A state trooper checks the cargo hold of a bus Wednesday at the San Angelo Coliseum, where some children and parents from the Yearning for Zion Ranch are being temporarily housed.
TONY GUITIERREZ: ASSOCIATED PRESS
CHILDREN OF ELDORADO
Posted on 04/24/2008 12:46:07 AM PDT by Gondring
A state trooper checks the cargo hold of a bus Wednesday at the San Angelo Coliseum, where some children and parents from the Yearning for Zion Ranch are being temporarily housed.
TONY GUITIERREZ: ASSOCIATED PRESS
CHILDREN OF ELDORADO
Raid on compound triggered by hoax?
Calls to authorities came from phone owned by woman with a history of making false reports
Copyright 2008 Houston Chronicle Austin Bureau
AUSTIN — The frantic, whispered calls that triggered the removal of more than 400 children from a West Texas polygamist sect came from a phone linked to a Colorado Springs woman with a long history of making false abuse reports, according to a court document unsealed Wednesday.
Two prepaid mobile phones that were used to make calls late last month to a domestic violence shelter in San Angelo had previously been used by Rozita Swinton in calls to abuse hot lines and authorities in Colorado and Washington, the affidavit said.
Swinton "is a known repeat victim who repeatedly reports sexual abuse with the Colorado Springs Police Department," the affidavit said.
The records also revealed that the 33-year-old pleaded guilty in June 2007 to false reporting and was placed on probation for one year. She was charged last week with misdemeanor false reporting to authorities in Colorado Springs, and is being investigated by the Texas Rangers in connection with the calls that prompted the April 3 raid of the Yearning for Zion Ranch in Eldorado.
"We are still examining evidence that was seized from her residence and do not expect that investigation to be completed for a while," said Texas Department of Public Safety spokeswoman Tela Mange.
Jim Harrington, director of the Texas Civil Rights Project, said the fact the state launched the raid on what appears to have been a hoax tip without checking it out makes a "sham" out of constitutional protections against wrongful searches.
"To me, this is either gross incompetence or this is a religious vendetta," Harrington said.
In calls that began March 29 to the San Angelo shelter, the caller claimed to be Sarah Barlow who was born in January 1992. She said she was pregnant, already had an infant and was the third wife of her 49-year-old husband.
The caller tearfully whispered that she was being held at the ranch against her will and that her husband beat her so severely, a rib broke. She expressed fear for her baby and a teenage sister who might soon be subjected to a similar fate.
Based on those calls, state law enforcement and child welfare authorities obtained a search warrant to enter the compound owned by the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, a breakaway Mormon sect that believes in polygamy for the men. Officials said they observed what they believed to be underage pregnant girls and began removing children and women from the ranch.
During days of searching, including a tense standoff before police entered the group's sacred temple, more than 400 children were taken away. They are now in state custody and being relocated to group homes around the state.
An initial arrest warrant was issued for the man named by the caller. But the man, who lives in Arizona, had been regularly reporting to his probation officer and there was no evidence he had lived at the ranch.
Randall Chapman, executive director of Texas Legal Services, said he believes state protective services "went over the bounds" but that the agency has "broad investigative authority" when it comes to allegations of child abuse or neglect.
Swinton, who works for an insurance office, is free on $10,000 bond. Her attorney, David Foley of Colorado Springs, said he could not discuss the allegations.
"There's a lot more to this than the public is getting. I think people would be surprised. Stay tuned," Foley said.
The eight-page affidavit paints a picture of a troubled woman who spent hours calling shelters pretending to be a hysterical teenager who had been sexually abused by male relatives and others. In 15 hours of calls to a Colorado Springs shelter, she claimed to be a 13-year-old named Dana who had been molested repeatedly by a local youth pastor.
Those calls prompted Colorado Springs police to look for the girl at a local high school.
In March, a shelter in Washington began getting calls from "April" about abuse by her father and uncle. The girl, however, refused to talk to law enforcement officers and ultimately said her "other personality" had gone to a safe house in Colorado. A callback number she left was linked to Swinton's home.
Meanwhile, one day after 111 older children were put on buses and sent to foster care placements around the state, child welfare authorities said Wednesday they would consider allowing the more than 40 nursing mothers that remain behind in San Angelo to remain with or near their babies.
The department has and will continue to work to keep older siblings together, though a spokesman for the department acknowledged that mix-ups occurred with the six busloads of children sent out Tuesday.
The agency found 16 residential foster home facilities that could take the children, none of which were at risk of losing their license or having it suspended, said Patrick Crimmins, a spokesman for the agency. None of the homes selected were under any kind of probation with the agency.
When the children arrive at the Arrow Child & Family Ministries Retreat Center, just north of Porter in east Montgomery County, they will be part of a long-term care program, said Scott Lundy, vice president for foster care and residential services. The ministry is hiring 100 new staff members who will be specially trained.
"Their society is totally different. Their belief systems are different. Their diet is different. ... Nobody knows what these children are going to need," Lundy said.
The Jim H. Green Kidz Harbor in Brazoria County is preparing to house as many as 36 children. Area residents are bringing sheets, towels, toiletries and checks to the small city hall in Liverpool, said city secretary Judy Dunbar.
Reporters Renée C. Lee, Richard Stewart and Terri Langford in Houston, R.G. Ratcliffe in the Austin Bureau and Lisa Sandberg in San Angelo contributed.
Oh, come on now...we just KNOW she's guilty...why did they even bother getting a warrant! Look at all the evidence they got when they went there...it just shows they didn't need a good warrant based on the Fourth Amendment! </sarc>
Watch out. Pretty soon the usual suspects will be here proclaiming loudly and incoherently that this Swinton nutcase’s fake calls had NOTHING to do with the raid on the compound, even though every news story in the last five days has basically said they did.
Ping
Yeah, but the kicker is... they have all this physical evidence, like the phone numbers tracing to there, the mobile phones with the Texas number, etc....so by the nutcase pitchfork-and-torch crowd, this woman should be considered guilty, even if I had just phoned in a claim that she was guilty! :-)
I like how the original warrant is unavailable. Nice little PR campaign the authorities are running.
Why did you post this article, then 45 minutes later post another with almost the same title from the same source?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2006174/posts
What is it you want to accomplish?
Different sources. Read carefully.
What is it you want to accomplish?
To post the information that's in both of them. Each had information not contained in the other one.
Why do you worry so much about information getting out?
I’m not at all worried with information getting out. It just seems kind of a n00b thing to do, to post the same thing instead of just adding a link to the original post.
As far as I can tell, they’re both AP articles, they’re both published in Houston, and there’s not much difference in the information.
What special information in one was not in the other? Couldn’t you just add it into the same thead?
Maybe I ought to go to threads posted by more experienced posters, who don’t feel the need to post thread after thread on the same topic, from the same source, with basically the same information.
I actually thought there was something new until I read both articles, and then I wondered why you were posting on top of yourself.
As far as reading carefully, I guess if I read articles you post I’m going to be wasting time duplicating what I’ve already done.
Unless you’d like to tell us the difference in the two articles, and why there needed to be two threads.....?
Abused teenager discusses her situation in a chatroom. The 33-year-old woman she meets in the chatroom befriends her and together they plot to blow the whistle.
Creating a story using fictional characters though the situation is a composite but real enough, the 33-year-old woman makes the calls, hoping that the police will intervene and get a warrant with sketchy but believable information.
That way the teenager will remain anonymous and not singled out for punishment by church leaders.
The investigating agency is bound to investigate, using its "broad investigative authority" mentioned in the story:
"Randall Chapman, executive director of Texas Legal Services, said he believes state protective services "went over the bounds" but that the agency has "broad investigative authority" when it comes to allegations of child abuse or neglect."
Agreed that is a possiblity...but highly unlikely.
Why?
It doesn't account for the fact that the alleged perp was in an entirely different state...and the fact that the claims are that these allegedly (allegedly, but my personal belief is that it's real) abused teens would never have had any access to a chat room. It's not like these were myspace kids.
I appreciate your rational, logical look at this. You don't seem to be approaching this from the typical "shred the Constitution, my emotions are running!" view, and that's refreshing.
The investigating agency is bound to investigate, using its "broad investigative authority" mentioned in the story:
Broad Investigative Authority is still constrained by the Constitution, and doesn't allow Aromored Personnel Carriers and automatic weapons onto private property to "investigate." Of course, without the original warrant (that they don't want us to see), we don't know what claims were made.
It just seems that the intial raid was not a good-faith effort to "investigate" or to apprehend the suspect named. And that might let the true criminals go free. :-(
That's like saying "these articles are all published on FreeRepublic."
They were both published in the Houston paper, but they have totally different datelines and bylines. One was reported from Austin and the other from Colorado Springs. One example difference is that one of them gives the name "Dana Anderson" and the other doesn't. That's a freebie.*
Maybe I ought to go to threads posted by more experienced posters, who don’t feel the need to post thread after thread on the same topic, from the same source, with basically the same information.
Please do. Obviously you can't synthesize information from multiple threads.
BTW, I've been on FR since the black-background days, just previously under a different handle. And I've been using computer networks for communication for more than three decades--for online political discussion for more than two of them (Usenet, mostly). More than half of my time online was before the www and these fancy graphical displays.
So your attempt at being high-and-mighty just makes you look rather foolish to third parties who see the broader picture. :-)
As far as reading carefully, I guess if I read articles you post I’m going to be wasting time duplicating what I’ve already done.
Please feel free to pass them by.
*Unless you’d like to tell us the difference in the two articles, and why there needed to be two threads.....?
You give me a credit card number for that service, and I'd be happy to. :-)
lemme see... a nameless, whispered phone call, lurid accusations, preconceived biases on the part of law enforcement and viola! armed troops storm your home, take your kids, bad mouth you in the media (also called tainting the jury pool), and demonize you.
yep. that’s government for ya!
What are you? some kind of pedophile?!!, You are sick! /s
Ping!
Correction: nice little PR campaign the FDLS people are running.
Gondring is doing a fine job defending himself and doesn’t seem to need my help (insert Laura’s “But Monkey” scream here) BUT....why don’t you find something more productive to do.
Looks like a DUKE LACROSSE ending coming soon.
“Correction: nice little PR campaign the FDLS people are running.”
Indeed. Some of the ex-members warned this would happen. Funny how some people think polygamy and child molestation are fine under the auspices of the Bible.
I’ve said it before and I’ll ay it again. Has these people been an offshoot of Islam instead of Christianity, these same people would be screaming for their heads.
Thanks!
Have any FReepers said this? Who has?
I have seen no evidence that such a message is being adopted by anyone, so it would seem the FLDS PR campaign isn't working, if that's what they are trying for.
Carolyn
“Have any FReepers said this? Who has?”
There have been plenty of threads, including this one, where the cops are viewed by certain posters as the wrong-doers and cultists as the victims.
Some freepers will step over child molestors, rapists and polygamists to get just one shot in on a cop. Then there are others who seem to believe that Bible-toters can do no wrong and the mean old state is violating their rights to hoard teenage girls for sex and babies.
“...this was an unConstitutional raid and the more info we get about it, the better.”
Why do you need more info? You apparently have your mind made up. Never mind that you are wrong.
I find it particularly interesting that these forums are filled with apologists for the Texas CPS. I guess if they have enough time and money to send hundreds of law enforcement officials into a cooky pioneer village (for a week and snatch all the kids) they have enough resources to clog these forums.
It is becoming more and more evident that the CPS is either massively incompetent (which being a part of state gov’t need I say more) or they were directed to make this raid on such flimsy evidence for other reasons. Time will tell. Remember the 1953 raid brought down a Governor. Maybe this one can flush that RINO Perry.
One other irony of this whole thing... The Police have far more evidence to charge Swinton with these false calls then they ever had to storm the FLDS ranch. Yet, “this process will take a awhile”.
ie "Fake but accurate" (and everybody was so mean to Dan Rather)
Bible-toters? FLDS is only nominally Christian, at most. They don’t read the bible at all, they refer to the Book of Mormon. No one here is supporting cultists as cultists, they are criticizing the way Texas handled this. There are thousands upon thousands of underaged girls who get pregnant every year in Texas alone; it’s a tragedy, but you don’t see the Rangers driving all over the place in AMVs and flak jackets.
There was one anonymous call (now known to be bogus) that initiated the raid. The cult could have been engaged in human sacrifice, it doesn’t matter—it seems pretty obvious that there’s a fourth amendment violation here. The 4th provides for an “evidentiary privilege” meaning that if it’s shown that the initial warrant was bad, everything else that came out during the subsequent raid and investigation could be thrown out under the “fruits of the poisonous tree” doctrine. In other words, Texas really f’d up badly and they could well wind up having to let real molesters go. It will all depend on whether they had reasonable suspicion, based upon an anonymous, out of state phone call that they never even followed up on until days later (in fact, it’s clear that they should have known that an other investigation into those calls made to the former FLDS woman was already going on).
Ah, Usenet. Good times. Last night someone mentioned googling me, and when I did it myself I noticed Google has quite a bit of the old usenet groups up online now.
Interestingly, it included a series of discussions we had on sci.skeptic in 1994 about CPS taking kids away, about imprisoning a few innocent people was better than letting a child molester get away, and about people who said that religion itself was child abuse and the children of religious parents should be “saved” from them by the CPS.
That is where I first formed my rather negative opinion of the CPS and of government taking children because they don’t like how the parents live.
I imagine if the average person actually went and lived in a typical ghetto for a week, or on the bayou of Loiusiana, would come away thinking ALL those kids should be saved from their parents.
I feel that way sometimes seeing parents deal with kids in public places, I have to suppress my urge to interfere. Fact is, we let parents have tremendous leeway in choosing how they want to run their families. We’d all love kids to be treated the way we treat our own kids, but that’s not the job of government.
And anyway, the Government will never treat my kids right — look at Public school and the government’s shunning of religious principles.
The agency found 16 residential foster home facilities that could take the children, none of which were at risk of losing their license or having it suspended, said Patrick Crimmins, a spokesman for the agency. None of the homes selected were under any kind of probation with the agency.
Doesn't that make anybody a bit concerned, when they have to specifically verify that the place the kids are supposed to be sent to be "safe" from possible abuse have to first be vetted to ensure that they aren't already on probation or under investigation?
The implication is that there are a lot of these "child-saving" facilities that ARE at risk of losing their licenses, or under probation.
So, when they have to investigate the child protective service facilities, do they seize the children from those facilities and send them back to their parents for safe-keeping?
“There was one anonymous call (now known to be bogus) that initiated the raid.”
That call initaited a visit from the authorities. What they saw at their visit prompted the raid. Nice try, though.
“They don’t read the bible at all, they refer to the Book of Mormon.”
They read both.
Hey I just thought of something.
Maybe Governor Perry can issue another Executive Decree forcing all of the FLDS girls to get that HPV vaccine (VD shot) that he was flogging for the Pharm Company (was it Merck). Then they can kick some of the profits back into his next politcal campaign.
I don’t believe that’s quite correct. The call initiated a visit to a woman who is a former FLDS member. On the basis of their interview with her, which was prompted by the fact that she tipped off the police to the Swinton calls (which she did not know to be fake at the time), they then visited the compound. As for “what they saw” they didn’t see anything that they couldn’t have seen for all those years that the compound existed at that site. Everyone knew that the members claimed to be engaged in polygamy (though legally they were not since they were never legally married in the first place, unless TX recognizes common law marriage). Despite the allegations that came out only after the raid, which may well be true, no one has demonstrated (or even claimed) that there was any actual evidence discovered prior to the raid that constituted reasonable suspicion other than the bogus phone calls—the CPS has, from the beginning, consistently relied on the content of those phone calls as the basis of their actions.
In no way does this suggest that what was going on at FLDS should be tolerated; I’m only suggesting that the CPS screwed up. If this were a group of lefties plotting illegal activities, there is no question but that the ACLU and dozens of other rights organizations would be fighting to throw out all of the evidence thus far gathered. It’s only because FLDS is extremely unpopular with everyone that this hasn’t happened yet.
It would give the authorities just enough excuse to do a search, being pretty sure they would find someone to fit the particulars. It’s my guess that their in-house informant gave them a lot more specific information over the years.
It has been my understanding that authorities visited the compund before a warrant was issued. What call led to that visit is irrelevant. Officers were said to observed girls they suspected were underage, pregnant and married as well as the ritual “marriage bed” in the temple. Then comes the warrant. The folks here screaming “4th Amendment!”, “un-Constitutional!” are just wrong. Every talking head lawyer and judge I have seen on TV says the warrant and raid was legit.
It is my opinion that some folks here are so quick to bash law enforcement, they really don’t care about any facts that don’t make LEOs look bad. Not directed at you.
That said, we all get our info on this from somewhere else. None of us was there so the chances of getting poor info are present.
Excuse me for posting the following comments a second time but I wanted to make some amendments to my original comments on another stream.
Let me preface my comments with the fact that I think these FLDS people are very odd indeed and I have no relationship to anything even related to Mormonizm. I also do not believe that Polygamy should be legalized.
However, this whole issue is very disturbing and should be a wake up call to ALL parents who raise kids in conservative religious homes — especially “home schoolers”. I know Evangelicals have a severe distaste for anything Mormon — observe their silence about this issue. But, let it be known, those Evangelical home schoolers will be next.
The worst thing about this case is that it is completely Un-American. When Abraham Lincoln was asked what he proposed to do about the “Mormons” — he said, “I propose that we do nothing”. Lincoln understood that in a somewhat pluralistic society, where freedom of religion is paramount, you are just asking for trouble when you stick your hand in a nest of otherwise happy bees because you think they are strange / odd maybe even duped. Our nation was founded on principals that allow all of those things — they are left to personal choice - if you want to be duped it is your free choice. Especially in our current degenerate society where anything goes — perversion of every type, shape and form is held up in the highest esteem. Why focus so much attention and resources on a few scruffy FLDS adherents. Why would bureaucrats risk the potential career limiting embarrassment of snatching children from their parents on such shoddy evidence and a hoax phone call. Evangelicals beware — there is something more at work here. Let us reason together.
Did they attack this group due to it’s propensity to let young girls marry (not legally but practically). This Angie Voss woman said there are 5 girls under 18 that are pregnant or have had a baby (Texas law does allow marriage at 16 with parental consent – before 2005 the age was 14). Assuming 100 adolescent girls, that means that the teen pregnancy rate in that community is somewhere between 2% and 5%. The Texas State teen pregnancy rate is 6.3% down from 7.8%. I would hazard to say that in the inner city of Dallas the teen pregnancy rate is probably close to 25%. We recently heard that a whopping 25% of the nation’s teenager girls have venereal disease (a national disgrace) — I would bet the FLDS girls have none. Why does the CPS not round up all of the children in the inner-city communities en-masse as well? When a homosexual catholic priest gets caught with his pants down, why doesn’t the CPS snatch all of the children in the parish – they all are at risk of abuse? Why did the CPS round up the children of even the monogamous couples with only toddler children? Why not just round up the families impacted by the 5 girls? Why separate nursing mothers from babies?
I find it particularly ironic that most of this nation’s school systems sex education classes virtually provide “how to do it guides” for children much younger then any FLDS pregnant teenager along with free condom gift packages. But, of course, this is government sanctioned so it is okay. It is all very clinical and good for society.
Did the FLDS ranch get raided for Polygamy? I can’t imagine so. That practice has been legal for all practical purpose for years. Polygamy appears to carry the same legal weight as Adultery (which is still illegal in many states) — after all if you can’t charge an Adulterer how can you possibly charge a polygamist (especially when there is no legal marriage contract). After all, in our society a polygamist is just an adulterer who makes a long term commitment. If not, then why is Elliot Spitzer not behind bars for Polygamy — after all he kept a conjugal relationship going with his wife and at least one paid concubine that we know about. New York’s version of the CPS should be making a night raid on the Spitzer residence and snatching their children. If polygamy is the issue then we need to round up the children of all of the politicians in Washington that keep or have kept concubines on the side. Besides the fact that every major Muslim community in this country practices polygamy — A large percentage of those Somali cab drivers that you occasionally use are also polygamists (oddly enough the government even helped most of them bring their extra wives into the country).
The CPS bureaucrat Angie Voss made the comment that when a man falls out of favor and leaves the FLDS group he will sometimes leave his wife/family behind (if his wife/wives choose to stay behind) and the women will be reallocated to other men. How preposterous that such a thing would be done....Shameful….Repugnant…. Perhaps this is the real reason for the raid?
Is this really much different then our society’s wife swapping practice that we call divorce and re-marriage? When we analyze it, let’s face it, the substance is the same.
Is it because of the forced arranged marriages that this group, of people has lost their children? I don’t think so or else I am sure the CPS would be rounding up all of the East Indian children and Moslem children in the state as well. I have more than once seen stories of an East Indian girl coming to a fatal end because she did not cooperate on an arranged marriage. Maybe the CPS is just a little more afraid of these communities. After all this Angie Voss woman said she even felt afraid in the relatively peaceful (virtually weaponless) FLDS ranch. She would have to get her pants (I am sure she wears pants rather than a dress) laundered if she tried this kind of thing in one of those two communities.
No my friends, there must be other reasons for this attack. Religion and secondarily parental rights — pure and simple. This massive response is an attack on religious freedom and parental rights. You evangelicals better hold your nose and start speaking up in their defense or your home school families will be next. You don’t have to defend their polygamy to defend their parental rights. It is in your best interest. Besides if you don’t defend them now, I can see Texas stumbling all the way to the Supreme Court with this one, to do further damage to marriage/family by getting a ruling that legalizes polygamy. By putting pressure on Texas to drop this now, except for any direct violations of the underage marriage deal, we may help Texas avoid being known as the state that ended up giving us legalized sodomy and legalized polygamy.
Sorry; just to add to that...I also wouldn’t characterize the police going to the compound as a “visit”—they were serving an arrest warrant. The arrest warrant also uses the calls to the ex-FLDS woman’s hotline as the sole basis of establishing “probable cause”. The CPS investigator, who is the affiant, expressly states that she had visited the compound several times in four years.
If something had been going on during that time that constituted a crime, then CPS must take some blame for doing nothing until now. Giving them the benefit of the doubt, then we will assume that CPS did not find evidence of child abuse in the past, or at least none that warranted shutting down the entire community. There is nothing in the affidavit of probable cause that suggests any other basis other than the almost certainly bogus calls. This may will still constitute legitimate probable cause, but it will depend on whether a court believes that a reasonable person would have accepted those calls at face value. I agree that in the area of child welfare, practically anything goes and that TX may be able to stand up the warrant.
As for the raid, my understanding is that it was just another attempt to serve the warrant, backed up by paramilitary equipment, when it appeared that there would be resistence to giving up the man they were initially trying to arrest (and who, apparently, had himself left FLDS some time before). What they cannot so far explain is how that single arrest warrant led to the seizure of all of the other children and, what I assume will be hundreds of dependency hearings. Those had to have been the result of other affidavits, but where are they?
It literallly takes months for county youth services to get the gov’t to take children out of abusive homes in almost every other situation—even when you have the child beaters dead to rights. Maybe TX CPS has far greater powers than other youth services in other states. It is extremely unusual for something like this to take place so quickly.
Again, I have no love lost for the weirdos at FLDS. I am, frankly, only academically interested in the case for the constitutional issues.
Uhm, ping...
“[Swinton’s] attorney, David Foley of Colorado Springs, said he could not discuss the allegations.
“There’s a lot more to this than the public is getting. I think people would be surprised. Stay tuned,” Foley said.”
Did you not see that part, Gondring? Or do you think because the CO woman is black that she couldn’t possibly know anything about the pasty white FLDS situation? Oh, and thanks for the ping.
Carolyn, this was not an “unconstitutional raid.” I’ve been reading about this for quite some time. I’ve read many many articles on FR about this. I’ve looked at all sides, I’ve been courteous, I’ve read as many opinions here as I can.
Your contention that I am missing the entire point seems to be nothing more than your assertion that we disagree.
And no, no more than Gondring has, will I “hush” if I have a comment. What do you think, that I am one of the “keep sweet” women who are not allowed to speak up?
Love it, ROTFL!
I am here so that folks reading this particular thread realize there is more than one side to this. That's fairly productive, in my opinion.
There is a copy of the warrant on Smoking Gun. Have you read that?
Many people out there do not know this especially up north but in many of the southern states Texas is one allows paddling in school by school officials. Not with the use of a hand either but with a designated paddle. When the child is paddled in school another authority figure is to be there and watched so they do not commit abuse.
I do know in many states that would be considered abuse it would be consider beating a child. Would that mean abuse is determined by the people in power BUT does not mean they have to follow the same rules they think parents should?
Would that mean some day if I send my child to his room and he doesn't want to go I'm holding him prisoner against his will? If parenting wasn't hard enough they keep trying to make it harder so more and more parents are afraid of punishing their children out of fear. What we are truly doing is letting down our children and not teaching them actions have consequences. Because our rights our always in question by someone who does not know us or all the facts.
A peculiar way to put it, IMO. I would have said the same thing to a man. It's a lot more polite than "shut up."
Carolyn
Pfff. Whatever. “More productive” referred to finding something better to do than post policing. That’s what mods are for.
"Keep sweet" is FLDS women's code for not speaking their opinions, for staying in line, for being subservient.
And are you a mod? After all, you are doing the same thing to me that you accuse me of doing, aren't you? Policing my posts? So far, no mod has ever told me to find something more productive to do.
The two articles may reference different states, but they reference the same event, the same supposedly hoax caller (who also gets due process, BTW) and the same specious argument--that the FLDS YFZ ranch didn't get the benefit of due process, that their 4th Amendment rights were violated for no more reason than Swinton.
Not true.
The FLDS girls certainly don’t have access to chat rooms. What is possible, though, is that given Swinton’s reported obsession with the FLDS, she had gotten information from another source describing a real girl in the caller’s situation named Sarah Barlow, and decided she had to do something to get the girl rescued. This would explain why children interviewed while still at the compound said there was Sarah of about the right age, who had a baby, and had been seen working in the crop fields a few days earlier.
It would also explain why two women who work to help escaping FLDS members said their sources inside the Utah-Arizona compound knew who this girl was, that her name was indeed Sarah Barlow, and that her husband’s last name was Barlow, though with a different but similar first name than the Dale Barlow named in the warrant. Since Dale Barlow had been convicted of a very similar crime, and there was presumably information about him available on the Internet, Swinton may have fleshed out the original information she had gotten about the real Sarah with her own Internet research, learned about this Dale Barlow (same last name as real Sarah) and figured he must be her husband.
All very weird, but the removal of the children from the compound was legally justified long before Swinton’s calls came in. The overwhelming amount of corroborated information about how this cult operates, and specifically about past activities of Merril Jessop who was known to Texas authorities to be in charge of the YFZ compound, was plenty to justify a warrant to go in and have a look, and what they saw when they went in to have a look was plenty to remove the children.
I think we’re getting very close to the truth of the matter.
Gondering... what’s the prolem bub? Didn’t you get the memo? We now submit our intended posts to Judith Anne, and if she says it’s okay, then she posts the articles on the forum for us, the way they should be posted.
Sheesh, will some folks every learn... /s
Gondering... what’s the prolem bub? Didn’t you get the memo? We now submit our intended posts to Judith Anne, and if she says it’s okay, then she posts the articles on the forum for us, the way they should be posted.
Sheesh, will some folks NEVER learn... /s
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.