Petition 6: the Knightly Petition

Additional commentary by Timothy Horrigan
(member of the House Petitions & Redress Committee)



There is a sad story behind this petition. Ms. Knightly was a single mom who had substance-abuse issues, and her daughter ended up being adopted, under questionable circumstances. She has turned her life around, but I don't think we will have much luck reversing the adoption.

She filed a virtually identical petition— Petition #3— in 2010.

Her mother, Dot Knightly has become a well-known grandparents' rights advocate. Dot Knightly's two other grandchildren (Candy's niece and nephew) have also been caught in the family law system's web.



PETITION 6

PETITION FOR REDRESS OF GRIEVANCE

TO: The Honorable House of Representatives

FROM: Petitioner Representative Peter Silva, Hills. 26

DATE: May 2, 2011

SUBJECT: Grievance of Candy Knightly, Nashua, New Hampshire

Your Petitioner Representative Silva on behalf of Candy Knightly of Nashua, hereinafter presents the following summary of her grievance against Judge Thomas Bamberger and the State of New Hampshire, Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Children, Youth, and Families and invokes the constitutional authority and duty of the Honorable House of Representatives pursuant to said Articles 31 and 32 to bring about redress:

Grievance against Judge Bamberger for violating Part 1, Article 15 by denying the admission of exculpatory evidence showing the mother did not harm her child and against the Division of Children, Youth, and Families (DCYF) and the Nashua District Court for facilitating the adoption of the child of Candy Knightly prior to the termination of her parental rights.

Wherefore, your Petitioner prays that the House of Representatives consider this proposed remedy:

  1. Determine if there was maladministration on the part of Judge Bamberger and consider commencing Articles of Impeachment against such Judge.

  2. Introduce legislation to punish denial of due process by DCYF and the Nashua District Court and to facilitate re-unification of Candy Knightly with her child.

Respectfully submitted by Petitioner Representative Silva on Behalf of Candy Knightly.

Co-Petitioners:

Rep. Itse, Rock. 9

Rep. E. Hogan, Hills. 25



In July 2012, we finally voted on this petition. Dot Knightly made many visits to our committee throughout the biennium, but her daughter the actual petitioner never showed up after the initial hearing. It took a few drafts before those of us in the Minority could come up with a report which the Speaker and the Chair could accept:


PETITION #6 grievance of Candy Knightly.  (Report filed 8/8/12)

MAJORITY


Grievance Founded with Recommendations.


Committee Majority Findings:

In a petition involving the Division for Children, Youth and Families (DCYF), the Redress of Grievances Committee, after hearing from the Petitioner and her mother and seeing the documents supporting that testimony, finds numerous inexplicable acts that indicate wrongdoing by individuals in the Division.  It finds that the Division, which refused to attend our hearings to respond even to questions of a general nature concerning their policies in similar situations, appear to have been intent on denying several relatives of an admitted former drug addict (who had been in the act of cleaning up) of adopting her child despite our laws providing for placement with relatives Sec RSA 169-C:6 V, 169-C:6-a I(f), 169-C:19, and 169-C:24 In fact, the Committee saw evidence that DCYF actually facilitated the adoption of the child prior to the rights of the mother being terminated in court.  Further, DCYF failed to contact the actual father, instead providing the courts with the name of another individual, while twice through the courts denying paternity testing to the individual claiming to be the actual father. The Committee also agrees with the Petitioner that the courts systematically violated Part 1, Article 15 when it denied the admission of all exculpatory evidence showing the mother did not harm her child. While it seems possible that the acts of the agency were well intended in the interests of the child, they also seem to have been notably opposed to the rights of parents and relatives as provided for in our statutes. Because of the sheer number of supported allegations raising significant red flags in this case, the Committee believes this matter should be thoroughly investigated with a view to revisiting the decision to returning the child to the custody of relatives or its actual mother. For this reason, the Committee recommends, as we have in a prior report, that in the next legislative term a standing legislative oversight committee be set up to review situations like these in depth with agencies involved in potential wrongdoing against our citizens. Any such committee must, like that of the U.S. Congress, have full subpoena power. The Committee also recommends a complete review of any policies making individuals working for our agencies immune from prosecution with a view to limiting that immunity when, in the course of their duties, they infringe on the rights of our citizens. 


Vote 9-3.


Rep. Harry B. Hardwick for the Majority of the Committee

MINORITY


Grievance Unfounded.


Committee Minority Findings:

This petition was brought in the name of Candy Knightly. The Committee heard very little from her, although her mother worked extensively with the Committee over a period of more than a year. (The younger Ms. Knightly, the Petitioner, was an adult when the petition was filed.) Unfortunately, her mother's wide-ranging testimony did not convince the Minority that her daughter's petition was founded.

The Petitioner's first suggested remedy was the impeachment of Judge Thomas Bamberger. There was no evidence that Judge Bamberger was guilty of anything other than making rulings which were unfavorable to the Knightly family. The Petition specifically accuses the Judge Bamberger of violating Part First Article 15 of the state constitution by refusing to admit certain pieces of exculpatory evidence. However, the Minority saw no proof that this evidence was improperly excluded or disregarded.  Also, in the opinion of the Minority, some of the evidence was not actually exculpatory. The Petitioner additionally wanted the legislature to "[i]ntroduce legislation to punish denial of due process by DCYF and the Nashua District Court and to facilitate re-unification of the Petitioner with her child."  The Minority believes that this proposal would be unconstitutional.  Also, although DCYF and Judge Bamberger made a decision which was very painful for the entire Knightly family, the Minority is satisfied that this decision was neither arbitrary nor unfair.


Rep. Timothy Horrigan for the Minority of the Committee.





2011 House Petitions:





See Also:



Home

The Forgotten Liars

2011 Session