State's case against FLDS weakening

Discussion in 'Law and Justice System' started by AllieBaba, May 21, 2008.

  1. AllieBaba
    Offline

    AllieBaba BANNED

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2007
    Messages:
    33,778
    Thanks Received:
    3,648
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +3,650
    And guess what, just as I said, the mainstream media is absolutely silent.

    http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_9330822
    Only 17 women, out of original 26, are left in the state's disputed-age group

    By Brooke Adams
    The Salt Lake Tribune
    Article Last Updated: 05/21/2008 07:56:04 AM MDT
    SAN ANGELO, Texas - An underpinning of the state's case for taking hundreds of FLDS children into custody continued to weaken Tuesday as officials acknowledged four more women whose ages were disputed are adults - including one who is 27.
    Still to come: The state was prepared to admit one additional mother was an adult, but her hearing was postponed. Four women had been deemed adults before Tuesday; other women's hearings have yet to come up in court.
    The Texas Department of Family and Protective Services has maintained a "pervasive pattern" of underage marriages justified removing all children from the YFZ Ranch and their parents, members of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
    It specifically claimed that 31 girls between the ages of 14 and 17 were pregnant, mothers or both - a tally that originally included 26 women whose ages were in dispute.
    One case that supports the state's claim was postponed Tuesday: that of 17-year-old Suzanne Johnson, who is eight months pregnant and has a 16-month-old child.
    But now, 17 women are left in the disputed-age group, and one attorney expressed outrage Tuesday about the state's tactics in dealing with the mothers.
    Andrea Sloan, who represents Leona Allred, said the state was given official documents showing the woman to be 27 the day it raided the YFZ Ranch. On Tuesday, more than six weeks later, Allred's case was dismissed without the state receiving any additional information, Sloan told a Texas judge.
    Sloan was informed of the impending decision Monday evening - but the state continued to tell Allred she could not participate in hearings on Tuesday for her two children because she was a minor. Allred turns 28 on June 2.

    Allred had been warned, Sloan said, that as an adult she would not be allowed to remain at the Fort Worth shelter with her two children, including a 15-month-old - which a state attorney confirmed during the hearing.
    But that apparently did not sit well with the judge hearing her case.
    "For a month, six weeks, this mother has been with these children in this facility," he said, resetting the hearing for May 27 to give CPS time to work out an alternative.
    Other judges also pressed CPS to accommodate the young mothers who have been in state custody for more than a month - something that one FLDS spokesman said was encouraging.
    "Inch by inch and day by day, the truth is starting to come out about what is really happening here," said Rod Parker. "We find that parents haven't done anything wrong and the state can't articulate to any parent what the parents did."
    Examples of the accommodations being made: Judge Jay Weatherby told CPS to allow Rebecca Allred, 20, and husband Wendell Jeffs, 23, to have a four-hour, unsupervised visit once a week. The couple have a 9-month-old son.
    Judge Tom Gossett told CPS to find a way to reunite Louisa Barlow Jessop with two children who were with her until she gave birth on May 12. A day later, the state acknowledged she was 22; it left the newborn in her care but moved the younger children, ages 2 and 3.
    A guardian ad litem "implored" Gossett to return the children, saying they have done poorly since being separated from their mother.
    "The 3-year-old has become very withdrawn," Marie Clark said, while the couple's son "is not eating well or sleeping well."
    The judge said it was "not acceptable" when told by a CPS worker there was no place that could take the mother and her children and gave the agency a week to resolve the issue.
    It may not take that long. Louisa Jessop, who participated in the hearing by telephone, said the shelter she is in will let them join her.
    Asked by her husband, Dan, why the state had taken his children, Gossett said a "wide loop" had been thrown around the FLDS community that might not fit all parents. The state, he said, had concerns about the FLDS' beliefs, plural and underage marriages and "communal attitude."
    If those allegations prove unfounded, "I'll be the first to apologize to you if it turns out you're not a person who has abused your child," the judge told Dan Jessop, who was in the courtroom. "There is no proof of abuse in your case. That gives you a leg up."
    brooke@sltrib.com

    Gosh, where's CNN?
     
  2. RetiredGySgt
    Offline

    RetiredGySgt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,581
    Thanks Received:
    5,905
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +9,002
    Allie none of the people that were so supportive of the State of Texas CARE that the rights of these people were and continue to be violated. They were clear when this first started, any means are acceptable when they do not like someone or something.

    Here is another link to an attempt by the State to continue to illegally hold onto children they had no right to seize to begin with.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080528/ap_on_re_us/polygamist_retreat

    The excuse now being they will flee. Hell I would leave Texas in a heart beat after the State made it plain I had no rights under the law as well. More importantly the State is refusing to allow the parents in the cases that go to court to return to the compound. They are requiring them to somehow get jobs and move hundreds of miles away to even have a chance to get their children ( illegally seized) back.

    The State is NOT operating in good faith nor in the best interest of its citizens. As I predicted the women they kept that were NOT minors, that gave birth while illegally held can not get their new borns back, it was a ploy by the State to try and gain custody of those new born children.
     
  3. William Joyce
    Offline

    William Joyce Chemotherapy for PC

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2004
    Messages:
    9,693
    Thanks Received:
    1,135
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Location:
    Caucasiastan
    Ratings:
    +1,349
    Pissed off that the great story about crazy religious fundamentalists has been complicated by facts.
     
  4. Ninja
    Offline

    Ninja Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2006
    Messages:
    2,220
    Thanks Received:
    377
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Glorious People's Republic of California
    Ratings:
    +377
    Not a surprise. You can't just throw out the law and constitution whenever it looks like children are in danger. Uncorroborated anonymous telephone tips do not constitute probable cause. Guilt by religious association is an anathema to the constitution.

    I hope they sue the living fuck out of Texas.
     
  5. Shogun
    Offline

    Shogun Free: Mudholes Stomped

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    Messages:
    30,495
    Thanks Received:
    2,224
    Trophy Points:
    1,043
    Ratings:
    +2,260
    yea.. maybe they can all get off of welfare then.
     
  6. Ninja
    Offline

    Ninja Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2006
    Messages:
    2,220
    Thanks Received:
    377
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Glorious People's Republic of California
    Ratings:
    +377
    Well Shogun, bleeding the beast is a pretty unmanly way to make a living, but even welfare queens have Constitutional rights.
     
  7. Shogun
    Offline

    Shogun Free: Mudholes Stomped

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    Messages:
    30,495
    Thanks Received:
    2,224
    Trophy Points:
    1,043
    Ratings:
    +2,260
    and breeding sexual fodder for dirty old men in the name of religion is not one of em.
     
  8. RetiredGySgt
    Offline

    RetiredGySgt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,581
    Thanks Received:
    5,905
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +9,002
    Facts not in evidence, that would be exactly why the State lost. You nor anyone else gets to dictate the Religion of anyone else in the US. The State of Texas CPS and the first Judge tried and continue to try and do JUST that.

    When they purposefully held women with VALID birth Certificates and claimed they were minor for the sole purpose of seizing their unborn children once they were born they lost what ever supposed credibility they might have had at the start. A 22 year old an a 27 year old woman do not look like they are 16 or 17.

    Whether you like it or not 16 and up CAN get married in Texas. And if they were married in another State with less restrictive laws it is also LEGAL. The State has at most only 5 girls that MAY be under age. They had no right and no authority to seize over 400 children. ANd then they had no right and NO authority to put them in Foster Care. Two superior Courts AGREED thay over reached any semblence of Authority.
     
  9. Anguille
    Offline

    Anguille Bane of the Urbane

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    17,910
    Thanks Received:
    2,122
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +2,137
    One of the news stations reported that the children in custody are being allowed to play with dogs for the first times in their lives. If anything, this time away from the compound will expose them to things they have so far been denied. When they get older, they may feel braver about leaving the cult, knowing the outside word can be a good place.
     
  10. RetiredGySgt
    Offline

    RetiredGySgt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,581
    Thanks Received:
    5,905
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +9,002
    And this attitude is EXACTLY what is wrong. You and the State of Texas do NOT get to decide to interfere in other peoples families because YOU think they are not doing what YOU want. In the States case they have been told TWICE now by two higher courts they had NO legal justification to take those children. Yet they are not returning them and the Courts are not forcing them too.

    The CPS did NOT act in good faith. The Courts have agreed. They wantonly violated their legal duty and carried out a systematic removal of over 400 children from their legal parents simply because they disagreed with their religion. That is Unconstitutional in Texas and the US. And now they won't return them. And YOU think it is all GOOD. Guess what? the parents get to decide if their children play with animals not you nor the State.

    Remind me again how one mistakes a 27 year old woman for a 17 year old, further explain how the State disputed the birth Certificate in good faith when it admitted weeks later with NO new evidence she was as old as she claimed? She should sue them for false imprisonment. As should every other woman held illegally as a minor that had LEGAL proof they were NOT minors.
     

Share This Page