None of us can answer such a complex question, but I want to say I am so sorry. I suggest you call a lawyer, and get his or her advice. Good Luck

Wow, how terrible. If truly innocent I hope you are fighting the decision in court. I can't imagine what would cause the court to forbid his return to your home after 23 years? Is there something you're not telling us? (Any evidence of involvement in the crime, neglect, or something about your home that they've cited?) Good luck.

What about trying to contact an advocacy group. www.google.com/search?q=advocacy+%2B+Colorado&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official

Yes. You can contact the Colorado Bar Association (or the Denver one) and the Colorado Trial Lawyers Association and the various law schools and see if you can't find people who would voluntarily help you with this case - perhaps, even a retired police detective who could investigate. If your son caused a fire - not uncommon to accidentally start one with a cigarette butt, for instance, the relevant legal question is what is the most appropriate least restrictive enviroment for him to be placed to avoid such a recurrance. Yet, even a placement in a fire-proof home in a supervised setting is not intended to drive a wedge between you and your son - in fact, he might not even have started a fire, nor be dangerous, and you may find that a committee, with some experienced investigator - attorney, police or social worker doing the fieldwork, can do some effective advocacy for your son. (You might find judges, prosecutors and defense attorneys on the committee, some with retarded relatives), and considerable assistance. Reach out.

Yes. You can contact the Colorado Bar Association and the Colorado Trial Lawyers Association and the various law schools in the area. Perhaps, a retired judge or prosecutor or attorney with a civil rights background or a law school professor or a committee of the associations can help you assemble a team to find out what happened and what is the least restrictive environment for your son, in event he caused the incident (such as accidentally dropping a cigarette butt, etc.) There are law students, retired police officers, retired social workers, psychologists and others who can help investigate the matter. You might even find, for instance, a retired police detective, with a mentally retarded relative, who is capable of taking performing a thorough and fair investigation - further, you can do some things to increase access to your son. (Sometimes, elderly parents can't cope with supervising an adult child, but there's no reason to draw a wedge between them....)

From what I have read, I would get a lawyer, and fight for him back!! He is like a child, and if you grill them long enough, they will eventually say, yes I did it, just so they will leave them alone, or because they make them feel like that is the answer that they want to hear. Good luck to you!!

I think that if he is mentally retarded then the police cannot question him without a parent or attourney present(that explicitly gave permission to question him! -not just standing there in shock from the fire while they violated his rights-that is not passive permission), so whatever he said, especially when HOUNDED like that should be thrown out of court! I don't know the term like quashed or suppressed(make a motioin to supress his statement). Ask for a jurry trial, and the lack of evidence in light of this would certainly make it tough to prosecute. My mentally ill brother started my closit on fire, but I just threw all the clothes in the shower and turned it on. We caught it in time for not fire dept or cops to be involved. He has never done that again for 25 years since. I don't think it is something that will be repeated. As you sy, he has been for so many years without having done this type of thing, and why would he be any less likely to do it again at a foster home????? I think love, and family are best for this child of 23. Maybe you can move to suppress his statement if you can get it in court again. Maybe you can ask for causation I think it is called (on what evidence is this merrited basicly that means). You can move for mis-trial to initiate the proceedings if this does not get it back in court(on the basis of bad representation by the attourney). There is a term for what they did asking him over and over again. It is like harrasment of sorts, or coersion of an answer. Something like that. A form of terrorism sort of. He thought they would hurt him if he did not say yes. He just wanted them to go away basicly so he says yes. This happens all the time to innocent people. ( I must say my brother was guilty, and was standing outside waiting for the house to burn down)(with all of us inside). He said he did it because I had more clothes than him, and I told him I was saving HIS clothes in there while he was in the institution. (he was on a home visit.) So he was so crazy that he burned his own clothes thinking they were mine! He always had his clothes stolen in the institution.... oh ya, did they read him his rights before questioning him? - that does not matter because he is not sane so still they need permission from you/attourney to q him, but if they did not read his rights to him/you then he is basicly off for two reasons now. On top of all this, he is mentally ill/retarded so also not guilty for a THIRD reason. I think the attourney took it upon himself to allow this verdict because he BELIEVED the kid was dangerous, and that is none of his business to do! (Hello!(attourney)) It is like a doctor violating his hippicratic oath because he thinks someone should die becaues HE believes the person commited a murder. it is basicly quackery by the attourney. Do you think F Lee Bailey would have lost this case????????? I dare say not. Even if the kid did it there is no way to convict him! Did anyone SEE it happen? Could it have been an accident? Could the child have been on his way to get the garden hose, or a neighbor, or have a need to get out as trained or for air or to escape flames? There are many questions that arise here. There is like a zillion good reasons for him to be outside, and only one bad reason for him to be there. Did they RUSH to judgement in light of this? Would there perhaps have been an actual investigation if they had not DECIDED this was the cause?-because obviously they decided he was the cause with little or no further investigation, but I will still ask, what did they say was the cause of the fire? What was the epicenter of the fire, such as near an appliance etc..??-and how much dammage was there?-such as maybe they have the wrong epicenter if there is huge damage. Did they use dogs like some heroic investigation? Or just kind of decide that is what happened immediately. Does anyone else smoke in the house if it was a smoking fire? I have left cigarettes I thought were out, then went to bed, only to find in the ashtray the whole filter burned the next morning. Most of all, don't stop! Don't let up! Keep persuing it! This is your cross, so go be crucified for your belief like our ideal example was. Rest upon Him who was the ideal!