Posted on 05/29/2008 9:43:07 AM PDT by MizSterious
I’m curious if flds members have social security numbers. Can you just not have one?
susie
The 38 mothers are the moms who appealed the case to the 3rd Appellate Court, represented by TX Rio Grand Legal Aid.
(In addition, there are 3 more mothers, represented by Northern TX Legal Aid) who also appealed.
The TOTAL number of mothers is something like 140.
The number of kids taken has varied, as many disputed minors have now been deemed to be adults.
The state may have evidence about physical or sexual danger to any one child. (Possibly the five 16-year old wives, if they are pregnant or have been in the past.)
And yes, I agree with you - the state claimed that all the kids were in imminent danger because of the FLDSers’ beliefs.
CPS can claim that all kids were in imminent danger of physical or sexual abuse, but they’d have to have evidence of it, and they do not.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_number
So, you don't ever have to have one, but it will create problems if you don't.
susie
I was under the impression, from something I heard this week, that evidence that was not heard in the appeal (which could only hear already heard evidence) could be heard by the supreme court (TX). If so, is it not possible that there is something there that the appellate court did not hear that might change things?
My impression, from weeks of reading threads is that many people will disagree with any decision that doesn’t give the kids back to the parents because they hate CPS and/or govt.
susie
The ACLU? ROFL! When have they ever been on the right side of ANY legal issue?
This one.
Impugning, or simply saying “since they are conservatives you can’t brush this off as a liberal ruling”? Because that’s what I was doing, until I did find out they were actually quite conservative. In this case, I think it was warranted. I’m not sure about the “rights” in quotes, except I might ask why, on this board, no one thinks the children have any.
I thought they can’t have new evidence to rule on the case. They have to intrepret the decisions from both courts and rule accordingly based on the evidence that those courts ruled on.
Please, don’t embarrass yourself. She also clerked at the USSC and has had extensive experience with child abuse cases. She’s hardly a lightweight, certainly not of the sort that have represented some of these mothers (a guy who worked for NORML, another who regularly represented child abusers, and other hacks, among some others who ARE well-qualified—and then there’s the ACLU).
You could be right. One has to be careful getting information from Foxnews talking heads. :)
susie
You are right to ask my source for “700 LEO’s”.
I don’t know how many officers were there - I was using 700 to prove a point, which is, I’m sure the kids looked frightened with so many LEO’s, and tanks, and guns.
I apologize for a confusing statement.
They hide when they hear a plane. Here are the pictures. Can you tell how many people are on the compound?
The sheriff has also stated that he was often made to wait, up to an hour, before someone would even come to open the gate. It was an hour and a half on the day of the raid. And he waited . . . he didn’t storm in with tanks. I wonder what was happening inside the compound during those 90 minutes.
Oh, surely you can’t mean “Saint” Big Willie Jessop? Lying? Whodathunkit? Don’t you know? ALL of the fLDS are “sweet” and saintly; the only bad guys here are Texans with badges. At least, that’s what I’m learning from this thread.
The children do have rights. They have rights to be with their mothers.
She hates all religion.
You sure have a peculiar way of learning things. Making stuff up in your head isn’t necessarily the best way to learn imo. I don’t even know if I would call that learning, more like suffering from paranoia.
I think there's a lot Texas hatred here, too.
Thanks!
Professor Hamilton is an internationally recognized expert on constitutional and copyright law.
You can't even make the words 'child abuse' appear if you rearrange the letters.
And if she's so bloody good, why isn't she representing the State of Texas in their appeal to the Texas Supreme Court pro bono?
She's never prosecuted a single case against a child abuser, has never defended an accused child abuser, and hasn't even helped to write a single Statute regarding child abuse. At least there's no evidence of that from her bio.
Nope. She's just another hack with an opinion and a book to sell.
Her opinion on the matter quite frankly doesn't matter.
Maybe she's some sort of Copyright Law heavyweight, but in matters Criminal or Child Custody she's a rank amateur.
If I wanted a Copyright defended, chances are I'd give her a call. If I wanted to defend myself from as yet unfiled Child Abuse charges I'd be better off hiring my auto mechanic than her.
L
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.