E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Rich Schultz / AP
The Campbells with their son, Adolf Hitler.
A New Jersey couple who lost custody of their first three kids after giving them Nazi-inspired names has been denied the right to take home their fourth child, a newborn boy they named Hons.
Heath and Deborah Campbell's other children - Adolf Hitler Campbell, JoyceLynn Aryan Nation Campbell and Honszlynn Hinler Jeannie Campbell - are in foster care. On Monday, the Campbells went to family court in their hometown of Flemington, N.J,. in a bid to regain custody of Hons, who they say was taken from them by state child welfare officials hours after Deborah gave birth on Thursday, reported myfoxphilly.com.
Hons is still in the hospital, but the couple has been barred from seeing the baby, they told FOX. Heath Campbell said police came into the nursery and took Hons without a court order.
“They kidnapped my kid,” Campbell said. “I’ve been sleeping with his little blanket from the hospital.”
The state took custody of the couple’s other children nearly two years ago, saying there were in danger because of previous violence in the Campbell home, The Associated Press has reported. The Campbells have been fighting to get their children back ever since, claiming the violence charges are fabricated. It wasn't clear whether the latest court hearing involved all of the children or just the newborn.
The Campbells came into the spotlight in 2009 when a supermarket refused to ice a birthday cake for their now 4-year-old son Adolf Hitler.
Heath Campbell defended the children's names and told myfoxphilly.com on Monday that his reverend approved of him naming his new son Hons.
The Campbells have denied that they are neo-Nazis.
Read more on myfoxphilly.com.
Leave a Comment:
take them away, castrate their fathers and sterilize the the mothers. It takes some sick m-*^!@rs to put a child through a life of cruelty, mostly by other kids, by giving them names of people who should have been publicly tortured and ultimately beheaded or hung by th kneck till dead. Growing up i would have made someone names hitler have a completely miserable life.
How ignorant are these two?They lose three over the same thing then lose a 4rth?
To bad for these children what a burden. That being said I thought this was a free country and people can be as stupid as they want. If there are no signs of abuse the courts need to stay out of it. Do his foster parents call him adolf hitler ?? Who know little dolf might grow up to be president. It was not hitlers name that made him evil it his actions that made the name to be assosiated with evil.
All right, it's 1:00 am. I can only just laugh at this story. Imagine those poor kids going through school with names like that.
The state should do two things here:
1) Change the names of the children to something they won't be ridiculed for their entire lives.
2) Change the names of the parents to something appropriately embarrassing, with no option of ever changing their names back.
Heath Campbell, your new name is "Richard Enda Assman"
Deborah Campbell, your new name is "Rotten Candida McTrout"
Here is the real question for all of our armchair attorneys out there: Was the evidentiary standard for removal used by the appellate court appropriate within NJ law and the federal rules of evidence? Discuss, and please cite. Most of what you need is already cited in the opinion. It's easy to think that you sound like a lawyer but it is much more difficult to actually be one. I'll check back later to see if anyone has risen to my challenge.
I wish to bring to the attention of all of the armchair attorneys on this forum the real issue. The issue is whether or not the appellate court erred in it's application of the "prior acts" standard under both NJ law and the federal rules of evidence. Discuss. I want citations and specific language. The Rutgers Law Library link previously posted will get you started. I will check back later to see if anyone has risen to my challenge. Let's see if being a lawyer is as easy as you think it is.
Sorry about the double post, however the challenge stands!
Christopher J Wick: No challenge from me, I think we our on the same side on this issue..
Read the court papers before you post. The children were in a dangerous environment. No child should be subjected to what the children in the article were. Please read the court papers link posted on several posts in this thread. You will be shocked and understand what really happened. Naming the kids after nazis isn't the worst thing this father did, and that's evil enough to do to a child.
Plenty of lose screws in thier head. Check thier DNAs and see if they are closely related to the Sea Urchin or something.
@big bald guy - Hitler was NOT skinny. He had a blood pressure of 140/100 he was also constantly constipated, and was badly addicted to something called 'vitimulen' which was specially mixed by his personal physician Dr. Morrell who took care of the creme de la creme of society when they had 'social diseases'. Also this formula was rumored to have been close to the chemical composition of what is commonly called meth.
He also had an 'irregular heartbeat' that was demonstrated by EKG's that were taken by Dr. Morrell who stopped giving him the injections due to the 'irregularity'.
These are not people I would choose to be friends with. However, from everything I have ever read on this case, there has been almost no real evidence of any serious trouble in the house. The bottom line is that DYFS took the kids because they don't like their names - and that is indefensible. DYFS is out of control, has WAY too much power and they regularly abuse people and ruin people's lives. I think it's scary that so many people think the State did the right thing taking these kids away from their parents.
I don't know how recently this link has been posted - it is the actual appeal decision on the case made by DYFS to remove the three older children from the home (after the lower court judge ruled to return custody to the parents - so much for government conspiracy):
http://lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/courts/appellate/a2208-09.opn.html
The case was based on extensive testimony - none of it about the names or the parents' obvious neo-Nazi leanings (the pic of the three cuddling together conveniently covers up the huge swastika tattoo o the father's neck). It also reveals some very hard work on the part of the system and the court-appoited guardian ad litem assigned to represent the children. You should read it.
So what this story is really about is sensationalist yellow journalism, a deliberate bending of the truth to make a story. It was originated by the darling of the right - Fox News - but repeated substantially and without any apparent effort at actual research by MSNBC. For once this news doesn't boil down to right and left, but to crappy news reporting and the willingness of ALL media to warp the truth.
I live in the same general area as the parents, so this case was in our local papers before it started receiving national attention. DYFS absolutely got involved in the case only after they became aware of the children's names.
And I read that opinion - there is actually very little there that makes me inclined to change my opinion on this matter. Again, I wouldn't choose these people as my friends, and they are certainly not anyone's shining example of good parenting - but that still doessn't give the State the right to take their children away from them. Life is not always fair and not everyone is born to perfect parents - that's just the way it is. But almost everything in that opinion is very subjective, based on "experts" hired by the State to bolster their case and is still, in my view, a case that is all about abuse of power. There are very very few cases where I would support the removal of children from their family home and this is simply not one of them.
These people are basically just guilty of being stupid - and poor. And being stupid and poor shouldn't mean the state gets to take your kids away from you.
There was a restraining order on the husband, and a conviction for domestic violence, with his last family. The state may have gotten involved because of the name (and, really, isn't that their job? Nazism isn't exactly non-violent,) but the removal of the children was based on facts. I have been a court appointed special advocate for years (for kids). A couple of real causes for alarm: the father wouldn't show up for court -ever. He refused to participate in therapy. And yet he is "sleeping with the little blanket". What a sleazeball.
\There was absolute evidence from the ex-wife of abuse. There was the mother's inconsistent testimony about the two pieces of hard evidence - the letter and the taped fight. When she tells two completely different stories under oath, she's lost her credibility and the judge must rely more on the documents and tapes themselves, which are pretty frightening. One of the most telling facts to me was foster-parent-witnessed incident where the little boy was threatening to kill his sister with a vacuum cleaner. That's very unique behavior, except that the same sort of activity was testified to in his other family. That's a nugget you just can't ignore when judging credibility.
Stripping these parents of their rights took over two years, and the state gave them opportunities, time and again, to get the kids back. I guarantee they were instructed to participate in parenting classes, and I guarantee they (at least the father)didn't attend. Even if you considered yourself the best person and parent in the world, wouldn't you go to a silly class if your kids were gone and that was the only way to get them back?
Parents rarely kill their children in public. For every public display of domestic abuse, how many private instances there are? You can't have incontrovertible or overwhelming evidence.
The authorities are acting very proactively. If these children were left in thier current parents custody they would have no chance whatsoever at a normal life.
Yes, and the foster care system in this country is reknowned for turning out successful, happy individuals. Right.
Suppose at some point the State decides to "act proactively" and take YOUR kids away from you because they think someone else could do a better job raising them? Who decides what's "normal"? You? Maybe someone who doesn't like your politics? I think it's terrifying that any State agency has this kind of power except in the most extreme cases - and this case just doesn't rise to that level, imo, no matter how much you disagree with the kind of parenting involved.
Child custody falls into the realm of civil courts, not the criminal courts. It is similar custody in a divorce case, in which often both parents are not crimnals, butcustody is determined based upon evidence and the child's best interest. The judge needs a preponderance of evidence to make a temporary custody warrant. Under federal regulation, the assessment is based upon risk of abuse or neglect in the home.
The evidence suggests that the mother was afraid for her life, but was unwilling to take her children and herself to a safe environment. If she had been willing to do so, she would have all her children now.
Several protections exist for parents before they lose parental rights permanently. Several hearings are held, and the parents have the right to state their case.
The reason the parents lost their children is a pattern of behavior that indicates that they are unwilling to create a safe home for their children.
This wreaks of complete BS on CPS's part. As someone mentioned, "previous violence" is entirely too vague if there were truly issues warranting the removal of these children from their parents. A foster home is not going to give them any advantages either. Poor choices by the parents of these children, but parents make poor choices every single day and don't have their children taken away. It is an individuals freedom to name their children whatever the heck they want!!!
These parents are idiots. They should change their own names to fit their stupid ideology, not their children's
Welcome to NAZI America. They steal your kids if you don't fit the mold.
Although I dont exactly care for their choices for naming their children. WHEN DID THIS STOP BEING AMERICA?!?!?!?! Perhaps this is a wake up call. If in fact the children were taken from the parents because of their names then we are all in trouble for our own government is no better than the Nazi party taking children because they were jewish. Just sayin
They could use some sensitivity training. And a freaking toothbrush.
fourth child. Oy.
They should be happy. This is exactly what the nazis did.
These idiots are allowed to breed; however, gay people that are responsible parents that want to provide for unwanted children are not allow to...what a great World!
I love how some people bring in the gay argument to everything.
I am very much against racism and naming your children after hatful murderers. However, have they been violent with the children? Have they not cared for their needs? Are they teaching their children to be violent? Unfortunately, these people have the right to name their kids whatever they want. If they're meeting the children's needs and not abusing them I don't see how legal it is to take away people's children because of differing opinions.
AGAIN, very much against racism and what they are doing to these poor kids... but if your kids can be taken away due to differing opinions, that's a problem.