Court rules against Texas Child Abductors

topic posted Thu, May 22, 2008 - 11:12 AM by  Cliff
posted by:
Cliff
  • Re: Court rules against Texas Child Abductors

    Thu, May 22, 2008 - 6:20 PM
    Granted, I can see the Courts logic in the lack of due process of law. However, the very nature of this group with such practices as child marriages warrents a close legal investigation...
    • Re: Court rules against Texas Child Abductors

      Fri, May 23, 2008 - 8:57 AM
      While I understand the logic one might invoke to get there the US Constitution forbids treating them all as if the deeds of one or even a great many should subject all of them to invasion, search and seizure, and having their most fundamental of rights nullified.


      The law requires that charges, warrants, seizures all be particularized.
      This is that the state muse make it case as to each household not as to a whole great collection of homes. When the state invades a family and takes the children out it must make it's case as to each child to be taken not as to a whole community of children.

      You can't just wave a stick at a town or neighborhood or any other community and use state power to nullify all the people's rights on the thesis that you believe that some of them are doing some wrong thing.

      That is tyranny.


      The state failed to meet it's burden. It should have done what it has always done and what the law requires. The only way it could have was to have planted agents inside who live as FLDS members and would return with actionable information with a high level of credibility and sought warrants as to specific persons and homes.

      The warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment has a particularity clause. All warrants must state the places to be searched and the things to be seized. A general warrant as to a whole town is not allowable.
      • Re: Court rules against Texas Child Abductors

        Fri, May 23, 2008 - 9:34 AM
        Failed or not -- Texas is appealing the ruling...
        • Re: Court rules against Texas Child Abductors

          Fri, May 23, 2008 - 11:15 AM
          of course they are. Would you expect anything else?
          • Re: Court rules against Texas Child Abductors

            Fri, May 23, 2008 - 1:26 PM
            Cliff, I think you've converted me on this issue.

            My mind is not changed about the community in this discussion - the rights of those young girls and women are being violated. And I believe that the young boys and men are being deprived of a full understanding and existence as well.

            But the flagrant laziness of the law enforcement to actually deal with the situation within the rule of law has the potential to erode that standard which is critical. If society sees that any group can be treated without due process then it will undermine society's belief and an individual citizen's belief in the rule of law. This erosion has already been underway since the 1980's with the uneven application of penalty and enforcement in the so-called War on Drugs and currently in the Gitmo and torture situation in the War on Terror.

            It appears to me that law enforcement was just too lazy to do the job right and thought they could bully their way through to successful prosecution of the alleged wrong-doers. Laziness may not be the issue, possibly it is lack of funding to do the job properly. I am uncertain about that. However, in this case, I'm glad the court ruled against the abductors because possibly if that ruling is upheld in the appeal, it will once again illustrate to law enforcement that they need to get it right.

            Confidence in rule of law is critical in a western democracy.

            Now, someone needs to get busy and look after those children. The trauma that their lives has become will affect them for a long time. Being improperly torn from their families will serve only to cement those relationships and deepen the warped beliefs in that community. If the job had been done properly, it would have taken longer but an awakening of understanding of the outside world could have been cultivated in that community and some would have had the courage to question those parts of their belief system that may be or are inherently harmful. Instead we've helped to harden positions that will take decades to see the light of day.
            • Re: Court rules against Texas Child Abductors

              Fri, May 23, 2008 - 1:42 PM
              It is never lack of funding. Enforcement has unlimited funds.

              I thought you wouldn't so much at sit at a table with me.
              • Re: Court rules against Texas Child Abductors

                Fri, May 23, 2008 - 8:59 PM
                naw, we're pallies, remember.

                So if it's not lack of funds, is it truly laziness or some other nefarious force at work?
                • Re: Court rules against Texas Child Abductors

                  Sat, May 24, 2008 - 8:48 PM
                  There is no way in fucking hell that Texas can justify taking all 400 kids. maybe ten or twenty, but taking EVERY single minor (and apparently a few adults too) away from their parents simply because a neighbor may have been a pedophile has no legal founding whatsoever. Those knuckleheads might as well cut those people checks right now because they will be in court forever. Their actions were not legally defensible at all.

                  It'll probably come out that CPS was either advised by attorneys not to do what they did, or never bothered to consult the attorney general. We're talking about mid level beurocrats making legal determinations based on things they had been able to get away with on a case by case basis. Following this there will be a thorough examination of their practices that will reveal that they routinely violate rights and break their own policies. If they were cocky enough to di this to a few hundred families, then they have done far worse to individual families, especially poor minorities.
                  • This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.

                    Re: Court rules against Texas Child Abductors

                    Sun, May 25, 2008 - 8:46 AM
                    None-a-less, what has been found out about the nature of the child marriages and such is enough for me to say flawed or not raid -- Texas should continue on with the case...
                    • Re: Court rules against Texas Child Abductors

                      Sun, May 25, 2008 - 7:28 PM
                      Set down the crack pipe and step away from the keyboard....

                      You need to keep current on the case. Several of the 'child brides' they took were actually adults, in fact they have proven very little. The original call was a hoax. You are basicly condoning the government's taking every child in town because of unfounded rumors that a ped was living in the neighborhood. If the police came to your town/city/community and took every kid in sight just because of a rumor you'd be right here on tribe screaming your dumb ass off.

                      I can;t believe you said that.
                • Re: Court rules against Texas Child Abductors

                  Tue, May 27, 2008 - 6:33 AM
                  ****************naw, we're pallies, remember. ***************

                  No we are not.

                  You started in on me with that crap about how you would not so much as break bread with me and I deleted you that same day.

                  That kind of surly personal attack is not the sort of thing any one who wants civil discourse would use.
  • nice title

    Mon, May 26, 2008 - 3:34 AM
    pretty funny
    • Did you sleep through American history? There is a reason that religous freedom was one of the founding beliefs. In America you have the right to be a religous wacko if you so choose. The law is the law and it applies to wackos the same as athiests. To even suggest that it is okay to preemptively take action against an entire town just because of their religion is a sign that you are smoking too much Mexican pack dope.
      • Even people that pretend to be "conscious" or "progressive", even those who claim not to subscribe to Christian religion, turn into evil assholes when the 1950s WASP model is too blatantly violated.

        When a group of people attempts to live according to a different paradigm, take note of the baboons that hoot angrily and make the "freak" comments: they are the dangerous ones. They will take your children away, and no one will help you; you will have no rights, no recourse, and will find no redress.
        • Yup, it's a byproduct of church marketing. Once a religion becomes established, their marketing plan becomes exclusive to other religions. How could they survive if their priests admitted that you could probably get to heaven just as well as a Muslim, Catholic, or Jew. Nope, they HAVE TO preach the evils of their competition. Once they have any modicum of power, they use it to further increase their market share. Religions are like businesses, and they'll do anything to stay in business.

          But the Texas CPS is another story. They've been doing their own thing in a heavy handed way for years. Enough to feel cocky enough to do it to an entire town. It is good for a CPS to be aggressive, but this one just cost the state of Texas millions in future lawsuits. Unbelievable breach of rights.
          • I'm sure the absolute opprobrium against cults in society at large was a factor in the emboldening, if not the sole predication for the mass kidnapping.
            • Due process kicks ass.
              • Actually, I'd support anyones right to Polygamous Marriage, it is their life. Just as must as I don't give a damn about Homosexual Marriage -- it is their life too.

                That being said, I give exception to the ways it is practiced with its child brides in the case of the Sect...
                • What about the Cultures Margaret Mead studied?
                  • This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
                    Various human societies have various cultural norms -- Margaret Mead herself had her critics on her methodologies and the outcomes of her results as a result. That does not invalidate a brilliant scientist; but it does still not justify a behavior that many in this this cultural setting finds unhealthy for the development of young children, especially girls...
                    • Oh in the USA or any western culture children are inappropriate as sexual objects. If one makes them out to be so the harms that can arise can be substantial and permanent.

                      However, in Meade's famous object of study the children were introduced to sex at very young ages by various village people as a matter of course. they were being taught how to be good lovers. And they suffered nothing as a result.

                      So the whole question is what the norms in the larger culture are. I find it interesting that in some circles the mere mention of Mead's work ignites hostility as the mommies gather their kiddies away from the horrible monster.

Recent topics in "Intelligent Political Discussion"