Earlier this year, a family of four from Florida faced serious allegations of abusing their adopted and foster children. However, all charges have now been dismissed, and the family has been released from custody.

In a twist, the prosecutor who was handling the case has voiced criticism toward Florida’s child welfare officials.

In July, Brian Griffeth, 47, his wife Jill Griffeth, 41, and their two biological children, Dallin, 21, and Liberty Griffeth, 19, were each charged with various degrees of aggravated child abuse. Brian, Dallin, and Liberty each faced a single charge, while Jill faced three separate charges.

By October 31, all the cases against the Griffeth family were officially closed, as confirmed by Columbia County court documents reviewed by Law&Crime.

For each family member, John F. Durrett, the State Attorney for the Third Judicial Circuit, filed a notice of nolle prosequi, a legal term signifying the decision not to pursue prosecution.

The notice explained, “Depositions with multiple current and former employees of the Department of Children and Families were conducted in recent weeks. The original complainant was also deposed. Throughout these sessions, we found evidence of blame-shifting, finger-pointing, and outright denials of the claims made in the initial reports. Allegations describing children as being treated like slaves or subjected to sexual abuse were found to be baseless in this investigation.”

The prosecutor goes on to categorize the allegations made by child welfare agents as “incredulous statements” and says they must be taken away in order to address the case “independently.”

“Although probable cause was established in the early stages via warrant, the discovery process has revealed information the State of Florida cannot refute,” each non-prosecution notice goes on.

The initial charging document includes a rising array of claims against the family that began with allegations one of the children was caught with a “Taser” at a church camp in Branford – a tiny town located roughly 45 miles northwest of Gainesville. That purported find led to the welfare investigation and the since-dropped criminal charges.

Now, in no uncertain terms, the state says the basis of the actual charged conduct is wholly lacking any criminal component.

The non-prosecution notice reads, at length:

The aggravated child abuse alleged in Count 1 of the State’s Information or charging document pertains exclusively to the action of “unlawful caging”. It is alleged that the victim was confined within a modified bunk bed with limited space and that his mother would at times secure a piece of particle board over the opening preventing the child from exiting his bed. Wooden boards run the length of the bunk allowing the child to be seen but not exit if secured or “caged” by his mother.

A heavily-redacted section of the document goes on to say the state did not previously consider “information on the history of the child.” Then, the notice appears to assert the child in question has long engaged in “violence against other children, adults, and animals.”

Then, the notice characterizes the Griffeth family as simply doing the best it can with the hand it was dealt, including such a child — while admitting that a conviction would be unlikely.

“A jury would be asked to consider: a poor family, devout in their faith, and raising 9 minor children in a small home, addressing the situation in a manner they deem appropriate to ensure the safety and security of the alleged victim and to also ensure no acts of violence were perpetrated upon the other children,” the notice goes on. “The State cannot refute such an argument, and this matter cannot be presented to a jury with liberty at stake.”

The second and third counts, which again only concerned Jill Griffeth, were directly linked to allegations the adoptive mother sprayed her children with vinegar as punishment. In the charging document, one adopted child recounted an incident in which she was “sprayed before bed by her mother and how the vinegar burned her eyes making her cry herself to sleep.”

Now, the state says the vinegar punishment in question was a “diluted solution” and homemade attempt to mimic a product called “Sassy Spray,” which itself is a combination of vinegar and vegetable juice used as a modern-day equivalent of “soap in the mouth.”

The notice says “numerous outlets” sell the product.

“In lieu of soap, apple cider vinegar is sprayed into the child’s mouth,” the document goes on. “Said action does not constitute child abuse.”