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.
“There are no legal, RECORDED birth certificates available for cult members”
Then why should I believe the government about her age? Just because they “believe” that she is under 18, I should take their word as gospel? Governments of any sort, local, state, or federal have not given me any reason to accept what they “believe” at face value.
It really was much harder years ago to escape abuse; I had an aunt that was seriously abused by her husband, same thing bing drinker- my parents tried to get her out of the situation- she tried to leave, cops were NO help. Her husband was well known in a small town. One night he beat her severely; broke her jaw, busted her ear drums, she was covered in gashes, and unrecognizable. My dad went and took their two kids out of the house, beat my uncle up severely and told him to never contact her or the kids again or he would kill him. My aunt and cousins lived with us until she could support them, and my father gave her money for emergencies for many years.
I am saying that kids, in an abusive situation, must make a personal choice.
If they report it to a responsible adult, then the police can get involved. The police can then gather evidence, which may be used in a court of law to convict the abuser.
If they decide not to notify an adult for help, then that was their personal choice also.
Here’s a test for you- go back and read your post that I replied to. I was not referring to your tag line; I was responding directly to your posted comment.
Fowl! Fowl! Pigeons, hawks and chickens!!
(oh I guess you meant foul)
My guess is... depending on WHICH Generation you are... we WILL live to see it fall.
200 years is about the length of any Republic.
They are presumed victims, not assumed guilty perpetrators. The children were removed for their own protection. Mistating the facts does you no credit.
You aren’t required, especially by me, to believe anyone on anything...my question to you was why should we take that bishop’s certificate at face value, given the history of the cult? Or do you believe bishop’s can do no wrong?
Or else what? That sounds like a threat, and I'm quoting what you "actually said."
It hasn’t been that many years ago that abuse in the home was considered “the family’s business” and police did not want to get involved. Men got a pass from LEOs for beating wife and kids unless someone died. I had two aunts married to abusive husbands that nearly killed them- LEO never lifted a finger to help either one and were called repeatedly. Once a cop told my aunt that my uncle worked very hard to support her and the kids and needed to unwind at home- referring to my uncle getting drunk and abusive.
It is a different world now- thank goodness, but you can’t apply what happens today in abuse situations with what happened years ago- no comparison.
Lets see,
I see it as greatly endangered kids and mentally damaged slaves being either put in protection or released from their captors (but I’m dramatic like that).
My question is why did the state allow it to be used in the custody hearing and then decide that they “believe” something else? If the courts decided it had enough face value to accept as evidence, then why is it now something else?
And sorry, baiting me with bishops can do no wrong isn’t going to work. Last time I looked, my denomination didn’t have bishops...so I couldn’t give a hoot in heck about any bishops.
My problem is a general distrust of government saying what they need to say to get their way. It usually turns out false and does far more harm than good.
The problem is that it is not possible to even investigate when there are no birth records, people are telling different versions, won’t give their names, ages, etc. I want to know how you propose they could have even investigated? If you were in charge what would it have taken for you to have found, when you went inside the compound, for you to have taken the children out? Or, would you have not even gotten a search warrant and gone in?
susie
I’m with you.
True Story:’)
LE: Your child reports that you have beaten him. Is
this true?
Mother: No,Not yet. Get back with me in a couple of hours
though.
You're STILL placing the blame on the children, in any situation.
It's WRONG!!!
I can testify that mothers of abused kids, especially in a religious setting, will usually side with their husband over the abused kid-— because it’s what God wants. (so they believe) And actually be an enabler and giving the child to the father for abuse. She’ll probably not even see it as abuse if her own spirit has been broken or she’s convinced of the ‘holiness’ of her husband.
Granted, very jaundiced eye here, but ya knowaddamean.
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.