Posted on 06/24/2008 9:41:49 AM PDT by Alice in Wonderland
SAN ANGELO, Texas — A court-appointed attorney for a 16-year-old FLDS girl caught up in a grand jury investigation will go to court today under armed guard. Natalie Malonis confirmed to the Deseret News she has received death threats since she sought a restraining order against a high-profile member of the Fundamentalist LDS Church to prevent him from contacting her client.
"I've been getting death threats and I am being provided a security detail," she said this morning. "That was not even at my request. Law enforcement recognized the need for it."
Malonis said she did not know who has made the threats. She represents four FLDS members — including Pamela Jeffs, for whom she was praised by FLDS supporters when she managed to secure additional rights in court for the woman once declared by Texas authorities to be a minor.
Malonis' 16-year-old client, meanwhile, has fired off several e-mails asking her to step aside.
In e-mails sent to the Deseret News and posted on pro-FLDS Web sites, Teresa Jeffs accuses her court-appointed lawyer of not acting in her best interest.
"My attorney is going against my wishes. Maybe you need a restraining order that you can absolutely have nothing to do with me and you have to stay 1,000 feet away from me! What do you think of that?" she wrote in an e-mail to Malonis.
Jeffs has been subpoenaed to testify Wednesday before a grand jury investigating crimes involving FLDS members. The Texas Attorney General's Office said it could not find Jeffs to subpoena her, and Malonis went to court seeking a restraining order against FLDS member and spokesman Willie Jessop. In court papers, she accused Jessop of coercing the girl to avoid the subpoena and interfering with her relationship with her client. Judge Barbara Walther signed a temporary restraining order that technically prevents Jeffs' mother from allowing her daughter to have any contact with Jessop. A hearing on a more permanent restraining order will be held this afternoon.
On Monday, Malonis said she spoke with the attorney for Jeffs' mother, but no agreement could be reached.
"I hoped we could, but no ... ," she told the Deseret News.
Malonis said she is prepared to call witnesses and present evidence to suggest that the girl is being intimidated and pressured by FLDS members. The judge is not expected to consider Jeffs' request for a new lawyer.
Rod Parker, a Salt Lake attorney acting as a spokesman for the FLDS, believes Malonis is not following her court-appointed duties. Because Malonis is Teresa Jeffs' attorney ad litem and not her guardian ad litem, her job is to be an advocate for the child, he said.
"I think that she's really out on a limb in doing what she's doing and injuring her own client in a very public way," Parker said. "This is just a very unhealthy and dysfunctional attorney-client relationship. The court ought to grant Teresa's wish and give her another lawyer. This system of justice does not work appropriately when attorneys and their clients are at odds with each other." When the Texas Supreme Court ordered the hundreds of children taken in the April 3 raid to be returned to their parents, Jeffs was exempted.
Malonis said in court papers it was because the girl was an identified sex-abuse victim who had been "spiritually united" to an older man at 15. A special order was put in place for Jeffs, preventing her from contacting her father — FLDS leader Warren Jeffs — and a man named Raymond Jessop, who was not further identified.
The Deseret News normally does not name sex-abuse victims, but the girl has gone public in media interviews and in an e-mail forwarded to the Deseret News. She insists she is not a victim. In her e-mail, the girl said neither Willie Jessop nor Raymond Jessop has ever threatened her.
"That have treated (sic) so very kindly," she wrote.
Jeffs wrote in the communication with Malonis that she did not want the grand jury subpoena, but acknowledged being served.
"Well, they want me to appear before a grand jury. I do not have confidence in you and how can I get you to help me in such a situation that I am in when it feels like to me all you are doing is going against me," she wrote. "So, that is the reason that I am asking you to step aside and let me do what I need to do to and get me a different attorney."
Just as I thought. You will be here tomorrow just as the sun rises no matter how hard you stomp your feet.
I understand.
We’re not goofing up. We just think this little martyrdom pity party is sort of funny. Anyone who doesn’t want to be here is welcome to go. It’s that easy. If not, continue your tearful goodbyes. Carry on.
You wear your inability to look at a situation from the angle of “What’s the truth” proudly? Alrighty then!
susie
Love your government at every turn. Trust the media to do the best by you.
Anyway, coming from you. LOL. Are you for real? You don’t own the truth. You don’t know the truth. I don’t know the truth.
But, for one thing I can bet you at every turn - I will be here and there and everywhere possible to protect the constitution,,, for you. Freedom of association. Individual Liberty. Freedom of religion. Silly stuff like that. All concepts that you are protected by and regardless of how weird I think you are.
I could care less what prism you look through when you see this country, whether it be bigotry, myopics, dependence, handicaps, or ignorance. Always here to see for you.
Where and when did this “That is unfair” attitude come from? We’re all FReepers, here.
Why separate this one little group from the usual posting of facts and opinion, links and debate?? Especially when they are the subject of a *News Article?*
Not to mention that some of us are politically active in protecting our girls and women in Texas.
The moderators hijacked this thread, no one else.
LOL. Innocent you.
I don’t know what I’d do off FR - it’s the first place I read to see what happened each day. I’m trying to determine how much censorship I can bear.
Hmm, that clothing store was tempting!
But they didn’t have my color.
I am going to place an order, 1 of everything, but it has to be in the color red!
:)
It seems a little odd to say nasty things about people, and then say you’re praying for them.
susie
I am still praying you contribute. Silly me. I pray for the impossible.
As usual, you seem to think that insulting people is some sort of wonderful debate tactic. If you have something to debate, do so, if all you have are personal insults, why bother? Or is this just therapy for you when you have a bad day?
susie
Oh I am so glad you are here to protect us mere mortals...
You sure you were not a member of the “Paulinati” Paul folks, they sounded quite the same from their post on mount Olympus...
Oh, and as to the the “knowing the truth”, if you don't know it, from what basis can you make your absolute statements about this case, about the Constitutional question, even beyond that of the courts? Defending the Constitution takes more than just the ability to read it, it also means one must understand the whole of the law, of practice and precedent, the things that go behind or beyond the document itself. Indeed a simplistic view does the Constitution a disservice, much like a tone deaf musician trying to play Mozart....
Yes it is fun to swing at the dirt pitch at times..
“My respect isn’t necessarily high for you so when you put down pixels sometimes I am amused, sometimes I ignore you, and sometimes I just make fun of you.”
You already told me that when you get on a thread, that you only read the posts you want to, and ignore any that displease you in any way.
You openly admit to being completely biased, and having a closed mind, and being here, again, just to attack other people.
You condemn me for being here, and responding to any thread I choose, even though I specifically mentioned it, which I never even see anyone else do. You have never been criticized for responding to any of my posts, no matter who I was originally responding to.
So, Why is that?
Why not discuss the case?
What is there to debate with the mindless. I can debate a paint chip, I can debate a puddle. Just as good. Contribute, as I pray you can someday, and perhaps I can actually debate you. And I hope you can do it outside the bounds of bigotry. If you can’t then I will treat you like anyone should, and as you are probably used to. Period, end of story.
Not leaving, I’m a FReeper. You - the group or individuals who have decided that the Mormons are above and beyond the debate - are indeed making huge mistakes. The community should be the judge, don’t you think?
I’ve hit the abuse button 2 times in 10 years, I think. I don’t remember an answer or response.
This is the first conversation I can remember with the mods, although I do remember complaining when a couple of threads were removed.
Each of these polygamy threads has included at least one reference to pedophile priests and the mod on duty is the one who brought up the Baptists, today.
These points are easily answered, and the answers and distinctions made could possibly be enlightening to some of our readers.
Let it go. Zot the abusive posts, but not the less-than-PC posts.
I know, I dare tempt the gods, but I find irony delicious and irresistible...
Yup, there you go again. Such wittiness and skill! :)
Thank you. You finally admit it.
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.