March 26, 2025 • 35 mins
Lori Gimelshteyn (GIHM-uhl-stine) of Colorado Parent Advocacy Network joins Dan to comment on the latest shocking grooming revelations out of a public school district in the state, as first reported by Mairead Elordi of The Daily Wire.
A student at Durango High School is being housed by an LGBTQ activist teacher and her trans-female identifying husband, against the mother's wishes. The biological female student now identifies as male, and 'has been diagnosed with autism, ADHD, an eating disorder, depression, and anxiety, according to medical records provided by her mother.'
Lori provides an update on the now-released (thanks to CORA) bodycam footage of La Plata County sheriff's deputies responding to the scene.
Colorado Parent Advocacy Network (@CPANColorado) / X
LGBT Activist Teacher, Trans Husband House Minor Teen Girl In Colorado Against Mom’s Wishes
A student at Durango High School is being housed by an LGBTQ activist teacher and her trans-female identifying husband, against the mother's wishes. The biological female student now identifies as male, and 'has been diagnosed with autism, ADHD, an eating disorder, depression, and anxiety, according to medical records provided by her mother.'
Lori provides an update on the now-released (thanks to CORA) bodycam footage of La Plata County sheriff's deputies responding to the scene.
Colorado Parent Advocacy Network (@CPANColorado) / X
LGBT Activist Teacher, Trans Husband House Minor Teen Girl In Colorado Against Mom’s Wishes
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
This is Dan Caplis and welcome to today's online podcast
edition of The Dan Caplis Show. Please be sure to
give us a five star rating if you'd be so kind,
and to subscribe, download and listen to the show every
single day on your favorite podcast platform. Justice Are the
American Way, Ryan, and that ties into this signal issue,
(00:20):
which to me is one of the more interesting issues
in a long time because it touches on so much right,
so much that's a big part of your daily life,
so much that part of our national life as well,
and I think there are so many different lessons coming
out of this, but'd love to get your take on
this and everything else. Three or three someone three A
two five five text d an five seven seven three nine.
(00:45):
And we've got a lot on the agenda locally today
as well. Special guests at four thirty six to talk
about another situation where we're allegedly, you know, is somebody
has a miner who maybe they're in the process of
trying to trans and the parents want the minor back.
That sort of situation we will get into again at
(01:06):
four thirty six. Obviously, we've devoted a lot of this
show to one of the most truly shocking and disturbing
school related events in a very long time in Colorado.
The Columbine situation that we've spent so much time on here,
where people at the school were actually planning to have
this child declared homeless so she could be taken from
(01:27):
her parents' home, never even let the parents know about
all this. She obviously had a very solid home. So
do we have another one of those situations. That's a
question that I pose, and we'll get more information at
four thirty six, But I do want to start with
this business about that. The accidental involvement of this reporter,
(01:49):
as Jeffrey Goldberg from the Atlantic, in this obviously ver
very highly sensitive conversation regarding this plan strike on the
hutis which as you know, was very successful.
Speaker 2 (02:03):
And to me.
Speaker 1 (02:05):
There are a few things that really jump out, and
one is if I wish everybody in America could read
the full text string and if they did, you know
Trump's approval, which is pretty darn high right now, We've
got some current sound on that as well from ceeingnoball places.
Speaker 2 (02:23):
I think is approval with Skyrocket.
Speaker 1 (02:25):
I think people would be very impressed with what they
saw with the communications with the planning. Obviously, the success
of the strike, I think it would give Americans even
more confidence in the administration if everybody could read this string.
At the same time, it's a huge mistake, right, can't
(02:45):
be doing this, and we're all human. Everything is a
human process, and this was a big mistake. Fortunately, fortunately
a mistake that didn't have any consequences. This mission was
a success, but it's a mistake that could have potentially
been disastrous, at least in this sense. Okay, at least
(03:07):
in the sense that the mission may have been called off.
Let's say that the reporter had immediately notified Walts, which
he should have. If he should have, the reporter should
have immediately notified the government he'd been accidentally included. The
reporter should not have continued to be part of those communications,
should not have continued to allow himself to have access
(03:28):
to communications he obviously was not intended to have access to.
But if he had ironically done what he should and
notified Waltz or others at that point, the mission probably
would have had to have been scrapped, right because at
that point they couldn't be sure there was enough operational security,
and it would have been tragic if the mission had
to be scrapped. So that's just kind of the starting
(03:50):
point on this kind of enormous mistake just can't happen.
But this we know right in life, enormous mistakes do happen,
including at the highest levels, including by probably all of
the greatest figures in American history. And I challenge anybody
Ryan I'll probably say Woodrow Wilson, because I think that's
(04:11):
has answered everything, right, But I challenge anybody to point
to any great figure in American history, and you can
start with Washington, Lincoln, whoever, any of the founding fathers, mothers,
bring them in, who has not made some enormous mistake
which had enormous public consequences.
Speaker 2 (04:30):
It's just part of being human.
Speaker 1 (04:31):
It's of having that level of responsibility, the heavy weight,
because we all see how these presidents age so dramatically, right,
And part of that is just the heavy weight of
knowing you are going to make mistakes, and when you
make a mistake, it may get a lot of people killed,
it could get a country killed, and so that's a
(04:52):
heavy weight to bear. But I would never in a
million years expect the Trump presidency to be any exception
you know, yeah, he's wrecking up the w's a lot
quicker than most anybody in modern time. But there are
going to be those mistakes. And what I'm disappointed in
here isn't necessarily the mistake. Wish it hadn't happened, but
(05:14):
you just know there are going to be some mistakes
in your life and my life, and the president's life, etc.
I'm just disappointed in the response to it because that
the response to it, in my view, should have been, Hey,
wait a second, everybody go read the text. Look at
how good we are, look at how good our people are,
look at how good everybody on that text string is,
(05:36):
at what they do, and look at the great outcome
for America. That would have been my first point. My
second point would have been big mistake and it will
not happen again. So the effort to try and claim
there was no classified information, downplay it, attack Jeffrey Goldberg,
and believe me, I'm no fan of his at all
(05:56):
at all. Again, I'm very critical of him for not
a mediately dropping out of that communication he knew.
Speaker 2 (06:03):
He was not supposed to be part of.
Speaker 1 (06:06):
But at the same time, even though he in my view,
is very often a bad actor on the left. He
did the right thing in the sense that, while yeah,
he should have dropped out of the conversation right away,
he did not publicly revealed the details that could have
blown up the mission, could have gotten people killed. So
(06:28):
it's to his credit that he did not reveal those details.
But the point is, the very best in the world
are going to make mistakes, just admit it, own it,
and the American people, I think respect that tremendously, and
I think there are so many examples that you can
probably think of him from your own life where if
people had just stepped up. And this crosses party lines, right,
(06:50):
I mean, the left screws up a whole lot more
than the right, but we're all human, we all mess up,
and these politicians just don't seem to get it. If
they would just come out and say, Okay, hey, big mistake,
won't happen again, and then emphasize the positive that can
be honestly emphasized. But trying to go out and tell
people there is no classified information here. Maybe they've changed
(07:13):
the definition of classified information, Ryan, but I think if
there's information about when you're going to strike, who you're
going to strike, how you're going to strike shortly before
you strike. If that ain't classified, nothing should be.
Speaker 3 (07:27):
This is one of those, Dan. I approach it from
a sports perspective. You know, there's something that the opposing
team does that maybe gets in the way of you winning.
And then there's things that you do wrong turnovers like
in the March Madness tournament, etc. And this is one
of those by the Trump administration. And I couldn't agree
with you more. You can point fingers all you want
at Goldberg or whatnot. And he's not a great guy,
(07:48):
and he's not an honest arbiter, and he's not an
actor in good faith. But like you said, he deserves credit.
He didn't reveal these plans. I think some of that
was self preservation. He thought he might be getting trolled
and that this wasn't a legitimate thread. And then he
went out to his car in the parking lot minutes
after he got this text information about the strikes, and
he saw on the Twitter x chatter that it.
Speaker 2 (08:09):
Was happening, so then he knew it was real. But
wait a second, bro.
Speaker 1 (08:13):
Anybody everybody knows just on their own basic ethics, right,
if you're not supposed to be part of a conversation,
you end it right there. You in most situations notify
the person. Hey, I don't think I'm meant to be
involved here, but at the very least you cut it off.
Obviously in my profession, my business law, right, yeah, you
darn well better, you're not going to have your license right.
Speaker 3 (08:34):
That being set, and I acknowledge that this is a
mistake by the Trump team and whoever made the mistake,
if it was a mistake, because why of all reporters,
this is what Joe Kernan was saying on CNBC with
Mark Warner, the centator from Virginia. Why have any reporter
in the in the universe, Brett Behar, you know, anybody
else that has journalistic and Lester Holt. Why was the
(08:57):
worst actor against the Trump administration to be Luke?
Speaker 2 (09:00):
And who did it? Why did they do it? How
did they do it?
Speaker 3 (09:02):
And the biggest thing for me, Dan as a Trump supporter,
that person, whoever it is, needs to be rooted out,
fired and made an example.
Speaker 1 (09:10):
If it was Espionache, if somebody on the inside intentionally
looped Goldberg in, well they need to be prosecuted. I mean, yeah,
they need to be fired and prosecuted. If it was
some kind of human error, and I think that can
I think there are a number of different ways that
human error could happen, and we can get into some
of those after the break will take calls starting after
(09:30):
the break will start.
Speaker 3 (09:31):
What do you think, as a matter of principle, Dan,
somebody needs to be held accountable for this on the
Trump team and cut out.
Speaker 1 (09:37):
Well, not necessarily, and I'll expand on that. I know
we have to this break, but here's my point. If
it was not done intentionally, and if there is some
explanation that stops short of just grossing competence, some kind
of technical switcheroo, then I don't think somebody necessarily has
to be fired. That's where I think you come back to.
(09:58):
Looking at you know, the Ledger. They're overall good, how
much good they do.
Speaker 2 (10:03):
Versus this mistake.
Speaker 1 (10:04):
But so no, I don't think it's an automatic somebody's
got to be fired over this. This isn't like the
disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan, which has premeditated, deliberate, planned out
over time, et cetera. This, if it is what it
appears to be, was one enormous human error, you get
to the bottom of it then make those calls three
or three someone three eight two five five text d
(10:25):
A N five seven seven three nine.
Speaker 2 (10:26):
Y're on the Dan Kapla Show.
Speaker 4 (10:35):
And now back to the Dan Kaplas Show podcast, Chevan Leclaire.
Speaker 5 (10:40):
One of the first things that happened when I was
confirmed as CIA director was Signal was loaded onto my
computer at the CIA, as it is for most CIA officers.
One of the things that I was briefed on very
early Senator was by the CIA records management folks about
the use of Signal as a permissible work use. It
(11:03):
is that is a practice that preceded the current administration
to the Biden mine.
Speaker 1 (11:09):
Yeah, and then I think the question would be why.
And again my starting point if you just joined us
and we'll go to the phone lines now, is I
wish every American could read the excuse me, the full
text string because you'd be very, very impressed with his
Trump team obviously with the outcome of the mission. But
why is anybody using an open source app like that?
(11:30):
And I don't doubt the director there that it's been
in use for a while, But why, There's got to
be a better way. Let's go to Dean and Ravada.
You're on the Dan Kaplas.
Speaker 2 (11:40):
You'll welcome.
Speaker 6 (11:41):
Hey, Hey, Dan, that the Hey. The question I have,
why haven't well maybe they have, Maybe they are the
FBI and investigating the reporter. Number one.
Speaker 2 (11:56):
He needs to be.
Speaker 6 (11:57):
Questioned thoroughly on when he got this, why he didn't
turn it over right away. You know, there's a lot
of like he has responsibility as a reporter to to
you know, to let the government know I'm in the
wrong chat here.
Speaker 1 (12:13):
Well, I think his responsibility I'm not saying a legal responsibility,
and somebody may educate me. I don't think there's a
statute that he violated, but I think his responsibility was
like it would be with any conversation. If you accidentally
texted him thinking you were texting your wife, the responsibility
is to drop out of that communication because you know,
you aren't supposed to.
Speaker 2 (12:34):
Be part of it.
Speaker 1 (12:35):
Obviously, when we talk about something of this nature, you know, he,
I think would have to know whether it's basic journalistic ethics,
you know, basic human ethics. He should not have continued
to monitor it. But I do respect the fact that
he did not publicize these facts at a time when
they could have gotten people killed.
Speaker 6 (12:54):
Right, No, that's true. I think that Brian makes a
good point. They define this sore all the way back
to how this happened.
Speaker 5 (13:02):
You know it was.
Speaker 6 (13:04):
Trump guy, you know, the one that admitted fault, and
I guess he takes full responsibility, but I'm thinking someone
else had something to do with it as well.
Speaker 2 (13:13):
Yeah, we got to know.
Speaker 6 (13:14):
Last thing. Last thing, I want to know when we're
going to get some people charged with fraudways and abuse,
and I want to see I want to see some
people in trouble over this. Oh no, you getting away
with this for millions. I let you go down.
Speaker 2 (13:29):
No, Dean, you make.
Speaker 1 (13:30):
Such a great point, my friend, and I'm with you,
and that is it drives me crazy. In my law practice,
I'd have been doing this forty years and we represent
catastrophically injured people or people who've been killed through the
recklessness of others. And I've had so many of these cases.
I have multiple going right now, you know, against these
big corporations where in my view, you know, the deliberate
(13:51):
decisions are made, Okay, we're going to do something dangerous
because it's going to be cheaper to pay the claims
that then it's going to be to do something safer.
Speaker 2 (13:59):
That's my take on it.
Speaker 1 (14:00):
Not every case, but some right, some other cases are
their negligence, their carelessness, and yes, they've got to make
it right, they've got to compensate people. But you get
these other cases where there are these conscious, deliberate decisions
made that that people have to know could easily get
somebody killed.
Speaker 2 (14:17):
Why aren't people going to jail in those cases? Right?
Speaker 1 (14:20):
I mean, you get somebody they go into a seven
to eleven. Maybe not in Colorado because Polis and the
left right now are so criminal friendly, but most saying
places in America, you get somebody they walk into a
seven eleven.
Speaker 2 (14:31):
They stick that place up.
Speaker 1 (14:32):
They're probably going to the state pen for a lot
of years, and they should. But why do you get
these top corporate types who sit there in these fancy boardrooms,
being catered all these nice beverages and food, and then
they make these conscious deliberate decisions. Yeah, yeah, we're going
to do it this way, and we know it'll probably
get people killed, but it's cheaper to pay the claims.
Why don't they end up in a jail cell? I mean,
(14:55):
you know, we'll hit them for a lot of money
and a jury verdict or this or that, But why
don't they end up in a jail cell. Yeah, I'm
with the caller. I'm frustrated by all that. I'm not
saying anybody needs to go to jail over this signal thing,
but we need the full truth in the end of
how it happened.
Speaker 2 (15:10):
The public needs to know. My guess is we're going
to find out that it was some kind.
Speaker 1 (15:15):
Of text switcheroo and sometime somehow the wrong name got
into somebody's contacts or into somebody's file and got onto
this string. And I think it's most likely going to
be something like that. And in a case like that,
I think you just need to clean it up, make
sure it never happens again. But I'm not saying that
you fire Waltz over this, you know, unless there are
(15:39):
different facts that come to the four. The reporter didn't
break any laws, did something admirable in not reporting it
while the mission was still being carried out, But I
think it was unethical for him to stay in that conversation.
Let me get to some text here as well. Dan,
I agree with you the mistakes are made by humans.
That being said, I agree with Ryan that when the
(15:59):
genus simple because identified that person loses their job and
clearance and listen, that may need to happen, you know,
based upon Okay, was this such gross negligence and recklessness
that person just has to be fired as an example
to others, or can't be trusted.
Speaker 2 (16:16):
Maybe there will be some level.
Speaker 1 (16:18):
Of criminal culpability there because the laws, you know, when
it comes to classified information are so strict.
Speaker 2 (16:23):
The problem we have is that once.
Speaker 1 (16:26):
The Democrats decided they were going to let all the
Democrats off without any criminal culpability, starting with Hillary Clinton,
that all of a sudden, the standard has been dramatically lowered. Dan,
My question is why was the reporter's name and number
anywhere near this textcrip? Yeah, we've got to get an
answer to that. I don't know. You know, some possibilities
(16:46):
are if you look on the more innocent side. I
think you have a lot of situations where people think
that they've put let's say, a contact that they put
the contact information for person A in the person A file,
but then they accidentally put somebody else's contact information in there.
I think we've probably all had that happen, but obviously
(17:10):
it can't be happening at this level, Dan Love, while
you try to flip the blame on the reporter for
not getting out of the chat room soon enough, how
long was he in there?
Speaker 2 (17:17):
Do you know?
Speaker 1 (17:18):
He was in there for a long time, right, He
was monitoring this thing as it unfolded. And obviously I
have praised the reporter, who I don't like. I don't
like his lefty stuff. I think he does a lot
of dishonest stuff. I have praised him for not publicizing
these facts at the time when they could have blown
up the operation in or gotten somebody killed. I praised
him for that, But ethically, how could anybody justify him
(17:41):
staying in? And obviously I've been critical of the people
in the Trump administration for not just owning up to
the mistake, saying, hey, read the text, you'll be very.
Speaker 2 (17:52):
Impressed with how we operated this mission.
Speaker 1 (17:55):
But yeah, that was a mistake that can't happen again,
and we're going to get you the full truth on it.
And the problem with the Trump administration admitting a mistake
is that the mainstream media would pick that up and
it would be the news cycle inte Election twenty eight.
Speaker 2 (18:06):
Who cares? First of all, you know it from the
time you were a little kid. It's in our DNA.
Speaker 1 (18:12):
As Americans, we respond very favorably, no matter how bad
the offense to somebody saying hey, I'm sorry, I made
a mistake.
Speaker 2 (18:20):
It'll never happen again.
Speaker 1 (18:21):
We're just wired to respond positively in that first, I
think it would be good politics. More importantly, it's the
right thing to do here on the Dankpla Show.
Speaker 4 (18:35):
You're listening to the Dan Kaplis Show podcast.
Speaker 2 (18:41):
What is it about Colorado?
Speaker 1 (18:43):
All of this insane craziness, this utter disrespect for parents'
rights and this belief to somehow elevating as a SAO
sacred right trans in kids.
Speaker 2 (18:55):
What's going on here?
Speaker 1 (18:56):
I'm going to talk to laur Gimmelstein right now from
Colorado Parent Advocacy Network about a story that they've been following.
We have some sound from that as well. Laurie, Welcome
to the Dan Kapla Show.
Speaker 7 (19:08):
Good actinute, Dan, thank you so much for the opportunity
to join you today.
Speaker 1 (19:11):
Well, thank you, and please just set the scene for
everybody and then we'll play some of this sound.
Speaker 7 (19:18):
Absolutely so if the Colorado Parent Advocacy Network we have
an incident reporting tool. It's really the heart of what
we do to help families and educators across the state
of Colorado that are experiencing difficulties. And in November, a
mom named Cindy Stein from Durango submitted an incident report
and her daughter at the time in November, when the
(19:40):
report came in, had basically sent her a text message
indicating that she was a Now she not only thought
she was a boy, but that she is a boy.
And that was a text message that came into mom
and Mom, you know, it was completely taken aback. It
had not you know, she was just like, what is
(20:01):
going on? You're not a boy or my daughter? You know,
basically a conversation that every parent would have with their
child when their child brings up a topic where you know,
they need some guidance and some direction on. And the conversation,
you know, basically ended with mom, you know, basically say
we're gonna we're going to move, We're going to go
(20:21):
up to Denver, going to spend some time with your grandmother,
and we're going to kind of get away from this environment.
And uh, the child ended up leaving and running away
and mom didn't know where she was.
Speaker 2 (20:32):
And that's that's.
Speaker 7 (20:33):
When kind of the calls came into to CPAN because
she needed to get some assistance, and she was eventually
returned home and life was quite tense. And we've uncovered
through all of our research and in our investigation that
she had developed a very close relationship with a former
math teacher at Durrangele High School named joe Anne Smotherman.
(20:56):
Now Smotherman may be a familiar name to some of
your listeners because the and sub motherman Joanne's spouse, who
is a biological male that believes he's a transgender woman,
is UH. His is married to joe Ane and Uh.
And that's where why the name might be familiar to
several of your listeners. But they essentially are l g B,
(21:20):
t Q activist. They really encouraged Jocelyn to move away
from her parents. We have documentation of text messages not
only between you know, Joanne and Uh, the daughter, but
also between the school counselor where there are bates basically
coaching her and coercing her to boove away from her family. Uh,
(21:44):
the counselor providing information on how to go in and
take the parents off the medical records, giving information on
how to get an apartment. The Joanne motherman Uh. At
the time when she was starting to be friends, the
daughter had encouraged her to drop out of high school.
(22:05):
So this was junior year, and there are some you
know that the daughter's very vulnerable, she's got some comorbidities
like autism and ADHD. She's very high functioning, but you
struggled in school, struggled socially, and you know, this relationship
came at a time when her mother had been diagnosed
with cancer and was going to extremely aggressive therapy. And
(22:27):
so mom, you know, felt like, well, maybe she has
a friend at school and thought maybe the GED is
a good idea, and you know, had a gut feeling
maybe this isn't the right thing, but you know, her
her daughter was upset and really wanted to do this,
and allowed her daughter to go to the Adult Drango
adult education senator to pursue her GED, which she did get.
Speaker 2 (22:51):
And we've uncovered and learned.
Speaker 7 (22:53):
That there is a gigantic gender ideology component in that
center and the people that work there. And when as
we're getting into December, the relationship that the family is
getting very tense. The daughters is dressing like a male
(23:14):
using you know, male yodorant and shampoo and getting a
kind of more aggressive and unhappy and they have an argument.
And part of the agreement and after the November runaway
experience was that they would find two homes where the
daughter could go in the event that she was you know,
(23:36):
stressed out, uncomfortable, unhappy, quote unquote unsafe, felt unsafe, and
that was what agreed upon. It was great upon which
health Protective services. And the daughter said, I'm leaving and
mom said, I'm not going to stand in your way,
and that's what the mom said. She'd say, I'm kissing
you out.
Speaker 2 (23:54):
I'm not going to say.
Speaker 7 (23:54):
I think you're just going to go to one of
these two places, which she doesn't do. And when we
realize that she is with this teacher that she doesn't
have permission to be with, we file a runaway report
with the Laplatta County Deputy Share Office and this was
December twenty sixth, and we were eventually told that they
(24:19):
removed the runaway status. They weren't going to do anything.
They said, you can do whatever you want.
Speaker 2 (24:24):
You can pick her up.
Speaker 7 (24:25):
And we have multiple communications that we've documented with the
Laplatta County Police department. We actually file the complaint today
for a full investigation into everything.
Speaker 2 (24:36):
That's gone down. But Cindy went to.
Speaker 7 (24:38):
Retrieve her daughter on January stipth, and that's the story
that broke yesterday, that particular story.
Speaker 1 (24:45):
So the sound we're about to hear, and the videos
available as well, I've seen it, is when Cindy goes
to retrieve her daughter and then there are two other
women in the car. Who's in the car with Cindy.
Speaker 7 (24:57):
Two friends?
Speaker 2 (24:58):
Two friends? Yeah, okay, and that's okay.
Speaker 1 (25:01):
I don't need the names, but I was just kind
of curious watching the video. But that's what people are
about to hear.
Speaker 2 (25:06):
Now.
Speaker 1 (25:07):
Describe for folks the visual on the first part of
this sound, which appears to me as if an officer
is in the home now talking to the daughter.
Speaker 2 (25:17):
Is that right?
Speaker 7 (25:19):
Yes, So when the officers arrived on scene, they walked
up the stairs of the other man's very small, one
bedroom home and they kind of giggled and laughed, and
you know, it's very friendly. Just in the deputy server
basically just claimed that he was just there for a
(25:39):
welfare check, very very calm, and they walked in and
the daughter was sitting on a couch and Joanne was
sitting to her left to the officer's right. And you know,
when any any time that there is a situation where
a child feels threatened or is it the situation with
(26:01):
an abuser and the abuser is in that room, that
child is not going to admit anything.
Speaker 1 (26:05):
Now, let me let me ask you this before I
go to sound, and I want folks to hear some
of the sound before the breakthrough. The rest of it
will have to come after the break But at this point,
would you refer to somebody as an abuser. There haven't
been any charges brought against disjoint smothermen or anybody else. Right,
that's so you're giving your opinion on what you thinks.
Speaker 7 (26:25):
Going and an analogy. I'm using an analogy. I'm not
claiming that she's an abuser. I'm just saying that in
this if that was a situation, we have a mom
calling in distress, saying her child is being harbored by
an adult that won't let her go, that she doesn't
have permission to be with. And so that's concern. The
(26:47):
mother is concerned that there is abuse happening, and in
that situation, the police officer you know, his due diligence
is his duty is to investigate that well.
Speaker 1 (27:00):
And what we'll do now because I want folks to
be able to hear the sound in a coherent way.
Speaker 2 (27:04):
And thank you for that set up there.
Speaker 1 (27:06):
Lourie Kimmostein is our guest Colorado Parent Advocacy Network.
Speaker 2 (27:10):
We'll come back and we'll pick it up now.
Speaker 1 (27:11):
That you've had a description of what we're about to hear,
we'll pick it up with the audio again. There's video
that goes with this, and then we'll cycle back and
talk about what can be done here. You're on the
Dan Kapla Show.
Speaker 4 (27:30):
And now back to the Dan Kapla Show Podcast fifty.
Speaker 2 (27:33):
Glad you're here.
Speaker 1 (27:34):
Larry Kimmostein our guest from Colorado Parent Advocacy Network. We
won't repeat the long setup. Lurie spent the last segment
telling us this story is I understand it of a
seventeen year old girl who had texted her mom saying
that hey, I'm really a boy, and then the mother
said no, you're not, and one thing led to another,
(27:54):
and then the child ends up, as I understand it,
living at the home of some other adults and the
mother wants her out of there, and that's what we're
going to pick up this sound and there's video as
well that goes with this, and we'll tell you when
we're done where you can see that video when you
get home. Anything you want to add to that, Lourie,
before I fired up, Hey.
Speaker 7 (28:19):
Deputies are on scene at the home. Mom has called
nine one one, The teacher has refused to release her daughter,
called their attorney and now deputies are finally on scene
after the mom waited over an hour for them to arrive.
Speaker 1 (28:32):
And when you say teacher for those not with us
in the last segment, this is apparently a former math
teacher of the daughter who the daughter is now staying with.
Speaker 7 (28:41):
Correct, And I'm also employed by the Durango Adult Education Center,
so she works there as well.
Speaker 1 (28:48):
And at this point in the story, is the daughter
still viewing herself as a male or has that phase passed?
Speaker 7 (28:58):
No, the mother and call her ONYX and you tee
him pronounce or they pronounce.
Speaker 2 (29:08):
For Cindy's daughter. Okay, And here is where the story
picks up.
Speaker 1 (29:13):
And again the visual here is I understand it is
the officer walking into the home where the daughter's present
along with Laurie tells us the smotherman's and then you'll
hear that, and then you'll hear the officer walk back out,
and then you'll hear that the child's mother interact with
the officers.
Speaker 8 (29:33):
I'm deputy server. How are you very good? That's all
I need to basically hear. I'm just coming by to
make sure you're good, you know what I mean. I'm
not going to try to insert myself into something that's
already sort of in process or whatever you're doing.
Speaker 2 (29:49):
You know, and by legal standard.
Speaker 8 (29:51):
You're technically a minor as a seventeen year old. But
I just wanted to make sure you're good.
Speaker 2 (30:00):
Yeah, Okrect're very good. That's all I need for now.
Speaker 8 (30:04):
And I appreciate you guys, and I appreciate your willingness
to I don't know, I guess help me check boxes, right.
Speaker 1 (30:12):
You know, I'm going to pause it for a second, Lorie.
And again, I'm not involved in this. I don't know
all the intimate details. I don't know whether she was
good or not at that moment. But I think your
point being that, hypothetically, let's not even talk about that situation.
Just generally speaking, if if a miner in that situation
(30:33):
was not good. You know, could an officer rely on
that exchange to conclude that the miner was good?
Speaker 2 (30:41):
Correct?
Speaker 7 (30:43):
Usually in an investigation and discuss in discussions with other
investigators is that the individual is interviewed separately, away from
the people that you know they're being that are housing now, right,
So if there's a concern by a parent, the investigation
would separate the child from the people and then give
(31:06):
them an opportunity to disclose in private if anything was happening.
Speaker 2 (31:11):
There was.
Speaker 7 (31:11):
There was absolutely no effort on Deputy Server's part to
verify or validate anything that the mom claims or you
know that others, some other men are just like, yes, absolutely,
she's totally fine, everything's great. And instead he just said,
I'm just there to check boxes. I mean, this was
(31:32):
not an investigation at all. There was no due diligence
in this investigation. It's outrageous and.
Speaker 1 (31:40):
We'll certainly invite the deputy on it. And obviously, you know,
I've got to bias in the son of a thirty
year cup, a fantastic cup, and and so I tend
to give a lot of deference to law enforcement their
feel for a situation, how to best handle a situation,
how to evaluate it, you know, based upon everything that
can be seen and heard and sensed. I get you concern,
(32:00):
I certainly do, but let me pick it up from here.
Speaker 8 (32:08):
I'm probably going to have to speak with them.
Speaker 2 (32:12):
Adown exactly now who's he referring to at that point?
Speaker 7 (32:18):
So the two deputies are walking to their vehicles. They're
about to drive down to Cindy's vehicle, which is just
off the property on the street, and one of the
deputies says, you know, we're probably gonna have to speak
with them, and actually I think it was Deputy Server
that said we're going to have to speak with them,
and then the other deputy said they're probably going to
(32:40):
have a meltdown, and then they both have started laughing, and.
Speaker 1 (32:44):
Then we being Cindy being the mother, so we'll we'll
pick it up from there.
Speaker 8 (32:58):
So I'm Deputy Server, and you folks are I'm mom.
Speaker 2 (33:03):
Okay, all right, okay.
Speaker 8 (33:08):
So I basically went and did a welfare check and
I don't see signs of distress.
Speaker 9 (33:16):
There doesn't need to be distressed. She needs to come home.
She's harbored by these folks. That does not have my
permission to be here. She is a minor. I don't
care if she's a day away from eighteen. A minor
is a minor, and she does not had my permission.
Speaker 8 (33:31):
To be here, right, But again, it doesn't rise to
the level of law enforcement involvement.
Speaker 2 (33:36):
She's not in distress right now.
Speaker 9 (33:39):
I'm sorry you're telling me that you're not going.
Speaker 2 (33:41):
To physically rip her out of that home.
Speaker 9 (33:44):
Yeah, even if there was an agreement between CPS and
her and the mother that.
Speaker 8 (33:49):
That those are civil agreements and you're gonna have to
deal with those on a civil level.
Speaker 9 (33:54):
So even though she is a minor, she has no
permission to be here, she's technically a runaway.
Speaker 8 (34:02):
At this point.
Speaker 2 (34:03):
They're harboring and that's okay.
Speaker 3 (34:09):
I mean, we heard you.
Speaker 9 (34:10):
Guys laugh up there, So there's obviously something that was fun.
Isn't they kidnapping when you were supposed to give a
child back? No, seriously, So what was funny is what
I'd like to know what you guys were laughing at them?
Speaker 7 (34:24):
So what was funny?
Speaker 2 (34:26):
I don't believe that's relevant.
Speaker 7 (34:29):
I do when you're talking about a child.
Speaker 2 (34:33):
This is a seventeen year old. He's still a minor.
Speaker 8 (34:36):
Minor and child are different, and distress was not seen.
I was told to distress, there isn't.
Speaker 1 (34:43):
Any and Laurie, I only pause it there because of
remaining time in the segment. So why don't you close
out the segment for us and then tell people how
they can follow you, how they can learn more about
your group, and where they can see the video.
Speaker 7 (34:59):
Absolutely, you know. So what I would really like to
mention to the listeners is that there has been a
formal complaint filed against the La Plata County Sheriff's office.
Cindy is a mom and she's done everything in her
power to go through the proper channels and follow the
law and protect her child, and she's just been treated
really with contempt and disregard by the very people that
(35:20):
are supposed to a full justice. So people can learn more,
follow us on x at CPN Colorado and subscribe on
our website, join us, join the movement Coloradoparents dot org.
Speaker 1 (35:31):
Heay, thank you, Laurie. Really appreciate the time today. We're
pleased with so many in the law enforcement community in
our audience.
Speaker 2 (35:37):
Would love your reaction to what you heard.
Speaker 1 (35:39):
What you think the proper protocol would be here if
you're on the Dankapito Show.
This is Dan Caplis and welcome to today's online podcast
edition of The Dan Caplis Show. Please be sure to
give us a five star rating if you'd be so kind,
and to subscribe, download and listen to the show every
single day on your favorite podcast platform. Justice Are the
American Way, Ryan, and that ties into this signal issue,
(00:20):
which to me is one of the more interesting issues
in a long time because it touches on so much right,
so much that's a big part of your daily life,
so much that part of our national life as well,
and I think there are so many different lessons coming
out of this, but'd love to get your take on
this and everything else. Three or three someone three A
two five five text d an five seven seven three nine.
(00:45):
And we've got a lot on the agenda locally today
as well. Special guests at four thirty six to talk
about another situation where we're allegedly, you know, is somebody
has a miner who maybe they're in the process of
trying to trans and the parents want the minor back.
That sort of situation we will get into again at
(01:06):
four thirty six. Obviously, we've devoted a lot of this
show to one of the most truly shocking and disturbing
school related events in a very long time in Colorado.
The Columbine situation that we've spent so much time on here,
where people at the school were actually planning to have
this child declared homeless so she could be taken from
(01:27):
her parents' home, never even let the parents know about
all this. She obviously had a very solid home. So
do we have another one of those situations. That's a
question that I pose, and we'll get more information at
four thirty six, But I do want to start with
this business about that. The accidental involvement of this reporter,
(01:49):
as Jeffrey Goldberg from the Atlantic, in this obviously ver
very highly sensitive conversation regarding this plan strike on the
hutis which as you know, was very successful.
Speaker 2 (02:03):
And to me.
Speaker 1 (02:05):
There are a few things that really jump out, and
one is if I wish everybody in America could read
the full text string and if they did, you know
Trump's approval, which is pretty darn high right now, We've
got some current sound on that as well from ceeingnoball places.
Speaker 2 (02:23):
I think is approval with Skyrocket.
Speaker 1 (02:25):
I think people would be very impressed with what they
saw with the communications with the planning. Obviously, the success
of the strike, I think it would give Americans even
more confidence in the administration if everybody could read this string.
At the same time, it's a huge mistake, right, can't
(02:45):
be doing this, and we're all human. Everything is a
human process, and this was a big mistake. Fortunately, fortunately
a mistake that didn't have any consequences. This mission was
a success, but it's a mistake that could have potentially
been disastrous, at least in this sense. Okay, at least
(03:07):
in the sense that the mission may have been called off.
Let's say that the reporter had immediately notified Walts, which
he should have. If he should have, the reporter should
have immediately notified the government he'd been accidentally included. The
reporter should not have continued to be part of those communications,
should not have continued to allow himself to have access
(03:28):
to communications he obviously was not intended to have access to.
But if he had ironically done what he should and
notified Waltz or others at that point, the mission probably
would have had to have been scrapped, right because at
that point they couldn't be sure there was enough operational security,
and it would have been tragic if the mission had
to be scrapped. So that's just kind of the starting
(03:50):
point on this kind of enormous mistake just can't happen.
But this we know right in life, enormous mistakes do happen,
including at the highest levels, including by probably all of
the greatest figures in American history. And I challenge anybody
Ryan I'll probably say Woodrow Wilson, because I think that's
(04:11):
has answered everything, right, But I challenge anybody to point
to any great figure in American history, and you can
start with Washington, Lincoln, whoever, any of the founding fathers, mothers,
bring them in, who has not made some enormous mistake
which had enormous public consequences.
Speaker 2 (04:30):
It's just part of being human.
Speaker 1 (04:31):
It's of having that level of responsibility, the heavy weight,
because we all see how these presidents age so dramatically, right,
And part of that is just the heavy weight of
knowing you are going to make mistakes, and when you
make a mistake, it may get a lot of people killed,
it could get a country killed, and so that's a
(04:52):
heavy weight to bear. But I would never in a
million years expect the Trump presidency to be any exception
you know, yeah, he's wrecking up the w's a lot
quicker than most anybody in modern time. But there are
going to be those mistakes. And what I'm disappointed in
here isn't necessarily the mistake. Wish it hadn't happened, but
(05:14):
you just know there are going to be some mistakes
in your life and my life, and the president's life, etc.
I'm just disappointed in the response to it because that
the response to it, in my view, should have been, Hey,
wait a second, everybody go read the text. Look at
how good we are, look at how good our people are,
look at how good everybody on that text string is,
(05:36):
at what they do, and look at the great outcome
for America. That would have been my first point. My
second point would have been big mistake and it will
not happen again. So the effort to try and claim
there was no classified information, downplay it, attack Jeffrey Goldberg,
and believe me, I'm no fan of his at all
(05:56):
at all. Again, I'm very critical of him for not
a mediately dropping out of that communication he knew.
Speaker 2 (06:03):
He was not supposed to be part of.
Speaker 1 (06:06):
But at the same time, even though he in my view,
is very often a bad actor on the left. He
did the right thing in the sense that, while yeah,
he should have dropped out of the conversation right away,
he did not publicly revealed the details that could have
blown up the mission, could have gotten people killed. So
(06:28):
it's to his credit that he did not reveal those details.
But the point is, the very best in the world
are going to make mistakes, just admit it, own it,
and the American people, I think respect that tremendously, and
I think there are so many examples that you can
probably think of him from your own life where if
people had just stepped up. And this crosses party lines, right,
(06:50):
I mean, the left screws up a whole lot more
than the right, but we're all human, we all mess up,
and these politicians just don't seem to get it. If
they would just come out and say, Okay, hey, big mistake,
won't happen again, and then emphasize the positive that can
be honestly emphasized. But trying to go out and tell
people there is no classified information here. Maybe they've changed
(07:13):
the definition of classified information, Ryan, but I think if
there's information about when you're going to strike, who you're
going to strike, how you're going to strike shortly before
you strike. If that ain't classified, nothing should be.
Speaker 3 (07:27):
This is one of those, Dan. I approach it from
a sports perspective. You know, there's something that the opposing
team does that maybe gets in the way of you winning.
And then there's things that you do wrong turnovers like
in the March Madness tournament, etc. And this is one
of those by the Trump administration. And I couldn't agree
with you more. You can point fingers all you want
at Goldberg or whatnot. And he's not a great guy,
(07:48):
and he's not an honest arbiter, and he's not an
actor in good faith. But like you said, he deserves credit.
He didn't reveal these plans. I think some of that
was self preservation. He thought he might be getting trolled
and that this wasn't a legitimate thread. And then he
went out to his car in the parking lot minutes
after he got this text information about the strikes, and
he saw on the Twitter x chatter that it.
Speaker 2 (08:09):
Was happening, so then he knew it was real. But
wait a second, bro.
Speaker 1 (08:13):
Anybody everybody knows just on their own basic ethics, right,
if you're not supposed to be part of a conversation,
you end it right there. You in most situations notify
the person. Hey, I don't think I'm meant to be
involved here, but at the very least you cut it off.
Obviously in my profession, my business law, right, yeah, you
darn well better, you're not going to have your license right.
Speaker 3 (08:34):
That being set, and I acknowledge that this is a
mistake by the Trump team and whoever made the mistake,
if it was a mistake, because why of all reporters,
this is what Joe Kernan was saying on CNBC with
Mark Warner, the centator from Virginia. Why have any reporter
in the in the universe, Brett Behar, you know, anybody
else that has journalistic and Lester Holt. Why was the
(08:57):
worst actor against the Trump administration to be Luke?
Speaker 2 (09:00):
And who did it? Why did they do it? How
did they do it?
Speaker 3 (09:02):
And the biggest thing for me, Dan as a Trump supporter,
that person, whoever it is, needs to be rooted out,
fired and made an example.
Speaker 1 (09:10):
If it was Espionache, if somebody on the inside intentionally
looped Goldberg in, well they need to be prosecuted. I mean, yeah,
they need to be fired and prosecuted. If it was
some kind of human error, and I think that can
I think there are a number of different ways that
human error could happen, and we can get into some
of those after the break will take calls starting after
(09:30):
the break will start.
Speaker 3 (09:31):
What do you think, as a matter of principle, Dan,
somebody needs to be held accountable for this on the
Trump team and cut out.
Speaker 1 (09:37):
Well, not necessarily, and I'll expand on that. I know
we have to this break, but here's my point. If
it was not done intentionally, and if there is some
explanation that stops short of just grossing competence, some kind
of technical switcheroo, then I don't think somebody necessarily has
to be fired. That's where I think you come back to.
(09:58):
Looking at you know, the Ledger. They're overall good, how
much good they do.
Speaker 2 (10:03):
Versus this mistake.
Speaker 1 (10:04):
But so no, I don't think it's an automatic somebody's
got to be fired over this. This isn't like the
disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan, which has premeditated, deliberate, planned out
over time, et cetera. This, if it is what it
appears to be, was one enormous human error, you get
to the bottom of it then make those calls three
or three someone three eight two five five text d
(10:25):
A N five seven seven three nine.
Speaker 2 (10:26):
Y're on the Dan Kapla Show.
Speaker 4 (10:35):
And now back to the Dan Kaplas Show podcast, Chevan Leclaire.
Speaker 5 (10:40):
One of the first things that happened when I was
confirmed as CIA director was Signal was loaded onto my
computer at the CIA, as it is for most CIA officers.
One of the things that I was briefed on very
early Senator was by the CIA records management folks about
the use of Signal as a permissible work use. It
(11:03):
is that is a practice that preceded the current administration
to the Biden mine.
Speaker 1 (11:09):
Yeah, and then I think the question would be why.
And again my starting point if you just joined us
and we'll go to the phone lines now, is I
wish every American could read the excuse me, the full
text string because you'd be very, very impressed with his
Trump team obviously with the outcome of the mission. But
why is anybody using an open source app like that?
(11:30):
And I don't doubt the director there that it's been
in use for a while, But why, There's got to
be a better way. Let's go to Dean and Ravada.
You're on the Dan Kaplas.
Speaker 2 (11:40):
You'll welcome.
Speaker 6 (11:41):
Hey, Hey, Dan, that the Hey. The question I have,
why haven't well maybe they have, Maybe they are the
FBI and investigating the reporter. Number one.
Speaker 2 (11:56):
He needs to be.
Speaker 6 (11:57):
Questioned thoroughly on when he got this, why he didn't
turn it over right away. You know, there's a lot
of like he has responsibility as a reporter to to
you know, to let the government know I'm in the
wrong chat here.
Speaker 1 (12:13):
Well, I think his responsibility I'm not saying a legal responsibility,
and somebody may educate me. I don't think there's a
statute that he violated, but I think his responsibility was
like it would be with any conversation. If you accidentally
texted him thinking you were texting your wife, the responsibility
is to drop out of that communication because you know,
you aren't supposed to.
Speaker 2 (12:34):
Be part of it.
Speaker 1 (12:35):
Obviously, when we talk about something of this nature, you know, he,
I think would have to know whether it's basic journalistic ethics,
you know, basic human ethics. He should not have continued
to monitor it. But I do respect the fact that
he did not publicize these facts at a time when
they could have gotten people killed.
Speaker 6 (12:54):
Right, No, that's true. I think that Brian makes a
good point. They define this sore all the way back
to how this happened.
Speaker 5 (13:02):
You know it was.
Speaker 6 (13:04):
Trump guy, you know, the one that admitted fault, and
I guess he takes full responsibility, but I'm thinking someone
else had something to do with it as well.
Speaker 2 (13:13):
Yeah, we got to know.
Speaker 6 (13:14):
Last thing. Last thing, I want to know when we're
going to get some people charged with fraudways and abuse,
and I want to see I want to see some
people in trouble over this. Oh no, you getting away
with this for millions. I let you go down.
Speaker 2 (13:29):
No, Dean, you make.
Speaker 1 (13:30):
Such a great point, my friend, and I'm with you,
and that is it drives me crazy. In my law practice,
I'd have been doing this forty years and we represent
catastrophically injured people or people who've been killed through the
recklessness of others. And I've had so many of these cases.
I have multiple going right now, you know, against these
big corporations where in my view, you know, the deliberate
(13:51):
decisions are made, Okay, we're going to do something dangerous
because it's going to be cheaper to pay the claims
that then it's going to be to do something safer.
Speaker 2 (13:59):
That's my take on it.
Speaker 1 (14:00):
Not every case, but some right, some other cases are
their negligence, their carelessness, and yes, they've got to make
it right, they've got to compensate people. But you get
these other cases where there are these conscious, deliberate decisions
made that that people have to know could easily get
somebody killed.
Speaker 2 (14:17):
Why aren't people going to jail in those cases? Right?
Speaker 1 (14:20):
I mean, you get somebody they go into a seven
to eleven. Maybe not in Colorado because Polis and the
left right now are so criminal friendly, but most saying
places in America, you get somebody they walk into a
seven eleven.
Speaker 2 (14:31):
They stick that place up.
Speaker 1 (14:32):
They're probably going to the state pen for a lot
of years, and they should. But why do you get
these top corporate types who sit there in these fancy boardrooms,
being catered all these nice beverages and food, and then
they make these conscious deliberate decisions. Yeah, yeah, we're going
to do it this way, and we know it'll probably
get people killed, but it's cheaper to pay the claims.
Why don't they end up in a jail cell? I mean,
(14:55):
you know, we'll hit them for a lot of money
and a jury verdict or this or that, But why
don't they end up in a jail cell. Yeah, I'm
with the caller. I'm frustrated by all that. I'm not
saying anybody needs to go to jail over this signal thing,
but we need the full truth in the end of
how it happened.
Speaker 2 (15:10):
The public needs to know. My guess is we're going
to find out that it was some kind.
Speaker 1 (15:15):
Of text switcheroo and sometime somehow the wrong name got
into somebody's contacts or into somebody's file and got onto
this string. And I think it's most likely going to
be something like that. And in a case like that,
I think you just need to clean it up, make
sure it never happens again. But I'm not saying that
you fire Waltz over this, you know, unless there are
(15:39):
different facts that come to the four. The reporter didn't
break any laws, did something admirable in not reporting it
while the mission was still being carried out, But I
think it was unethical for him to stay in that conversation.
Let me get to some text here as well. Dan,
I agree with you the mistakes are made by humans.
That being said, I agree with Ryan that when the
(15:59):
genus simple because identified that person loses their job and
clearance and listen, that may need to happen, you know,
based upon Okay, was this such gross negligence and recklessness
that person just has to be fired as an example
to others, or can't be trusted.
Speaker 2 (16:16):
Maybe there will be some level.
Speaker 1 (16:18):
Of criminal culpability there because the laws, you know, when
it comes to classified information are so strict.
Speaker 2 (16:23):
The problem we have is that once.
Speaker 1 (16:26):
The Democrats decided they were going to let all the
Democrats off without any criminal culpability, starting with Hillary Clinton,
that all of a sudden, the standard has been dramatically lowered. Dan,
My question is why was the reporter's name and number
anywhere near this textcrip? Yeah, we've got to get an
answer to that. I don't know. You know, some possibilities
(16:46):
are if you look on the more innocent side. I
think you have a lot of situations where people think
that they've put let's say, a contact that they put
the contact information for person A in the person A file,
but then they accidentally put somebody else's contact information in there.
I think we've probably all had that happen, but obviously
(17:10):
it can't be happening at this level, Dan Love, while
you try to flip the blame on the reporter for
not getting out of the chat room soon enough, how
long was he in there?
Speaker 2 (17:17):
Do you know?
Speaker 1 (17:18):
He was in there for a long time, right, He
was monitoring this thing as it unfolded. And obviously I
have praised the reporter, who I don't like. I don't
like his lefty stuff. I think he does a lot
of dishonest stuff. I have praised him for not publicizing
these facts at the time when they could have blown
up the operation in or gotten somebody killed. I praised
him for that, But ethically, how could anybody justify him
(17:41):
staying in? And obviously I've been critical of the people
in the Trump administration for not just owning up to
the mistake, saying, hey, read the text, you'll be very.
Speaker 2 (17:52):
Impressed with how we operated this mission.
Speaker 1 (17:55):
But yeah, that was a mistake that can't happen again,
and we're going to get you the full truth on it.
And the problem with the Trump administration admitting a mistake
is that the mainstream media would pick that up and
it would be the news cycle inte Election twenty eight.
Speaker 2 (18:06):
Who cares? First of all, you know it from the
time you were a little kid. It's in our DNA.
Speaker 1 (18:12):
As Americans, we respond very favorably, no matter how bad
the offense to somebody saying hey, I'm sorry, I made
a mistake.
Speaker 2 (18:20):
It'll never happen again.
Speaker 1 (18:21):
We're just wired to respond positively in that first, I
think it would be good politics. More importantly, it's the
right thing to do here on the Dankpla Show.
Speaker 4 (18:35):
You're listening to the Dan Kaplis Show podcast.
Speaker 2 (18:41):
What is it about Colorado?
Speaker 1 (18:43):
All of this insane craziness, this utter disrespect for parents'
rights and this belief to somehow elevating as a SAO
sacred right trans in kids.
Speaker 2 (18:55):
What's going on here?
Speaker 1 (18:56):
I'm going to talk to laur Gimmelstein right now from
Colorado Parent Advocacy Network about a story that they've been following.
We have some sound from that as well. Laurie, Welcome
to the Dan Kapla Show.
Speaker 7 (19:08):
Good actinute, Dan, thank you so much for the opportunity
to join you today.
Speaker 1 (19:11):
Well, thank you, and please just set the scene for
everybody and then we'll play some of this sound.
Speaker 7 (19:18):
Absolutely so if the Colorado Parent Advocacy Network we have
an incident reporting tool. It's really the heart of what
we do to help families and educators across the state
of Colorado that are experiencing difficulties. And in November, a
mom named Cindy Stein from Durango submitted an incident report
and her daughter at the time in November, when the
(19:40):
report came in, had basically sent her a text message
indicating that she was a Now she not only thought
she was a boy, but that she is a boy.
And that was a text message that came into mom
and Mom, you know, it was completely taken aback. It
had not you know, she was just like, what is
(20:01):
going on? You're not a boy or my daughter? You know,
basically a conversation that every parent would have with their
child when their child brings up a topic where you know,
they need some guidance and some direction on. And the conversation,
you know, basically ended with mom, you know, basically say
we're gonna we're going to move, We're going to go
(20:21):
up to Denver, going to spend some time with your grandmother,
and we're going to kind of get away from this environment.
And uh, the child ended up leaving and running away
and mom didn't know where she was.
Speaker 2 (20:32):
And that's that's.
Speaker 7 (20:33):
When kind of the calls came into to CPAN because
she needed to get some assistance, and she was eventually
returned home and life was quite tense. And we've uncovered
through all of our research and in our investigation that
she had developed a very close relationship with a former
math teacher at Durrangele High School named joe Anne Smotherman.
(20:56):
Now Smotherman may be a familiar name to some of
your listeners because the and sub motherman Joanne's spouse, who
is a biological male that believes he's a transgender woman,
is UH. His is married to joe Ane and Uh.
And that's where why the name might be familiar to
several of your listeners. But they essentially are l g B,
(21:20):
t Q activist. They really encouraged Jocelyn to move away
from her parents. We have documentation of text messages not
only between you know, Joanne and Uh, the daughter, but
also between the school counselor where there are bates basically
coaching her and coercing her to boove away from her family. Uh,
(21:44):
the counselor providing information on how to go in and
take the parents off the medical records, giving information on
how to get an apartment. The Joanne motherman Uh. At
the time when she was starting to be friends, the
daughter had encouraged her to drop out of high school.
(22:05):
So this was junior year, and there are some you
know that the daughter's very vulnerable, she's got some comorbidities
like autism and ADHD. She's very high functioning, but you
struggled in school, struggled socially, and you know, this relationship
came at a time when her mother had been diagnosed
with cancer and was going to extremely aggressive therapy. And
(22:27):
so mom, you know, felt like, well, maybe she has
a friend at school and thought maybe the GED is
a good idea, and you know, had a gut feeling
maybe this isn't the right thing, but you know, her
her daughter was upset and really wanted to do this,
and allowed her daughter to go to the Adult Drango
adult education senator to pursue her GED, which she did get.
Speaker 2 (22:51):
And we've uncovered and learned.
Speaker 7 (22:53):
That there is a gigantic gender ideology component in that
center and the people that work there. And when as
we're getting into December, the relationship that the family is
getting very tense. The daughters is dressing like a male
(23:14):
using you know, male yodorant and shampoo and getting a
kind of more aggressive and unhappy and they have an argument.
And part of the agreement and after the November runaway
experience was that they would find two homes where the
daughter could go in the event that she was you know,
(23:36):
stressed out, uncomfortable, unhappy, quote unquote unsafe, felt unsafe, and
that was what agreed upon. It was great upon which
health Protective services. And the daughter said, I'm leaving and
mom said, I'm not going to stand in your way,
and that's what the mom said. She'd say, I'm kissing
you out.
Speaker 2 (23:54):
I'm not going to say.
Speaker 7 (23:54):
I think you're just going to go to one of
these two places, which she doesn't do. And when we
realize that she is with this teacher that she doesn't
have permission to be with, we file a runaway report
with the Laplatta County Deputy Share Office and this was
December twenty sixth, and we were eventually told that they
(24:19):
removed the runaway status. They weren't going to do anything.
They said, you can do whatever you want.
Speaker 2 (24:24):
You can pick her up.
Speaker 7 (24:25):
And we have multiple communications that we've documented with the
Laplatta County Police department. We actually file the complaint today
for a full investigation into everything.
Speaker 2 (24:36):
That's gone down. But Cindy went to.
Speaker 7 (24:38):
Retrieve her daughter on January stipth, and that's the story
that broke yesterday, that particular story.
Speaker 1 (24:45):
So the sound we're about to hear, and the videos
available as well, I've seen it, is when Cindy goes
to retrieve her daughter and then there are two other
women in the car. Who's in the car with Cindy.
Speaker 7 (24:57):
Two friends?
Speaker 2 (24:58):
Two friends? Yeah, okay, and that's okay.
Speaker 1 (25:01):
I don't need the names, but I was just kind
of curious watching the video. But that's what people are
about to hear.
Speaker 2 (25:06):
Now.
Speaker 1 (25:07):
Describe for folks the visual on the first part of
this sound, which appears to me as if an officer
is in the home now talking to the daughter.
Speaker 2 (25:17):
Is that right?
Speaker 7 (25:19):
Yes, So when the officers arrived on scene, they walked
up the stairs of the other man's very small, one
bedroom home and they kind of giggled and laughed, and
you know, it's very friendly. Just in the deputy server
basically just claimed that he was just there for a
(25:39):
welfare check, very very calm, and they walked in and
the daughter was sitting on a couch and Joanne was
sitting to her left to the officer's right. And you know,
when any any time that there is a situation where
a child feels threatened or is it the situation with
(26:01):
an abuser and the abuser is in that room, that
child is not going to admit anything.
Speaker 1 (26:05):
Now, let me let me ask you this before I
go to sound, and I want folks to hear some
of the sound before the breakthrough. The rest of it
will have to come after the break But at this point,
would you refer to somebody as an abuser. There haven't
been any charges brought against disjoint smothermen or anybody else. Right,
that's so you're giving your opinion on what you thinks.
Speaker 7 (26:25):
Going and an analogy. I'm using an analogy. I'm not
claiming that she's an abuser. I'm just saying that in
this if that was a situation, we have a mom
calling in distress, saying her child is being harbored by
an adult that won't let her go, that she doesn't
have permission to be with. And so that's concern. The
(26:47):
mother is concerned that there is abuse happening, and in
that situation, the police officer you know, his due diligence
is his duty is to investigate that well.
Speaker 1 (27:00):
And what we'll do now because I want folks to
be able to hear the sound in a coherent way.
Speaker 2 (27:04):
And thank you for that set up there.
Speaker 1 (27:06):
Lourie Kimmostein is our guest Colorado Parent Advocacy Network.
Speaker 2 (27:10):
We'll come back and we'll pick it up now.
Speaker 1 (27:11):
That you've had a description of what we're about to hear,
we'll pick it up with the audio again. There's video
that goes with this, and then we'll cycle back and
talk about what can be done here. You're on the
Dan Kapla Show.
Speaker 4 (27:30):
And now back to the Dan Kapla Show Podcast fifty.
Speaker 2 (27:33):
Glad you're here.
Speaker 1 (27:34):
Larry Kimmostein our guest from Colorado Parent Advocacy Network. We
won't repeat the long setup. Lurie spent the last segment
telling us this story is I understand it of a
seventeen year old girl who had texted her mom saying
that hey, I'm really a boy, and then the mother
said no, you're not, and one thing led to another,
(27:54):
and then the child ends up, as I understand it,
living at the home of some other adults and the
mother wants her out of there, and that's what we're
going to pick up this sound and there's video as
well that goes with this, and we'll tell you when
we're done where you can see that video when you
get home. Anything you want to add to that, Lourie,
before I fired up, Hey.
Speaker 7 (28:19):
Deputies are on scene at the home. Mom has called
nine one one, The teacher has refused to release her daughter,
called their attorney and now deputies are finally on scene
after the mom waited over an hour for them to arrive.
Speaker 1 (28:32):
And when you say teacher for those not with us
in the last segment, this is apparently a former math
teacher of the daughter who the daughter is now staying with.
Speaker 7 (28:41):
Correct, And I'm also employed by the Durango Adult Education Center,
so she works there as well.
Speaker 1 (28:48):
And at this point in the story, is the daughter
still viewing herself as a male or has that phase passed?
Speaker 7 (28:58):
No, the mother and call her ONYX and you tee
him pronounce or they pronounce.
Speaker 2 (29:08):
For Cindy's daughter. Okay, And here is where the story
picks up.
Speaker 1 (29:13):
And again the visual here is I understand it is
the officer walking into the home where the daughter's present
along with Laurie tells us the smotherman's and then you'll
hear that, and then you'll hear the officer walk back out,
and then you'll hear that the child's mother interact with
the officers.
Speaker 8 (29:33):
I'm deputy server. How are you very good? That's all
I need to basically hear. I'm just coming by to
make sure you're good, you know what I mean. I'm
not going to try to insert myself into something that's
already sort of in process or whatever you're doing.
Speaker 2 (29:49):
You know, and by legal standard.
Speaker 8 (29:51):
You're technically a minor as a seventeen year old. But
I just wanted to make sure you're good.
Speaker 2 (30:00):
Yeah, Okrect're very good. That's all I need for now.
Speaker 8 (30:04):
And I appreciate you guys, and I appreciate your willingness
to I don't know, I guess help me check boxes, right.
Speaker 1 (30:12):
You know, I'm going to pause it for a second, Lorie.
And again, I'm not involved in this. I don't know
all the intimate details. I don't know whether she was
good or not at that moment. But I think your
point being that, hypothetically, let's not even talk about that situation.
Just generally speaking, if if a miner in that situation
(30:33):
was not good. You know, could an officer rely on
that exchange to conclude that the miner was good?
Speaker 2 (30:41):
Correct?
Speaker 7 (30:43):
Usually in an investigation and discuss in discussions with other
investigators is that the individual is interviewed separately, away from
the people that you know they're being that are housing now, right,
So if there's a concern by a parent, the investigation
would separate the child from the people and then give
(31:06):
them an opportunity to disclose in private if anything was happening.
Speaker 2 (31:11):
There was.
Speaker 7 (31:11):
There was absolutely no effort on Deputy Server's part to
verify or validate anything that the mom claims or you
know that others, some other men are just like, yes, absolutely,
she's totally fine, everything's great. And instead he just said,
I'm just there to check boxes. I mean, this was
(31:32):
not an investigation at all. There was no due diligence
in this investigation. It's outrageous and.
Speaker 1 (31:40):
We'll certainly invite the deputy on it. And obviously, you know,
I've got to bias in the son of a thirty
year cup, a fantastic cup, and and so I tend
to give a lot of deference to law enforcement their
feel for a situation, how to best handle a situation,
how to evaluate it, you know, based upon everything that
can be seen and heard and sensed. I get you concern,
(32:00):
I certainly do, but let me pick it up from here.
Speaker 8 (32:08):
I'm probably going to have to speak with them.
Speaker 2 (32:12):
Adown exactly now who's he referring to at that point?
Speaker 7 (32:18):
So the two deputies are walking to their vehicles. They're
about to drive down to Cindy's vehicle, which is just
off the property on the street, and one of the
deputies says, you know, we're probably gonna have to speak
with them, and actually I think it was Deputy Server
that said we're going to have to speak with them,
and then the other deputy said they're probably going to
(32:40):
have a meltdown, and then they both have started laughing, and.
Speaker 1 (32:44):
Then we being Cindy being the mother, so we'll we'll
pick it up from there.
Speaker 8 (32:58):
So I'm Deputy Server, and you folks are I'm mom.
Speaker 2 (33:03):
Okay, all right, okay.
Speaker 8 (33:08):
So I basically went and did a welfare check and
I don't see signs of distress.
Speaker 9 (33:16):
There doesn't need to be distressed. She needs to come home.
She's harbored by these folks. That does not have my
permission to be here. She is a minor. I don't
care if she's a day away from eighteen. A minor
is a minor, and she does not had my permission.
Speaker 8 (33:31):
To be here, right, But again, it doesn't rise to
the level of law enforcement involvement.
Speaker 2 (33:36):
She's not in distress right now.
Speaker 9 (33:39):
I'm sorry you're telling me that you're not going.
Speaker 2 (33:41):
To physically rip her out of that home.
Speaker 9 (33:44):
Yeah, even if there was an agreement between CPS and
her and the mother that.
Speaker 8 (33:49):
That those are civil agreements and you're gonna have to
deal with those on a civil level.
Speaker 9 (33:54):
So even though she is a minor, she has no
permission to be here, she's technically a runaway.
Speaker 8 (34:02):
At this point.
Speaker 2 (34:03):
They're harboring and that's okay.
Speaker 3 (34:09):
I mean, we heard you.
Speaker 9 (34:10):
Guys laugh up there, So there's obviously something that was fun.
Isn't they kidnapping when you were supposed to give a
child back? No, seriously, So what was funny is what
I'd like to know what you guys were laughing at them?
Speaker 7 (34:24):
So what was funny?
Speaker 2 (34:26):
I don't believe that's relevant.
Speaker 7 (34:29):
I do when you're talking about a child.
Speaker 2 (34:33):
This is a seventeen year old. He's still a minor.
Speaker 8 (34:36):
Minor and child are different, and distress was not seen.
I was told to distress, there isn't.
Speaker 1 (34:43):
Any and Laurie, I only pause it there because of
remaining time in the segment. So why don't you close
out the segment for us and then tell people how
they can follow you, how they can learn more about
your group, and where they can see the video.
Speaker 7 (34:59):
Absolutely, you know. So what I would really like to
mention to the listeners is that there has been a
formal complaint filed against the La Plata County Sheriff's office.
Cindy is a mom and she's done everything in her
power to go through the proper channels and follow the
law and protect her child, and she's just been treated
really with contempt and disregard by the very people that
(35:20):
are supposed to a full justice. So people can learn more,
follow us on x at CPN Colorado and subscribe on
our website, join us, join the movement Coloradoparents dot org.
Speaker 1 (35:31):
Heay, thank you, Laurie. Really appreciate the time today. We're
pleased with so many in the law enforcement community in
our audience.
Speaker 2 (35:37):
Would love your reaction to what you heard.
Speaker 1 (35:39):
What you think the proper protocol would be here if
you're on the Dankapito Show.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.