Post by: Racehorse on May 29, 2008, 01:17:47 PM
Quote
By MICHELLE ROBERTS, Associated Press Writer
23 minutes ago
SAN ANTONIO - In a crushing blow to the state's massive seizure of children from a polygamist sect's ranch, the Texas Supreme Court ruled Thursday that child welfare officials overstepped their authority and the children should go back to their parents.
ADVERTISEMENT
The high court affirmed a decision by an appellate court last week, saying Child Protective Services failed to show an immediate danger to the more than 400 children swept up from the Yearning For Zion Ranch nearly two months ago.
"On the record before us, removal of the children was not warranted," the justices said in their ruling issued in Austin.
The high court let stand the appellate court's order that Texas District Judge Barbara Walther return the children from foster care to their parents. It's not clear how soon that may happen, but the appellate court ordered her to do it within a reasonable time period.
The ruling shatters one of the largest child-custody cases in U.S. history. State officials said the removals were necessary to end a cycle of sexual abuse at the ranch in which teenage girls were forced to marry and have sex with older men, but parents denied any abuse and said they were being persecuted for their religious beliefs.
The case before the court technically only applies to 124 children of the 38 mothers who filed a complaint that prompted the ruling, but it significantly affects nearly all the children since they were removed under identical circumstances.
The ranch is run by the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, which teaches that polygamy brings glorification in heaven. It is a breakaway sect of the Mormon church, which renounced polygamy more than a century ago.
Texas officials claimed at one point that there were 31 teenage girls at the ranch who were pregnant or had been pregnant, but later conceded that about half of those mothers, if not more, were adults. One was 27.
Under Texas law, children can be taken from their parents if there's a danger to their physical safety, an urgent need for protection and if officials made a reasonable effort to keep the children in their homes. The high court agreed with the appellate court that the seizures fell short of that standard.
23 minutes ago
SAN ANTONIO - In a crushing blow to the state's massive seizure of children from a polygamist sect's ranch, the Texas Supreme Court ruled Thursday that child welfare officials overstepped their authority and the children should go back to their parents.
ADVERTISEMENT
The high court affirmed a decision by an appellate court last week, saying Child Protective Services failed to show an immediate danger to the more than 400 children swept up from the Yearning For Zion Ranch nearly two months ago.
"On the record before us, removal of the children was not warranted," the justices said in their ruling issued in Austin.
The high court let stand the appellate court's order that Texas District Judge Barbara Walther return the children from foster care to their parents. It's not clear how soon that may happen, but the appellate court ordered her to do it within a reasonable time period.
The ruling shatters one of the largest child-custody cases in U.S. history. State officials said the removals were necessary to end a cycle of sexual abuse at the ranch in which teenage girls were forced to marry and have sex with older men, but parents denied any abuse and said they were being persecuted for their religious beliefs.
The case before the court technically only applies to 124 children of the 38 mothers who filed a complaint that prompted the ruling, but it significantly affects nearly all the children since they were removed under identical circumstances.
The ranch is run by the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, which teaches that polygamy brings glorification in heaven. It is a breakaway sect of the Mormon church, which renounced polygamy more than a century ago.
Texas officials claimed at one point that there were 31 teenage girls at the ranch who were pregnant or had been pregnant, but later conceded that about half of those mothers, if not more, were adults. One was 27.
Under Texas law, children can be taken from their parents if there's a danger to their physical safety, an urgent need for protection and if officials made a reasonable effort to keep the children in their homes. The high court agreed with the appellate court that the seizures fell short of that standard.
While I'm definitely against sexual abuse and underage marriages, this whole thing has been an enormous abuse of power by CPS. I'm glad the court stood up for freedom and due process. They should punish individual offenders hard when they're proven guilty, but this was taking things to a ridiculous and unconstitutional extreme.
Post by: gunsmith on May 29, 2008, 02:09:48 PM
Some of us knew from day one what TX was doing was plain wrong.
http://www.armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=11791.150
However saying so on here was construed that you somehow support rape and child abuse.
This ruling is a victory for families and gun owners in particular.
I am sick of the liberal media trying people on tv before the case goes to court.
Nancy Grace was all over this case yelling and screaming for prison and more then half of the folks here cheered her on, forgetting that a few months ago Nancy Grace excoriated a mom who bout her son a 9mm high point carbine.
Nancy Grace wanted the mom prosecuted for "giving her kid a high powered assault weapon" I don't trust Nancy Grace now and I sure didn't trust her before, or the time before that.
The state of TX let real victims of child abuse down, they let due process down.
They were aping the old soviet union, trial by innuendo and arresting on the word of accusers who never had to reveal who they are.
A prank phone call shouldn't be able to destroy innocent people and thank God better legal minds then mine agreed with me.
Some of those kids were undoubtedly abused, but the CPS and the liberal hysterics bent on a witch hunt of all they don't like screwed it up so bad that those kids will not see justice.
Funny haircuts and a lack of the latest nitendo does not equal abuse
Nancy Grace, Larry King and Fox/CNN/MSNBC are for the most part
vile imbeciles with way to much power to sway public opinion.
(I do like Glen Beck though)
Post by: gunsmith on May 29, 2008, 02:24:08 PM
the next time they go off half cocked against
a
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on May 29, 2008, 02:31:47 PM
this saga is far from over
Post by: gunsmith on May 29, 2008, 03:05:17 PM
TX will be forced to pay out big time for false arrest.
cassandra and sara's daddy, you wouldn't want your kids
taken because a prank phone reported that you were an active participant
on pro gun internet forums.
Post by: K Frame on May 29, 2008, 04:08:37 PM
this isn't judge judy when the dna tests comeback there will be some wailing and gnashing of teeth. and some guys on the run or in jail
this saga is far from over
this saga is far from over
Why?
Because they fathered children with multiple women?
Last time I looked that wasn't against the law.
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on May 29, 2008, 04:11:14 PM
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on May 29, 2008, 04:18:29 PM
I agree, it is far from over.
TX will be forced to pay out big time for false arrest.
cassandra and sara's daddy, you wouldn't want your kids
taken because a prank phone reported that you were an active participant
on pro gun internet forums.
TX will be forced to pay out big time for false arrest.
cassandra and sara's daddy, you wouldn't want your kids
taken because a prank phone reported that you were an active participant
on pro gun internet forums.
thats almost funny
don't hold your breath waiting on that check
if you can make the stretch from being on here to belonging to a group like the flds you are capable of stretches beyond me. i'd do the honorable thing and off myself before i would pimp or allow someone else to pimp a teenage girl. but then again different strokes for different folks. though some strokes carry legal repercussions
Post by: K Frame on May 29, 2008, 04:34:19 PM
my understanding is that a girl who has my kid whens shes 15 would make me guilty of statutory rape. thats why the "church" hid identities and birth records it bit em in the tail before in utah if an old mans memory serves
Ah. Good point.
What's Texas law on age of consent and such?
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on May 29, 2008, 04:42:43 PM
bet some fellers are cursing the dna tests
in the earlier cases the birth records hung em so they hide birth records now as well as tried to muddy the id trail.
they do have a shot trying to get the dna suppressed but since it was done under court order i don't see that happening were it me i'd be on the run looking for a place with no extradition
Post by: roo_ster on May 29, 2008, 05:05:45 PM
By acting in such a reckless, feckless, and precipitous manner, CPS likely has queered all the evidence collected after they hauled off the 400 kiddos. Which includes all the DNA evidence, BTW.
IOW, honest-to-goodness statutory rapists will walk because of CPS's and the State of Texas's actions.
Dumbass CPS & dumbass cheering section, IMO.
As in many gov't abuse of power cases, the process will be the punishment.
Disgusting all the way around.
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on May 29, 2008, 05:20:00 PM
Post by: gunsmith on May 29, 2008, 06:15:48 PM
Quote
if you can make the stretch from being on here to belonging to a group like the flds you are capable of stretches beyond me. i'd do the honorable thing and off myself before i would pimp or allow someone else to pimp a teenage girl. but then again different strokes for different folks. though some strokes carry legal repercussions
There is a huge, gigantic, humongous difference between wanting due process and wanting TX to help abused children in a legal & fair manner, and advocating freaking child rape.
Your post really make me question your reading comprehension.
(both in this thread and the last FLDS thread)
Please, PLEASE, read this before attempting debate, please please please!
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on May 29, 2008, 08:12:30 PM
theres a picture of warren el supremo with a 12 year old girl in his arms kissing her
12 a lil young for you fellers?
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on May 29, 2008, 08:16:07 PM
The age of consent in Texas is 17 {Texas Penal Code Section 21.11}. However , "...It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under this section that the actor...was not more than three years older than the victim and of the opposite sex...(and) did not use duress, force, or a threat against the victim at the time of the offence" and is not a registered sex offender {Section 21.11(b)}.
Section 21.12 further prohibits all sexual contact between an employee of a school (including educators)and a student enrolled at the primary or secondary school where said employee works. No age is specified by the statute (thus, even if the student has reached consent age of 17, it is still a violation), and violations are a second degree felony.
heck maybe its me being old fashioned but a guy kissing a 12 year old when hes 30 plus years older than her rubs me the wrong way must not be libertarian enough. and hes not ashamed got posed pictures was nothin he hid
Post by: Zardozimo Oprah Bannedalas on May 29, 2008, 08:26:16 PM
Quote
What's Texas law on age of consent and such?
Consent to marriage: 18, 16 with parent permission.
Consent to sex: 17 (except with spouse)
See:
http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/FA/content/htm/fa.001.00.000002.00.htm
http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/PE/content/htm/pe.005.00.000021.00.htm#21.11.00
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on May 29, 2008, 08:29:06 PM
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on May 29, 2008, 08:36:42 PM
for your viewing pleasure or disgust depending which way you swing
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on May 29, 2008, 08:39:51 PM
Elissa Wall Speaks Out About Her 'Stolen Innocence'
Forced Into Marriage at 14, She Testified Against Polygamous Prophet Warren Jeffs
By JOSEPH DIAZ
May 16, 2008
75 comments FONT SIZE
SHARE
RSS The recent raid on Warren Jeffs' Yearning for Zion ranch in Eldorado, Texas, which resulted in the removal of more than 400 children from their homes, has thrust allegations of widespread child abuse at the polygamous sect into the national spotlight.
Elissa Wall recounts her traumatic experience at Warren Jeffs' compound.
More PhotosBut one of the darkest secrets of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints unfolds at a seedy roadside motel in the remote Nevada desert, where underage girls some as young as 14 are allegedly forced through hasty and secret wedding ceremonies.
Elissa Wall says she was one such 14-year-old who was taken to the motel and plunged into wedlock with no choice but to accept and obey the command of Jeffs.
Sam Brower, a private detective who has spent five years investigating Jeffs and his sect for a number of former members, says the weddings are done "covertly, real cloak-and-dagger like."
Wall, now 21, told ABC News' John Quinones that, "I was trapped. I felt like I had nowhere to turn. I did not want to go through with this marriage. I felt, honestly, what it was like to die."
Related
PHOTOS: Growing Up Polygamous'Stolen Innocence' Book ExcerptPolygamy Moms' SOS Plea: Help Us
'I Knew It Wasn't Right'
Wall has documented her terrible ordeal in a new memoir called "Stolen Innocence."
In it, she described in detail growing up in the sect that she says betrayed her faith. She says her wedding was the culmination of a traumatic experience that began when church leaders removed her, her mom and sisters from their family and reassigned them to another man Fred Jessop.
Then, just months after her eighth-grade graduation, Jessop told her she'd be married in a week.
"Deep down inside, I knew it wasn't right," Wall said. "I didn't want to be married at 14. [Sect members] honestly believe, and I did and so did my mother, that God sent down inspiration from heaven, like a strike of lightning, down to the prophet. This was God's word. And we were to follow it, obediently and happily."
During a meeting in the church hall, she learned her husband-to-be was her cousin Allen Steed, 19, whom she said she despised.
"I remember he walked over and I got this really sick feeling in my stomach," Wall said. "Once I found out I was going to marry Allen something in me just rose up and I really resisted."
She pleaded her case to Jeffs, but he turned her down and she was quickly fitted for a wedding dress.
Post by: Balog on May 29, 2008, 08:49:43 PM
I don't think most people are saying there aren't some evil people involved. We're saying that no matter how bad some of them are CPS breaking the law and screwing over dozens of innocent families to try to get those bad people is wrong.
Your argument is no different than the gun-banners who point to an innocent kid shot in a drive by and exploit the death to try to justify bad law.
Oh hell, why am I trying to use a logical argument on a guy who thinks cops should be able to break the law as much as they want (usually using his status as a former drug dealer to lend himself authority) and tries to smear everyone as a racist because he is? I'm done with you. At least when SS is blathering some idiotic defense of terrorists he uses fricking capital letters and punctuation. I don't know if you're incapable of writing correctly, or you just don't have enough courtesy to try, but either way I've wasted enough time on you.
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on May 29, 2008, 09:16:45 PM
Post by: MicroBalrog on May 29, 2008, 09:48:59 PM
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on May 29, 2008, 09:54:22 PM
Post by: seeker_two on May 30, 2008, 01:29:28 AM
Well, since they got all that DNA by breaking the law themselves, I think it might not be that easy.
By acting in such a reckless, feckless, and precipitous manner, CPS likely has queered all the evidence collected after they hauled off the 400 kiddos. Which includes all the DNA evidence, BTW.
IOW, honest-to-goodness statutory rapists will walk because of CPS's and the State of Texas's actions.
Dumbass CPS & dumbass cheering section, IMO.
As in many gov't abuse of power cases, the process will be the punishment.
Disgusting all the way around.
By acting in such a reckless, feckless, and precipitous manner, CPS likely has queered all the evidence collected after they hauled off the 400 kiddos. Which includes all the DNA evidence, BTW.
IOW, honest-to-goodness statutory rapists will walk because of CPS's and the State of Texas's actions.
Dumbass CPS & dumbass cheering section, IMO.
As in many gov't abuse of power cases, the process will be the punishment.
Disgusting all the way around.
Agreed....this poison tree is going to shade any probable abusers and hang CPS......
Notice how no one from CPS has replied?.....
Post by: MicroBalrog on May 30, 2008, 02:43:04 AM
This sort of thing is going to repeat itself until society reviews how it deals with child protection altogether.
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on May 30, 2008, 03:05:11 AM
Well, since they got all that DNA by breaking the law themselves, I think it might not be that easy.
By acting in such a reckless, feckless, and precipitous manner, CPS likely has queered all the evidence collected after they hauled off the 400 kiddos. Which includes all the DNA evidence, BTW.
IOW, honest-to-goodness statutory rapists will walk because of CPS's and the State of Texas's actions.
Dumbass CPS & dumbass cheering section, IMO.
As in many gov't abuse of power cases, the process will be the punishment.
Disgusting all the way around.
By acting in such a reckless, feckless, and precipitous manner, CPS likely has queered all the evidence collected after they hauled off the 400 kiddos. Which includes all the DNA evidence, BTW.
IOW, honest-to-goodness statutory rapists will walk because of CPS's and the State of Texas's actions.
Dumbass CPS & dumbass cheering section, IMO.
As in many gov't abuse of power cases, the process will be the punishment.
Disgusting all the way around.
Agreed....this poison tree is going to shade any probable abusers and hang CPS......
Notice how no one from CPS has replied?.....
what do they reply to?
notice howno one has filed to suppress?
Post by: The Annoyed Man on May 30, 2008, 03:19:33 AM
Ah! You beat me to it.
. . .
Nancy Grace was all over this case yelling and screaming for prison and more then half of the folks here cheered her on, forgetting that a few months ago Nancy Grace excoriated a mom who bout her son a 9mm high point carbine.
Nancy Grace wanted the mom prosecuted for "giving her kid a high powered assault weapon" I don't trust Nancy Grace now and I sure didn't trust her before, or the time before that.
. . .
Nancy Grace was all over this case yelling and screaming for prison and more then half of the folks here cheered her on, forgetting that a few months ago Nancy Grace excoriated a mom who bout her son a 9mm high point carbine.
Nancy Grace wanted the mom prosecuted for "giving her kid a high powered assault weapon" I don't trust Nancy Grace now and I sure didn't trust her before, or the time before that.
Nancy Grace is a mental midget and should have her vocal cords forcibly removed via surgery.
Post by: MicroBalrog on May 30, 2008, 03:22:05 AM
Ah! You beat me to it.
. . .
Nancy Grace was all over this case yelling and screaming for prison and more then half of the folks here cheered her on, forgetting that a few months ago Nancy Grace excoriated a mom who bout her son a 9mm high point carbine.
Nancy Grace wanted the mom prosecuted for "giving her kid a high powered assault weapon" I don't trust Nancy Grace now and I sure didn't trust her before, or the time before that.
. . .
Nancy Grace was all over this case yelling and screaming for prison and more then half of the folks here cheered her on, forgetting that a few months ago Nancy Grace excoriated a mom who bout her son a 9mm high point carbine.
Nancy Grace wanted the mom prosecuted for "giving her kid a high powered assault weapon" I don't trust Nancy Grace now and I sure didn't trust her before, or the time before that.
Nancy Grace is a mental midget and should have her vocal cords forcibly removed via surgery.
It amazes me how Americans who KNOW the media lies about guns trust them on other issues.
Post by: The Annoyed Man on May 30, 2008, 03:28:30 AM
Ah! You beat me to it.
. . .
Nancy Grace was all over this case yelling and screaming for prison and more then half of the folks here cheered her on, forgetting that a few months ago Nancy Grace excoriated a mom who bout her son a 9mm high point carbine.
Nancy Grace wanted the mom prosecuted for "giving her kid a high powered assault weapon" I don't trust Nancy Grace now and I sure didn't trust her before, or the time before that.
. . .
Nancy Grace was all over this case yelling and screaming for prison and more then half of the folks here cheered her on, forgetting that a few months ago Nancy Grace excoriated a mom who bout her son a 9mm high point carbine.
Nancy Grace wanted the mom prosecuted for "giving her kid a high powered assault weapon" I don't trust Nancy Grace now and I sure didn't trust her before, or the time before that.
Nancy Grace is a mental midget and should have her vocal cords forcibly removed via surgery.
It amazes me how Americans who KNOW the media lies about guns trust them on other issues.
The media distorts almost everything it reports. Objectivity is not an object, or part of the business model anymore.
Post by: MicroBalrog on May 30, 2008, 03:39:03 AM
Ah! You beat me to it.
. . .
Nancy Grace was all over this case yelling and screaming for prison and more then half of the folks here cheered her on, forgetting that a few months ago Nancy Grace excoriated a mom who bout her son a 9mm high point carbine.
Nancy Grace wanted the mom prosecuted for "giving her kid a high powered assault weapon" I don't trust Nancy Grace now and I sure didn't trust her before, or the time before that.
. . .
Nancy Grace was all over this case yelling and screaming for prison and more then half of the folks here cheered her on, forgetting that a few months ago Nancy Grace excoriated a mom who bout her son a 9mm high point carbine.
Nancy Grace wanted the mom prosecuted for "giving her kid a high powered assault weapon" I don't trust Nancy Grace now and I sure didn't trust her before, or the time before that.
Nancy Grace is a mental midget and should have her vocal cords forcibly removed via surgery.
It amazes me how Americans who KNOW the media lies about guns trust them on other issues.
The media distorts almost everything it reports. Objectivity is not an object, or part of the business model anymore.
It never was.
But at least at one point press was openly 'party press'.
Lies disguised as 'objectivity' are worse because people don't realize the media is not being objective.
Post by: The Annoyed Man on May 30, 2008, 03:50:21 AM
Ah! You beat me to it.
. . .
Nancy Grace was all over this case yelling and screaming for prison and more then half of the folks here cheered her on, forgetting that a few months ago Nancy Grace excoriated a mom who bout her son a 9mm high point carbine.
Nancy Grace wanted the mom prosecuted for "giving her kid a high powered assault weapon" I don't trust Nancy Grace now and I sure didn't trust her before, or the time before that.
. . .
Nancy Grace was all over this case yelling and screaming for prison and more then half of the folks here cheered her on, forgetting that a few months ago Nancy Grace excoriated a mom who bout her son a 9mm high point carbine.
Nancy Grace wanted the mom prosecuted for "giving her kid a high powered assault weapon" I don't trust Nancy Grace now and I sure didn't trust her before, or the time before that.
Nancy Grace is a mental midget and should have her vocal cords forcibly removed via surgery.
It amazes me how Americans who KNOW the media lies about guns trust them on other issues.
The media distorts almost everything it reports. Objectivity is not an object, or part of the business model anymore.
It never was.
But at least at one point press was openly 'party press'.
Lies disguised as 'objectivity' are worse because people don't realize the media is not being objective.
Actually, journalists used to be train to report the facts and minimize the opinions. Now it is the opposite.
Post by: HankB on May 30, 2008, 03:52:27 AM
But there are SO many inconsistencies in the press releases and statements coming out of CPS (the numbers change every day) it's looking more and more like a rogue, out of control agency decided to pump up their publicity by attacking a nontraditional religious group that included some bad people, without regard for collateral damage.
Now local media is reporting that some of the female "children" taken and incarcerated without arrest or charges filed were legally adults. (Kidnapping charges, anyone?)
With two adverse court rulings, it looks like CPS is going into full CMA mode. What bothers me is that CPS employees who screwed up royally are almost certainly not going to suffer any consequences personally . . . and that's just wrong.
It amazes me how Americans who KNOW the media lies about guns trust them on other issues.
I, and others, have made exactly that observation before.
Post by: roo_ster on May 30, 2008, 05:07:53 AM
we'll see as far as i know there have been no attempts to suppress and i haven't heard the talking heads getting excited...
what do they reply to?
notice howno one has filed to suppress?
notice howno one has filed to suppress?
Folks gotta be charged in order to suppress evidence obtained illegally. Nobody's been charged with squat, therefore, no defense lawyer has had to try to suppress anything to properly represent their client.
I expect CPS to just release more & more illegally obtained data to the press in order to try them in the press and convince us the FLDS is filled with wierdos*. That, plus the process itself will be the punishment.
CPS truly humped the canine on this one. Folks who ought to go to jail will walk. And then they'll sue the State of Texas for megabucks. And win.
* They don't need to convince ME. I already think they are wierdos. But, they are also American citizens.
Post by: Racehorse on May 30, 2008, 05:51:39 AM
In my opinion, forty and fifty year old men who have sex with 12, 13, or 14 year old girls need to be hammered - hard - by the law, regardless of any so-called "consent."
But there are SO many inconsistencies in the press releases and statements coming out of CPS (the numbers change every day) it's looking more and more like a rogue, out of control agency decided to pump up their publicity by attacking a nontraditional religious group that included some bad people, without regard for collateral damage.
But there are SO many inconsistencies in the press releases and statements coming out of CPS (the numbers change every day) it's looking more and more like a rogue, out of control agency decided to pump up their publicity by attacking a nontraditional religious group that included some bad people, without regard for collateral damage.
That pretty well sums up how I feel about it.
Post by: MicroBalrog on May 30, 2008, 05:56:30 AM
It's called An Austrian Analysis of the Fourth Estate, and it's incredibly enlightening.
Post by: MechAg94 on May 30, 2008, 06:03:08 AM
In this case, CPS did get a court order to do what they did. They did not violate anyone's rights without due process. Going forward, I can only hope and assume the judge and lawyers have all the evidence in front of them to make sure justice is done one way or the other. If you want to gripe about the raid, talk to the judge who issued the warrant.
While it looks like some of the worst fears about this compound may not be true, I think it likely something was happening. I don't have enough info right now and neither does anyone else on this board. Someone with extra time should go down there and sit in on the court proceedings.
Post by: MicroBalrog on May 30, 2008, 06:05:34 AM
Quote
Some of the anti-CPS rhetoric on this thread is worse than the anti-pedophile stuff on the other thread.
I have always said that the way society handles child protection is completely screwed-up.
I don't see how this event proves me wrong.
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on May 30, 2008, 10:02:53 AM
seperate issue from the seizure
Post by: The Annoyed Man on May 30, 2008, 10:13:51 AM
Some of the anti-CPS rhetoric on this thread is worse than the anti-pedophile stuff on the other thread.
Agreed. I swore off of this topic in the other thread, but I want to do one thing before I go away. i want to explain this process.
CPS gets a referral on a case. They go out and investigate. if they believe the situation warrants removal of a child, they apply for a court order authorizing the removal. if the court authorizes it, they remove the kid, then have a full heairng on this situation the next day solely on whether the removal was legally justified. There is a full trial on the original allegations within a certain period of time. at all times, the burden is on the state/CPS to prove their actions were warranted. parents are entitled to appointed counsel if they cannot afford an attorney. A guardian ad litem/attorney is apointed to act as an independent voice on behalf of the child.
the system has plenty of protections for the parents.
Post by: Tallpine on May 30, 2008, 10:25:03 AM
Quote
They go out and investigate.
I think they skipped the part about the 400++ investigations
Post by: seeker_two on May 30, 2008, 10:57:07 AM
Some of the anti-CPS rhetoric on this thread is worse than the anti-pedophile stuff on the other thread.
Agreed. I swore off of this topic in the other thread, but I want to do one thing before I go away. i want to explain this process.
CPS gets a referral on a case. They go out and investigate. if they believe the situation warrants removal of a child, they apply for a court order authorizing the removal. if the court authorizes it, they remove the kid, then have a full heairng on this situation the next day solely on whether the removal was legally justified. There is a full trial on the original allegations within a certain period of time. at all times, the burden is on the state/CPS to prove their actions were warranted. parents are entitled to appointed counsel if they cannot afford an attorney. A guardian ad litem/attorney is apointed to act as an independent voice on behalf of the child.
the system has plenty of protections for the parents.
That's pretty accurate......and, as a former CPS investigator who had to do child removals in the past, I can also say that CPS didn't even follow their own procedure in this case......
1. If only one parent is suspected of abuse and the other parent can care for and protect the child, the alleged abuser can leave the home until the investigation is complete. In this case, the men could have been escorted from the ranch and kept separate until the investigations were complete.
2. The press releases from CPS were highly inappropriate....esp. the ones about children with prior bone fractures indicating "abuse". You and I both know what kinds of fractures strongly indicate abuse and which ones are just as likely injuries from typical accidents. If the fractures were the abusive kind, I would have expected CPS to be yelling "greenstick" from every hilltop in West Texas. But we heard nothing........
3. CPS had someone on the inside: CPS doesn't do undercover investigations.
4. Unsubstantiated, anonymous tip: That's probably the worst failing of the CPS system....no way to verify the person making the allegation or follow up on false allegations. If the police require a complaintant to identify themselves, CPS should also.
5. Investigation training: You know who CPS investigators usually are? Fresh-faced social-work types just graduated from college who receive less that two week's training in investigation and affidavit-writing. I came in with more investigation skills from reading Robert B. Parker novels than my trainer (a former CPS investigator) had. And forget about investigations that will hold up in a criminal court. Most DA's won't even touch a CPS case due to investigative errors....and a lot of perps walk away. I was lucky enough to do one sex-abuse (3 victims all under 5 y.o.) investigation tight enough that the local sheriff's dept. used it for their own investigation. The perp ended up with a 40-year stay in TDCJ Hilton-Huntsville. How many are still free?
The CPS system needs to be fixed....and it's needed to be fixed for a long time. This case just put all their faults in the limelight on a massive scale. I wouldn't mind seeing DFPS moved from DHHS supervision to DPS supervision and hiring actual trained investigators (retired LEO's would be great) to oversee these investigations.
I also wish we had a conservative Republican as govenor, too......
Post by: gunsmith on May 30, 2008, 02:52:37 PM
Quote
but i'm not as open minded as some here
Its not about being open minded, you do not understand debate and seem to advocate that the State has unlimited powers of arrest based on
false reports. Also you seem to advocate trial & conviction by media &
unlimited power of the State to detain parents and take their children.
Unfortunately, your mindset is prevalent in the Texas CPS, this failure to comprehend basic Jurisprudence has led to the State returning abused children to their abusers.
You are not guilty of failing to protect those children, but people like you
(who feel that unlimited State power is good "for the children")
are guilty of failing the children of the FLDS.
So do not point fingers at people here, cassandra and sara's daddy, you can look in the mirror and see the type of person who is so closed minded that they would rather have the FLDS children returned
to their suspected abusers then seek to learn, grow and understand.
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on May 30, 2008, 03:54:38 PM
false reports.
were it only the one set of reports they were working with you might be right. rather we have multiple long term reports from multiple sources we have prior mutiple acts convictions in the states they fled from based on their own records. we have pictures for those who need/loke em. we have 15 year old moms with dads your age and older. i know you hate links but talke a chance look at the pictures. when the dna comes back there will be some guys going to be someones wife
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on May 30, 2008, 04:05:22 PM
A search warrant for the DNA alleges that Jeffs had "spiritual" marriages with four girls, ages 12 to 15.
Jeffs, who is revered as a prophet, is serving a prison sentence for a Utah conviction of being accomplice to rape in the marriage of a 14-year-old girl to a 19-year-old sect member. He awaits trial in Arizona on similar charges.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24887140
click the link and vote interesting breakdown there
Post by: MechAg94 on May 30, 2008, 05:48:39 PM
I am actually looking for an answer, not BS.
Post by: roo_ster on May 30, 2008, 07:08:18 PM
I think what has normal non-lawyerly folks outraged is that this shows the unbridled power exercised by these CPS agencies. Based on an anonymous tip (later found out to be dropped by a nutcase) CPS went to a judge and the judge was willing to sign a warrant based on bullshit. CPS marched in and then took 400 kids and kidnapped a number of adults it claimed were kids.
Folks have just realized how quickly and on what little, unverified "evidence" CPS and judges can rip their families apart. And the CPS apparatus & apologists are surprised at the outrage, the poor dears.
All this noise about "process" is not comforting to real folks who might be subject to the authority of the state CPS apparatus. We have seen that CPS & the judge will skip steps in that process if it suits them and drag the families through every minute procedural quirk in retaliation when they get their weenies spanked by wiser heads above them.
Also, the process itself is part of the punishment:
Take your kids away on flimsy/no evidence, shove them into the foster care system, when the allegations/evidence are found to be bullshit then force the parents to give up their right to demand a warrant for CPS to intrude upon their house. All the while, the parents are paying lawyers by the minute.
The knucklehead judge in this case is insisting on the above & more to return the kids even after the Supreme Court of Texas pretty much said she was an idiot in a black robe. The chowderhead does not know when to leave well enough alone.
The judge and folks in CPS need to feel some serious repercussions, to serve as an example of poor conduct, to show hte citizens of Texas that shenanigans will be punished, and so that those who were wronged will see that their tormentors are getting some justice through the process so the wronged won't have to "go outside the process."
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on May 30, 2008, 08:05:24 PM
Ruling allowed leeway for judge
The Supreme Court justices, however, said Walther could put restrictions on the children and parents to address concerns that they may flee once reunited and that CPS had authority to investigate and intervene in the family's lives to prevent abuse.
Texas authorities, meanwhile, collected DNA swabs Thursday from sect leader Warren Jeffs in an ongoing criminal investigation separate from the custody dispute.
A search warrant for the DNA alleges that Jeffs had "spiritual" marriages with four girls, ages 12 to 15.
Jeffs, who is revered as a prophet, is serving a prison sentence for a Utah conviction of being accomplice to rape in the marriage of a 14-year-old girl to a 19-year-old sect member. He awaits trial in Arizona on similar charges.
the court said she was a chowderhead where?
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on May 30, 2008, 08:44:56 PM
Everything you did was monitored and controlled and everybody reported on everyone else, she said. It was a police state. You were not allowed to make decisions in your life. I had no power over my life or the lives of my children. It was a terrible way to live.
The alleged control began in infancy.
The method he would use with infants was a form of water torture, Jessop said of her former husband. He would spank the baby until it was screaming out of control, and then he would hold the baby faceup under a tap of running water so it couldnt breathe. He would do this repeatedly. Sometimes, it would go on for an hour, until the baby was so exhausted it couldnt cry anymore. This method he called breaking them.
To a child, the abuse becomes normal, she said, and resistance becomes unthinkable to most. With this level of mind control, its something youre born into and its generational. The babies born into this, they dont stand a chance from the beginning, she said.
What prompted her to leave was what she saw as a threat to her daughter.
It was getting worse every year, she said of the level of control and abuse. Thats one of the things for me where I felt so urgent to get out was that my daughter was turning 14, and Warren was resetting the marrying age at that point to 14. This was in 2003.
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on May 30, 2008, 09:18:49 PM
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Supreme Court offered unanimous support for police Wednesday by allowing drug evidence gathered after an arrest that violated state law to be used at trial, an important search-and-seizure case turning on the constitutional limits of "probable cause."
Post by: roo_ster on May 31, 2008, 04:12:18 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/04/23/scotus.searches/index.html
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Supreme Court offered unanimous support for police Wednesday by allowing drug evidence gathered after an arrest that violated state law to be used at trial, an important search-and-seizure case turning on the constitutional limits of "probable cause."
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Supreme Court offered unanimous support for police Wednesday by allowing drug evidence gathered after an arrest that violated state law to be used at trial, an important search-and-seizure case turning on the constitutional limits of "probable cause."
So, you support the admissibility of illegally-obtained evidence? Are you one of those, "Living Constitution types?"
Post by: seeker_two on May 31, 2008, 04:12:56 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/04/23/scotus.searches/index.html
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Supreme Court offered unanimous support for police Wednesday by allowing drug evidence gathered after an arrest that violated state law to be used at trial, an important search-and-seizure case turning on the constitutional limits of "probable cause."
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Supreme Court offered unanimous support for police Wednesday by allowing drug evidence gathered after an arrest that violated state law to be used at trial, an important search-and-seizure case turning on the constitutional limits of "probable cause."
So what's the point in warrants, anymore?......
Post by: Mabs2 on May 31, 2008, 04:22:44 AM
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on May 31, 2008, 04:36:02 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/04/23/scotus.searches/index.html
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Supreme Court offered unanimous support for police Wednesday by allowing drug evidence gathered after an arrest that violated state law to be used at trial, an important search-and-seizure case turning on the constitutional limits of "probable cause."
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Supreme Court offered unanimous support for police Wednesday by allowing drug evidence gathered after an arrest that violated state law to be used at trial, an important search-and-seizure case turning on the constitutional limits of "probable cause."
read the whole article i couldn't get it to cut sand paste right
So, you support the admissibility of illegally-obtained evidence? Are you one of those, "Living Constitution types?"
Post by: Racehorse on May 31, 2008, 07:49:12 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/04/23/scotus.searches/index.html
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Supreme Court offered unanimous support for police Wednesday by allowing drug evidence gathered after an arrest that violated state law to be used at trial, an important search-and-seizure case turning on the constitutional limits of "probable cause."
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Supreme Court offered unanimous support for police Wednesday by allowing drug evidence gathered after an arrest that violated state law to be used at trial, an important search-and-seizure case turning on the constitutional limits of "probable cause."
So what's the point in warrants, anymore?......
That's what has me worried. It seems the 4th amendment has already been thrown out with little to no outcry. The 2nd amendment is important, but the 4th amendment is just as important, and I don't see many people complaining about the latest governmental power grabs.
Post by: Perd Hapley on May 31, 2008, 07:51:26 AM
I have a separate question from the current discussion: is there some particular reason (religious or other) why these people have a history of marrying off underage girls? Polygamy is one thing, but marrying off underage girls is to me another thing all together.
I am actually looking for an answer, not BS.
I am actually looking for an answer, not BS.
Yeah, they are definitely two different issues. A third issue would be the mind control or brain-washing sort of tactics that have been brought up in this thread. I think that might be the biggest reason to marry the girls off early. Being married and having kids ties them more strongly into the community, and makes it harder for them to leave, in practical terms. It also allows the cult to have more control over them, through their husbands, and by having children to use as leverage over them.
My uninformed guess is that they also want to do things the old-fashioned way, from back when fourteen years old would not have been an unusual age for a girl to be married. I find that religious conservatives often have a tendency to value tradition or older practices for their own sake. I'm kind of like that, myself. Edit: Or maybe traditionalists just have a high likelihood of being religious conservatives.
Post by: MicroBalrog on May 31, 2008, 09:36:41 AM
Some traditional cultures and societies have that, and that goes all tumbling down when confronted with us modern day people who see such fellows as 'pedophiles' to be taken down on sight.
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on May 31, 2008, 09:40:31 AM
Post by: MicroBalrog on May 31, 2008, 09:48:04 AM
150 years ago women couldn't vote and one could own slaves. if the flds brought back those traditions would it be ok with you?
What is your point? That everyone that says that perceptions of various subjects vary from time to time supports slave-ownership?
Really, a strawman argument if I ever saw one.
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on May 31, 2008, 09:56:30 AM
Post by: MicroBalrog on May 31, 2008, 10:00:19 AM
I replied that their brains function in a different gear, left over from the 1850's.
That's a perfectly legitimate answer.
But for the record, no, I don't think something is good merely because it is a tradition. I also don't think something is good merely because it is the way we do things now. There are many thing that are done now better than in the 1850's, and there are some things that I think we'd be better off if we did like Ancient Greece did it.
Post by: MechAg94 on May 31, 2008, 10:32:50 AM
My great grandfather married his wife at 14 when she was 13. At least that is what I was told. They were still together and happy in their 90's. She wasn't married to some old man though. I think the laws governing such things were set up later. Things changed bit through WWI, the Great Depression, and WWII.
Post by: Perd Hapley on May 31, 2008, 11:14:38 AM
For one, this probably started with a couple of guys that just really had a thing for girls of that age. And they encouraged other, impressionable, younger men to lean that way as well. That could be as subtle as continued suggestions to 19-year-old Bill that he and 13-year-old Susie would make a good couple. Or it could be more overt. If the women and girls are being forced into things, perhaps the young men are, too.
Secondly, it could be that these guys prefer a very young, inexperienced, and child-like wife that is easier to control, easier to handle, easier to intimidate or simply cow into submission to a man that's several years or even a few decades older.
But I'm not accusing your great grandfather of that, Mech. That was a much different situation, partly because he was only fourteen. And as MicroBalrog pointed out, people (especially girls, I would think) were accustomed to growing up faster in earlier times.
And for the record, my first, last and only wife was twenty-nine when we got married. I was twenty-eight.
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on May 31, 2008, 11:17:23 AM
Post by: gunsmith on May 31, 2008, 03:37:04 PM
by the use of either the quote button or the use of quotation marks.
Quotation marks are these things " and are found to the left of the enter button. You use them like this.
Gunsmith said to use "quotation marks" to further accurate understanding of what idea I am trying to convey...
The quote button makes it even a little clearer,
Quote
Gunsmith said to use "quotation marks" to further accurate understanding of what idea I am trying to convey...
To answer your earlier question, yes cassandra and sara's daddy
I looked at those horrifying links you provided.
I saw the pictures of the FLDS leader swapping spit with a kid.
Its disgusting, and because of people who feel the same way as you about Due Process
She will be returned to the FLDS "compound"
Your own failure to read (or understand) the links provided to you are the reason people say you use "straw man" arguments.
WILL YOU PLEASE TAKE A LOOK AT THIS LINK!!???
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/
Ad Hominem, straw man, red herring's e.t.c all work really well
on the TV shows you watch, in Court they do not count.
When used in Court you lose.
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on May 31, 2008, 03:52:30 PM
in reallity most of those kids should eventually end up back home. its only their organized refusal to identify themselves accurately when in conjunction with the deliberate hiding of birth records by church officials that made running this circus come about. not all those folks abuse kids just hard to sort the wheat from the chaff when they clam up and circle the wagons
they've got the dna folks are going to the country
in what way do you imagine due process has been denied?and i stress imagine.
as a result of due process jeffs is toast with still more trial to come
ps i don't watch much tv didn't have any for years its a family tradition i am a heretic still believe in books
and i'm nowhere near as impressed with that site you worship as you are but again different strokes for different folks
pps how , in your imagination/opinion, should things have been done?
Post by: roo_ster on May 31, 2008, 05:24:49 PM
See chris's post post up above, describing how such ought to be done. I would add that the processes be targeted at those individuals (not entire religious sects) who have had substantive allegations placed against them. And that those allegations be investigated for substance before action taken against the family.
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on May 31, 2008, 05:31:32 PM
Post by: gunsmith on June 02, 2008, 06:25:25 AM
Quote
i'm nowhere near as impressed with that site you worship as you are
& this kind of "argument" is exactly what I am referring to.
You lose debates with this kind of argument, kids get returned to their abusers because the people arguing on their behalf think being smug and unaware of Jurisprudence and simple rules of conduct is proper behavior.
Post by: seeker_two on June 02, 2008, 06:31:28 AM
so how in this situation where the group engages in deliberate coverup, bad id hidden birth records etc., would you accomplish those goals? and how long, how many victims, should they wait before taking action?what is acceptable collateral casualtys for you?
Setting a precedence of compromising the rights of every American citizen is an unacceptable collateral casualty....
Post by: roo_ster on June 02, 2008, 08:19:54 AM
so how in this situation where the group engages in deliberate coverup, bad id hidden birth records etc., would you accomplish those goals? and how long, how many victims, should they wait before taking action?what is acceptable collateral casualtys for you?
Police work in a free society is not easy. If it were easy, it would no longer be a free society, but a police state.
The protections and principles in the COTUS are more valuable than any sect, child, or state agency. Those protections are something I jealously guard, even if wierdos and criminals also benefit from them.
This sect has been around since the 1800s, believing what they believe and doing what they are doing. Taking one more week to investigate a lead as credible/incredible is not going to be the end of the world. Besides, if this sect is so outrageous and flagrant as you have been at pains to show, they WILL slip up.
Setting a precedence of compromising the rights of every American citizen is an unacceptable collateral casualty....
Preach it, brother!
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on June 02, 2008, 09:44:23 AM
the question i asked for you or anyone else was
so how in this situation where the group engages in deliberate coverup, bad id hidden birth records etc., would you accomplish those goals?
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on June 02, 2008, 09:53:04 AM
You lose debates with this kind of argument, kids get returned to their abusers because the people arguing on their behalf think being smug and unaware of Jurisprudence and simple rules of conduct is proper behavior."
so in your mind one "wins" debates? your life experience is different than mine, greatly.
also you imagine the folks involved in this were unaware of jurisprudence? perhaps you shouls offer your wise counsel to the various lawyers and judges. since you see things so much clearer.
i don't believe that all those kids were in immediate danger. the problem is that with a deliberate witholding of id its impossible to sort out. folk made a choice to help; obsfucate and impede the investigation. those choices have consequences. as does statutory rape. some ofthose consequences are about to arrive
maybe you missed this part
"in what way do you imagine due process has been denied?and i stress imagine.
as a result of due process jeffs is toast with still more trial to come"
Post by: RoadKingLarry on June 02, 2008, 10:36:50 AM
cps got a judge to approve the raids and removals. that would seem to comply with the law. another higher court overuled the initial court again that would indicate to me that the system worked as designed. i thought we used the courts to sort these kinda things out and it seemed that is happening here. some of those folks whos kids got taken might wanna take a look at what role their refusing to id themselves played in their situation
Would that we were all blessed with such divine knowledge as you. You don't know anyomre about this stink than the rest of us and all we know is what has been in the press. So far CPS has proven NOTHING of there allegations. The whole mess started with an "annonymous" phone call that has been all but proven to have been at best a hoax. Untill I see more proff that actuall criminal activity has taken place I'm going ot error on the side of liberty.
It is human nature to fear that which we don't understand and to hate that which is different and to try to destroy that which is feared and hated.
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on June 02, 2008, 10:49:55 AM
the mess started long before this is the culmination of lots of bad behavior.and th
e call being a hoax would only be a major issue if the cops knew it was bogus.
as to proof do pictures and jeffs convictions work? or you want video? how do you reconcile a 15 year old mom with a 30 something dad in a state where age of consent is 17?
'It is human nature to fear that which we don't understand and to hate that which is different and to try to destroy that which is feared and hated. "
no argument there heck my first wife looked 25 when she was 14 and we were "active" but i was 15 and it was consensual as opposed to her dad p;imping her to "the prophet"
Post by: gunsmith on June 02, 2008, 03:32:16 PM
Quote
as to proof dp pictures and jeffs contions work? or you want video?
That proves Jeffs is a creep, not the whole cult.
Quote
how do you reconcile a 15 year old mom with a 30 something dad in a state where age of consent is 17?
If a law has been violated by a 30 year old why do you take the children away from women in their 20's ?
Why not prosecute the 30 year old male? If I violate the law you would arrest my neighbor and take her kids?
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on June 02, 2008, 03:50:32 PM
Quote
as to proof dp pictures and jeffs contions work? or you want video?
That proves Jeffs is a creep, not the whole cult.
Quote
how do you reconcile a 15 year old mom with a 30 something dad in a state where age of consent is 17?
If a law has been violated by a 30 year old why do you take the children away from women in their 20's ?
Why not prosecute the 30 year old male? If I violate the law you would arrest my neighbor and take her kids?
"That proves Jeffs is a creep, not the whole cult."
and when they join to hide him? whats that make em? in va they call them accomplice or at best unidicted coconspirator
"If a law has been violated by a 30 year old why do you take the children away from women in their 20's ?"
so you can dna test and prove that her 10 year old was concieved when she was 15
"
"Why not prosecute the 30 year old male? If I violate the law you would arrest my neighbor and take her kids?"
all for prosecuting you and theneighbor if she aids and abets. but taking a momentary break to return to reality were any of the women and kids charged? or are you havinga "it coulda happened that way moment"?
Post by: GigaBuist on June 02, 2008, 04:48:40 PM
Quote
as to proof dp pictures and jeffs contions work?
Whoa.. I didn't hear anything about pictures of double penetration at the camp.
And who the heck is Jeffs Contions?
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on June 02, 2008, 04:55:03 PM
Post by: gunsmith on June 03, 2008, 12:31:40 AM
Quote
were any of the women and kids charged
Were any kids taken away from their moms without DUE PROCESS!?
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on June 03, 2008, 02:41:18 AM
Post by: Brett Bellmore on June 03, 2008, 05:55:46 AM
if you call due process a warrant being presented to a judge and a court order being written then the answer would be no.
If you call due process an application for a warrant which actually complies with the law being presented to a judge, and him writing a court order with a basis in the law, the answer would be yes. That's why they won on appeal: Because the judge had issued a court order with no real legal basis.
The actually having a legal basis bit is part of due process, it's not "due process" if you go to court to get a judges' order when the law isn't on your side, even if he gives it to you anyway.
Post by: roo_ster on June 03, 2008, 05:56:39 AM
if you call due process a warrant being presented to a judge and a court order being written then the answer would be no.
Wrong. At least in the eyes of the appellate & sup ct of Texas.
--BB beat me to it, and with more eloquence.
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on June 03, 2008, 04:38:08 PM
on an interesting note... did you read the flds statement today?
http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_9462175
Therefore, in the future, the church commits that it will not preside over the marriage of any woman under the age of legal consent in the jurisdiction in which the marriage takes place. The church will counsel families that they neither request nor consent to any underage marriages. This policy will apply church-wide.
i like the in the future part
heres how they are screwed. if they try to use the we was married exemption to the age of consent they set themselves up on the bigamy charges. and the dna is due back this week.some lawyers gonna get rich here
Post by: gunsmith on June 03, 2008, 04:54:36 PM
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on June 03, 2008, 04:59:29 PM
you work out a plan to beat the dna yet? how you gonna escape age of consent charges?
Post by: MechAg94 on June 03, 2008, 05:19:17 PM
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on June 03, 2008, 05:31:43 PM
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on June 03, 2008, 06:22:35 PM
http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_9462174
FLDS worry grand jury could come after them
By Brooke Adams
The Salt Lake Tribune
Article Last Updated: 06/03/2008 01:09:14 AM MDT
, Texas - Hours after signing an order releasing FLDS children from state custody, 51st District Judge Barbara Walther arrived at the Schleicher County Courthouse in Eldorado to swear in a grand jury that may be considering indictments related to the polygamous sect.
By the end of the day, 18 indictments had been issued, although no details were immediately available. The number was more than the usual; typically, five to 15 indictments are returned, a court clerk said.
Walther arrived at the Eldorado courthouse at 12:30 p.m., accompanied by two bailiffs and her clerk. She left an hour later.
Allison Palmer, the deputy district attorney for Tom Green County, also was at the courthouse. Palmer has been leading the office's investigation into the sect and appearing at related hearings.
Schleicher County Sheriff David Doran was unavailable because he was meeting with the D.A.'s office, a spokeswoman said.
In a story published Saturday by the Los Angeles Times, Doran indicated that criminal charges were pending, while downplaying reports that FLDS members had requested voter registration forms and could influence county elections.
"Once we begin impaneling some grand juries and the criminal case comes to light, we'll see the tide turn once again," he said.
It could be days before the focus of any of Monday's
indictments are known; the county's policy is not to release information about indictments until they are served.
News of the grand jury's meeting circulated among members of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, creating concern about returning to their homes on the YFZ Ranch, several attorneys said.
A raid of the ranch that began April 3 led to the removal of about 450 children, who were eventually placed in shelters throughout Texas. Walther signed an order on Monday morning that allowed them to be returned to their parents immediately while Child Protective Services continues an abuse investigation.
Last week, Arizona and Texas authorities collected DNA samples from Warren S. Jeffs, the sect's leader. He is jailed in Kingman, Ariz., awaiting trial on charges related to marriages he conducted between underage girls and older men.
The search warrant said the evidence was needed as part of a new investigation of four spiritual marriages between Jeffs and girls who range in age from 12 to 15.
In Texas, the Attorney General's Office is awaiting results from 599 DNA samples collected six weeks ago, mostly from FLDS adults and children living at the YFZ Ranch, just outside Eldorado. The state had said it needed the results to match parents and children. A spokeswoman for the office did not return a call from The Salt Lake Tribune on Monday.
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on June 03, 2008, 09:53:19 PM
Case Against Sect May Not Be Over
Legal Experts Say Individual Prosecutions Could Be Ahead
SAN ANGELO, Tex., June 3 -- The state of Texas's case against members of a polygamist sect is damaged but not dead, legal experts said -- even after a series of court defeats that ended with the return of hundreds of children who had been seized at the group's compound.
On Tuesday, as members of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints continued to pick up their children from foster homes, some in Texas said that the court rulings proved the state had overreacted when it removed more than 400 children from their parents.
But child-protection authorities said their investigation will carry on. And legal experts said they might still
have a good chance at proving abuse at the Yearning for Zion Ranch, using DNA tests and seized records to show that underage girls were married to and impregnated by older men.
"Simply returning the kids to the ranch . . . doesn't say there can never be any individual prosecutions" said Adam Gershowitz, a professor who teaches Texas criminal procedure at the South Texas College of Law in Houston. "If the evidence indicates that men have been having sexual relations with underage girls, that's still a crime."
The state's case began on April 3, when state authorities raided the group's compound near Eldorado, Tex. The state alleged that the group's beliefs, which allowed girls to become wives and mothers just after puberty, created a physical threat to some children and a threat of psychological corrosion for all.
But last week, the state Supreme Court rejected that logic and pressed the state to provide evidence of abuse or threats against individual children.
Following their direction, on Monday a lower court judge in San Angelo ordered all the children released. By Tuesday afternoon, 229 had already left.
One lawyer, however, pressed for an order exempting her client, a girl from the sect, from the order releasing the children. The lawyer declined to give details, beyond saying the girl would be in too much danger of abuse if she went back to the compound.
Seventy-two of the boys who are returning home had been living at Cal Farley's Boys Ranch, a group home outside Amarillo, Tex. Dan Adams, the home's president and chief executive, said that the staff had spent weeks trying to explain to the boys why they were there.
"They just wanted us to know that they were good people," Adams said in a phone interview. Not wanting to offer an opinions, Adams said, his staff said, " 'You seem to be good boys.' You know, we didn't try to get into explanations about why the state did what they did."
Some outside the sect also have questioned the state's actions. John Kight -- chairman of the board for a Kerrville, Tex., mental health center that treated some of them -- said the seizures had been painful and unnecessary.
"It was just traumatic on the little kids," said Kight, of the Hill Country Community Mental Health and Mental Retardation Center. The state, he said, "decided that the people were guilty, and they have to prove themselves innocent."
On Tuesday, an official who oversees the Texas child-protection agency defended its actions in an opinion column in USA Today. Albert Hawkins, the executive commissioner of the state Health and Human Services Commission, said that investigators had found evidence of underage pregnancies -- and evidence that children had been coached to lie and confuse.
"They found records indicating a pattern of underage marriages and births. And they encountered a wall of deception unlike any they had experienced," Hawkins wrote. A spokeswoman declined to make him available for an interview Tuesday.
Patrick Crimmins, a spokesman for the Department of Family and Protective Services, said their investigation is continuing -- as is a separate, criminal, inquiry by the Texas attorney general's office.
Neither agency has revealed much about the evidence it has accumulated against the sect. But, in the last couple of weeks, court documents have indicated that records found at the ranch may provide definite proof about who married whom, and whether the bride was underage.
Last week, for instance, state investigators cited records and wedding photos taken from the ranch as they sought a warrant to take DNA samples from the FLDS' jailed prophet, Warren Jeffs. They said the records showed Jeffs had married at least four underage girls, and the photos showed him kissing one and cradling another's baby.
Experts on child-abuse investigations said these records could provide evidence of improper sexual relationships, even if the underage girls cannot be coaxed into testifying against their husbands.
More information could come from DNA test results: The state has sought DNA samples from dozens of men and women, to establish how they are related to the sect's children. Expert said this could provide powerful evidence.
The state "got knocked down twice in the first round, then the bell rang and they went to their corner," said John Sampson, a University of Texas law professor. "There will be a second round, for sure."
Post by: Tallpine on June 04, 2008, 07:21:13 AM
Quote
"Simply returning the kids to the ranch . . . doesn't say there can never be any individual prosecutions"
Which is of course what the state should have been doing in the first place
My personal opinion is that all churches are abusive and FLDS is one of the most extreme, exceeded in this instance only by the State of Texas
Instead of going after the perpetrators, the state punished the "victims". Separating the mothers and children was one of the most cruel and inhumane things I have ever heard of. (besides ending sentences with prepositions)
Post by: Balog on June 04, 2008, 11:37:34 AM
Post by: gunsmith on June 04, 2008, 02:53:54 PM
Quote
No different than saying all anarchists are losers who're just in it for the rock throwing at protests.
I was an anarchist for a long time, black block before it was called black block.
I sincerely believed no gov't is better then the massive gov't we have today.
Also, in the eighties, punk rock girls wore mini skirts and fishnet stockings and said "yes" to certain questions posed by anarchist punk rock guys.
I never threw rocks, to easy to get busted
Today I find the Conservative "less gov't" view and my Christianity to be a better fit. (note I am a deeply flawed Christian, I have not gone to Church or read the bible in a long time)
Post by: Tallpine on June 04, 2008, 06:26:55 PM
