Posted on 05/30/2008 6:40:22 PM PDT by Utah Girl
The devil was in the details.
Discussions about a proposed order involving the return of children taken from the Fundamentalist LDS Church's YFZ Ranch broke down late this afternoon when attorneys for the families wanted to review proposed changes with their clients.
Judge Barbara Walther announced the attorneys had better get all of their clients' signatures before she would sign the agreement and abruptly left the bench late this afternoon.
A lawyer for the families, Laura Shockley, said she expected attorneys would return to an Austin appeals court Monday to push for an order returning the children. It was the 3rd Court of Appeals that said Walther should not have ordered the children to be removed from the ranch and warned that if Walther failed to act, they would do it for her.
Lawyers for the families said that an agreement had been tentatively reached with Child Protective Services when they walked into court earlier today. Walther, however, expressed concerns about the proposed agreement and called an hourlong recess. She then returned to the bench with her own proposed order.
That led to concerns from many family attorneys who raised objections and questions on behalf of their clients.
The judge added additional restrictions to the the agreement, including psychological evaluations and allowing CPS to do inspections at the children's home at any time. Several of the more than 100 attorneys in the courtroom and patched into the hearing through phone lines objected to the judge's additions.
"The court does not have the power, with all due respect, to enter any other order (other than vacating)," said Julie Balovich of the Texas RioGrande Legal Aid over the telephone. She argued that no evidence justifying the additional restrictions had been entered as evidence before the judge.
After reviewing the appellate court decision, Walther returned to the bench and announced she believed the Supreme Court's decision upholding the appellate court decision gave her the authority to impose whatever conditions she feels are necessary.
"The Supreme Court does say this court can place restrictions on the parents. I do not read that this decision says that this court is required to have another hearing to do that. You may interpret that however you choose."
With that, the judge abruptly left the bench, saying she would await any submitted orders.
Immediately, attorneys in the courtroom and over the phone, expressed confusion.
"What did she say?" one attorney asked.
"Do We have another hearing?"
"What did she order?"
No additional hearings are currently scheduled. The judge signed no orders that would allow for the release of any children.
Lawyers for CPS left the courthouse declining to speak about the hearing.
"I'm going to do what the court directed," said CPS attorney Gary Banks.
Perhaps you should do some research into the crimes committed to children who are placed in Texas foster care.
You're right, all the evidence was bulldozed. Probably David Koresh again, but however you view it, it is a lot more current than the examples you posted and far more prevalent this day and age.
If you can find a copy of the 1987 edition of Jane’s “Armour”, my picture is in it.
And I am still in the same field.
So I will stick with my opinion, thanks.
“I have serious issues with the militarization of civilian police.”
As do I. And, it should not be forgotten, when cops have these toys, they will find an excuse to use them.
They got a liking for those new taser toys too lately.
And that was the larger point I was trying to make, if in a somewhat obtuse fashion.
In military terms, it is.
Also sad.
I completely agree. But to a 4 year old child, it is a bit more.
I have been concerned about the rapid militarization of the police forces.
Recall the huge negative play these devices got back during the civil rights turmoil of the 60's. Wonder how the cops are getting away with it now?
A fleshy-faced bear of a man who stood 6-foot-2 and weighed 220 pounds, Mr. Clark strode through the civil rights era wearing a lapel button emblazoned with a single word: “Never.” A billy club, pistol and cattle prod often dangled from his belt.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/07/us/07clark.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
“But to a 4 year old child, it is a bit more.”
Agreed. And the crunchie kills painted on the side are more than a little disturbing.
Police now brag about combat kills? Anybody see a problem with that?
I believe that they have the Texas state police at their disposal to carry out their lawful orders. Don't be surprised to see Judge Walther is some deep trouble in, at most, a couple of days. The FLDS lawyers would be well advised to seek emergency relief from the Appeals Court and I see no reason why that Court would not respond TODAY.
I don't think anyone at Waco was offered a choice (by ATF) once the first shot was fired they could have filled in the scorecards.
You'd have to define 'deliberate', I doubt anyone went kid-hunting but firing full auto into a house with kids in it is strong circumstantial evidence in my opinion.
Sadly, I can't mourn four dead while they were involved in criminal exercise of government power over its own people. I wish I could just consider them as pawns but I KNOW that I'd have refused the task.
Otherwise, I agree with you.
Where is the front door?
I want to know if this judge is a Baptist. The reason I’m asking is because they used Baptist buses to cart away the children and Baptists volunteered to care for “the children” after they were rounded up at gunpoint. Furthermore, I want to know how many of the law enforcement thugs who went in there were Baptists . . . thinking they are doing God a great big favor!
Those poor pathetic FLDS people, they must be absolutely horrified at the way they are being treated in the “land of the free”.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FN_QG1UqHLs&feature=related
Does a “disgusting lifestyle” (in your opinion) trump the U.S. Constitution?
“Anyone who seeks to collectively punish an entire community, without due process protecting individual rights, is supporting socialism.”
More like fascism.
You almost called it a tank. Whew for you. The pro-gov’t-raid-on-innocent-children people would eat you alive.
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.