Posted on 04/23/2008 1:01:12 PM PDT by Howdy there
A court document says one phone number used to report alleged abuse at a polygamist retreat in Texas had been used previously by a 33-year-old Colorado woman.
It's not yet clear whether authorities suspect Rozita Swinton of Colorado Springs made any of the calls that triggered this month's raid of the compound.
An arrest warrant affidavit made public Wednesday says a phone number she had used previously was used for a call to a Texas crisis center before authorities conducted the raid and removed more than 400 children. Swinton's whereabouts are unknown.
Authorities have said a 16-year-old girl called a crisis center claiming she was abused at the compound. Authorities have not found that girl but say they have found evidence other children were abused.
I don’t even think it will affect them criminally.
Thanks! I will watch that video.
Why?
If new information comes to light, that means the Media got it wrong.
It was the Associated Press (who you yourself cited as a source) who now says the women were even of different names in the phone call.
Are you serious? On my screen, which has plenty of color, fLDS is NOT in color on that post.
BTW, I use fLDS to distinguish them from the Mormons I know and love. I am not prejudiced here, and I don’t care about Mormon history.
What I AM concerned about is this sect. From now on, I will use FLDS instead of fLDS. That way, it will be quite clear what I am discussing.
Her call was not the reason for the cops action, since her first call was made to the lady in Arizona while the search was going on.
Not according to CNN. They are reporting that:
"Calls were made to a Texas family shelter March 29 and 30 from a female identifying herself as Sarah Barlow, the affidavit says.
The caller said she was 16, had a baby about 8 months old and was pregnant again. She said that her 49-year-old husband was physically and sexually abusive toward her and that they were living at the YFZ Ranch.
The phone calls were made from a prepaid cell phone with no available records, according to the affidavit. However, it has been used in other cases linked to Swinton, the document says."
Subsequently, "The woman identifying herself as Sarah Barlow also called a battered women's shelter in Snohomish County, Washington, using another phone number, the affidavit says.
That phone number was traced to Swinton's address, the affidavit says."
So, if CNN is reading the affidavit correctly a prepaid cell phone which was previously used to make calls by Swinton was used for the initial call which led to the raid in Texas. A second call from 'Sarah Barlow' was made from Swinton's apartment some time before April 10th. A third call was routed to Texas law enforcement authorities on April 10th.
If CNN is reporting accurately, it is very likely that 'Sarah Barlow' is actually a 33 year old woman from Colorado with a history of making false abuse claims - who also happens to be an Obama supporter.
Example:
Subsequently, "The woman identifying herself as Sarah Barlow also called a battered women's shelter in Snohomish County, Washington, using another phone number, the affidavit says.
That phone number was traced to Swinton's address, the affidavit says."
Prior to this point the cnn story said the lady who first called from the ranch was using an unregistered prepaid phone. Not the one made by this nut.
Flora Jessop, a former FLDS member who escaped and now runs a crisis center, says that Swinton repeatedly called her posing as a young abused girl. Jessop said she first got a call March 30 (the day after the San Angelo hotline call) from Swinton, who said she was an abuse victim named SarahOne day after. The only people aware of the existence of the call were the people called and "Sarah"
Give it up Mulder. No matter how much you want to believe, Sarah is not out there.
The link DOES go to http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/stories/P/POLYGAMIST_RETREAT_COLORADO?SITE=WIMIL&SECTION=US&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2008-04-23-16-30-46
I checked it to be sure
Smoking gun doesn't have the affadavit up. Don't see it anywhere on the AP site I checked.
Matthew 7:15 - 20 "Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.
The fLDS are practicing the pure Smithian religion as that one fabricated it to be and showed with his thirty plus wives, many of whom were still married to living men when Smith 'took them for his'.
I’m sorry. Are you equating the possibility that an investigator questioned a person of interest with the bizarre belief that the moon was made of cheese?
Do you really think they do NOT try to question people of interest? Do you think they are NOT looking at her phone records to see if she made the calls?
Certainly, she might not have been the first caller. And it’s also possible that they have not been investigating her since last Friday.
But that possibility is certainly not in the same realm of reason as the belief the moon was made of cheese.
You do know that it was always impossible for the moon to be made out of cheese, right? That the belief in the “cheese theory of the moon” was complete fiction, and had zero probability of ever being true?
Because if you think it could be made of cheese, it would explain why you related those two things.
Unless you simply think it’s impossible that investigators did investigations.
It rarely takes very long for people who are defending the state to resort to namecalling and ad-hominen attacks.
While that in no way changes the possibility that the government is doing the right thing, it certainly does explain why a lot of other freepers are having trouble taking the discussion seriously.
Pretty much every mother who has not been alleged to have committed a crime, for whom there is no specific allegation of wrongdoing, and for whom the child shows no sign of abuse.
In fact, absent a credible threat of actual harm to the infant, the state law would dictate that mother and child be kept together.
Heck, even if you are into taking away people's rights in order to get the children separated to get dirt on the parents, there's no point in doing that with infants, who can't actually talk.
I’m not sure why you ever used a small “f”, since the term is a 4-letter abbreviation, and is always done in all capital letters.
I apolgize if I misunderstood the intention of everybody who used the small “f”. The RESULT of the small “f” is do diminish that letter, and make the resulting abbreviation look much more like “LDS”, drawing a CONNECTION between the two groups.
You may have not realised that.
The “color” was a poorly constructed and lame play on words based on the poster’s screen name.
In this case, a group of Freepers has pretty much believed every last word from the media when it suited their belief about the FLDS compound — even when there were conflicting media accounts, they chose parts from each which fit their conclusions and insisted anybody who had doubts about the reports because of the inconsistancies were simply apologists for child rapists, polygamists, mormons, and child abusers.
Or that they were related to the founder of the religion.
Also can you link me to where a child that was taken out of a home got to take his mother with him? I’m not saying I don’t believe you. I just have not heard of this before.
It goes two ways. An article that states the call might have been a fake and people start falling all over themselves with “See. See.There is no Sarah” Why don’t we all just wait for offical reports?
If CNN is reporting accurately, the cell phone which made the calls was also used in other cases linked to swinton.
Now, that is NOT the same as saying it was a cell phone which was used BY swinton in those other cases.
But it is possible that the authorities haven't been able to MAKE that link yet. They only know that the SAME cell phone made calls in cases where Swinton was linked, and THIS case where swinton is linked.
It is a rational conclusion though that the phone was either used by Swinton, or by someone who was working with Swinton. The alternative is that some independent person happened to make calls as Sarah in this case while Swinton made a call in this case AS Sarah, and that in an independent case this SAME real Sarah called the organizations that Swinton was also calling.
Which would raise the question as to why, if Sarah is real, she used a cell phone which previously had been involved in FALSE accusations in another state. How did Sarah get that cell phone?
Anyway, we'll know soon if the phone calls came from a real Sarah at the compound. They should be able to find the phone at the compound, or somewhere Swinton stashed it, showing the truth one way or another.
The point again is that this story is not static. The "facts" known last Friday are not the facts known today. And they aren't what we will know next week.
I hope when the DNA links parents and children, and somebody posts "Children related to parents", that the same people don't call those reports lies because current reports say they don't know all the links yet.
I would correct people who say “There is no Sarah”, except there are plenty of other people to do that. :-)
If only they would stop there, instead of insisting there IS a Sarah, and that people are lying because some news report from last week says something wasn’t known then.
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.