Fink fought for his freedom, but it was not to be.
The state, through its expert witness, testified Fink could not take care of himself and in fact would be in danger if he returned home.
That witness testified Fink did poorly on a battery of tests, and Dr. C. Alan Hopewell said that while Fink could handle minor physical and mental tasks, he was not able to function independently and that he had substantial cognitive impairment.
That finding was in contrast to that of another state psychologist and the findings of Dr. William Tedford, the former chair of psychology at SMU who also evaluated Fink.
It was Tedford's opinion that nothing is wrong with Fink that would prevent him from living in his own home. At the end of the day, Judge John B. Peyton allowed the emergency protective custody order of Adult Protective Services to stay in place.
"We're extremely disappointed with the findings by the judge," said Fink's attorney, Lysette Rios.
"We didn't believe there was enough credible evidence by any doctor that indicated Mr. Fink lacked capacity. The records speak for themselves; you've got two reports out of three indicating he has none to mild impairment, and then one report by a doctor who didn't include half of his objective findings in his report."
Officials with Adult Protective Services disagreed with Rios, though."We do feel that Mr. Fink lacks capacity," said Shari Pulliam with Adult Protective Services. "We're concerned for his health and safety in his own home living alone. We are also now concerned with financial exploitation, which is huge in elderly populations. We want to prevent that before it happens, and that's what we are doing here today -- trying to make sure that Mr. Fink is going to be safe financially."
Fink says the state's witness was untruthful in his testimony on Friday and that what he testified to in court was not the same thing he told Fink after performing a psychological test on him at the Arlington nursing home he has been in and returns to Friday.
"Yes, I'm disappointed," said Fink. "If it's against me, if he tells the truth and the judge rules against me, I can take it, but don't rule against me on account of lies. Don't do that on account of boldfaced lies."
Fink is in custody for another 30 days. The state says it will move forward now seeking guardianship of Fink.
Source:
Judge Rules N.Texas Man Will Stay in Custody
See Also:
Texas: Charlie Fink May Bet to Go Home
The state which proclaims Mr. Fink is a danger to himself is the danger.
ReplyDeleteThis is absolutely outrageous!
ReplyDeleteThe state fears that Mr. Fink will be financially exploited ...the state is the one that exploits people under guardianship.
ReplyDeleteOf course they want him in guardianship; it's the Protection Racket!
ReplyDeleteThis is a pretty simple case.
ReplyDeleteThe petitioner has to prove incapacity by clear and convincing evidence.
APS failed to do that due to the conflict in expert opinions.
I hope this attorney will do the unthinkable and appeal on behalf of this gentleman.
If he's in a nursing facility, what finances will be left to exploit after a few months? None.
WTF????? This makes me want to throw up.
ReplyDeleteI'm so sorry, Mr. Fink. We will pray for diving intervention.
My dad was forcibly taken from his home in May 2010 by the Adult Protective Service. They lied on the witness stand and got custody of my dad. They put him in a nursing home that had abuse cases against them saying the home was under new management. My dad caught staph from the person that was in the same room. Even though there was a court order that stated that we could visit our dad, Adult Protective services told the nursing home not to let us near him. He died July 10, 2010 without us seeing our dad for over a month.
ReplyDeleteThis poor man. My heart breaks for him. At the same time, I am filled with rage at these people who have too much unbridled power.
ReplyDeleteWhat a crock of BS - the judge is allowing the G Team to run his courtroom - oh what a surprise - this is reality folks and I will say it again and again --- you, me = we are next.
ReplyDeleteWe are aware, we are trying to stop this madness while innocent people are getting consumed by the probate conveyor belt 24/7 churning people into products to feed the probate machine.
See the old movie: Soylent Green.
I wish a lawyer would speak up and sue the hospital for Mr. Fink.
ReplyDeleteHang your head in shame judge.
ReplyDeleteA corrupt Judicial system.. It is not his right to overuse his authority, and deny Mr. Fink his self-determination.
ReplyDeleteKathleen said: "The state fears that Mr. Fink will be financially exploited ...the state is the one that exploits people under guardianship."
ReplyDeleteThe state does not do the exploiting, but it's the state that permits others to do it.