Thanks for your reply:
>>Not able to abuse the kids. Get it yet?
His conviction was for ordering the rape of a 14 year old girl. He need not be present; there are women whose marriage was ordered by him who have never seen him.
The crime he was convicted of can easily occur again. Controlling and being responsible for a criminal act from prison is not that rare. He is not in solitary and has a great deal of communications privileges.
So, the case I’m making is that if a parent willingly gives control of their minor child to a known convicted child abuser (rape and currently indicted for sexual abuse of a child), then, I believe, criminal endangerment has occurred.
I know we disagree here, and I appreciate your courteous replies.
Is that right? I thought perhaps he had "officiated" at a false possibly polygamous marriage to an underage girl.
I wasn't aware that he wasn't present. Did he order the sexual consummation of the marriage? Or just the marriage?
Please tell me how you know that he need not have been present to be convicted of being an accomplice to rape?
Also, what happened to the girls parents? They would have a legal duty to protect an underage girl. Simply believing that Jeffs is a prophet would not diminish that duty.
It would do far more to end the abuses people are describing if the parents are treated severely for permitting such abuse and not just the religious nut who the parents willfully follow. Even the army teaches soldiers that they are not obligated to obey an unlawful order.