Court: Texas had no right to take polygamists' kids 3 minutes ago

AP via Yahoo ^ | 5/22/08

[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.

[CottonBall]

Should we have left the children in that situation while more investigations where going on?

This leaves all parents open to having their children removed from their care without just cause.

[atruelady]

Wrong. Based a on the phone call they believed was legite, they acted on it. They have the right. When they got out there, they could not find the caller. Of course, the men lied and said no Sarah lived there, but aftewards several women have said that their are 6 or 7 Sarahs and a couple are not accounted for.

[TBP]

You can’t break one law to enforce another.

[CottonBall]

Good point. There is no lack of danger for girls under 18 getting pregnant in the general society. Surely, we need mass raids everywhere.

Any local high school would net lots of them.

[atruelady]

You are comparing Duke Lacrosse players (obviously innocent from the beginning) to a cult well known for raping young teens. Not too bright, are you.

[Maximilian]

Their vile replies to anyone who questioned ANYTHING CPS did was among the worst displays I've ever seen here. It quickly became easier to just ignore the FLDS threads than to put up with their abuse.

You hit the nail on the head. "Vile" is not too strong a word. There is a thread still active, based on a story in which many of the false claims of the Texas CPS were debunked, in which the usual suspects are making the most vile and disgusting accusations against anyone who dares to question the right of the all-powerful government to take away your children.

I have been sickened to witness this behavior by supposed "conservatives," and as you say, it has been easier to stay away than to deal with this kind of lynch mob mentality.

[TBP]

Do you have evidence that all 460 children were in danger?

There is supposedly evidence that perhaps 30-40 of them may have been. That doesn't justify sweeping inand grabbing all the kids.

[CottonBall]

When they take a child out of the home, they take it to a recieving home, where all the amenities of childhood are available. They go on outings, watch whatever they want on TV, play video games, and have non-threatening conversations with adults. The kids actually enjoy the experience, and don't really want to go home right away. They tell the workers, and the workers think it must be because the child is afraid of abuse. Even if it is found that the child is not abused or in danger, a record exists.

While I get your point, I would think that the trauma of being separated from their parents would be worse than all the fun and games. Especially for the younger kids.

[atruelady]

Bogus comparison. Why don’t you talk about the “temple” bed?

[manc]

same as me, i actualy got told I was a troll because I actually thought that the govt should have prove before taking kids away with no evidence

sill my hey I should just let anyone who works for child services come in and take my kids when ever they want based on a hoax call

[untrained skeptic]

Because they are hiding. So much for their beleifs in what they are doing. They know damn well they were wrong.

This ruling kicks the case back down to the family court to enforce. If there's no more evidence that keeping the kids in state custody is the only option, most of the children will go back to their parents while the criminal cases are investigated and work their way through the legal system.

The girls that appear to have been abused won't likely be returned unless the men in that household leave, but if the men vacate, those girls might be returned to their mothers as well.

However, if it is proven in criminal court that the parents abused their children or were complicit, they'll likely end up back in state custody again.

But, since they got away with it in Utah, Arizona and Colorado, why not Texas?

Jeffs was convicted in Utah and is awaiting trial in Arizona. Justice is being slow in coming, and there appear to be a lot of children that have suffered because of it's slow pace, but I don't foresee Texas dropping this now.

The appeals court didn't say there wasn't evidence of abuse, it said that the CPS improperly apprehended ALL of the children without fulfilling it's obligation to only apprehend children when other alternatives were not possible.

I think the CPS workers were likely appalled that the community would all work together to obstruct them from finding out who had raped those young girls, and possibly overstepped and took more extreme measures than the law allowed.

The CPS may have more evidence now, or might even produce a more convincing argument that the putting the kids in state custody is needed than they had done originally now that they understand the appeals court's objections to their actions. However, it does seem likely that the boys and prepubescent girls aren't in immediate danger of abuse, and the state should only take children into custody when it must.

[GovernmentShrinker]

Per the article you linked to, the baby was never taken from the mother. When the mother was determined to be an adult, she was told she was free to leave, but could not take the baby with her if she chose to leave. She was also free to stay with the baby, and she did. As I said, no newborn has been taken from its mother.

[Soliton]

I figured I was wasting my time with you.

I was simply trying to point out that ALL religions look goofy in the cold light of day and that Protestants, Catholics, and everybody else has a problem with child molesters. This does NOT mean that we toss out the constitution. You do not punish the 99% of priests who aren't chil molesters and you don't punish the members of this religion unless you prove they have committed a crime.

[patton]

18 & 27.

And CPS admitted in court today that the 14 yo is not prgnant, and never was.

The court ordered them to correct the record, as it was the basis for many of their claims.

Huh, who would have thunk it.

[donna]

I clarified in post #376.

I work hard at having the same standards for my children as I would for yours. God loves them all the same.

[TBP]

And none of that justifies violating their rights. Youhave to defend the rights of even the most contemptible if you want to protect your own.

[atruelady]

Excuse me, deport but I live here too.

[atruelady]

And your comparison is valid to this situation in what way?

[Paleo Conservative]

There was no evidence presented of any abuse of any of the children. The Appeals Court pointed out that even potential hypothetical abuse alleged by the CPS would have applied only to girls in a certain age bracket. No abuse has been proven, and none of families who filed the appeal even had children who could have fallen into the category of the hypothetical allegations.

Let me see. Wives and children are stripped from men out of favor with the "prophet" and given to the other men in the cult. Children don't know which adults are actually their parents. That isn't child abuse? Also, children are transported across international boundaries without their parents or the permission of their parents in violation of Canadian law, and that isn't child abuse? We don't even have the DNA results back yet to document which children have which parents. We don't even know if the women claiming to be the parents are actually the parents of the children they are claiming.

I'll give you a hint. The Third Court of Appeals is the second most overturned appealate court in the State of Texas. It's to the Texas court system what the 9th Circus is to the US court system.

[tobyhill]

Do you honestly believe the cops thought that was a legitimate phone call? It’s a good excuse for the cops but there is no way they could have thought it legit. A few questions would have told them it was fake.