Question? About Flds Women and Child support

When you mention CNN you may be referring to a statement by Mark Shurtleff who is a politician in Utah and not a part of the Texas situation but rather Utah's FLDS.

The FLDS in Texas have stated clearly that no one in their sect received welfare. If the press or CPS could refute that in court they would have. They didn't.

Most members of the media dropped the ball big time on this case. In the interest of selling papers or snagging viewers they said whatever was most titillating rather than what was true.

Once people heard headlines such as "polygamists" "pregnant young girls" and "beds in the temple" it was off and running. You could have written an article stating that these people were eating their young and it would have been gulped down whole.

The press got very quiet once the facts (in court) started to come out. The state of Texas and CPS also got very quiet. If they had anything at all to crow over after such a controversial mass removal of children - they would have. And yet all we hear is deafening silence.


Here is a journalist who knows this story thoroughly and does a good job of getting the actual facts out.

http://blogs.sltrib.com/plurallife/
 
how can they have birth certificates if many of them dont even go to the hospital to give birth???

Hi, first post!! Many people have home births and the babies still get birth certificates and social security numbers.
 
When you mention CNN you may be referring to a statement by Mark Shurtleff who is a politician in Utah and not a part of the Texas situation but rather Utah's FLDS.

The FLDS in Texas have stated clearly that no one in their sect received welfare. If the press or CPS could refute that in court they would have. They didn't.

Most members of the media dropped the ball big time on this case. In the interest of selling papers or snagging viewers they said whatever was most titillating rather than what was true.

Once people heard headlines such as "polygamists" "pregnant young girls" and "beds in the temple" it was off and running. You could have written an article stating that these people were eating their young and it would have been gulped down whole.

The press got very quiet once the facts (in court) started to come out. The state of Texas and CPS also got very quiet. If they had anything at all to crow over after such a controversial mass removal of children - they would have. And yet all we hear is deafening silence.


Here is a journalist who knows this story thoroughly and does a good job of getting the actual facts out.

http://blogs.sltrib.com/plurallife/

A few points:
  1. CPS has very little interest if the families were on welfare. They would not necessarily address that in court.
  2. The state supreme court decision regarding this case addressed the validity of the emergency removal, it did not address the grounds for the removal
  3. I believe you referenced the Gates decision. That also addressed the criteria for an emergency removal. It did not change the family code.
  4. Several of the children remain in care.
 
A few points:
  1. CPS has very little interest if the families were on welfare. They would not necessarily address that in court.


  1. I agree with you. Under normal conditions, that would be so. Given the high degree of notoriety this case received everything was under scrutiny. A lot of what was fed to the public came from the media spin. In spite of that, there was still no one from the compound found to be receiving welfare.


    The state supreme court decision regarding this case addressed the validity of the emergency removal, it did not address the grounds for the removal

    Yes. The higher court ruled against CPS in their action.

    I believe you referenced the Gates decision. That also addressed the criteria for an emergency removal. It did not change the family code.

    I apologize, I am not familiar with the Gates decision.


    Several of the children remain in care.

415 of the YFZ children have now been “nonsuited,” leaving approximately 50 children remaining under court supervision. I believe there are hearings scheduled for both January and February.
 
Hi, first post!! Many people have home births and the babies still get birth certificates and social security numbers.

Hi milky!

You are absolutely right about that. Two of my four births were home births but all 4 have birth certificates and social security numbers.

Glad you chose to post here and Welcome to WS!
 
I agree with you. Under normal conditions, that would be so. Given the high degree of notoriety this case received everything was under scrutiny. A lot of what was fed to the public came from the media spin. In spite of that, there was still no one from the compound found to be receiving welfare.

That's not necessarily true. I have also heard differently, but since I can't find a source, I am willing to concede the point :crazy:




Yes. The higher court ruled against CPS in their action.

They ruled against the emergency. They didn't rule that the removal was inappropriate, just the way it was done. CPS could have gone back and filed for a non emergency removal, but by then, the kids were removed and considered "safe" so they couldn't remove them.



I apologize, I am not familiar with the Gates decision.

I thought it was you who mentioned a recent court decision effecting CPS in TX. It's referred to as the Gates decision.




415 of the YFZ children have now been “nonsuited,” leaving approximately 50 children remaining under court supervision. I believe there are hearings scheduled for both January and February.

Those are status hearings. The children have now been in care for 8 or 9 months I think. At this point, the Court will be determining permancy for them. Currently, children can only remain in care for 12 months. So if the Court is satisified with the parents progress, the children may very well go home at these hearings. However, the fact remains that the removal was valid in those cases.
 
the fact remains that the removal was valid in those cases.

Hi Woof,

Sorry for the late reply. Life has been getting in the way of my posting lately.

You mention that the removal was valid.

You state that as a fact. I understand that you see it that way but actually?

That is an opinion.

It is your opinion and many share it, but it is still just an opinion.

Perhaps it will be the long term effects both economic (to the taxpayers of the state) and emotional (to the children) that will determine the validity of what was done.
 
Hi Woof,

Sorry for the late reply. Life has been getting in the way of my posting lately.

You mention that the removal was valid.

You state that as a fact. I understand that you see it that way but actually?

That is an opinion.

It is your opinion and many share it, but it is still just an opinion.

Perhaps it will be the long term effects both economic (to the taxpayers of the state) and emotional (to the children) that will determine the validity of what was done.

The court decided it was valid. Since such stuff are kept under wraps to protect the children, what was used to make such a decision will not be reported by the courts or adults involved in the case. That leaves no one able to make an 'opinion' on the matter of wither it was valid but the courts.

What was done to these children? What was done to them, happens everyday to some child. Reports are made, children are removed, the family investigated. Many are found to have been nothing and the children get to go home. Traumatized. The system isn't perfect. But it's all we have to protect those who truely need the protection.
 
Spangle is correct. Here is a link to the CPS regarding the case

http://www.dfps.state.tx.us/About/News/2008/eldorado/2008-12-22_report.asp

There were 146 FAMLIES investigated. The findings were as follows. The reason to believe are VALIDATED child abuse allegations.
Reason to believe: CPS determined that it was reasonable to believe that one or both parents in the family sexually abused or neglected a child in the family by entering into an illegal underage marriage with a child; failing to take reasonable steps to prevent the illegal underage marriage of a child; or failing to remove one or more children in the family from a situation in which they would be exposed to an ongoing underage marriage. 91
Ruled out: CPS determined that it was reasonable to conclude that no child in the family was abused or neglected.
12 families
Unable to determine: There is not a preponderance of the available evidence to either find that abuse or neglect did occur, or to
39 families
Unable to complete: CPS was unable to complete the investigation due inability to locate the subjects of the allegations.
1 family

As far as the removals go:
the Current Status of the Legal Cases Of the 439 children involved in the Eldorado cases:

DFPS has ended cases involving 424 children because the family has taken appropriate steps to protect the child from sexual abuse or there was no abuse or neglect in the family.

There are pending lawsuits in the cases of five mothers and their 15 children. Of these, DFPS has temporary managing conservatorship of one girl who was placed with her mother and one girl who remains in foster care. DFPS continues to work with the remaining families to ensure the safety of those children.
 
The court decided it was valid. Since such stuff are kept under wraps to protect the children, what was used to make such a decision will not be reported by the courts or adults involved in the case. That leaves no one able to make an 'opinion' on the matter of wither it was valid but the courts.

Hi Spangle,

You are right Judge Walther (sp) decided there was reason to go in and seize the children if CPS thought that was necessary.

A higher court later reversed that and returned the children.

What was done to these children? What was done to them, happens everyday to some child. Reports are made, children are removed, the family investigated. Many are found to have been nothing and the children get to go home. Traumatized. The system isn't perfect. But it's all we have to protect those who truely need the protection.


Your argument is one that is often used. The concept that some damage is "necessary" to achieve the higher good. I understand what you mean and I agree that while our system is not perfect, we do have to have it.

At the same time, I am made very uneasy by the fact that a government entity of any sort can come into a home and take away the children first and sort it out later.

What if in the future the government decided that circumcision w/o anesthesia was child abuse and started taking all the children from a subdivision full of Jewish people?

This case went beyond CPS doing its job. It raised constitutional issues that have the potential to effect us all at some point.
 
Spangle is correct. Here is a link to the CPS regarding the case

http://www.dfps.state.tx.us/About/News/2008/eldorado/2008-12-22_report.asp

There were 146 FAMLIES investigated. The findings were as follows. The reason to believe are VALIDATED child abuse allegations.


As far as the removals go:


From your link:

Reason to believe: CPS determined that it was reasonable to believe that one or both parents in the family sexually abused or neglected a child in the family by entering into an illegal underage marriage with a child; failing to take reasonable steps to prevent the illegal underage marriage of a child; or failing to remove one or more children in the family from a situation in which they would be exposed to an ongoing underage marriage.[end quote]


The truth is it would later be found true that none of the parents had sexually abused their children. In fact the ruckus about what did and did not constitue under age had recently changed. The reason? Texas State Rep. Harvey Hildebran has publicly admitted his efforts to craft legislation to drive the FLDS out of Texas. He is quoted as telling the Deseret News: “I wanted to make it unappealing to them,” Hilderbran said. “I hoped they wouldn’t stay.”

The children were returned to their parents in June after the Texas Supreme Court ruled the state had overstepped in removing all the children when it only had evidence of abuse or neglect involving about a half-dozen girls. Many of the children were boys or younger than 5.

This demonstrates, once again, that yes, CPS did grossly overstep its boundaries, the state Supreme Court was correct and Judge Walthers was wrong.

CPS is still refusing to acknowledge the damage they did to those children under five. They prefer to insist that they needed to burn the village to save it
 
:behindbar

On paper miss use of funds appears low, this is because of privacy laws. The women can claim unwed mother status and receive benefits, without questioning paternal ties. Exampled by now indicted Merrill Jessop, Carolyn had 2 special needs children, both of which Merrill got social security benefits on and claim them to the IRA. There medical bills however were claimed under unwed mother status at 3 hospitals, he did the same with Barbara and his other wives. His construction business in Paige AZ and the Caliente Hot Springs Resort in Nevada, were just 2 of his businesses that he owned. While he ate steak, taxpayers footed his medical bills and more!

In Canada Winston got $300. per child for an education stipen and with 108 children, 75 in school offered him $22,500. per month, one more reason why he restarted his charter school after the split. His wives who claim unwed status or no father get another $200-$300 per month per child. Winston further used same sex marriages in Canada to secure Lorraine Johnson who was both underage and an American to circumvent Imigration laws by having another wife marry her.

The alarming rate of Fumarase disease is another medical cost added to taxpayers from cousins marrying cousins.

The return of social services benefits from Mohave County is, for every $1. in taxes taken out, $8. of services are returned. If privacy laws that do not permit blood test or DNA to ID fathers are accepted, then abuse and fraud on paper will be low. The School District was reclaimed by the state for fraud and mismanagement, so its difficult to flatly deny the issues of fraud.

Food stamps are high and in the reverse if the family admits to 17 children with two wives they indeed legally qualify for a variety of social service programs. Four years ago my friend was raising 17 kids from 2 wives, making $25,000. a year, so he qualified legally for many programs.

If you look at the money in millions being sent to that zip code, the staggering numbers tell another story. Since polygamy is technically illegal, but unenforced, not enforcing it, results in an unfair tax burden to those who abide by the law.

Mothers benefit from social services need to ID the fathers, but you also need to consider, that as a church they can sign half their paycheck over to the prophet and claim that as a deduction, that results in poverty status. It becomes legal by way of the reporting criteria. Program rules were not established for families with 30-108 children and in that way some FLDS families are in part getting benefits legally, exempting the fact that multiple wives are still technically illegal.
 
The truth is it would later be found true that none of the parents had sexually abused their children. In fact the ruckus about what did and did not constitue under age had recently changed. The reason? Texas State Rep. Harvey Hildebran has publicly admitted his efforts to craft legislation to drive the FLDS out of Texas. He is quoted as telling the Deseret News: “I wanted to make it unappealing to them,” Hilderbran said. “I hoped they wouldn’t stay.”
_____________________________

In Utah Senator Ron Allen introduced the CHILD BIGAMY Bill in 2000 and it was signed into law in 2001. The FLDS were interviewed about it and denied marrying girls underage. Mayor Dan Barlow was interviewed by AP and Larry Warren a SLC New Anchor interviwed long time FLDS attorney Rodney Parker, who also denied young girls were being married below the age of consent.

Since FLDS theology placed Colorado City as ZION, Warren under pursuit and in contempt of the law, intended to relocate to a state where he could continue his edicts uninterrupted. It was Texas! The U.S. and each state, passes new laws every year, this occurs for the "Health, Safety & Welfare" of the public. A cult of less than 10,000 does not represent the main stream values of the public interest and as a religion intollerant of Mormons and Gentiles, religious freedom to violate the law, offers no legal exemptions for them!

Since multi unions are not currently legal any any, the legislation closed loop holes that permitted some to exploit underage minors for sexual purposes. Under the law its cohabiation with a minor, but directed by those in authority, greater than 24 months the females seniors. Harvey's bill acknowledged it as a sham union and that the girls were minors. If it was a first marriage, the rules could apply, but that was never the intent of the fleeing and now jailed felon.

Why is a new law a surprise and if it was illegal in both Utah and Arizona, Texas as well, attempting to curventvent the law by rewriting FLDS prophesy to make Eldorado Texas the new FLDS Zion, didn't offer a legal sanctuary any way. The former age of consent never applied to multiple wifes and without the marriage contract the girls were not legally able to offer consent to authority figures that much older than them.

Keep in mind Warren was Marrying Marrianne age 12 on August 26th just before his arrest, while fleeing the FBI on their 10 Most wanted list. Everyone now that was at the ranch was aiding and abetting, harbouring a fugitive and continuing a practise they publicly denied. A practise that caused Warren to leave his own community his father as prophet stated was ZION!

If Texas makes this cult unwelcome, the FLDS will chose another state seeking to continiue illegal acts and a smart investigative journalist should be able to figure out why General Shurtleff with Hildebran proposed that legislation. Arizona has a bigamy bill coming to, introduced by David Lujan. We make new laws all the time, that is the job of state legislators.
 
From your link:

Reason to believe: CPS determined that it was reasonable to believe that one or both parents in the family sexually abused or neglected a child in the family by entering into an illegal underage marriage with a child; failing to take reasonable steps to prevent the illegal underage marriage of a child; or failing to remove one or more children in the family from a situation in which they would be exposed to an ongoing underage marriage.[end quote]


The truth is it would later be found true that none of the parents had sexually abused their children. In fact the ruckus about what did and did not constitue under age had recently changed. The reason? Texas State Rep. Harvey Hildebran has publicly admitted his efforts to craft legislation to drive the FLDS out of Texas. He is quoted as telling the Deseret News: “I wanted to make it unappealing to them,” Hilderbran said. “I hoped they wouldn’t stay.”

The children were returned to their parents in June after the Texas Supreme Court ruled the state had overstepped in removing all the children when it only had evidence of abuse or neglect involving about a half-dozen girls. Many of the children were boys or younger than 5.

This demonstrates, once again, that yes, CPS did grossly overstep its boundaries, the state Supreme Court was correct and Judge Walthers was wrong.

CPS is still refusing to acknowledge the damage they did to those children under five. They prefer to insist that they needed to burn the village to save it

No. This is the finding after the TSC ruling.
 
Abuse was rampent in Colorado City and its not likely that it ended in Texas. That said, Warren moved his elite to Texas, a chosen and loyal few, so each family must be judge differently. Under the law, those underage unions amounted to abuse. Basically Merrill & Warren swapped daughters, Merrill giving Marriane to Warren and Teressa to Merrill son.

As for Nat Malonis I have worked with her and I doubt Glow knows the inter workings of the Texas investigation. Glow can only be one of 3 people active on these blogs and his postings sound like the Pro FLDS site webmaster.

I didn't start in Texas, I started 8+ years ago in August of 2000 and have worked with both AG's in Arizona & Utah. I also provided documents to Harvey H. I think I know more first hand knowldge than Glow, but sooner or later, he will come out to play!


Other usernames
fincenMIB
Obstructionist
ShameontheTribune!
 
Texas was the "Fruit of the Crime", it existed because Warren was fleeing prosecution in both Utah and Arizona. Having filed complaints against the Hildale & Colorado City Police Dept. with p.O.S.T. in October and November of 2000, there was several reasons that Warren needed compounds outside the 2 states he was leaving behind.

In March of 2001 Rodney Parker the FLDS attorney threatened me on letterhead of "Snow Cristensen & Martineau" his firm for reporting abuses. These reports had gone to the Attorney General and were mandated from my role as Tri-State rep. for "For Kids Sake". An interesting tactic to silence a child abuse prevention agency that specialized in training county prosecutors. FKS was the certified P.O.S.T. Instructor in California at sever police academies.

Additional issues of weapons violations and drugs surfaced connected to peticular FLDS members, one a UEP trustee at that time.

In 2000 Utah Senator Ron Allen had proposed the "Child Bigamy Bill" in SB 146, which passed and was signed into law my former Utah Governor Leavitt on April 30th of 2001. Approaching this passage, Mayor Dan Barlow was interviewed by Associated Press, where the only FLDS spokesman at that time stated no underage unions were occuring, thus the new law would not effect them. Larry Warren a SLC News Anchor interviewed FLDS attorney Rodney Parker and Parker stated, the practise of marrying underage brides was an exageration of apostates who had left. In escense the FLDS lied to protect the practise.

The marriages continued at Merrill Jessops Caliente Hot springs resort through out 2001 & 2002, using the place of intercourse as a defense, as noted in the St. George, Utah trial of Warren Jeffs in September of 2007. Using Nevada state laws to say intercourse with a juvenile was legal conflicted with the Mann-Act of transporting minors across statelines for classified lude acts. The defense that a minor could be married at age 15, required that she go before a judge, which was not occuring. They couldn't because it required admitting they were practising polygamy or violating the Child Bigamy legislation. While exemption of age applied to legal marriages, they did not apply to 2nd, 3rd or 15th wives, because only the first was a legal union. Also those who officiated the ceremony were not certified, nor could be, since the girls were below the age of consent.

In 2003 to avoid prosecution and pending court cases, David Allred was sent out on buying trips and secured property in more areas than just West Texas. The intent appeared to be to seek rural counties and states that had lose age of consent laws, which includes a compound in Mexico. The Press Conference in Texas exposing the ranch and its purpose beyond a hunting ranch as stated, had Mohave County Supervisor Buster Johnson, Flora Jessop, Dave Doran and Jon Krakauer speaking out publicly. The Press releases were sent out by Linda Walker of Child Protection Project and ME!What was occuring in Texas was an extension of crimes already reported in 2000 3& 1/2 years ealier.

Warren was also accused of sodomy with his nephew Brent Jeffs and his brother from his time as teacher and principal at the "Alta Academy" in Cottonwood Canyon UT. To save the UEP trust valued at 110 million dollars, Warren and his brother Leroy needed to defend the trust, but fearing his own arrest Warren Jeffs hit the road and lost control of the trust by default.

Per the monies used in part to build YFZ ranch, Rulon had 8 homes that warren diverted the assets from, circumventing any inheretance to his siblings in his fathers death. Ward, Hyrum, Seth, Elaine and other children of Rulon received nothing because of changed Warren had made to his fathers assets.

Even to the date of Warren's arrest, he was performing illegal and underage unions, the week before!

The question of Texas and the raid, comes down to "good faith" and whether the state of Texas considered any children in peril, based on an anonymous tip! If you have ever worked with "We Tip" a national hotline, callers report a variety of crimes and based on information a report is made or an investigation started. If Texas DPS considered a victim at risk, their mandate was to investigate. Based on a lack of coperation or a fear of being damned, my guess is, Texas might of agonized over how to rescue or seperate one needle in a large haystack! When asked about a Sarah, the FLDS claimed there were none? In truth there were several!

Once on site, in Law Enforcement terms, "the eyes can not trespass" which means visual evidence of a crime, becomes a stair step to further investigate. If you had followed Harvey H. legislation, the indictments and trials in Arizona of other FLDS men accused and convicted of unlawful sex with a minor, once on compound any one from DPS could of known what to consider as a risk to a child, justifying a 2nd and 3rd search warrant. If Texas was a clean slate, any reader could assume the FLDS were being blind sighted, but in truth Texas was about fleeing prosecution of active and pending cases, both criminal and civil.

Warrens unlawful flight to avoid prosecution, once on the FBI's 10 MOST WANTED list, made each of Warren's trips to the ranch a circumstance of "conspiracy", "obstruction of justice" and harbouring a fugative, by those men and women who assisted him or failed to report his where abouts. The documents confiscated at his arrest near Mesquite Nevada, detailed many members, including police officers, who offered money, written support of his unlawful flight, a place to hide him and blind loyalty!

The circumstances that led to an evaluation of risk and potential, included dialog state to state that occured in the Harvey H. hearings on the proposed legislation. Dialog between sheriff's in counties in Texas, Utah & Arizona. Complaints similiar to those I filed 42 months earlier, numerous trials where convictions were already behind these actions. Given a history that included court cases, depositions and affidavits, Texas DPS had to weigh potential with the caller, who wasn't being completely anonymous in saying her name was Sarah.

Now you can pretend that Arizona and Utah never occured or that people like me never filed reports, were threatened or had clients, but we do exist and see a side Johnny come lately's dont. Like the web site says "The Truth Will Prevail" and I know what that truth is. On my side I have 550 audio cassettes by Warren Jeffs this revered leader. He says in his own voice that he is breaking the law, but is protected by God! He is also in prison, 10 years after these audio's were made. Like my user name "In Light and Truth" is a 890 page FLDS theology book, I loaned to Texas through a 3rd party, you like to trash here. The book authored by Rulon T. Jeffs in 1994 details every aspect of the FLDS belief. Its is the undeniable truth of any faithful member and you should respect it! I have Rulon Jeffs sermons volumes 1-8 all hard back books, by Fred Jessops old print company "Twin City Publishing" out of Hildale UT. I have "Priesthood Articles", "Priesthoom Succession", the oversize Allta Academy books "The Student Star" volumes 14, 15 & 16! My personal favorite is a smaller soft back titled "Purity in the New and Everlasting Covenant of Marriage", it reveals the Jeffs teaching on the reassignment of wives and "blood atonement".

Its like Warren's confession in the Purgatory Utah jail, the FLDS books and audios condem Warren and the true intent of this CULT, but far to many base their opinions on what newspapers right! You should ask yourself where Brooke Adams at the SLC Tribune gets her leads from?

The Southern Poverty Law Center considers the FLDS a hate group by desination. This occured from Warrens own teachings of the Negro race. When you deny the prophets spoken words, it becomes a curious thing! He confessed, but his defenders like to ignore the recorded tapes. He actually produced alot more than just 550 audios, but without listing to them, the defenders ignore these as well. 10,000 pages of FLDS theology, that too gets ignored! It kind of lays out an agenda that makes both the FLDS and exploited children pons in a battle between the letter of the law and constitutionalist like McVeigh & Nichols who justified attacking the government, by murdering government employees. Its a question of localism and survivalism of smaller cohesive units that believe they have a sovergn right to self govern their actions. The FLDS is merely their call to arms. If you ignore 2 decades of court records, writing your own conclusions, then being pro FLDS makes lots of sense.

I can post Warren Jeffs transcribed text on the Negro race or offer the audio's of Warren explaining his edicts to the faithful. As long as he remains the revered leader, his spoken word will be law and ignoring his audios might work here, but won't in court. In Warrens trial 3 of his audios to the Home Economics classes were entered as evidence and in his own words, he damned himself. If you want to listen to these one at a time and then discuss them, that is logical and fair, but if you think that you can ignore these as facts, they will be played in court in Arizona & Texas. They are simply facts generated by the revered jailed leader and can not be ignored, just like Warrens confession.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbudqrmFSDs

Listen to this and then we can discuss it! Since only warren had the keys to marry the faithful, he then admits that he officiated all these unions, thats pretty tough to deny in court later.
 
Warren on the Negro Race

#3 to #7 become more interesting

#1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSgZzTkYiz4

#2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVzQZm75Nco

#3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXo8qNxUlCU

#4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6TNp63ZCZ0

#5 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSKHLbxkkec

#6 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7YI3Q6U4Bw

#7 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GUEpNbPxx4

This is one of 550 audios, if 60 minutes is the average, I could make over 3,000
of these! You can debate due process and you will, but the facts on the FLDS
and what they believe, is what their leader says it is. So many want to argue and debate about a group they know far to little of. So you hate the state of Texas and CPS, but thats not my problem, I had a list of 50 girls given to the FBI in October of 2000 and it took 6 + years to get this addressed. It got reported, but it needed help and Warren provided that help!

Before you post, listen to the audios, because THERE WILL BE A TEST LATER!
 
I doubt Glow knows the inter workings of the Texas investigation. Glow can only be one of 3 people active on these blogs and his postings sound like the Pro FLDS site webmaster.


See? Now....your making assumptions. The problem you create for yourself when doing that, is you call your own credibility into question. There is a massive amount of research on this thread

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=65729

therein you will find explained my connection to the case. As well as my gender :)
 
At the same time, I am made very uneasy by the fact that a government entity of any sort can come into a home and take away the children first and sort it out later.

Let me explain to you how a removal, in general, works.

A call is made to a centralized hot line in Austin. The worker documents the information and staffs with a supervisor. The supervisor and the worker see if any of the allegations fit the family code definition of abuse and neglect. Any allegations that meet the definition are assigned a priority (I or II) level and sent to the local office and assigned to an investigator. The priority dictates how soon the investigator must go out. Of course there are bogus calls, but CPS is obligated to investigate all allegations.

The investigator is obligated to see all children in the home and notify all parents, involved or not. The investigator goes to the home and asks permission to go into the home. The parents must give permission, if not, the worker can not enter the home and must explore other options.

The investigator is assessing for safety and risk. Safety is immediate, risk is in the future. If the child is in immediate danger (not safe), the worker calls their boss (supervisor), who gathers information and contacts their boss (PD) and makes a recommendation for removal. If at all possible, a Court order is obtained first. However, if it's 3 am and you are pretty sure the child is in danger, you can remove with out Court Order. However, the order must be obtained before 5 pm the next business day.


Now, let's look at the FLDS case This is all in my above link.

There was a report of abuse. I know it turned out later to be bogus, but it sounded legitimate and that means CPS must investigate. Lots of "bogus" claims end up being true.

The investigator went out and was allowed into the compound by the mothers. They were invited to interview the children. While interviewing, the became concerned. The children were being moved, they were refusing to give family relationships and they told investigators about under age marriages.

Investigator contacted their bosses and it went up the chain of command. Because they could not be sure they were seeing all of the children, how old those children were, whether or not they children had children and who the parents were, they assessed the children were not SAFE and were given permission by the Court to remove.

Glow, you refer to the TSC decision. What the Court actually said was that the judge allowed the removal of all of the children based on what a few of them said. To simplify it, pretend you have a family with 5 kids. CPS interviews 1 kid who says that daddy has been having sex with them and will beat them for telling. Based on that information, the worker determines that all 5 children are in danger and removes them all before finding out whether or not they are being abused. The Court said that this was in error and that all the children should have been interviewed and only the ones who made out cries should have been removed. That is very different from saying abuse did not occur. In fact, the TSC did not offer any opinion on whether or not abuse occurred.

Due to that finding, some of the children were returned home and the RISK was controlled other ways. However, the investigation continued and there were 91 substantiated findings of abuse.

Glow, those 91 findings are a fact. They are a matter of record. They are not a figment of my imagination, nor are they my opinion. They were not over turned by the TSC. They will remain the findings of the investigation.

I think part of the problem is that you are confusing the rules of a criminal investigation with a CPS investigation, which is a civil matter.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
142
Guests online
3,456
Total visitors
3,598

Forum statistics

Threads
592,573
Messages
17,971,209
Members
228,821
Latest member
Pechi_eupa
Back
Top