Court in West Virginia terminates a father's rights with paper thin case
Judge Steve Shaffer terminated Michael Bean's rights in 2020, but his case was built on smoke and mirrors.
At first glance, Michael Bean is an irresponsible parent who should not be in the life of his daughter, born on October 9. 2011.
After his daughter was taken by social services in West Virginia, he made a damning admission. Here is part of transcripts in which Preston County, West Virginia Circuit Judge Steven Shaffer quotes from a stipulation from Bean.
That hearing occurred on December 28, 2020, and Judge Shaffer ruled to terminate Bean’s rights that day.
The stipulation further stated that he could not provide care for his daughter during his incarceration.
“My inability to provide stable housing for my daughter. I think it's -- and caused severe educational and emotional harm.” Judge Shaffer further quoted from Bean’s stipulation. “Both this abuse -- I can't make out the next few words. Causing abuse and/or neglect to my daughter resulting in court intervention. I understand that these stipulated facts may cause the Court to terminate my parental rights.”
Michael Bean did spend approximately five months in jail from late 2017 through part of 2018, after he sold an undercover cop some drugs.
{Being jailed is not enough on its own to terminate your rights, especially once you are released}
The situation was made worse because during this period his ex-girlfriend refused to put their daughter in school.
Meanwhile, after West Virginia Child Protective Services (CPS) stepped in, Bean failed another drug test.
“Mr. Bean tested positive for cocaine on July 9th.” Judge Shaffer stated.
Bean was without a job and living with his mom at the time of the hearing.
Furthermore, Judge Shaffer read off a series of incidents of alleged domestic abuse both against his ex-girlfriend and their daughter.
Judge Shaffer even said that Bean did not take the court services seriously, going sporadically for some time.
This is one example of Judge Shaffer twisting the facts. Here, he is actually penalizing Michael Bean for missing sessions from March-May 2020, when nearly everything was closed.
It’s one of several places where Judge Shaffer twists facts, omits important facts, or relies on unreliable testimony to get to his conclusion.
Michael Bean’s nightmare, he told me, started when the father of his ex-girlfriend’s other children took them for a visit, and he proceeded to take them on a drug deal.
That opened everyone up to CPS involvement, even though Bean was nowhere near the incident, and his daughter was not even directly involved.
His being in jail did not help, nor did the fact that he never actually established paternity or had a formal custody agreement.
Once his daughter was in CPS custody, a litany of allegations made by his daughter, and the two sons of her ex with another man.
Judge Shaffer relied heavily on these allegations.
The hearing was held on December 1st, 2020. The Department continued with the testimony of Ms. McMillen. Ms. McMillen testified that there was a strong emotional bond between {Bean’s daughter} and the two boys now. That this has changed drastically because when they first started coming, there was a lot of jealousy and a lot of problems because of the preferential treatment that Mr. Bean and Ms. Casteel gave to {Bean’s daughter}. Ms. McMillen testified that the bond that {Bean’s daughter} has with her brothers is now way stronger than the bond that {Bean’s daughter} has with her parents. The two boys are scared and afraid that if the minor child, {Bean’s daughter}, would be returned to Ms. Casteel and Mr. Bean, that Ms. Casteel would not protect {Bean’s daughter} from Mr. Bean.
There is a huge problem with all the references to the two boys, a problem that Judge Shaffer conveniently left out of long statement from December 2020.
They are not credible, according to a forensic report. Here is part of what a forensic evaluator found about one of the boys, “He contended during an evaluation that Mr. Bean ‘tried’ to touch him and his brother, but nothing happened. He also said this ‘happened a long time ago’ so the possibility for false memory syndrome is very high…His responses regarding possible sexual abuse are likely not credible as his words seem rehearsed and details are somewhat vague.”
So, if Bean’s daughter developed a bond with two boys who are making up stories, could they be influencing her?
Ms. McMillan refers to Sharon McMillan, a psychologist in West Virginia.
I reached out to Ms. McMillan but received no response. I also left a message with Judge Shaffer’s chambers, but he did not respond.
According to Judge Shaffer, Ms. McMillan first started working with Bean’s daughter and then the boys.
“The Court heard testimony from Sharon McMillen. Ms. McMillen testified that she worked with the children and parents, that she began with {the two boys} on August 7th, 2019. She began with {Bean’s daughter} on May 21st of 2018.” Judge Shaffer stated on December 28, 2020.
Ms. McMillan, in other testimony, shows just how much the two boys may have influenced Bean’s daughter. Here is part of a disposition from December 1, 2020.
We started joint sessions here, and then there were different points in time that the kids would prompt each other and talk about their past or that {Bean’s daughter} would remember people or something, and bring that up to the boys, and then they would remember their part. So, they would together brainstorm {emphasis mine} and talk about the in particular things that they could remember from their past.
I think that was real beneficial with their bonding in that, you know, they were looking back through the eyes of hindsight, {emphasis mine} you know, and looking at how it changed since then and {Bean’s daughter} has changed since then. And they've got a much stronger bond at this point in time.
We did birthday parties here for them, and we did their Valentines party here for them and the kids wanted to have plans for each other for Christmas, that sort of thing, that they weren't used to consistence.
“They would together brainstorm,” that’s what Ms. McMillan claimed.
Why would kids need to brainstorm about events which happened? That statement takes on even more meaning, when you consider the boys have been deemed to make up stories by a forensic evaluation.
Ms. McMillan was asked what the boys thought of Mr. Bean during the same December 1, 2020, disposition.
“Yes. As far as the parenting that he did with the boys, the boys knew that he would say, he was just trying to raise them right. You know, or after something was hit or being disciplined with some type of corporal punishment and just trying to raise them right, then the boys worried that what if {Bean’s daughter} got old enough to give them problems too or she not follow directions and that sort of thing because they know what happened to them.”
Except, they don’t know what happened to them. They made up stories about what happened to them, and Ms. McMillan is relying on their statements to build a case against Michael Bean.
The credibility of these allegations is even more dubious when you consider that none of this came out until after Bean’s daughter got into CPS custody, after she “bonded” with her brothers, brothers whose testimony would never be allowed in a criminal court.
Instead, Judge Shaffer used it as the centerpiece of his decision to terminate his rights.
Judge Shaffer also referred to a report by Wayne Baker.
Dr. Baker did say that, but in his evaluation, he came to a far different conclusion. Here is that conclusion.
The conclusion was conveniently left out of Judge Shaffer’s December 28, 2020, hearing entirely.
Dr. Baker also addressed Bean’s apparent anger issues, something Judge Shaffer referred to repeatedly.
Dr. Baker didn’t find any anger issues with Michael Bean. This was also not included in Judge Shaffer’s decision on December 28, 2020.
Judge Shaffer also tried to tie Bean to his ex-girlfriend, who was a mess.
Except, later on, Judge Shaffer claimed that Bean was living with his mom.
If Bean was living with his mom, then he’s obviously not in a relationship with his ex-girlfriend. Michael Bean told me that he was working for much of the time that the CPS case was ongoing, but that it was difficult to maintain employment while having to be at hearings, therapy, and all the other services which CPS requires.
Judge Shaffer even misconstrued his own prior order. Judge Shaffer claimed on December 28, 2020, that he required Bean to have two random drug tests per week.
“Now, I want to say at this time, the drug test that this Court requires is two random drug screens per week.” Judge Shaffer said on December 28, 2020.
Here is part of what Bean’s attorney, Lance Rollo, stated in a hearing on January 27, 2020.
So we're also going to ask for the extension of the improvement period. We will also, Judge, ask for a reduction in the frequency of the drug testing. I will say that it is becoming an issue -- or it has been actually. It's not becoming, Judge, it has been an issue. It's still -- even though we moved them closer to where the folks live, it's still fairly burdensome and it's inhibiting his ability -- Michael's ability to maintain full-time employment. In that, he has to continually travel a fair distance to drug test. I don't think we've had any issues with any illegal or unprescribed substances. And so what I would ask, Judge -- and then I spoke to the parties beforehand, and I think the consensus was, yeah, we can probably consider reducing the frequency, but not get rid of it altogether, which I certainly understand, and I don't have an issue with that.
Judge Shaffer agreed, reducing the drug tests to once per week.
Michael Bean told me that the only drug screening place available only did the drug tests on Friday.
Lance Rollo declined to comment, when I reached him at his office.
Finally, Judge Shaffer also relied on another CPS caseworker, Carrie Poier.
According to a story on the website Fighter Cries, Poier has previously lied in court testimony.
The story is told in the first person, by the parent who had their children taken. The parent does not identify themselves. As such, the veracity is difficult to determine, however, the judge is not.
The judge in the case from Fighter Cries is also Judge Steven Shaffer.
I reached out to the West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources (DHHR), which oversees CPS, but they did not respond to my email for comment.
In his appeal, Bean’s attorney, Kevin Connoley, laid out the standards for terminating someone’s parental rights in West Virginia.
In this case, Michael Bean went to jail for five months, and then, he failed a drug test. Everythign else is dubious. Here is more from Connoley. (Connoley did not respond to an email for comment)
Termination of parental rights is the equivalent of the death penalty for parents. It is an option left to the most extreme situations. In this case, a draconian judge used smoke and mirrors to get there.
