Victim blames Children’s Aid Society for years of abuse by guardian


SLM
+1
#1
Victim blames Children’s Aid Society for years of abuse by guardian

TORONTO - A slender, blonde-haired, blue-eyed girl suffered eight years of horrific physical and sexual abuse starting when she was just seven at the hands of the man the Children’s Aid Society entrusted to keep her safe.
A jury found Mac Bool Hassan guilty eight days ago of 13 criminal offences for sexually and physically abusing the girl — who isn’t biologically related to him — as well as assaulting her half-brother.
The verdict was reached swiftly after only fours hours of deliberations because the evidence was overwhelming, said Crown attorney Heather Keating.
Hassan, 49, will be back in Superior Court Monday to set a date for sentencing.
But the now 20-year-old woman is seething with outrage at both Hassan and the Toronto Children’s Aid Society because it granted him custody of her when she was two years old.
And the CAS kept her and her half-brother in his care despite Hassan’s drug use, criminal record and neighbours’ reports of neglect and abuse.
“I had to do what he told me to do or I’d get beaten, punched and kicked, dragged by my hair along the floor. He told me he loved me and that he would marry me, like Woody Allen married his adoptive daughter, when I was 18,” the girl recalled in an exclusive interview with the Toronto Sun. “I felt like I was his wife. It’s like we’re a couple, but he’s my dad.”
She is now working two jobs, one at a retail outlet and another as a babysitter, hoping to save enough money so that she can pursue her dream of becoming a flight attendant.
“Children’s Aid ruined my life because I could have been adopted as a baby,” she said angrily. “Instead, they thought it was in my best interest ... to be placed into this man’s care. He was a single man with a criminal record who had no connection to me. Why would he want to parent me?”
The abuse occurred twice a week when she was younger but became a nightly ordeal after she turned 11 or 12, said Keating, who successfully prosecuted Hassan.
“He had no business to be basically using the victim as a vulnerable sex toy,” Keating said. “It’s disgusting.”
CAS granted Hassan custody of the girl because he already had custody of her half-brother despite the fact that Hassan already had five criminal convictions.
“I read the CAS reports when I was 17 years old, I was one of nine children born to a drug-addicted mother and all nine were seized. My older sister was adopted, yet I was given to him,” the victim said. “My CAS reports, a police file, showed a babysitter noticed I had soreness and redness in my genital area when I was eight years old.
“There were reports that we were malnourished and grossly underweight while we were living in Regent Park (until 1999) — we barely had enough to eat.”
When the girl was seven years old, reports of drug use and prostitutes frequenting Hassan’s Regent Park apartment forced the CAS to apprehend the two children.
Once Hassan completed drug rehab, both children — who cannot be identified due to a publication ban — were returned to his care and the family moved to another neighbourhood in the GTA.
The half-brother confirmed that the victim was sleeping in Hassan’s bed almost nightly, but he didn’t know of the abuse. Hassan explained he wanted company in his bed because he wasn’t feeling well or was lonely .
When she was 15 and began having crushes on high school boys, Hassan erupted in a violent, jealous rage.
He stripped her naked and overpowered her, calling her a “*****.” When he left her alone, she bolted to a neighbours’ home where she hid and finally disclosed her nightmarish life to her friend, her mom and police in July 2008.
The case has dragged through the courts for almost five years with Hassan mostly free on bail as he fired various lawyers and delayed proceedings.
Hassan is on a disability pension with heart problems, undergoing quintuple bypass surgery in June 2008, his family court affidavit stated.
He maintained that he’s innocent and that the victim fabricated these allegations to free herself from his harsh discipline.
CAS spokesman Dave Fleming said he couldn’t comment on this case specifically due to confidentiality reasons.
In general, the CAS tries to keep siblings together “when it’s safe to do so,” explained Fleming, the CAS’s intake co-ordinator.
The CAS investigates suspicion of child abuse, especially sexual abuse, jointly with the police and “can intervene based on a balance of probabilities,” Fleming said.
The CAS conducts 8,000 investigations of neglect or abuse a year, he said.
“Our goal is to keep children with families where it’s safe and practical,” Fleming said. “(But) the child’s safety comes first.”

Victim blames Children

I don't blame her one bit, I feel enraged for her.

And I cannot believe the CAS had the audacity to say this.

Quote:

“Our goal is to keep children with families where it’s safe and practical,” Fleming said. “(But) the child’s safety comes first.”

Absolutely unbelievable!
 
Sal
+2
#2
I hope the charged lives through his bi-pass surgery so he can go to jail.

I feel absolutely stunned by her story. How can such a thing even happen?

I know our system is over burdened and social services is always the first to be cut when things go sour and we justify it in our heart and our mind but it is never really justified because it is always the weak who the burden falls upon. And then society blames them for being the weak. People advocate for self care which is all well and good when one has the skills and ability to do so. So many do not.
 
petros
+1
#3
Quote: Originally Posted by SLMView Post


And I cannot believe the CAS had the audacity to say this.


Absolutely unbelievable!

Quote:

“Our goal is to keep children with families where it’s safe and practical,” Fleming said. “(But) the child’s safety comes first.”

She's loco to blame CAS. In what big way did her parents fvck up to lose their kids to CAS? Blaming her real parents would be the logical choice but they are probably broke so there is no money in blaming them.
 
Sal
#4
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

She's loco to blame CAS. In what big way did her parents fvck up to lose their kids to CAS? Blaming her real parents would be the logical choice but they are probably broke so there is no money in blaming them.

No it wouldn't. CAS removed her from her parents and placed her with a pedophile.
 
petros
+1
#5
Her parents were the better option? What were they? Junkies who would have starved them? They don't just take kids away without damn good reasons.

To take it step further in tludicrousus land, she should bsuingng the pedophile who abused the pedophile since the vast majority of pedophiles were once abused themselves.


They knew he was a pedophile? He was wearing a neon sign in the application interview?

People are selfish and there is a massive shortage in families willing to take kids in. If people weren't so fvcking selfish, there would have been better placement options.
 
karrie
+5
#6  Top Rated Post
CAS would have had to pretty much purposely overlook all the warning flags in this case in order to deem this a preferable situation to adoption or replacement.
 
captain morgan
+1
#7
I see Pete's point.

No one has identified the primary root cause of the situation... If it is truly blame that we seek to establish, leaving out the biggest factor is very naive
 
SLM
+3
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

I see Pete's point.

No one has identified the primary root cause of the situation... If it is truly blame that we seek to establish, leaving out the biggest factor is very naive

Her parents are to blame for being, at best, inadequate parents. But the society assumed responsibility for her well being when they determined her placement. Then, as Karrie has already mentioned, seemingly overlooked a ton of warning signs.
 
karrie
+4
#9
Once CAS steps in and takes kids away from their parents, CAS is now responsible for that child's safety and well being.

Telling her she should be happy to have been someone's sex toy for her entire youth, because it means her mom didn't starve her death, is beyond crass and dismissive.

And petros, I'll point out, those 'selfish' people might have taken her. That's half her complaint. CAS made a point of keeping her with this man, specifically.
 
captain morgan
+1
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by SLMView Post

Her parents are to blame for being, at best, inadequate parents. But the society assumed responsibility for her well being when they determined her placement. Then, as Karrie has already mentioned, seemingly overlooked a ton of warning signs.

I think that a suggestion that the parenting skills practices of a addicted mother with 9 children is a little more significant than 'inadequate'

Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

Once CAS steps in and takes kids away from their parents, CAS is now responsible for that child's safety and well being.

Agreed, but they are also one element in a chain that gets longer as more become involved.

In this case, it looks like all the links were weak/broken, but focusing on one link while ignoring the others does no one any good.

Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

Telling her she should be happy to have been someone's sex toy for her entire youth, because it means her mom didn't starve her death, is beyond crass and dismissive.


I guess that I shouldn't have said that the victim was ecstatic to be used as a sex toy - my bad


Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

And petros, I'll point out, those 'selfish' people might have taken her. That's half her complaint. CAS made a point of keeping her with this man, specifically.

CAS should have their azz handed to them for that - but they shouldn't be the only ones on the hook (the abuser notwithstanding)
 
karrie
+3
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

Agreed, but they are also one element in a chain that gets longer as more become involved.

In this case, it looks like all the links were weak/broken, but focusing on one link while ignoring the others does no one any good.

No, they are not one link in a chain. They cut the mom out and took the kids away. They are now THE chain. Focusing on that one link does a world of good for the children who are tied to it. The abuser has already been tried and punished and sent to prison. He is no longer an issue. The mom was cut out at the start of this child's life. She is no longer an issue. That leaves one link that needs examining for her sake, and the sake of the little kids who come after her.
 
SLM
+1
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

I think that a suggestion that the parenting skills practices of a addicted mother with 9 children is a little more significant than 'inadequate'

That's the reason I said at best, lol. As in, that's the very best that could be said. But, because of CAS intervention, the addicted mother, aside from practising piss poor birth control, didn't actively do anything to harm the child. Not saying she is guiltless or blameless, she did create the situation after all, but she did not abuse the child nor have a hand in placing the child in a home where abuse occurred.

CAS was ultimately in charge and they dropped the ball big time on this one. And for that they deserve to be held at fault, were it not for their actions and subsequent inactions, this child's life might have been very, very different. Taking the child away from the mother was a good move, no doubt, but placing the child with a drug addicted man with a criminal record was like going from the frying pan to the fire.
 
Sal
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Her parents were the better option? What were they? Junkies who would have starved them? They don't just take kids away without damn good reasons.

I never said nor did I imply that the parents were a better option.

Quote:

To take it step further in tludicrousus land, she should bsuingng the pedophile who abused the pedophile since the vast majority of pedophiles were once abused themselves.

I think you are missing a whole component here. This is a child who was handed to a pedophile by CAS. He was reported to CAS by others concerned with the situation. Nothing was done. He had to undergo an addiction program. How many red flags do you need? Now you want to blame the victim because you think the child is being illogical.

Quote:

They knew he was a pedophile? He was wearing a neon sign in the application interview?

They knew he was a single man and a convicted criminal and they handed him a two year old child along with her brother. You can discern no problem here from those facts?

Quote:

People are selfish and there is a massive shortage in families willing to take kids in. If people weren't so fvcking selfish, there would have been better placement options.

That's a huge assumption. They handed her to a pedophile because there was no one else. And you are saying this poor child should have no recourse against CAS. I can in no way understand your point nor where you are coming from with this.

Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

I see Pete's point.

No one has identified the primary root cause of the situation... If it is truly blame that we seek to establish, leaving out the biggest factor is very naive

I sure don't. This is a victim so lets victimize her further? I don't get it at all.
 
petros
+1
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

CAS would have had to pretty much purposely overlook all the warning flags in this case in order to deem this a preferable situation to adoption or replacement.

What would the warning signs be?
 
captain morgan
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

No, they are not one link in a chain. They cut the mom out and took the kids away.

I am referring to a chain that lead to the entire circumstance.

Biological parents, link 1.. CAS, link 2... Abuser, link 3

Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

Focusing on that one link does a world of good for the children who are tied to it.

There is NOTHING that can be done today that will undo the damage.. It would be great if all the links were strong and never broken, we would not have a need for CAS and there'd be no abuse.

.... But that isn't reality. So, what do we do about it?

Each party in this equation (excepting the kids) f*cked up big and all I'm saying is that this has to be addressed IF there is any sincere interest in curbing the number of instances where this will occur.



Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

The abuser has already been tried and punished and sent to prison. He is no longer an issue. The mom was cut out at the start of this child's life. She is no longer an issue. That leaves one link that needs examining for her sake, and the sake of the little kids who come after her.

That link is being examined AND repercussions will result.

Like it or not, the biological mother was the first link to break. The only reason that CAS was necessary was because of mom's issues..... So, where the jail-time or civil lawsuit against her?
 
karrie
+2
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

What would the warning signs be?

Did you not read the article? There was a laundry list of evidence so clear cut they convicted in 4 hours. Basically read through where she describes what's in her CAS file. They should have pulled her from his care. It's pretty obvious.
 
petros
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

Once CAS steps in and takes kids away from their parents, CAS is now responsible for that child's safety and well being.

Telling her she should be happy to have been someone's sex toy for her entire youth, because it means her mom didn't starve her death, is beyond crass and dismissive.

And petros, I'll point out, those 'selfish' people might have taken her. That's half her complaint. CAS made a point of keeping her with this man, specifically.

They only do placements. CPS does the taking away and then the the placement agency (CAS et al) does the rest. Foster parents are legally responsible for the child once placed just like a child born into the family.
 
karrie
+1
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post


Like it or not, the biological mother was the first link to break. The only reason that CAS was necessary was because of mom's issues..... So, where the jail-time or civil lawsuit against her?

The mother was the first link to break, and for that, she was severed and removed from the equation. She already faced governmental review and action for anything she did, and was punished with the removal of her kids. Their care was taken out of her hands, and all legal authority over them stripped from her by the courts and CAS. Once that happens, there's no going back and demanding she have legal responsibility for them. Society, the government, and CAS made that call. They can't then go back and demand she be partly liable for their failures.
 
petros
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

Did you not read the article?

Yup. Drug use but no 'warning signs" of sexual abuse.
 
karrie
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Yup. Drug use but no 'warning signs of sexual abuse.

except for the police reports about her genitals
 
petros
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

except for the police reports about her genitals

Quote:

“My CAS reports, a police file, showed a babysitter noticed I had soreness and
redness in my genital area when I was eight years old.

Reports? How did one become plural?

And the cops never acted for what reason? No proof?
Last edited by petros; Mar 15th, 2013 at 10:13 AM..
 
karrie
+1
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

And the cops never acted for what reason? No proof?

I don't know, I wasn't there.

The combined file speaks volumes though, obviously.


What it boils down to is they failed her, and she has every right to take them to court and address that failure. To try to pass it off as the fault of people who had no control over the situation.... a mother stripped of all legal rights, imagined 'selfish' foster families.... is ridiculous. CAS had direct control over that girl.
 
petros
#23
What reports? The red ***** and skinny?

That just screams child sex abuser does it?

Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

I don't know, I wasn't there.
, imagined 'selfish' foster families.... is ridiculous. CAS had direct control over that girl.

Right, you weren't there and there was no hard evidence of sexual abuse. Where the hell do you get the foster families being selfish?
 
captain morgan
+1
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

The mother was the first link to break, and for that, she was severed and removed from the equation. She already faced governmental review and action for anything she did, and was punished with the removal of her kids. Their care was taken out of her hands, and all legal authority over them stripped from her by the courts and CAS. Once that happens, there's no going back and demanding she have legal responsibility for them. Society, the government, and CAS made that call. They can't then go back and demand she be partly liable for their failures.


With that logic, why not apply the same 'punishment' to the CAS case workers and disallow them from working with the agency?

... I'm guessing that this would not sit well with the victim as it does nothing to provide her with any comfort... That said, if the punishment isn't good enough for CAS, what makes it good enough for the Mom?
 
karrie
+1
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

What reports? The red ***** and skinny?

That just screams child sex abuser does it?


Right, you weren't there and there was no hard evidence of sexual abuse. Where the hell do you get the foster families being selfish?

Your statements that selfish people are to blame for her not having had a better home to go to.

And yes, the combined files should have been a warning flag to look into what was going on with these kids. She deserves to take them to court and make them answer for their failure to protect her.

Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

With that logic, why not apply the same 'punishment' to the CAS case workers and disallow them from working with the agency?

... I'm guessing that this would not sit well with the victim as it does nothing to provide her with any comfort... That said, if the punishment isn't good enough for CAS, what makes it good enough for the Mom?


That happens all the time.... people found unsafe or unreliable to work with kids are fired every day. But there are also times where people are found truly negligent or criminally complicit. I don't blame her one bit for wanting to take this to court and root out what was going on in her case. For all we know it could have been mere oversight, or it could have been worse. I think she and the kids who come after her, deserve to have it examined.
 
captain morgan
#26
Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

That happens all the time.... people found unsafe or unreliable to work with kids are fired every day. But there are also times where people are found truly negligent or criminally complicit.

All I'm saying is that this same standard must be applied to ALL parties involved (excepting victims of course). The bio mother qualifies as a direct party in my eyes.


Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

I don't blame her one bit for wanting to take this to court and root out what was going on in her case. For all we know it could have been mere oversight, or it could have been worse. I think she and the kids who come after her, deserve to have it examined.

Agreed, quite enthusiastically in fact
 
karrie
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

All I'm saying is that this same standard must be applied to ALL parties involved (excepting victims of course). The bio mother qualifies as a direct party in my eyes.


I really don't get how, once stripped of contact and legal rights, you can view the mother as legally responsible for the placement of the child.
 
captain morgan
#28
Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

I really don't get how, once stripped of contact and legal rights, you can view the mother as legally responsible for the placement of the child.

The very same applies to CAS once they have placed the child.

Would you feel that applying the same punishment to CAS as was applied to the mother as fair?
 
karrie
+1
#29
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

The very same applies to CAS once they have placed the child.

Would you feel that applying the same punishment to CAS as was applied to the mother as fair?

It is not the same. CAS never gives up control over the child unless there is an adoption. That child is in their system, under their protection, even when in a foster home. Those children had case workers whose job was to ensure that they were safe and well. Foster care is not the same as adoptive families.
 
petros
#30
Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

Your statements that selfish people are to blame for her not having had a better home to go to.

And yes, the combined files should have been a warning flag to look into what was going on with these kids. She deserves to take them to court and make them answer for their failure to protect her.




That happens all the time.... people found unsafe or unreliable to work with kids are fired every day. But there are also times where people are found truly negligent or criminally complicit. I don't blame her one bit for wanting to take this to court and root out what was going on in her case. For all we know it could have been mere oversight, or it could have been worse. I think she and the kids who come after her, deserve to have it examined.

Noooooo. I said selfish people don't want to take in foster kids causing a huge shortage of homes.

There was only 2 3rd party reports. 1 for under feeding and the other for her red vag. She obviously never told the babysitter what was going on or the cops would have nailed him right then and there after a medical exam.

She chose not to open up and reveal what was going on. This created the lack of evidence needed fo0r charges. Why did she wait so long?
 
no new posts