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

Skip to comments.

Court: Texas had no right to take polygamists' kids 3 minutes ago
AP via Yahoo ^ | 5/22/08

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.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: betterthancrispy; biggovernment; constitution; cpswatch; cultists; donutwatch; duplicate; fascism; feminism; firstamendment; flds; freedomofreligion; governmentnazis; jeffs; kidnapping; longdresses; mobrule; molesters; mormon; patriarchy; polygamy; property; ruling; statistapologists
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 1,321-1,331 next last
To: mnehrling

Now the CPS has acknowledged that 11 of their “children” were adults, and another 8 will be found to be adults today.

And you may have missed it, but the “14-year-old” who was claimed to be pregnant has proven she is not pregnant and never had a child.

But I presume those posting here will continue to claim that 14-17 year olds were pregnant.

I won’t say that everything CPS says is a lie. But it is clear that CPS is not a reliable source for information.


161 posted on 05/22/2008 11:54:09 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: mnehrling
I’ll trust the Texas Rangers any day over a group whose leaders have a history of convictions for rape, accomplice to rape, sexual contact with a minor, and incest (found guilty in a court of law, not just in the media)

When did all of these things happen? I have never heard of them. There may be a case or two against a member or two, but I very much doubt it is wide spread. I am sure that there have been a couple of Protestants, and Catholics who have also been guilty of sexual crimes, but that does not make the entire religion guilty.
When I lived in AZ I knew many LDS members and they were all great people.
162 posted on 05/22/2008 11:54:46 AM PDT by John D
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: Proud_texan

Well said.


163 posted on 05/22/2008 11:54:57 AM PDT by WayneS (I'm not one to say I told you so, but....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: freedomrings69

I don’t think the court can simply say they should all go home. CPS may have information sufficient to keep SOME of the kids. But now maybe they will get a real hearing, not the sham hearing and a bad ruling by a judge.


164 posted on 05/22/2008 11:55:33 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: conservativeinferno

Do you consider parents who hand their underage daughters over to statutory rapists as unfit?


165 posted on 05/22/2008 11:56:13 AM PDT by Irish Rose (Will work for chocolate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: mnehrling
but telling the future is not something we have the luxury of

I don't really see what "telling the future" has to do with it.

Some of the older kids were being raped by the men.

So separate the kids from the men.

How this justifies separating babies from mothers I'll never understand.

You seem to be hung up on wanting punitive measures for the mothers including permanent separation from their babies and young children, without any proof and without even any observed threat to the younger children.

That's weird.

166 posted on 05/22/2008 11:56:19 AM PDT by steve86 (Acerbic by nature, not nurture™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: mnehrling

And you have proof that your scenario is true, I suppose?


167 posted on 05/22/2008 11:56:59 AM PDT by WayneS (I'm not one to say I told you so, but....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: John D

LDS is different than FLDS. It’s the F folks who are for polygamy.


168 posted on 05/22/2008 11:57:29 AM PDT by getmeouttaPalmBeachCounty_FL (****************************Stop Continental Drift**)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: green iguana

Do YOU?

There’s a lot of juicy allegations being thrown about, but there’s a distinct absence of facts supporting ‘em.


169 posted on 05/22/2008 11:58:06 AM PDT by ctdonath2 (The average piece of junk is more meaningful than our criticism designating it so. - Ratatouille)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: jpl
"I got excoriated by quite a few people here when I suggested that just blindly taking all of these children away from their mothers was unjust."

However, there's a downside to all of this. I can easily imagine homosexual activists (even the NAMBLA crowd) using these rulings as a precedent for the protection of "alternative families".
170 posted on 05/22/2008 11:58:36 AM PDT by DesScorp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: steve86
That's weird.

I was thinking more along the lines of cruel, insane, or evil.

171 posted on 05/22/2008 11:58:36 AM PDT by Ron Jeremy (sonic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
How is Elian doing these days?

He is 15 now, and undoubtedly thoroughly indoctrinated to Castro's Marxist paradise.

172 posted on 05/22/2008 11:58:47 AM PDT by Wolfstar (Politics is the ultimate exercise in facing reality and making hard choices.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: goodwithagun

Except that the state treated ALL the parents the same without even bothering to investigate where the call came from, who made it, and if THAT person was in danger. And NO ONE has even dared to say that the small children were in danger of sexual molestation, only the teenage girls. So why are they taking newborn infants away from their mothers? BECAUSE THEY CAN! Screw the rights of the parents to a fair hearing. Just threat them ALL the same because they LOOK the same and “we don’t like what they are doing”!

Bunch of hypocrites!


173 posted on 05/22/2008 12:00:24 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (G-d is not a Republican. But Satan is definitely a Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: GourmetDan

Put me on the “excoriated” list too.

I refuse to be indoctrinated.


174 posted on 05/22/2008 12:00:29 PM PDT by WayneS (I'm not one to say I told you so, but....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Dog
They got to release those kids back to their parents.

And they were getting ready to seize assets to pay for the care of those children.
They should'nt have done what they did in the first place...
175 posted on 05/22/2008 12:00:32 PM PDT by firewalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Marie

Bump!


176 posted on 05/22/2008 12:00:56 PM PDT by Gondring (I'll give up my right to die when hell freezes over my dead body!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
I wonder who is going to cash the checks their mouths have been writing now.

My guess is the FLDS members who's rights have been so egregiously violated.

Their 'compound' is going to rival the Taj Mahal when the last of the lawsuits are settled.

L

177 posted on 05/22/2008 12:01:38 PM PDT by Lurker (Pimping my blog: http://lurkerslair-lurker.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: WayneS

try again she was actually 27 years old and provide Arizona DL and birth certificate day one. But still classified as child so they could interview her under the color of law.


178 posted on 05/22/2008 12:04:02 PM PDT by Orange1998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: mnehrling

Have you even considered the possiblity that the investigators exaggerated or even out-right lied to the judge in order to get that warrant?

PS - Fewer than 100 years ago, in many parts of this country, it was COMMON for 14 year old girls to be married.


179 posted on 05/22/2008 12:04:32 PM PDT by WayneS (I'm not one to say I told you so, but....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: paul51

Watch how quick these backward people learn “HOW TO FIND AN ATTORNEY” who wants to make some big bucks.


180 posted on 05/22/2008 12:05:47 PM PDT by Sacajaweau ("The Cracker" will be renamed "The Crapper")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 1,321-1,331 next last

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.

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