The question is not whether the information was accurate but whether their was a reasonable basis for the finding of probable cause for the search. If it was reasonable for the magistrate to find probable cause based on the information given to him, even if the information later turns out to be incorrect, the search would be legal and evidence of criminal activity discovered in the search would be admissible.
Thanks - I am biased on this story, I am looking at a picture of my 13 year old daughter on my desk who is quite mature for her age.
I am also mentally picturing the gun in my desk pointed at the heart of some 50 year old man who would sexually lust after her like these men do and would be stupid enough to act on that lust.
Though true, any further investigation requires renewed probable cause if the initial probable cause is found deficient. If the CPS hasn't established probable cause to take DNA samples from all the adults, then the game is practically up.
I don’t do criminal law, so if you know something about this, I’d be interested to hear it.
A few days ago, the lawyer for the man named in the warrant, Dale Barlow, said that, before the warrant was executed, Texas authorities had investigated, had spoken with numerous witnesses and Arizona authorities, and already knew that Barlow had never been in Texas. If that is true, wouldn’t it eliminate any “good faith” argument?
" If it was reasonable for the magistrate to find probable cause based on the information given to him, even if the information later turns out to be incorrect, the search would be legal..."
is the best I've seen on FR.
As many have stated - I don't support child abuse, but I don't support persecution either.
Remember that the feds drove tanks through a cult compound in Waco based on precisely the same allegations. In that case they could have simply pulled over the leader, outside he compound, and left his followers alive!
What they faced here appears more of a (wealthy & sophisticated) communal settlement than what we think of when polygamy comes to mind. Not an excuse, but makes me wonder it they'd have been safe with a peace sign hung over the front door.
Without recourse to tinfoil I'd posit that some pretext was needed, 'the call' came from some official or semiofficial agency to provide that pretext, and the loon in Oklahoma is someone dug up to provide cover when 'Sarah' does not surface.
(Which in turn implies other crimes.)
Should the cult be prosecuted? It probably does not matter because they WILL be prosecuted. What comes from those prosecutions is another matter that will be far enough in the future to obscure the constitutional and ethical questions of the raid.
One thing I'll virtually guarantee is that, had the compound featured a mosque and occasional stonings of women and girls for not obeying any male in sight, honor killings, or (Oopsie) underage marriage, there would never have been a raid for us to discuss.