The Rest of the Story...

[Glow]

Responding to claims by disgruntled ex-members and anti-cult activists that the church was engaging in widespread child abuse, 90 state troopers and 50 social workers simultaneously entered the 19 residences and buildings belonging to a minority religious group in the early morning hours, burst into bedrooms, and commanded family members to get up and get dressed because they were there to take the children into custody. All of the children under age 18 were loaded onto busses and transported 20 miles from their homes. The state authorities had planned to interview the children and subject them to physical and psychological examinations in an effort to discover evidence of child abuse.

No, this wasn’t Texas in April of 2008, nor was it an action against members of the FLDS Church. The events took place over twenty years ago in the little village of Island Pond, Vermont, on the morning of June 22, 1984.
A religious organization calling itself the Northeast Kingdom Community Church, now known as the Twelve Tribes Community, was founded in the 1970s in the forests of Vermont, about twenty miles from Canada. The group started a small settlement in Island Pond in the summer of 1978 and now has about 50 communities in 9 countries with a total membership of about 3,500. Members live in communal houses and work in businesses run by the church, such as shoe stores, candle shops, print shops, house-restoration businesses, and dairy farms. They try to follow closely the Bible and to create a “Kingdom of God” on earth. The church believes that children must be disciplined to create a sense of self worth and that the lack of discipline is what is destroying the nation at large.

Corporal punishment is regularly used to train children in obedience and is administered with thin rods called “balloon sticks.” Members insist that they discipline their children in the spirit of love; however, critics of the religion claim that the children are severely beaten and are victims of child abuse. Other features of the group that have aroused suspicion and prejudice are the communal lifestyle, the fact that members home school their children, the reluctance of the people to register births and deaths, and the distinctive appearance of members, with men being bearded and women wearing head scarves.

Responding to allegations that parents were beating their children, the Vermont attorney general began a series of strategy sessions in the fall of 1983. Meeting with members of the AG staff were anti-cult activists Galen Kelly and Priscilla Coates. Kelly had previously written a six-page report proposing a plan for the destruction of the church by working closely with government agencies. Following the strategy sessions, investigators were sent around the country to interview hand-picked ex-members and tape record stories of abuse. No actual sworn affidavits were obtained except those of the investigators, who quoted hearsay and statements of defectors.

John Buchard, the State Commissioner of Social and Rehabilitation Services (SRS), headed the agency responsible for investigating child abuse claims. Buchard subscribed to a philosophy of government interference similar to that currently espoused by Judge Walther and CPS authorities in Texas. Subsequent to the Island Pond raid, he wrote two articles defending the raid and advocating laws for more expansive access to children living in minority religious communities. He felt that Constitutional rights were a hindrance to investigation but that social service personnel were aided by the fact that most parents were unaware of their rights and could be intimidated into cooperation by the presence of state officials so that they believed that any resistance would be futile.

Relying entirely on newspaper accounts and anti-cult propaganda from those seeking to destroy the Island Pond group, Buchard became convinced that the children needed to be rescued from their abusive parents and obtained a warrant to search some twenty homes and seize the children because the “parents shared a common faith.” The charge of a “pervasive belief system” among the residents of the YFZ community in Texas is reminiscent of this earlier approach.

That the children themselves did not feel abused at the time of the raid or since is evidenced by the statements made at a gathering of parents, children, and friends held in 2000, close to the sixteenth anniversary of after the raid. A Greyhound bus brought 80 of the original 112 “children” back to Island Pond for the occasion.

Lisa Campbell, who at age 17 was the oldest child involved in the raid, was the first to speak. "I remember that several police officers gathered us into the living room to ask us our names and dates of birth," she said. "As evidence of the supposed child abuse, the police were picking up knitting needles and pieces of wood used to prop the windows open. I remember thinking that this was all ridiculous because I knew the truth: there was no abuse in our household." (Toensing, 2000)

State investigators, however, had believed the unsubstantiated claims made against the Island Pond group and approached parents with the attitude that they knew they were guilty of something terrible and that the investigators now had power over them. Whenever any parents tried to assert their Constitutional rights, they were accused of being “uncooperative.”

Buchard and his SRS workers seized 112 children and planned to detain them for three days, during which time they would undergo physical and psychological evaluations to discover signs of abuse. The plan might have worked except for the courage and honesty of one man—Judge Frank G. Mahady.

The Island-Pond children were bussed about twenty miles to the courthouse in Newport, where Mahady was the district-court judge. Judge Mahady conducted 40 individual hearings, which kept the court in session until about 9:00 P.M. In response to Judge Mahady’s question of what harm there was to the children, the assistant attorney general replied, “It’s as if the child is living amongst bacteria and the bacteria in this case that jeopardizes this child’s health is the teachings and doctrines of the church.” (In Re: CC. Orleans District Court, Unit III, Transcript, p. 67, 22 June 1984)

After listening to the total lack of evidence in the first 40 cases, Judge Mahady characterized the raid as a “massive fishing expedition” and ruled that all of the children should be returned immediately to their homes. He then gave opportunity for any parents who desired to speak to address the court. Many parents passionately related their stories of the raid and expressed their deep gratitude for a judge who ruled justly and not according to public prejudice. Court finally was dismissed about 11:00 P.M. In response to the heartfelt gratitude of parents and children, Judge Mahady replied that he was only doing his job. YFZ residents will smile wryly at the recollection of the many state officials who justified their unconstitutional conduct as “only doing my job.”

Over the next several days and weeks, Judge Mahady issued five separate opinions on the Island-Pond case, totaling 64 pages and severely reproving the state for violating the Constitutional rights of the parents and children:

1. June 25, 1984—denied the state’s request to detain all children for examination

2. June 25, 1984—declared illegal the photographs taken of each child by the State for identification

3. July 2, 1984—dismissed all cases because “religious association is an unlawful basis to allege danger of harm”

4. August 7, 1984—dismissed all state petitions and ruled that the state was without jurisdiction “because it had no allegations of specific facts for specific people”

5. August 6, 1984—disallowed as evidence all items seized in the raid because the general warrant was unlawful and without probable cause

These opinions contain a number of examples of Judge Mahady’s lucid reasoning on proper standards of conduct for state authorities in child custody cases and apply directly to the current YFZ case in Texas or to any case where a minority religion is singled out for persecution:

“Adlai Stevenson once noted that ‘guilt is personal,’ and I might add ‘not communal.’ Our Court has held many times that mere presence at a particular place is not sufficient to establish participation in a particular act. Therefore, ‘when the court seeks to take the child out of the parental home, it may do so only upon convincing proof.’ Here, that State lacks any proof whatsoever as to these children and these parents, much less ‘convincing proof.’” (Detention Order opinion, p. 4)

“The phrase ‘child abuse’ cannot be invoked as talismanic incantation to support the exercise of State power which egregiously violates both First and Fifth Amendment rights. Even where the State acts in a noble cause, it must act lawfully.” (Dismissal Order, p. 7)

“What the state really sought was investigative detention. In effect, each of the children was viewed as a piece of evidence. It was the State’s admitted purpose to transport each of the 112 children to a special clinic where they were to be examined…. Not only were the children to be treated as mere pieces of evidence; they were also to be held hostage to the ransom demand of information from the parents.”

Commissioner Buchard had planned to return children to their parents only if the parents “cooperated” by giving the SRS investigators certain information. In response to this use of the children as pawns of the state, Judge Mahady said, “No human being in the United States may be [so] dealt with… by the government officials or by anyone else.

Because of the courage of one man, the 112 Island Pond children were returned to their homes within 48 hours of their seizure. The entire state case was dismissed, and there was no lingering SRS presence to harass the families and attempt further to control their lives.

In recognition of the courageous stand he took in the Island-Pond raid, Judge Frank Mahady was named Vermont Man of the Year in 1984. Following Judge Mahady’s death from cancer in 1992 at age 53, the 1993-1994 Vermont Legislature in a joint resolution named the new Addison County Courthouse the “Judge Frank Mahady Courthouse” in recognition of the fact that “despite considerable public criticism, Judge Mahady repeatedly emphasized and upheld the Constitutional rights of all Vermonters, regardless of their age or station in life….”

Judge Mahady will be remembered as a man of decency and courage. What a contrast we see between this champion of human rights and Judge Barbara Walther, who, if she continues her manipulative course of collaborating with CPS and trampling upon the rights of parents and children, will be remembered as a petty tyrant and go down in infamy.

Ed Wiseman, one of the founders of the Island-Pond community is quoted in the New York Times of June 19, 2000, as offering these appropriate observations:

“The issue of religious persecution and discrimination against new religions is an issue all over the world today. We see a great need for government leaders to make sure that the information they’re receiving about these new minority groups is reliable. Not doing that was what created the atmosphere of moral panic in Vermont in 1984.”

Jean A. Swantko, a trial and appellate attorney who defended the Island Pond parents in 1984 and later became a convert to the group, made the following suggestions for state authorities investigating minority religious cultures:

“1. Wait on actual evidence of harm or bad acts. (i.e. good faith presumption applies to all)

“2. Rely on judiciary, not press or public opinion.

“3. Don’t trust anti-cult movement (ACM) data as true or reliable.

“4. Gain understanding of new religious movements. Scholars are more objective than press or private interests. (i.e., non-reliability of defectors, apostates; financial or discriminatory motives of ACM have effect of denying human rights)” (Swantko, “Anti-Cultists”)


References:

Bazilchuk, Nancy. “The Raid Revisited: Island Pond Community Heals Wounds from 1984.” Burlington Free Press, 18 June 2000.
Johnson, Sally. “Defender of the Faith.” Boston Globe Magazine, 12 March 1993.
Swantko, Jean A. Anti-Cultists, Social Policy, and the 1984 Island Pond Raid. August 2000.
__________. “The Vermont Cases.” In James T. Richardson, ed. Regulating Religion: Case Studies from Around the Globe. New York: Springer, 2004.
Toensing, Amy. “Trip Home to Stand Up for Their Community.” New York Times, 19 June 2000.

http://www.truthwillprevail.org/

 

[Glow]

Another take. Same Angle.

Judge Walther: Why so long for FLDS evidence hearing?
by Kurt Schulzke

What takes so long to hear a motion to exclude evidence obtained in the April YFZ Ranch raid? Could it be, in part, that Rosita Swinton and Texas Rangers have been subpoenaed to testify about the fraudulent search warrant used to justify the raid?

The motion was filed in April. Judge Walther has only today reportedly scheduled a hearing for October 1. Asked to comment on why the Judge is taking so long, one attorney close to the case said, “I think that the real question is what they did or said to convince her to SET it for hearing [at all].” One wonders how many other motions lie gathering dust in the dark recesses of Judge Walther’s chambers.

I’ll let that comment rattle around while we wait for others to opine.

Meanwhile, some readers may find refreshing contrast to Judge Walther’s procedural mayhem in an entertaining and educational series of opinions by Vermont district judge Frank Mahady. He wrote them in a similar 1984 case wherein the State of Vermont attempted a blanket removal of 112 children belonging to members of a single religious sect, the Northeast Kingdom Community Church. Seems that twenty years and thirteen degrees of latitude can make all the difference.

http://iperceive.net/judge-walther-why-so-long-for-flds-evidence-hearing/

 

[Glow]

Pay close attention to the comments at the end.

I guess one could say that these comments are all "coming from the flds". Given the fact that this is a Houston based paper, that doesn't seem likely. It would be nice if at least a majority of these comments are coming from mainstream folks. That would mean that the true CPS and state agenda are becoming obvious. Based on the "tone" of the comments, it sounds like America is waking up!


http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5950365.html


Attorneys for the state's Child Protective Services on Monday resumed efforts to regain custody of the first of several children from a West Texas polygamist ranch, after negotiations to reach an amicable agreement on the case failed.

The mother of a girl allegedly given in marriage at age 12 to jailed polygamist leader Warren Jeffs refused to answer questions Monday from CPS attorneys. The state wants to remove the girl, now 14, and an 11-year-old brother from the mother's care, saying 55-year-old Barbara Jessop isn't a suitable caregiver because her daughter and several other children were involved in underage marriages.

Jessop has 10 children, and Ruby Gutierrez, an investigator for CPS, testified Monday that two adult sons took underage brides and three daughters were given in marriage when they were underage.

The children's father allegedly blessed the girls' marriages. Two of the girls are now over 18.

Invoking her right against self-incrimination, Barbara Jessop, the third of six wives married to Frederick Merrill Jessop, a leader of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, refused to answer all but a few of the more than 30 questions fired at her by attorneys.

Her attorney, Gonzalo Rios, said Jessop was exercising her right against self-incrimination because of the continuing criminal investigation.

Barbara Jessop's former sister wife, Carolyn, in contrast, spoke expansively for more than 45 minutes, painting a devastating portrait of her former life as Merrill's fourth wife. (She left her husband, and the group, with her eight children in 2003).

Gutierrez, the CPS investigator, said she didn't believe the Jessops' younger children could safely remain with their mother, citing the parents' previous failure to try to prevent sexual abuse because of their blessing of the underage marriages. The state dropped its effort to also take custody of their 17-year-old son, saying he is old enough to protect himself.

But when asked about the danger to the 11-year-old boy, she said, "If a 12-year-old has been married to a gentleman over the age of 50, there is no way a sibling doesn't know that and hasn't had to cope with that knowledge," Gutierrez said.

The Jessop hearing ended after CPS attorneys finished presenting their evidence Monday evening and was scheduled to resume today with witnesses for Barbara Jessop.


Attorneys for the state's Child Protective Services on Monday resumed efforts to regain custody of the first of several children from a West Texas polygamist ranch, after negotiations to reach an amicable agreement on the case failed.

The mother of a girl allegedly given in marriage at age 12 to jailed polygamist leader Warren Jeffs refused to answer questions Monday from CPS attorneys. The state wants to remove the girl, now 14, and an 11-year-old brother from the mother's care, saying 55-year-old Barbara Jessop isn't a suitable caregiver because her daughter and several other children were involved in underage marriages.

Jessop has 10 children, and Ruby Gutierrez, an investigator for CPS, testified Monday that two adult sons took underage brides and three daughters were given in marriage when they were underage.

The children's father allegedly blessed the girls' marriages. Two of the girls are now over 18.

Invoking her right against self-incrimination, Barbara Jessop, the third of six wives married to Frederick Merrill Jessop, a leader of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, refused to answer all but a few of the more than 30 questions fired at her by attorneys.

Her attorney, Gonzalo Rios, said Jessop was exercising her right against self-incrimination because of the continuing criminal investigation.

Barbara Jessop's former sister wife, Carolyn, in contrast, spoke expansively for more than 45 minutes, painting a devastating portrait of her former life as Merrill's fourth wife. (She left her husband, and the group, with her eight children in 2003).

Gutierrez, the CPS investigator, said she didn't believe the Jessops' younger children could safely remain with their mother, citing the parents' previous failure to try to prevent sexual abuse because of their blessing of the underage marriages. The state dropped its effort to also take custody of their 17-year-old son, saying he is old enough to protect himself.

But when asked about the danger to the 11-year-old boy, she said, "If a 12-year-old has been married to a gentleman over the age of 50, there is no way a sibling doesn't know that and hasn't had to cope with that knowledge," Gutierrez said.

The Jessop hearing ended after CPS attorneys finished presenting their evidence Monday evening and was scheduled to resume today with witnesses for Barbara Jessop.

Comments


-thebirdofhappiness wrote:
Child Protective Services had asked Texas District Judge Barbara Walther to return the children to foster care, alleging their mothers refused to ensure they didn't have contact with men accused of being involved in underage marriages._______________Who are these men and if they are a danger to children have charges been filed against them? Why not remove the danger to the children instead of removing the children?


- Iwin wrote:
Provide proof, or leave these people alone.


- bobinhouston wrote:
As I recall the problem is the mothers refuse to sign a document prepared by CPS. There is no allegation that any unsafe act has happened or will happen - only that the mothers refuse to sign this document


- alsharptoon wrote:
CPS is the PROBLEM not the solution. Stop CPS now!


- WontStandIdlyBy wrote:
There is no fury like a police state scorned.

 

[Glow]

For all the hype, few actual abuse cases coming out of the Great Eldorado Polygamist Roundup

At the height of the Great Eldorado Polygamist Roundup, the state claimed 466 kids were abuse victims and dozens of fundamentalist Mormon men were suspected of sexual abuse charges. When the rubber met the road, though we've only seen "four removal requests and last month's indictment of six FLDS members on sexual abuse-related charges," reports the San Angelo Standard Times, while 66 child custody cases have been dropped. Of the six men indicted, one was a doctor accused of failing to report alleged abuse, and one was FLDS prophet Warren Jeffs who was already incarcerated in Arizona. There are still no complaining victims in any of these cases.

The hard truth about the Great Eldorado Polygamist Roundup is that despite all the tough, hang-em high rhetoric and demagoguing by state and local officials, the massive police action probably made it harder, not easier to identify or prevent abuse within the group. It caused Eldorado polygamists to circle the wagons to protect their innocent brethren, and made kids more fearful of the state than of their religious leaders, which means they'll be less likely to speak out when bad things happen.

Part of the problem with the state of Texas' approach to the raid was that officials took the wrong example as their model. They thought they were dealing with another David Koresh like in Waco, but really the better comparison was the Short Creek Raid in 1953 on the Utah-Arizona border. The Arizona Republic on Saturday offered an excellent analysis comparing the Texas raid with its historical antecedent out west, reaching these conclusions:

It's hard to see your way in polygamist country, and the most dangerous pathway through this, says Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff, is the one that came before.

Arizona and Utah officials have carefully worked to carve exit routes from Colorado City for those who want to leave. They established the Safety Net Committee to help domestic-violence victims, and on the road into Colorado City, a large billboard now advertises a "safe talk" hotline.

But "if they fear us more than they do their abusers, they're never going to seek help," Shurtleff says. "It's this fear of government they've been taught from the cradle - 'See what happened in '53? If you seek help, they'll come and take everybody.' We keep telling them, 'No, no, no. If someone needs help, we'll handle that one case. There won't be a raid.'

"And now the polygamists are saying, 'See, we told you, we told you it would happen again,' " Shurtleff says.

There's another force at work here, too, a kind of unlikely glory that comes each time the police knock on the polygamists' doors.

Nothing makes a religion like a martyr. The Bible leans on the stories of those who put faith first, who sacrificed their freedom and their families, who laid down their lives for the Lord. Through all their persecution, the polygamists talk of nothing but strength.

"The outside pressure from the government only reinforces their convictions," says [FLDS researcher Ken] Driggs, "reinforces the belief that 'We are God's chosen people, and we are going to be persecuted for living God's laws.' "

In the polygamists' darkest hours, they say, the light shines more brightly on the pathway to God.
In other words Texas blew it, however this handful of prosecutions turns out. Just like in the aftermath to the Short Creek debacle, if there are actual abused kids among the FLDS, Texas ' actions made it more difficult, not easier, for them to get help - and not just in Texas but in other locales.

http://gritsforbreakfast.blogspot.com/2008/08/few-actual-abuse-cases-coming-out-of.html

 

[Glow]

Walther & CPS in good-cop, bad-cop gambit vs. FLDS?
by Kurt Schulzke


Reportage is always fragmentary, so it’s tough to tell what all really went on during the last two days of custody hearings in San Angelo. But these snippets can be interpreted as a coordinated good-cop, bad-cop routine by Judge Walther and CPS in which Walther is rehabilitated to appear a bit less voracious and inhumane than she’s seemed in the past:

A judge today ordered that the now-14-year-old bride of polygamist sect leader Warren Jeffs be placed in state custody, saying she feared the girl’s mother was unable to protect her.

“Allowing the child to remain (in her mother’s custody) would be contrary to the interests of the girl,” said state District Judge Barbara Walther.

Walther, however, denied a request by Child Protective Services for custody of the girl’s 11-year-old brother and ordered that he remain with his mother. . .

Good cop. Girl has to go, but boy gets to stay with Mom, though neither can see their father, Frederick “Merrill” Jessop.

“It’s a very difficult decision for a judge to make,” said Marleigh Meisner, an attorney for CPS. “We certainly respect her decision.” . .

Yeah, right. I’m sure Meisner does “respect” Judge Walther who, as part of the O’Neill-inspired love fest between Texas courts and CPS, is Meisner’s partner and collaborator.

At this week’s custody hearing, Barbara Jessop, 55, repeatedly invoked her right against self-incrimination, refusing to answer all but a few of the more than 30 questions fired at her by CPS attorneys.

“I stand on the Fifth (Amendment),” she said when asked such questions as the names of her children and visitors to her San Antonio home, whether it would be in the best interests of a 12-year-old girl to be married to an older man and whether she had ever beaten her children when they were young.

I’d like to see the transcript of this portion of the hearing. I have a feeling something is missing. If this is really all there is, I wonder what strategy Barbara Jessop is pursuing by refusing to answer such simple questions. It doesn’t seem to help her case and surely plays into the good-cop, bad-cop routine:

Walther today cited that, pointedly asking Rios, “When parents can’t affirmatively state that they will take steps to protect their children, what recourse does the court have?”

Enter the bad cop:

Valerie Trevino, a San Angelo-based caseworker assigned to represent the children’s interests, said she had tried to make three scheduled visits to San Antonio and that Barbara Jessop had skipped each appointment without explanation.

Trevino urged the judge to remove the children from their mother’s care.

But the “seasoned jurist,” carefully weighed the facts and decided to deny Trevino’s “urge” to remove those kids. Ergo, “Judge Walther good, CPS bad.”

There’s more. In negotiation parlance, this issue (removing these kids) appears to have been for CPS a “low-cost concession,” something CPS were willing or even anxious to give up in order to make it appear that they made a concession (thereby paving the way for more demands) when they really haven’t given up anything.
~~~~~

One of the comments following this article is by a person who titles themselves "In the Know".

The comment certainly "sounds" like it is by someone who was in the court room and thus "in the know"

here is the comment:

IN THE KNOW { 08.20.08 at 9:01 am }

Simply put, Barbara Jessop choked on the stand. She refused to admit information CPS already had (such as the names of her children) and other simple questions that could not have led to a criminal complaint. She was under a lot of pressure, and she simply did not handle it well.

The case against her was weak. The most recent alleged act of “abuse” offered against her occurred in August of 2006. What sealed her fate was taking the 5th on a couple of key questions she could have answered and the testimony that CPS and CASA were unable to contact her at her address.

There was not one shred of evidence that any of the spiritual unions that she and/or Merrill Jessop were alleged to have participated in resulted in sex between an adult and a child. There was also no evidence that simply engaging in a purported marriage was harmful to the physical or emotional well-being of the child. The oldest male child was not removed because he was seventeen and the youngest male child was not removed because CPS put forward insufficient evidence that he was at risk.

Walther was more moderated in her temperament compared to the 14-day hearing. I don’t agree with the good cop/bad cop analysis, however. She was merely exercising a more judicial temperament and the evidence was weak.

Finally, Valerie Trevino is CASA, not CPS.


http://iperceive.net/walther-cps-in-good-cop-bad-cop-gambit-vs-flds/#more-909

 

[Glow]

Keep in mind as you read this, that minus the nut job that is Warren Jeffs, some of the basic tenets and beliefs of these two groups are the same. Including their treatment of their young women.

Amish Population Booming, Study Finds
By MARK SCOLFORO,
AP

LANCASTER, Pa. (Aug. 20) - The Amish are expanding their presence in states far beyond Pennsylvania Dutch country as they search for affordable farmland to accommodate a population that has nearly doubled in the past 16 years, a new study found.

States such as Missouri, Kentucky and Minnesota have seen increases in their Amish populations of more than 130 percent. The Amish now number an estimated 227,000 nationwide, up from 123,000 in 1992, according to researchers from Elizabethtown College's Young Center for Anabaptist and Pietist Studies.

Over the same period, Amish settlements have been established in seven new states, putting them in at least 28 states from coast to coast. The new states are: Arkansas, Colorado, Maine, Mississippi, Nebraska, Washington and West Virginia.

"When we think they might be dying out or merely surviving, they are actually thriving," said Elizabethtown professor Don Kraybill, a leading expert on the Amish who shared his research from an upcoming book with The Associated Press.

Also known as Anabaptists, the Amish are Christians who reject most modern conveniences and rely on horse-drawn carriages. They began arriving in eastern Pennsylvania around 1730. Along with English, they speak a German dialect called Pennsylvania Dutch or Pennsylvania German.

Amish couples typically have five or more children. With more than four out of every five deciding in young adulthood to remain within the church, their population has grown steadily. More than half the population is under 21.
A small portion of the increase is also due to conversions to the faith.

The Amish are attracted to areas with relatively cheap farms, a rural lifestyle and nonfarming jobs such as construction or cabinet making that fit their values and allow them to remain independent. In some cases, they have migrated to resolve leadership problems or escape church-related disputes.
In Intercourse, a town just east of Lancaster popular with tourists, Amish goat farmer Lester Stoltzfus said a number of area families had moved recently to other states in search of affordable farmland.

"It's fine with me if people move out," Stoltzfus, 37, said from his farm along a country lane hemmed in by cornfields. "There are too many people living here anyway."

Down the road at Fisher's Tin Shop, where stove pipes and decorative items fashioned out of tin hung on the walls, Ben Fisher could not offer any explanation for why the Amish are doing so well. But he said families are on the move all the time.

"They've got to go somewhere," Fisher said.

As they move into new areas, some of the conflicts that occurred years earlier in established Amish settlements are playing out again, often involving issues such as building codes or waste treatment.

sound familiar?

In Mayfield, Ky., an area into which a few hundred Amish have moved in recent years, nine men are fighting charges they operated horse-drawn buggies without the flashing lights or orange safety triangles that state law requires.

"They are moving into new states and settling or establishing new settlements in communities where local officials aren't acquainted with them. That creates some misunderstanding on zoning issues or other unique factors in Amish practice," Kraybill said.

At the same time, some businesses have been glad to accommodate the Amish. In Mayfield, hardware store owner Dan Falder said his business is one of several to install hitching posts where the Amish can tie up their horses.
Now when Falder looks across the parking lot, he sees horse manure. "That's new within the last few years," he said.

Pennsylvania, Ohio and Indiana continue to be the geographic center for the Amish, accounting for about two-thirds of the faith's population. They also accounted for more than half of the total population gain.
But eight states with at least 1,000 Amish residents had higher rates of growth, led by Kentucky, which saw its population jump 200 percent, from 2,835 to 8,505, the study found.

The number of Amish "districts" — congregations that usually consist of two or three dozen families — has increased by 84 percent in the past 16 years, from 929 to 1,711.

The arrival of the Amish can raise land prices, and their self-reliance translates into a relatively low burden on public services.
Dennis Hubbard, a government official in Sheldon Township, Wis., said the newcomers seldom appear in the court system, require long-term care or attend public schools.

"As they live their lives, they really do not become very involved with government," said Hubbard, whose state has seen its Amish population climb 117 percent since 1992.

At least 350 Amish families migrated into Missouri, New York or Wisconsin between 2002 and 2007. Over the same period, about 520 families moved out of Ohio and some 470 left Pennsylvania.

"One family doesn't go — there is a group of them that goes, like two or three or four," said Fannie Erb-Miller, national editor of The Budget, a weekly newspaper serving the Amish that is based in Sugarcreek, Ohio.
Once a settlement has six families and at least one minister, it qualifies to send The Budget dispatches about its activities, often with an invitation for others to join it.

"They can continue to let people know: We're here, come visit us, how the land is, the orchards do great or whatever," Erb-Miller said.
Kraybill said only families who use horse-drawn buggies and call themselves Amish were considered Amish for purposes of his research.
Researchers combed Amish publications and mined other sources to determine where new settlements were being established and to count the total number of districts.

They used a figure of 135 people per church district to calculate population estimates, but the study cautions that its method could result in numbers that are too high for newer settlements and too low in long-established Amish communities.

In Ontario, Canada, the only Amish community outside the United States also is growing. It consists of about 4,500 people, up from 2,300 in 1992.
The Amish have noticed their changing demographics. The population boom is posing practical challenges for a people who, for example, often pay non-Amish "taxis" — private vehicles — to take them on longer trips.
"An Amish woman said, 'We joke among ourselves, if we keep growing at this rate, soon half the world will be Amish and the other half will be taxi drivers,'" Kraybill said.

http://news.aol.com/article/amish-p...s/142277?icid=200100125x1207723602x1200414507

 

[Glow]

Wednesday, August 20, 2008
The Virginity of the Bride


Warren Jeffs 12 year old (now 14 year old) bride is probably a virgin. That's my guess. A variety of thing may make this hard to prove but you can bet on Texas behaving in a specific way.

In ancient times the "evidence of virginity" was the bloody sheet on which a virgin lost hers. In modern times, we are less concerned with virginity and a variety of occurrences can cause the breaching of a hymen, including use of certain feminine hygiene products. At least, that is what I am told by those in a position to know.

So after this rather personal discussion of biology, we can guess what Texas will do next. If they believe, for one second, that Warren's now 14 year old betrothed has been deflowered, or cannot produce evidence of her virginity, they will examine her. She is now theirs to do with as they please, they are state, parent, prosecution to her parents and husband and they need the evidence.

If you hear them talking about what a violation of her rights and how damaging it would be to her to do this. If they speak of how unenlightened such and act would be, anything along those lines including "no comment," then she's a virgin. Or at least, she can prove she is.

http://www.hughmcbryde.blogspot.com/

 

[Ciara]

That link about the amish was very interesting Glow, thanks for posting it. Although I don't agree with a lot of these group's practices, I find it sooo fascinating reading about them.

Off topic: I hope you are well:seeya:

 

[Glow]

Hi Ciara,

I have been off dealing with tropical storm Fay.

I feel as you do. I dont agree with these two groups in some ways either. My disagreement stems from some of their beliefs also.

I think that seeking to understand why people believe what they do is different than agreeing with what they do. Agreed?

 

[Glow]

New indictments in Schleicher County mean what?
by Kurt Schulzke

Three additional indictments were reportedly handed down today in San Angelo, Texas, in connection with the FLDS case. What do they mean? That depends. Betcha haven’t heard that one before!

While I’m not the first, let me join the chorus in saying that there’s no way that Judge Walther will exclude evidence gathered pursuant to the warrants she signed to approve the April raid on the YFZ ranch. Walther has too much of her own credibility invested in an unhappy outcome for the FLDS to exclude — at least on grounds related to probable cause or scope of the warrants — any significant evidence that prosecutors drag into court. That means that the results in this case will rest entirely on the jury and the appellate courts.

Given the relatively small size of San Angelo and the ubiquity of the media coverage of the case, it’s hard to imagine how San Angelo could empanel a truly impartial jury. But truly impartial and legally impartial are often not the same thing. My sense — open to correction by locals — is that there are significant numbers of potential jurors in Schleicher County who are already strongly for and against CPS in the case. Probably very few in the jury pool have no opinion about how the case should end.

In some communities not all that far from Schleicher County, juries convict always just as a matter of tradition. Last week, I spoke with a defense attorney from Louisiana who told me that in his community, there have been only two acquittals in the past twenty years and those were true flukes. The people there just take as truth everything prosecutors say no matter how ridiculous or internally inconsistent.

I don’t know what the acquittal rate is in Schleicher County. And given the hotly divisive nature of these prosecutions, it’s not clear that historical trends will hold here. Nevertheless, I think those under indictment should be building their cases for the appellate courts. At this stage, this means focusing, as Rod Parker commented yesterday, on two key issues, the legality of the search warrants and jurisdiction:

Rod Parker, an attorney for the FLDS, said Wednesday that his side has two fronts to fight: suppress the evidence by proving the search was illegal; and raise jurisdictional questions that would make prosecutors prove that if there was illegal activity, it took place in Texas.

Worth noting here is that Parker (who may not represent any of the individual criminal defendants, for all I know) seems to be conceding big-picture, document authentication issues. That is to say, it doesn’t appear that the FLDS defendants have a coordinated strategy to challenge the authenticity of the documents confiscated in the raid. I’m guessing that they will enter authenticity and privilege objections on a spot basis.

But the money game revolves around probable cause, scope of the warrants, and the situs of alleged illegal acts. In addition, as Bob has commented on the blog, the defendants would be wise to get into the trial record facts supporting constitutional violations and malicious prosecution. I said before that the case can be made that the Texas legislature crafted their bigamy and age-of-consent laws for the specific purpose of snaring one religious group — the FLDS. And that would arguably invalidate these statutes as unconstitutional.

Readers who would like to educate themselves on the question of whether the warrants in this case were overbroad might start by reading Wikipedia’s commentary on the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Stanford v. Texas. You can read the full opinion at Findlaw. And it’s just a start. ht: TBM

http://iperceive.net/new-indictments-in-schleicher-county-mean-what/#more-929

 

[faw720]

I think that seeking to understand why people believe what they do is different than agreeing with what they do. Agreed?

I agree. I belong to, what today, is considered a very traditional, mainstream church. Some people disagree with the doctrines of this church but most don't consider it "way out there". However, 450 years ago the government would have considered me a heritic & I could have been burned at the stake. I'm glad I live now, not back then.

 

[Glow]

Yes, and good for you faw for saying that! Times change as do laws, but we all have certain rights to choose that must be carefully balanced when considering what is "right" and "wrong".

Im glad that you found something that allows you that.

 

[Glow]

Monday, August 25, 2008

FLDS August 25th

There seems to be a trend here- Judge Walthers botched the 14 day hearings, refusing to give the children the individual hearings required by law, because it was just too hard to do the thing the right way. CPS overstepped its boundaries, snatched 476 children and adults it lied about and said were children without actually seeing any evidence of abuse (it saw two pregnant adults and possibly one pregnant minor, hardly unusual in Texas which has the highest teen pregnancy rates in the nation- and so, although their own unethical shortcuts created that difficult situation, Walthers used the difficult situation to excuse herself from hearing the evidence that each child or at least each family was at risk of abuse. And she excused herself from answering what she termed as a stack of motions the attorneys for children and parents presented.

And though she was never able to find time to get to those, she did find time recently to respond to a CPS suit immediately- the one denying discover. And some of the parents' lawyers have objected to this, as well they should:


Lawyers representing a group of FLDS mothers caught up in the raid on the YFZ Ranch are headed back to court in an attempt to force child welfare authorities to hand over evidence of child abuse and neglect.

They say evidence has not been shared with lawyers representing parents and children from the Fundamentalist LDS Church ever since the judge overseeing the massive custody case issued a July 24 order suspending discovery.



"Although the investigations have not been completed, and the Department has not yet reached a conclusion with respect to all the alleged abuse and neglect of the more than 400 children involved in these cases, numerous parties propounded interrogatories and other discovery requests," CPS lawyer Charles Childress wrote in a motion filed July 24.

IT is a highly questionable proceeding, and I remain astonished that anybody defends Judge Walthers' actions at any point in this case.

TRLA has since drafted its own discovery control plan, as have other attorneys. Susan Hays, a Dallas lawyer representing a 2-year-old girl, urged better communication on all sides.

"All fail to require productive communication for the vast majority of cases," she wrote in a letter to the judge.

I wonder how Susan Hays knows what the other attorneys have done or not done in this case.

And here's the CPS whine:

Childress, who was just appointed to oversee the YFZ case, said in an Aug. 18 letter to the court and attorneys in the case that CPS is not trying to deny discovery to anyone. He noted that Texas evidence rules make reference to discovery being used to drive up the costs of litigation or to stall a case.

"In a case with more than 140 mothers and 400 children, all of whom have lawyers, we maintain, and hope to show at the hearing on Sept. 4, that formal discovery ... is virtually impossible," he wrote.

Whose fault is it that they are dealing with over 140 mothers and 400 children?

Most recently, CPS has filed "nonsuits," seeking to end court supervision for approximately 176 children for various reasons.
Demonstrating, yet again, that CPS LIED when it said that every family on the ranch had participated in underaged marriages and abuse.
They took too many unethical short cuts, and that makes doing their job and following some basic due process issues far too hard- and since they are the ones who created the situation, naturally, they are NOT the ones who should be inconvenienced by it- in Judge Walthers Court.


http://heartkeepercommonroom.blogspot.com/

 

[Glow]

Here's a story on how families are coping with the trauma CPS has inflicted on them with the help of their extended community.




FLDS struggle beyond YFZ Ranch borders
By Nancy Perkins



Deseret News
Published: August 25, 2008
CONVERSE, Texas — Tammy Jessop wasn't anywhere near the YFZ Ranch when Texas authorities raided the sprawling polygamist community just outside of Eldorado in early April on abuse allegations, but she's here now.
"It was frightening to hear about it, read about it and not know what was going on," said Jessop, a 50-year-old member of the Fundamentalist LDS Church and a certified teacher with 24 years of experience teaching seventh grade. "What I did know was that I needed to be here to help."

By now, said Tammy, the entire world knows the story of the raid on the YFZ Ranch that resulted in the removal of 440 children by a Texas judge. Two higher courts overturned that decision, and the judge was ordered to release the children back to their parents, although the families remained under oversight by the court and child welfare officials.

Some of those children and their parents have returned to live at the YFZ Ranch, which FLDS members have transformed into a 1,700-acre community of homes, orchards, gardens, a school, dairy, store, sewing and cabinet shops, a large meetinghouse and the sect's first temple.

For many other FLDS parents and their children, returning to the ranch has been an elusive dream. Tammy Jessop's desire to help extended family brought her to Barbara Jessop's small apartment, where she cares for 11-year-old Benjamin while his mother struggles to regain custody of his 14-year-old sister.

"We need her," said Benjamin of his big sister, who was ordered back into foster care last week by a district judge after allegations arose that the girl is an underage bride to FLDS leader Warren Jeffs. "I miss her."

Video clips and photographs of the traumatic separation between mother and daughter are posted on captivefldschildren.org. Poems and notes lamenting the absence of Barbara's daughter are written on a large white board hanging on a wall at the Jessop apartment. The comments and quotes change often, reflecting the family's reliance on God and their faith.

Watching her child sob and handing her off to child welfare officials was the hardest thing she has ever done, said Barbara. None of the allegations of sexual abuse are true, she said.

"She is a precious, innocent child who needs her mother, and I need her," said Barbara, who suffers from seizures that began several years ago stemming from a benign brain tumor. "I can't describe how I feel. It's very difficult, very hard."

Living anywhere else but at the YFZ Ranch keeps FLDS families in an otherworldly kind of limbo, said Tammy Jessop. Barbara and the other FLDS women living here describe their new accommodations on a suburban cul-de-sac as "camping out."

"We're not moving in. We are being very conservative and trying to find ways to bring in means to help out," Barbara said, noting that an older son found temporary work in the area and the family is looking into the idea of producing wooden toys to sell online.

"But this is not our home. The one thing that's helpful is that we have some family nearby. It means so much to know that Tammy is here to help me," Barbara said. Benjamin's eyes widen at the thought of one day returning to the YFZ Ranch with his mother and siblings where he can do what he misses most — and it's not riding bikes or playing with friends.

"I want to work. Whatever I'm asked to do. Working is fun," said Benjamin, whose bright red hair is a family trait. He's doing his best to help his mother and other FLDS family members now, building a chicken coop that sits on a narrow strip of yard and helping to care for the younger children.

Edson Jessop and his family were able to return to the YFZ Ranch in early June, although they remain under the state's child welfare system's oversight. Edson and his wife, Zavenda, are hopeful that CPS will release them from the restrictive plan they have been living under since they retrieved their four children from various shelters around the state.

For the past couple of months, more families have returned to the ranch and sounds of life as it used to be before the raid are beginning to fill the air. Weeds reach into the lower branches of hundreds of fruit trees, a vivid reminder that the ranch emptied out right at harvest season.

Zavenda bakes bread for the ranch store and Edson's carpenter skills are in high demand. Their children, Zachary, 10; Ephraim, 7; Russell, 6; and Anne, who just turned 4; are thrilled to be home with their parents on the ranch.

On a recent overcast day, the boys and their sister showed a Deseret News reporter and photographer some of their favorite spots to explore and play at the ranch.

The very best place to be, according to Anne, is next to her mother or father. After that, she tags along with her big brothers as they pat the noses of newborn calves, scurry up a mound of gravel for a quick slide down and wind down with a toasted cheese sandwich.

School will start soon, either at the ranch schoolhouse or at home with approved educational packets. Even those FLDS children not yet home at the ranch will receive packets to begin their studies, said several mothers.

"We'll be grateful when everyone else can come back to the ranch," said Edson. "We miss their contributions and talents. I haven't heard of anyone that doesn't want to come back. There are families all around Texas waiting to be released from their bondage. We miss Barbara and the others. They need to come home."


http://deseretnews.com/article/content/mobile/1,5620,700253581,00.html?printView=true

 

[yolorado]

If Merrianne is such precious innocent child who needs her mother at 14, why on earth did her dear mother permit her marriage at 12 to Warren Jeffs, a 50-something fugitive from the law at the time? I think 50-something Tammy may be Barbie's sister wife, who was assigned to Merril after the death of her 1st husband, a prophet, Uncle Roy, I believe. If so, wonder why Merril didn't have her at the ranch before now. Too bad Barbie didn't co-operate with the authorities. If she had, then in spite of what a bad track record she has established for protecting that child, her child might still be with her. BTW, where's Merril, why is he leaving his wives and children to deal with all this alone? Wonder if he's holed up in some secret room at YFZ.

If they can't be at home in the real US, can't they please move somewhere else? Please? They don't want to follow the laws of the land, unless it suits them. They don't like the way they're treated in Texas, Utah, or Arizona. Why are they still here? Why should the rest of society have to put up with their scornful law-breaking? (That's rhetorical... We shouldn't!)

 

[Mira]

/quote Glow (Benjamin) "I want to work. Whatever I'm asked to do. Working is fun," said Benjamin, whose bright red hair is a family trait. He's doing his best to help his mother and other FLDS family members now, building a chicken coop that sits on a narrow strip of yard and helping to care for the younger children. /unquote

he is longing to be a person of worth. i know how he feels. this makes me cry for him.

i helped around the dairy farm from time i was 5 and came to live with my auntie and uncle. i couldnt even talk, but i felt part of the family because i was allowed to help. i dont know how my life would have been if i hadnt been part of everything.

of all the farm kids i know, few think of the work as work. it is fun. if there is love at home, doing your part, no matter how small, is important. eating a tomato you watered and weeded and picked warm from the garden is such a thrill i cant describe.

the feeling of 'I CAN DO THIS!!!" is a big part of why i am a functional human being today.

while i dont like some of the stuff that flds does, i grieve for the families torn apart and disempowered. punishing the children for what some of the adults may or may not have done is so unfair and hateful.

ya know, hitler turned his whole country against jews by propaganda. after he succeeded, the murder of 6 million was easy to turn a blind eye to.

should we imprison all catholic children because some catholic priests are nasty? i dont think so...

 

[Ciara]

Hi Ciara,

I have been off dealing with tropical storm Fay.

I feel as you do. I dont agree with these two groups in some ways either. My disagreement stems from some of their beliefs also.

I think that seeking to understand why people believe what they do is different than agreeing with what they do. Agreed?

I most definately agree with you on that Glow Even though sometimes, it is hard to understand the "Whys" of what they do, its both educational and often enlightening trying to understand

I hope you were not affected by the Tropical Storm Fay. We dont get storms like that over here Thankfully. I feel so bad for those who lose their homes etc when I see the coverage on the news in the US.

 

[Glow]

If Merrianne is such precious innocent child who needs her mother at 14, why on earth did her dear mother permit her marriage at 12 to Warren Jeffs, a 50-something fugitive from the law at the time?

If they can't be at home in the real US, can't they please move somewhere else? Please? They don't want to follow the laws of the land, unless it suits them. They don't like the way they're treated in Texas, Utah, or Arizona. Why are they still here? Why should the rest of society have to put up with their scornful law-breaking? (That's rhetorical... We shouldn't!)

Hi Yolorado, I think that is the question of the hour. To all of us who have been raised in the mainstream America of the 21st century this seems foreign and even appalling. 100 years ago even mainstream girls were married young. It was even a "bragging" point their later descendents would comment on. I have actually heard people say things like "this is my grandmother and she moved west when she was 11 and married my grandpa when she was 14 and raised 11 kids - she had 15 but 4 died." That kind of statement is sprinkled throughout the "memories of our ancestors" even in our mainstream consciousness. So we have to make some type of allowance for how times change what we view as "shocking" and what we don't. Remember just 4 short years ago "mainstream" Texas saw no problem with a girl marrying at 14. That law got changed specifically to target the FLDS.

The idea of a law being passed to "target" a specific group of people is an alarming thought to say the least. Sit aside that in this particular instance it is the FLDS that we are talking about. Just look at the principal of the matter. Is it a good thing when a law "targets" a specific group? Is there ever a time when that would be a "bad" thing? Just talking generalities here.

Last but not least, we have to look at things through the same lens that the FLDS are using. Not because we "agree" with them but because wisdom goes hand in hand with insight. The two are inseparably linked. If we as a society are going to take it on ourselves to make life changing structural changes to a group of people involving over 400 children, it is imperative that we do so with wisdom as the responsibility for the outcome will rest squarely on the shoulders of those who took action to change the status quo. It is in that vein that we need to analyze and comprehend exactly the "why" behind the "what".

The what is these people marry their young daughters off very young. So the next logical question is why?

In their view it is all about planning for the future. The belief is this life is temporary and transient and the heavenly life is permanent and of much greater value. In this after life women are "bound" to men to be cared for honored and protected for eternity. This is not considered a bad thing or a dead end street for a woman. Rather it is considered a valuable position.

This way of thinking isn't that far removed from the mainstream if you extract the religious aspect. The Bible is full of women who prayed and yearned for children as that was perceived as the highest purpose in life. We wont even go into the fact that they were praying for MALE children and not females like themselves.... I would suggest that in our core we are not that far removed from that time period as fertility clinics are a flourishing business in mainstream America today.

Even the word "spinster" while dropping out of our everyday vocabulary, is still a word that we have all heard and carried the association of a "pitiable" position for a woman.

So back to the women of FLDS. In their minds they are safeguarding their daughters future to marry her to a highly spiritual man. This assures that she will find earthly fulfillment and even more importantly heavenly security for eternity. This is important to understand because it goes to motive. Some have gotten very worked up and emotional on this topic, even to the point of expressing hatred towards these women. That type of emotion is misplaced and dangerous. It stems from a complete lack of understanding of the other sides reasons for their actions. It is fine to feel shocked. Even to feel momentarily repulsed by some of the headlines as well as some (not all) of the actions of the FLDS.

The thing we must not do is take any action that makes us worse than them. Taking their children away does that. Those are THEIR children. Period. They do not belong to the government. The day that the government begins to decide what a parent may and may not teach their children, or believe in themselves is a day where we all lose ground.

As far as "they" need to leave so "we" can have our country like we like it, I have a question. How do we decide who becomes a "they" and who becomes an "us"?

Some would get rid of all black people. After all, they are not originally "from here" and they eat up a LOT of tax dollars supporting a "baby daddy" lifestyle that most disapprove of .

Wait! Is that a little too racist?

Maybe we should get rid of the Catholics. I mean after all just go back 50 years and you couldn't even get a Catholic elected as president in this country. If we got rid of the them, then we would also be rid of that pervasive little issue of pedophilia that the Catholic church has been battling. Surely that would be a good thing, no?

Is that not a good idea because they are a big religion?
Surely size shouldn't matter when we are deciding matters of moral principal.


Maybe we should get rid of the Democrats. After all they are mostly all in Denver at the moment and that would solve most of Americas problems - if you are a Republican.

Or maybe get rid of the Republicans - they start to many wars and ruin the economy, right?

Ok enough with being facetious. My point is there is no "them". There is only "us". Skinheads to Goths, button downed conservatives to liberals.

Whatever.

This country belongs to them all.

Even those weird little FLDS children belong. They belong by virtue of birth and they belong by virtue of the ideals this country was established on.

 

[Glow]

/
i helped around the dairy farm from time i was 5 and came to live with my auntie and uncle. i couldnt even talk, but i felt part of the family because i was allowed to help. i dont know how my life would have been if i hadnt been part of everything.

of all the farm kids i know, few think of the work as work. it is fun. if there is love at home, doing your part, no matter how small, is important. eating a tomato you watered and weeded and picked warm from the garden is such a thrill i cant describe.

the feeling of 'I CAN DO THIS!!!" is a big part of why i am a functional human being today.

while i dont like some of the stuff that flds does, i grieve for the families torn apart and disempowered. punishing the children for what some of the adults may or may not have done is so unfair and hateful.

ya know, hitler turned his whole country against jews by propaganda. after he succeeded, the murder of 6 million was easy to turn a blind eye to.

should we imprison all catholic children because some catholic priests are nasty? i dont think so...

I have been super busy lately and have neglected this thread. I just wanted to tell you Mira that this was an absolutely awesome post! You are exactly right about children needing a sense of purpose in order to feel true happiness. That isn't found sitting in a bedroom staring at the latest electronic game, which is what most mainstream kids are doing in homes all across America.

I think your mention of Hitler is a point well taken also. This situation with the FLDS is of course on a much smaller scale, but certain principals carry over. Even Hitler did not start with the Jews. He started with the Gypsy's. They were small and distasteful to most mainstream Germans. No one had a problem with Hitler over that. Emboldened, he moved on to the arts and theatre community. He targeted the homosexuals therein. Once again, the mainstream paid little attention. We all know how things ended up.

No one is suggesting that the Catholic church be eradicated because of the problems within. I think you make a good point that the standard should be the same for the FLDS. And ALL of us should be questioning why it isn't.

Thanks for posting Mira. :clap:

 

[Glow]

Some good comes out of all the nonsense....

CPS may find life as they know it somewhat altered:

Meanwhile, a new federal appeals court ruling will affect how Texas Child Protective Services removes children from homes when there are allegations of abuse.

The ruling last month by a three-judge panel of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals will bar welfare officials from automatically removing all children from a home if one child is alleged to be abused. While unrelated, the ruling came amid scrutiny of the state's removal of hundreds of children in April from the Fundamentalist LDS Church's YFZ Ranch.

"The decision will require us to make some extremely difficult decisions," Carey Cockerell, commissioner of the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, said in an "urgent legal advisory."

The ruling means child welfare workers will also be required to obtain court orders in most cases before removing allegedly abused children from their homes, officials said.


http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,700254339,00.html