Posted on 06/20/2008 3:36:08 PM PDT by Flo Nightengale
Hi, Virgie - I feel the witch hunt against the FLDS is a disgrace and black mark on our Constitution and our beloved heretofore free country.
“No one will ever know the truth.”
Yes, we will. That is what the investigation is about. That is what the Grand Jury hearings are about. That is what the civil and criminal trials will be about.
“I am not sure that the truth even exists anymore. “
That sounds more like you don’t want the truth to exist.
“History is being rewritten before our eyes.”
Is this your way of preparing for the inevitable?
If the allegations that there are ‘child-brides’ turn out to be true, If it is true that a 15 year old girl was spiritually married to Raymond Jessop and he was over 35, then will that be your ‘mantra’ for claiming it is all a lie?
Or am I interpreting your meaning incorrectly?
“Well let us look at the facts. Both the attorney and the guardian were appointed by Judge Walthers. Who has now granted a restraining order against Jessops. Does it strike you as odd that Walthers is still presiding over this case?”
No.
Maybe it’s because you don’t understand the law.
“Or could the more plausible explanation be that when the Lady was being ‘detained’ that she said whatever she thought would help get her released. Now that she is free she no longer wishes to cooperate with her former captors.”
I have stated much the same thing, on several threads.
Along with other possibilities. I think it is the most likely explanation.
Don’t blame you for saying Huh. I wasn’t very clear.
There is a civil lawsuit going on at the same time the hearings for the Grand Jury are occurring.
It might be Pamela who is the lead on that one, not Teresa.
Maybe not, but I know more about the law than you do : )
There is a civil lawsuit going on at the same time the hearings for the Grand Jury are occurring.
Right and the Constitution provides no guarantees against self incrimination in a Civil case. That is why what the CPS did was so heinous. They are trying to use Civil laws to make a Criminal case. In other words, they are trying to side step the Constitution in their prosecution of the FLDS.
I absolutely guarantee that when lawyers get involved, truth becomes irrelevant. The legal system has very little to do with the truth it is all about winning or losing, that is it, period, end of story.
If the allegations that there are ‘child-brides’ turn out to be true, If it is true that a 15 year old girl was spiritually married to Raymond Jessop and he was over 35, then will that be your ‘mantra’ for claiming it is all a lie?
Do you understand that a 'spiritual' marriage does not necessarily mean a physical relationship at the time?
“They are trying to use Civil laws to make a Criminal case.”
Are they now?
I wasn’t aware the CPS pursued criminal cases.
I thought that was the Prosecutor, and LE.
“I absolutely guarantee that when lawyers get involved, truth becomes irrelevant. The legal system has very little to do with the truth it is all about winning or losing, that is it, period, end of story.”
So, why the interest in this case, if you ‘know’ the truth will not come out, and it’s all about lawyers trying to better their record in court?
Because you ‘say’ it doesn’t , is that to be considered proof?
What proof do you have that these type of marriages were not consumated?
Isn’t it necessary to see the ‘evidence’ before making a judgment like that?
I know there has been a lot of speculation about what may have happened, but the ‘evidence’, if any, hasn’t been revealed yet.
Now, if I may continue, If there is proof that Raymond spiritually married a 15 year old, and consumated the marriage, then, would you accept that the law was violated?
“Right and the Constitution provides no guarantees against self incrimination in a Civil case. That is why what the CPS did was so heinous. They are trying to use Civil laws to make a Criminal case. In other words, they are trying to side step the Constitution in their prosecution of the FLDS.”
So maybe they should ask Kevin for help.
Just don’t let them go to the Brown Brothers.
“Maybe not, but I know more about the law than you do : )”
Maybe. I guess a lawyer would know more about the law.
However, you said lawyers were only interested in winning, not in the truth of the case.
So, if you are a lawyer, that would explain your viewpoint, and many of your posts.
Or, you could be a Judge. They know quite a bit about the law. Or are they just as blind?
Which is too bad for those who have to appear before the law.
I guess it’s irony because the one place you go to get justice, you can’t get it, because of the lawyers.
Don't forget the judges and the legislatures, but I think you are getting the idea.
Unless it was done prior to 2006 when the law went into effect, then yes of course I would accept that the law was violated.
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.