The telling sentence is this one:
This is what CPS found upon their initial investigation.
What does that mean?
When was “their initial investigation”?
The Nauglers have been living at the Blessed Little Property since the fall of 2013. And they have had three different “dwellings” since moving there.
Here’s the first one.
It was a garden shed, just like the current garden shed (more or less).
According to Nicole’s account, they returned it in order to save the monthly payment, and because they were headed into winter (fall of 2014), they built the infamous Blessed Little Shitshack, where they lived until Child Protective Services came down on their heads in May, 2015 and took the kids.
But here’s what she says during the period right after they got the first shed.
So, according to Nicole’s own account, the “initial investigation” by CPS occurred eleven days after they moved into the original, first garden shed.
With Nicole, you have to read carefully, because she often chooses her words to deceive.
She’s not saying that CPS thought the Blessed Shitshack was a great place to live. She is saying that CPS, with whom the Nauglers are very, very familiar having had frequent visits from them throughout the years, thought that the original garden shed was okay.
The children were removed in May, 2015, and when they were returned, it was to the second garden shed. And Nicole and Joe had to get that one delivered before the children were returned.
They try to spin this every which way, but it just won’t spin.
They cherry-pick the situation, and say that the Guardian Ad-Litem was the only person who didn’t just faint with delight at the Blessed Little Shitshack and its quaint features and rustic ambiance. The CPS folks found it beautiful and more than adequate.
But Nicole is the same person who has insisted over and over again that the whole CPS thing is all over. Case closed. They found nothing at all except that the Nauglers failed to notify the state they were “homeschooling.”
You know what? We moved interstate with a minor child and we never even thought about CPS or anyone else for that matter. We just moved. That’s what people do when they don’t have a current, open case with Child Protective Services. When you cannot move without “the court” putting you “under that areas [sic] CPS,” you have an open case.
. . .we still have CPS visits. . .
Yeah. That’s called “we still have an open CPS case.”
But this is what Nicole wants her leghumpers to believe was found to be “structurally sound” and “clean and well organized.”
I’ve left them large (click to see them), so you can appreciate the “structural soundness” and “cleanliness and organization.”
If Kentucky’s (or any other state’s) Child Protective Services thought that mess was a “structurally sound, clean and organized” place to raise children, we have a very serious problem with Child Protective Services.
These people are not ideal poster children for some sort of silly protest against the perceived injustices of Child Protective Services. They are, instead, the sort of people who absolutely need CPS to watch their every move, hopefully until the last child is of age.