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.

[Awestruck]

So underage mothers equals abuse? Teen pregnancy equals taking away every child in the house or the neighborhood? Good luck with that.

[ican'tbelieveit]

FLDS members: US Citizens, afforded certain CONSTITUTIONAL rights under the US Constitution.

Terrorists at Gitmo: NON-US Citizens, enemy combatants, not afforded CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS under the US Constitution.

[Awestruck]

I see.. and who decides what’s “normal”? You? The state of Texas? Just because you don’t like how they think doesn’t mean you get to yank their kids away from them.

[Awestruck]

Thinking that laws are broken isn’t the same thing as having evidence that laws were broken.. no one on here had any evidence.. any more than the state did.. just speculation.. and apparently many Freepers are happy hanging people and ruining lives on speculation.

[exhaustedmomma]

The Third District Texas Court of Appeals found that, "the department (CPS) did not present any evidence of danger to the physical health or safety of any male children or any female children who had not reached puberty," and, "there was no evidence that the department made reasonable efforts to eliminate or prevent the removal of any children."

CPS issued a response Thursday afternoon, saying "the department removed children from the ranch after finding a pervasive pattern of sexual abuse," and, "will work with the office of the Attorney General to determine the state's next steps in this case."

6 News has also learned all custody hearings have been put on hold as a result of Thursday's ruling.

What happens to the children in state custody now is not very clear at the moment, although in issuing its ruling, the appeals court gave a lower court ten days to release the children to their parents' custody.

However, the state could appeal to the Texas Supreme Court to try and block the order.
SOURCE

[shadeaud]

I'm a Realtor here in San Antonio and have been approached by two members of this ‘’religious community’’. Both were looking for short term leases on properties with acreage.Both had substantial funds to pay for the lease requirements. Both had the same references. Both had told me that there may be 4 children or possibly 6 depending if the older ones chose to stay with them. They both claimed to be general contractors. They had the answers to every question the application requested. I thought I was dealing with some type of zombie when I spoke to the males. I caught a glimpse of one of the females and of course she had her hair up in a beehive, the dress was identical to the ones I've seen on the tube. One thing odd was that both males were wearing red shirts with long sleeves( it's over 90 here in San Antonio). I was told later that wearing red was a sign of leadership. Another Realtor has placed ‘’Jacob’’( the one who was thought to have gotten an underage girl pregnant) in a property that has 3 plus acres on a year lease. Something odd is happening here in San Antonio. Where are they getting all this money from to lease properties? All had funds wired to them on the same day, all had to have a place secured within 2 days.

[Awestruck]

ok. you say you haven’t been following the case but you “know the men marry underage girls”... how do you know this? especially if by your own admission you havent’ even been following the case..?

[Utah Girl]

I also read that the first judge, that female judge, has been given 10 days to vacate her order that allowed CPS to seize the children. There’s much more legal wrangling left to go.

[exhaustedmomma]

Number of underage mothers claimed by Texas continues to dwindle

Tina Louise Steed had just one question for a judge who declared her an adult Thursday morning.
"I'm wondering how come they wouldn't believe my ID in the first place?" she asked Judge Jay Weatherby.

[JasonC]

Immediate danger of physical harm to the specific child removed. That is the standard. Otherwise, you go to court, but you cannot just take them as an administrative action, nor can an judge order it as an "emergency" matter. It takes a lawsuit to remove a child, unless you can show that child is going to be beaten, the next day. They simply didn't even try to show any such thing.

[JasonC]

The court of appeals gave the trial judge 10 days to vacate the previous court order. If the state appeals to the state supreme court within that time, then the order might remain, frozen. Otherwise, the state loses any authority to hold the children in 10 days. And will be sued every which way from Sunday if it holds any of them five seconds longer.

[Peter Libra]

I agree with your premise. This being:

Just because you don't like how they think doesn't mean you get to yank their kids away from them.

What bothers me is that women and children are very often vulnerable to males. It is true that society has drifted to nasty propaganda against the father as the head of the household. Nonetheless, in a confined situation the rights of the female may be taken away. The ideal maybe a partnership between two people. These being man and woman. Each having an equal say in the upbringing of their children. Each one willing to defer to the other, when it is for the best interest of the child.

Out in an open society, a woman can still be coerced and sometimes they are. The chances of a woman having any sort of choice are virtually nil in these compounds. I pay tribute to the outspoken women on this thread- those that I disagree with. They have freedoms to dissent here- as they should.

What freedoms would they have in the FYZ compound? The unquestioned authority of a man and his degenerate desires. Are the women in the compound free as American citizens?

[Utah Girl]

That’s really odd. I read somewhere that Warren Jeffs had banned red (too evil). I do know why they wear the long sleeved shirts, it is to cover up their religious garments. It is the same thing with the women in their prairie dresses. You will see FLDS women in the heat of the summer in their long sleeves also. Even the children wear the long sleeved shirts and dresses. I believe in modesty, but long sleeves in 100 degree weather? No thanks.

As for the money part, these sects do have a lot of money. The men in charge live like kings. Most of the women and children depend upon Medicaid. It is the young men in their twenties and thirties who work 18-20 hour days to fund this lifestyle. They build the FLDS compound in less than four years.

[exhaustedmomma]

I read it too, somewhere. If I run across it, I'll post it. Right now I'm reading through some news articles trying to figure out what is going on!

Appeals court says CPS improperly removed children...
snip
Under state law, children may be removed from home only when their physical health and welfare is in danger and the need for protection is urgent. In addition, the state must make reasonable efforts to keep families intact before concluding that such a move is dangerous to the child.
The 3rd Court of Appeals said Child Protective Services failed to meet any of those guidelines at the ranch, which is owned by the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, a Mormon splinter group that practices polygamy.

****************
Told y'all!

[exhaustedmomma]

The appeals court ordered State District Judge Barbara Walther, who presided over the chaotic first days of the case, to vacate her order in 10 days. She had approved the removal of the children, sending them to a variety of foster homes and shelters around the state. The appeals court said the judge had erred in her ruling and that the state had not proved the children were in "immediate danger" — the only condition under which the government could take the children.

State attorneys are now assessing their options. The state can either move to stay the ruling or appeal the entire ruling, says former District Judge Scott McCown, now director of the Center for Public Policy Priorities, an Austin think tank. But the state has to move quickly, McCown says. If the full court or a higher court does not put a hold on the order, the children will have to be returned to their families once the 10-day period is up. "Child Protective Services could go on with their investigation, but flight could be a real problem."

Texas's child protection agency posted a statement on its website restating its position that the children of the Fundamentalist Church of the Latter Day Saints (FLDS) taken from the Yearning For Zion Ranch were victims of a "pervasive pattern of abuse." It declared: "Child Protective Services has one duty — to protect children. When we see evidence that children have been sexually abused and remain at risk of further abuse, we will act." It then summarized its evidence: "The very first interviews at the ranch revealed a pattern of underage girls being 'spiritually united' with older men and having children with the men. Investigators also observed a pattern of organized deception in those first interviews. Women and children frequently said they could not answer questions about the ages of girls or family relationships. Children were moved from location to location in an apparent attempt to prevent investigators from talking to them. Investigators observed numerous girls who had small children, and girls told us that marriages could occur at any age."

There's more, HERE.

[dragnet2]

And to be clear, the term "only" was probably too rigid. Note, I never supported any one religion over another and feel that's private matter anyway.

In addition I never did say this group, cult, extremest clan, club or what ever they are considered, were totally innocent. I do know they never tried to rob, shoot or kill me.

Are they hypnotized zombie like vodoo worshipers?

A place of brain wash through religion?

Maybe, but I doubt it.

Bottom line for me, as this case opens up, more is discovered or revealed, and seems to become more painful to those that haven't burned their copy of the Constitution.

[exhaustedmomma]

The rule of law prevails -- at least for 38 of the 463 children forcibly taken from their parents at the polygamous FLDS community in El Dorado, Texas. Now a higher court finds that the "round-them-all-up and let's-sort-it-all-out-later" approach is illegal and wrong.

It takes present evidence, not future speculation, of dangers to physical health and safety to justify the extreme approach of immediate removal of children from parents, according to the Texas 3rd District Court of Appeals in Austin.
Despite Ruling Children Remain Captive

************* Wonder how much all this is gonna end up costing me and my fellow Texas taxpayers??????????

[Awestruck]

your determination to find things that aren’t there scares me.. you personally have no proof of anything, just a dogged determination to stand your ground even if you’re wrong. have fun with that attitude.. and btw.. a True Lady admits when she’s made a mistake.

[FreeInWV]

“Most of the women and children depend upon Medicaid.”

Perhaps in other places, but no such evidence was found in Texas.

From http://www.star-telegram.com/news/story/655071.html

“Albert Hawkins, the state’s executive commissioner for health and human services, said it was unclear whether members of the sect have private insurance. He also said that officials have found no evidence that anyone from the sect is receiving any sort of public assistance.”

[TBP]

Not at all. I simply stated the ambition of the “authorities” like DFS and others, to control the children and turn them into little robots who think, say, and do only what the commissars allow.