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

To: org.whodat
It is sickening - a sickening persecution of people who have an unusual, but deeply held religious belief:

From the article:

They also agree Louisa Jessop, who gave birth last Monday to her third child, is 22 years old.

Both women are in monogamous marriages and their attorneys say none of the state's allegations fit their situations.

But the state, as laid out in the service plans, maintains that the couples and other FLDS parents "have chosen to be members of a community that appears to support systemic abuse of children."

Previously CPS claimed Ms. Jessup was a minor - even though she insisted she wasn't, and presented a drivers license and birth certificate as evidence of her age. CPS nevertheless insisted she had no proof of her age. Finally, they had to admit the obvious.

But now, even though they have before them a 22 year old woman married to a 24 year old man with several children born after she was 18 years of age, just because Ms. Jessop and her husband belong to a particular religion, the state refuses to return their children to them. If that doesn't fit the definition of "sickening" I don't know what would -- perhaps you need them to be stuffed into cattle cars and hauled off to a death camp before it bothers you, but for me this type of governmental conduct is a simply unacceptable abuse of the law.

32 posted on 05/18/2008 11:21:51 AM PDT by freeandfreezing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]


To: freeandfreezing
Pamela Jessop, who gave birth April 29 to her second child, was listed as “15 or 16” in a May filing related to taking custody of her newborn. A different document, filed in April, had said she was 18, as officials now acknowledge.

They also agree Louisa Jessop, who gave birth last Monday to her third child, is 22 years old.

Reading the sentence as written, "A different document, filed in April, had said she was 18, as officials now acknowledge.", say that the people acknowledge the document, it does not say there is one word of proof are approval by the court that the rest of the statement is in fact true. The judge gave limited custody of the child born a few days ago to her, because the child was not subject to original warrant, since the baby was not born.

The spin by the supports of this cult in Utah is out of the world.

34 posted on 05/18/2008 11:34:43 AM PDT by org.whodat (What's the difference between a Democrat and a republican????)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | 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