Posted on 04/22/2008 3:40:19 PM PDT by BGHater
What abuse of law? A tort based on what?
Would a pregnancy work for you as valid evidence? Because there's several of those. And it doesn't need a trial by jury to determine pregnancy.
A trial is just to determine the guilt or innocence of any particular man, not that the rape occurred. A pregnant 13 or 14 year old demonstrates that.
Oh, for heaven’s sake.
I can’t believe this has to be said repeatedly on the same thread.
The original search warrant named who/what was being searched for on the ranch property.
They saw evidence of statutory rape. They obtained a second warrant. (If you don’t understand, look up the term “In plain sight”.)
Based on the information and evidence recovered using that warrant, a judge signed a letter of removal, which isn’t even a necessary thing, from what I have read. They went OVER what they had to do.
Which house was named in the original warrant?
What family?
What street address?
How did it expand to an entire town?
What specific charges were made against Joe Blow, the neighbor of the original family under suspiscion, that justified a warrant to search his house, and sieze his kids?
You can drive a military convoy through the legal holes in this.
So you expect them to get evidence on the spot, without questioning the witnesses? If the girls won’t identify the father, then what?
They couldn’t even get their correct names and ages out of these children, let alone much else.
Besides, they found a log book detailing underage “marriages” in a locked safe on the premises.
(ibidinum)
Which house was named in the original warrant?
What family?
What street address?
How did it expand to an entire town?
What specific charges were made against Joe Blow, the neighbor of the original family under suspiscion, that justified a warrant to search his house, and sieze his kids?
You can drive a military convoy through the legal holes in this.
It’s not a town. It’s a single property. They didn’t know exactly where the caller may have been. They had to search the entire compound.
Have you even bothered reading the supporting documents for the warrants?
Ooooh, that explains it.
I guess, if on of my cousins called in a report of abuse from my grandparent’s farm, every house on the original property could be searched. All twelve houses, whatever, no resort to the rule of law. Hell, it must be a compound!
And I will drive a legal truck through that search warrant, even if granny is guilty as hell.
Not all - I have a life, you know. ;)
Fine. Present that evidence to the judge, and convict.
Is it true that New Hampshire still allows 13 yr olds to marry, and North Carolina still allows 14+ etc etc.?
As a fervent opponent of CPS Nazis, I hope the state gets its hat handed to it (or some other, lower part of the corpus) but I am also glad to see that p**** farm shut down. Mormons may have not been too worried about that sort of behavior before, but they will move quickly to repress groups that tarnish the letters “LDS” much more quickly in the future, I think.
What town?
It was YFZ Ranch, 2420 County Road 300, El Dorado Texas, 76936, owned by Frederick Jessop.
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2008/0410081polygamy1.htmlnch, all structures thereon.
Forget the parts you don’t like to read, the editorializing against fLDS, just read the warrant. Read it for yourself.
Legally, yes. But morally? It sure sends a chill down my spine to think that the State is going to make decisions to raid and swipe based on morals! My first question is "who's morals?". Am I wrong?
Additionally, it is troubling that CPS and the Courts are defending the decision to nab over 400 children, including boys, when the allegations in the phone call dealt with early marriage, pregnancy and abuse. This is the darndest 'investigation' of which I've ever heard.
Actually the guy named in the warrant wasn’t there partially because he is on probation for involvement with an underage girl in Arizona. Additionally the girl named in the call does exist, although it is not clear where she is. There are groups in Utah made up primarily of women who have left the FLDS and similar groups who keep track of the girls in the polygamous churches. They are well aware of who she is, who she is actually “married” to (a man related to the man named in the warrant) and the fact she does actually have children already.
There are serious problems from a legal standpoint, but the basic story of what has been going on in the FLDS is very accurate and has been well documented for years. Those are 2 completely seperate issues.
I agree - but, there are legal issues that we must address.
These girls aren’t married. They were raped. The laws of other states have no bearing on the matter.
They will present the evidence when they have collected it all.
Seems like a lot of people would be happy if the state rushed this and goofed up because of it.
The warrant is linked in my post 53 to you. Would you please point out the problems with it, where it is in error?
Sigh, just because you asked so nicely, I will go read it.
But before I do - can a search warrent cover an entire apartment building, even though each apartment is a seperate residence? Even if one guy owns the entire building?
Absolutely, it can.
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.