Their was a search warrant issued. The LEO’s moved to execute that warrant. They found and “reasonable cause” to suspect that the children in this communal home had their welfare endangered. They moved on their lawful authority to remove the children from the endangerment. (The families were all in one home near as I can tell, so certain dangers could be considered to be dangers to all including the transient residency of convicted child molesters in this same home which is my point previously. Nothing to do with guilt by association. EVERYTHING to do with protecting the welfare and rights of the minor.)
Two different courts found that the LEO’s reasonable cause was unjustified to the extent of separating the children from their parents and ordered that the children be returned back to their parents. However, even the courts made stipulations on the parents that would have to be abided by for the protection of the welfare of the children.
So while the courts found that there was not enough reasonable cause to separate them from their parents in all cases, there was some sort evidence of continuing threat to the children or else why would they have ordered restrictions on the parents even after the children are returned to their care/guardianship?
These LEO’s have never been tried, never been convicted, never been found guilty of any wrongdoing. They made a judgment call about the safety of a citizen of the state of Texas. The courts found that they made the wrong call. The courts adjusted the call and this investigation is still ongoing with the courts satisfied as to the safety of the children and the protection of their rights in the meantime.
This has never had anything to do with the guilt or innocence of the adults. It has everything to do with the safety and welfare of the children involved. So while as much BS gets tossed around about the “do it for the children”, this one really was done for the the children.
Sometimes the rights of individuals in society conflicts. That's what the courts are there to sort out. In this case the CPS workers were faced with the conflict of the parent's rights to direct the upbringing of their children and the children's right to be free from abuse and exploitation. They tried to resolve the case and made mistakes. It doesn't mean that they should have never went into the compound. It doesn't mean that they were wrong in their judgment that immediate action needed to be taken to protect the children. They just were wrong about separating them from their parents. They could have demanded that the children be removed from any and all endangering situations until the investigation was complete and the various parents would have had to found separate residency by defacto.
Funny how the article implies that the laws be damned, the public wanted the children returned to a potentially abusive situation, and that’s all that counts.
Then, there are those who state there is no evidence, there never was.
Funny,again,because that is not what the TXSC said.
What the TXSC stated, resembles more closely with your closing paragraph.
If you would like to read it for yourself, and see where the TXSC definitively STATES that there was EVIDENCE, here:
http://www.supreme.courts.state.tx.us/historical/2008/may/080391.htm
and here:
http://www.supreme.courts.state.tx.us/historical/2008/may/080391.htm
“They found and “reasonable cause” to suspect that the children in this communal home had their welfare endangered. “
1. TX SC ruled it was many homes, not one.
2. TX SC ruled there was no “reasonable cause.”