Court: Texas Had No Right to Take Children from Polygamist Sect

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/04/09/national/main4002969.shtml?source=RSSattr=HOME_4002969

Polygamy
Forced sex of underage girls
Marriage under the age of 16

These are all allegations of course - the proof doesn't occur until any trials take place. But if you have children in potential danger, the government always protects the child first, rather than waiting to see if the danger actually occurs.

 

This also tends to hinge on people's perception of "abuse." Most people immediately think of physical or sexual abuse or neglect.

Are these kids being beaten? Probably not.

Are these kids suffering from neglect? Probably not.

Are these kids being subjected to emotional abuse? Debatably, but not in the stereotypical "Mommy Dearest" style,

Are these kids being subjected to sexual abuse? Probably so, but not in the classic "Uncle Ernie diddling about-style"

The "abuse" is in the instillation of a set of BS "beliefs" cloaked in the veil of "religion" that brainwashes young girls that sexually pleasing these elderly men as "wives" is their "Godly" duty.

 

Devil's Advocate Question: Is this you or 'people' forcing their views/definition of what is abuse on these folx?


Bigger Question to me: Are you comfortable with the government invading a person's home or a group's home based on nothing more than a phone call . . .a phone call that was bogus?

maybe I am watching too much LAW AND ORDER but
I see alot of ways that can be abused

Rocket River

 

If you're being held hostage in someone's home, and somehow you call 911 and tell them that, do you want the police to have the right to enter the home to see if that's the case? Or should they just knock on the door, if the person comes up and says "no sir, I have no hostages", they leave?

 

Upon discovering that the phone call was bogus . .. should they hold your kids. . . while the investigate further?

What if this happens to the Scientologist . . . or one of those Sects that don't beleive in modern medicine?

Rocket River

 

If they found other evidence of crimes, then I would hope so.

 

Better safe than sorry...

 

This is one of the few times due process can be a real sum'b*tch...

 

The state of Texas had no right to remove these children and do anything with them other than place them with their biological father. Roger Clemens and Steve Garvey were unavailable for comment.

 

I agree that there will always be room for abuse of any form of police power, so it is a very slippery slope.

My philosophical side understands and agrees with you, but my pragmatic side lands me on the side of supporting the removal of these kids.

In this situation, it is no secret that the intent of this cult is the manipulation and cultivation of pre & post pubescent females for the sexual use of older men. This is the difference. If these were all consenting adults, there would be no crime other than polygamy, with which I have no problem.

If you were to make a false phone call reporting that your neighbor was manufacturing explosives, would you not expect the police to respond?

 

Respond yes. . .confiscate all his stuff and hold it for weeks maybe months
on end . . . ..

I would worry

Rocket River

 

I'd say statutory rape is pretty much physical abuse. I hope this goes to the Supreme Court and they rule for the police. I think the state has a vested interest in protecting the physical and mental welfare of its citizens that trumps privacy or religious cloaking; that's why domestic abuse laws are in place.

Also, doesn't this appeals circuit have a long history of rulings that are reversed by the Supreme Court?

 

From the story I'm reading here, I do not know the actual evidence presented. If it went down as I've heard it did, though...then the "there was no imminent harm" argument is a joke. Statutory rape so repetitive as to become cultural in this little group absolutely equals imminent harm.

But again...I didn't get to see/hear the evidence presented in this case. We're all kinda guessing at this point, I think.

 

The false phone call got them in the door to investigate. Once they were there, the children were placed in protective custody on the basis of things that the CPS saw with its own eyes as I understand it.

If police responded to a false call about your neighbor building a bomb, then got there and found a giant stash of illegal machine guns and rocket launchers while looking for that bomb, should they walk away because the bomb call was false?

 

Thanks Otto, I was fully expecting to provide a similar response.

 

Here is the decision:

http://www.3rdcoa.courts.state.tx.us/opinions/htmlopinion.asp?OpinionId=16865

I haven't had a chance to read it closely.

 

nice way around taps/warrents/etc

"OH . .well . .we got . . an . . uhm . .. . anonymous tip .. . yea yea that's the ticket" - Officer Vick Mackie

Rocket River

 

I see and agree with your point in regards to civil liberties RR, but I don't think you have a very clear understanding of how CPS works.

We will soon be seeing/hearing the backlash coming from child welfare groups whose goal is to protect these children.

I'll wait for this to play out further in the courts. It is going to be very difficult.

 

I think the tip can be fairly well documented, and the person who made the fake tip will face legal penalties. It is different from the situation where the police make up a tip that you are talking about. If the police can be shown to be operating in good faith, it is generally regarded as legal, from what I understand. When someone provides you with false 911 information, and the police have no reason to not believe the tip is credible it is probable cause.

If the police fake the tip then the individual in question can sue for violation of civil liberties and become really wealthy at the PD's expense.

Honestly, in the hypothetical case I sited, would you prefer the police to just turn around and leave if they got a fake bomb tip but only found illegal machine guns and rocket launchers?

 

jeff's sixteen year old daughter alleges abuse


A lawyer for the 16-year-old daughter of polygamist group leader Warren Jeffs is requesting a restraining order to prevent a spokesman for the group from intimidating and harassing the girl.

The request for a restraining order against Willie Jessop was filed in San Angelo today by Natalie Malonis.

The teenager was one of the hundreds of children taken from the Yearning For Zion Ranch by Texas Child Protective Services in April because investigators believed they were exposed to abuse by members of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

Her name is not being disclosed because Malonis has said that she is a victim of sexual abuse.

Malonis, of Dallas, maintains in her request that Jessop has ''engaged in conduct designed to intimidate and harrass'' Malonis and her client.

Several sources close to the case have indicated that the girl is expected to be asked to testify before a Schleicher County grand jury, which next week will begin hearing the state of Texas' criminal case against FLDS members.

Malonis' request comes one day after investigators from the Texas Attorney General's Office attempted to serve the girl with a subpoena, but were unable to locate her.

''I believe that (the girl) was avoiding service because of coercion and improper influence from Willie Jessop,'' the order states.

When the teenager could not be located by investigators or her attorney, court officials contacted Malonis to tell her a letter had been filed with them, purportedly written by the girl and claiming that her attorney had said ''untrue'' things about the FLDS.