Posted on 05/01/2008 4:44:54 PM PDT by Politicalmom
SAN ANTONIO — A judge ordered that the baby boy born to a girl taken from a polygamist sect's ranch in West Texas be placed in state custody, according to documents released Thursday.
Texas District Judge Barbara Walther signed the order Wednesday giving the state custody of the 1-day-old infant born to a teen believed to be 15 or 16 years old.
The girl has claimed to be 18, according to an affidavit signed by Ruby Gutierrez, a Child Protective Services caseworker, but officials believe she is younger and placed her in foster care with other children taken from the ranch.
The newborn is the teen's second child; the first is a 20-month-old boy. The father of both children was identified as Jackson Jessop, 22, but state officials say they don't know his whereabouts.
Child welfare officials now have 464 children in their custody, swept from the Yearning For Zion Ranch in Eldorado because authorities believe underage girls were forced into marriages and sex with older men. Authorities are also now investigating possible sexual abuse of boys.
Church members have vehemently denied there was any abuse, and civil liberties groups have raised concerns at the sweeping nature of the removals.
Individual custody hearings are set to be completed by June 5.
CPS and law enforcement raided the ranch on April 3 after a girl who was purportedly 16 called a domestic abuse hotline to complain of abuse at the hands her much older husband. Authorities are investigating whether the calls were a hoax.
Regardless, child welfare authorities say 31 of the 53 girls aged 14-17 have children or are pregnant.
Under Texas law, children under the age of 17 generally cannot consent to sex with an adult. A girl can get married with parental permission at 16, but the girls who belong to the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints are not believed to have legal marriages.
FLDS is a breakaway sect of the mainline Mormon church, which disavowed polygamy a century ago.
I have done nothing of the kind. I have simply noted that the people have (as you no doubt claim - voluntarily) joined themselves to a group which is classified as a cult by any number of means of measurement. Whether we choose to judge by 1) orthodox Christian doctrine, 2) psychological definitions of cults, 3) sociological definitions of cults, or 4) colloquial ideas as to what is a cult. As you're aware, the LDS is not all that supportive either of the FLDS's position in relation to society at large.
If you would prefer to discuss religion at large and how all religions can be defined as "cultic" and the difference in definition from that general definition and the colloquial understanding of the term, we certainly can have that discussion. You, of course, wish to do nothing of the kind and only wish to muddy the waters.
So, you support FLDS polygamist “families” and all the evil attendant thereof?
Cult is defined by a group that has total control over all aspects of members lives——
that restricts information, basic freedoms, free will, freedom of association, breaks natural bonds between individuals etc.
Sound familiar?
Consider yourself corrected.
So the DU sect of FR has spoken eh?
When my wife filed for divorce, she called the police and accused me of sexually abusing my children. No evidence was possible, but it was good enough for her to get custody of our children!
Now my two daughters, when they grew up and also filed for divorce, listened to their mother and attempted the same thing.
With both of their husbands, I warned them what my daughters would do in court, and their lawyers were well prepared.
Both of my daughters were convicted for lying in court and lost custody of their children.
Until these people have actually been convicted in a court of law, I will assume that the mothers, fathers and their children are members of a loving family.
That quote from CS Lewis is dead to rights on the money!!
What an utterly ignorant generation we have become....
When I read what passes for Conservatism on this board these days... I shudder for our Republic... and of course... it explains WHY we have John McCain as our standard.
What age were these abandoned boys? Bottom line, was doing this illegal? Granted, it’s heinous; but as Liberals have shown time and again, being heinous isn’t necessarily illegal.
Still no reason to take her baby away from her. We *know* that one is hers. Just put them both in a shelter. Newborns really need their mother around, if only to nurse them. Nursing is much better than formula for any number of reasons. The Judge and CPS have by this action shown that they really don't give a rat's patootie about the welfare of the children.
Honestly,
I’m not blowing hot air up your skirts,
but many of the girls we get on psyche peds are in in homes with their kids (granted, their babies stay in the home while they’re in the hospital).
And in my county, parental rights are only severed if you really don’t give a rip and don’t fix what needs fixing (like get off drugs usually).
We have one repeater who is now an adult who has more than one baby removed from her, and the reason was she made it clear she would hurt it if she saw it.....Honestly, I wouldn’t leave a dust bunny in her care.....
No. It's the opposite of intellectually dishonest. It's intellectually dishonest to pretend that postings on FR on a case under investigation influence the guilt or innocence of any person eventually tried in the criminal justice system. We need not withhold our own common sense or our abilities to discern truth with the evidence at hand simply because our justice system proclaims "innocent until proven guilty."
Find the people responsible for statutory rape, and give them their day in court.
Do you know what the typical time frame is for a criminal case for a situation where there is one possible victim and one suspect? Would you allow that 1) the extra media attention will cause a longer time frame than normal, and 2) the complicated nature of the interrelations of the suspects and alleged victims could cause a longer time frame than normal?
Keep in mind, the state of Texas knows there's plenty of people out there just like you, ready to crucify them for not crossing a "t," and all-to-ready to accept the excuses and excesses of a cult known for sexual assault.
You are either a good liar or someone utterly unfamiliar with the day-to-day machinations of the cult.
Got that figure from the Dr. Phil show, on last Thursday's show. Dr. Phil did a visit to the site (he flew over it), but his comments said that only a minority of the families were polygamous, with most of them being a single mother/father households.
But you bring up a legitimate point. I can find no written evidence of this; thus I will immediately cease and desist quoting that figure - until I do find something.
My position is a result of my experience.
If there is no proof that the parent is abusive, give them a chance! They may surprise you.
Good grief.
THEY DID NOT SEPARATE HER FROM HER CHILDREN!!!!!!!!
You were also here a few weeks ago saying that a non-consenting 14 year old married as wife number 4 to a 50 year old man was a ‘real’ wife (based on him having sex with her).
So you’re standard for what makes a group ‘loving’ is twerked.
You watch Dr. Phil? Seriously? :’)
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.