Security Increased for FLDS Hearing Today

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.

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.

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."

The thought police, alive and well.

Party ownership of the print media
made it easy to manipulate public opinion,
and the film and radio carried the process further.

16. Ministry Of Truth

The Ministry of Truth, Winston's place of work, contained, it was said, three thousand rooms above ground level, and corresponding ramifications below.

The Ministsry of Truth concerned itself with Lies. Party ownership of the print media made it easy to manipulate public opinion, and the film and radio carried the process further.

The primary job of the Ministry of Truth was to supply the citizens of Oceania with newspapers, films, textbooks, telescreen programmes, plays, novels - with every conceivable kind of information, instruction, or entertainment, from a statue to a slogan, from a lyric poem to a biological treatise, and from a child's spelling-book to a Newspeak dictionary.

Winston worked in the RECORDS DEPARTMENT (a single branch of the Ministry of Truth) editing and writing for The Times. He dictated into a machine called a speakwrite. Winston would receive articles or news-items which for one reason or another it was thought necessary to alter, or, in Newspeak, rectify. If, for example, the Ministry of Plenty forecast a surplus, and in reality the result was grossly less, Winston's job was to change previous versions so the old version would agree with the new one. This process of continuous alteration was applied not only to newspapers, but to books, periodicals, pamphlets, posters, leaflets, films, sound-tracks, cartoons, photographs - to every kind of literature or documentation which might conceivably hold any political or ideological significance.

When his day's work started, Winston pulled the speakwrite towards him, blew the dust from its mouthpiece, and put on his spectacles. He dialed 'back numbers' on the telescreen and called for the appropriate issues of The Times, which slid out of the pneumatic tube after only a few minutes' delay. The messages he had received referred to articles or news-items which for one reason or another it was thought necessary to rectify.

In the walls of the cubicle there were three orifices. To the right of the speakwrite, a small pneumatic tube for written messages; to the left, a larger one for newspapers; and on the side wall, within easy reach of Winston's arm, a large oblong slit protected by a wire grating. This last was for the disposal of waste paper. Similar slits existed in thousands or tens of thousands throughout the building, not only in every room but at short intervals in every corridor. For some reason they were nicknamed memory holes. When one knew that any document was due for destruction, or even when one saw a scrap of waste paper lying about, it was an automatic action to lift the flap of the nearest memory hole and drop it in, whereupon it would be whirled away on a current of warm air to the enormous furnaces which were hidden somewhere in the recesses of the building.

As soon as Winston had dealt with each of the messages, he clipped his speakwritten corrections to the appropriate copy of The Times and pushed them into the pneumatic tube. Then, with a movement which was as nearly as possible unconsicious, he crumpled up the original message and any notes that he himself had made, and dropped them into the memory hole to be devoured by the flames.

What happened in the unseen labyrinth to which the tubes led, he did not know in detail, but he did know in general terms. As soon as all the corrections which happened to be necessary in any particular number of The Times had been assembled and collated, that number would be reprinted, the original copy destroyed, and the corrected copy placed on the files in its stead.

In the cubicle next to him the little woman with sandy hair toiled day in day out, simply at tracking down and deleting from the Press the names of people who had been vaporized and were therefore considered never to have existed. And this hall, with its fifty workers or thereabouts, was only one-sub-section, a single cell, as it were, in the huge complexity of the Records Department. Beyond, above, below, were other swarms of workers engaged in an unimaginable multitude of jobs.

There were huge printing-shops and their sub editors, their typography experts, and their elaborately equipped studios for the faking of photographs. There was the tele-programmes section with its engineers, its producers and its teams of actors specially chosen for their skill in imitating voices; clerks whose job was simply to draw up lists of books and periodicals which were due for recall; vast repositories where the corrected documents were stored; and the hidden furnaces where the original copies were destroyed.

And somewhere or other, quite anonymous, there were the directing brains who co-ordinated the whole effort and laid down the lines of policy which made it necessary that this fragment of the past should be preserved, that one falsified, and the other rubbed out of existence.

Too bad you weren't here today to take a look at Heller v.

In an almost unimagineable end to the Religious Wars of the 16th Century a Roman Catholic majority on the USSC decided that there is an individual right to keep and bear arms.

When we last looked, in the 17th Century, the RCs in France (and presumably elsewhere) were cheering when Louis XIV RESCINDED the Edit of Nantes.

Lest we forget, the Hugenauts, the "other side" from the RCs in the earlier conflicts, had REFUSED TO STACK ARMS at the conclusion of the hostilities fearing that the state might once again undertake to support the religious inclinations of a future king of France. Their opinion was that their own religious rights and freedoms depended on the right to keep and bear arms.

You can't imagine how cheering it is to know that in America, if nowhere else, both traditional Protestants (descendants of the Huguenots) and Roman Catholics now hold, without doubt, that the Founders intended the right to keep and bear arms to be as fundamental right for the individual as the right to speak, or to have religious liberty, or to print, or to assemble and petition for redress of grievance, and so forth.

I'm glad you took the time to read through the successive posts to come up with a face saving reply.

Well, now that doesn't quite square up with my first post..and the one you posted to. Does it?

Just curious, how many sexual assault exams have you performed? As a former ER RN I've performed many.

I've performed none. Great you're a former ER RN...I've known hundreds. What does THAT have to do with the fact that a M.D. cannot tell if a woman is a virgin based on the lack of a hymen?

So you'll excuse me if I think the one who is laughing is the fool.

Any fool...( which I've been before, LOL! )....can look back on your posts to me...and see what transpired. I dunno, nor do I care what burr you are sitting on now...but I'm sorry you seem to be uptight.

BTW, I still wasn't laughing at you...I was laughing at the ridiculousness of the Princess Diana bit.

BWDIK?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diana,_Princess_of_Wales

**When she married Prince Charles in 1981, Diana, Princess of Wales, was a virgin, a status infamously tested by the Royal Family before they would allow the heir to the throne to step down the aisle.**

http://www.londonnet.co.uk/ln/guide/themes/diana_lovers.html

**Much was made of her virginity at the time— **

http://www.time.com/time/daily/special/diana/readingroom/8191/4_20.html

**In order to gain the approval of his family and their advisors, including his great-uncle Lord Mountbatten of Burma, any potential bride had to have an aristocratic background[citation needed], could not have been previously married, should be Protestant and, preferably, a virgin. Diana fulfilled all of these qualifications.**

http://www.biographyonline.net/people/biography_princess_diana.html

**At that period Prince Charles love life was linked with many glamorous women. He was even pressurized to find a wife as he was in his early thirties. Some of his marriage restriction were, he had to marry a virgin protestant and a member of the church of England with royal aristocratic background. Diana met this qualifications rather she had to prove one. She had to go through virginity test, to show that she has a spotless history. **

http://living.oneindia.in/celebrity/other-celebrities/princess-diana-biography-crash-death.html

Diana played sports and rode horses.

If you would like more references you can Google for yourself.

You have wasted enough of my time. Have a nice day.

I hope history won't repeat itself.

Here's an item from the Warren Jeffs trial:

A Utah judge has threatened attorneys with contempt of court for making unwanted calls to jurors in the trial of polygamous sect leader Warren S. Jeffs.

Fifth District Judge James L. Shumate's order says he "has been made aware of persons making unwanted, and, in some cases, harassing attempts to contact jurors in this case and members of their families."

David Finch, who served as jury foreman, was one of several jurors who received unwanted calls from a private investigator hired by Jeffs' attorneys.

"What he was trying to do was get something that would impeach the jurors so they could file an appeal," Finch said. "A couple of us called the judge and told him we were having a problem with that."

Shumate reminded attorneys of a professional conduct rule prohibiting them from contacting jurors who have made known "a desire not to communicate."

He also ordered that "no person" shall "harass, intimidate, or otherwise annoy members of the jury regarding members in this case."

The jurors convicted Jeffs on Sept. 19 of two felony counts of rape as an accomplice, which is punishable by five years to life in prison.

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.