Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: William Tell

Every agreement signed by any of these parents were signed under duress.


They are free to file an appeal about the order vacating the original order taking the children into custody. The order from the Supreme court allowed for the judge to place restrictions.

The order in it’s entirety is here if you care to read it..... Not long but does spell out what can and can’t be done.

http://web.gosanangelo.com/pdf/flds0602.pdf


16 posted on 06/02/2008 2:32:12 PM PDT by deport ( -- Cue Spooky Music --)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]


To: deport
deport said: "The order from the Supreme court allowed for the judge to place restrictions."

I think we don't agree completely on the significance of the ruling and the Judge's response.

Judge Walther was ordered to release the children, who had been taken unlawfully from the ranch, unconditionally. The first part of the resulting order does exactly that.

The details supplied by the Supreme Court as to what the Judge could further do are not something authorized by the Court, but are authorized by existing law.

You will note that the parents don't have to agree to anything. They only have to identify themselves and the members of their "household" and they get their kids back. (I suspect that the "household membership" information requirement could be challenged and would be found by the higher Courts to be irrelevant to the custody issue. So I think Walther is still wrong on this point.)

The additional requirements are just that; additional. These requirements are not a condition for the release of the children.

Judge Walther was absolutely WRONG about the higher court rulings on Friday. How she became educated as to her responsibility over the weekend is a mystery to me. One Freeper suggested that a call from the Court threatening disbarment could do the job. I thought it might take a citation for contempt from the higher court.

What seems obvious to me is that the parents don't have to agree to anything to get their kids back. Whether, on a case-by-case basis, the CPS might establish that failure to cooperate on the part of some parent justifies state custody of the child is a process that can be carried out NOW, but there is no presumption that lack of cooperation must be met by denial of custody.

25 posted on 06/02/2008 6:12:48 PM PDT by William Tell (RKBA for California (rkba.members.sonic.net) - Volunteer by contacting Dave at rkba@sonic.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson