Mom begged DHS to remove 2-year-old daughter from custodial dad's home; two weeks later, daughter bashed to death (Victoria, Australia)

The great unanswered question here: why did this sh** of an UNNAMED DAD have custody? Who gave it to him and why? Notice that these "child welfare agencies" are all the same--whether in Victoria or Vancouver. These "professionals" ignore and belittle the concerns of mothers, no matter how solid the evidence.

This is fathers rights in action, folks.

http://www.smh.com.au/victoria/mother-asked-dhs-to-take-killed-girl-20110627-1gnrx.html

Mother asked DHS to take killed girl
Adrian Lowe Court Reporter
June 28, 2011


A TWO-YEAR-OLD girl who was fatally bashed while in the care of her father would still be alive if Victorian welfare authorities had not rejected her mother's pleas for the toddler to be removed, a court has heard.

The girl, identified only as Hayley, died of head injuries a month after being bashed at her father's home in St Arnaud in July 2009.

Her mother, ''CG'', yesterday told the Coroners Court that she had begged a case worker to remove her children from the father's house two weeks before the bashing.

''She said no and I had to leave the children at the house,'' CG tearfully said. ''If she had turned around and said yes, I wouldn't be here today.

''The Department of Human Services are a disgrace to society. Please understand that … the department knew that my children were being brutally assaulted.''

The girl's father, Robert, 26, was charged with bashing her, but protested to CG and to his own mother that police had the wrong person - he would not hurt his child.

He took his own life after seeing a news report about his daughter's injuries four days after Hayley was admitted to hospital.

Both deaths are the subject of a coronial inquest that will examine the roles of the Department of Human Services and Victoria Police.

The inquest will examine whether police were too hasty in charging Robert and the way DHS investigated repeated complaints about the care Hayley received.

Hayley's mother told the Coroners Court, sitting in Ballarat, that she noticed Hayley had a bruise on her right cheek and she feared for the safety of her children. Robert was living with a new partner, SR, and had custody of Hayley and her three-year-old brother, who ''looked scared''.

CG said she asked Robert how the children had been injured. He said that Hayley had fallen down the stairs and her brother had been hurting himself. She told the court that she didn't believe Robert and asked the DHS worker who accompanied her if she could take the children with her.

Cross-examined by counsel for DHS, Judy Benson, CG said she had concerns for the children's safety but they were not taken seriously.

When asked by Ms Benson if she had directly complained to the department, CG replied that she had just had another baby and neither the department nor the police had listened to what she had tried to tell them.

CG testified that Robert had never been violent towards the children. His mother, SHM, agreed and told the court that he deeply loved his children.

SHM testified that while waiting at hospital, she tried to have her son open up to her about how Hayley had been injured that night when he was home with his girlfriend, SR, and SR's brother.

''He told me one day he saw [SR] standing on Hayley's throat in the shower,'' SHM said. ''He wasn't talking to me much - [SR] already told me she hated me so I wasn't going to push the issues and cause more problems for him.

''That's where I made my mistake. I should have jumped in earlier and then maybe Hayley would still be alive and maybe my son would still be alive.''

SHM also accused the department of failing to intervene to protect the children when they were earlier involved with the family, including when Hayley was observed having two black eyes.

Counsel for SR, Tony Lavery, successfully applied to have her excused from testifying on the basis that her evidence may incriminate her.

Mr Lavery told coroner John Olle that the homicide squad still saw his client as a suspect and senior detectives were dissatisfied with the original investigation conducted by Stawell detectives.