text:
Polygamist Hoax
Authorities in Colorado are reporting that 33 year-old Rosita Swinton has been arrested for filing a false report in connection with the raid on a Texas Polygamist compound.
The brief report mentions that Swinton has been in trouble for filing false reports in the past. However, it is equivocal about whether this is the caller who alleged to be a "sixteen-year-old" pregnant mother who had been injured by an abusive "husband". According to the news report from TheDenverChanel.com- "The Texas Rangers were in Colorado Springs Wednesday as part of their investigation involving the compound in Texas. They left and have not filed any charges on Swinton, said Colorado Springs police spokesman Lt. Skip Arms."
To this point in the investigation of the compound there has been no sign of the supposed under aged mother who was the original complainant.
This information raises some questions about the evidence which caused the raid in the first place and places additional burdens on the evidence gathered in legitimate investigations prior to the raid and since.
In the meantime a legally mandated state hearing required to commence within fourteen days of the seizure of children by CPS began yesterday (April 17th) with officials alleging that women under 17 years of age were found either to be pregnant or to have already given birth. The raucous hearing, in which as many as 250 lawyers were said to have been present representing children and mothers, appears, from news reports, to have progressed glacially, with only two witnesses testifying while constantly being barraged by objections from lawyers.Posted by Lee Emmerich Jamison at April 18, 2008 10:13 AM
Lee thanks for following up on this issue. Seems at this point the calls to the hotline were the real deal however the person making the calls was not the real deal. What should the authorities in Texas have done different? If the cult had a record of allowing the older men to marry the underage girls and impregnant them what would have been your reaction if the CPS had not reacted to the phone calls and a disaster had struck the compound?
"Damned if they do and damned if they dont" seems to be the case here. So if it was me I would rather take the heat for doing something wrong than for not doing something. Seems CPS feels the same way, Proactive instead of reactive. Unfortunately they might have stepped on a few rights (but not 1st amendment rights) of the members of the group but what the hell we have allowed W and his minions to do the same. its just a GD piece of paper afterall. What say you?
No matter how we may stand on the issue, it looks like its in the hands of the court now.
ABC News
Never Too Young to Marry, Sect Girls Say
Texas Official Testifies Girls Said Teen Marriages and Pregnancies Were Desirable
Polygamy Garb Born of Rules
Garment Rules Used to Control Women's Individuality, Former Cult Members Say
Posted by: Linda H. at April 18, 2008 11:05 AM
Where is the 16 year Old Polygamist Victim?
The only way to be balanced in this issue is to admit to my biases and try to keep people informed as to the way things unfold. What seems really important here is that the legitimate functions of CPS not be compromised or undermined by what happens in San Angelo. If they seem to have jumped on an obvious hoax, and they could have identified the originating cellular tower and phone number within hours of an initial report, and then maintained the hoax that damages their credibility. If that was just the proximate trigger for an inevitable raid, and the caller was really not an issue, we should know that for the sake of their credibility.
As the recent experience of the Catholic Church has shown institutions live off of the trust people have in them. The ball is in CPS's court. It's up to them to prove they have not violated our trust.Posted by: Lee Jamison at April 18, 2008 11:20 AM
A news report based on a "maybe"? I wonder how Rosita Swinton, in Colorado Springs, even knew about the "Yearning for Zion Ranch in Eldorado, Texas".
Sympathy is beginning to swing towards the mothers, and I certainly think they should be reunited with their children. The question then becomes the fathers and bigamy and how to get the truth from people who look hypnotized.
It looks like TX has just got themselves a whole bunch of dependants that have no means of supporting themselves. I think the real LDS church, and other charitable groups, should step in to help the mothers and their children.Posted by: ohrealy at April 18, 2008 12:31 PM
ohrealy a faith based solution for a faith based problem? Seems like a good idea to me.
The children and mothers need to be able to get out of the mess they are in but taking the kids from the mothers and putting them into foster homes isnt the answer.
With the world we live in today I don't even see how polygamy can be an issue. We live in a society where serial polygamy (divorce) is, if not the norm, at least not at all unusual even among the minority who think it's important to be married when you're having children. Laws against polygamy in the current situation are a sham at best.Posted by: Lee Jamison at April 18, 2008 12:53 PM
Polygamy is not an issue. Although it is illegal, it is usually ignored the in southwest.
Child abuse, however, is NEVER ignored. And this constitutes a pretty horrifying example of child abuse. Not only is marrying and impregnating a 14 year old wrong, but knowing about its occurrence and not saying anything is also criminal.
If there was no child abuse, then there will be a lot of explaining to do. But as we know, the religious view of women as chattel, or property, is not uncommon, and it can be taken to extremes, such as we see with this case of apparent child abuse.Posted by: phx8 at April 18, 2008 1:12 PM
There is a major difference between divorce, in which women have rights, and polygamy, in which women have no rights.
Divorced couples rarely have children with more than 2 spouses in a lifetime. Most of the divorced people that I know have only had children with 1 spouse. Many do not have any children at all.
In polygamy, does the first wife have any right of refusal over the additional wives? If not, then she is being forced to enter into a relationship without her consent, and is not a free person.Posted by: ohrealy at April 18, 2008 1:17 PM
Most of the kids were receiving welfare benefits anyway. Jeffs and FLDS orchestrated it that way. He has taught them to lie, switch identities and play to the media to thwart legitimate criminal investigations.
It's only about rights and ideals to those living in ivory towers. They are getting a fair hearing and day in court. I hope it works out for the kids' sake.Posted by: googlumpus at April 18, 2008 2:01 PM
The women that I have seen on TV reports all look thin and sickly, or wearing clothes that are too big for them. I suspect that they were being controlled and punished in some way. It looks a lot like a Jonestown brainwashing cult, but that must just be the way the media is presenting it.
The children looked healthy in the reports from before they were removed. I wouldn't object to them receving food stamps, as some have complained. There must be a record somewhere, of who applied for them, where they were used, and what their statements were when they applied. If fraud was commited, there could be a recovery of property from the FLDS church.
The question is going to be who are the fathers, which I don't see them getting at without DNA tests, since it looks like the women are not going to cooperate.Posted by: ohrealy at April 18, 2008 2:19 PM
Lee, it's really incredible to think that you still have such a concern for what's shaking loose in this issue. Do you support the idea of child abuse and/or polygamy? It almost seems so based on your intent to show this as some radical bureacratic pillaging of this complex.
Have you seen some of the interviews with the "wives" and mothers? They look and act like zombies….with that "nobody's home" blank stare and total inability to either comprehend, or answer the questions. What a great way to perpetuate the population of the sect.
It sounds like some of the latest is that the judge is trying to determine how to place the children in foster care.
"They look and act like zombies….with that "nobody's home" blank stare and total inability to either comprehend, or answer the questions."
Janedoe I would say, in their defense, that were I wife 2 of 6 openly talking in front of a camera about an illegal activity or two Im involved with, I might appear to have that nobody's home look myself. Being a shy person I would also be uncomfortable in front of the camera in general. The women Ive seen seem to comprehend just fine after the time delay involved with remote interviews. I also think they realize that anything they say can and will be used against them in a court of law and by the elders of the group. I sense desperation and I believe they are truely worried about the children. "Between a rock and a hard place" springs to mind.
jane doe,
I am supporting neither child abuse nor underaged marriage, but, so far the state hasn't been able even to find a complainant. The complainant now clearly is CPS and it is up to the state to prove their contentions.
Polygamy is not sufficient cause to remove all the community's children since fathering children by many women is common in our culture. Furthermore, the state will have to show that the whole community functioned as a single household, something I'm personally certain they will lose on appeal.
Absolutely, I have my biases. I think the state has overreached here, but, as you say, we will have to see how it works out in court.Posted by: Lee Jamison at April 18, 2008 3:48 PM
You know Lee as I think about this issue I think the reason it took 4 years is because this is the first time CPS was involved. Hasnt it been the state or local law enforcement up to this point in similar situations? Maybe someone just figured out recently to use CPS to deal with this group.
At the time of the raid CPS probably didnt know (nor care)the calls were not true. To wait for an investigation by the Texas Rangers would take a week or so as shown in your links. I dont think it damages their credibility by being Proactive as much as a law enforcemnt agencies credibility would be damaged. After all they are bringing the children's case in front of the judge rather quickly, much faster than a criminal trial. The raid and subsequent actions seems, at this point, to focus on the safety of the children and not the polygamy aspect of the group. Thats not to say the law enforcement types wont jump on the other issues now that they have gained access to the computers of the group, which could be a topic of discussion regarding violated rights, but Im sure time will tell. I just dont see the 1st amendment right of religious beliefs being violated so far.Posted by: j2t2 at April 18, 2008 3:51 PM
From the Go San Angelo article linked: "Girls at the YFZ Ranch were forced into marriage and gave birth as young as 13, a Child Protective Services investigator testified ". If the father of the child of a 13 year old mother is an adult, he should be arrested and prosecuted. The church itself should be forced to conform with the laws of the state in which they live. If a marriage is performed between a 13 year old and an adult, the person performing the marriage should also be prosecuted.Posted by: ohrealy at April 18, 2008 4:32 PM
As the saying goes - "Where's there's smoke there's fire."
Frankly I don't have the foggiest what the state of Texas should do. I do wonder why this sect has continued operating for as long as it has, since it has blatantly been around for some time.
I also know that these types of atrocities should never have been allowed to occur, and just like a child who grows up in an alcoholic, drug addicted, physically, or emotionally abusive home, these children deserve better.
Unfortunately, in this case, its not just one child, but hundreds. Hundreds of young people who will suffer because this situation has been allowed to continue. Granted it is a shame there are this many children involved in one case, but there are thousands more who are being abused as well, who are continue to stay in their abusive homes. I am just grateful that these children are hopefully being helped. At least some help is better than none at all. I hope.
I will admit my heart breaks for their families (who knew they were breaking the law), I find I am not only sadden for them, but also for all the other children out there who are not being helped.
More Than 20 Teens From Polygamist Ranch Got Pregnant
Testimony on Under-Age Pregnancies in SectExpert: Polygamous sect belief system is abusive
Testimony on Under-Age Pregnancies in Sect
Why Do They Dress That Way?
Child Abuse - The Hidden Bruises
Child Abuse and Neglect
Sexual Abuse Statistics
Lee, I still don't get it….
Underaged females having children sired by "legal" aged men, is still a condition of rape! And I don't give a rip what culture they are connected to, it's still rape. And since they are still considered children themselves, it's also subject to child abuse laws, compounded by adding their children to the scenario. Just because they choose to practice a "religion" that sets its' own way of life and rules to live by, does not allow them to evade and avoid the laws of the land.
There still doesn't appear to be concrete evidence to determine if the informer was legitimate or not. If it's an issue of the original 16 year old making a phone call, then it seems legitimate to continue protecting her identity and existance. If it wasn't because of that, then once they had accessed the compound and discovered all that was going on, they would have been totally remiss in walking away.
Texas polygamist sect is accused of indoctrinating girls
SAN ANGELO, Texas - Girls in the west Texas polygamous sect enter into underage marriages without resistance because they are ruthlessly indoctrinated from birth to believe disobedience will lead to their damnation, experts for the state testified Friday at a custody hearing for 416 youngsters.
The renegade Mormon sect's belief system "is abusive. The culture is very authoritarian," said Dr. Bruce Perry, a psychiatrist and an authority on children in cults.
Now this I believe.
Lee: you just really want the government to be in the wrong on this (and probably many other things), rather than any concern for those women and children.
Multiple marriages are one thing, and perfectly legal. Polygamy is not justified because multiple marriages are legal. Nor are they the same thing at all.
jane doe and womanmarine,
Once again, I do not support the underage marriage of young girls and consider such to be an abuse. If the doctrine of this community is that girls should be paired to middle-aged men at their first "flower" and be suckling babes at nature's first convenience I'm all for placing the not-so-gentle-men on softball teams at the Wynne Unit here in Huntsville where they can find out what "manhandling" is all about.
However, I am enough of a student of history to know that governments cover themselves in a concern for the morality of their people at every opportunity, when it suits them. Hitler's concern for the morality of his people was much admired in his time, and the government of China continues to parade populations of experts on the necessity of protecting the moral fiber of its people to this very day.
Furthermore, I will be most pleased with the experts and sources of information when they show a smidgen of independence from a set of people trying to cover their asses. My historian friends like to point out that a thousand papers written about one piece of evidence amount to a single source. Right now that source is the CPS and a group of people circling their wagons around the CPS. To that extent it is good the system provides for both sides to be represented before the courts. Somebody must hold the government's feet to the fire even if they have stood up in the long run for the wrong side.
That's the system. Bad people get representation right along with good people. In spite of that our general bias toward trust in the government puts hundreds of innocent people in prison for crimes they didn't commit. Fancy that!
Am I a knee-jerk distruster of government? I've twice been the foreman of juries that put people in prison. Didn't like it a bit, but that was the way the evidence went.
Nonetheless, I'm going to by-God insist the government PROVE its case. Especially when the authorities can't seem to find a pretext to act on evidence they've been gathering for some supposed FOUR YEARS until they get a fake cell phone call from a thirty-three-year-old in Colorado posing as a sixteen-year-old in Texas.Posted by: Lee Jamison at April 18, 2008 9:54 PM
That hasn't been proved yet "fake cell phone call from a thirty-three-year-old in Colorado posing as a sixteen-year-old in Texas".
And, as many people have posted, CPS is doing it's job when they get a report. It is in the court, and fast at that. Even if it comes out that the report was fake (and that person should be charged), the findings based on the resulting investigation should not be negated or thrown out.
I'm with you on the jury thing, although I wasn't foreman. I don't believe in the death penalty and hope to never be on one of those juries. With my belief it isn't likely that I ever will be. Jury duty is hard if you take it seriously. I was a little put out by some of my fellow jury members.
Thanks for your considered response, it's always nice to be able to express our differences without belittling each other. Viva La Difference!!
I tend to agree with you, except on two major points.
Even if the ,"girl" is not found, there is apparently enough evidence to show that in no small part, statutory rape has occurred. If the authorities can show that they would have arrived at or discovered this abuse via another legal means, then it doesn't matter whether they find the "girl" or not.
Under the LAW, once ANYONE a report has been made, they must react. If possible abuse is occurring, has occurred, or is going to occur, an investigation MUST take place. CPS did this. This true regardless of whether the complaint is legitimate or not.
You stated earlier that you, yourself, have had this experience. I know how utterly humiliating it must be to have this kind of report made.
However it is this way in order to HELP the CHILDREN - who are are frequently at the mercy of their parents.
Yes, their have been many governmental abuses in history, and I suspect, unfortunately there will be others, but I, for one, would rather err on the side of the children than that of the abuser.
I have to say that I'm fairly creeped-out by this religious sect and can find few if any redeeming qualities in anything they're about. Something that's only been reinforced by watching them give their zombie-like interviews and by learning more about their beliefs and attitudes towards women.
Having said that, however, all of us should have a serious problem with the idea of the government confiscating children from their parents BEFORE any legal proceedings have taken place which evaluate each individual on a case-by-case basis.
If a child is pregnant, remove that child. Don't remove all. Have a complete and fair investigation, let everyone have their day in court, and ONLY THEN remove additional children.
This is a truly disturbing precedent and one that shouldn't be tolerated. We have a legal system for a reason, and none of our rights mean anything if we don't allow some of our citizens to have them just because we find their beliefs and outward behaviors creepy and disturbing (as I definitely do). If one of these children is pregnant, it could mean a lot of different things. It could be another child who impregnated her OR an adult who is breaking the rules within the cult. We don't know without a fair trial, and an anonymous phone call is not a trial.
Personally, I happen to think that there is some crazy stuff going on with that cult and those children probably should be removed. But let's do it right. Follow the process of law.
If a pregnant teen is grounds for essentially confiscating children from an entire group of people without roper legal proceedings first taking place, there a LOT of groups which could suffer the same fate. Ever looked at the rates of teen-pregnancy among African-Americans? Would we tolerate the government rounding up black children on this basis? Absolutely not.Posted by: Loyal Opposition at April 19, 2008 12:06 AM
"Even if it comes out that the report was fake", then the lady in question must have psychic powers and she should get an award from a child protection group.
"teen-pregnancy among African-Americans",
A former co-worker of mine, a grandmother raising her grandaughter while the mother was on dialysis and awaiting a kidney transplant, ended up suing the parents of the boy who got her pregnant, for child support. They were both underage.
We're talking about 50 year olds with 16 or less year olds in TX. Where are these guys anyway?Posted by: ohrealy at April 19, 2008 12:33 AM
I'm shocked that someone would bring up the minority angle.
If this woman did game the system, I hope she is cleared, by nulification if no other way, and given her just kudos.
The FLDS has gamed the system for years. Their "leader" is a convicted child rapist.
I have to guess those asserting that children not being currently raped, encourage other forms of abuse.
Indoctrinating child rapists, queing up little girls for rape, silencing mothers of raped children, banishing boys that threaten to be prefered by 13 year olds to 50 year old rapists,and abandoning them.
Take your pick. Whichever form of abuse you wish to aver for.
Likely many children will be returned, hopefully under some form of CPS monitoring.
While I respect privacy and the sanctity of home and church, there has been no violation of law here. Thank goodness for courageous law enforcement, CPS and judges for doing the right thing.
Idealogues who think this is some form of rights violation, get a clue. You are swaddled in your non reality. It's why most think you are idiots, fools or both, and why they are right. And stay far away from my kids, as well.Posted by: googlumpugus at April 19, 2008 2:15 AM
"Yes, their have been many governmental abuses in history, and I suspect, unfortunately there will be others, but I, for one, would rather err on the side of the children than that of the abuser."
Linda H perhaps that is the problem. The CPS has just taken 416 children from their homes at a compound in Texas because of a phony phone call. Because CPS err's on the side of the children as an MO they have just taken 416 children from their parents. Certainly some of these children that are 4 and 5 years old would be better off with their mothers.
The real problem is the men have disappeared into the night while the women have taken the brunt of the government 's assult on the men of the compound. The children will not be better off, the mothers will not be better off and the men who are the actual targets of the government will walk away scot free. Go figure.
These children did not look to be mistreated, unfed, uneducated or sickly in any way. Yet it has been determined that they should go live in foster homes with total strangers for the rest of their child hood. All because of the men that may or may not have taken the occasional bride when they were 14 or so. 416 children must be removed from their families forever due to the possibility that they may be forced into marriage before they are ready. Is this the best thing for the children?
Just this quick their fate has been determined and their lives irrevocably changed forever because CPS has err'ed on the side of the children. The men who caused the problem are not held responsible yet the innoncent children are made to pay the price because the government of the state of Texas has allowed 1 small part of the government to make the decision that these children may be at risk years from now. Out of the frying pan and into the fire comes to mind.
How many truely deprived children in Houston, Dallas, El Paso and San Antonio will not be able to be saved from wretched conditions because the system is overburdened with these 416 additional children?
Is this really erring on the side of the children? It seems punishment of the innoncent has been achieved but prosecution of the guilty has been forgotten.At most temporary custody should be arranged for the children and a real resolution to the problem be found. This is a lose lose for all concerned.
Using CPS as a branch of law enforcement needs to be scrutinized very carefully. In fact it should be outlawed as this is one of the worst possible outcomes for the children. I mean afterall the worst that happened to the children was they married way to soon and bore children before they were ready to do so. Now they are subject to lord knows what. Im willing to bet that at least 5% (20 pregnant from reports works out to the same) of these children will suffer worse fates than what they faced before the CPS interferred in their lives. What say you?
If the government is going to interfere with the lives of the citizens of this nation they had better have a resolution that works better than this one or they need to get out of the way.
"These children did not look to be mistreated, unfed, uneducated or sickly in any way."
Wow!! You can tell by looking?
"Yet it has been determined that they should go live in foster homes with total strangers for the rest of their child hood."
No, it hasn't. It is temporary while they try to sort out relationships by DNA testing.
"All because of the men that may or may not have taken the occasional bride when they were 14 or so."
Occasional? From what has been studied, this is the norm.
"416 children must be removed from their families forever due to the possibility that they may be forced into marriage before they are ready."
Where to you get forever?? See above.
"The men who caused the problem are not held responsible"
Not yet maybe. There is still court and the investigations.
"It seems punishment of the innoncent has been achieved but prosecution of the guilty has been forgotten."
To be removed from an abusive situation is punishment? Not forgotten, still being investigated.
"I mean afterall the worst that happened to the children was they married way to soon and bore children before they were ready to do so."
No comment.
The Danger here in taking the side of the cult should be plain: the woman could have been lying about who she was, but that does not mean she was speaking falsely about the cult.
Some Republicans would like to make this into Waco, Pt. 2, and sympathize with a poor, government persecuted religious community. I would say, hold off on supporting these people until the DNA tests are finished. Otherwise, y'all may end up defending statutory rape and child molestation.Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at April 19, 2008 9:36 AM
In a case regarding child abuse, do you really want to be handing a child back to parents suspected of it?
You can't be too careful in these cases, because the child's life and psychological well-being is at stake. Worse yet, the abuser could intimidate the kid into accepting their abuse once more.Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at April 19, 2008 9:41 AM
Even if it comes out that the report was fake (and that person should be charged), the findings based on the resulting investigation should not be negated or thrown out. Posted by: womanmarine at April 18, 2008 10:15 PM
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
The emphasis is mine because without a ligitimate first-hand witness's signature, there is no grounds for a warrant to be granted. Second-hand knowledge is not constitutional grounds for a judge's signature. Where are the witnesses to this probable cause? What did the judge issuing the warrant for search and seizure have to say about an anonamous person/he said/she said causing this type of government action? The information must be documented and submitted to the judge. Evidence is physical and subject to discovery.
It's been stated suspicion has existed for 4 years. Was any physical evidence aquired thru investigation during these four years? Are there other person's giving testimony pertaining to first hand knowledge of illegal activity? Or, they exhaust their legal avenues or ignore the legal avenues of investigation in favor of bashing in the door and searching every persons, houses, papers, and effects in hopes of finding some way to accuse someone of a crime?
My guess, with quotes such as Linda's:
Yes, their have been many governmental abuses in history, and I suspect, unfortunately there will be others, but I, for one, would rather err on the side of the
children than that of the abuser.
Posted by: Linda H. at April 18, 2008 11:44 PM
we give the government the ability to disreguard constitutional guidelines that are the law in favor of the
children than that of the abuser
child than that of the parent
customer than that of the business
devorse plantiff than that of the defendant
neighbor's property than that of the neighbor
neighbor's sensiblities than that of the speech.
Some Republicans would like to make this into Waco, Pt. 2, and sympathize with a poor, government persecuted religious community. I would say, hold off on supporting these people until the DNA tests are finished. Otherwise, y'all may end up defending statutory rape and child molestation. Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at April 19, 2008 09:36 AM
How Karl Rove'ian of you Stephen Daugherty! Welcome to the dark side where you suggest not supporting someone or something because you could end up on the wrong side. Ignore the constitutional implications/abuses. I guess that only pertains to "Some Republicans", eh! Stephen Daugherty? Congratulations on not seeing our basic law being thrown aside and hundreds of family's lifes thrown aside in favor of getting the one guy we were after to begin with. We'll worry about getting evidence later.
Posted by: Weary Willie at April 19, 2008 10:59 AM
Wearie Willie-
First, I think your constitutional interpretation hardly represents consensus opinion.
Additionally, you run right over an important ethical quandary: A call comes in like this, with a woman claiming to be a part of this rather secretive, rather closed off cult. If you don't investigate, you're taking your chances that it's real, and that you will later have to justify your inaction.
What's happening right now is that we're trying to establish the parentage of these children. Evidently, in investigating the original, false claim, they came up with some evidence which justified further concern.
The evidence will determine whether the children have been in an abusive system, if the laws of the state of Texas were broken. Suspicion has been raised. Let it either be discredited, or confirmed, before you take a position. Wait to find out just what you're supporting. If it's truly a hoax, you will be vindicated. If it's a matter of somebody's tip off uncovering a real problem, you will have avoided the dubious distinction of having supported supremely offensive conduct.Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at April 19, 2008 11:58 AM
Suspicion is not probable cause.
All of what you say is happening now should have been done over the last 4 years. I'm leaning towards it being done and no evidence was found.
Evidence must be used to aquire a search warrant.
Unless you're George Bush! Right?
You have already painted me as a supporter of child abuse.
Suspicion has been raised. Let it either be discredited, or confirmed, before you take a position. Wait to find out just what you're supporting. If it's truly a hoax, you will be vindicated.
I am a supporter of the Constitution and ethical and legal investigative tactics of the government.Posted by: Weary Willie at April 19, 2008 12:09 PM
Evidently, in investigating the original, false claim, they came up with some evidence which justified further concern.
The evidence they came up with was the phone call! An anonamous phone call from someone in a differnt state! Who lied about who she was!
Hardly, constitutional grounds for this type of broad reaching action.
One word of caution, to myself and others, we really do not have the entire story - only what the spokespeople tell the media, and what the media can uncover. At this point everything is on a TEMPORARY basis. We do not know what the judge, lawyers, parents, or children will say. We can not actually get into the compounds where they resided. Until there is something concrete decided about this situation, I suggest we try to keep our suppositions to ourselves.
I don't trust the government any more than the rest of you, but I can pray that maybe this time, with the entire country watching it will do the RIGHT thing - according to our nation's laws - and not because it satisfies the public.
Weary Willie,
The only Constitutional Amendment that MIGHT come into play is the First, when it supports the freedom of religion.
While I can understand your point about illegal search and seizure, in this case the BODIES of the babies, child\mothers, and fathers ARE the evidence.I suspect the evidence will be found in the DNA of the babies that have been born.
There have already been LAWS PASSED, and ENFORCED regarding children and sex - its called STATUTORY RAPE.
It is also against the laws of this country to have more than one wife. POLYGAMY is simply illegal. Period.
I also want to know is why it take so long for the Sheriff's department to investigate. Surely in four years they found some evidence.
I simply can cannot believe you actually believe what you wrote when you stated:
"I mean after all the worst that happened to the children was they married way to soon and bore children before they were ready to do so."
You are way too intelligent to believe this junk.
Other than than, I will leave Womanmarine and her summations to your reply as my reaction to your comment. Way to go, Lady!!!!Posted by: Linda H. at April 19, 2008 12:54 PM
Four-hundred children snatched away and relocated.
In fifteen years, when they're available for a draft they will have experience.
The only Constitutional Amendment that MIGHT come into play is the First, when it supports the freedom of religion.
Posted by: Linda H. at April 19, 2008 12:54 PM
The fourth amendment and the fourteenth amendment also comes into play.
Vast numbers, the strength of 2 infantry companies, of innocent people have been ripped apart and deciminated into a so-called, "Protective Service"!
A much simplier solution must be available. This type of behavior by these "Protective Services" has a much broader scope and we are worse off for it.
"I simply can cannot believe you actually believe what you wrote when you stated:
"I mean after all the worst that happened to the children was they married way to soon and bore children before they were ready to do so."
You are way too intelligent to believe this junk."
Linda first of all thank you for the indirect compliment of mistaking my post for Lee's writings. However you may owe Lee an apology as it was j2t2 that made this comment.
As for the comment I was under the mistaken belief that the judge's orders were permenent and not temporary, as womenmarine pointed out in an earlier post. That being said I to would like to see justice served in this matter, I just dont think permenent removal of the children from the mothers accomplish's the task. At the time I was posting this comment I was thinking of past abuses of children, as an example in Florida where kids that were in state custody were lost and/or missing from state authorities. There have been other news stories such as kids that have been tied up in closets ,kids that have been starved and so on. Comparatively this group doesnt seem nearly as extreme.
Maybe we can get to the point, now that we have all the facts straight.
Let's just hope they don't burn the place down.
"Wow!! You can tell by looking?"
Yep I may not be right but I can make a judgement call from looking at the videos that they appear to be clothed and fed and educated not locked up in a closet and malnourished.
"No, it hasn't. It is temporary while they try to sort out relationships by DNA testing."
My mistake WM I had thought I heard the orders were permenent. I stand corrected.
"Occasional? From what has been studied, this is the norm."
I have heard on news reports that this happened but not as the norm. Not that it is right either way.
"Where to you get forever?? See above."
See above
"Not yet maybe. There is still court and the investigations."
True hopefully justice will be served to the right people.
"To be removed from an abusive situation is punishment? Not forgotten, still being investigated."
To be removed from the mothers because of abuse by the father, and placed into foster care may not be the best thing to happen to these children IMHO. The fathers/husbands are the problem they need to be removed from the compound. But if you ask the children Im betting they would say its punishment to be taken away from their mothers.
Posted by: j2t2 at April 19, 2008 2:19 PM
Just keep in mind that the mothers allowed whatever happened. This is just as abusive.
Prove it.
WM Maybe the mothers are victims to. While some may have volunteered for this type of lifestyle I would think many grew up in it.
Im just not a big believer in seperating the child from the mother unless it is really necessary. And to put them in foster care permenetly should be the very last resort.
Im also not a big fan of CPS using the power they have for social engineering reasons or to help law enforcement do their job. The children should not be pawns in this situation.
As I have posted previously Im not against CPS and the people that have this hard job, especially when they are doing things on a temporary basis but we all need to tread lightly when it comes to permenent orders IMHO.Posted by: j2t2 at April 19, 2008 2:39 PM
but we all need to tread lightly when it comes to permenent orders
Do you mean the Constitution, j2t2?
WW When the parents accept welfare checks from the government to provide for their children arent the welfare agencies responsible for monitoring these people?
If CPS is part of the welfare system would they not then have the right to make sure the children are taken care of. Afterall the money and goods received from Welfare is for the childen.
Im not sure, Im just wondering seeing that CPS is not technically law enforcement if they are subject to ensuring our rights enumerated in the 4th amendment?
LO- In a case regarding child abuse, do you really want to be handing a child back to parents suspected of it?
You can't be too careful in these cases, because the child's life and psychological well-being is at stake. Worse yet, the abuser could intimidate the kid into accepting their abuse once more.
You cannot be too careful—exactly. But confiscating hundreds of children is not being careful at all.
The ONLY time you are justified in removing a child from her/his parents without first having fair legal proceedings in which all parties get to make their case is when you have solid reason to believe that the child is in imminent danger.
As I understand it, this group allegedly permits the marriage of minors once they reach adolescence. I've heard nothing along the lines of anyones "life" being at risk, as you put it. On what basis, then, do you remove pre-adolescent children and from their parents before hearings? The worst case scenario appears that many of this children are in danger of harm years in the future, so I see no reason to not let a fair and patient legal process take place before essentially confiscating these children from their parents. Removing some children in a targeted fashion would be one thing, but removing all before any real investigation on a case-by-case basis is an outrage.
"Suspicion" is, I agree, grounds for initiating legal proceedings. And like I've said before, I really do believe that these all of these kids would probably be a lot better off removed from this cult. But it has to be done right, and just because we suspect things and don't like a group's beliefs and practices doesn't mean that they shouldn't be afforded a presumption of innocence—an assumption which is a bedrock principle of our legal system.Posted by: Loyal Opposition at April 19, 2008 3:08 PM
WW When the parents accept welfare checks from the government to provide for their children arent the welfare agencies responsible for monitoring these people?
Are they? The answer is no. They met the requirements when applying for this assistance.
If CPS is part of the welfare system would they not then have the right to make sure the children are taken care of. Afterall the money and goods received from Welfare is for the childen. Im not sure, Im just wondering seeing that CPS is not technically law enforcement if they are subject to ensuring our rights enumerated in the 4th amendment? Posted by: j2t2 at April 19, 2008 03:01 PM
It would be much more cost effective if you just gave this responsiblility (ensuring our rights enumerated in the 4th amendment) to Wallmart!Posted by: Weary Willie at April 19, 2008 4:01 PM
"It would be much more cost effective if you just gave this responsiblility (ensuring our rights enumerated in the 4th amendment) to Wallmart!"
While this may make sense to you WW I have no idea what you are trying to say.
LO said "On what basis, then, do you remove pre-adolescent children and from their parents before hearings?"
Lo I think this is how law enforcement is using CPS to gather evidence they are not able to get otherwise. This is the "using the childrens as pawns" part of the issue. Once the children are in temporary custody the parents will need to comply with any and all requests that CPS may make in order to get custody of the children returned to them. Very effective and evidently legal.Posted by: j2t2 at April 19, 2008 4:43 PM
What some need to keep in mind, too..is that for these children, be they the mothers ( and children themselves )or their offspring, a cycle has just been broken. With any luck, it will prove to be a permanent break! While abuse is often cyclical, cult life is as well, without outside intervention. These children may well have been saved from a future as "zombie" women and perverted beliefs on how to be a "man".
I don't think there has been any viloation of civil rights….how the hell do you violate the rights of a criminal living outside multiple laws??
Some of these arguments seem to be just for the sake of argument…;(
"how the hell do you violate the rights of a criminal living outside multiple laws??"
Well it used to be by:
1. no presumption of innocence
2. illegal search and seizure
3. no due process
Any more who knows.
Right now there is no one charged with any crime is there? It seems they are just hunting for evidence now. The man with the criminal record they claimed they were hunting for was in Az not in Tx.
Really? You mean this was all a waste of time?
No one's charged with a crime? I will Charge! Deception. Theft by deception. A good law.
Not used enough.Posted by: Weary Willie at April 19, 2008 7:10 PM
Weary Willie-
I have not painted you as a supporter of child abuse. I'm just warning you that just like the author of the original entry, you're arguing from ignorance about the nature of the situation. That ignorance could lead you to mistakenly support people who may be illegally marrying young teenage girls and engaging in what we consider child molestation under the law. I'm not saying that you are setting out intentionally to support such awful abuse.
If some girl calls them about being forced into an abusive situation, that's their probable cause, so long as they have a good faith belief that it's true. To ignore it at this point would be negligent on their part.
As for your second quote, I believe this is a case of the organization's secrecy working against it. There are kids who don't even have birth certificates being raised by the cult. The polygamy element of this, probably engaged in with the cover of it being a spiritual marriage (they don't prosecute folks for having multiple partners or open marriages) rather than a legal one, creates an extra layer of ambiguity. That they're tight-lipped about what's going on tops off that mystery.
All in all, it makes it very difficult for investigators to determine what's going on. That's what the genetic tests are for. It's the only real way to puzzle out what suspicions are founded or unfounded, to determine the age of the parents, the parentage of the children, and whether some branches in the family tree don't separate the way they're supposed to under the law.
The thing to keep in mind is that if these tests come up negative, they will clear the group of the charges. Suspicion will be laid to rest, and the authorities will have lost their authority to continue their investigation along those lines.Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at April 19, 2008 7:15 PM
We are all, when we deal with the powers of the government in addressing what they allege to us as crime, are, until we have insisted on their proving to us an open and transparent process, acting out of ignorance.
It is highly unlikely the society that nurtures and sustains us will be overwhelmed by religious minorities practicing abuse of children. It has far more often been the case that societies are eaten out from the inside by governments that first abused distrusted minorities.
There is nothing ignoble about erring on the "side of the children", but there is also nothing ignoble about recognizing where the greater potential danger to the whole of society historically has lain.Posted by: Lee Jamison at April 19, 2008 11:13 PM
I happen to think it is abusive to parade girls AND women around in revealing clothing as though they were sexual status symbols. Yet, as a society, we routinely do- even in church, for goodness sake!
Back away from that perspective a little and one can make out the outline of a cultural AESTHETIC standard that we take to be the truth. People raised in the midst of a culture can't see how others would perceive that culture abusing them.
I see abuses where my fellow Americans don't. We see abuses where these FLDS people, even the children, may not.
If you know absolute truth you've got better connections than the rest of us do.Posted by: Lee Jamison at April 19, 2008 11:34 PM
WW, LO, and j2t2,
Personally, I think most of the folks here are trying to wrestle with is the idea that these parents appear to have been found guilty instead of innocent, instead of the other way around. We have been raised and taught that we are all innocent until proven guilty. It is the nature of Americans to growl when they feel this system has been turned upside down. As we should !!!
However, this is not Criminal Court, this is Family Court and somewhat different rules and laws apply in Family Court. The Judge has a great deal more flexibility in Family Court, than in Criminal Court.
While I can't speak specifically to the laws of Texas, in most states on the East Coast, CFS or DSS, cannot remove a child from their home. It requires the intervention of Law Enforcement who actually perform the removal. It sounds pretty hokie, but the child is placed in or taken by the officer, and then the officer turns the child over to the worker.
It then it becomes the Child Services Worker's responsibility to determine what should be done next. It the CSF of DSS determines that the child is indeed in danger, then they must schedule a date with Family Court and get the case placed on the Family Court Docket. If one wants to put it bluntly this actually means that CSF of DSS is the organization that finds the evidence, not law enforcement.
If CSF oF DSS determines that the child is indeed in danger, either through negligence, or physical abuse, the parents are required to attend a court hearing with a JUDGE within 3 business days of the removal. It is the JUDGE who makes the final determination regrading the temporary custody of the child. The JUDGE also informs the parents that they have the right to a lawyer - either one they wish to get on their own, or one though the public defender's office.
Frankly considering the size of this case I'm amazed that the hearings have taken place as rapidly as they have. They are having to do DNA tests to determine the patronage of this many children - since it is so difficult to even determine just who the parents actually are, the rules must be bent while DNA tests are run to determine parenthood.
As to those of you who think the mothers are being illegally or innocently harmed by the removal of their children because they may have grown up in this same culture, none of you can deny that ignorance of the law is an excuse to break it.
Besides most people would agree that one of the MAJOR ROLES of motherhood is to protect their children. In this case, it appears many of them failed to do this.
As for the children,I'll leave that to Jane Doe
"…abuse is often cyclical, cult life is as well, without outside intervention. These children may well have been saved from a future as "zombie" women and perverted beliefs on how to be a "man".
By-the-way, I would imagine a treatment program will be set up for these parents, so that their children can be restored to them. As long as these men and women make an honest effort to follow the plans derived by both the CFS and DSS and the JUDGE these children will most likely be returned to their mothers, many by the end of the year.
I can only imagine the public out cry when that occurs.
One way or the other,I do believe that the mothers, and fathers, if they are willing, should remain in the lives of their children - as long as they agree to follow the laws of our nation, and do not disrupt the childhoods.Posted by: Linda H. at April 20, 2008 12:51 AM
"Frankly considering the size of this case I'm amazed that the hearings have taken place as rapidly as they have."
It was 1 hearing for 416 children, the individual hearings are to take place by Mid May according to the news.
"As to those of you who think the mothers are being illegally or innocently harmed by the removal of their children because they may have grown up in this same culture, none of you can deny that ignorance of the law is an excuse to break it."
So family court is not that much different after all except by taking the child from the parents without proving the abuse they can force DNA testing upon all concerned, which then can be used against them in a criminal trial right? Seems like the easy way to find out who did what to who and to prove paternity, which would then mean Welfare can go after dad for the money taxpayers via welfare are contributing to this FLDS group, which is a religion, which the government isnt supposed to be supporting. Well except once they prove paternity and can determine at what age the child was sexually abused the criminal courts will put the bad dads in jail. So by bypassing the criminal courts and the rights of the individuals in the initial stages of this rescue the state of texas has basically came in the back door , bypassed the protections of the constitution (which would now include the 5th amendment protection against self incrimination) of the moms and dads involved and accomplished their goal of breaking up this group. All of this without even going after the polygamy aspect of the issue.
So Linda H. does the ends justify the means? The intent certainly is a good and noble intent, but as they say the road to hell is paved with good intentions. First it was the druggies now those with different religious beliefs, who's next and when are they coming for us is the obvious question. Another question that springs to mind is now that CPS has been used to rid the state from this group what will they be used for next? Political dissenters? Any and all criminal cases where the suspects have children?
From the founding fathers:
"Is it a right or a duty in society to take care of their infant members in opposition to the will of the parent? How far does this right and duty extend? —to guard the life of the infant, his property, his instruction, his morals?
Thomas Jefferson 1817"
This quote was in reference to education. At the time I dont think anything these people have been accused of was against the law, although I'm not sure of that.
A police officer acting in good faith (believing that a child/person is in danger or in eminent danger) legally in every state that I am aware of enter a residence or compound as it may be to find assess and deal with the potential crimes alleged, even without a warrant If in the course of that said investigation an officer of the law or court finds a child, or other person in dire or unfit circumstances must act. I believe the police and CPS acted appropriately in this instance. The police and CPS in this particular instance where acting on what they believed to be an actual call from an endangered teen. It would not be prudent to launch an investigation and take the kind of time that would have been involved if they where interested in timely action.
Though the separation of the children from their mothers may be damaging to those children, until it is sorted out weather those mothers where complicit in the abuse of said children, it is imperative that the children remain in controlled safe environments until the mothers can be checked out, since abuse was widespread in this instance.
I haven't seen anyone address the issue that probably in many if not most of these cases the mothers also are victims of abuse. The youngest I read reported with a birthed child was 13, hardly an adult.
I really feel a lot of pity for those children and for those involved. Including the police officers that had to make some very hard decisions once inside the compound and evidence started to come to light.
I don't think this is a valid 1st amendment issue either. Everyone's rights end where another's begins. As human sacrifice is illegal even in the name of religion so is child abuse. This is an issue about abusive practices and warped minds tailoring religion as an EXCUSE to live outside of the law. This situation should make all religious people furious. I will outright call a duck a duck; this sect of the FLDS is a cult that was designed to enslave women and children to build a personal kingdom. But that is just my opinion, I could be wrong.
Bless you, for saying far better what I have been trying to express.
We are dealing with CHILDREN!!! Not adults. Children's whose lives have already, and will continue to be difficult. And in the name of religion, you seem to think their parents should be allowed to disregard the laws of this COUNTRY!
I personally hate what is happening to these people,all of them, but the adults made their choices, and now it is the children who are suffering.
More importantly I abhor what these adults have done, have allowed to be done and would continue to do to their very own flesh and blood (and heaven only knows who else's). I am more concerned about the young lives whom they may have very well harmed and ruined - permanently.
I give up - it is apparent that you do not follow what I have been trying to say, so I will quit.
i pray that the children's best interests will be the foremost thing in the minds of all the adults involved.Posted by: Linda H. at April 20, 2008 2:33 PM
The police and CPS in this particular instance where acting on what they believed to be an actual call from an endangered teen.
Appearently, they did nothing to verify the story becase, the so-called teen was a 33 year old woman in another state.
Had they considered this a reliable source they would have looked for her parents. Not rounded up everyone in the compound like wwII japaneese living in the U.S.
It was wrong how they performed this operation, but the tactics are all too common. Consider the police officer who stops an automobile, uses a manufactured report of a phone call of a suspicious auto in the vicinity to perform a search of his auto and person in hopes of finding something illegal.
This happens every day and it will lead to abuses we don't even want to consider.
There are legal ways of investigating crimes. Barging in and confiscating everything and everyone is not one of them. Remember the wording of the fourth amendment.
.. describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
How many of our founding fathers would gather an army and invade a community like this? Maybe, Hamilton. Yea, Hamilton would.
Hamilton wanted a monarchy. He wanted George W to be king. He wanted senators elected for life. He didn't get his way, but that didn't stop his fellow Federalists.
As soon as the badgering in the media took it's toll, the new Hamilton party, The Democratic Party was the rage.
The Democratic Party reigned supreme until the Civil War started. I wonder why? We're doing the same thing now. We're devided on many levels yet we cling to a party that reigned into the Civil War! What's up with that?! Why are we doing it again?
I just don't get it and I
I give up - it is apparent that you do not follow what I have been trying to say, so I will quit.Posted by: Weary Willie at April 20, 2008 5:02 PM
Posted by Linda H. at April 20, 2008 02:33 PM
You're very wrong, again, WW. There has been nothing released to give you the idea that the 16 year old informant, and the 33 year old caller are one and the same.
And napajohn, I did comment on the fact that the abuse is multi-level. Some of the mothers of the younger ones are still children themselves. How many generations are involved??
It was wrong how they performed this operation, but the tactics are all too common. Consider the police officer who stops an automobile, uses a manufactured report of a phone call of a suspicious auto in the vicinity to perform a search of his auto and person in hopes of finding something illegal.- Weary Willie
Your analogy fails to convey the truth of what actually happened. If you called 911 with an emergency would you want the police to show up, secure you and ensure your safety then start asking questions of everyone involved, or would you want them to start an investigation interview potential witnesses etc. before acting on your call? It is idiotic to believe that the police where acting in bad faith. All 911 calls that seem on their face to be actual calls for assistance are always acted on as fast as possible. A call to 911 isn't a call to the District attorneys office it is an emergency system set up so the police can respond rapidly and efficiently to protect the community.
The police had no way to verify in this instance that the call was fraudulent without entering the compound and searching for the alleged caller. It is true the caller turned out to be a false report, that in no way absolves the police from the responsibility to act once inside the compound and witnessing the illegal acts.
I just don't see the logic of treating this as a freedom issue it is ridiculous. These people are a large group of pedophiles, abusing and enslaving children. Your argument just comes off as cold and unfeeling. No person of good conscience would have stood by and allowed this to continue. Even as a former law enforcement officer, if I had been aware of what was going on in Mr. Jeffs little kingdom, I also would have made that call, the possibility of my serving time for a false police call would be nothing compared to the suffering of those children. All the what ifs mentioned here fail to take into account that this wasn't a case of a false report and innocent people charged with crimes they did not commit. These are people that have no regard for the law mans or Gods. They need to not only be charged but also made an example to others that this kind of abuse must always be exposed and halted.
When the Texas authorities do these DNA tests they may have a big surprise on their hands.
In Hilldale/Colorado city where this cult is based, historians estimate that between 75-80% of the two towns occupants can trace their lineage to the towns founders, Joseph Smith Jessup and John Yeates Barlow.
These two towns have the highest rate of fumarase deficiency, a rare genetic disorder, in the United States. This disorder, which causes severe mental retardation, is thought to be caused by inner family marriage (cousins marrying cousins).
Theoretically this could be just one big happy family.
The sorces for the above information were "The Phoenix New times", and Wikipedia.Posted by: Rocky at April 20, 2008 11:02 PM
all of us should have a serious problem with the idea of the government confiscating children from their parents BEFORE any legal proceedings have taken place…
No - I have no problem with this, and, in fact, children are always legally removed from any situation where abuse is suspected. You don't suspect abuse but then wait to prove it. Child safety is different in this regard, and I think rightly so. I realize its awful to take a child away from a parent, but… not if the parent is having sex with their child! Anyway, LO you act like this is not in keeping with legal precedent, but it is.Posted by: Max at April 20, 2008 11:38 PM
Lee Jamison-
It's the rule of law. With due process under the law and rights against unwarranted search and seizure taken as givens, when authorities have probable cause to believe a crime may have taken place, they should investigate.
The danger lies in groups like these being left to be a law unto themselves. Now they can isolate themselves however they wish, for whatever reasons they wish, to live however they want to, for the most part. That's not the issue. When they start breaking laws with their behavior, when they start thinking that they are above the law, there's no reason to give them special dispensation from investigation.
As for what women wear? I come from Houston, Texas, so its not uncommon to see women wearing relatively little compared to the ladies of this cult. It's not terribly exciting or lustful, though. Most women I know of do not act like stereotypical sexpots.
To most Americans, and in the eyes of the law, a thirteen year old getting pregnant is bad, a thirteen year old getting pregnant by an adult is worse, and a bunch of thirteen year-olds getting married in a religious sense to that person as part of the religious doctrine is absolutely atrocious. While it is true that in ancient times such marriage might not have been frowned upon, just as polygamy might not have been frowned upon, it is not ancient times. It is modern day America, in the state of Texas.
That is the truth. Abuse is defined in the law, and restrictions against this kind of behavior are well-known. Screw absolute truth, what's true of our laws and our constitution?
Weary Willie-
They did look for her. The real problem comes in them being so damn secretive that nobody could determine the truth right away. They had probable cause to investigate, since they believed in good faith that the call was real. As they have investigated, evidence has come to light that's pretty alarming.
The Fourth Amendment allows for probable cause. our system could not function if at the start of every investigation a police officer had to get a warrant. Patrols would become pointless because they'd have to wait to arrest criminals until they got their warrant.
Because of that, Officers are allowed to search without warrants when they have probable cause to believe a crime has been committed, and that search is germane to following up on that call.
If a police officer investigates a domestic disturbance call and comes upon a stack of bills and bags of crack cocaine on the dinner table, would you throw out a case based on that discovery if it turned out that the original call was a fake? The officer was just doing his duty, investigating the call as given. Unless the officer had reason to believe the call was a fake, it falls under plain sight: evidence that is gathered in the course of response like this is admissable.
If they discover, in the course of investigating the woman's claim, that all this abuse may be going on, there is legal cause to continue the investigation to its end, even if the original call was false.
The confusion here is that people here are operating under the impression that this all has to add up like some college debate argument, that the whole thing falls apart if not all the T's are crossed and the I's dotted. In reality, the case can evolve as what officials become aware of changes.
As for Alexander Hamilton? He did throw his support behind Thomas Jefferson, but he was the prototypical Federalist.
As for your implication? The liberal political philosophy in America emphasizes far more oversight, of the executive by Congress, and both by the people than the Republicans do. The Republicans have, to the displeasure of many of the old-school conservatives, followed a course of justifying and rationalizing a theory of the unitary executive, concentrating more power at the top, and attempting to argue that in a time of war, the president's power become even more extensive.
Though Democrats in theory vest more power in the federal government, in practice, they vest less absolute power in the hands of a few, and distribute and delegate powers more broadly among the branches.Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at April 21, 2008 10:21 AM
Judging by these events, it seems as if I could phone in an accusation of child abuse in my neighboring town, about 450, and the govt would sweep in and forcefully take every child from every family and you guys would be fine with that.Posted by: kctim at April 21, 2008 12:28 PM
It seems like that to you.
The issues here are the fact that this cult shares living space and lives as an insular, clannish sort of community. This is not a bunch of people living in separate households that don't affect one another.
This is a special case.Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at April 21, 2008 12:48 PM
Is everybody in your neighboring town a member of a cult that has a history in other towns of child abuse, and of female subjugation?
Has the "leader" of your neighboring town been convicted of facilitating rape?
Was the "leader" of your neighboring town on the FBI's most wanted list?
It's really easy to sit on the sidelines and bitch about the rights that may, or may not have been violated in this case.
That said, I would venture a guess that the mothers of these children had no idea what rights they actually had until they were informed of them when the children were rounded up. These women have been indoctrinated from birth to be subservient to the adult males in their cult, and the only rights they have enjoyed have been that which they were granted at the pleasure of the adult male leaders of this cult.
You guys that are whining about rights violations should really do some research into the FLDS. Then you might understand who had rights in this cult, and who didn't. The FLDS has been a society unto itself. They have made their own rules and refuse to abide by society's.
I just had to post the following links!
BTW - where's the money come from to build this place, run it, and maintain it?
Who's in Charge at the Polygamist Compound?
Men From Polygamy Sect Speak
If it's only been there five years, how come the men didn't know about the legal age of consent and marriage?
Many thanks to those of you who honestly see the wrongs that have be done to these children.
napajohn, if I may quote you:
If you called 911 with an emergency would you want the police to show up, secure you and ensure your safety then start asking questions of everyone involved, or would you want them to start an investigation interview potential witnesses etc. before acting on your call?
As Max said:
You don't suspect abuse but then wait to prove it.
phx8 wrote:
Child abuse, however, is NEVER ignored.
googlumpugus summed up nicely:
Take your pick. Whichever form of abuse you wish to aver(sic)favor.
Stephen Daugherty Added:
In a case regarding child abuse, do you really want to be handing a child back to parents suspected of it?
and then added much more - i wish I had room to quote everything he wrote
Jane Does stated the situation very well:
Underaged females having children sired by "legal" aged men, is still a condition of rape! And I don't give a rip what culture they are connected to, it's still rape.
womanmarine wrote clearly:
"I mean afterall the worst that happened to the children was they married way to soon and bore children before they were ready to do so."
No comment.
And then she wrote:
Just keep in mind that the mothers allowed whatever happened. This is just as abusive.
Rocky, I don't know about your sources, but you may just be right - ONE BIG FAMILY - although not necessarily a happy one. Bless you for your additional thoughts
And finally I must give Weary Willie credit for saying:
A much simplier solution must be available.
It is certainly easier to criticize what we have than to develop a new and better one.
I could kiss both napajohn,phx8,Stephen Daugherty, googlumpugus, and Max, and hug womanmarine and Jane Doe! You have all put out terrific arguments supporting the rights of children! Rocky, I'll give you a hug, just cause you brought up a very interesting point!!!
I apologize for adding more than I thought I would yesterday. Hopefully this will end my involvement in this issue - at least until more information has been confirmed.
I just had to post the following links!
BTW - where's the money come from to build this place, run it, and maintain it?
Who's in Charge at the Polygamist Compound?
Men From Polygamy Sect Speak
If it's only been there five years, how come the men didn't know about the legal age of consent and marriage?
Many thanks to those of you who honestly see the wrongs that have be done to these children.
napajohn, if I may quote you:
If you called 911 with an emergency would you want the police to show up, secure you and ensure your safety then start asking questions of everyone involved, or would you want them to start an investigation interview potential witnesses etc. before acting on your call?
As Max said:
You don't suspect abuse but then wait to prove it.
phx8 wrote:
Child abuse, however, is NEVER ignored.
googlumpugus summed up nicely:
Take your pick. Whichever form of abuse you wish to aver(sic)favor.
Stephen Daugherty Added:
In a case regarding child abuse, do you really want to be handing a child back to parents suspected of it?
and then added much more - i wish I had room to quote everything he wrote
Jane Does stated the situation very well:
Underaged females having children sired by "legal" aged men, is still a condition of rape! And I don't give a rip what culture they are connected to, it's still rape.
womanmarine wrote clearly:
"I mean afterall the worst that happened to the children was they married way to soon and bore children before they were ready to do so."
No comment.
And then she wrote:
Just keep in mind that the mothers allowed whatever happened. This is just as abusive.
Rocky, I don't know about your sources, but you may just be right - ONE BIG FAMILY - although not necessarily a happy one. Bless you for your additional thoughts
And finally I must give Weary Willie credit for saying:
A much simplier solution must be available.
It is certainly easier to criticize what we have than to develop a new and better one.
I could kiss both napajohn,phx8,Stephen Daugherty, googlumpugus, and Max, and hug womanmarine and Jane Doe! You have all put out terrific arguments supporting the rights of children! Rocky, I'll give you a hug, just cause you brought up a very interesting point!!!
I apologize for adding more than I thought I would yesterday. Hopefully this will end my involvement in this issue - at least until more information has been confirmed.
Linda H.
Thanks for the kudos. I did mean aver for, but favor works as well
a·ver (-vûr)
tr.v. a·verred, a·ver·ring, a·vers
1. To affirm positively; declare.
2. Law
a. To assert formally as a fact.
b. To justify or prove.
Linda H,
I want to thank you for your contributions as well. This article was posted to illicit an airing of legitmate issues. Thanks to you the position favoring great caution on behalf of the protection of children has been well stated.
In defense of the constitutional issues raised by folks like Weary Willie, kctim, Max, and others Gerald Treese, who is a professor of Constitutional Law at the South Texas School of Law in Houston and for ten years or more has been the Houston area media's go-to guy on Constitutionla issue has been raising the same concerns about illegal search and seizure based on a fraudulent report. And has been questioning the legality of evidence seized based on warrants derived from the fraudulent report as well. It appears that the courts will permit the current investigation to run its course for the children's sake but, according to Treese, any permanent finding short of imminent danger may have a difficult time surviving in the courts.
As for your question on funding, Linda, an article in the San Antonio Express-News addressed the issue this morning.Posted by: Lee Jamison at April 21, 2008 5:48 PM
On the funding article, that's pretty much the way SLC was built in the 1850s. Buchanan sent an army out and there was nearly a war. Jeffs thinks of himself as a successor to Brigham Young.Posted by: ohrealy at April 21, 2008 6:54 PM
There are Fundamentalist Anonymous groups 'out there', and like anything else, there are the legitimate ones, and the others that prey on people seeking help.
I vividly remember watching a segment of Phil Donahue years ago on this very subject. It was amazing to listen to the ways people are taken into these cults, if not born into them.
If a person has different thoughts and ideas once inside, then it becomes an almost life-threatening task to escape. If successful, then months and sometimes years pass before they can live without looking over their shoulders. Intense therapy to un-do all of the brainwashing that they lived through.
If anyone doubts that these cults are as threatening as it sounds, just take a look through some of the F. A. sites and check it out. It may take a while to weed through some of the really kooky ones, so be patient. It should prove to be quite educational to some of you who still don't believe these groups can,and should be considered "dangerous". Insert your children into any of the scenarios and then tell us how you'd resist their rescue.
It is certainly easier to criticize what we have than to develop a new and better one.
Thank you, for the opening.
There are innocent people involved and they shouldn't be treated like criminals while we "sort it out".
Their life/job/routine should not have been disrupted the way it was. If the state was sure abuses were in evidence they could have seized the entire complex and occupied it, removing people of interest, monitored it's daily functions to gain the truth and provide direction, while at the same time providing a secure environment for the innocent without the trauma of being uprooted and taken from friendly faces. Instead they dismantled it, destroyed it.
A child can much more accept a parent leaving than they can being taken from that home and parents. They are the innocent ones and this barbaric treatment inflicted on them is just that, barbaric.
Guilty until proven innocent.
Given the size of this operation one must consider the value of the tax revenue that could be generated by this "City".
This isn't a "sect" that started 4 years ago. Lee's link paints a picture of resourceful people.
I got the impression from the lady interviewer in Linda H.'s link that nobody under the age of 18 got pregnant in our world and we're destroying their way of life because they have in theirs. It's a pretty common thing for someone under the age of 18 to get pregnant in this country. Why is it subjected to all this in theirs?
I can see this has brought up some pretty deep emotions. I want to keep an open mind. I'm not supporting child molesters. I'm supporting my rights granted to me by God. It only takes a phone call and someone suffers. It shouldn't take just a phone call.
Posted by: Weary Willie at April 21, 2008 7:14 PM
I am surprised that none of the "conservatives" point at the small c communist aspect of this FLDS church. If they didn't look historically picturesque, people might react very differently. Is it okay to be a communist, as long as it's a religion?Posted by: ohrealy at April 21, 2008 7:33 PM
"Is it okay to be a communist, as long as it's a religion?"
It's okay with me if you want to be a communist as long as you don't interfere with my way of living and it don't cost me anything.
I was raised in a fundmentalist religion I understand what these children have gone through, they may not even understand that the life they are living is detrimental to them depending on the level of brainwashing. It took me a full 15 years and lots of therapy and two failed marriages to begin healing from all of my upbringing. I am sure my story is not unique.I believe that those children should have been removed much sooner than they where.
I for one applaud the actions taken thus far. Perhaps with hindsight there could have been better ways to resolve this but you can't undo that you can only move forward in the best intrests of those 400+ children.
In a bar fight it is standard practice to detain all inside until the perps can be sorted out. Although I agree it is a poor analogy, that is pretty much what happened in this case too, I am oversimplifing but you get the idea.
This is how the BBC is reporting the story:
A Texas judge has ordered that 416 children, removed from a polygamous sect by police, remain in state custody for genetic testing.
Welfare officers had told the judge they had been unable to determine which parents the children were related to.
The ruling comes after officials said some of the girls may have had babies when they were just 13 years old.
The closed community was first raided amid reports that a 16-year-old girl was physically and sexually abused.
Detectives are looking for evidence of a marriage between the girl and a 50-year-old man.
She is reported to have been beaten and raped by her older husband and to be pregnant again eight months after giving birth to her first child when she was 15. The legal age of sexual consent in Texas is 17.
and in Canada:
SAN ANGELO, Texas — Lab workers began taking DNA samples Monday from the more than 400 children in state custody since a raid on a polygamist compound more than two weeks ago.
Officials hope the samples, to be taken by cheek swabs from the children and their parents, will help sort out the confusing family relationships in a convoluted custody case that has strained the resources of the child welfare system and the courts.
The testing is being conducted in the San Angelo Coliseum, where most of the children have been held since last week.
Judge Barbara Walther ordered the tests at the request of state officials, who have complained that members of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints have continually changed their names, possibly lied about their ages and sometimes had difficulty naming their relatives.
The process will likely take about half an hour per sample because of the paperwork and care needed to avoid contamination, said Darrell Azar, a spokesman for Child Protective Services. The tests could take three or four days to be completed.
A certain number of DNA markers — segments of the DNA with specific genetic characteristics — are tested to determine whether two people are related. If any uncertainties arise, analysts test additional markers.
Three male members of the sect said in an interview aired on CBS's "Early Show" Monday that they would cooperate in DNA testing if it would help them get the children back.
"Whatever we need to do to get them back in their peaceful homes," a man identified only as Rulan said.
State prosecutors have argued that the FLDS church encourages underage marriages and births, subjecting children to sexual abuse or the imminent risk of abuse. "Rulan" said sect members are reconsidering whether girls under 18 should have sex with adult men.
"Many of us perhaps were not even aware of such a law," he said. "And we do reconsider, yes. We teach our children to abide the law."
When the DNA sampling is completed, state officials will begin to relocate some of the 416 children staying at the coliseum and will separate the children younger than 4 years from adult mothers.
Officials say family relationships in the sect can be confusing to outsiders because the children of more than one wife live in the same household.
The children identify all the women in the house as their mothers, and if a father leaves the community, children and mothers are reassigned to another man, a child welfare investigator testified during a hearing last week.
Mothers of the youngest children had been allowed to stay with the children before the judge's order on Friday. But that arrangement will end after they are moved from the coliseum, Azar said.
He said it's not clear how soon the children will be moved, but state workers will try to keep them grouped together with siblings or others from the community.
They'll also try to shield the children, raised in an insular community with no television and little contact with outsiders, from overexposure to mainstream society.
"We're going to try to keep the children in groups so I don't think we're talking about your traditional foster setting," Azar said.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNewsPosted by: ohrealy at April 21, 2008 8:36 PM
416 children, removed from a polygamous sect by police, remain in state custody for genetic testing.Go figure, only in these U.S. could a government afford to do this. Posted by: Weary Willie at April 21, 2008 9:14 PM
Linda H,
"Rocky, I don't know about your sources, but you may just be right - ONE BIG FAMILY - although not necessarily a happy one. Bless you for your additional thoughts."
The Phoenix New Times has been covering the story of the FLDS for years. If you run a search on FLDS at the "New Times" web site there are dozens of stories to choose from going back to 2002.
BTW, having lived in Phoenix I have been following this story. John Dougherty is an excelent writer.
Here's another;
http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,635182923,00.htmlPosted by: Rocky at April 22, 2008 2:15 AM
I'm curious as to whether you think our policy toward the prosecution of this case should be materially affected by what we perceive the reactions of the outside world to be.
I'm not suggesting it is irrelevant how credible we appear to be elsewhere but should we change policy to make them comfortable?Posted by: Lee Jamison at April 22, 2008 9:20 AM
No matter how they live, they are American citizens and this sort of grabbing them all in hopes that something is found, is wrong.
It is our bigotry towards those who are different that makes us willing to break the rules, not their weirdness.
Are all members guilty because of what their "leader" has done, or for what he says? Of course not. Should it just be assumed that they knew everything going on? No.
People are not defending what "may" have gone on there, or it coming to a halt. They are questioning the tactics used. If we stand by and allow this type of potluck guesswork for this group, whats to stop them from doing the same to a group we do not consider weird?Posted by: kctim at April 22, 2008 9:46 AM
Lee, not at all, but I always like to see things from different perspectives. Almost all of our media tend to report things in exactly the same way. I used to look things up in different newspaper websites, but they all use the same source material, usually the AP. The BBC is actually becoming more like us, but I thought the Canadian article was interesting and detailed about what will be happening next in this case. I was particularly annoyed by a local report that there was something strange about the white church building, but maybe that report was based on an article in The Onion. The BBC showed a picture of the building. It's just a church.
The best source for news here is The News Hour on PBS, which is less biased, but they do very few stories each night. This is followed here by Chicago Tonight, which also does a very good job. I used to turn on GMA when I got up in the morning, but I am so tired of infotainment, I end up muting it, and then missing the beginnings of stories that I actually wanted to see. Youtube is actually a better news source than much of what is on television, but you have to sort through the garbage, and it's time consuming. I get RSS feeds for AP, Reuters, Chicago Tribune, and others.
We had a tempest here recently at the Journalism school at my alma mater, because the Dean wanted everyone to take an Integrated Marketing Communications course, which some students resented as having nothing to do with their very expensive course of study. Freedom of the press and free speech is always trumped by commerce here, which can currently be seen to distort our electoral process.
Anyway, I think the DNA part of this story is going to be pretty creepy for a lot of people.Posted by: ohrealy at April 22, 2008 10:41 AM
kctim "People are not defending what "may" have gone on there, or it coming to a halt. They are questioning the tactics used. If we stand by and allow this type of potluck guesswork for this group, whats to stop them from doing the same to a group we do not consider weird?"
Exactly kctim exactly. Because children are involved it seems the ends justifies the means for some people. This "rush to justice" happened with the previously mentioned McMasters and other cases years ago and as a result peoples lives and business's were ruined, they served time in prison and were branded with sexual predator for life. Everyone wans to see the children safe but if this situation was immenent danger what will suffice for just cause next, affiliation with the wrong political group?
The CPS is well intentioned and does a great job for the most part under trying circumstances, but should not be the easy avenue for law enforcement to bypass other means of proper police methods. Especially when the rights of the accused are being violated.
"womanmarine wrote clearly:
"I mean afterall the worst that happened to the children was they married way to soon and bore children before they were ready to do so."
No comment."
Once again "At the time I was posting this comment I was thinking of past abuses of children, as an example in Florida where kids that were in state custody were lost and/or missing from state authorities. There have been other news stories such as kids that have been tied up in closets ,kids that have been starved and so on. Comparatively this group doesnt seem nearly as extreme."Posted by: j2t2 at April 22, 2008 12:54 PM
"If we stand by and allow this type of potluck guesswork for this group, whats to stop them from doing the same to a group we do not consider weird?"
Did you bother to read any of the links I have provided?
This isn't about these people being weird, it's about their lifestyle and the way that the men in this cult treat their women and children being totally unacceptable.
The wives of these men are no more than chattels. They are slaves to the men and are placed in, or removed, from their marriages at the whim of the leaders of this group, and the women accept this because they have been taught from childhood that this is the way things should be.
This is the worst type of mental abuse. It was wrong in the '30s when this group was formed, and it is just as wrong now, and it's time somebody stopped it.
"The BBC showed a picture of the building. It's just a church."
It's not "just a church". It's a big assed church.
"Comparatively this group doesnt seem nearly as extreme."
So a lifetime of mental abuse, virtual slavery, and the rape of under aged girls isn't as extreme as starvation?
These women and children have no rights in the cult.
That is a well documented fact.
The big assed church is probably a crude copy of the one that was recently rebuilt in Nauvoo, Illinois, which scared many of the residents there too. Ever been to Idaho Falls? The LDS church has an American history. The FLDS thinks they are reliving some of it. They're deluded and dominated by a nutcase who thinks he is a prophet, but they are as American as apple pie, and more sad than scary.
Rocky IMHO starvation is worse , not that what you are describing is good.
Judge for yourself:
This is the current update on the DNA testing from the AP on youtube:
On Youtube, click on subscribe, and you get the current stories everyday.Posted by: ohrealy at April 22, 2008 3:40 PM
I agree that those situations were appalling, and I am not dismissing them out of hand, but as appalling as those cases were, sometimes shit does happen.
Can you, in all honesty, expect that this will happen again in this case, especially with the high profile media spotlight that has been applied here?
This sect has been a tragedy waiting to happen for decades, but has managed to survive because they have been extremely low profile. I will grant that the Texas authorities have been high handed, but I also expect them to respond immediately to a 911 call of this nature regardless. As it has been pointed out, the 911 operator's switchboard doesn't tell the operator whether this is a hoax call or not, and they have to respond accordingly.
This sect has a long documented history of abuse of women and children. Whether or not this was a factor in this raid, I don't know, but it should have been.
Sorry about my mistake - I just had eye surgery and have been having a great difficulty reading most of the posts. You are quiet right. 'Aver' is actually a much better word. I apologize for miss correcting you post.
Lee Jamison,
Thank you for you note. Obviously this is a matter many of of us feel strongly about.
I really appreciated the links. I found them to be most educating, and frankly somewhat disturbing.
You're welcome. It is important that more people educate themselves in matters such as this.
I would like to make one final point, and I will then let it rest.
My hope is that these women get their children back by exercising rights they probably never knew they had.
Whether these women choose to use these rights, or not, they now know there is a different way, and this wouldn't have come about if the Texas authorities hadn't raided the compound.
I also hope that FLDS collapses under the weight of these women exercising their newly found rights, and this incident will serve as a lesson to next messianic yahoo that thinks taking liberties away, or using women and children as property, is his key into heaven.
It would be great if all the public outcry would serve to wake up at least some of the people living inside this stronghold that theirs is a very different way of life. Living differently is not a bad thing, but when it creates virtual slavery and abuse, then it stops being just different.
It will be interesting to hear what the DNA results say about how many actual "contributors" there are in these children, and back as far as is trackable. Talk about a tainted gene pool !
We all seem to agree on the one fact that it is our right to worship as we desire, but when the exercising of our rights violates others, or the laws, then it opens the doors to being held responsible for those violations. Hopefully these children, mothers and offspring alike, have been given an opportunity to break a small link in the chain of control and opression.
Thanks Linda for your responses here and what sounds like your more personal contributions on a larger scale in another environment.
Linda, Do you remove children from their homes?
WW, Good for her! if she has anything to do with removing children from homes where abuse is evident!
Latest news releases are saying that a number of legal/law experts have weighed in and have agreed that if the police entered the compound based on a tip that they believed to be legitimate, and upon entry found evidence supporting that tip, they were well within the law to effect the removal of the children.
So it would seem that there is no determination that the rights of the inhabitants were violated. You break the law, you pay the price.
People working for DCFS in Illinois have actually gotten into trouble for not taking kids out of homes where bad things were happening. Maybe they are just trying to cover their own asses.Posted by: ohrealy at April 24, 2008 12:23 PM
We are major hypocrytes! We train our children from a young age it's okay to be enlisted for a war to go kill our bibical ancestors! It's okay that our children are being raped threw our war list(NCLBA). It's okay to profit from death and destruction as long as we get permission from our so called government. You want to arrest the MEN , well fine!! Go do it!! But leave the children and the mothers out of it! We are terminators! We drug our children by the thousands, but it's okay to do that because we live by government law, not GOD's!! Even though our officals swear to god to protect our constitution. Well "WE HAVE FAILED MILLIONS" and now we failed just 400 more!! We are the "Robotic Zombies"! Dummies, research your own schools and while your at it, get your "NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND RAPIST ACT" out of our schools!! Freekin Vampires!! Peace in America and the Middle East!!Posted by: Robin Hood at April 25, 2008 4:01 AM
More teenage mothers emerge in Texas polygamy probe
Texas authorities said on Thursday they identified 25 more mothers below age 18 among those removed from a polygamist compound, raising to about 460 the number of minors at the heart of a huge abuse probe.
The 25 additional teenage mothers who have been sorted from the adults and who initially claimed to be adults may provide prosecutors with more ammunition if it was found for example that some had become pregnant when they were in their early teens.Posted by: womanmarine at April 25, 2008 9:23 AM
And womanmarine, there will continue to be a number of dissidents like the poster before your last comment, who will reject and deny support for the law, no matter what. Pathetic ! And even more sad, is that after some time, this will all fade away while this group and many others will continue as they have for so long. Their drive to recruit and control is so great…….Posted by: janedoe at April 25, 2008 2:25 PM
The 911 caller is a sufferer of Multiple Personality Disorder. "Sarah" does exist inside of Rozita. Rozita's mental history is well documented. So are her selfless acts of service to others. Rozita is horrified at the actions of one of her personalities. Please read the information in the link I've provided if you wish to gain a better understanding of this woman.Posted by: ydkwyata at April 26, 2008 6:56 PM
Here is the link I mentioned in my previous post:
The linked article in in a PDF format, which may cause problems for some. Here are the highlights:
"Rozita is a Mormon who suffers from MPD/DID which falls under the heading of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. She has been diagnosed with these disorders, which have often been associated with children who have been abused in the same way as is alleged in the FLDS raid. Since she was a teenager. Rozita has flashbacks to a time when she was an abused child and teenager, and to times when she had been locked up and kept hostage. According to professionals, when a person is in this state, their reality is that they are reliving the situation. Therefore, if Rozita did make these calls claiming to be a Mormon, claiming to be a teenager being sexually abused and locked up it is entirely possible that in her mind, she was indeed experiencing those
…In 1992, while Rozita was still in the Department's custody, the Tennessee Department of Human Services (now DCS) had a restraining order issued against him(her father) on her behalf. When he located Rozita in Colorado in 2005, this order was registered in that state so that it could be enforced there. Over the years, Rozita Swinton has moved many times trying to keep her whereabouts a secret from her abuser and his associates. "She is not a person who would willingly seek attention," said a source close to her. "She is a loving person who spends her spare time trying to help other abuse survivors, goes on mission trips to help those in foreign countries, and is trying to make a better life for herself and others."
What gets me is , In any inner city shcool theres a hella lot more teenage mothers than here. Hell when I was in Shcool I knew atleast 10 girls or so dating men in their mid twenties to early 30s. At 16 I dated a 42 year old.
We critique these people on how they live and we dont do much better. The children are polite and more advanced in shcool according to what ive read online that outside students.
That said. Im against any kind of religous brainwashing. The women look to me like your normal non denominational/ penecost person. In that way I feel for em . But knowing how my local penecostals are I bet they are praying harder than ever before.Texas thinks this will weaken the Flds? Hardly its free advertising.
Lastly with the bills I have , If my wife wanted a second hard working bill paying husband Im all for it=PPosted by: RJ at April 26, 2008 9:20 PM
What gets me is , In any inner city shcool theres a hella lot more teenage mothers than here. Hell when I was in Shcool I knew atleast 10 girls or so dating men in their mid twenties to early 30s. At 16 I dated a 42 year old.
I would assume that these were voluntary? And the teenage mothers probably weren't forced into marriage before they got pregnant.
Ever hear of statutory rape?
I think the difference is that you got to choose your dates.Posted by: Rocky at April 27, 2008 1:47 AM
To: Property Owner,
Due to the recent increase in methamphetamine labs, your government has instituted a program to curb this henous scurge on our security.
Your property and papers have been randomly selected to be searched to verify compliance with the laws in effect that discourage the use, posession, and production of all illegal drugs.
Your support is expected and appreciated.
Mayor DoGooder
And your post applies to this thread in what way, WW ???Posted by: janedoe at April 27, 2008 12:27 PM
And the question is…As I hold the envelope to my turbined forehead,
What will America look like 30 years from now in our quest to guarantee our security?
Has the 16 year old been found? What arrests were made and for what?
It's a shame all the evidence being collected will be, with a proper ruling from a real judge, thrown out on fourth amendment grounds.
Maybe a few obstruction charges will be pled to, or some tax evasion or perjury charges tried. Obviously one or two rape charges will be tried, but nothing will justify the destruction of this community and the incarceration of the innocent men, women, and children.
Guilt by association is also suppose to be against our laws.
……….and meanwhile, back on our planet, evidence is piling up while more victims are being identified.
At least they didn't burn it down this time.
Probably because it isn't made of wood.
Weary Willie,
I just now got a chance to read your question. I apologize for my late response.
I no longer work for Social Services. i retired 5 years ago. For over twenty five years, I counseled abused children, set up tutoring programs, Big Brother\Big Sister Programs. I also worked with suicide\Crisis Prevention Services, which included both the Rape and Domestic Violence areas. I also came from an extremely abusive childhood background myself.
No, I have never physically been the one to remove a child from their homes, however, today I volunteer as a Guardian Ad Litem, a volunteer who acts solely for the best interests of the child. I have done this for nearly 20 years, most recently here in the state of SC and having first volunteered in NC.
In essence, I act as a representative for the child(ren) in the Family Court system. I frequently am the only adult who starts with the child and stays with them until their case is settled. DSS workers, teachers, foster homes,doctors,lawyers frequently change,even parents sometimes change (believe it or not) but I am always there.
I become a very familiar face and presence in the lives of these children. I generally become involved within 2 weeks of removal, and stay with the child until such time as the case has been permanently settles - sometimes for as long as 4-5 years, however usually 6 mos. to 1 year.
I (personally)spend no less than 10 hours a month with the child, reviewing DSS, of CFS records, talking with family members, doctors, teachers,friends, ministers, and anyone else I can find in an effort to help the Court try to determine where a child should be placed.
I try to listen especially to the child(ren) and I make certain their desires are brought to the attention of the Court. I may not agree with their desires, but I firmly believe the child(ren) have the right to be heard. (As a child no one asked or listened to me)
I also work with the family in helping them follow whatever treatment plan the Court, DSS and I with have devised with the SINGLE INTENTION of UNITING THE ENTIRE FAMILY.
In my over twenty years with this program, I have had exactly 5 (five) permanent removals. In these 5 cases, obviously a rarity, it was at the parents request, or obvious lack of desire that their children were permanently removed. I have also, unfortunately been at the bedside as the life left the bodies of 27 children - killed by the abusive acts of their "loving parents,."
I suggest that anyone who cares for the rights and welfare of children consider volunteering for a GAL Program, also known as CASA , work in a Crisis Shelter, start a Scout Troop, consider becoming a mentor, tutor, or Big Brother\Big Sister or simply help organize a sports team.
Believe me, every minute one spends touching the lives of children is worth more than any money one could ever receive. There is nothing more joyful, youth defying, thought provoking,or loving than spending a few moments with a child. Frequently I am the first to see the both the tears, and the smiles of the children in whose lives I have become involved. I am there when the family is re-united, and I get to experience the joy of time well spent, a job well done, and the knowledge that I have hopefully had a GOOD impact in the lives of an entire family.
Over the years I have had the opportunity to run into parents, families, and most importantly the children in whose lives I have been whose lives I have been involved.
I have never had a negative reaction - either from the family, or the children.
Instead I have always been greeted with the same love I gave, the same honesty I required and gave them, and the knowledge that they gained positively from the experience.
Seeing these children who have grown into wonderful, productive, HAPPY adults, with bright futures stretched before them is an experience I love. Receiving the hugs, the smiles and just plain catching up is a more valuable than any gold I could I have been paid. It is priceless.
There is no payment better than this.
Linda H, dealing with children is one thing, but try dealing with handicapped adults, or the elderly who are abused or neglected, when you know the only place they are going to end up is in a nursing home or other institution. The elderly also frequently have pets that they are no longer able to take care of, which can make the home unfit for human habitation.Posted by: ohrealy at April 28, 2008 5:28 PM
Janedoe on April 27 at 4:42pm says, "and meanwhile back on our planet":
Good observation Jane. On our planet we totally disregard unlawful search and seizure. We also disregard morality in favor of government intrusion.
A lot has been said above in defense of upholding our societal position (not morays) of monogomy, but there is a paradox or two that simply should be considered here:
Our societal morays seem to support fornication before marriage, and to ignore adultery afterward. I agree with prosecution of adultery, and believe that the FLDS also agree with that. However, the cultural clash between mainstream society and FLDS includes the following: Mainstream policy rewards the murder of unborn children via abortion. It's solution to unwed teenage pregnancy, when abortion is not chosen, is to either place the unwed mother on welfare or to get her to give up her own child. That said, consider the FLDS approach of respect for the unborn as well as the future of the pregnant teenager and her child, with strongly held beliefs that if she is pregnant then she should keep and raise her child as a married woman. This seems to usually or often result in spiritual marriage to an older man who is financially capable of supporting a second (or third or 4th) family. Please remember that the 14 year old that Warren Jeffs "forced" into marriage with her cousin, had become pregnant by that same 18 year old cousin. For heaven sake, she was pregnant with his child. It was their child, not just hers. The child had a right to be raised by both of it's parents.
Okay, now we can start debate over what ever this brings up. Just please do not loose sight of the cultural differences. Abuse occurs in both systems. Does anyone believe that the FLDS culture is evil? I don't. But I believe that there is evil and abuse in both systems.
R.W., your comments are ludicrous. Speak of culture and beliefs all you want, it doesn't change the fact that the law was broken, many multiple times, and not through ingnorance of it, but blatant disregard and disrespect for it.
Recent news releases have shown that the DNA testing and other testings have proven that over half of the females between the ages of 14 and 17 have either been pregnant, or currently are.
Your comment on respect is even more laughable…..do you really believe that a man who can rape a woman even understands the concept of respect??? And in this scenario, unless the unborn child is female, (he) will only rate possible passing interest.
These girls and women are merely breeding stock……nothing more.
"Does anyone believe that the FLDS culture is evil? I don't."
So what you're saying is that it's ok to treat women and female children as property?
It's ok to teach female children from childhood that they are to be subservient?
It's ok that their rights are defined by their betters, those being the adult males of this cult?
It's ok that teen males can be ostracized from the group simply because they are competition for the adult males?
It's ok to take a wife from her husband and give her to another man because he does you favors?
These are facts that I have read from many sources, and I have linked some of these in this thread and the one previous.
You seem to have a different definition of evil than I do.
Because the states' pay lousy salaries, I frequently took on second and sometimes third jobs. I worked 2nd shift,and often 3rd shift for several years in an ambulatory nursing home.
It had both disabled young adults, mentally as well as physically, and much older residents. Many of the older persons (our oldest was 100) had already out lived most of their family, and a great many had what today we would diagnose as Alzheimer.
My last 'second' job was working in an assisted living facility, primarily in the Alzheimer Unit. Many of these residents were relative young. Most had had families and careers that the disease robbed them of.
Several of the residents had been high power persons in their chosen fields of endeavor - one lady, admitted at age 54 was been the head of the Chemistry Department at UNC. Another was the previous CEO of one of the better known banks.
So yes, I know how difficult life can be for the elderly. Unfortunately the abuse that occurs appears to be growing among care -givers. Having 5 cats and 1 dog, I completely understand the difficult choices one must make as one ages.
I understand living on a small fixed income, (especially with today prices), having extremely high medical bills, high insurance, and little if any support from family members - assuming there are some. One of the areas I volunteer for at our church is carting the church, and other churches elderly to their various appointments, grocery stores, visits with friends, etc.,
I have been the driver when the doctor told them they needed more care at home and needed to move,or were diagnosed with cancer. I've been fortunate to have the money to help pay for the couple of items they may buy that over-load their budgets. I've reported bruises,black - eyes, broken arms, legs, fingers, etc. to the Police, because I am the one who deal with getting them in a car, and taking them to the hospitals, and home again.
I have been physically threated or had threats made on my life by some "caring" family member who is I suppose afraid I might get "Mama" or "Papa" to sign a will in my favor. I've had several encounters with angry care-takers for reporting them to the police.
So yes, I do know what you are talking about.
Frankly I not that far off from being considered elderly myself.
Linda H, thanks for the info. I am 56 years old and wearing out. In my forties, I could pick a client up out of bed, put them into the wheelchair, on to the toilet, off the toilet back on to the wheelchair, and from the wheel chair into a comfortable chair for the day. MS and spinal cord injury patients eventually wore me out.
I had a diabetic client in many years ago, going blind, using a walker, and dragging one leg. He told me I should kill myself when I turned 50, because it's all downhill from there. Sometimes I have to search out weaponry, and hide it or give it to family members.
Pets of all varieties can be problematic. Someone gave a COPD client of mine 2 birds in a cage. There are little feathers and seed and who knows what all over the place. After I'm there a while I start sneezing.
I had a client with 4 cats. The city tricked her and her family into getting her to go in to the hospital for an "evaluation", but they never let her go back home.
I used to go to a client on the weekends. They had a basset hound. I tore out all the carpeting in the house myself, after repeatedly asking their son to do something about it.
Keep up the good work.Posted by: ohrealy at April 29, 2008 4:57 PM
I honestly knmow what you mean as they say "Been there, done that…" and more - know all about finding stuff form pateints, making sure they actually swallow they meds, and all that stuff.
I alos understand about aging out. As I stated I am approaching the senior citizen age (59) myself, but I do know if I ever quit doing, then I will be dead. Doing stuff is what keeps me going.
Weary Willie
In a lengthy discussion dated Sept. 11, 2007, Bent said his work is finished and he does not expect to be "in the earthly sphere" much longer.
Thank heavens the man is already 66 years old.
No charges have been brought against this church either.
So what's your points?
Serna said her agency received information on April 21 that warranted the removal of the children. She declined to reveal the information or its source.
The two girls and one boy — all under the age of 18 — were taken from the northeastern New Mexico compound
following an April 22 investigation, Romaine Serna, spokeswoman for the state Children, Youth and Families Department spokeswoman, said Wednesday.
Wednesday was April 23.
The information was discovered, processed, and action taken in a span of 3 days!? The actual investigation is refered to as the april 22 investigation. How can you justify taking 3 children from their home on an investigation done in one day. Government is nowhere near being that efficient.
Bent, on an April 27 posting on the Web site, accused the state of kidnapping the children. "My children are kidnapped because some demon wrote a letter to people in authority accusing me of some crimes," he wrote.
There are certain constitutional standards that need to be met regardless of the necessity of the action taken. To get information 1 day, and react to it the next only to say
No charges had been filed, she said.
has to be questioned. Just who may be abusing those children? The parents or the government that kidnapped them?
Posted by: Weary Willie at May 2, 2008 5:51 PM
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
She declined to reveal the information or its source.
This violates the Constitution.
supported by oath or affirmation,
If it were supported by oath or affirmation it would be a public record. It may have restrictions applied to it but it is subject to discovery.
Why would she want to keep this information a secret if not for ignorance of the facts.
Why are there never any judges of record being questioned by the media?
I commend you on your devotion to others, Linda H. I'm sure you wouldn't do what you do if you didn't see the reaction in the eyes of the people you save.
I just don't think the actions taken in Waco or Laraido, or New Mexico are adhearing to the rules defined in the U.S. Constitution.Posted by: Weary Willie at May 2, 2008 6:30 PM
In a crushing blow to the state's massive seizure of children from a polygamist sect's ranch, the Texas Supreme Court ruled Thursday that child welfare officials overstepped their authority and the children should go back to their parents.
Child Protective Services failed to show an immediate danger to the more than 400 children swept up from the Yearning For Zion Ranch nearly two months ago.
The ruling shatters one of the largest child-custody cases in U.S. history.
The Third Court of Appeals in Austin ruled last week that the state failed to show that any more than five of the teenage girls were being sexually abused, and had offered no evidence of sexual or physical abuse against the other children.
Texas officials claimed at one point that there were 31 teenage girls at the ranch who were pregnant or had been pregnant, but later conceded that about half of those mothers, if not more, were adults. One was 27.
Under Texas law, children can be taken from their parents if there's a danger to their physical safety, an urgent need for protection and if officials made a reasonable effort to keep the children in their homes. The high court agreed with the appellate court that the seizures fell short of that standard.
There you go, folks. I knew it was wrong and I didn't wait…
Some Republicans would like to make this into Waco, Pt. 2, and sympathize with a poor, government persecuted religious community. I would say, hold off on supporting these people until the DNA tests are finished. Otherwise, y'all may end up defending statutory rape and child molestation. Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at April 19, 2008 09:36 AM
until it was swept under the rug and forgotten.
I wasn't supporting the people, I was supporting the Constitution. This action walked like a duck, talked like a duck, and quacked like a duck. I didn't have to wait to see if it was a duck and if more people were willing to stand up and speak out against the flagrant abuses of our Constitution by overzealous do-gooders who don't give a damn about it, the better off we would be.
This is a must read.
"Many people have suffered at the hands of others without fault of their own. Take for instance the pain a child feels when they are abused by an alcoholic parent or family member or the person who has suffered great loss because of the actions of someone who was inebriated behind the wheel of a car. Others suffer from their own choices in life and the list of those circumstances can fill my computer hard drive."
Go to Drug Addiction Treatment: Our Sober Approach to God OR http://goo.gl/CPV6n to read more."
HTML Formatting Tips:
<strong>bold text</strong>
<em>italicize text</em>
<u>underline text</u>
strike text</strike>
<a href="http://domain.com/link">link text</a>
<blockquote>quote text</blockquote>
By clicking the "Post" button you agree to abide by the Rules For Participation. Please report abuse and inappropriate behavior to email@example.com.