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.
This is legal?
Ping. This is absolutely stunning. Who does this judge think she is?
The judge doesn’t have to sign off on the order but the kids must be returned or they will be returned by force.
That ignorant witch has been on a power trip since this started. She needs to be removed from this case, and possibly from the bench.
Power corrupts...
She needed to talk to her masters for an hour...
Do they have to go back to the Appellate Court for mandamus, again, or will the presiding judge step in and restore rule of law in his Court?
Bring ‘em Young University, back in business.
Judge Judy
I have no idea what will happen. It sounds like the lawyers for the mothers are going back to the court of appeals. But this witch knows she can torture these people and drag things out for some period of time before anybody can do anything to her. That’s what she’s doing.
Utah Girl: “Who does this judge think she is?”
Like many judges these days, she thinks she’s above the law. If she feels something is or is not done to her satisfaction, she feels she has the right to interpret the law to mean whatever she wants.
I’m no lawyer but it seems to me if a superior courts says you cannot seize the children, you also cannot “legally” resist returning them or set “conditions” for their return.
A judge who would allow CPS to seize that many children without proof of an imminent threat to their safety (which the law requires) isn’t likely someone who follows the law in other ways. In other words, she’s a rogue, activist judge.
Perhaps not, but it is hardball.
It just means the church will end up owning an even bigger chunk of Texas when it’s all said and done.
***A Texas judge today refused to sign an order returning more than 300 children seized from a polygamist community, saying she wanted the mothers involved to sign the order first.***
If they refuse to sign then the Texas SC order still stands and the kids must be returned. No court can force a signature to circumvent a standing order from a higher court.
The stench from the bench. What an arrogant a**hole.
It seems to be a general rule: judges consider themselves above all rule of law and order, absolute tyrants within their courtrooms, royalty in most twisted way possible. Reform is needed - at all levels.
wow
I don't care which side of the coin anyone is on but this judge is wrong and needs a good reaming out by the State Supreme Court.
This b*tch is just playing standard “black robed tyrant” games.
She’s been gutted so she decides to act like a child herself.
Not unexpected.
The judge will face sanctions for defying the Texas Supreme Court.
Rather unclever.
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.