Criag Mills and his family.
In our latest Sound Off Louisiana feature, we continue our investigative series entailing Craig Mills and his unfortunate experience as the alleged victim of an adoption scam. In this segment, Mills provides the names of folk with whom he has frustrations in various agencies of Louisiana law enforcement to include Paul Edmonson of Louisiana State Police (LSP) and many others. Here’s our latest installment of the Mills adoption scam investigative series:
Mills vents his frustrations with law enforcement entailing his alleged adoption scam and those of others.
Supporting Documents and Links:
The late-breaking article on the Central couple apparently being victims of a HUGE adoption scam. As the author of the preceding article points out, if, by chance, the mother changed her mind and decided to keep the baby, then no law has been broken. However, given the text messages on display in the article, it is highly unlikely that’s the case and the birth mother simply used this couple as leverage and, when they would not agree to cosign on a note for a trailer, these are two text messages which the birth mother sent back upon being informed that the adopting parents would not agree to cosign on such a promissory note:
“Yea, imma start looking for another family.”
“Can’t believe u wouldn’t do it to keep Abagail and myself safe.”
So, as the article link above indicates, it appears this Central couple has now likely been scammed out of $35,000 as part of this latest alleged adoption scam.
================== Statute / Code References by Mills in Video ===========================
LA R. S. 14:66 (extortion statute). LA R. S. 14:67 (theft by nonviolent means). LA R. S. 14:118 (bribery and intimidation).
LA R. S. 14:286(C)(7) providing for a maximum of 45 days of postpartum housing (the successful adopting family, with the full knowledge and assistance of the social worker, provided 86 days of such hosing).
LA CHC 1186 (confidentiality of adoption records).
===================== Emails Referenced by Mills in Video=============================
LSP Lieutenant Chad Gremillion (LSP Investigator – Special Victims Unit) email.
Danny McAllister (AG) email (1). Danny McAllister (AG) email (2).
Noteworthy Assessment by Mills:
Mills states that the DCFS “finding” notes that the birth mother, “appears to have some documented issues with being truthful.” In addition, Mills advises that DCFS also notes that she was changing her story during her 24-hour stay at the hospital. Mills later found out that this hospital stay was because the birth mother thought she was in labor. She was communicating with Cindy Simonson, a California adoption facilitator, during this episode, but Mills contends, “she never contacted us regarding her potential labor and delivery on April 11, 2014. All of this should have lead LSP to establish at least probable cause to ask questions.” Mills added, “if those statements alone do not establish intent to deceive us, I guess I am not really sure what intent is.”
Mills expressed extreme frustration with Lucy McGough. As evidenced by the email link above, he responded to her email stating that she would not talk to LSP. Mills made it clear that he was not requesting her representation. Mills indicated that she never responded to his “very simple question of having someone else represent the Children’s Code work product to LSP.”
Mills also provided Sound Off Louisiana with two emails of communication with Danny McAllister at the Attorney General’s office. Mills stated that, in his opinion, the Attorney General’s office wants him and his wife “to do their investigation for them,” a fact he made clear in the video above. Also as stated on the video, Mills indicated that he is willing to do the Attorney General’s investigation for him, but he emphasized to Jeff Landry, “I’m not going to be ignored.”
Mills also stated that, regarding his reference to Molly Lancaster in the McAllister email: “she felt compelled enough from our story that she said LSP could go to New Orleans and arrest both birth parents.” Mills pointed out the astounding contradiction of Lancaster’s assessment vis-a-vis Gremillion’s “no statutes violated” email above. Mills emphasized that Lancaster represented “the third member of the Attorney General’s Office pointing me to criminal statutes that Chad Gremillion can’t find.” He named the three: Molly Lancaster, Assistant Attorney General; Whitney Higginbotham Green, Assistant Attorney General; and Danny McAllister, Investigator.
Mills expressed frustration with LSP’s Chad Gremillion in that “even though he made the claim that he discussed our situation with an Assistant Attorney General, he would never tell me who he talked to at the Attorney General’s office, yet I have three who directly contradict what he says.”
The above video and documentation provide incredible substantiation to Mills’ claim that law enforcement is either ignoring or being totally indifferent to the sheer number of adopting scams being perpetrated upon prospective Louisiana adoptive couples.
We will conclude our thorough, in-depth investigative series with the fifth installment of this series in coming days. We appreciate our loyal viewers who have followed this series, and we believe you’ll find the final episode very intriguing.
If you would like to be added to our Sound Off Louisiana email list to be notified of future Sound Off posts, simply scroll to the very bottom of this page (mobile devices) or to the end of the right-hand column (desktops) and supply your email address within the subscribe box. You’ll then receive an automated email from Word Press, and all you have to do is click on the blue “confirm follow” bar contained within that email, and you’ll begin receiving great posts such as the preceding one above.
It all boils down to individuals working for the Government are above the law!!
The Attorney General represents these State Agencies. However, the AG should not protect (by doing nothing about it) these individuals working for the State Agency but instead prosecute them personally for their criminal behaviors and making them personally pay restitution to the victim.
The more I think about it, Mr. Mills needs to take this case directly to the AG Jeff Landry himself, it’s hard for me to believe the AG would allow this type of behavior to continue on his watch.
Mr. Mills I must say to you personally, I highly respect what you’re doing by trying to keep the two brother and sister together.
I am very frustrated to know that my tax dollars are being used to fund a State Agency that’s handling this matter like this.
Thank you, Billy. When we agreed to adopt the daughter, I promised the birth mother she would be treated just like our biological son. When she came back 18 months later and asked that we keep the siblings together, so they could see them grow up together through our open adoption contract, we thought it to be in the interest of the children…not in the best interest of the adults.
It’s funny, that if we were to renege on our open adoption contract – we would be accused of adoption fraud. Here is the text from the adoption fraud overview at findlaw.com:
– An adoptive couple who promises to adopt a pregnant woman’s child and then cuts off all contact with the woman after the adoption is finalized – See more at: http://family.findlaw.com/adoption/adoption-fraud.html#sthash.p1oP3pFt.dpuf
It was the defendants in our civil lawsuit that forced the violation of the open adoption contract and showed complete disregard for the open adoption arrangements set forth by state law. DCFS could not care any less that their own licensed agency is participating in these activities. As a matter of fact, when I finally was able to meet with DCFS (along with the FBI, but that is another story)…one of the 2 lawyers they sent to the meeting fell asleep mid-way through. In my opinion, we spend way too much money on DCFS for the return we get.