Multiple residents tell commissioners they experienced problems in dependency court and urge legal review
Loading...
Summary
Several residents and advocates spoke during public comment alleging coercion, misconduct and constitutional violations in juvenile dependency court and Department of Children and Families processes; commissioners referred the matters to the county legal department.
Three speakers at the Oct. 23 Santa Rosa County commission meeting described personal and third-party experiences with the Department of Children and Families and the juvenile dependency court and urged the commission to take action or refer evidence to law enforcement.
Britney Honecker, who identified herself as a mother from Santa Rosa County, said her daughter was removed by DCF in June 2023 and that she followed agency requirements yet saw “the goalpost moved” repeatedly. Honecker alleged her court-appointed attorney discouraged her from contesting a surrender, and she described the surrender as coerced; she said she later filed to vacate that surrender. “No more mothers should lose their children for telling the truth,” she said.
Civil-rights advocates who identified themselves as attorneys from Washington, D.C., also addressed the commission. A speaker identifying himself as Tanner (or Tanner Wooddownian) delivered a legal notice asserting constitutional defects in state prosecutorial practices and warned of potential litigation; he urged the board to confirm constitutional compliance. Jessica Saxon presented three affidavits she described as prima facie evidence of misconduct by a local judge identified in her comments as Judge Warwick, and she urged commissioners to report those affidavits to federal authorities, saying the appropriate authority is the FBI.
After public comment, commissioners said they would refer the family-court allegations and related materials to the county legal department for review. One commissioner said: “The next 3, dealing with family service and public officials, I'm gonna refer all that to our legal department.” The transcript does not record any independent county investigation or formal action beyond that referral at the Oct. 23 meeting.
The speakers made allegations of coercion, constitutional violations, and conspiracy. Those are claims made on the public record by members of the public and advocates; the commission did not adjudicate them during the session and did not record any formal referral to state or federal law-enforcement agencies during the Oct. 23 meeting beyond directing staff and legal counsel to review the materials and questions raised.
