TX has completely screwed up Polygomist Cult Investigation

[Johnny_Blaze_47]

BC-APNewsAlert,0034

SAN ANGELO, Texas (AP) -- A judge has ordered that all 416 children taken from a polygamist compound remain in state custody and be subject to DNA testing.

(Copyright 2008 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)

APTV-04-18-08 1941CDT

[FromWayDowntown]

Yes, dan's math degree has also made him a lawyer as well as a demolitions expert. Again, it has to be determined whether any abuse occurred and whether the mothers were complicit. Unfortunately the best way to get the child's testimony is to separate them from their mothers. Now if there is such widespread abuse in the foster care system, that's a separate issue and I'm sure dan is an expert in that field as well.

If the mothers didn't do anything wrong they will get their kids back. If they did do something wrong, many of them will probably have diminished capacity defenses or whatever the lawyers call it these days. It will definitely take time, but cults are ed up things, and the FLDS did themselves no favors by being secretive, insular and threatening to whoever came near their land..

No, no Chump. Allegations that children are being sexually abused are just allegations. Until they're proven otherwise, there's no justification whatsoever for separating the children from their parents!! If there actually has been sexual abuse and it continues while the investigation into the allegations is ongoing, that's just the price that we pay for living in a free society. There's absolutely no reason to act on the behalf of children by presuming (for purposes of assessing the best interests of the children) that the allegations might be true and protect the children accordingly.

Make the government prove it's case beyond a reasonable doubt before the children can be protected -- that's the American way!!

[Mr. Peabody]

How is due process being denied?

You have one judge reviewing the cases of over 400 children. How can he possibly make individual determinations and findings of fact for each child?

The kids are being are being placed into large groups and assigned a color to represent their large group. The attorneys make their arguments when the assigned colors are called. This is due process?

Furthermore, the kids are being denied access to their parents while they are being questioned. While some may argue that the separation is necessary to limit influence from the parent, my question is whether someone is there preventing influence from the person asking the questions? Kids are impressionable, easily influenced, and in my experience, aren't very reliable when they are being questioned in the absence of someone they trust.

[Nbadan]

Furthermore, the kids are being denied access to their parents while they are being questioned. While some may argue that the separation is necessary to limit influence from the parent, my question is whether someone is there preventing influence from the person asking the questions? Kids are impressionable, easily influenced, and in my experience, aren't very reliable when they are being questioned in the absence of someone they trust.

Now quit being logical Peabody, it's much easier and safer to be a illogical reactionary idiot....

[Nbadan]

No, no Chump. Allegations that children are being sexually abused are just allegations. Until they're proven otherwise, there's no justification whatsoever for separating the children from their parents!! If there actually has been sexual abuse and it continues while the investigation into the allegations is ongoing, that's just the price that we pay for living in a free society. There's absolutely no reason to act on the behalf of children by presuming (for purposes of assessing the best interests of the children) that the allegations might be true and protect the children accordingly.

Make the government prove it's case beyond a reasonable doubt before the children can be protected -- that's the American way!!

I'm really disappointed because FWDT is usually a rational poster...look, the law requires individual adversary hearings....if the State didn't want to handle 416 individual hearings, they should have been more selective in who they removed. Since they identified 5 victims, they could have limited the removal to 5. I'm sorry, but I cannot and will not accept any justification of railroading children's Cons utional & human rights because it's inconvenient to the State to comply with the law.

[Nbadan]

Not only that, the original complainant is likely also a hoax...

So here's where we are:

No complaining victims exist and the original abuse allegations were fraudulent, pumped up in the media by anti-polygamist activists.

No pregnant girls were found at the YFZ Ranch who were under 16 (the legal marriage age in Texas, with parental consent).

The most troubling outstanding claim: A CPS investigator testified one FLDS woman "may" have given birth as young as 13, which of course also means she "may" not have done so. The same CPS investigator, Angie Voss, also testified yesterday that an FLDS woman told her "Sarah" does exist and does have a baby, something all FLDS sources deny, and which we now know is likely not true.

More than 400 kids have been removed from their homes at state expense as a result of this fraud, generating court proceedings that are presently descending into farce.

Can the Judge put a stop to this now, please? Identify any individual cases that can be actually proven (I doubt there are any; five pregnant girls between 16 and 19 does not an abuse case make) and send the rest of the group and their lawyers home with the thanks and apologies of the court.

Link

Ready for all the chicken-littles to start apologizing - Yeah, that's gonna happen!

[Nbadan]

Rangers confirm probe of Springs woman's calls
By Kirk Mitc
The Denver Post
Article Last Updated: 04/19/2008 12:52:01 AM MDT

R

ozita Swinton was arrested on a charge of false reporting in February. (Colorado Springs Police)
Related

Texas officials confirmed Friday that a Colorado Springs woman is a "person of interest" regarding telephone calls placed to a crisis hotline before a massive child-protection raid on a polygamist compound.

Denver Post

TX is opening proceedings to permanently remove 400 children from parents who aren't guilty of anything but bad lifestyle choices.....hope some of you are happy....

[xrayzebra]

this is what i get for giving the state the benefit of the doubt

You have never, never, given anyone or thing the benefit of
the doubt. Well except the dimm-o-craps.

[FromWayDowntown]

I'm really disappointed because FWDT is usually a rational poster...look, the law requires individual adversary hearings....if the State didn't want to handle 416 individual hearings, they should have been more selective in who they removed. Since they identified 5 victims, they could have limited the removal to 5. I'm sorry, but I cannot and will not accept any justification of railroading children's Cons utional & human rights because it's inconvenient to the State to comply with the law.

My point had nothing to do with the procedural issues associated with the hearings and everything to do with the propriety, in the first instance of removing the kids from their homes on the report of abuse. Perhaps I'm short-sighted, but it makes sense to me for the State to remove kids from the home -- at least temporarily -- when there is a report of abuse to allow some time for an investigation while ensuring that there will be no abuse during the time of the investigation.

I balked at the suggestion that the State was wrong to remove the children from the situation in the first place. I don't think it should take proof beyond a reasonable doubt to step in and protect kids where there is an allegation that should be investigated.

But there should also be two steps to the process: investigation and then prosecution (if warranted).

You're talking more specifically about the procedural safeguards associated with the hearings that follow the investigation and, on that front, I'll agree with you that the procedures employed here are hideously unfair. The thing that struck me about the original story was the passage explaining that the State hopes to prove facts sufficient to warrant termination of parental rights. Could have been a poor sentence by the story's writer, but I'm not sure that should ever really be the state's goal. More specifically, even if the State is going to try to terminate parental rights -- a draconian penalty if there ever was one -- it had damned well better have first conducted a full investigation that develops facts indicating that it is more likely than not that the child has been abused. And then, it should have to prove its case as to that child and (I would think) do so beyond a reasonable doubt.

I certainly agree that putting children into large groups and trying to hear what should be individualized cases in some sort of en masse fashion is beyond scary. To do so without the initial step of a full investigation (I've heard virtually nothing about an investigation and a whole lot about the State moving quickly to terminate parental rights) is suggestive of an agenda that should be alarming to anyone.

[xrayzebra]

My point had nothing to do with the procedural issues associated with the hearings and everything to do with the propriety, in the first instance of removing the kids from their homes on the report of abuse. Perhaps I'm short-sighted, but it makes sense to me for the State to remove kids from the home -- at least temporarily -- when there is a report of abuse to allow some time for an investigation while ensuring that there will be no abuse during the time of the investigation.

I balked at the suggestion that the State was wrong to remove the children from the situation in the first place. I don't think it should take proof beyond a reasonable doubt to step in and protect kids where there is an allegation that should be investigated.

But there should also be two steps to the process: investigation and then prosecution (if warranted).

You're talking more specifically about the procedural safeguards associated with the hearings that follow the investigation and, on that front, I'll agree with you that the procedures employed here are hideously unfair. The thing that struck me about the original story was the passage explaining that the State hopes to prove facts sufficient to warrant termination of parental rights. Could have been a poor sentence by the story's writer, but I'm not sure that should ever really be the state's goal. More specifically, even if the State is going to try to terminate parental rights -- a draconian penalty if there ever was one -- it had damned well better have first conducted a full investigation that develops facts indicating that it is more likely than not that the child has been abused. And then, it should have to prove its case as to that child and (I would think) do so beyond a reasonable doubt.

I certainly agree that putting children into large groups and trying to hear what should be individualized cases in some sort of en masse fashion is beyond scary. To do so without the initial step of a full investigation (I've heard virtually nothing about an investigation and a whole lot about the State moving quickly to terminate parental rights) is suggestive of an agenda that should be alarming to anyone.

The state has certainly taken on quite a task. And the
judge in the case has quite a task. Can you imagine
one lawyer for each child. I just don't see how this can
be resolved in a timely and fair fashion. To the children
or to the State. I am curious where all the money is
going to come from to handle the cost of lawyers, courts,
housing, on and on and on. The county certainly can
stand the gaff and CPS budget wont handle it. This
thing is going to cost millions maybe tens of millions
before it is all over with.

[word]

Not producing the so called' informant' and then having someone arrested in Denver for filing a false report doesn't help. Do I think it's a cult ? Yes, if not certainly 'cultish'. Do they molest children ? I don't know. Many of this is about sociol mores conflicting with commonly held beliefs. I side with society more on this but what the .

This rarely happens but I was listening to pags on the radio for aboot 1/2 minute and he said this: 'I don't care how we got here ( talking about the fake witness ) I'm just glad we are.' ( meaning...I'm all for the prosecution )

Okay...I'm 'part' of the way with him but I *do* care about how they 'got there'. I'm in the 1% it seems, that feels that 'the system' and all that cons itution 'crap' is more important than 'how we got here'.

Given that, it seems the state of Texas didn't have their ducks in a row here and once again, did what they wanted. It is reminiscent of Waco. Another sitation where I can't agree with the group and it certainly does not fit my belief system but I have another belief that supercedes that belief and is more of a 'core belief'. It's called the Bill of Rights. You either believe in it, or you don't.

At Waco it was about guns and the whole assault rifle ban thing was under way but ultimately they used 'molestation' as their reason when they got burned as the 'fall back'. They (US government) did kill 33 children in that compound. YOu know, it's about the children..must protect the children...that is, when we're not KILLING them. All of those people in the BD were found not guilty by a jury trial right here in SA. Every one of 'em.

I'll go with George Carlin on this. Whenever the government or a politician says, 'oh it's about the children'.....look out !!!

[Cant_Be_Faded]

cuh-rawfl
I had been intentionally avoiding this story since the start, waiting, just waiting first to hear reports that the original whistleblower could have been fake.

Talk about mormon bashing COR-SO. Next thing you know we'll hear state reports that the compound was stocked up with guns and explosives.

[xrayzebra]

Not producing the so called' informant' and then having someone arrested in Denver for filing a false report doesn't help. Do I think it's a cult ? Yes, if not certainly 'cultish'. Do they molest children ? I don't know. Many of this is about sociol mores conflicting with commonly held beliefs. I side with society more on this but what the .

This rarely happens but I was listening to pags on the radio for aboot 1/2 minute and he said this: 'I don't care how we got here ( talking about the fake witness ) I'm just glad we are.' ( meaning...I'm all for the prosecution )

Okay...I'm 'part' of the way with him but I *do* care about how they 'got there'. I'm in the 1% it seems, that feels that 'the system' and all that cons itution 'crap' is more important than 'how we got here'.

Given that, it seems the state of Texas didn't have their ducks in a row here and once again, did what they wanted. It is reminiscent of Waco. Another sitation where I can't agree with the group and it certainly does not fit my belief system but I have another belief that supercedes that belief and is more of a 'core belief'. It's called the Bill of Rights. You either believe in it, or you don't.

At Waco it was about guns and the whole assault rifle ban thing was under way but ultimately they used 'molestation' as their reason when they got burned as the 'fall back'. They (US government) did kill 33 children in that compound. YOu know, it's about the children..must protect the children...that is, when we're not KILLING them. All of those people in the BD were found not guilty by a jury trial right here in SA. Every one of 'em.

I'll go with George Carlin on this. Whenever the government or a politician says, 'oh it's about the children'.....look out !!!

The "San Antonio Express News" had a long story on
the legality of the search warrant this morning. What
opinion do you want? There was one from some expert
on every aspect if it was legal or not.

I listen to Fox News legal expert yesterday say that it
wouldn't be according to "many" Supreme Court
rulings, if it is based on an anonymous phone tip.

Pay your money, take your choice.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Rangers confirm probe of Springs woman's calls
By Kirk Mitc
The Denver Post
Article Last Updated: 04/19/2008 12:52:01 AM MDT

R

Denver Post

TX is opening proceedings to permanently remove 400 children from parents who aren't guilty of anything but bad lifestyle choices.....hope some of you are happy....

this is funny
http://www.peakdems.org/obama_state_del.asp

[Nbadan]

One you start a rock rolling...

SAN ANGELO, Texas -- Buses filled with women and children today began leaving the San Angelo Coliseum where 437 FLDS children have been been held for more than two weeks.

The movement came after Judge Barbara Walther issued an order setting destinations and explaining how the children will be placed.

The judge's order came despite a request for a temporary restraining order seeking to keep any children moved within a five-county radius of San Angelo. Walther's order said the specialized needs of the mothers and children have been shared with the care providers, as well as their background and cultural characteristics. Texas Children Protection Services workers will be arranging meetings with those facilities to take care of medical and educational needs, the judge said.

Link

Yeah, I like how they had the stadium on lock-down so the parents and their attorneys couldn't turn it into a big tear-filled show for the media...heartless bas s...

[WalterBenitez]

Oh Dan you are just jealous. You know you want to join the
Mormons and get you some of those "wives".


By the way, when did you get your Law degree? And how do you
like San Angelo?

Remember my friend, every wife could come with an extra Mother in law

[WalterBenitez]

I am a casual reader of this forum, but I am surprised about the complexity of this case.

First of all, the children's right, that's ok and perfect with me, but what about spliting families with charges that must be proven??

Second, if charges are proved what about adoption issues, what about DNA's test must run, it's pure complexity in this area.

Third, how religious enter to this case? OMG it won't be easy, because those people could easily argue they are following their religion.

At the end, I'm still thinking in those crying kids going from here to there.

[ChumpDumper]

So a couple dozen mothers appear to be minors themselves, about half the mothers choose to stay in a women's shelter instead of going back to the ranch -- and everything is fine for those kids there?

[Nbadan]

I am a casual reader of this forum, but I am surprised about the complexity of this case.

First of all, the children's right, that's ok and perfect with me, but what about spliting families with charges that must be proven??

Second, if charges are proved what about adoption issues, what about DNA's test must run, it's pure complexity in this area.

Third, how religious enter to this case? OMG it won't be easy, because those people could easily argue they are following their religion.

At the end, I'm still thinking in those crying kids going from here to there.

Welcome to the forum...the more complex problem for the state now seems to be that the original charge from the state was based on a hoax phone call, that could set this whole thing up as a mistrial if any future polygamy charges are brought against the fathers...

[ChumpDumper]

What Texas cases were declared mistrials for the same reason, counselor?

[Nbadan]

Well, if there was a case against some of the men on polygamy charges, those very well could fall apart now...

SAN ANGELO, Texas - An attorney for FLDS families in Texas challenged the state's allegations of a "pervasive pattern" of underage girls having children, saying the state's own do ents show just three teenagers in custody are pregnant. Of those girls, one will turn 18 in a few months and another merely refused to take a pregnancy test, said Rod Parker, a Salt Lake City attorney representing families at the YFZ Ranch. "That leaves us with one," he said.

Parker also said Friday that one state do ent includes a woman whose first child was born more than a decade ago. He said he based his statements on a copy of a list created by an investigator for Texas Child Protective Services. "I challenge CPS to come forward with the pregnant minors," said Parker. Investigator Angie Voss submitted the chart last week during a two-day court hearing to bolster the state's contention that all children at the ranch were at risk of abuse.

<snip>

The count of children in custody rose again Friday after CPS determined that 25 girls who claimed to be adults are actually minors, said spokesman Chris Van Deusen. That group may overlap with the 20 listed in the court do ent as pregnant or as mothers, he said. "The only thing we can say is we're aware of 20 young girls who became pregnant when they were between the ages of 13 and 16," Van Deusen said. "That's not to say that there are 20 now, but at the time they conceived they were 13, 14, 15, or 16. "That establishes that there was some sexual abuse here," he said. Van Deusen said the court do ent may not include minors identified as pregnant or mothers since the court hearing. He also said he could not talk about investigative results that haven't been made public in court or otherwise.

One CPS do ent reviewed by The Salt Lake Tribune lists just three pregnant teenagers. The court do ent, also reviewed by The Tribune, includes women who became mothers before the FLDS' move to Texas or before the state raised the age of marriage, with parents' permission, from 14 to 16 in 2005. The chart does not indicate whether the women are legally married or the ages of the children's fathers. Among them: One woman, now 30, listed as having given birth to her first child in 1993 when she was 14. A reference to this situation was made by a CPS investigator without explaining when the pregnancy occurred during the two-day court hearing in which Judge Barbara Walther made her decision to keep the children in state custody.

St, Louis Tribune

Parker also refuted CPS' description of an orderly, calm separation of mothers and children at the coliseum. He said it was "complete pandemonium." As the children, all younger than 5, figured out what was happening, they started screaming and CPS workers had to pry many away from their mothers. CPS also assured nursing mothers they would be able to take breast milk to their infants but, as of early Friday, had been given no information on where the children had been taken. They also were told sibling groups would be kept together but thirteen children from one family were sent to five locations...

[ChumpDumper]

Wrong city.

[Don Quixote]

From the AP ...

SAN ANTONIO — Texas child welfare officials say more than half the teen girls swept into state custody from a polygamist sect's ranch have been pregnant.

Child Protective Services spokesman Darrell Azar says 53 girls between the ages of 14 and 17 were living on the ranch in Eldorado. Of that group, 31 already have children or are pregnant.

State officials took custody of all 463 children at the Yearning For Zion Ranch more than three weeks ago after a raid prompted by calls to a domestic violence hotline.

Child welfare officials say there was a pattern of underage girls forced into "spiritual marriages" with much older men at the ranch.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,352966,00.html

I guess there's a case here after all?

[Nbadan]

CPS has claimed a lot of things in the press that haven't panned out...one thing that is panning out though is that the search warrant that sparked the Zion ranch raid probably wasn't legal...

“Moreover, prior to executing the initial warrant, (Schleicher County Sheriff David Doran) was advised that Dale Barlow was in Arizona and not on the premises sought to be searched. In fact, prior to entering the premises Sheriff Doran actually spoke to Dale Barlow in Arizona by cell phone, confirming his driver license number and the fact that he was in Arizona.”

Barlow advised the sheriff that he did not know Sarah Jessop, he had not been to Texas in over 20 years, nor had he ever been to Yearning For Zion Ranch, according to the filing. Thus, Goldstein argues, law enforcement had been advised and verified that the only person suspected of posing an immediate risk to children was not located at the polygamist compound.

The later discovery that the reported abuse may have been the invention of a woman in Colorado Springs with a history of making similar false reports weakens the integrity of the Yearning For Zion Ranch raid, the legal filing states.

“The veracity of the factual underpinnings for any probable cause in support of (one of the search warrants) is further undermined by the revelation that the telephones utilized by the alleged sexually abused, pregnant, 16-year-old mother, claiming to be Sarah Jessop to the New Bridge Family Shelter ‘Crisis Hotline’ in San Angelo, Texas, have been traced back to a 33-year-old childless, African American woman in Colorado Springs, Colorado,” Goldstein states.

Aspen Daily News

[ChumpDumper]

So dan, do you think anything bad has happened with this group ever?