Posted on 05/22/2008 10:46:31 AM PDT by ElkGroveDan
SAN ANGELO, Texas - A state appellate court has ruled that child welfare officials had no right to seize more than 400 children living at a polygamist sect's ranch.
The Third Court of Appeals in Austin ruled that the grounds for removing the children were "legally and factually insufficient" under Texas law. They did not immediately order the return of the children.
Child welfare officials removed the children on the grounds that the sect pushed underage girls into marriage and sex and trained boys to become future perpetrators.
The appellate court ruled the chaotic hearing held last month did not demonstrate the children were in any immediate danger, the only measure of taking children from their homes without court proceedings.
The only danger was of an overreaching government sticking their noses in where they are not wanted.
In before gnashing of teeth and wringing of hands!
The mob will not be pleased.
But five minutes ago would have been ok?
L
That’s just an AP thing that I inadvertantly copied.
FYI
I just got your screenname....clever....:-)
The state has found zero abuse or otherwise the appeals court would have ruled otherwise. The warrant should have ended the second they found out that the call was fake.
Oh, my.
Heh. If it hadn’t been “legally and factually insufficient” how would you tell it had been performed by CPS?
I got excoriated by quite a few people here when I suggested that just blindly taking all of these children away from their mothers was unjust.
Pass the popcorn, this should be good.
They got to release those kids back to their parents.
“child welfare officials had no right to seize more than 400 children...”
Damn right they didn’t! They will deserve every lawsuit that’ll come out of this.
Militant
No sweat, the CPS will just round them up and bus them back to the ranch, right?
Judges: CPS improperly removed FLDS children
By Chuck Lindell | Thursday, May 22, 2008, 12:32 PM
A Texas agency improperly removed more than 450 children from a polygamist ranch in West Texas, an Austin appeals court ruled today.
The Texas Department of Family and Protective Services failed to prove that children at the YFZ Ranch were in danger and needed to be removed from their homes, the 3rd Texas Court of Appeals ruled.
In addition, the appellate court ruled that District Judge Barbara Walther abused her discretion by failing to return the children after three days of hearings last month.
“Even if one views the FLDS belief system as creating a danger of sexual abuse by grooming boys to be perpetrators of sexual abuse and raising girls to be victims of sexual abuse as the department contends, there is no evidence that this danger is ‘immediate’ or ‘urgent,’ as contemplated” by state law, the court opinion states.
yeah I know, was just teasing you.
I see the appeals court didn’t order a return yet. So it seems the appeal ruling hangs on the definition of what “immediate” is.
Amen! There is a long line of SCOTUS precedent giving parents the fundamental right to the care, custody, and control of their children. Unless the parents are unfit, the govt cannot pry them away from their parents.
Substantive Due Process- 1
US Govt- 0
Aren’t there several underage children pregnant or already with child? They need to keep these kids away their insane parents until each crime is investigated. Do you really believe nothing is going on here??????????
Do they? Watch and see.
-—I suspect the Texas taxpayers will be footing the bill for this for a long time—
I linked to this article in another post on this, but since yours is currently in the Breaking News section, I thought it might be beneficial to post it in your thread too...
From the Deseret News:
http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,700228198,00.html
Appeals court rules officials acted improperly in removing FLDS children
By Ben Winslow and Amy Joi O’Donoghue
Deseret News
Published: May 22, 2008
ELDORADO, Texas — An Austin appeals court has ruled that Texas child welfare authorities acted improperly in removing more than 450 children from the FLDS Church’s YFZ Ranch.
The 3rd Court of Appeals ruled on a legal challenge by a group of FLDS mothers seeking to have their children returned to them immediately.
“CPS was not justified in removing these children,” said Cynthia Martinez of the Texas Rio Grande Legal Aid Society, which is representing the mothers. “They did not provide any evidence that the children were in danger, and they acted hastily in removing the children.”
It is unclear if the children will be returned immediately to the ranch or what impact this will have on ongoing status hearings.
Outside the ranch, an FLDS woman rushed up to attorney Julie Balovich and hugged her, crying. They both went onto the ranch, but did not speak with reporters.
“This is huge,” Balovich told the Deseret News as she left the YFZ Ranch.
One FLDS woman, who was headed to court in San Angelo this afternoon, seemed pleased, but reserved, about the decision.
“That’s encouraging,” said a woman named Annette, when told of the decision by a Deseret News reporter. “I’m waiting to see if it’s really going to happen.”
Marleigh Meisner, a spokeswoman for the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, said the agency has just received word of the ruling. “We are assessing the impact it may have on our case. Any decision regarding an appeal will be made at a later date.”
After hearing the news outside the San Angelo courthouse, one FLDS woman said, “There is justice in America.”
The woman was standing with William Crouse, a parenting instructor from the House of Yahweh, which is another religious group in Texas that has come under scrutiny by state officials. Criminal charges have been filed against members of that group, alleging it is a “sex cult.”
“People are finally starting to see through it,” Crouse said. “They’re attacking these people for what they believe in. It’s nothing but malarkey.”
E-mail: bwinslow@desnews.com; amyjoi@desnews.com
Oh, that musty old thing? It should be put out on the curb to be hauled away with the rest of the trash.
After all, it's for the children ya know...
The willingness of people to give up their freedom is scary. The inability of people to see that their freedom is being taken away and to applaud it is scarier.
Just a couple of hours ago, you had all these folks convicted; now the CPS has to start over again and actually make a case.
Didn't really happen over Waco or Ruby Ridge, certainly won't happen here.
Yes, all pregnant girls under age 18 in greater society should be taken away from their parents immediately /sarc
Yep. Amazing how we get railed here for (HEAVENS!) daring to suggest that procedures should be followed.
According to what DFPS has released, 30 of the 53 girls believed to be between 14 and 17 are pregnant or have had at least one child. Six, two children, and two three children.
PING
Hang in there, those folks haven’t found this thread. Yet.
If the parent was the one who raped the child or set up a situation for the child to be raped, then yes, they should.
Don’t hold your breath, unless your favorite color is blue.
CPS just operates like every other thug government agency (Fed or State).
That's the AP wire service time stamp.
What is the solution to forced marriage of 12-year-olds?
According to the following article, the underage girl you are speaking of is NOT pregnant:
Lawyer: FLDS girl isn’t pregnant
By Brooke Adams
The Salt Lake Tribune
Salt Lake Tribune
Article Last Updated:05/22/2008 04:25:24 AM MDT
SAN ANGELO, Texas - A lawyer for a 14-year-old FLDS girl argues her client - listed by the state of Texas as an underage mother - is not pregnant and does not have children.
Attorney Andrea Sloan with the Texas Advocacy Project said the girl has taken a pregnancy test to confirm she is not pregnant.
Texas child welfare officials originally claimed 31 girls from the YFZ Ranch between the ages 14 to 17 were either pregnant, have children or both.
So far, however, they have acknowledged that 11 girls are actually adults. At least six more are likely to get that designation today, when status hearings resume at the Tom Green County Courthouse.
Sloan said her client is the youngest girl included on the list. While a judge told her the girl’s status was not relevant to Wednesday’s hearing, Sloan said the record should be corrected because Texas Child Protective Services has used the girl to mislead the public. Doing so would improve the mother’s chances of regaining custody of the girl, Sloan added.
District Judge John Specia told Sloan to work with CPS to get the girl’s status clarified.
In afternoon hearings, state attorneys acknowledged another three mothers are adults: Barbara Joy Jessop, Lenora Jeffs and Janet Jeffs Jessop.
Judge Jay Weatherby ordered CPS to quickly move Barbara Joy Jessop and her 8-month-old daughter quickly to a family shelter where she will be allowed more freedom than the facility where they are currently housed.
Attorneys for parents and children continued Wednesday to seek modifications to the boilerplate service plans the state has set up, arguing neither the claims nor remedies fit their clients.
And the requirements may set parents up for failure, attorneys said, as they crisscross Texas trying to hold down jobs and visit their children.
Parents’ suggestions for modifying the plans have been rejected by the judges.
Caseworkers acknowledged they had little to do with crafting the one-size-fits-all plan, which they said was put together by “culturally sensitive” experts.
A CPS spokeswoman told The Salt Lake Tribune that psychologists and psychiatrists from across the country helped write the plan, but said specific names of those individuals weren’t available. The plan calls for the parents to undergo psychological evaluations, take parenting classes, get jobs and live independently.
Many FLDS women have already moved, gotten jobs and begun lining up evaluations in hopes they will be accepted by CPS.
Sarah Draper, 37, has moved to Abilene, Texas, and taken a job as a registered nurse to be near her four children, who are in Henderson Home.
“I feel very blessed,” she said, praising the facility and its activities, which have included trips to the zoo and a local fire department.
Inexplicably, caregivers there told Draper on Monday her children would no longer be allowed to participate in off-campus excursions. No one could explain why or who ordered the change.
“And frankly, I would rather have my children going to the fire department than sitting in front of television all day,” she said.
brooke@sltrib.com
Is that a rhetorical question??????????
If you really want to know, why not search my posts?????????? :-)
My take is that the fathers would seem to be unfit and an immediate physical threat to the children but the same can’t necessarily be said about the mothers, especially with respect to the younger children. If the fathers are out of the picture I am unclear on the threat to the children from the mothers.
I told everyone that I could not see how there was enough evidence to take the actions that the Texas authorities took, and that they jeopardized the whole case by over stepping the bounds of their authority.
Stupid is as stupid does.
Before they are deprogrammed and want a normal existance.
Yep, along w/ me and anyone else who even questioned 'the authorities'.
Society's training in 'democracy' is going quite well by that standard.
If the mother’s were raped and it was allowed by the parents then, yes, they should all be taken away until it’s investigated. A short time away from the parents is in the best interest of the children.
I believe that the “child protectors” are totally out of control and are capable of any fiction to make their case.
I'm not claiming to be unusually knowledgeable about this case and haven't followed it closely.
But I think it's very possible that the mothers were under undue influence/coercion from the men, and with the males out of the picture the threat evaporates.
The actions weren't based on evidence you saw, the actions (warrant) was based on what the Texas Rangers saw and documented in their affidavit. Hindsight games are fun, but what options where there based on what the Texas Rangers reported? Should we have left the children in that situation while more investigations where going on? What if this wasn't a 'religious' compound, what if it was just some creep who lives down the street? Would we be so concerned about his right(sic) to marry a 14 year old then?
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.