by Virginia McCullough

On October 20, 2008 an article in (Click.) described the troubled background of California Family Law Elite Attorney Terence F. Colyer and recounted his involvement in a high profile child dependency and parental termination case in the state of Washington. Terry Colyer, renowned in Marin County, California for his dedication to Judge Michael Buck Dufficy’s FLEAs and for his brutal legal tactics, had “volunteered” to serve as a Court Appointed Special Advocate (CASA) in a Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) case. Colyer was working hand in glove with the state in a joint attempt to terminate the parental rights of a young mother and destroy the mother-daughter bond. The state had decided that 44-year-old foster mother Linda Gallez would provide better maternal care for the fragile three- year-old child.

Under the care of Linda Gallez the little girl had ended up with a black eye and arrived at a supervised visitation with her mother with food shoved up her nose.  It was apparent that DSHS was not closely monitoring the care the child was receiving at the hands of the foster parent.

Washington State Senator Pam Roach began exposing the travesty of this case when it became apparent that DSHS and CASA Colyer hid from the court the fact that both the grandparents and the aunt and uncle of this child had passed investigations that would highly qualify them to serve as caretakers for the child. Placing the youngster with relatives of the mother would enable the little girl to know that she was loved and wanted by members of her biological family while her mother continued complying with the stringent requirements imposed on her by DSHS. In a series of blogs posted to Pam Roach Reports the progress of the case was documented over a period of months

It is extremely rare to see a politician actually paying attention to the wrongs that public agencies repeatedly inflict on constituents. Pam Roach is a rarity. She is dedicated to serving the people who elected her to represent them. In retaliation for the coverage Senator Roach gave the case, the foster mother filed an ethics violation complaint against the Senator. It is important to note that Senator Roach never mentioned the name of either the foster mother or the CASA volunteer, but she did detail the wrongs inflicted on the mother, child and the maternal extended family by both DSHS and CASA. For example one paragraph from her blog dated November 6, 2008 states:

Oh, and, yes, after the fact, I expressed my displeasure that they put this mother and child in a home with 13 people and one bathroom. Oh, I certainly did tell them about the restraining order that the foster mother had against her old lover. It would have been irresponsible if I had not done so. And, I certainly did report and demand an investigation when little Lisa showed up at daycare with a black eye! That was not happening without me! People who care about kids do not put them in danger. (Let's see...wasn't it DSHS that put the pyromaniac teenager back in the home with four other children...only to have two kids burn to death?)

Naturally this kind of honest criticism stung the powers that be that do absolutely nothing but collect their ill-earned paychecks. Instead of taking the responsible and morally correct position of investigating DSHS and CASA for their deliberate transgressions in this case, the Senate Ethics Committee expanded its investigation of Senator Pam Roach. It is a lesson in “no good deed goes unpunished”.

It is refreshing, however, to announce that there is good news in this Washington State case. On November 5, 2008 , Senator Pam Roach announced in her report that the CASA volunteer whom she did not call out by name had resigned as a CASA on this high profile case
(Click. Pam Roach Reports)

The CASA volunteer who resigned was Terence F. Colyer. Surprisingly Colyer’s attorney Andrew Sachs has not tendered his resignation. In a phone interview with King County CASA supervisor Linda Katz today, Ms. Katz was asked if her office would appoint another CASA to this case. She acknowledged that would happen but she declined to state when that appointment would take place. When questioned about Andrew Sachs position in this case, Ms. Katz said that she would prefer that Mr. Sachs explain this himself.  Ms. Katz was asked by this reporter whether or not Andrew Sachs represented CASA or only Terence F. Colyer.  Her reply was that Mr. Sachs would have to address that issue. Previously this reporter was told by Sachs that his client was Terence Colyer.

The question remains what is Andrew Sachs doing on this case now that his client has resigned? Is it possible that Mr. Sachs does not only represent Terence Colyer, but also represents the non-profit CASA organization? The evasiveness of King County CASA supervisor Linda Katz when questioned about the identity of Andrew Sachs’ client, might lead one to believe that is the case. The possibility is supported by a November 2005 article in the Washington Bar Association newsletter describing a group of attorneys entitled Washington Attorneys Assisting Community Organizations (WAACO). The article by Jim Bamberger describes the WAACO as “business lawyers [are} giving their time, energy and expertise to non-profit community based organizations with needs for civil legal assistance on a broad array of matters”.  Andrew N. Sachs is one of the many attorneys listed as contributing (Click. "Business lawyers pitching in for the public good”)

If Andrew Sachs is representing CASA as well as Terence Colyer, the new CASA appointee will be represented by the very same attorney that protected the actions of volunteer Colyer. That fact would introduce a pre-determined bias into this high profile case, because the new CASA would be hamstrung by the immoral actions of California FLEA Terence Colyer. The dependency court and the parental termination court would not be receiving an objective, fresh look at the facts of this case because the need to protect the judgment of CASA and its supervisor Linda Katz would be paramount in the eyes of their legal counsel.  Such a situation would start another sad chapter for the mother and daughter at risk in the hands of the state.

Many other questions remain about this high profile case -- particularly the glaring improper conduct of the foster mother. The people Linda Gallez exposes her foster children to should be carefully examined.  It would appear that CASA has abdicated its responsibility under the law to properly run background checks not only on the foster mother but also on her close associates. The Internet reading public are closely following this case and they are vetting Linda Gallez and those who share her address and phone number:

For example, one individual, commenting on an article in Pam Roach Reports, reported:

Pam, has anybody mentioned any other members of the foster parent’s family? A quick google search will show that the foster parent’s brother is listed in the white pages using the same address.  Also, Wa. Voters registration shows him listed at that same address.  Another quick and easy google search shows this same brother has SEVEN FELONIES and an open civil suit filed against him\. Could this be the mystery man? After all he is listed at the same address.  And does this mean if it is not him, she never sees her brother, or her brother never comes around? Because everybody knows by law he can be nowhere around these children! Obviously the state didn’t bother checking ANY backgrounds into this foster parent I’m just your average citizen, and I found all this in about ten minutes. Hummm! Way to go CPS!

This reporter found the history of the alleged brother on the Internet and phoned the courts to determine what kind of acts had brought about the charges. The court records indicate this man has a history of misconduct involving vehicles in both Pierce and King Counties.

If this person shares a home with the foster mother Linda Gallez and the children entrusted to her care, than the children could end up in vehicles driven by this man.  Where is DSHS and why aren’t they monitoring the past and current actions of adults these children encounter on a daily basis?

Who is protecting these children? Certainly not those paid to do so.

Virginia McCullough © November 8, 2008


Painting in heading: Honore Daumier. A Lawyer with His Client. c. 1862. Crayon and watercolor on paper. Staatsgalerie, Stuttgart, Germany.