on them.  This accusation is corroborated by the mother’s statements that the child was frequently sent home with clothing soaked with urine.  Why are DSS, the court and the Dalton Police not investigating these charges of abuse by childcare workers at the Bear Care daycare center who have exposure and possible harm to large numbers of children?  Why is the persecutorial lens of their efforts exclusively focused on the Piccone Parents - perhaps because they are pressuring Louis to drop his case against DSS?

Why do they want the kids?

The mission of DSS is to ensure the health and well being of children.  Their first rule is to do no harm.  For this reason, it is the stated policy of DSS to first place the children with the other parent, secondly to place the children with alternative family and only in the last resort to place the children into foster care.  It is the duty of family court to follow these priorities as well.  Why then at every step of the way, from the first meeting and before an investigation was even begun ha

ve DSS and Judge Perachi insisted that the children be placed into foster care?  The tactics of DSS, the court and the police have been designed at every step of the way to get their hands on the children.  The question that the court won’t allow to be asked is why?  Do they have no evidence to support their charges against Louis?  Do they need to turn the children against their parents using the outmoded and discredited suggestive interview techniques of DSS to fabricate testimony by the children against their parents?  If not, then why not agree to an impartial interviewer and recorded interviews as volunteered by Louis and Elena?  Do DSS, the court and the Police know that their unorthodox and overzealous persecution of the Piccone family would be perceived as governmental abuse without some meaty and inflammatory statements by the children to substantiate their misbehavior? Without the children, they have nothing ... without the DSS process, they have no way to fabricate the evidence to their purposes.  All the talk of kidnapping and contempt charges are a smoke screen to hide the fact that they have no evidence and have gone way out on a limb to try to invent it.

The other motive for demanding the children could be that the small town powers that be in Dalton, Massachusetts have decided to punish this young, educated, affluent family from outside their community in the worst way they know how.  Who are these outsiders with a foreign wife (who is Russian to boot) to thwart their powers and refuse to submit to their process?  We’ll show them!  We’ll accuse them of the most horrible crimes possible and seize their children into foster care.

DSS filed charges against Elena as an afterthought and only after it was clear that their charges against Louis would not have their intended result of scaring him into dropping his suit against them.  Did they purposely charge her to ensure that foster care would be the only option for the children?  Why did neither DSS nor Judge Perachi initially inquire into the availability of extended family to care for the children and instead jump immediately to the mandate for foster care?  Why have the charges against Elena never been specified and the evidence supporting them presented?  Why, when asked what the specific charges were against Elena did Heather Nietsche say “I haven’t gotten to that yet?”

DSS Track Record

DSS is notoriously inept at caring for children - Abuse of children in DSS custody is rampant.  79 of 100 children who die each year in Massachusetts are in DSS custody.  Two thirds of children in the care of DSS are being administered psychotropic drugs.  In Massachusetts, DSS has knowingly approved scores of convicted criminals to be foster parents, including child abusers, drug dealers, habitual drunk drivers, kidnappers, armed robbers and other violent offenders.  Recently, a foster care mother was indicted on second degree murder in the death of a four year old child in foster care.  A Massachusetts legislative committee concluded after a 5 month investigation that children in state care were often worse off than they were in the original homes from which they were removed.  The National Coalition for Child Protective Reform published a study of 15,000 children that concluded that foster care is much more damaging to children than keeping them with their families.  Massachusetts DSS is infamous for ignoring reports of abuse within their own care and even harassing individuals who criticize their system and methods, while being vociferously aggressive in their pursuit of children from their natural parents.

Massachusetts is far more likely (over 30% more likely) than most other states to remove children from their homes.  The median length of stay in Massachusetts DSS foster care is 15 months.

A recent New York Times article states “Massachusetts Foster Care Shaken by Abuse Cases” and confirms that 20% of 13,000 children in foster care have been in temporary placement for more than four years.  Over half of these children have been moved from home to home.  Alec Gray, DSS Counsel stated that “By law, it’s unclear whether the child’s best interest is the state’s top priority”.

Let’s review the statistics on child abuse allegations from a jurisdiction where such statistics are available.  In Florida, in a two year period, 92% of abuse allegations which were “supported” by the equivalent of DSS investigators were overturned on appeal.  What does this say about the quality of these types of investigations, and the alleged justification to undeniably damage children by removing them to foster care.   From Article: Child Abuse: Guilty Until Proven Innocent or Legalized Governmental Child Abuse by Karen Radko.  The weblink of the article citing these statistics  is http://www.ipt-forensics.com/journal/volume5/j5_2_6.htm.

In conclusion, the vast majority of child abuse charges against parents are false, yet DSS has the authority to place your children into a harmful and abusive foster care system while they are investigating whether your children are in the minority who are abused.  Out of 100 cases, 92 children who were never abused will be placed into foster care where they are almost certain to be abused and harmed to identify the 8 who were actually in abusive homes.  And those 92 pairs of innocent parents have very few tools at their disposal to resist an incompetent, inflexible, corrupt, sadistic system administered by DSS.

Small Town Justice

Our popular culture infuses mention of the Berkshire Mountains with visions of Norman Rockwell’s America, James Taylor lyrics and Tanglewood.  This Berkshire horror story reveals the realities of ignorance, corruption and meanness that represents the real Berkshire tableau.  Dalton, Massachusetts is a small industrial town in the mountains of Western Massachusetts.  The Police Chief holds five jobs in service to the town, including Burial Agent, Zoning Officer and Traffic Commissioner.  He is the son of a former Township Selectman and stated that his lifelong dream was to become Police Chief.  Can we expect justice to be done for new residents from outside the community when the police, courts and DSS officials (and perhaps the owner of the daycare?) all act in support of one another based upon long standing community relationships?  Can we expect that officials in such backwards and out of the way communities can act in full knowledge of their required constitutional and professional obligations and restrictions?  Can we expect them to act in a tolerant and just fashion that should support the requirements of the situation when they’re used to getting things done “Their Way”?  This case cries out for reassignment to a higher jurisdiction where the relationships aren’t quite so cozy and where the officials are a little more enlightened in the laws of the United States of America.

Death Sentence

Have the judges and Police and DSS conspired wittingly or unwittingly to deliver a death sentence to Louis Piccone?  Right now he’s in solitary confinement to protect him from the general prison population who are notoriously violent toward child abusers.  Will Louis be the “accidental” victim of a shank or a shiv when he’s being moved from his cell to the shower or meal?  Will Judge Perachi’s fabricated charges of contempt (a misdemeanor and the only charges holding him in custody) result in the death of an innocent man at the hands of the Berkshire County Department of Corrections?  Is this the ultimate fate of someone who dares to cross the all powerful and ever vindictive Berkshire DSS and Dalton Police?