Foster Parents Convicted Of Abusing Disabled Teen
Meet Frank and Marylynnette (my fingers hurt from typing her name) Barney, who apparently took out their deep-rooted issues with their unfortunate monikers on their foster kid. Neighbor Loretta Kearns began picking up signals from this lovely couple’s nanny cam on her home security system. What she saw were scenes of the Barneys beating the shit out of the 15 year-old boy in their care. The Kearns made a couple of phone calls, and the unsuspecting Barneys ended up getting “Punk’d” by the Chicago Police Department.
Making this even more charming: the fact that the poor kid has an IQ of 45. But let’s not be too hard on the Barneys. After all, their lawyers said that they “never intended to harm the child”. Which…yeah, I can see that, because when I don’t intend to hurt people I make sure to hit them with my belt, fists, or a large wooden paddle, rather than, say, throw a Nerf ball at them. And according to defense lawyer George Lynch, such abuse was OK, since the nuns in Catholic school used to give the kids a good beatin’ with a strap when he was a lad. I’m no lawyer, but I’d like to suggest to Mr. Lynch that he not use this particular stream of logic if he’s ever called upon to defend a child-molesting priest.
The story has a happy ending; the boy is living with a new family and plans to graduate high school. Meanwhile, the Barneys have lost their jobs, filed for bankruptcy, and are currently sitting in lockup waiting for sentencing. Have fun in prison, Frank and Marylynnette; hope you enjoy “tossin’ salads”!
Tags: Abuse, Chicago, foster+parents, parents+behaving+badlyRelated Stories
POSTED IN: Abuse
5 opinions for Foster Parents Convicted Of Abusing Disabled Teen
Ann Adams
Sep 16, 2005 at 3:45 pm
Finally - someone paid attention to a suffereing child. The neighbors may have saved a life. I’m pretty much live and let live but if I see abuse (not just a difference of opinion on parenting), I report it.
Nicole
Sep 16, 2005 at 4:25 pm
There was a lot of debate about whether the video was admissible. The judge ruled that it was, because the neighbor had obtained it inadvertently.
In addition, the judge went out of his way to praise the neighbors for going out of their way to help a kid in need.
Ann Adams
Sep 16, 2005 at 5:39 pm
The law is an ass; I’m glad the judge wasn’t. I thought a video or recording was inadmissable only if was done by the police or their agent.
Whatever, I’m glad they nailed those monsters.
Ann Adams
Sep 16, 2005 at 5:48 pm
Sorry, I just read this post again. With what they were doing to this child, they thought they needed a nannycam? What could the nanny possibly have been doing that was worse?
When I was thinking about foster care vs guardianship with my girls, I read the foster care agreement. At that time foster parents in CA could not corporal punishment on their foster children. It may be hard to enforce but at least the law is there.
Ann Adams
Sep 16, 2005 at 7:06 pm
Last paragraph if anyone noticed except me:
foster parents in CA could not inflict corporal punishment, etc.
It’s been a long week. Sorry