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.
I think most would. I would. But it has to be *proved* in a due process hearing or court proceeding where the accused parents have the right and power to defend themselves, before they can be declared unfit and their children taken.
The mothers were allowed to stay as lactating factories imo.
According to Texas law, the children conceived during a marriage are assumed to be fathered by the husband. Texas does not recognize plural marriage, so no marriage existed with most of the "wives", so there is no such presumption. Also, for most of these children there is no birth certificate recorded by any jurisdiction stating who the father is. I'm not even sure if there are any surviving FLDS records documenting which women were "married" to which men.
yep
Yeah, I hear you.
At first I thought I didn't care, but after awhile it just pissed me off that they managed to turn the whole focus towards my tendency to enjoy raping young girls and away from my stated concerns about the Constitutionally of the raids.
It appears from your statistics that children are suffering abuse in TX foster homes. Therefore, CPS should round up ALL of the children in TX foster homes because there is abuse taking place in some of the foster homes.
Not at all. These rulings are about due process and following the law. They had nothing to do with the "lifestyle" of the parents. The allegations will have to be dealt with in accordance with the Constitutions of the United States and the state of Texas, as well as Texas statute law.
Where did I say that?
Weren't we all.
And the most vituperous ones haven't showed up here yet.
Must be that their coffins don't open up before nightfall.
I was equated to being a DU’er here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2003819/posts?page=141#141
That thread was pretty wild. And, after browsing a few of the threads following, one of the tamer threads.
LMAO
Excellent idea!
Things like that have a way of getting public. DO NOT put my name on any of your "lists"
One of the leaders of the pro CPS pro government raid FReeper faction, forbid me to ping her or post to her. I asked her why she loathed the Constitution and she had my post pulled. I have been waiting for an apology but nothing so far. I can’t ping her because it pisses her off royally. She was the one who had the pro CPS pro government raid ping list and she was the one who posted anti Constitution articles one after the other, basking in the joy of all those children being rounded up, dumped in a coliseum, ripped right out of the arms of their mothers, and then dumped in scary foster homes, all on a false report. Whatever.
Do you think much of this case could be similar?
The thing that broke my heart was taking the babies away from their mothers. One woman gave birth and the CPS took legal guardianship of the baby. CPS condescended and let the mom stay in the shelter with the baby instead of separating them.
And CPS has been taking babies away from their mothers the day after their first birthday, when most are still nursing.
And one judge ruled that CPS could take away copies of the Book of Mormon from the FLDS boys who were at a foster care ranch. Last time I checked, that’s against the constitution. Freedom of religion and all that.
I do not agree with what the FLDS believe and do, but the State of Texas and CPS really blew it on this one. The end does not justify the means. CPS acted so hastily that they have ended up taking children of mothers who are not minors, they have taken children away from parents who do not participate in the FLDS religion, but happened to be living in the compound. It’s a can of worms.
Sad sad thing going on FR, whereby a bunch, albeit small (about 10-15) can intimidate the mass of right thinking folks into silence. You ain’t seen the last of the government religion righteous yet. On a conservative, less government type website nonetheless. This sort of activity has led to millions slaughtered in the history of man and it seems easy to do. A small group denounces others into submission, in intervals. Thank God the court here spoke of reason rather than emotional poppycock.
“they managed to turn the whole focus towards my (alleged, according to them)tendency to enjoy raping young girls and away from my stated concerns about the Constitutionally of the raids.”
I added the parenthetical correction to clarify the argument.
Perhaps their allegations regarding you say far more about them than you?
Can they say “projection”?
;-)
I doubt it. The law requires there to be immediate/imminent *physical* danger to the child for the child to be taken without an adversarial proceeding. That means one where the child, the parent(s), and the state all have a chance to make their case, or have it made by their attorney. The child gets a court appointed attorney, the parents may, or may not depending on their circumstances. The state obviously has lots of attorneys, but they may still hire "outside council, in some cases.
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.