Welfare fraud? Prosecute ‘em. Statutory rape? Do what the law demands.
However, the more I’ve read on how the Texas CPS and Family Court system is treating the FLDS families it raided last month, putting over 400 children into state custody, the more it looks less like “the best interests of the child” and really illustrates a possible long term plan of busting the religion and/or driving it out of Texas. Hearings yesterday clearly demonstrate that Texas CPS has no evidence of wholesale abuse and yet it pursues open-ended power to micromanage every adult connected with these cases by holding the children as hostages.
SAN ANGELO, Texas  Hearings to discuss custody of FLDS children resumed this afternoon with attorneys for parents and children becoming increasingly agitated about the lack of personalization and specifics in the family service plans.
Nancy Delong, who represents Carlene Jessop, a mother of four children in state custody, attacked the plan in court, saying it is not specific to her client.”The plan that has been filed is not specific to Ms. Jessop,” she said.“It is specific to Ms. Jessop,” Joni Manske, a Texas Child Protective Services worker replied.
“It’s specific to Ms. Jessop, just like it is for 400 other children?”
“Yes, ma’am.”
Delong also criticized the many requirements necessary for her client to be reunited with her children, which include open-ended suggestions such as parenting, psychological and vocational classes. Those requirements are in addition to Jessop’s weekly visits with her children, who are scattered in facilities a day’s travel apart.
“What are you going to do to help her?” Delong asked the CPS worker.
“I don’t know the answer to that,” Manske replied
Despite earlier assurances by CPS to place siblings either together or in close proximity, children are scattered hundreds of miles apart while their parents are required to visit them all weekly to demonstrate their worthiness to regain custody.
Jerri Lynn Ward, representing James and Sarah Jessop  a couple who have a number of children in state custody  said their children are scattered in foster care facilities in Texas from Amarillo to Liverpool and simply arranging visitation has proven nightmarish.”
It’s creating a hardship to even effectuate the parenting plan you have put into place,” Ward said.
Couple that with the sensational way the CPS decided to inflate the number of children in its custody by declaring over two dozen young women “minors” by looking at them, a number that was suspect and is now being slowly whittled away.
Four young women believed to be minors have now been legally declared adults. [...]
The reclassification calls into question the number of underage mothers that Texas authorities have claimed they have.
CPS has also demanded that fathers of these children who are not members of the FLDS sign on to “the plan.”
Arthur L. Barlow drove thousands of miles from his home in southern Utah to appear in court alongside his 35-year-old estranged wife, Esther.Barlow, 59, said he was excommunicated from the FLDS Church four years ago, but his wives remained. He learned that his children were in Texas custody when a brother-in-law called him, asking if he could help. [...]
“How does this involve me?” he asked CPS caseworker Ashley Kennedy.
“Your children were on the ranch. We found reason to believe there was a pervasive pattern of sex abuse. Your children were at risk,” she replied.
“You have no proof I’m guilty of those,” he said. “If I’m not guilty, why can’t I have my children?”
The judges at these hearings refused to allow or consider any questioning of due process or origins of the case. Not surprising as
CPS attorneys have dismissed the custody action involving a child alleged to belong to Sarah Jessop and Dale Evans Barlow.”To our knowledge, we don’t have that baby in custody,” said Meisner.
Sarah is the name of the 16-year-old girl who called in to a family crisis shelter here, claiming she was pregnant and in an abusive, polygamous marriage to a man named Dale Evans Barlow. That call prompted the raid on the YFZ Ranch and the removal of all of the FLDS children.
Authorities continue to investigate if the call was a hoax; a Colorado woman has been named as a “person of interest” in the investigation and was arrested on similar charges. A warrant for Barlow, who lives in Colorado City, Ariz., has been dropped.
Admittedly, I find the FLDS a creepy lifestyle. I firmly believe polygamy is exploitive of women, be it FLDS, Islam or hippie commune. However, I’m more disturbed by the horrendous overreach that Texas has committed in their willingness to drive these creepy people from their state. From using a hoax call as an excuse for an armed raid – to the wholesale seizure of children from families on the ranch – even from those who didn’t participate in polygamy — to deliberately vague “family plans” that seem to be setups for failure of the parents, Texas is not covering itself in any kind of glory here. Even cries of “but think of the children” has lost its gloss.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 5/21 @ 7:47 am #
The Emperor Misha calls those organizations “Child Abduction Services”.
Comment by thor on 5/21 @ 7:51 am #
The whole thing stank from the word go.
Comment by Jeffersonian on 5/21 @ 7:52 am #
It’s becoming clear that the kids here are being held as hostages to get the women of the FLDS to turn state’s evidence on the men.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/21 @ 7:59 am #
the stete doesn’t need the women to turn states evidence.
they have DNA testing.
quite simply, Darleen, the rights of the women and children not be treated as chattel override freedom of religion.
if your religion advocates child rape, polygamy, and child forced marriage, then your religion is going to be busted.
Sub-sapients.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/21 @ 8:05 am #
Urban legend (my cousin’s middle school) says that the excess boys were “exposed” (my term, devolving from the exposure practice of leaving unwanted chinese girl children on the hillside to dies).
Dropped off in the middle of big cities where they instantly became the prey of drugdealers and pimps.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 5/21 @ 8:05 am #
I believe the problem mostly lies, here, with the little detail of knowing whose parents are really whose. If this were any other custody case, there’d be no problem. Some of these kids have been shuttled around from family to family, so who’s really the parents?
Just to take a poke at nishi, though, who are YOU to tell other people what to do? Just let religion BE FREE, BABY!
Or maybe it’s just science that needs to be unsupervised. So hard to tell, anymore.
Comment by Lisa on 5/21 @ 8:05 am #
#3: I agree.
Darleen: Yeah, but forcing your underaged daughters to marry someone is a bit beyond “creepy”. And the polygamy alone is enough – isn’t that illegal?
This is so disgusting (apparently this is a ‘wedding’ photo:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/a/aa/Rulonfull.jpg/180px-Rulonfull.jpg
Comment by Darleen on 5/21 @ 8:08 am #
nishi
when you actually learn to comprehend what you read rather than what you think it says, let me know.
Communes and commune living is not illegal. Many of the families on the ranch did not participate in the commune living. Many of those “underage” girls are NOT underage.
Yet everyone is being treated the same.
And that is not how due process is supposed to work.
you bore me, nishimonster.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/21 @ 8:09 am #
Slart, you missing the core evo theory of culture meme.
Religion is bad. Science is good.
Comment by Darleen on 5/21 @ 8:11 am #
Lisa
If someone is underage, then its illegal. Forced or not. Period. End of discussion.
However, arranged marriages are not illegal. And if people who didn’t participate in underage marriage are swept up in this, when will we see the raids in urban areas with high teen pregnancy rates? Why aren’t we seizing every child from every family that has one pregnant teen in it?
I mean, it’s “for the children” right?
Comment by Darleen on 5/21 @ 8:14 am #
Slart
CPS separated twins. It’s hard to accidently slip up in that case, ya think?
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/21 @ 8:14 am #
Communes and commune living is not illegal.
yeah, but childrape, childmarriage, polygamy, and childabuse ARE illegal.
Many of the families on the ranch did not participate in the commune living. Many of those “underage†girls are NOT underage.
so prove it.
the State is going to prove with DNA testing who is the parent and who is the child.
If those legal age women had babies at 14, the FLDS patriarchy daddie is still responsible for child rape.
the community failed to report illegal activity. and now the community is practicing deception to protect the guilty.
accomplices and enablers.
let the DNA testing sort them out.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/21 @ 8:18 am #
btw the legal age for marriage with parental consent is 16 in Texas.
but there is NO legal age of consent for polygamous marriage, because it polygamy is illegal.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/21 @ 8:25 am #
so any of the “sister wives” that were “spiritually married” before the age of !7 (age of consent in texas) are actually the victims of statutory rape.
like these children
also, any “sister wives” that have children of an age which proves the girl was raped before the age of 17.
Comment by serr8d on 5/21 @ 8:27 am #
Nishi, you are not really objective enough to be a good scientist.
Another thing to work on…
“Many people say that it is the intellect which makes a great scientist. They are wrong: it is character” â€â€Albert Einstein
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/21 @ 8:27 am #
and i guess the FLDS term for what happened to the excess boys between 14 and 17 is exiling.
/spit
Comment by Lisa on 5/21 @ 8:28 am #
#10: What they are trying to do is sort out who is involved in underaged marraiges, forced marraiges, etc.
When there is an investigation of possible child abuse of some gross nature, the kids are usually removed from the home until things get sorted out. Since there are 400 kids to sort out (with plenty of people undoubtedly lying their asses off), it is going to be a long process.
If they let them all go then they went home and drank poisoned Kool Aid, we would be bitching about how the authorities could have been so stupid and let those people go so prematurely.
I agree with Nishi that if someone in there had a baby at 14, it is a good bet that there was an underage marraige/sex with a minor issue.
I would LOVE for someone to go in there and arrest every last one of the predators that impregnate young urban minors. But we both know that that is not going to happen.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 5/21 @ 8:29 am #
And you are an idiot.
See, argument by assertion works!
Comment by Slartibartfast on 5/21 @ 8:31 am #
I don’t necessarily think CPS is run by geniuses, so I think it’s entirely possible that CPS screwed up by accident. Still: it’s a bad thing.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/21 @ 8:31 am #
to me that is even more cruel than what ahppens to the girls and women.
why not just cull the excess boys and sell them as slaves?
Comment by Slartibartfast on 5/21 @ 8:35 am #
I actually don’t have a problem with polygamy, in theory, other than it’s against the law, and other than I think it only works well in fiction. The libertarian in me wants polygamy to be legal, provided no one’s being coerced.
Which is not anywhere in the neighborhood of me hankering for another adult woman in the house, on a permanent basis.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/21 @ 8:35 am #
Still: it’s a bad thing.
yah, an lets just admit that it is a less bad thing than childrape, kk?
Comment by Lisa on 5/21 @ 8:36 am #
Just taking the child bride thing out of it: Say they waited until the kid was 18 and then forced them to marry some old perv. Is that kind of Taliban-like shit what we want going on in our country?
Comment by Slartibartfast on 5/21 @ 8:36 am #
And while we’re at it, we can just stop pretending that people are saying things that they’re not saying.
Learn to read. You can’t be a scientist if you can’t read.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/21 @ 8:37 am #
and Darleen, there is the very real possibility of flight to Canada where there is another mormon polygamy ranch.
those kids are american citizens.
Comment by maggie katzen on 5/21 @ 8:43 am #
oh, so they’re all guilty until proven innocent. nice.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/21 @ 8:49 am #
no maggie…the rights of minors not to be abused override the rights of adults to abuse them.
“better 99 guilty men go free than one innocent man should suffer” doesn’t apply where the rights of minors are in question.
Comment by maggie katzen on 5/21 @ 8:51 am #
you have proof they’re abused?
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/21 @ 8:51 am #
the State is executing its duty to those minors, to provide a safe place for them until the trials are over.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/21 @ 8:52 am #
statuatory rape is pretty abusive.
the State has evidence of that.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/21 @ 8:53 am #
i can’t believe there are apologists for the FLDS here!!!
you are the ones that can’t read.
Comment by maggie katzen on 5/21 @ 8:55 am #
it’s just that the more info that’s coming out, the more this seems like a fishing expedition. note to self, don’t live on a compound with funny religious people.
Comment by Evil McGehee on 5/21 @ 8:57 am #
Let the meltdown begin!
Comment by maggie katzen on 5/21 @ 8:58 am #
do they? they can’t seem to tell who are minors and who aren’t.
Comment by Evil McGehee on 5/21 @ 9:00 am #
Maggie, it’s the “Nishi” standard of evidence: “because they say so.”
Comment by Slartibartfast on 5/21 @ 9:02 am #
Belly laugh. I wish there were emoticons in existence for how hard that made me laugh.
Nishi, you have a truly staggeringly miniscule intellect.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 5/21 @ 9:04 am #
You spelled “don’t” wrong.
Comment by CassarahW on 5/21 @ 9:05 am #
One of the downsides to the group thing, is that law enforcement sees you as conspiring together when the group has a widespread pattern of engaging in illegal behaviour as part of the group ethic.
They think the women aren’t sufficiently cooperative, and they don’t think it’s safe to send the kids back to them. I happen to agree with that. And the burden of proof necessary is not what it is to prove a crime. Reasonable suspicion of danger is enough to remove a child, and due process follows.
I am so biased about outcome in this case, maybe I’m not the best judge of whether law enforcements suspicions are reasonable. But I do think they are. The women have dissembled and there is reason to believe they feel they are obligated to do so for the group welfare and their own personal salvation, let alone that of their children.
But the complaint that they are being treated as a collective instead of as individuals seems kind of ridiculous under the circumstances. Of course it matters the connections they have to a group that requires obesiance and fealty to rules that allow abuse.
The individual will be appraised in context of that collective. The individual matters to the law. It’s seems almost silly to me to protest that their group affiliation be a major concern in appraisal of individual cases.
Comment by thor on 5/21 @ 9:07 am #
I dunno about that. When I was a 16-year-old in Texas the 15-year-old I was statutory-rape-banging seemed to like it. In fact, she liked my rigid handle so god-darn much she married me 8 years later.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/21 @ 9:10 am #
read this again, illiterati.
FOX news says just now that 31 girls between the ages of 14 and 17 are either pregnant or have young children.
Cockerell told legislators the investigation has been difficult because members of the church have refused to co-operate. Parents coached children not to answer questions and children – even breast-feeding infants – were switched around to different mothers in what Cockerell called a co-ordinated effort to deceive.
The state has said that nearly 60 per cent of the 14-to 17-year-old girls in custody from the ranch are pregnant or already have children. Many refused to take pregnancy tests, the agency said Wednesday.
Where are the boys?
Of those 463 children, 250 are girls and 213 are boys. Children 13 and younger are about evenly split  197 girls and 196 boys  but there are only 17 boys aged 14 to 17 compared with the 53 girls in that age range.
Someone got those children pregnant, the boys went somewhere.
The State percieves that it has sufficient evidence to remove the children from an unsafe environment, and indeed, it is the duty of the State to remove the children.
take Texas to court if you like…..but I’d wait for the DNA tests to sort stuff out myself.
/shrug
you are apologists for the FLDS patriarchy daddies. after all you are all christians. ;)
Comment by TmjUtah on 5/21 @ 9:10 am #
Texas is laying down cards now, when there are less than a thousand FLDS people living in the state, rather than in ten years, when there will be five thousand.
Child rape is illegal. Polygamy is illegal. The welfare and social services fraud that is part, parcel, and essential to the scam is a burden measured by millions of dollars to the taxpayers of the state.
There is no easy or cheap way, under our legal system, to fight this cult. But the resources of the State of Texas CAN may be sufficient, and should be used now to make the state simply too troublesome for colonization by the polys.
The states’ AG of Utah, Colorado, and Arizona have just about surrendered state sovereignty in the areas of their states that are under polygamist rule. It’s ugly, it’s undeniable, and Texas is just trying to get out ahead of the problem.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/21 @ 9:11 am #
so thor?
it was still illegal.
Comment by MayBee on 5/21 @ 9:12 am #
no maggie…the rights of minors not to be abused override the rights of adults to abuse them “better 99 guilty men go free than one innocent man should suffer†doesn’t apply where the rights of minors are in question.
The McMartins can attest to that.
I would think minors that are not being abused should have the ‘right’ to be with their parents.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/21 @ 9:14 am #
DNA test results may make polygamy too troublesome for Utah, Colorado, and Arizona too.
May they all move to Canada.
;)
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/21 @ 9:16 am #
would think minors that are not being abused should have the ‘right’ to be with their parents.
unless the parents are the abusers.
that was the determination in the FLDS case…the court determined that all the children were at risk.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 5/21 @ 9:16 am #
Irony so thick, you’ll be tempted to eat it with a fork.
Comment by MayBee on 5/21 @ 9:18 am #
Children who are not being abused don’t have parents that are abusing them, nishi.
I feel for the state, here, and little sympathy for the FDLS. That doesn’t mean the state hasn’t done some things wrong.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/21 @ 9:19 am #
TmjUtah is right tho.
In 1953 Arizona attempted to rid itself of the infestation.
All charges were dropped because of basic unprovability.
But now we have DNA testing.
That will either make the polygs obey the law, or pack up and move on.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/21 @ 9:21 am #
Maybee, that is not congruent with the court’s opinion.
the judge stated, that all the children were at risk, either of being abused or becoming abusers.
Comment by David R. Block on 5/21 @ 9:24 am #
OK, I sux at the HTML, but here’s the Fort Worth Stat-Telegram’s State News page
http://www.star-telegram.com/state_news/
My opinion of the objectivity of a Utah paper in this is below zero.
Comment by BJTexs on 5/21 @ 9:30 am #
I’m calling the EPA. Nishi’s just polluted another thread. Maybe there is Superfund cash available for a cleanup.
Comment by CassarahW on 5/21 @ 9:30 am #
“I would think minors that are not being abused should have the ‘right’ to be with their parents.”
There’s the concept of being “at risk” of abuse to contend with, though.
Only a single child may be actually abused in a family with multiple children. The “unabused” children may be removed until it’s determine that abuse allegations are unfounded or that its safe for ALL to return. Smack your cyring baby, and you could lose your 10 year old, too.
If you belong to a cult-like group that accepts the “marriage” of early adolescents, or forced marriage of minors, maybe your 5 year old daughter isn’t abused NOW, but it at risk, And this is notwithstanding the peculiar treatment of the younger children, ( including methods of discipline employed in infancy, the sufficiency of education or medical care provided, and issues of forced child labor)
The mothers, to hear them talk, seem to be in huge competition to establish the “usefullness” and “activeness” and willing spirit to industry their offspring possess, to the point of announcing to news cameras how the children hop out of bed at 4:30, no 4:00, no they try to get out of bed at 3:00! to attend to chores. Those children in my appraisal are at risk. Not that it counts for anything but my opinon, but it is reasonable to the extent my bias allows me to percieve what is reasonable.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 5/21 @ 9:32 am #
When did you become CassarahW, rather than SarahW?
Comment by SGT Ted on 5/21 @ 9:32 am #
Who are you to foist your ethical standards on FLDS members nishi? Funny how you advocate policing for others but seek to exclude yourself from same. You are a bigot.
Also note that you don’t think the Constitution should apply to citizens who are members of unpopular groups. Again, a bigot attitude.
Comment by MayBee on 5/21 @ 9:33 am #
There’s the concept of being “at risk†of abuse to contend with, though.
Only a single child may be actually abused in a family with multiple children. The “unabused†children may be removed until it’s determine that abuse allegations are unfounded or that its safe for ALL to return. Smack your cyring baby, and you could lose your 10 year old, too.
The point is, if you haven’t smacked *any* of your children, the court has damaged the children by taking them away from their innocent parents. In the name of protecting the kids.
I realize no system is perfect, but that is problematic to me.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 5/21 @ 9:41 am #
Get accused of smacking your crying baby, and you can lose both kids without due process. Which is awesome!
Not much of which applies to the current topic, but what the hell.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/21 @ 9:44 am #
i don’t know if it is so much bigotry, Tmj, as elitism.
it seems obvious to me, so i have no patience with the slow.
Comment by Evil McGehee on 5/21 @ 9:45 am #
Our society today worships children the way Hindus worship cows.
I rather prefer the Western attitude toward cows.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/21 @ 9:46 am #
oops sowwy, that was for SGT Ted.
thank you for your service, sir.
gtg.
Comment by Evil McGehee on 5/21 @ 9:47 am #
I do. It’s bigotry.
How do you stand yourself?
Comment by JD on 5/21 @ 9:49 am #
you are apologists for the FLDS patriarchy daddies. after all you are all christians. ;)
This one was breath-taking, even for the nishit.
would think minors that are not being abused should have the ‘right’ to be with their parents.
unless the parents are the abusers.
Do you even read what you type?
Nishit wants no moral or ethical standards to be applied to her, but wants to dictate all standards to everyone else.
Comment by thor on 5/21 @ 9:49 am #
I didn’t steal it. I didn’t break it. I didn’t trespass. I was invited in, and out, and in again and …
Comment by maggie katzen on 5/21 @ 9:53 am #
exactly.
but they’re guilty, guilty, guilty!
but the state has had some trouble distinguishing 22 year olds from 17 year olds.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 5/21 @ 9:55 am #
Says the Muslim.
Comment by CassarahW on 5/21 @ 9:55 am #
Slarti, it’s one thing to argue CP law is being misapplied in this case, another to argue against the law itself, another still to argue that the law is broadly misapplied. I suppose its possible to argue all three things at the same time, but they are different arguments.
I’m saying that as written the law is not being misapplied, so far as my own bias allows me to perceive.
A person accused of slapping his or her baby, gets due process, it’s wrong to say they don’t.
But reasonable suspicion that the chld is in danger is all that is necessary to establish to remove a child, not proof positive; the “process” continues and determines the ultimate outcome. Children have rights independent of their parents, under this theory of the law, to be safe from harm, even before the final dermination of risk is made.
I know that “process” is subject to error and abuse. I don’t see it here at all. At all. But if the process itself is bad, that’s another discussion.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 5/21 @ 9:57 am #
Really?
You seriously have no fucking idea what you’re talking about, or of the consequences of what you espouse.
Comment by CassarahW on 5/21 @ 9:57 am #
And slarti – I think it’s perfectly reasonable for you to start talking about what the process or lack of it is or should be, because I think that these seperate questions are heavily coloring opinion about the polygamy cult case.
Comment by maggie katzen on 5/21 @ 10:01 am #
oh, Rob, if we go there, she’s also murdering terrorist. BECAUSE OF THE PRETTY T-SHIRTS!
Comment by JD on 5/21 @ 10:09 am #
Her religious kinfolk don’t mind stoning them some of teh ghey. Raped? Punish the woman. She is a textbook definition of a bigot.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 5/21 @ 10:11 am #
Bingo! We’re agreeing, aren’t we? And of course, if “reasonable suspicion” is left up to idiots, bad things can happen, no? Keep in mind that I live in Florida, where such things can and do happen with alarming frequency.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 5/21 @ 10:12 am #
I just thought it was amusing that she’s saying advocating child rape, polygamy, and forced marriage is grounds for having your religion “busted”. She’s setting a standard under which every mosque in the country would be raided and the children of every Muslim would be taken away.
But no doubt her particular sect ignores all the stuff Mohammed actually did…
Comment by Slartibartfast on 5/21 @ 10:19 am #
I guess what I’m saying is that if your state’s version of DCF has gotten a reputation for fucking up nearly everything they touch, the due-process card is a bit more credibly played. I have no idea what it’s like in Texas, but I do know that the Florida DCF has avoided the fine line between protecting the child’s well-being and respecting parental rights like it had some kind of repulsive force.
Comment by SGT Ted on 5/21 @ 10:25 am #
CPS’s are usually stocked with socialist do-gooders, progressives and other control freaks, not professionals trained in respecting Constitutional rights. They are the BATF of social services.
Comment by TmjUtah on 5/21 @ 10:41 am #
I’m not saying that Texas isn’t out on a limb here, legally and/or ethically. There is certainly reason to believe that state laws are being broken and that minors are involved. They are exercising their duty, and the courts will be the battlefield where right, wrong, and outcomes will be decided.
Better than shoving an APC with a gas projector into the compound, I think. But it will be more expensive and if in the end the state ends up with convictions or favorable judgements concerning custody for a fraction of the cases going now, it will probably be painted as “state abuse” by media. Take that to the bank. This is a hugely complicated issue, and our media hates anything more complicated than Paula Abdul’s breasts and when they might escape again.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 5/21 @ 10:49 am #
“#
Comment by Evil McGehee on 5/21 @ 9:00 am #
Maggie, it’s the “Nishi†standard of evidence: “because they say so.—
Wait, I thought it was “Because I say so.”
Comment by N. O'Brain on 5/21 @ 10:50 am #
Ok, nishi, I have a question for you to process through your bulging sciency brain.
Why is it that 14 year old girls can get pregnant?
Comment by Lisa on 5/21 @ 10:51 am #
#74: Well said. That should be the last word on this matter, as it was articulated so beautifully. However, as Nishi has gotten hold of this thread, it will not be (you know I love you Nish, but girlfriend you can cock up a discussion thread).
Comment by Slartibartfast on 5/21 @ 10:51 am #
…because someone might get hurt, this time.
OT: I was unaware that Paula Abdul’s breasts had ever staged an escape. Linky?
Comment by JHoward on 5/21 @ 10:53 am #
Good post, Darleen, hopefully to again illustrate that the long arm of the fourth branch of government, its vast social engine, operates more or less as it alone deems best. Sure, Texas should be terribly ashamed for singling out an oppressing a religious group, but the core of this issue is virtual state ownership of kids across the country, and with them, the rights of their parents.
I’ll ask again: What would it take to prosecute every public servant involved in every violation of basic personal rights here?
Comment by Slartibartfast on 5/21 @ 10:57 am #
No, the core of this issue is whether parents (and communities, even) own their children.
Sure, the rights of children as independent beings are highly limited. But there are a number of things a parent may not do to their child, and that community was actively participating in at least two of them.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 5/21 @ 10:59 am #
…but it’d be interesting to hear what a pure-libertarian community might have done in this situation. Let them alone; they’re not bothering anyone? Kill them all, and let doG sort them out?
WWARD?
Comment by JHoward on 5/21 @ 11:21 am #
The assertion that laws are meant to be maintained is sound, but when Waco’s occur, as happened here, huge rights issues arise. There are a number of things the State may not do with children first, Slart, except that we know which of those contrasts trumps the other these days. Hell, nuggie-san argues, straight-faced, for DNA testing following a clear violation of rules of evidence. So much for rights. And then presumably for proving innocence. So much for due process.
Despite this, my quaint notion is that rights trump laws. Especially when the State is found to have violated them willfully, as also happened here. Remember, Texas legislated law specifically to alienate Mormons.
At any rate, should this matter ever go to a fair Supreme Court, it’ll prove the case for the private sector. Which means it’ll never happen. We should not underestimate just how far our rights have been infringed.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 5/21 @ 11:39 am #
Eh? What’d I miss?
I guess I missed that, too. Linky?
Comment by Lisa on 5/21 @ 11:45 am #
#80: Exactly.
Comment by TmjUtah on 5/21 @ 12:24 pm #
“I was unaware that Paula Abdul’s breasts had ever staged an escape. Linky?”
Slart -
No info on that subject, sir. I was being hyperbolic. Again. Still. It is a curse.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/21 @ 12:30 pm #
No, the core of this issue is whether parents (and communities, even) own their children.
Slart is exactly correct.
JHoward is exactly wrong.
“following a clear violation of rules of evidence.”
The court determinded that there was compelling evidence to raid the compound.
Legally, all that is required under law is that the judge issuing the warrants has a sincere belief in the evidence.
/shrug
Until this is challenged and overturned in a higher court, what they did is legal.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/21 @ 12:34 pm #
what a pure-libertarian community might have done in this situation.
i think the rights of the children not be chattel would trump the rights of the parents to hold them as chattel.
in a pure libertarian community, children would have full citizen rights at birth.
Comment by Lisa on 5/21 @ 12:55 pm #
Tjm, I think may well have had a nip-slip. You may have been inadvertantly correct.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 5/21 @ 1:07 pm #
Then thank God we’ll never see any such thing.
Comment by JHoward on 5/21 @ 2:01 pm #
A broader perspective?. San Angelo doesn’t equal Waco on a number of levels, obviously. But on one it’s a mirror: In both authority harmed many innocents in contravention of what legions believe are their rights.
So now it takes a SC decision for us to evaluate those rights? A significant national outcry suggests otherwise.
Look, entire neighborhoods are suspected of harboring crack dealers. Entire urban populations harbor teen pregnancies. And there are thousands of laws on the books in this country that were they taken to the various SC’s, would fail. Is this somehow a controversial notion?
As to Texas law and what motivated it, for starters, how would making polygamy a felony jive with the establishment clause? In Texas it’s a first-degree felony to marry under 16 and a second-degree felony to marry between 16 and 17. It’s a class A misdemeanor to give consent for an underage marriage. It’s a third-degree felony to conduct a marriage ceremony of a minor. And it’s class A misdemeanor to providing false information about identity or age.
Does it strike you that this is a reasonable series of laws if bias isn’t somehow involved?
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;” (First Amendment to the Constitution, extended to the States by the Fourteenth Amendment).
“The test may be stated as follows: what are the purpose and the primary effect of the enactment? If either is the advancement or inhibition of religion then the enactment exceeds the scope of legislative power as circumscribed by the Constitution. That is to say that to withstand the strictures of the Establishment Clause there must be a secular legislative purpose and a primary effect that neither advances nor inhibits religion.” (Supreme Court in Abington School District v. Schempp, 1963)
Comment by Zelda on 5/21 @ 2:58 pm #
Speaking from personal experience (parents were members of the Children of God cult), there is nothing more confounding to a society that places a high value freedom than a cult. The cult doesn’t have the right to infringe on the freedoms of others against their will, but for the state to gather evidence usually requires that they violate the law in many different ways. Cult leaders, while evil, are not stupid. They know how to play the game, especially in America. It’s monstrously complicated and horrible.
Pandora’s box has been opened and the children are going to suffer no matter how this whole thing goes down – and most likely would be suffering in the cult anyway – so you may as well investigate and go from there.
Comment by BJTexs on 5/21 @ 3:08 pm #
Good God, Zelda, I had no idea that your parents were involved in that rolling hippie train wreck. Were they in so deep that you still carry the traumas of the groups practices?
As an evangelical I tend to get unreasonably angry with religious (especially pseudo-christian) cults that prey on children. One of the great aspects of our 1st Amendment rights is the opportunity to go live naked in the woods and worship FeatherPimple the divine Jackalope if that is our wont.
However, if you exploit/abuse children then your religious freedom just went bah-bye. I can’t tell you, Zelda, how sorry I am that you had to go through with that growing up.
Comment by SarahW on 5/21 @ 4:01 pm #
Whose woods these are, I think I know
His pants are in the village, though.
Comment by Zelda on 5/21 @ 4:31 pm #
BJ – There’s nothing to be sorry about, at least from my perspective. I think the experience made me more cognizant of my freedoms and America’s freedoms than I ever would have been otherwise. And it is always an interesting story. I don’t have much residual trauma because my parents left it when I was very young (escaping from Iran just before the Shah was deposed, but that’s another story and even I don’t know all the details). However, my parents carry a lot of baggage. It isn’t easy to escape that cult mentality even having escaped the cult. And the kids whose parents stayed in as it got worse and worse have been severely traumatized.
But I have hope for the children of the FLDS cult because they didn’t choose to belong. Choosing makes a huge difference as to whether there can be an appeal to one’s intrinsic logic. Even though my parents tried to raise my sisters and me with many of the cult traditions and practices, we could pretty easily tell what was horseshit and what wasn’t, ahthough it made for a somewhat rocky adolescence.
I won’t pretend that busting up a cult doesn’t infringe on people’s rights. It always will. Even if someone escapes with physical evidence of abuse, there will be people involved in the cult who have no knowledge of it, and their rights will be trampled upon. I’m not thrilled by that aspect of it, but I imagine it’s extremely difficult for someone in law enforcement to be nearly certain that abuse is taking place against innocent children and not try to do something.
No one comes out of cult involvement looking good, not the state, not the members. It’s all ugly.
Comment by Foxfier on 5/21 @ 4:47 pm #
1) The adults on the ranch objectively lied–identified multiple mothers for each child.
2) Age is a problem because many of the members have no birth certificates.
3) Many of the children who were sent down to start the compound came without their parents.
4) FLDS owns everything– it’s a little hard to leave when you won’t only be leaving your entire family, but everything you own.
5) That father wasn’t exactly “estranged”– they booted him out to improve the man/woman ratio, and reassigned his wife/wives.
The Lost Boys, Ms. Jessop’s interviews with G. Gordon Liddy, even my own site has more information.
http://sailorette.blogspot.com/search/label/FLDS
Comment by happyfeet on 5/21 @ 5:13 pm #
This is embarrassing, cause Texas is usually pretty sharp. Problem is mostly that Child Protective Services is universally gay and retarded. I mean everywhere you go they are teh suck. It’s not just a Texas thing.
Mostly these are those people that did two years at community college then transferred to what used to be called Southwest Texas State University but they had to change it’s name and start over cause it was a joke. Those people.
See the deal really is we pretend college is for everyone and so low wattage child protective services types get degrees and think they’re professionals just like they see on the tv but really these are those people you went to high school with but never the same classes except maybe gym.
Comment by B Moe on 5/21 @ 5:20 pm #
the State is executing its duty to those minors, to provide a safe place for them until the trials are over.
The State has a duty to protect minors, you see. Unless science is involved, then YOU AIN’T THE BOSS OF ME!
Comment by B Moe on 5/21 @ 5:33 pm #
statuatory rape is pretty abusive.
the State has evidence of that.
The teen pregnancy rate is astronomical in most government housing projects. When can we expect the raids to start there?
Comment by Darleen on 5/21 @ 8:46 pm #
Slart
IIRC, Texas changed their marriage law, upping it from 14 to 16, specifically when it realized the FLDS moved there.
Fox
It can be kind of hard to prove a child’s identity when the state has confiscated every bit of paper/journal/computer/notes/identification in your home and on your person and also tells you it doesn’t consider any birth certificate from Utah (remember, many of these people haven’t been in Texas that long) illegitimate.
I’m not particularly fond of cults, even benign ones are a bit creepy looking in. But what of the Amish? Or the long history of “cults” in the US – Shakers, Pentacostals, Jehovah’s Witness?
The fact remains that the First Amendment explicitly states a right of association. So no matter how creepy or weird the tenets of a particular group that claims to be a religion, be it Islam, FLDS, Wicca, etc … the best one can do to counter it is by the usual, IE persuasion.
To demand the law to bust heads and ignore due process (and with all due respect to Cassarah above, I think the concept of “due process” in this Texas case has been tossed to the winds. There is no way any criminal court would have allowed it to be played out as this so-called “family court” has) because one’s sense of decorum is offended is scary.
And America’s history has vacilated in how to treat people who’s lifestyles are The Other. It is chilling to see how superior Child Advocates facilitated the wholesale seizure of American Indian children – to “save them” from “primitive tribal” life.
When fathers who never set foot on the Texas ranch show up to get custody of their children while the case moves forward and are denied because CPS demands they, too, sign open-ended agreements, then “best interest of the child” is NOT the motivating factor in this case.
Comment by RAH on 5/21 @ 8:47 pm #
I have problems with the logic here. Why should anyone be upset that in this commune that maternity might be questioned? Freedom of religion and by inference lifestyle is celebrated in America. The reason for the Puritans that immigrated was that they wanted to live the way their religion instructed. That is a lifestyle. In many inner cities communities and among blacks illegitimacy is 70%. Many children do not know who is their father and it could be several different males. So questionable paternity is accepted by society and CPS does not involve themselves in those cases. Also underage pregnancy is not uncommon. Why else have school pushed for allowing dispensation of condoms to middle and some elementary schools?
So we have a communal lifestyle and in this lifestyle women make up the family unit and share child raising duties. Certainly seems to be a method for ensuring that children get good care from loving adults. Since the women share child raising there is a question on the maternity of the children. If society does not care about paternity, why should it care about maternity? The whole emphasis is that the children get a strong family unit and have caring adults. If people here are upset with that idea, then are they upset with 2 gay men raising a child, or 2 gay women raising a child? It is conceivable that among gay women that the maternity may not be told to the offspring. The children could even be adopted or from donor eggs so there is no biological maternity. Society has already agreed that that is acceptable. Why not in this case?
The main offense is the assumed underage age sex of teenagers to older men. This violates age of consent and is statutory rape. How many teenagers that are under 16 get pregnant by a male over 21 in this country? So we prosecute every one? I doubt it. Generally the only time this becomes an issue is when the girl cries forcible rape.
Now for the real issue, this is a cult. They like to live separate. The limit outside influences and they abide to very old tenets of male dominance and female submission. For Christ sakes look at the outfits!! They are very modest and the style is exact. No individuality, It is all conformist. They are old fashion. The women certainly seem to like it and the rest of humanity recoils because we don’t like conformity, or female submission or the idea that women can be happier living with this lifestyle. They are different and it offends our sense of normality. So it must be condemned.
Our country was founded on the idea that people can live different ways if they want. But the people who scream for the law and prison to be thrown at these people seem to missing that our society has allowed isolationists cults from the beginning. The Amish has been here since the colonies started and they live in similar styles. Now they do have distinct parents and the do not marry before the age of consent. But all the girls are married. There are no or little illegitimacy. They dress all the same with conformity. They limit outside modernity. They have a more old fashion gender roles.
I read the CPS testimony and I was struck on how CPS seemed to think it was abuse that girls are taught to get married and have lots of children. They encourage child bearing at younger ages when the girls are more fertile and capable of child bearing. I do not think CPS has the authority to break up families because they do not like the religious lifestyle on encouraging youthful marriages and multiple children.
Also if CPS suspected abuse why did they come in at 9 pm instead of morning when more children would be up? This smack of SWAT like tactics. If you read the testimony the CPS supervisor said that they left at 3 am after waking up lots of families after being there 6 hrs. There was no suspicion of imminent death or torture to justify a late raid.
If CPS was making a reasonable investigation, they should have made arrangements to meet the commune and arrange to speak with the young mothers and try to determine the ages at marriage and whether their male partners were old enough to claim statutory rape. Ask those women if they were forced into marriage with old men? If they objected to be expected to bed old men?
I got the impression after reading the CPS supervisor testimony, that she was horrified at this conformist lifestyle and the women who married young and had lots of children, unlike what modern society teaches. Their ideas and lifestyle offended her personal sense of what is normal, so she yanked all the children, since children should never be brought up to a paternalistic doctrine. This was so anti feminist.
I have a real problem with someone who uses or abuses their authority of law to destroy families, tear nursing babies from the breast, just because she thinks it is wrong and violates her feminists’ beliefs. I do not believe that justice is served when the government subjects children to abuse like separating nursing infants and toddlers from their mothers in order to save the child from nonexistent abuse. There was no evidence of physical abuse to these young children according to her testimony. The broken bones were normal childhood injuries. This is the classic throwing the baby out with the bathwater in order to save the baby from drowning.
The false call that caused the destruction of hundreds of families is problematical. They had a duty to investigate but they went overboard.
Texas law when this commune started had marriage at 14 allowed with parental consent and 16 without consent. There are many states with those laws. Texas law has changed to 16 for marriage with or without consent, I believe a few years back. So for mothers who had married at 14, the fathers would not be liable for statutory rape a few years ago.
Now these marriages may be irregular since there were not civilly recorded but they still may be legal. Common law marriage is still on the books.
I do not like this commune or their beliefs systems, but what I like or not is immaterial. The question is did CPS abuse their authority or overstep their authority? If the criminal behavior is statutory rape, then why does not CPS investigate every case of teenage pregnancy to see if the father was old enough to be statutory rape? There are enough girls in the cities that qualify.
I predict that there will be a few convictions of the older males and a lot of civil rights cases that Texas will pay damages.
The CPS sensationalized the news that they had over 31 females between 14-17 that were pregnant. Now ten of those children that were pregnant are determined to be over 18 and one is 27. These pregnant women were declared children so they could be held in custody until their children were born, so that the child could be taken by the state. These women had shown birth certificates and drivers licenses the first day they were taken from the ranch. So far only 2 females have to been documented that have children were pregnant when younger than 16. However it is not against the law for a fertile female child to be pregnant. The only case would be if the father of those children were a much older male. It is not statutory rape if the male is about the same age. In a group of 462 females it is not unusual to have a couple of teenage pregnancies.
CPS has lied the entire time. They have not proven one allegation of child abuse. No adult has been charged with a crime. The children have been held hostage and one plan size all has the mother having to go through psych testing, parenting classes, objections to home schooling and required to be able to earn an income and live off the ranch. I have yet to see what is illegal with the males having multiple illegitimate children. The fathers up to the raid did support the children and mothers. They were self sufficient on the ranch with homegrown food and diary. Making their own clothes, shelter provided free by the church.
These women appear to like this lifestyle and not forced. They have been all over Texas trying to see their children that have been spread over 1000 miles, because CPS deliberately dispersed the siblings to make it hard for parents to visit so that would be evidence of bad parenting.
Comment by happyfeet on 5/21 @ 8:53 pm #
See reading that it’s even more embarrassing. I wish we should just ignore the whole thing but CPS really needs to be understood for what it is. They should be spat on and shunned I think. Their families too.
Comment by happyfeet on 5/21 @ 8:55 pm #
oh. I wish we *could* just ignore the whole thing. I’m really tired of news that’s driven by the news.
Comment by Foxfier on 5/21 @ 11:20 pm #
How many teenagers that are under 16 get pregnant by a male over 21 in this country? So we prosecute every one?
Gee, we can’t catch EVERY person who breaks into a car, so let me drop my charge against the ring of idiot criminals who broke into my car! After all, if we can’t catch them ALL, why bother stopping anyone?
Comment by Darleen on 5/21 @ 11:53 pm #
Foxfier
I have 10 years in the DA office behind me. I’ve seen gangbangers that are 2nd, 3rd, 4th generation. Please tell me why CPS isn’t getting judges to seize all kids of all parents who affiliated or live near gangbangers.
I mean, this is all about the children, right?
Prosecute the lawbreakers, but stop pretending that seizing over 400 children (and at least a couple of dozen of them are possible adults) has ANYTHING to do with “due process” or “the children.”
Comment by B Moe on 5/22 @ 12:04 am #
If they ever raid one of these sites:
http://tinyurl.com/4pp2t3
do you think they will be that slack ass about due process or probable cause?
If they ever do it.
Comment by MayBee on 5/22 @ 12:23 am #
o/t
Darleen- did you see the story on local news about Jamiel Shaw’s alleged gang affiliations? Supposedly some pictures on his MySpace page have created a stir.
Comment by Foxfier on 5/22 @ 2:19 am #
Please tell me why CPS isn’t getting judges to seize all kids of all parents who affiliated or live near gangbangers.
If you actually think that folks who are a member of a cult that controls all of their worldly possessions counts the same as folks who are “associated” or “neighbors” or whatever nice term you want, as opposed to, say, gang members–why are you in the DA office?
Yes, if I found a gang of thousands that openly promoted child rape and was well-known for abandoning male children after puberty, I *would* support removing children from said gang until it was well-established that the children weren’t a result of child rape, or directly associated with child rapists.
I suppose that you also object to arresting everyone in the room when you bust a drug dealer, because you can’t PROVE that everyone was involved–after all, they ALL say they’re innocent!
Comment by McGehee on 5/22 @ 5:32 am #
There is an element of proportionality to be considered. Being arrested != being convicted. Having a cop pat you down != being arrested. Being pulled over != being sized up for a one-way ticket to Gitmo.
Any one of these things does involve a (hopefully temporary) infringement on people who are by law presumed innocent. No one has ever found a way for the law to do its thing without infringing in one way or another on the innocent. And it’s not as if unchecked crime doesn’t constitute its own infringement on the innocent.
That may be one reason I’ve never advanced beyond “libertarian sympathizer.”
Comment by Lisa on 5/22 @ 6:31 am #
#108: Agrees.
Comment by Lisa on 5/22 @ 6:32 am #
#104: Actually if a house full of gangbangers gets busted, the kids get taken away.
Comment by B Moe on 5/22 @ 6:35 am #
It isn’t against the law to be in the same room as a drug dealer. If you ain’t holding, you most likely won’t get charged.
Comment by Darleen on 5/22 @ 7:01 am #
Actually if a house full of gangbangers gets busted, the kids get taken away.
Wrong, Lisa. Absolutely wrong. Any child at the scene of a bust will only be taken into custody if all the adults at the scene are arrested. And the child will be in custody only as long as it takes for another relative to show up.
Good lord, these kids visit their gangbanger parents at jail. And non-arrested gangbanger parents visit their kids at juvie hall.
Where the hell are you getting your information?
And Fox?
You are now plain ducking the issues I’m raising about due process. The “advocating child rape” is a dead giveaway.
Comment by Darleen on 5/22 @ 7:05 am #
Maybee
Yes, that’s been rumbling around for some awhile and it’s disgusting what some of the illegal alien advocates are trying to do with a whisper campaign around Jamiel.
I haven’t seen the pictures, but according to reports and the Shaw family, the pictures show him doing the “peace sign”. Um, that is NOT throwing a gang sign. Fact remains Jamiel was not in any gang database or had any gang affiliation (and believe me, LAPD’s gang unit is pretty thorough in documenting members and affiliates of gangs. Most So Cal police departments cooperate and have regular interdepartment gang meetings to share information).
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/22 @ 9:19 am #
RAH
the State is trying to get rid of the polygs.
welfare fraud is quite expensive.
Arizona tried to get rid of the polygs in 1953, in the Shortcreek Raid.
But they didnt have DNA testing back then.
btw, there are pregant 14 year olds that call each other “sister wife.”
a common law marriage must be of 7 years duration.
how long has that 14 year old been married now?
since she was 7?
this is really about who owns the children.
nice to see you on the of the FLDS patriarchy daddies, tool.
Comment by B Moe on 5/22 @ 9:20 am #
I was beginning to think nishi was going to miss a golden opportunity to make an idiot of herself again.
Comment by SmokeVanThorn on 5/22 @ 12:59 pm #
Per a link at Instapundit:
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.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/22 @ 2:33 pm #
haha, guess what?
the Texas authorities knew that would happen…and the tipoff was likely a fix too.
but chu know what they got?
DNA from ALL the kids.
TjmUtah is right..this is mostly an operation staged to drive the polygs out of texas.
now enough of the perps can prosecuted with DNA evidence and inshallah they will all wind up like Warren Jeffs.
;)
TEXAS FTW!
Comment by happyfeet on 5/22 @ 2:39 pm #
I just hope the kids get to have a nice summer.
Comment by RAH on 5/22 @ 2:39 pm #
Nishi,
The state does not own children. The state did not get pregnent. The state does not pay for the child’s needs. The parent had the child, the parent controls the child until adulthood. Sorry that your totalitarian mindview is so engrained.
My children are mine; any anyone that tries to kidnap my child will suffer my personal consequences. I have a natural God given right to defend my children from the state if necessary. That is natural law,same as any mammal defends their children from predators.
Comment by B Moe on 5/22 @ 2:41 pm #
They are just fine tuning the procedure for rounding up the transhumanists and gene-manipulators down the road, nishi.
FUCK DUE PROCESS, ITS FOR THE CHILDREN!
Comment by RAH on 5/22 @ 2:49 pm #
I was pleasntly surprised at the speed of the Appeals Ct decision and glad that they concurred that CPS failed to show evidence of imminent abuse. Now they need to tell CPS to give up the children they stole from the parents. More and more CPS has shown a total disregard for Constitutional rights. Like yesterday to show up at the ranch without a search warrant and expect they can just walk onto private property to take more children.
These cultists were a lot more forgiving than many; this type of state police tactics tends to rile the natives and thinking that armed resistance may be a better choice.
The FLDS wisely coose to go through the system and legally get their children back. CPS allegations have not been validated and more and more shown to be lies.
Texas is going to pay a heavy price for these violations of civil rights. Hopefully the laws on CPS will be revised so witchunts like this are less likely in the future.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/22 @ 2:53 pm #
nah B Moes…we will rule the world and u godbots will be relegated to the antique genome reservation.
RAH, u weren’t listinin.
the texicans knew it would be thrown out eventually, either illegal search an seizure from the setup callin, or insufficient evidence of risk to the removed children.
they just wanted the DNA.
they really just want to railroad the polygs out of texas and let them be someone elses welfare fraud problem.
poor kiddoes, tho.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/22 @ 2:55 pm #
Texas is going to pay a heavy price for these violations of civil rights.
haha, no they wont.
;)
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/22 @ 2:56 pm #
RAH u dont get it at all.
this was the only Texas could get the DNA evidence.
i hope ALL the FLDS patriarchy daddies end up jus like ol’ warren jeffs.
dope.
;)
Comment by MayBee on 5/22 @ 3:03 pm #
this was the only Texas could get the DNA evidence.
Yeah, RAH, aren’t you listening? Nishi has a new theory that she now knows was the plan all along!
Sure, yesterday she was all, the State is executing its duty to those minors, to provide a safe place for them until the trials are over.
But now she knows RAH, u weren’t listinin.
the texicans knew it would be thrown out eventually,
And so you, RAH, are a dope.
Comment by RAH on 5/22 @ 5:21 pm #
Maybee,
Thanks. I saw her change of viewpoint. The DNA evidence may be thrown out as illegal obtained evidence since it was coerced because the children was held hostage. Plus among FLDS which has been in existance since early 1900’s the family relationships are so closed that DNA may not be good enough. They all seem to be from 4-5 families and DNA testing is not usually that refined for crime labs.
I agree that potential criminal charges may occur due to any cases which has actual evidence of rape and statutory rape.
The cult seemed to be very careful of ensuring the pairings were consensual. After 17 any female can bed any man even if he is 50 years older than her.
Comment by RAH on 5/22 @ 5:27 pm #
Nishi.
From what I read Warren Jeffs, deserves whatever hell exists. But his case on appeal may free him from the charges since it criminalized the priest/minister for what appeared to be consensual marriage. Evidence of marriage photos of smiling bride, etc. But I don’t really care about Jeffs, just the abuse of the state against a group that has different beliefs. I believe in freedom and the problems of the cults are theirs to iron out. If the women choose to leave, they can, they are not held forcibly.
Comment by RAH on 5/22 @ 5:29 pm #
The political costs of this raid may be yet to be realized. The Short Creek raid destroyed the political career of the UTAH governor, I believe.
Comment by McGehee on 5/22 @ 5:31 pm #
Um, I’ve got Hitler on line four, Genghis Khan on line two, Alexander of Macedon on live seven, Napoleon on line five — they all want to have a word with you, Nishi.
Comment by JD on 5/22 @ 5:46 pm #
McGehee – Even those clowns would be embarssed by the nsihit.
Comment by Spies, Brigands, and Pirates on 5/22 @ 6:24 pm #
Personally, I don’t see nishidiot winding up in a bunker.
The news story about her demise is more likely to include phrases such as “found suffocated under a mountain of her own filth after neighbors reported not seeing her for several weeks” and “Animal Control officers removed more than seventy-five cats from the dilapidated structure”.
Comment by McGehee on 5/22 @ 6:30 pm #
So you’re saying even 75 starving cats wouldn’t nibble on that carcass?
That’s cold, man.
Trackback by language of babies on 6/29 @ 7:14 am #
language of babies…
…