Posted on 05/22/2008 10:46:31 AM PDT by ElkGroveDan
SAN ANGELO, Texas - A state appellate court has ruled that child welfare officials had no right to seize more than 400 children living at a polygamist sect's ranch.
The Third Court of Appeals in Austin ruled that the grounds for removing the children were "legally and factually insufficient" under Texas law. They did not immediately order the return of the children.
Child welfare officials removed the children on the grounds that the sect pushed underage girls into marriage and sex and trained boys to become future perpetrators.
The appellate court ruled the chaotic hearing held last month did not demonstrate the children were in any immediate danger, the only measure of taking children from their homes without court proceedings.
Actually, HG, that would only be part of what would be needed to prove a criminal act. But the rest is easy. They would need to show that the mother was either, under 14 when the child was concieved, or not legally married to the father at that time. Depending on relative birthdays, an 18 y/o could have concieved a 4 y/o when she was 14. Prior to September of 2005 a 14 y/o could marry in Texas with parental permission. Oh one other thing. If the father was less than 36 months older than the mother, and the mother was 14 at conception, again, no crime would have been committed. (Actually it would, but there's a "defense to prosecution" if the ages are less than 3 years apart.) But those are all facts easy to prove or disprove as required.
Then you go after the father, since he is the one who would have committed the crime of sexual abuse of a minor.
As for breaking up cults, who gets to decide what is a "cult" and what is a legitimate religion, with first amendment protections? I'd just as soon stick with prosecuting people who commit crimes, and let those chips fall where they may, and of course they'll fall all over the leadership of such groups, because religion is no defense for criminal behavior. A lot of "Holy Men" have found that out, recently and in the more distant past as well.
“The only fact that was real was there was a bed in the building.”
True. And a long blond hair. Which proves nothing.
Besides, that last time I read about that Jeffs performed a ‘spiritual-marriage’ (or legal one) was the one of his 19 year old cousin to a 14 year old girl, and that happened in some seedy motel room.
Good cause the list of people who are free because of their money is quite long. My point was we don’t seem to have any rights UNLESS we have money and a good lawyer.
“True. And a long blond hair. Which proves nothing.”
Right, so why did they release it? Why did they tell everyone that they were raping children in this bed right after the fake marriage?
“Besides, that last time I read about that Jeffs performed a ‘spiritual-marriage’ (or legal one) was the one of his 19 year old cousin to a 14 year old girl, and that happened in some seedy motel room.”
With parents permission I don’t have a huge problem with a 19 yr old and a 14 yr old marrying. A 40 year old and a 14 yr old would be far far far different. In some states a 40 yr old and a 14 yr old marrying is legal WITH parents permission.
The minimum age for marriage, with parental permission. (It is and was 18 w/o such permission). The minimum age to consent to sex (presumably outside of a lawful marriage) is and was 17, unless the older participant is less than 3 years older than the younger. Then it is and was 14. Nothing is ever simple.
My point was we can’t get off on technicalities unless we bribe the Judge through our lawyer.
If the rights we have depends on how much we pay the lawyers, then we ought to arrest every one of them, because they are sworn to do their best for each and every client.
Isn’t that true?
‘If the rights we have depends on how much we pay the lawyers, then we ought to arrest every one of them, because they are sworn to do their best for each and every client.”
I’m saying that the police/govt/cps can do whatever they want and unless you have money to pay a lawyer you cannot do anything about it. The govt used to respect the law and you were generally safe. The govt doesn’t seem to care anymore what the law says because they rarely have any impact. At most their city loses a lawsuit 6 to 8 years later.
Take New Orleans confiscation of firearms as an example. The police knew it was illegal and took guns anyway. With help from the NRA a judge told the city to return them. The city still hasn’t and most likely never will. meanwhile these people have lost their property and ability to protect themselves.
In this case the govt went in willy nilly and stomped on everyones rights. Weeks later a judge says the govt screwed up but still nothing has really changed. The govt people have no skin in the game and are basically doing whatever they want to do.
“Right, so why did they release it? “
To who? The public? I think it was SMOKING GUN and another website that got copies of the affidavits and posted them.
“Why did they tell everyone that they were raping children in this bed right after the fake marriage?”
IIRC, It was a combination of information gathered from interviews with the FLDS members, and some ex-FLDS members.
‘My point was we can’t get off on technicalities unless we bribe the Judge through our lawyer.”
have you ever been in court? With good lawyers you can legally get off on a technicality. With a bad lawyer you can be railroaded even if you are innocent. It all depends which questions they ask.
“But after interviewing Barlow in Arizona on April 12, Texas officials declined to arrest him.”
Did that help?
They weren’t. Alyssa Walls was the star witness for the state of Utah, and she was 14 when Warren Jeffs married her to her first cousin. That is against the law and Jeffs was imprisoned for it. All I am saying is that the state must have proof to back up their assertions. Unfortunately, it looks like Texas took a shortcut.
BTW, I think Warren Jeffs is scum and is where he belongs.
“have you ever been in court?”
Yes, occasionally.
“With good lawyers you can legally get off on a technicality. With a bad lawyer you can be railroaded even if you are innocent. It all depends which questions they ask.”
Now you are referring to ‘good’ lawyers vs. ‘bad’ lawyers.
I thought we were talking about how much dough you give them to fix your case.
PSSSST... wanna hear Rosita Swinton’s phone call?
“But things should not have to get so far and to the level it did.”
Ideally. In reality though, there are laws to ensure that if the authorities break the law, one has the right to appeal their action.
“Surely someone involved thought that it might be a bit too far to seize 400 kids as a community seizure instead of individual cases and that it might end up problematic?”
The CPS took 52 kids the first day, 100 some the second, and by the third day, based on the information from interviews, evidence they witnessed, made a judgment call and decided that they had to take all the children, until the whole mess could be sorted out, and the ‘danger’ removed.
Judge Walther agreed. The appellate court has overturned her decision.
The CPS didn’t realize they were going to have 400+ children on their hands until the third and final day of the ‘raid’.
It wasn’t what they planned to do, it was what they felt they had to do, under the circumstances.
My sister is a nurse, and has worked with a couple of polygamist wives. One would never know. Many lead assimilated lives in Utah, being married to more than one wife, but not living in secluded places.
I think the Tom Green conviction spooked a lot of polygamists living in Utah. My sister said that were 3 families living in their extended neighborhood, when Green was convicted, they were gone the next day.
“If these CPS agents actions end up being deemed non-Constitutional, then I think being taken offline and retrained in the Constitution and applicable laws. Just makes sense. “
Now there is an opinion I could stand behind.
One of the most reasonable and intelligent comments of the day.
No one from the YFZ ranch, save the children and some adult women that CPS claimed were children, were "apprehended". The only charges that have been made involved events during the "raid". Obstruction sort of things involving two men at the compound/ranch. Six weeks it's been, and no charges yet on the base allegations of child sexual abuse, polygamy, etc. That's with the "take" of the the first and second warrants.
You are absolutely correct. While all the legal finangling is going on, those children are in limbo. This could go right up to the United States Supreme Court and in the meantime???
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.