To: Utah Girl
CPS is sure doing some serious backpedaling now.
And note that this is only a 'proposed' agreement meaning it ain't worth squat.
L
5 posted on
05/30/2008 2:07:38 PM PDT by
Lurker
(Islam is an insane death cult. Any other aspects are PR, to get them within throat-cutting range.)
To: Lurker
I’s suggest that there be FLDS mothers put in charge of supervising CPS management from the top down to the local office.
7 posted on
05/30/2008 2:10:34 PM PDT by
Paladin2
(Huma for co-president!)
To: Lurker
Frankly I would be surprised if the attny.’s don’t tell the CPS to pound sand, they’ll do as they please. The CPS doesn’t seem to be on very solid foundation right now.
8 posted on
05/30/2008 2:12:39 PM PDT by
Reno232
To: Lurker
Judge Walther needs to stop expecting that everything will be the same for each child. That's partly why the Texas Supreme Court kicked this back to her.
9 posted on
05/30/2008 2:14:46 PM PDT by
nomorelurker
(keep flogging them till morale improves)
To: Lurker
Has the district court judge vacated her order allowing CPS to retain custody of the children. If not, is there a Ranger on the way to arrest her for contempt? If she has, then CPS has no power to retain custody, not even over the weekend. They didn't seem to have much trouble finding buses when the grabbed the kids.
And what's all this about addresses. Doesn't CPS know the address of the YFZ ranch?
33 posted on
05/30/2008 3:40:53 PM PDT by
El Gato
("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson