Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Simon Poll: Voters back remap reform, revolving door ban and a ban on legislators lobbying
Next Post: IKCA Celebrates National Kidney Month
Posted in:
* Peoria Journal Star…
The internal bleeding a 4-year-old East Peoria boy suffered last week was so severe it caused cardiac arrest and led to unconsciousness, a condition from which he never awoke.
That’s the message from a one-page probable-cause statement filed Friday in Tazewell County Circuit Court by prosecutors in support of murder charges against a woman who was dating the boy’s father.
Lesli Jett, 33, faces three counts of first-degree murder and one count of aggravated battery. Her bond was set at $3 million on the charges during a hearing Friday afternoon.
* Peoria Public Radio…
Cook County Public Guardian Charles Golbert said DCFS isn’t being transparent about its potential involvement with the family of a 4-year-old East Peoria boy who died last month.
“The response has been crickets,” said Golbert. “And of course that raises my suspicion antennas even higher.”
Golbert said his office requested a timeline of agency involvement in Tate Thurman’s life last week, but still hasn’t received that information. In other recent high-profile child death cases like the A.J. Freund case in Crystal Lake, he said the agency has released that information readily.
“If, in fact, this was another case where DCFS had warning after warning, and red flag after red flag, and a child ended up dying because of very poor judgment and social work practices, that would need to be exposed,” he said.
Golbert’s full statement is here.
* DCFS…
Director Smith and DCFS staff at every level are completely devastated by the sudden loss of Tate Thurman, who was just 4 years old when he died two weeks ago. The tragic incident that led to his death is heartbreaking and DCFS is fully cooperating with law enforcement as we investigate what took place. Our department is committed to being as transparent as possible as this investigation moves forward, while also protecting the privacy of Tate’s siblings and family. We serve families in times of extreme crisis and our top priority will always be protecting them and ensuring they have the support they need to recover.
* DCFS timeline…
DCFS’ involvement with Tate’s family began in 2011 when the department investigated his mother for an unsafe sleep environment that led to the death of her newborn child.
DCFS conducted a total of seven investigations involving the household over the next six years. Tate’s mother lost guardianship of her children a number of times during those years.
Following the death of his mother in 2017, Tate and one of his siblings were returned home by the Tazewell County Court to live with their father, Jeremy Thurman. Following the closing of the case in 2018, DCFS had no further contact or hotline reports involving this family.
On February 18, 2020, DCFS received a hotline report when Tate was brought into OSF St. Francis Hospital with abdominal injuries and internal bleeding. Following Tate’s death, the girlfriend of his father, Lesli Jett, was charged with three counts of first-degree murder and one count of aggravated battery.
Tate’s older sibling and an unrelated child in the household have been removed from the home and have been placed with relatives.
DCFS is investigating allegations of abuse and neglect related to Tate’s death and is working closely with law enforcement to fully investigate what happened in this case.
There is no prior history of DCFS involvement with Leslie Jett or with the other unrelated child removed from the home.
Thoughts?
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Mar 4, 20 @ 1:57 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Simon Poll: Voters back remap reform, revolving door ban and a ban on legislators lobbying
Next Post: IKCA Celebrates National Kidney Month
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
The policy of making sure the children stay with their parents needs to be revisited. You have more than a 120 kids die after DCFS contacted them last year. Sometimes the safest place for a kid is not with their abusive parent that has already had other children taken away
Comment by Crying Shame Wednesday, Mar 4, 20 @ 2:10 pm
=== returned home by the Tazewell County Court ===
The dad was not given custody by the court unless The State’s Attorney’s office and DCFS signed off.
And they are being a less than transparent since it was reported by Phil Luciano and confirmed by the coroner that Tara Foley died of a drug overdose.
Whose bright idea was it to place two young children back in a home where two people had already died?
What services were wrapped around that placement and who provided them?
Comment by Thomas Paine Wednesday, Mar 4, 20 @ 2:27 pm
Just because DCFS had involvement with the kid’s now deceased mother, somehow DCFS is to incur some blame for his death. Horrible people do horrible things and stop living in a world where a state agency or ANYONE can prevent any tragedy.
And Crying Shame, look to the some of the judges who place the kids with their parents. That’s not a DCFS issue.
Comment by So wait... Wednesday, Mar 4, 20 @ 2:28 pm
@So wait -
DCFS didn’t just “have involvement”, they removed the children from the home…the home of Tate’s parents.
Then they returned children.
So yes, DCFS is responsible. Was the death preventable or foreseeable as it was in AJ’s case? We don’t know.
What we do know is that the current director said he was going to have his staff go back through the old cases an re-assess.
Was this case reassessed, and if so, why was the decision made to maintain the status quo?
Comment by Thomas Paine Wednesday, Mar 4, 20 @ 2:58 pm
Once again it appears this poor child didn’t have a chance. So dispiriting and so sad. How frightening and horrible and confusing his short life must have been for him.
Comment by Responsa Wednesday, Mar 4, 20 @ 3:07 pm
That poor child never had a chance. Can we please get some smart people involved in this to size the problem. Forget the blame for now.
Comment by SSL Wednesday, Mar 4, 20 @ 3:17 pm
Is the timeline directly from DCFS? If so, it’s not helping because it is unclear whether the father was part of the household during the 7 initial investigations. It sounds like he wasn’t since only the mother is listed as losing custody, but then turns around as says the child was returned “home” to the father, suggesting to me, the shared home of the mother and father.
In my experience these timelines produced in response to criticism are reviewed by the highest level of agency management, and the simple fact that the timeline is not 100% clear in regards to whether or not the father had involvement with DCFS says a lot about agency management.
Comment by JSS Wednesday, Mar 4, 20 @ 3:23 pm
This case is complicated by the fact that the birth mother had passed away, and the woman now accused had never had a complaint lodged against her.
My thoughts on DCFS: total reform, top to bottom, starting yesterday.
There’s another really shocking Tazewell County case, that of 13-year-old Robert Bee: he disappeared from his home in late November 2016 and his skeletal remains were found in South Pekin in late July 2018. COD: murder by strangulation.
There’s a very good documentary series underway on this case; inter alia we are informed that there had been no fewer than 20 documented calls to DCFS before he disappeared on Nov. 18, 2016. DCFS pretty much just dropped the ball 20 times.
There’s something very wrong with Tazewell County’s DCFS / Pekin Police Department / Tazewell County State’s Attorney’s office, and it’s slowly coming to light over the course of the documentary series.
I’d like to see an exhaustive investigation - in fact, I’d implore anyone in power to do so, promptly.
Comment by dbk Wednesday, Mar 4, 20 @ 3:30 pm
DCFS is responsible for what happened 2 years after they ended involvement with the family? If the mother died in 2017, was the girlfriend even around when the case closed in 2018?
I don’t understand the logic behind saying that DCFS should be prescient.
Comment by Perrid Wednesday, Mar 4, 20 @ 3:39 pm
Like a previous poster, I can’t tell if the father was in the same home as the mother before her death. However, there’s no mention of the father mistreating the children at any time.
Are we going to start requiring all single or divorced parents to pro-actively meet with DCFS monthly? Are we going to require all single or divorced parents to have DCFS approve their dates? How many additional caseworkers will that require?
Given that the girlfriend or boyfriend of parents do sometimes mistreat the children, it is a good idea that parents really consider whether they want to leave the children alone with them or move the person into the home- but we cannot supervise every parents significant relationships.
People that should have been paying attention besides the parent? Adults who came into contact with this child - relatives, friends of relatives,friends of the adults, doctors, Dentists, day care etc. that’s the reason for the DCFS hotline.
Comment by thoughts matter Wednesday, Mar 4, 20 @ 3:49 pm
== says the child was returned “home” to the father, suggesting to me, the shared home of the mother and father.==
Former DCFS attorney here. “Return home” is the terminology used even if the parent who gains custody at the close of the case is not the same parent from whom custody was originally taken.
I don’t know the details of this case, but it appears bio mom had a history of problems, Tate came into care. Bio dad got involved and did whatever the court asked of him, such that the judge gave custody to dad, and closed the case.
Subsequently, the child was killed by the dad’s girlfriend, but DCFS has no prior information about problems with the girlfriend.
DCFS is full of people who want the best for kids, but they aren’t fortune tellers. They can’t predict the future.
Comment by Former DCFS Wednesday, Mar 4, 20 @ 3:57 pm
DCFS has an impossible job. They often dont have final say.
Comment by Washingtonian Wednesday, Mar 4, 20 @ 4:50 pm
Was he in preschool or daycare? Ensuring that such services are available to and paid for, for all young former wards, can provide extra protection when DCFS closes the case, which it must eventually do. We don’t know if it would have helped here, but episodes of fatal abuse are often preceded by lesser attacks, which are less easily hidden if professionals see the child daily.
Comment by Cassandra Wednesday, Mar 4, 20 @ 5:10 pm
I agree with the previous commentators that the timeline from DCFS is unclear, but based on what Former DCFS said it does seem like this case does not seem to be the fault of DCFS.
But I’m curious what the COOK COUNTY Public Guardian is doing involving himself in a Tazewell County case. It has nothing to do with that office and I would think that office has plenty to worry about without Charles Golbert acting like he’s the DCFS Inspector General or something like that. Unless he wants to be DCFS Director, which might not be a bad idea…
Comment by MyTwoCents Wednesday, Mar 4, 20 @ 5:20 pm
MyTwoCents, Freund is not a Cook County case either. I guess Golbert has solved all the problems there and is ready to take on the other 101 counties.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Mar 4, 20 @ 7:10 pm
–But I’m curious what the COOK COUNTY Public Guardian is doing involving himself in a Tazewell County case.–
Good point, I’m wondering that as well. What is Mr. Golbert’s remit, precisely?
Comment by dbk Wednesday, Mar 4, 20 @ 8:23 pm
== The policy of making sure the children stay with their parents needs to be revisited. You have more than a 120 kids die after DCFS contacted them last year.==
There were 123 deaths last year. 24 were homicides. You can’t assume that all homicides were caused by the parents.
Comment by Da Big Bad Wolf Thursday, Mar 5, 20 @ 6:50 am