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.
Maybe I missed it Charles...show me a poster here on this thread that insists there is a Sarah, and call people liars.
You didn’t answer my question though. Do you think the kids were safe and no abuse was going on at the ranch?
I don’t know of any such reports. My point was that it is rare to have such a separation unless the mother has been charged, or at least there is evidence, or a specific allegation, that the specific mother in question has done something wrong.
In this case you have women for whom NOBODY filed a report of wrongdoing, NO CPS agent did a specific interview with, and for whom NO evidence was found of abuse, who were removed from the compound with their children, and who now face being separated from those children they are breastfeeding.
If this was a family where the father was accused, the FATHER would be removed from the house, and the mother and child left.
In this case, it was a group setting, they don’t want the kids going back, they are tired of keeping up temporary shelter, and it’s hard enough to place kids without asking a foster family to take a mother.
It’s just not a normal situation, by any stretch of the imagination.
But separating a breast-feeding mother and infant is a SERIOUS step. Breast-feeding provides children with protection from disease, and better nutrition. It helps the mother/child bond. Without feeding, the mother will have to take significant steps to maintain her milk supply, and if the child is gone too long they may lose interest in breast milk and never go back.
I never saw you ask me what I thought. My guess is that some or most of the younger kids were safe. But there may have been evidence of abuse from SOME of the pre-teens — there is nothing in the court record that identifies any specific abuse in that age group, but that doesn’t mean for certain they don’t HAVE evidence that they simply haven’t made public.
Among older kids it would seem highly improbable that NO abuse was going on. While the teen pregnancies do not PROVE abuse, they surely raise the possibility of abuse. If people said there was a strong enough possibility of abuse that those kids had to be removed, I wouldn’t argue. I only argue with people who insist that the pregnancy and early childbearing PROVE there was rape.
The DNA will prove if there was statutory rape. And those men better be punished severely. And if the mothers of those kids participated, they should be punished as well.
But if you posted a woman’s picture, and asked me “is she guilty”, I’d have to say I have NO IDEA if that specific woman did anything, was charged with anything, or was suspected of anything.
See, I’ve learned something — I didn’t know there was a place named colorcountry. I thought it was a commentary about our country being colorful, not black and white.
Of course, some people think the “CT” in my name means I’m from Connecticut.
When the group was removed to safety from the compound, the ‘mothers’ —young and older— would not all tell which children were theirs. The confusion from this deceit was why the court decided to just keep them all until the connections could be verified. At least that is what some on the scene have reported to us here at Freeper Central. [FR search ‘barkeep’, for one.]
Interesting post. You make some good points.
So what’s the CT for?
I know that all serial killers have Wayne for a middle name, but I won’t hold that against you. ;-)
Prior to this point the cnn story said the lady who first called from the ranch was using an unregistered prepaid phone.
The CNN article says, as I quoted it:
"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."
The prepaid cell phone "has been used in other cases linked to Swinton", which means Swinton used the same phone that was used to call in the abuse report! Either you are misreading the article, or are suggesting that somehow the same phone Ms. Swinton used for previous prank calls just happened to turn up at the ranch by some magical process. There is no evidence that the call was made from the ranch, it appears it was made from Colorado, most likely by Ms. Swinton -- after all it was made on a prepaid cell phone she had used before.
If Rozita is a delagate,why isn’t this in breaking news all over the country?
Post 78:put the lie to this whole silly post
Post 50:This BS story and that BS question
Post 51:It just does not fit the agenda of some posters to know the facts.
Post 46:I certainly hope race has nothing to do with thim.
Other posts suggested the next person who posted a news report that said Swinton made a phone call should be zotted.
Realise I made a single-sentence post with a brief statement, I wasn't trying to call one one specific post. You may argue that none of the referenced posts above specifically meets YOUR criteria. Also, the biggest "Sarah" reference was from a thread yesterday, and the one which called her existance was actually quoting someone else.
Thanks for giving me a chance to review all the various posts. It reminds me why I'm not actually speaking to the facts of this case anymore. No point.
I have no idea if she is a “delegate”. There’s a person by that name from the same area who is a delegate, but we don’t know how common the name is there. Further, one report called her a county delegate, which may mean someone who goes to the state convention where they pick the real delegates. I doubt the mainstream media has much interest in the thousands of people in each state who might be delegates to a state convention.
However, it has gotten some minor coverage. Frankly, I’m guessing the media would wait until the police announce some more information about her.
If it is true though, it is interesting how there seems to be no interest by Obama in dumping a delegate who has made false reports (in that other case), while he was QUICK to dump the delegate who called a couple of black kids “monkeys”.
I can live with the serial killers. However, there’s John Wayne Bobbit to live down. And he actually is from MY county here in Virginia.
CT is the abbreviation for an opinion column I write for the local paper, titled “Critically Thinking”. I first signed up here because it looked like a good place to try out my opinions on various stories, and see what others thought before finalizing my thoughts.
I’d drop it now, but I don’t know how. So I put a note in my home page. Some people have “alias” names, that would work for me but I don’t know how to do that either.
No, you have no need to go back and read them. I just wanted to show you that I had a sound basis for my opinion, not to convince you my opinion was right.
So long as you agree that I wasn’t just making up my charge out of whole cloth, that’s fine with me. You don’t have to even say you agree.
CT is good. Nothing wrong with Critical Thinking.
I even actually know some good men named Wayne.
I am pleased to meetcha, Mr CharlesWayneCT.
Post #46 was mine.
In context it was about judging Ms. Swinton guilty before she has been charged of a crime, and how similar it is in fact to finding the FLDS guilty before charged.
The reason I added the “race” issue was to highlight that race and religion can be used as a scapegoat issue instead of looking at the actual crimes.
I didn’t mean to suggest that anyone was racist. I simply meant that it is easy to blame religious bias when accusing someone of pre-judgements, it would be just as easy to inject race as a reason for pre-judgement also.
One perhaps from a news source?
An arrest warrant affidavit made public Wednesday says calls to a Texas crisis center were made from Colorado Springs-area cell phone numbers before authorities raided the compound and removed more than 400 children. One of the numbers was connected to Swinton. It wasn't known when the particular number was used.
Are you basing your “reasoning” on an unnamed source? Because that old article from the 18 quotes an unnamed source.
The current articles are based on an affidavit.
I don’t have a horse in the race either way. It was this nut job, or it was another nut job or it was a real person.
But if it was a real person, why are the rest of the supposed facts incorrect, even the name of the supposed husband?
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.