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

To: DustyMoment

I believe that I wrote that it didn’t sound like the right thing was being done here. And, technically, the state is not stealing them blind. It is whomever the Probate Court appointed as guardian that is making the bad decisions. Also ... Probate Court judge used to be an elected position IIRC. Perhaps this judge should be out on his rear.


87 posted on 09/01/2009 6:34:31 AM PDT by JustaDumbBlonde (America: Home of the Free Because of the Brave)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies ]


To: JustaDumbBlonde

I believe that I wrote that you were technically, legally, probably right. I’m still not convinced that the state hasn’t overstepped in this case. From a technical standpoint, I don’t doubt that the sleazy lawyers in the state legislature setup this nanny state procedure so they could do what they are doing.

By the same token, I also don’t think that either the Founding Fathers OR Sam Houston et al had this kind of stuff in mind when they formed their various state or federal governments.

Even if this couple is eventually “paroled” from custody, they will never get back the money that has been confiscated from them, they will never get their sense of security and safety back after the way their house was left, and they will never be relieved of their fear that it could happen again! This is why “I’m from the government, I’m here to help you” has such a chilling effect on people. We just never thought that it would apply to the Texas state government.


90 posted on 09/01/2009 8:19:15 AM PDT by DustyMoment (FloriDUH - proud inventors of pregnant/hanging chads and judicide!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies ]

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