Posted on 06/15/2008 10:33:33 AM PDT by TLI
As Texas officials sort evidence that could lead to new criminal charges against polygamous sect leader Warren S. Jeffs, charges against him in another state are shrinking.
Just two of five cases originally brought against the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints leader in Arizona are still in play, and a significant portion of those two cases have been dismissed.
Now, a judge has set a July 11 hearing on whether the remaining charges, based on Jeffs' alleged role conducting marriages for underage girls, came out of a tainted grand jury proceeding.
Defense attorney Michael Piccarreta argues the grand jury panel that met May 10, 2007, was not properly advised on Arizona law nor questioned sufficiently about potential bias against Jeffs. He also argues that Mohave County investigator Gary Engles gave jurors misleading or false information.
In his response, Mohave County Attorney Matt Smith said the grand jury heard the charges months before Jeffs' high-profile September trial in Utah.
He concedes jurors were not questioned extensively about their exposure to media or knowledge of Jeffs but says they were asked, "Has anybody read anything about a man named Warren Jeffs?"
When some raised their hands, they were told not to discuss anything they had read about the case during proceedings. Two jurors were dismissed when they could not be impartial, leaving 12 on the panel.
Smith also defends Engles' statements and the prosecution's discussion with the jury as appropriate.
Five cases were initially filed against Jeffs in Arizona, where anyone under the age of 18 cannot consent to sexual intercourse.
The Mohave County Attorney's Office dismissed three cases after it was unable to prosecute the other men involved. The remaining cases charged Jeffs with incest and sexual conduct with a minor for conducting illegal marriages.
One case involves Elissa Wall and her 2001 marriage to Allen Steed. Utah officials used that case to convict Jeffs of being an accomplice to rape. He is serving two five-to-life prison terms.
But on June 4, Mohave County Superior Judge Steven F. Conn dismissed the incest charges.
In Arizona, the charge can only be brought against adults who are both over the age of 18. In both of Jeffs' cases, the women were minors.
Also, Conn said marriages between "first cousins of the half blood" are not defined as incestuous under Arizona law. Wall and Steed have a common grandfather but different grandmothers. The same was true in the other case.
"Those were actually the more serious charges facing Mister Jeffs," Piccarreta said.
The remaining charges are punishable by up to two years in prison. In Texas, officials have taken DNA samples from Jeffs as part of an investigation into alleged marriages to four underage girls.
So perhaps this was the real reason for the massive raid on the ranch in Texas. The case against Jeff's was in trouble and they wanted direct evidence of child molestation against him. So with the evidence from the ranch, they now have 4 potential cases
Mohave County Superior Court Judge Steven Conn dismissed the charges ... Conn ruled the law only applies if both participants in the sexual activity are older than 18, and that the law does not apply to half cousins.
They give two reasons for the dropping of those charges.
In both of the marriages Jeffs is accused of arranging, the girls were under 18 and were their husbands' half cousins. He was charged with incest as an accomplice.
So is there still a charge of being an accomplice in a child rape for these cases?
In his ruling, Conn wrote that Arizona's incest law initially was enacted without reference to participants' ages. In 1985, it was amended to apply only to people who were 15 years or older, and in 1998, it was changed to its present form, applying only to those 18 or older.
So they have given thought to it and they have changed the incest law age up. Perhaps that is because those younger than 18 are covered by ordinary child rape statutes? I wonder why they raised it? Perhaps they also raised the age of consent around that time also?
Conn also wrote that because the incest law specifically mentions half brothers and sisters, it arguably excludes all other relationships of the half blood by not mentioning them.
Hmmmm. So according to this judge, the incest charges are prohibited because they are cousins.
If convicted of all charges, Jeffs could face anywhere from probation to eight years in prison. Before the incest charges were dropped Wednesday and two others were dropped in March, Jeffs faced up to 27 years in prison.
Not really relevant now is it? Prosecutors routinely throw multiple charges at a person to see what will stick. When stripped back down to the basic charges, they should still have an okay case.
Okay, so here is the root of what is left that they are charging him with.
Jeffs, who was already prosecuted in Utah, is still charged in Arizona as an accomplice with four counts of sexual conduct with a minor stemming from the marriages of the two girls.
Those charges sound kind of lame.
Last week, investigators at the Texas attorney general's office took DNA from Jeffs, saying they were looking for evidence of relationships between him and four girls from the Yearning For Zion Ranch ages 12 to 15.
Now those would be much better charges to convict him on. The actual molestation of kids. I suppose that is why they were wanting to DNA test all of the kids. To find out which ones were actually his by underaged girls.
They must be really worried that the charges they currenly have him on are not adequate.
Polygamist gets 45 days for sex with teen bride Investigator fears sentence sends wrong message By Harriet Ryan Court TV Friday, August 4, 2006; Posted: 11:04 a.m. EDT (15:04 GMT) (Court TV) -- An Arizona judge has sentenced a polygamist to 45 days in county jail for having sex with a teenager he took as his third wife.
So perhaps this was the real reason for the massive raid on the ranch in Texas. The case against Jeff's was in trouble and they wanted direct evidence of child molestation against him. So with the evidence from the ranch, they now have 4 potential cases
That actually seems to make sense, and it would explain why the CPS was so insistent on the DNA testing even when they didn't have DNA samples from the adult men. They do have a sample of Warren Jeffs DNA. That would also explain why they took adult women into custody too, they wanted their DNA too and since Warren Jeffs has been on ice for a while they needed a large net.
It may also help explain why the FLDS created YFZ in Texas. It would make it very hard for Utah and Arizona officials to get information or testimony from those witnesses.
Ah, that may be so. Although I was thinking they may have moved there before that case broke. That it was the lax Texas laws with the young marriage age (at the time) that was the root cause.
Hmm, I believe that the investigation against Warren Jeffs got hot in 2004 the year the FLDS bought the property in Texas. Warren Jeffs ran from a warrant issued against him in 2005 and was finally arrested in 2006.
I bet that the 14 year age minimum helped make Texas a destination of choice. When you are running, you might as well run to a safe area. My guess is that the FLDS became model citizens waiting for the inevitable investigation from the Texas LEO's.
Before his 2006 arrest, Jeffs had last been seen on January 1, 2005, near Eldorado, Texas, at the dedication ceremony of the foundation of a large and elaborate new FLDS temple on an area of land called the YFZ Ranch.
And this from the same source. In July 2004, Warren Jeffs' nephew, Brent Jeffs, filed a lawsuit against him alleging that in the late 1980s his uncle sodomized him in the Salt Lake Valley compound then owned by the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (FLDS). Brent Jeffs said he was five or six years old at the time, and that Warren Jeffs' brothers, also named in the lawsuit, watched and participated in the abuse. Two of Warren Jeffs' other nephews also made similar abuse claims against him. One of the alleged victims, Clayne Jeffs, committed suicide with a firearm after accusing Warren Jeffs of sexually assaulting him as a child.[20]
So what happened to those claims? They should certainly give him more time in jail that the onces the convicted him on.
And Texas responded by raising the marriage age!
[quote]Constitutional Law
Texas Changed Marriage Age to Restrict Rights of Polygamy Ranch Residents
Posted May 2, 2008, 10:48 am CDT
By Martha Neil
Much has been written, in recent weeks, about the number of teen girls entering into “spiritual” underage marriages at a Texas ranch from which some 462 children were removed last month.
However, it was not until the fringe religious group that operates the ranch, the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, moved to Texas that legislators adopted a law that made marriages of teens under age 16 illegal, Reuters reports.
“There was suspicion, speculation and concern and we knew they were the most obedient followers of Warren Jeffs and people were alarmed,” says Harvey Hilderbran, a state legislator who represents the area in which the Yearning for Zion ranch is located. He was the sponsor of a bill that became law in 2005 that raised the age at which children can marry, if their parents consent, from age 14 to age 16.
[/quote]
http://abajournal.com/news/texas_changed_law_to_restrict_rights_of_polygamy_ranch_residents/
My guess would be that there is no evidence that those crimes took place. Rumors are easy to start, but hard to prove : )
Good point. Certainly nobody is talking about those particular issues. They are frantically looking for something real to pin on him.
I have a hard time calling someone an accomplise to rape if all they did was preside over a wedding. Perhaps the crime in that case would be conducting an illegal wedding. But the other crime should be cast solely on the shoulders of the person who committed it.
I think it is Al Capone all over again. They are going to nail Warren Jeffs and the FLDS for tax evasion, or something similar. Modern day witch hunts have a lot more weapons at their disposal and absolutely no one is immune if they are targeted.
Well, taking 400+ children from their parents is certainly a good tactic to get someone to start groveling. Parents will do anything due just about anything to get their children back from a kidnapper. I guess it was at least successful in obtaining the DNA tests on the children.
Now perhaps that tactic has backfired on them to some extent. However, the state has certainly continuing with the threats against the parents. So perhaps it will eventually be effective.
New threats? The last I heard was that the 'special' parenting classes have been changed to normal and the CPS has yet to figure out how to schedule oversight. I think they have some budget problems considering the 14 to 30 million in expenses so far.
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.