Forensic Interview violated Public Act 168 of 1997

Bolden’s forensic interview clearly violated Public Act 168 of 1997 and the  Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Statements made to interviewers  that serve primarily a forensic or investigative purpose are testimonial and are inadmissible pursuant to the Confrontation Clause.

             It is clearly established Nyela Bolden a professional failure to follow the proper Forensic Interview protocol and process during the November 21, 2007  interview “contaminated” the child witness, put words into his mouth of false allegations of abuse that really did not occur clearly establishing the minor child’s responses to questions were not reliable. (EX 26)

            As a result of the grossly negligent interview of OB, an ex parte petition was filed and expart order executed unlawful detention of AB placing her in the Fathers custody who had been substantiated twice for child abuse of AB’s siblings and abandoned his parental role in 2004.