No spine. If she had one she would simply have made the order and taken the risk of it being appealed.
Instead she tried to get the parents to give her a mulligan, and when they wouldn't, stamped her little foot and went into a sulk
:
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.
Yep expensive and some restrictions i am sure but if you got the $$$ yep
I have no doubt that, if the YFZ folk have good lawyers (which apparently they do), that polygamy as they practice it will be ruled legal, or, more exactly, the State of Texas will be enjoined from enforcing laws against it.
I'm not sure that the court will command the issuance of marriage licenses to all of these people (although they may), but I'm quite sure that the court will not allow punishment of behaviors which are common and are either legal or go unpunished in the rest of society (cohabitation, sex with multiple females, one man fathering children serially with different women)
If statutory rape is all there is to this case, it may not turn out to be much of a case at all.
You are doing well here - keep it up!
I wonder what would happen if border patrol started using “Armored personnel carriers” to patrol the Mexican Border. Oh, my goodness, there would be outrage that the U.S. government was using what looks like a TANK to terrorize everyone. There would be hell to pay. But it’s OK to terrorize the little children at the FLDS ranch. Go figure.
That would be bizarre and I am convinced it would not be legal. Yes, I think we are looking at statuatory rape for charges coming out of this. That can be serious for sure depending on the circumstances but the result would be a handful of men going to jail and FLDS continuing their lifestyle; Just like what happened when Jeffs and a few others were a few years back. In fact- unless I am reading the articles wrong or the media is again muddying the water with bad reporting it looks to me like there are hints out there that some of the underage girls in concern at FYZ are believed to have been statuatorily raped by Jeffs himself- he is already in jail so it would essentially mean a longer sentence for him and no change for the community in those cases.
I have been extremely impressed with the carefully thought out rebuttals to your posts and mine. Some excellent examples of give and take. One is inclined if one knows what exploitation of the defenceless is. We are to believe that there is but little at YFZ.
I have taken the liberty to look beyond the poster themselves. This they have enabled me to do. Their profiles. I am again impressed. Some had advanced themselves in the armed services. (bravo). Others have gone to institutions of higher learning (university). Still many went, no doubt to excellent high schools. Dedicated teachers nurtured their intellect. Still others have done quite well as business people. Others have learned to cope as useful employees. They have been able to own and drive an automobile. They have had monies to buy or rent their own dwelling. They have been able to travel abroad. They have partaken of yes- THE AMERICAN DREAM. The Constitution of the United States has given them that chance.
Grand rhetorical question:
What chance do those children have being confined to the FYZ and it's likes? To follow the American dream? To have the chance of higher education? To go forth and make one's mistakes as a young person will? Then be able to learn and be wiser?.To have Life,liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Exactly.
It is possible, legal, and not really expensive.
No spine. If she had one she would simply have made the order and taken the risk of it being appealed.
Instead she tried to get the parents to give her a mulligan, and when they wouldn't, stamped her little foot and went into a sulk
:
Maybe the neighbors and I could pool our resources. Thanks for the link- they cost considerable more than a horse or even an ATV which is what hubby uses now to check cows. Do they have A/C or any other creature comforts?
I imagine your grand rhetorical question could have been asked about many of us, 20, 30, 40, 50 years ago.
Is this reason to remove all of the kids from the ranch? How about the inner cities? What about those of us stuck in small towns? And those that cannot afford universities or have access to excellent high schools? The children of alcoholics and drug addicts? What about those who are taught the Constitution and state law and react to government abuses?
Who makes the rules here or are they made up as they go along? Child abuse is a crime, so is ignoring jurisprudence. Great rhetorical question, but it could apply to nearly everyone here since we were not born with silver spoons. The massive increases in the welfare state has done nothing to change this.
The answer to your question, they have the same chance as any other person in this country that “wants it”. We have the RIGHT to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, no where does it say “government supplied or approved”.
LOLOLOL - exactly.
Until recent years FLDS was a much more open community- the members did attend public school and college- work regular jobs and shop and travel in the open. Older members had all those opportunities according to what I am told by a friend that lives near Colorado City. If there were a way to convince them to do so again I would not have such a problem with their lifestyle- of course they would still need to comply with laws just like the rest of us. Of course convincing them might be made harder by the way this raid was conducted. Just my thoughts but I bet that raid didn’t make them more trustful of outsiders.
I am not sure why the change occurred- if it was fear of outside persecution - or if Jeffs did it for more control- which is what most think. In any case I agree those people need to be able to enjoy the same freedom of choice the rest of us do.
Well if I ever decide I need my 15 minutes of fame I know how to get it now. You may see me on FOX news someday. There would also be flaming threads here no doubt argueing about what I did. Hmmmmm.
Do they have A/C or any other creature comforts?
The newer ones might but the ones I were around was just a metal box on tracks the hot in summer and cold as all git out in the winter.
LOL - it has happened before.
Actually, the troop heaters in those things are great.
Or they were in the 1980’s, anyway.
That's why I didn't capitalize "state police".
Our system of checks and balances provides power to the courts through the executive branch. Unless the Governor of Texas disagrees with a decision of the Texas Supreme Court, then he is bound by his oath of office to see that the order is obeyed.
When there is a disagreement between the Supreme Court of Texas and the Governor of Texas, then it would be the job of the state legislature to impeach one or the other for failing to obey their oath of office. Such disagreements are among the ugliest one can imagine and test the system to its utmost.
I haven't heard that the Governor of Texas is in doubt about the correctness of the Texas Supreme Court in this case, so we really can't rule out the possibility of the Rangers hauling Judge Walther before the Supreme Court, if that is the wish of the Court.
only got about two rides in one and it could be the guys driving were playing with us but my memory was it was cold in it that would be about 77-78 some about there
I do hope the newer ones are more comfortable for our guys in the sand box a good a/c could be worth its weight in gold
You might be fine if you keep it along the river, but motoring down the road to get there would be problematic.
The highway department and DPS in particular, may frown on this. You can be fined for getting excessive mud on the road, so imagine the response to a tracked vehicle. ;)
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.