Introductory Paragraphs:

On December 3, 2017, The Messenger published an article entitled, “A Court Aided Kidnapping.” The article included quotations of statements by third-parties. The truth of the contents of those third-party statements has been challenged by Mr. Lonnie Jordan.

To provide our readers with a complete view of the story from relevant parties, The Messenger has decided to publish a statement of facts by Mr. Jordan at his request and by his permission. The Messenger believes it is important that our readers have a complete view of the facts and perspectives on stories such as this. The Messenger has not verified the truth of these statements, and these statements do not reflect the opinion or investigation of The Messenger.

Mr. Jordan asserts the following:

Statement of Facts

  1. The child in interest is an eight-year old male. Mr. Jordan is his uncle.

  1. The child reported and others allegedly observed signs of abuse and neglect.

  1. The child made an outcry which was reported to Child Protective Services and triggered a “Level 2” investigation.

  1. In addition to abuse and neglect, in late May or early June 2017, the child’s mother abandoned the child, and, thereafter, the child lived with his aunt and uncles including Mr. Jordan.

  1. The child’s mother executed both non-parent authorizations and Medical Directives in favor of the child’s aunt and/or Mr. Jordan.

  1. Medical providers, and not Mr. Jordan, initiated another CPs investigation after a reported instance of abuse by the child’s mother in November 2017.

  1. Mr. Jordan sought a temporary restraining order against the mother after this incident in the mother’s home county.

  1. The temporary restraining order was granted and lawfully authorized Mr. Jordan to retain exclusive physical possession of the child.

  1. After the issuance of the temporary restraining order, the child’s mother made a kidnapping complaint to the police.

  1. The child’s mother appeared without counsel at court at the hearing. She was offered the opportunity to get or apply for counsel should she be unable to afford one. She did not, and, instead, went forward with the hearing. The court warned her about the risks of proceeding without counsel.

  1. Independent professionals, including CPS and medical professionals, as well as the child’s adult sibling testified at the hearing.

  1. No technician was present to give the mother information on the QT.

  1. Testimony at the hearing included allegations that the child’s mother had previously surrendered another child to the same aunt.

  1. The child’s adult sister testified at the hearing regarding allegations of abuse and neglect.

  1. Medical providers and medical records evidenced an abuse-related outcry by the child as well as injuries to the child.

  1. The court granted a permanent protective order.

  1. The legal proceedings were not a “custody issue or contest,” but, rather, were for an emergency protective order.