Posted on 04/17/2008 10:12:04 PM PDT by Howdy there
Please consider this.
It was a Search warrant.
To go look for underage pregnant girls.
They were found.
do you have a referance for this from what I have read so far it was a search warent for a girl who was being abused named sara who has not been found
My sentiments exactly.
Apart from all the discussion involving the girls .... and whether there was good cause to take them... Tell me, why did they take the boys?
I don't know.
I would have really rather that this were handled differently. Perhaps a co-ordinated effort between Law Enforcement and the LDS Church, as an example, wherein the FLDS church leaders were deposed and an LDS ordination established in it's place.
In such a condition, enforcement would be supervisory, the offending behavior would be stopped, a long term resolution is established by way of and within their faith, and the entire matter is resolved in situ with a minimum of disruption to the families (excepting existing illegalities, to be sure).
Of course, such an arrangement would suppose a voluntary compliance on the part of the families, but some attempt of this nature would be far preferable, when compared to the heavy handed approach that is currently on display.
Agreed.
The only thing I don’t trust is the Media and their staged releases of information, and the terribly biased articles , no matter which side of the table they are on.
I don't trust ANYBODY, especially the law, and the media. There is too much power, which is fine, provided that it is transparent, serving power.
In such a condition as exists in this situation, I would hope that a better resolution could be attained.
I think it’s a given that sex with minors is being practiced.
I think it a high probability as well. That doesn't mean one should rip 400 kids out of their houses and subject them to the foster care system though. that seems entirely whack to me.
I think it’s a given that the CPS and LE are walking on broken glass while a majority of the nation is watching and judging their every move.
I would hope that to be the case, but history tends to prove differently. Some dipwad will figure it is his day in the sun, and swing the hammer for all he's worth. Watch and see.
What was that old Twilight Zone movie? “The Monsters are due on Maple Street” [...] it feels like that movie.
I know exactly what you mean.
“do you have a referance for this from what I have read so far it was a search warent for a girl who was being abused named sara who has not been found”
You are correct about that.
It was. Sarah, actually, is the actual first name of the alledged caller.
She is the underage pregnant girl. She was supposedly 16, had one child in hand, one in the belly.
The CPS found six girls named SARAH, and with the same last name.
They found girls from 13-18 who were pregnant.
“What I am adamant about is that the law is followed, and more so by the authority than by the citizen. “
And as soon as we can find proof that the authority has broken the law, then we can deal with it.
Haven’t seen that yet, have you?
Yes, it does matter. It matters very much.
Violation of due process = inadmissible evidence.
Making everything that was found after the fact......disappear.
FIVE pregnant females under 18 (not necessarily statutory) caused the removal of four hundred and sixteen children. How can that be justified?
Oh my! Gee, do you think maybe it has something to do with the fact that the whole compound is founded on an abusive doctrine, as proven in the trial of Warren Jeffs?
Or perhaps the stuff found on page five of this affadavitt. Are you really telling me that chiildren should be left in the care of somebody who was allowing that to go on? I wouldn't let someone like that take care of sea monkeys, much less 400 kids.
Because those I accuse are beholden by oath, by duty, and by law to follow a standard of due process that was *not* adhered to.
Unless everything on pages 1-4 of that affadavitt are a lie, they did engage in due process and a judge agreed. Besides, if we use your standard, the police have to investigate the background of every person who reports a crime before they do anything. "Don't worry, ma'am, we'll send the squad car around in about 20 minutes or so when we're sure this isn't a prank. Tell the ax murderer to wait."
Are you the first to disover this? If so, great scoop, BGHater!
Drudge needs to add this info to update story on his page...
This fraud Rozita Swinton is a state delegate for Obama!
http://www.peakdems.org/obama_cd5_del.asp
Technically you are correct but I’d bet my mortgage it won’t matter here. Child services does not need probably cause beyond an anonymous tip anyway. If there are pregnant minors .... all the adults are guilty of conspiracy to commit and abet child molestation and slavery. Let’s through in kidnapping and selling children too while we are at it.
I beg to differ.
-----
If there are pregnant minors .... all the adults are guilty of conspiracy to commit and abet child molestation and slavery.Let’s through in kidnapping and selling children too while we are at it.
No, they're not 'guilty' until they've been proven so in a court of law.
That's what the law IS. Technicalities...procedures.
-----
If there are pregnant minors .... all the adults are guilty of conspiracy to commit and abet child molestation and slavery.
No one is guilty until proven so.
LOL! Pardon my 2 posts for the same reply
That may have damned Warren Jeffs, but it doesn't stand as evidence now, or the courts would have disbanded them then.
Or perhaps the stuff found on page five of this affadavitt. [...] Unless everything on pages 1-4 of that affadavitt are a lie, they did engage in due process and a judge agreed.
But the whole of the affidavit, based upon the supposed testimony of a single girl, is now suspect for the reasons given in this thread's OP. If the judge had known the evidence given was not verified, the warrant would never have come... That is assuming an actual judge who discerns the law rather than making his own law.
As it stands now, if the press report is correct, the affidavit you rely upon is made of whole cloth.
Besides, if we use your standard [...]
But that is were you are wrong. The standard is not mine. The standard is the law, as expressed in the Bill of Rights in the US Constitution.
Would you be so quick to defend these actions if they were happening to you? Would you be so understanding of the lawlessness exhibited here, if law enforcement seized your children because of an anonymous tip saying that you were a molester, leaving you to prove the negative (which is an impossibility) in order to get your children back?
I think it is clear you have revealed yourself as an apologist for these sub-human scum.
Seems to me we have some Jeff’s sympathizers here on fr. If not members in full.
Really, you can disband a religion? Dude, we can't even disband a gang! Do you think we have it on record in a court of law that the Crips, Bloods and MS13 are all organized crime outfits? Have we gone and arrested every person wearing their colors? No. We have to wait for probable cause, and if a guy claiming to be a Blood calls up 911 and says a bunch of Crips plan to kill him, you don't sit around picking your nose wondering if the Crips are really all that bad. You saddle up.
But the whole of the affidavit, based upon the supposed testimony of a single girl, is now suspect for the reasons given in this thread's OP.
If you think the affadavitt only contains the supposed testimony of the girl who made the phone call, you didn't read it. I even pointed out what page it was on. The last two pages talk about whta they found when they got to the compound.
As for the doctrine of poisonous fruits, it's moronic. A search a cop made in goood faith should never be thrown out.
But that is were you are wrong. The standard is not mine. The standard is the law, as expressed in the Bill of Rights in the US Constitution.
Baloney. It says in the Constitution that police have to investigate a caller before they can accept their report as probable cause? I missed that clause during Civics class. Where is it?
Would you be so quick to defend these actions if they were happening to you?
Ah, here's where we get to the real point.
If someone called the police and told them I was holding her prisoner, I would expect a squad car at my house. Anyone who wouldn't is a complete moron.
If they found that there was no prisoner, but found that I was screwing an underage girl who I had "married," I would expect them to take her. I would certainly not expect that after they found evidence that I was a child abuser, they would leave any other children in my custody.
But, since they would only find three well-adjusted kids, I would expect them to do absolutely nothing and go on their way. And I know they would, because I've had child welfare at my house over an anonymous tip before, and the guy knew after being here for five minutes that we weren't abusive.
Go to www.childbride.org, read the stuff in the True Stories section and tell me a phone call from a kid being held prisoner on a ranch by these people is like someone calling and saying there's a unicorn in their garden.
ROFLMAO!
Typical. No refutation, just accusation.
I do hope you remember this situation should CPS ever pay your family a visit.
And it’s ‘throw’, not ‘through’.
I see you caught it. Freeper Posting Debility.
It seams to bee very contagious.
“the affidavit you rely upon is made of whole cloth.”
The term ‘whole cloth’ is a misuse of the original meaning.
‘Whole cloth’ would imply the full truth.
The original term was ‘hole cloth’. Meaning, made up of something ‘full of holes’.
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.