Woodside Trails: abuse, or government conspiracy?

[Anonymous]

Sleeping platform at a therapeutic campsite.
Foster children have limited space for their possessions. A toothbrush and tube of toothpaste lay on the floor near the door. During the winter, plastic sheeting is used to provide limited protection from the cold. This facility receives a daily rate from DPRS for each foster child ranging from $80 to $115.


Open fire pit and sleeping quarters for foster children at a therapeutic camp.
Foster children gather around the fire pit at night. There is no electricity or heat. This facility receives a daily rate from DPRS for each foster child ranging from $80 to $145.


Sleeping platform at a therapeutic campsite.
DPRS standards require permanent camps to provide clean and sanitary bedding and clean mattresses. DPRS standards for wilderness camps do not address bedding or sleeping facilities. Foster children sleep in these conditions 365 days a year, during all types of weather.

[Anonymous]

Perishable food storage at a therapeutic campsite.
Foster children at this therapeutic camp cook their own meals at night and on weekends. The Comptroller opened this ?ice chest? during an unannounced visit in the middle of the day. There was no ice in the cooler. According to DPRS standards, when ice chests are used, adequate ice must be provided. Left-over meat patties were not wrapped. In addition to the daily rate that includes room and board, providers are reimbursed through the USDA free- and reduced-price lunch and breakfast program. This facility also receives charitable donations and weekly donations from the local food bank.


Food preparation area at a therapeutic campsite, littered with trash.
DPRS standards for permanent camps require trash to be stored in containers with lids. This facility receives a daily rate for each child ranging from $80 to $115.

[Anonymous]

Those kids were better cared for at camp than their families could ever imagine!

Really?

[Anonymous]

Bexar County will no longer send foster kids to Woodside Trails, a Hill Country wilderness/therapeutic camp that was the subject of a News 4 WOAI Trouble Shooters investigation. That's because the county terminated its contract because quote "there's too much smoke."

Now, the state legislature is investigating Woodside Trails along with other wilderness camps in Texas.

The News 4 WOAI Trouble Shooters obtained page after page in documents of allegations never seen before regarding Woodside Trails in Bastrop.

The Trouble Shooters first showed you pictures of foster kids living in crude outdoor camps, staying for months, and in some cases years at a time.

It's something State Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn explains, "This isn't care. It's cruelty." Her office spent months investigating foster care facilities in Texas, and says Woodside Trails has a lot of problems.  She's concerned because of the rustic campsites, or the infamous "pee wall" that serves as a latrine, as well as disturbing allegations that hang like a cloud over the facility.

The nearly 200 pages of state documents that detail the allegations involving questionable behavior among campers and staff at Woodside Trails.

State Rep Carlos Uresti saw them, too. "They make you sick," Uresti says, "I mean they're graphic. They make you sick. They involve some of the staff that deal with our children."

There are allegations of instances documented where staff are accused of having sexual contact with the kids, and other allegations where the boys were supposedly left unsupervised and were able to have sex with each other.

In another case, CPS documented that a child tried to commit suicide by downing a bottle of Ibuprofen. Then only a couple of days later he was supposedly able to get his hands on more Ibuprofen and overdosed again.

There are also findings that Woodside Trails used something called empathy therapy, where a staff member forced a boy to re-enact some sequences of a sexual attack with the boy playing the victim.

The state comptroller's office tells me that CPS investigations of these allegations were often incomplete, while other allegations were never even investigated.

Woodside Trails Executive Director Bebe Gaines defended the camp recently to the state committee investigating it and other foster care facilities in Texas.

Bebe Gaines invited, "I said all along. Come and ask my kids. They're there because they wanted to be."

That's exactly what representative Uresti did. After that visit and reading these reports, he believes Gaines misled the state. "A couple of days ago we had the executive director testify before committee and left us with the impression that everything was fine, that there weren't any assaults, that the children never ran away...but the reports that were delivered to me [Friday] tell us otherwise."

Gaines tells News 4 WOAI in a written statement: "Carlos visited Woodside Trails last week and he has stated that he understands that our boys have failed in many prior foster placements and that this is the only home some of them have ever had. We filed an open records request with the Comptroller over three weeks ago, but she has never replied, so we haven't seen the reports Carlos is talking about, but we think that if we could sit down with him and review the reports he's seen, we could set his mind at ease and we hope to do so soon."

Her lawyer tells us that she may be able to respond to these allegations better once she sees these documents.

----

sounds like a lovely place to put a child.  :roll:

[Anonymous]

On 2005-08-26 15:58:00, jdr7181 wrote:

"You're real brave when the breadth of the internet stands between you and the person you make maliscious allegations against."

Who here made allegations against you? I thought it was some kid at the program you worked for. You brought your own allegations here. You brought us your website. Who we choose to believe is our own choice. Very strange audience you have chosen to redeem yourself in front of.  :tup:  :em:

[jdr7181]

delete

[jdr7181]

delete

[jdr7181]

delete

[jdr7181]

delete

[Anonymous]

Whether you want me to call you folks folks or not, I'm just asking you tone down the rhetoric a bit and discuss this with me rationally. That's all. If you're right, you have nothing to lose. If you're wrong, you learn something important: not everything is as it appears.

Jack

okay.  ::dove::

[Anonymous]

One Year Later: Counselor Continues Fight to Clear His Name

One year after his felony indictment on two counts of aggravated sexual assault of a child, former Woodside Trails counselor, Jackie DeWayne Reynolds, Jr., is still seeking vindication.

(PRWEB) August 25, 2005 ? According to Jackie DeWayne Reynolds, Jr., the former counselor charged last year with sexually assaulting a resident at the therapeutic camp Woodside Trails in Bastrop County, there is a consistent pattern of official misconduct related to his case that begins and ends with the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts and current republican gubernatorial candidate, Carole Keeton Strayhorn.

Mr. Reynolds wouldn?t comment on any specific evidence of misconduct by Mrs. Strayhorn, but did say much of the basis for his assertion could be gleaned in the lawsuit he filed recently in federal court alleging multiple violations of his civil rights.

?I just want my name cleared,? he says when asked about the lawsuit that names Mrs. Strayhorn as one of more than ten defendants. ?News reports of my arrest and indictment are all over the Internet. It?s frightening to think that state officials would intentionally label an innocent man a child predator knowing it wasn?t true, but I am convinced that?s what [the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services and Bastrop County] did.?

On August 25, 2004, a Bastrop County Grand Jury indicted two Woodside Trails counselors, including Mr. Reynolds, for sexual improprieties with children that resided at the therapeutic camp.

Mr. Reynolds, now living in Brownwood, Texas, says he was shocked to learn through media reports that he had been indicted. ?I was never notified that a grand jury was convening,? he says, ?nor was I given an opportunity to present any evidence.?

Mr. Reynolds contends that the case should never have gone to a grand jury. According to his lawsuit, the alleged victim admitted he lied to Detective Suriano of the Bastrop County Sheriff?s office and Investigator Shaw with the Residential Child Care Licensing division of TDFPS nine days before the indictment.

But even if the child hadn?t recanted, says Mr. Reynolds, charges still should never have been filed.

?To suggest that I could sexually abuse a child while surrounded by eleven other children and staff and there not be a shred of corroborating evidence just isn?t believable. It makes me wonder whether they investigated the allegation at all or whether they just concluded I did it because it was politically expedient.?

Also on August 25, 2004, the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (TDFPS) ruled against Mr. Reynolds in their investigation, which was conducted jointly with the Bastrop County Sheriff?s office. TDFPS also ruled against the other counselor indicted that day and issued three other negative findings against their employer, Woodside Trails.

?There?s something really fishy about this whole thing,? says Mr. Reynolds. ?They (TDFPS) returned three rulings against Woodside Trails and two against its employees on the same day the Bastrop County Grand Jury indicts those same two employees? Come on, that?s too much of a coincidence?

Although the criminal charges against Mr. Reynolds were dismissed in March of this year, he still has to fight to keep his name out of the TDFPS central registry as a sex offender.

?They (TDFPS) botched my administrative review and now I have to wait up to two years for a Due Process Hearing. I am really looking forward to getting this before an actual judge. If given a fair hearing, I guarantee the ruling will be overturned.?

He claims he would have been happy to wait for his Due Process Hearing to clear his name, but TDFPS forced him to act by harassing him and threatening his family. Mr. Reynolds filed the Section 1983 lawsuit only after a TDFPS investigator told his fiancée that they would remove her children if Mr. Reynolds did not leave the home. In the lawsuit, he is requesting immediate injunctive relief barring TDFPS from any further harassment.

?I haven?t been convicted of anything, yet they charged my fiancée with neglectful supervision of her children based solely upon her relationship with me, nothing more. There was no evidence of any abuse in the home and they have admitted as much.?

Mr. Reynolds is forbidden from having any contact with his two step-children and is not allowed to live in the same home with his fiancée. He states the stress has put a strain on their relationship.

?We had to cancel our wedding. We had a great church reserved here in town and everything. Sent out invitations. We had to cancel it, though, because there?s just no telling what they?ll try next. They just sent the determination letter to her this week giving her forty-five days to respond, but they?ve left four voice messages on her cell phone since urging her to accept their services as soon as possible. It?s harassment, plain and simple.?

The threats and harassment notwithstanding, Mr. Reynolds says he will fight as long and hard as he has to to clear his name.

His lawsuit was received by the United States District Court, Western District of Texas, Austin Division on August 12, 2005, at 2:34 pm. It was assigned case number A05CA638 LY.

###

[jdr7181]

delete

[Deborah]

Jack,
I have questions but first I want to respond to your comment,
?how does any of the issues you raised support the allegation that I forced this child to perform oral sex on me and vice-a-versa??

Only you and the boy know what happened. I understand your defensiveness, particularly if you are innocent, but you misinterpreted my intention. And further, I personally am not interested in having that discussion/debate with you. It?s really futile, imo. I?m more interested in the ?relationship-based? therapy, at the moment, and the specifics of how Woodside Trails operated.

You said that by having ?credentialed? employees, there would be little money left for the kids?

Well, to an outsider, that is what appeared to be the case ?without? credentialed employees. I do not believe that living in freezing cold and sweltering heat and what some would call 'squalid' conditions, is necessary to resolve one?s ?psychosexual issues?.  That appears to be more about making $$$.

You said: If by "service plan" you mean the safety plan, it was prepared by a licensed professional, not me.

No, I meant this comment:
?37. As his incamp counselor and in close conference with his family and the treatment team?which consisted of the boy?s DFPS caseworker, the Executive Director of the facility, two masters level therapists, and at least six other counselors that worked the same camp?I set goals for his treatment and wrote monthly progress reports for his case file.?

I interpreted ?set goals? and ?monthly progress reports? to mean a ?service plan?.  How is that different? What exactly did the two masters level therapist do to earn their money?

Quote from your pleadings:
27. As a counselor, I was encouraged by the therapists, my supervisor, and others at Woodside Trails to form close bonds with the children I worked with as a part of their therapy.

Q: Is it really appropriate to refer to yourself or for Woodside and other programs to refer to their ?uneducated? helpers as ?counselors?. My understanding is that is a ?professional? title that implies a certain level of education. You can?t just hang out the ?counselor? shingle and start doing therapy with folks (Sorry guys, it?s a Tx thang), especially those with 'psychosexual issues' without eventually being charged with practicing without a license.  Wouldn?t ?care taker? be more appropriate?  

But then, perhaps you were indeed their primary ?therapist?. These comments from your pleadings certainly would suggest that:
38. I spent the most one-on-one time with him discussing his issues, known as Individual Counseling Sessions or I.C.S. time.
40. It was my responsibility to work closely with this child to help him work through his psychosexual issues.
f. I continually requested coaching and guidance from my supervisors and peers with regards to my complicated and therapeutic relationship with the alleged victim.
i. My work with the alleged victim was consistently monitored and reviewed by my supervisors, their supervisors, by the consulting psychologist and consulting psychiatrists, and by the therapist?all of whom with their combined 100+ years of experience in this field believed it consistent with the practice of relationship-based therapy used by Woodside Trails and NOT ?sexual grooming of a child? as Defendant DFPS continues to try to claim.

Q: Why would a ?care taker? spend the most one-on-one time (Individual Counseling Sessions) with highly distressed kids with ?psychosexual issues?? That?s a little more than what TSW described- addressing behavior, facilitating group therapy, issuing consequences. What training did you received? Was it from a person with credentials? What was your understanding of R-B therapy?

Re: being moved to another camp, you said: That's kind of a long story, but in a nutshell, my supervisor and I weren't getting along. Instead of working to solve the problem, I was forced to move to another camp, a decision I fought vigorously and completely disagreed with.

Q: Well, where does that fit into ?relationship-based? therapy? What does that model for the kids, when the adults can?t resolve an issue and the adult they have been groomed to bond with is removed from their life? Woops, another rejection due to another dumb adult conflict. Isn?t that the modeling most kids who find themselves involved with this industry experience? Conflict?. Someone goes away.

You said you were trying to explain why you had to move, but didn?t you actually lie to him? You said you disagreed with your supervisor, yet told the boy you were too ?close to be an effect counselor?, which I assume was the super?s opinion. Were you not allowed to tell him the truth? If so, how might that fit into the R-B therapy model? I personally expect honesty in my relationships (that matter). Doesn?t mean I get it, but I do have that expectation. And I?m going to assume the kids do too, particularly when they are being groomed to build trust (bond) with their care takers. I have to wonder if he knew or sensed that you were lying and that?s why he was angry.  

Sorry about the confusion about the two boys and the adoption issue. It really wasn?t clear to me.
I didn?t ?fail to mention the overwhelming exculpatory evidence?. That?s not what I want to discuss, as mentioned earlier. I have no opinion, one way or another on your innocence or guilt. And as stated before, not what I?m interested in discussing.

While you fully trust Bebe Gaines, I have some serious concerns about the way she runs the program-  how ?counselors? (people who want to help) are put in the direct line of fire- not being the least. I?m concerned that she?s opening another program and is using a slight of hand to avoid licensing, for what little protection it might afford these kids. And, the staff for that matter. While DFPS/CPS is flawed by design, it occasionally works as intended and the kids deserve to have the opportunity for it to work in their favor as much as it possibly and reasonably can.

For all intents and purposes, these types of programs are psych wards in the woods. Isolation from the world, meds, therapy, BM. WHY should they be allowed to operate totally unmonitored, even if it only provides minimal protection?

Any person with good common sense would not ever allow a ?counselor? to be alone with this population of kids, particularly, as TSW suggested.  And aren?t there state regs for ratio? One ?counselor? for 11 ?sexual predators? who are potentially violent. Did you hear about the ?counselor? who was on duty alone (against regs) and was hit in the head with a baseball bat and locked in a closet where he died? Or the EMT that hiked a kid to death, ignoring signs of heat exhaustion because she was ordered to defer to the programs ?method? of flushing out fakers? I don?t know how that affected her life, but the owner is still earning money off distressed kids (parents?) under a new name. Sorry, but while you appear to have the greatest respect for and loyalty to Ms Bebe, I?m not so sure she has your?s or the childrens best interest at heart. I ?spect she is a business woman with the intent to make money, and defend her livelihood, first and foremost.

Seems like you could very well be the royal scapegoat in this ordeal. Given the role of ?counselor?/ ?therapist? by Woodside. Instructed to form bonds with the kids, aka relationship-based therapy. Worked alone with the kids. Abuse allegations directed at you, not the credentialed folks. People who ?just want to help? should consider protecting themselves when they hitch up with a program in this industry.

[Anonymous]

Jack, IF YOU ARE INNOCENT...and IF YOU EXPECT to have a life with your fiancee and IF YOU EXPECT to have contact with your OWN CHILDREN: sounds like you need a good attorney; that you need to stop supporting this so-called school, and find a new line of work!!!!

[Anonymous]

August 29, 2005 ? United States Magistrate Judge Andrew W. Austin has granted a motion allowing a former Woodside Trails counselor to proceed with his Section 1983 lawsuit against state officials without paying court costs.

The same day he filed the lawsuit, Jackie DeWayne Reynolds, Jr. filed what is called an in forma pauperis plea requesting court costs be waived on the grounds that he is indigent.

?I?m delighted the court approved my plea,? said Mr. Reynolds. ?Being able to proceed in forma pauperis is a big relief. It was the first big hurdle I had to overcome.?

According to Mr. Reynolds, now that the expense of litigating a costly civil rights lawsuit is less of a concern, he can focus all of his attention on the flurry of dismissal motions likely to follow.

?I suspect they will try to assert various immunity defenses and I have to be ready with an answer. Civil rights litigation is complicated and this would obviously be much easier if I had an attorney.?

Mr. Reynolds confirms that he has spoken to several attorneys and is confident he has a legitimate case. This was confirmed in the Notice of Order or Judgment granting his in forma pauperis plea issued by the Court on August 23, 2005.

?After reviewing Plaintiff?s Complaint,? the notice reads, ?the Court has determined that this case should not be dismissed as frivolous . . .?

Despite the confirmation and previous assurances that his case is valid, the attorneys he spoke with were unwilling to represent him at this time.

?I don?t know why, quite frankly,? says Mr. Reynolds. ?I?ve been told that I should be scared of the state. They convicted me of child molestation in the court of public opinion. My reputation is utterly destroyed. I really have nothing to lose and I have a legitimate case.?

Jackie DeWayne Reynolds, Jr. was one of two Woodside Trails counselors arrested and indicted last summer on child sexual assault charges stemming from his work at the therapeutic camp in Bastrop County. The indictments led to the revocation of the facility?s license by the Department of Family and Protective Services.

Less than six months after the criminal charges were dismissed, Mr. Reynolds filed a 109-page, 18-count lawsuit on his own behalf alleging that, among other things, the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts and republican gubernatorial candidate, Carole Keeton Strayhorn, deprived him of his civil rights under the color of state law.

According to the Section 1983 lawsuit, the charges against Mr. Reynolds were "motivated by ill-will toward Woodside Trails and its former or current employees and was undertaken on behalf of and as a direct result and consequence of the reckless and wanton abuse of power and authority by Defendant Strayhorn."

Section 1983 of Title 42 of the United States Code makes every "person who, under color of [law]. . . subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States . . . to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution" liable to the party whose constitutional rights were deprived.

Other defendants in the lawsuit include officials of the Department of Family & Protective Services, Bastrop County District Attorney Brian Goertz, Assistant District Attorney Kathy Holton, Sheriff Richard Hernandez and Detective Steve Suriano.

In addition to the deprivation of civil rights charge, other counts include conspiracy, malicious prosecution, and intentional infliction of emotional distress, abuse of process and defamation of character.

The Section 1983 lawsuit was received by the United States District Court, Western District of Texas, Austin Division on August 12, 2005, at 2:34 pm. It was assigned case number A-05-CA-638 LY.

A copy of the lawsuit can be viewed at http://www.whataboutthekids.info.

###