State court rules on polygamist case

[Larkinn]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080522/ap_on_re_us/polygamist_retreat

SAN ANGELO, Texas - A state appellate court has ruled that child welfare officials had no right to seize more than 400 children living at a polygamist sect's ranch.

The Third Court of Appeals in Austin ruled that the grounds for removing the children were "legally and factually insufficient" under Texas law. They did not immediately order the return of the children.

Child welfare officials removed the children on the grounds that the sect pushed underage girls into marriage and sex and trained boys to become future perpetrators.

The appellate court ruled the chaotic hearing held last month did not demonstrate the children were in any immediate danger, the only measure of taking children from their homes without court proceedings.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Yet they did not order the children returned. However one more nail in the coffin that is Texas's grand scheme to illegally seize children to break up a religious group.

 

[jillian]

Well, yes, they did, but gave the state 10 days to appeal.

from the article:

The ruling gave a lower-court judge 10 days to release the youngsters from state custody, but the state could appeal to the Texas Supreme Court and block that from happening.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Well, yes, they did, but gave the state 10 days to appeal.

from the article:

The story has been changed from the original. The Original story said the court had NOT ordered their return.

This decision should have occurred BEFORE the children were seized and removed, the court aided and abetted the illegal activity by refusing to hear the case till weeks after the event.

Who wants to bet now the State tries to claim they do not know who to return the children too?

 

[Yurt]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080522/ap_on_re_us/polygamist_retreat

SAN ANGELO, Texas - A state appellate court has ruled that child welfare officials had no right to seize more than 400 children living at a polygamist sect's ranch.

The Third Court of Appeals in Austin ruled that the grounds for removing the children were "legally and factually insufficient" under Texas law. They did not immediately order the return of the children.

Child welfare officials removed the children on the grounds that the sect pushed underage girls into marriage and sex and trained boys to become future perpetrators.

The appellate court ruled the chaotic hearing held last month did not demonstrate the children were in any immediate danger, the only measure of taking children from their homes without court proceedings.

exactly as i have said all along

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Ohh look the State is appealing. I hope the appeal costs them millions more and they lose.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080523/ap_on_re_us/polygamist_retreat

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Ohh look, did I call it or what?

State officials said in their Supreme Court filing that it would be impossible to return all children covered in Thursday's ruling because they have not determined which children belong to which parents, and DNA tests were incomplete. The appeals court ruling technically applies only to the 38 mothers who filed the complaint.

The CPS in Texas is out of control. I think these families should sue in FEDERAL Court to have the State charged with violating their Civil Rights and equal protection rights.

Who wants to bet the Supreme Court takes months to even hear the case?

 

[Zoomie1980]

Ohh look, did I call it or what?



The CPS in Texas is out of control. I think these families should sue in FEDERAL Court to have the State charged with violating their Civil Rights and equal protection rights.

Who wants to bet the Supreme Court takes months to even hear the case?

Well, the truth will lie in the DNA. If the DNA results, indeed, indicate an significant majority of these kids have jumbled parentage that would be proof beyond doubt that things are not right inside the compound and removal was warranted. Otherwise, this group should sue the pants off Texas and some criminal proceedings are in order for Texas CPS officials.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Well, the truth will lie in the DNA. If the DNA results, indeed, indicate an significant majority of these kids have jumbled parentage that would be proof beyond doubt that things are not right inside the compound and removal was warranted. Otherwise, this group should sue the pants off Texas and some criminal proceedings are in order for Texas CPS officials.

There is no law that prevents women from having sex with and having children with more than one man, even when married. Unless you can provide said law? And when you do remind me why thousands upon thousands of women are not rounded up yearly in this country and their children removed from them for doing EXACTLY that? Both my sisters have children from different fathers. I do not remember the State ever accusing them of breaking any laws by doing so ( and they were not always married when they had children).

The State of Texas is REQUIRED by its own laws to prove Immediant, imminant danger. They have done no such thing. Further they ILLEGALLY classified dozens of families as a single family simple because they all lived on the same compound. Not in the same house, just the same HUGE compound with NUMEROUS houses and Living quarters all seperate and individual. Add to that they seized almost 30 women that are adults and held them illegally as minors in an effort to gain control of their unborn children. Women with LEGAL, properly registered and documented BIRTH CERTIFICATES From Utah. A Federal violation in its own right. One woman is 27 YEARS old, another 22.

The State has not operated in good faith once in this case. The upper Courts are to blame as well, even though the upper court ruled against the CPS, they waited WEEKS to hear the case refusing to hear it BEFORE the Children were shipped hundreds of miles from their parents into foster care. They aided and abetted the seizures by their inaction.

Claiming now the State does not know who the parents are is another illegal action by the State in order to refuse to return the children to their parents. A ploy to hold onto the Children.

 

[cbi0090]

Hell, half of the children in my friends classroom doesn't even know who their fathers are?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Ohh look child welfare lost again, get ready for that " we don't know who to give the children to" excuse. Funny they knew who they TOOK them from. And playing with Birth Certificates earlier proves they do not act in good faith.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080529/ap_on_re_us/polygamist_retreat

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Where are all those people that INSISTED the State had every right to seize these children?

http://www.yahoo.com/s/890507

 

[jreeves]

Where are all those people that INSISTED the State had every right to seize these children?

http://www.yahoo.com/s/890507

I give you props on this one, while alot of people prejudged the case you were right in the end.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I give you props on this one, while alot of people prejudged the case you were right in the end.

It never shold have happened, and when it did the First Judge had to know the law and know what she was doing was wrong. Add in the attitude on this board. People calling me a child molestor and insisting the ends justified any means.

The facts were OBVIOUS from the start and made more obvious when we discovered the State was holding 27 year old women and claiming they were teens for the sole purpose of seizing their unborn children.

The Texas authorities violated federal law by refusing to honor Utah Birth Certificates. And the people on this board did not care on whit.It is pure LUCK the courts threw it out. With the attitude from here it was clear people do not mind at all violating others rights just because. Including 2 LAWYERS on this board.

And it is not over, CPS is going to hold those children as long as they can by any means possible. The first dodge will be that only 38 Mothers were involved in the case, the next will be they do not know who to give the children back to and the third will be just refusing to do it.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Who wants to bet the CPS does NOT work diligently to return the children?

The Court ruled the CPS over reached, which was evident to lay people around the Country. That the CPS continued to argue knowing it was wrong tells me they have no intent of complying in a timely manner. Remember this is the group that refused legal Utah Birth Certificates in a bid to seize unborn children from women as old as 27. I think it is hilarious that Texas is not out 30 million dollars and lost the case.

This never had to happen, as the Supreme Court pointed out, and the lower Court already knew, measures short of seizure are REQUIRED except in extreme cases. Only 5 girls even come close to that situation, over half the children are under 5.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080530/ap_on_re_us/polygamist_retreat

 

[Steerpike]

It never shold have happened, and when it did the First Judge had to know the law and know what she was doing was wrong. Add in the attitude on this board. People calling me a child molestor and insisting the ends justified any means.

I made the same point as you on another board at the time CPS first took the kids, saying they had way overstepped. Got much the same reaction as you apparently got here.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I made the same point as you on another board at the time CPS first took the kids, saying they had way overstepped. Got much the same reaction as you apparently got here.

And now none of them have a thing to say.

 

[AllieBaba]

Lol, I said they made a big mistake, too, and delineated the reasons they could not just wade in at gunpoint and remove hundreds of kids based on nothing but crappy tips.

Which is exactly what the courts are saying as they return them. They have to prove each individual case, they have to prove the children are in IMMINENT HARM (I believed I used that term myself) and while they may investigate the charges, if there isn 't substantial threat of imminent harm there is no precendent for them to take the children.

Our lovely lawyer (and arbiter of all that is good and just) Jillian accused me of defending child molesters and a variety of not very nice things because I didn't jump on the lynching bandwagon.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Lol, I said they made a big mistake, too, and delineated the reasons they could not just wade in at gunpoint and remove hundreds of kids based on nothing but crappy tips.

Which is exactly what the courts are saying as they return them. They have to prove each individual case, they have to prove the children are in IMMINENT HARM (I believed I used that term myself) and while they may investigate the charges, if there isn 't substantial threat of imminent harm there is no precendent for them to take the children.

Our lovely lawyer (and arbiter of all that is good and just) Jillian accused me of defending child molesters and a variety of not very nice things because I didn't jump on the lynching bandwagon.

Yup, you and I both got called a lot of nice names for pointing out what was patently obviously illegal. And by a Lawyer no less.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Ohh look, the first Judge is trying to play games. Just as I predicted.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080531/ap_on_re_us/polygamist_retreat