Posted on 06/20/2008 3:36:08 PM PDT by Flo Nightengale
A lawyer for the 16-year-old daughter of polygamist group leader Warren Jeffs is requesting a restraining order to prevent a spokesman for the group from intimidating and harassing the girl.
The request for a restraining order against Willie Jessop was filed in San Angelo today by Natalie Malonis.
The teenager was one of the hundreds of children taken from the Yearning For Zion Ranch by Texas Child Protective Services in April because investigators believed they were exposed to abuse by members of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
Her name is not being disclosed because Malonis has said that she is a victim of sexual abuse.
Malonis, of Dallas, maintains in her request that Jessop has ''engaged in conduct designed to intimidate and harrass'' Malonis and her client.
Several sources close to the case have indicated that the girl is expected to be asked to testify before a Schleicher County grand jury, which next week will begin hearing the state of Texas' criminal case against FLDS members.
Malonis' request comes one day after investigators from the Texas Attorney General's Office attempted to serve the girl with a subpoena, but were unable to locate her.
''I believe that (the girl) was avoiding service because of coercion and improper influence from Willie Jessop,'' the request states.
Jessop called the petition "outrageous."
"She's trying to blame me for her client not liking her," he said today. "It shows her pathetic mindset. The only thing I ever did was try to get them together."
Jessop disputed the notion that he has attempted to intimidate Malonis or her client
(Excerpt) Read more at chron.com ...
The client is a MINOR. The attorney’s job is to work for the best interests of the child, not do what the child wants. There is every reason to believe that this child 1) has been sexually abused, and 2) has been brainwashed into believing she will roast in hell for eternity if she doesn’t do/say exactly what the FLDS leaders tell her to do/say, including allowing herself to be raped by whoever the leaders authorize to rape her. It is not the attorney’s job to work towards getting the girl sent back to her brainwashers and abusers for more brainwashing and abuse, just because the scared and brainwashed girl says that’s what she wants.
"The girl "wants to go home and doesn't understand why everybody else can. The only obstacle is her lawyer," he said. "When a person and their lawyer cannot get along, then the appropriate solution is to appoint a new lawyer.""
The child's attorney is not a defense attorney. Are you suggesting that the attorney try to prevent service of the subpeona, which is an order for a person to appear in court.
The attorney for the child should be her advocate and as such is identical with a Defense Attorney, that is what a Defense Attorney is. Certainly, the Attorney should do everything in her power to prevent the lady from testifying. The easiest way is to not have the lady served.
And, before you jump to conclusions, no, I do not want the girl to be arrested or fined.
Why would the Lady be arrested or fined if she avoids service?
But I do want to know why the men of the flds are so dead set against the girl appearing in court.
What is the benefit to the Lady for testifying before a Grand Jury? She doesn't even get the benefit of council. Are they guaranteeing her immunity? Are they paying her for her testimony? Bribes? What does she have to gain?
Are you familiar with the joke/half truth about the Prosecutor, Grand Jury and Ham Sandwich?
I heard recordings of some them a while back, that some news website had linked to. Scary, sick stuff.
Doesn't mean a whole lot. Attorneys could not find me in an attempt to serve a subpoena for testimony in an industrial accident years ago. I was listed in the phone book and had lived in the same house, that was listed on the tax roles, for the past five years. Had both children enrolled in public school and had a valid, current commercial Texas drivers license at the time.
64 posted on Saturday, June 21, 2008 12:03:16 PM by SouthTexas
“that it would have to have been the mother”
... requesting change of representation?
Back peddling? You are the one who has admitted "embellishing" the truth and I have caught you lying. You are a liar, does that sound like back peddling to you?
Keep back paddling.
Disbarred? You two are really out of touch with reality. An attorney for a MINOR is not supposed to be taking orders from the minor. Abused children (and adults) will often protect their abusers. The job of an attorney for a minor is to pursue the minor’s best interests. The attorney is no more supposed to do whatever the minor says, than parents are supposed to do whatever their children tell them to do.
Excuse me, I thought we were still discussing Willie Jessop’s presence at the meeting.
I think the child is the only one that COULD request a new attorney. She would be the only one with standing to do so, but being a minor, this judge may not allow the change.
This is more of the “stay tuned, same time, same channel”....
Sorry ST but the AG would have found even you, if they went looking:’)
“You are the one who has admitted “embellishing” “
Why yes, I did.
I took your words, and added some embellishment.
They were not in italics, qoutes, or bold, and were my statement, not yours.
I was saying what you stated was true, and I added some details you left out.
You tried to do the same thing to me and failed. You actually put the words in BOLD,and QUOTES, implying they were my words.
Which they weren’t, which means you failed, and it pisses you off.
Maybe so, but they didn’t until they called and asked where I lived, but I wasn’t even attempting to hide.
After I gave them directions, they came and served the papers, gave me my $2.00 to cover travel and expenses (100 miles one way), and left.
No excuse me, needed.
I got lost, and was trying to find out where you were headed.
Exactly.
Yeah it did. ;)
At the rate this case is moving, it will probably outlive all of us.
2 dolllars? lol
That was it and I’ll never forget that part.LOL
I figured the guy was trying to say “thanks for the directions, go have a beer”, but he said it was required by the state to offset expenses. that was early to mid 80s so I’m sure they’re up to at least $3.00 now.LOL
“That is positive proof that the lawyer is working against her wishes when she filed an order against returning the young lady.”
And the reason for the order, and what it involved have been explained.
“You are confusing a defense Attorney with a Prosecutor. “
No, I was talking about apples, and you went off comparing watermelons and squash.
And the lawyer in question is not a Defense lawyer, as you stipulate.
And no, she isn’t acting like a defense attorney, because that is not what she is.
Is it in a child's best interest to testify before a Grand Jury with the proviso that any mistake could put the child away for years?
There is every reason to believe that this child 1) has been sexually abused
There is? Where is it? If there is, why haven't they arrested the abuser if they have the evidence?
and 2) has been brainwashed into believing she will roast in hell for eternity if she doesn’t do/say exactly what the FLDS leaders tell her to do/say, including allowing herself to be raped by whoever the leaders authorize to rape her.
LOL I don't know where to start. Does your religion believe that sinners roast in Hell for Eternity? I don't know what the FLDS believe but I do know that Joseph Smith certainly didn't believe or teach that, so that statement is probably wrong.
It is not the attorney’s job to work towards getting the girl sent back to her brainwashers and abusers for more brainwashing and abuse, just because the scared and brainwashed girl says that’s what she wants.
Then you obviously don't understand the purpose of a lawyer.
“So you are claiming that the Attorney is the guardian too?”
No. Never did. You are making that up, again.
Everyone gets it. You are always right. If you ask a question, it is not to learn, it is because you want to see what others say, and then ridicule them if they don’t give the answer you ‘know’ is right.
I never said any different. You are the only one saying it.
Well, apparently you don’t know the law very well, because you insist that the girl’s attorney for the Grand Jury hearings is a defense attorney.
Maybe you should take some of your own advice.
You really are confused or lying aren't you? The words in bold and quotes were mine that you were misquoting by omission. That was the whole point.
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.