Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Lawyers for FLDS may sue over raid
Deseret News ^ | June 13, 2008 | Ben Winslow

Posted on 06/13/2008 9:31:37 PM PDT by Saundra Duffy

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-175 next last
To: SeaHawkFan
SeaHawkFan said: "I’m not sure of the point of your reply to me. "

Your statement that the FLDS could be charged with welfare fraud if evidence exists is a true statement.

I simply posted another true statement. I don't actually have any evidence that you have committed welfare fraud. Do you have any evidence that the FLDS in Texas has committed welfare fraud?

21 posted on 06/14/2008 11:41:58 AM PDT by William Tell (RKBA for California (rkba.members.sonic.net) - Volunteer by contacting Dave at rkba@sonic.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Saundra Duffy
Lawyers for FLDS may sue over raid

No kidding?

What a shocker.

22 posted on 06/14/2008 11:44:08 AM PDT by dragnet2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: William Tell; SeaHawkFan
I simply posted another true statement.

As I read through the posts, I missed the point of that "true statement".

SeaHawkFan clearly qualified the possible prosecution of welfare fraud with "...if the evidence is there".

23 posted on 06/14/2008 3:25:26 PM PDT by IIntense (o)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: IIntense; SeaHawkFan
IIntense said: SeaHawkFan clearly qualified the possible prosecution of welfare fraud with "...if the evidence is there".

And I clearly qualified my statement in exactly the same manner. Is there a problem here?

My point is the same as SeaHawkFan's point.

24 posted on 06/14/2008 3:52:59 PM PDT by William Tell (RKBA for California (rkba.members.sonic.net) - Volunteer by contacting Dave at rkba@sonic.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Tennessee Nana
Further proof that mormons are not Christians...

I'm not wading into that one.

One thing the outcome of all these lawsuits will be is to prove without a doubt is that CPS didn't follow the law.

25 posted on 06/14/2008 6:27:54 PM PDT by Balding_Eagle (OVERPRODUCTION......... one of the top five worries for American farmers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: MrCFdovnh
Say, you bring up a good point!! I'll bet the FLDS lawyer will show video footage of all the news reports - including Nancy Grace & Bill O'Reilly - where they mutilated the truth and trashed the FLDS. Remember the tall tale about all the boys with broken bones and how the boys had been molested? What a whopper. One lie after the other. Unfortunately, many a gullible ignorant viewer fell for it. Assassination of character . . . and more. The truth about the media coverage of FLDS (guess you have to copy and paste): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6hgpSoUZCs&feature=related
26 posted on 06/14/2008 6:30:32 PM PDT by Saundra Duffy (For victory & freedom!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Saundra Duffy; All
The FLDS people deserve NOTHING! They are an evil and abusive cult. It's not a stretch to wonder if the posters who are adamant in the defense of their practices are actually FLDS members.

If not, they choose to be "blind" to their beliefs. In their minds, every person who has found their way out of this cult, and described their life within it, is a liar.

That the Texas CPA may have/did misjudge the ages of some of the people removed from the ranch, including the children, MAY be understandable, as, was published, many, if not all, lied about their ages.

This polygamous cult (religion, if you choose) has gotten away with polygamy (against U.S. law) and the forced marriages of young girls to men old enough to be their fathers. Yes, I do believe that's true, and it is clearly repulsive.

It does not seem to be that repulsive to you, as you'd rather focus on due process and the opinions of the appeals court and the Texas supreme court.

I am left to believe that the welfare of the FLDS children is of secondary importance to you.

27 posted on 06/14/2008 11:26:09 PM PDT by IIntense (o)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: IIntense

IF THE EVIDENCE IS THERE.

That is the ‘key’ to this case. And you can bet the attorneys will do their best and fight every piece of it, as they should. Warren Jeff’s lawyers are already trying to suppress this “NONEXISTENT” evidence.

What I find IRONIC about the trend of some posts is the insistence that because the State is taking it’s time to assemble all the evidence, and charge the ‘correct’ defendents, that one can conclude that means there is none.

One must ask, with all the ‘evidence’ that the FLDS Lawyers have, why have there been no arrests of Judges, Sheriff, Texas Rangers, CPS staff, Baptist Volunteers, MHRH Volunteers, nor any actual lawsuits filed?


From the article:

“We’re still in the research and drafting process,” Laura Shockley said Thursday.

“There are a lot of different ways to pursue this and look at it,” he said. “We want to be smart about it and not be reckless.”


So, because they are ‘taking their time’ can we not assume that they really have no evidence, and are just making baseless accusations?

That is the basis that the Judge, the CPS, Texas Rangers,DPS, and the Sheriff, have all been sentenced guilty on.



28 posted on 06/15/2008 5:46:23 AM PDT by UCANSEE2 (I reserve the right to misinterpret the comments of any and all pesters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Balding_Eagle

“One thing the outcome of all these lawsuits will be is to prove without a doubt is that CPS didn’t follow the law. “

Oh, but they did follow the law.


29 posted on 06/15/2008 5:55:19 AM PDT by UCANSEE2 (I reserve the right to misinterpret the comments of any and all pesters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: SeaHawkFan; William Tell

“I’m not sure of the point of your reply to me.”

Well, it seemed pretty obvious to anyone reading it.

You made your original comment, and William Tell couldn’t find anything good to counter it with, so he tried to turn the ‘light’ on you, instead of the FLDS.

His hope is that because you haven’t committed fraud, and know there is no evidence, that somehow you must equate that with the FLDS case.

Even though in the FLDS case, there have been daily descriptions of 400 boxes of evidence, and a bunch of white dresses. Even though it was ‘known’ that the DNA was taken of the FLDS members, and the results of ALL of them may still not be complete.


30 posted on 06/15/2008 6:14:39 AM PDT by UCANSEE2 (I reserve the right to misinterpret the comments of any and all pesters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Saundra Duffy

“The FLDS people deserve to be compensated for pain and suffering they endured.”

Yes. They most certainly should.

I think that now that Warren Jeffs is out of the picture, that they should take the $100 million in the UEP Fund, and distribute it among the current FLDS members, any Lost Boys, and ex-members that Jeffs ‘excommunicated’ because they were in his way.

Let them rebuild their religion, without a megalomaniac sex offender at the helm.


31 posted on 06/15/2008 6:26:38 AM PDT by UCANSEE2 (I reserve the right to misinterpret the comments of any and all pesters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: dragnet2

Lawyers for FLDS may sue over raid

No kidding?

What a shocker.


I wonder if the FLDS members will file a ‘class action’ suit?


32 posted on 06/15/2008 6:33:40 AM PDT by UCANSEE2 (I reserve the right to misinterpret the comments of any and all pesters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2
Oh, but they did follow the law.

We'll see. I predict that when this is all over, even people like you will witness the courts finding otherwise.

33 posted on 06/15/2008 7:46:30 AM PDT by Balding_Eagle (OVERPRODUCTION......... one of the top five worries for American farmers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Balding_Eagle

“”When there is no longer an emergency, the department cannot justify continued custody by suggesting it must retain the discretion to make snap judgments,” according to the briefing filed this morning by ACLU attorneys.

“The issue here is not whether the department acted in good faith at the time of removal, but whether - 14 days later - it had satisfied criteria for continuing custody of the children.”


34 posted on 06/15/2008 9:09:25 AM PDT by UCANSEE2 (I reserve the right to misinterpret the comments of any and all pesters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2

This is just a sliver of what is to come.


35 posted on 06/15/2008 9:16:40 AM PDT by Balding_Eagle (OVERPRODUCTION......... one of the top five worries for American farmers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Balding_Eagle

Maybe. But you are missing the point.

You said CPS broke the law.
I said they didn’t.

I posted the words of the ACLU where they admit the CPS was justified in taking the children in the first place, just not keeping them beyond 14 days.

When the TXSC made the ruling, the CPS cooperated, and followed the law, in returning them.

So, I flat out state you are wrong.


36 posted on 06/15/2008 9:27:24 AM PDT by UCANSEE2 (I reserve the right to misinterpret the comments of any and all pesters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2
posted the words of the ACLU where they admit the CPS was justified in taking the children in the first place, just not keeping them beyond 14 days.

When the TXSC made the ruling, the CPS cooperated, and followed the law, in returning them.

So you admit they were breaking the law when they kept them beyond 14 days, and the court agreed with your assertion. What's your point?

37 posted on 06/15/2008 9:31:27 AM PDT by Balding_Eagle (OVERPRODUCTION......... one of the top five worries for American farmers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Balding_Eagle

“So you admit they were breaking the law when they kept them beyond 14 days, and the court agreed with your assertion. “

You wish.

The CPS was following the law, and the ruling of the Judge.
That ruling was overturned, and they followed the law on the new ruling.


38 posted on 06/15/2008 9:37:27 AM PDT by UCANSEE2 (I reserve the right to misinterpret the comments of any and all pesters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2

You’re wrong on all counts.

I’m confident in my assertions, and willing to wait to see the headlines confirming the same.


39 posted on 06/15/2008 9:40:05 AM PDT by Balding_Eagle (OVERPRODUCTION......... one of the top five worries for American farmers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Balding_Eagle

“You’re wrong on all counts.”

However you provide nothing in the way of evidence to back it up.


“I’m confident in my assertions, and willing to wait to see the headlines confirming the same.”

As long as you admit they are assertions, instead of proven fact, I have no problem with you waiting.

There may even be some lawsuits stipulating what you suggest. Whether they have a chance of succeeding, is another question.


40 posted on 06/15/2008 9:50:30 AM PDT by UCANSEE2 (I reserve the right to misinterpret the comments of any and all pesters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-175 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson