Is the State of Texas arguing that the FLDS

[MikeWaters]

I don't think they had a strong case in the first day or two when they rounded everyone up. From the media reports, it sounded like "that girl looks young and pregnant."

Ok. But what does that have to do with rounding up a 2 year old?

The law should be applied judiciously. Maybe I am crazy and it shouldn't be.

[Flystripper]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

Again, this may or may not be true.

Everyone who is mad does not seem to allow for the possibility that they have interviewed a TON of these people and have built a very strong case.

I am agreeing with you. Obviously I am not communicating that very well.

[Flystripper]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I don't think they had a strong case in the first day or two when they rounded everyone up. From the media reports, it sounded like "that girl looks young and pregnant."

Ok. But what does that have to do with rounding up a 2 year old?

The law should be applied judiciously. Maybe I am crazy and it shouldn't be.

2 year olds can't be abused?...I thought there was an account of a baby having water poured down its throat to stop it from crying? Maybe that was a different case and I am getting confused. Abuse is not limited to 14 year olds.

[hyrum]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

so an infant is at theoretical risk in 2022 when she is 14? So you take her away?

I'd like to see the statutes that support that.

It is true that all children can be removed from a home if there is abuse to one. There is a precedent for that.

One problem is that the standard rules and procedures are primarily designed for single family housing arrangements. The FLDS seem to make this difficult because there is not the typical living arrangements. This is complicated by the fact that they are providing confusing and contradictory information in the interviews about names, parentage, ages, etc.

Also note that the women share legal responsibility to protect their children from abuse -- by knowingly allowing the men to rape their teenage children they are also in violation of the law.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Flystripper

2 year olds can't be abused?...I thought there was an account of a baby having water poured down its throat to stop it from crying? Maybe that was a different case and I am getting confused. Abuse is not limited to 14 year olds.

Show me an allegation where a child under ten has been abused or harmed in that compound.

[Venkman]

I think we're already starting to see a backlash. The initial reaction of most is to say "it's about damn time they did something about those freaks", but it's difficult to maintain that gung-ho attitude when you see the fallout of young children crying for their mommies and mothers barred from even speaking to their children.

Triplet, as far as PR goes, I agree, if Texas has more evidence than they're letting on, they need to get some of it out. Because right now, this looks like a fishing expedition. Fishing with dynamite.

[MikeWaters]

Btw, the court were all this was going--3 employees total.

I hope we don't see frontier justice by some moron judge.

I also happen to know one of the attorneys involved, representing the children. (but not well).

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I don't think they had a strong case in the first day or two when they rounded everyone up. From the media reports, it sounded like "that girl looks young and pregnant."

Ok. But what does that have to do with rounding up a 2 year old?

The law should be applied judiciously. Maybe I am crazy and it shouldn't be.

I hear you.

I have no idea how strong their case was, only that reports indicate that the warrant was properly executed.

The other thing the outraged are not addressing is that what the FLDS (and the LDS back in the day) were/are doing IS illegal. You cannot marry someone under 16 in Texas. You cannot have sex.

While I agree that it is certainly possible that there is a local agenda at play, some slack has to be given to the police....that is a HUGE mess to sort out when you are talking about hundreds of people.

one reason they may want to separate these kids is that these kids are now material witnesses to abuse. If they are with their parents, the moms coach the kids to lie. That sort of thing. It does suck to separate them, but there are logical explanations for it.

The other thing that is quite fishy about all of this....where are all the men now? Where are all these husbands? Did they all flee?

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

I hear you.

I have no idea how strong their case was, only that reports indicate that the warrant was properly executed.

The other thing the outraged are not addressing is that what the FLDS (and the LDS back in the day) were/are doing IS illegal. You cannot marry someone under 16 in Texas. You cannot have sex.

While I agree that it is certainly possible that there is a local agenda at play, some slack has to be given to the police....that is a HUGE mess to sort out when you are talking about hundreds of people.

one reason they may want to separate these kids is that these kids are now material witnesses to abuse. If they are with their parents, the moms coach the kids to lie. That sort of thing. It does suck to separate them, but there are logical explanations for it.

The other thing that is quite fishy about all of this....where are all the men now? Where are all these husbands? Did they all flee?

can you give me an example of where kids were separated from both parents, because they were material witnesses to custody? Also, were any of them 5 years old?

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

can you give me an example of where kids were separated from both parents, because they were material witnesses to custody? Also, were any of them 5 years old?

Actually, I can...or at least the facts, not the exact cite.

In law school, everyone takes a Legal Writing class. At BYU, it is called Lawyering Skills. in it, you are assigned a legal issue around which you are to compose a legal brief. Our small section was assigned the topic of custody when one parent was gay.

So in our research, there were some cases that popped up wherein the child was removed from custody of both parents when the environment was deemed unsafe. Admittedly, I seem to recall that in almost every instance, the "unsafe" conditions were due to drug use in the home. But in the FLDS case, arent there allegations of physical beating? Also, not allowing people to leave the compound? I am not sure, so I am asking on this one.

There was one case where the unfit parent was found to be using a sexual device known as a "tiger paw." I remember thinking that was pretty funny, actually.

Maybe the FLDS are using tiger paws on their compound.