In re A.T. CA2/8

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

In November 2012 we affirmed a juvenile court order placing seven-year-old A.T. with her father after the court sustained an amended petition (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 300) filed by the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) alleging that A.T. was a dependent of the court because mother had been coaching the minor to falsely accuse father of sexually abusing her when in fact the abuse was committed by mother’s nephew. (Los Angeles County Dept. of Children and Family Services v. N.F. (Nov. 29, 2012) [nonpub. opn.].) The court had previously taken jurisdiction of A.T. in 2008 after father was wrongly blamed for sexually abusing the child, finding that A.T. had been a victim of sexual abuse, but that someone else in the household had been the perpetrator.1 In May 2013 the juvenile court terminated jurisdiction over A.T. and placed her with father, granting him sole legal and physical custody of the child. The court entered exit orders regarding monitored visitation by mother that ordered mother to pay for the costs of the monitor. The court did not specify the frequency and duration of her visits. Mother contends the juvenile…