Sect Moms Appeal to Gov Perry [Archive] - In Session Message Boards

spydernweb2006

04-14-2008, 11:09 AM

Maybe I am wrong, and Lord forgive me if I am, but why didnt these Mothers PROTECT their children so something like this couldn't happen? Why didnt they care enough for their children to protect them from any form of abuse? Seems to me its crying now cause the horse is outta the barn when they knowingly didnt lock the barn doors.

I am sure these women are in pain, but I am just as sure those children have suffered worse pain being abused then their Mothers are feeling at their loss.

Its called paying the band Ladies, you danced the dance, and the price of the band was removing the kids for THEIR protection, not your comfort. You knowingly and willingly allowed the Men of these compounds to abuse your children and then cry when your kids are removed.

If you truly loved and cared for your children you would HELP LE identify the kids, identify the abusers and see justice done. Allowing your kids to be horribly abused time and time again is not love and its not an environment that ANY human should have to live in, especially an innocent vunerable child.

JMHO

Hugs,

Spyder

lotty

04-14-2008, 11:32 AM

I agree with Spyder.

IMO what we are about to see is some "bleeding heart" propaganda.

I'm not being ugly, just observing facts. There were misrepresentations when they bought the land at Eldorado and Mancos. "Hunting reserve" I'm sure. Mind you these were mearly "misrepresentations" or "stories." How about things being called like they are...if it looks like a duck...

So all of these women were away from the compound when the raid happened. Wait...women and children were not allowed to leave the compound. Someone needs to get some facts straight.

How about the fact that this raid just "sullied" Warren Jeffs most pure compound and children. Totally exposed to the outside world.

I get tired of them trying to have it both ways...FLDS breaks the laws of this country knowingly...as soon as they eyes of the nation turn towards them. "Freedom of religion, We didn't know "that" was a law, Just leave us alone, ...and let's not forget poor me," start rolling out of the collective mouths of the adults.
IMO/JMO sorry a little indignant this morning.:cuss:

dsmith

04-14-2008, 11:36 AM

I can understand the mothers wanting their children back. But what I can not see is now that the law is involved, giving the children back to mothers who will return to the "compound" to continue raising the children to live with these beliefs. Religion is fine. That is your choice, but to do what has been done to these children in the name of religion is against the law. I wonder because of the inbreeding just what kind of sickness there is. How many of the children have been abused. How many can read and write. So many ? so few answers.

awareness

04-14-2008, 01:50 PM

IMO part of the problem is its likely the mothers themselves were raised with "the Principle" of polygamy and they only adhere to that as its what they were taught all their own lives.

Girls are taught to "Be sweet, no matter what" - meaning to just accept whatever BS they throw your way. Warren Jeffs sect has furthered that with immediate consummation with that bed in the church.

I can understand they aren't comfortable not being in their own homes. Perhaps a bit cramped with living quarters, etc. But the State of TX needs to conduct and conclude their investigation before any children get released. Its said there's a few pregnant teens there and ones with babies as well.

I agree that if the Moms truly loved their kids they wouldnt want them being abused... but I have to remember these women were raised this way, probably saw young boys they knew cast out, they were married off at a young age, etc.

JMO/IMO

dsmith

04-14-2008, 02:03 PM

An FBI agent and an other law enforcement official walk into an entrance to the temple at the Yearn for Zion Ranch, home of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints in Eldorado, Texas. A polygamist compound with hundreds of children was rife with sexual abuse, child welfare officials allege in court documents, with girls spiritually married to much older men as soon as they reached puberty and boys groomed to perpetuate the cycle.

(AP Photo / Tony Gutierrez / April 8, 2008)
http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/wire/sfl-polygamist.pg,0,3380788.photogallery

Why as a mother would you want this to happen to your child? Religion? I do not think so, not sure why this religion thing is just not sitting right with me.

lotty

04-14-2008, 03:49 PM

IMO/JMO "Keep sweet" those two words have vast conotations to these people (FLDS). Eternal damnation...the children suffer for the parents to save their own souls. No laughter is allowed, emotions are bad. I have a real problem with the whole "they won't let us see our children issue." This religion has no problem with separating children from their biological parents, paternal or maternal. Misbehave, off you go to Bountiful, or who knows where else. There are missing people in this religion...MISSING...IMO/JMO

awareness

04-14-2008, 04:44 PM

I heard there's a few "camps" for wayward wives to get them more obedient/back in line. I heard one of them was near Colorado City, but who knows if that's still the case.

ITA with your post Lotty... I feel some of them are likely just using those words (in their letter to the Govenor of TX) just to get out of there, to get back home, and back into the nasty cycle they all live in.

Its also engrained that the FDLS "bleed the beast" as much as possible (the US Gov't) by collecting as much free $$$ as they can via medical, welfare, food stamp benefits, etc.

its all one huge, horrible cycle... sadly many of the women today were raised that way, its all they know and are programmed to do unless they want to risk eternal damnnation.

JMO/IMO

Freebird

04-14-2008, 11:07 PM

Originally posted by lotty
IMO/JMO "Keep sweet" those two words have vast conotations to these people (FLDS). Eternal damnation...the children suffer for the parents to save their own souls. No laughter is allowed, emotions are bad. I have a real problem with the whole "they won't let us see our children issue." This religion has no problem with separating children from their biological parents, paternal or maternal. Misbehave, off you go to Bountiful, or who knows where else. There are missing people in this religion...MISSING...IMO/JMO [/*]

It's not the religion separating these kids from their mothers now.

lotty

04-15-2008, 12:49 AM

Originally posted by awareness
respectfully snipped

its all one huge, horrible cycle... sadly many of the women today were raised that way, its all they know and are programmed to do unless they want to risk eternal damnnation.

JMO/IMO [/*]

IMO/JMO There are some who left because they couldn't live this way anymore. Some with all of their children, and some with a few of their children. For these ladies who were strong enough to stand up and make a difficult and life altering decision, who don't get to see or speak to the children (now adults) left behind... I am sure that to some extent Warren Jeffs was right. Their loss is, I'm sure...Hell. IMO/JMO

lotty

04-15-2008, 01:25 AM

From Sydney, always interesting to see what someone else has to say:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/polygamist-sect-saga-turns-even-murkier/2008/04/15/1208025153766.html

"The women were given a choice: Return to the Eldorado ranch of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, a renegade Mormon sect, or go to another safe location. Some women chose the latter, Gonzales said."

Why would some of the women choose to go to "another safe location?" :eek:

lotty

04-15-2008, 02:09 AM

Originally posted by grammybear
respectfully snipped

It is just high time that society started taking responsibility for their own actions.

jmoo [/*]

ITA. Grammy you always keep the priority where it should be...the children. You and Walton are so diligent...my hat is off to you both. Keep up the good work.:rose:

awareness

04-15-2008, 02:50 PM

They want their cake and be able to eat it too... I mean they are crying about religious prosecution now, but they have no problems accepting free medical care, being on welfare, etc. Then again they're taught that "bleeding the beast" (the US Govt) is a good thing to do.

I think I heard on the news they moved the kids, but some of the mothers weren't allowed to go? Or they chose not to go? And are now hiring attorneys of their own to get their children back?

I wonder if they realize that will entail facts coming out they want kept secret. Like who's your mother/father? Who's your young child married to?

I know its wrong in most of our eyes here on trutv message boards, but for these women its a way of life - they're taught to distrust outside people. That their way is the only true way to heaven. On one hand I feel for them, its their religion -- but after reading several accounts from some women who've left the sect, I know some of them feel weird / gross / revolted / abused when they were taken as plural wives... not to mention the call that set this recent investigation off... you have to wonder why these women just feel its OK for their daughters to go through the same if/when they felt negativley about it when they were "wed".

JMO/IMO

awareness

04-15-2008, 06:21 PM

Ok I have since figured out that authorities have separated the mothers from the children, that some of the mothers went back to the ElDorado compound and others have gone elsewhere (possibly a battered womens shelter).

JMO/IMO

Debb

04-15-2008, 07:14 PM

Originally posted by awareness
I heard there's a few "camps" for wayward wives to get them more obedient/back in line. I heard one of them was near Colorado City, but who knows if that's still the case.

ITA with your post Lotty... I feel some of them are likely just using those words (in their letter to the Govenor of TX) just to get out of there, to get back home, and back into the nasty cycle they all live in.

Its also engrained that the FDLS "bleed the beast" as much as possible (the US Gov't) by collecting as much free $$$ as they can via medical, welfare, food stamp benefits, etc.

its all one huge, horrible cycle... sadly many of the women today were raised that way, its all they know and are programmed to do unless they want to risk eternal damnnation.

JMO/IMO [/*]

I agree completely. These women do not know what constitutes child abuse. They don't understand what is considered inappropiate and how could they if they have no outside contact and that is what they are taught from birth?

I saw a reporter ask one of the women today if there were actually 13,14, and 15 girls getting married on the compound and she said "This is about the children." Indicating that she doesn't consider the 13,14, and 15 year olds children. I'm not sure why the reporter didn't ask her that.

Then another lady said they were living in Zion. She said in a soft, dreamy manner like someone on drugs. Very scary. But, I don't think these women have the skills, knowledge or means to really deprogram themself and then their children.

Details

04-15-2008, 07:44 PM

Originally posted by lotty
...Why would some of the women choose to go to "another safe location?" :eek: [/*]I think "another safe location" means another shelter where the women can be safe from the cult. The compound - the men are still there - that means returning to the cult.

Carol25

04-15-2008, 08:59 PM

I thought the way all of these women talked was strange. They almost sounded like robots. Of course, just knowing about this cult, my perception could be askew.

If I was one of the mothers. I too would choose to stay in a shelter, not knowing if I could get out of the compound again to take legal guardianship of my children. I believe the ones who were a little brighter might have taken this approach. JMO

Carol25

04-15-2008, 09:31 PM

Originally posted by essiemadge
it surely would be good to know the mental level of most of these women. i do not mean just education, i mean the ability to live without constant controls to be able to cope with daily living. all the inbreeding over the years must have taken a toll. [/*]
Walton may be able to address this. Some may have to have social workers work with them for a couple of years to help them understand fundamental elements of living on their own. I believe there are social workers that do this kind of work for the mentally challenged.

John7878

04-15-2008, 10:16 PM

I don't know much about this really.

But I DO know that I haven't seen ANY evidence.

The police 'alledge' a lot of stuff. (like what the bed in the church was used for, abuse, etc)

They have had a week to find the girl that was supposed to have called.

They have had a week to question everyone....so where is the proof?

I have seen the news report that the women 'voluntarily' left their church, but then find out the women left to be with their children, they didn't actually want to leave.
And now the authorities are taking them away from even the Mothers.

And the interviews from the mothers seem to be quite a different story than the propaganda put out by family services.
The women claim they were lied to.
They claim that the girl they are looking for isn't even there.

So there we are....who DO we believe??

Hey if I have missed a news report with evidence please post it.

I am all for making the kids safe, be it from abuse from family or abuse from Texas Children's Protective Services.

Carol25

04-15-2008, 10:57 PM

Originally posted by John7878
I don't know much about this really.

But I DO know that I haven't seen ANY evidence.

The police 'alledge' a lot of stuff. (like what the bed in the church was used for, abuse, etc)

They have had a week to find the girl that was supposed to have called.

They have had a week to question everyone....so where is the proof?

I have seen the news report that the women 'voluntarily' left their church, but then find out the women left to be with their children, they didn't actually want to leave.
And now the authorities are taking them away from even the Mothers.

And the interviews from the mothers seem to be quite a different story than the propaganda put out by family services.
The women claim they were lied to.
They claim that the girl they are looking for isn't even there.

So there we are....who DO we believe??

Hey if I have missed a news report with evidence please post it.

I am all for making the kids safe, be it from abuse from family or abuse from Texas Children's Protective Services. [/*]
I think LE rarely gives out all of the evidence before they go to court, especially while the investigation is still going on. They have to get DNA tests done. All of that takes time.

They also have to establish a rapport and get the confidence of 400 children before they can ask them questions and expect them to answer them truthfully.

Freebird

04-15-2008, 11:51 PM

Originally posted by John7878
I don't know much about this really.

But I DO know that I haven't seen ANY evidence.

The police 'alledge' a lot of stuff. (like what the bed in the church was used for, abuse, etc)

They have had a week to find the girl that was supposed to have called.

They have had a week to question everyone....so where is the proof?

I have seen the news report that the women 'voluntarily' left their church, but then find out the women left to be with their children, they didn't actually want to leave.
And now the authorities are taking them away from even the Mothers.

And the interviews from the mothers seem to be quite a different story than the propaganda put out by family services.
The women claim they were lied to.
They claim that the girl they are looking for isn't even there.

So there we are....who DO we believe??

Hey if I have missed a news report with evidence please post it.

I am all for making the kids safe, be it from abuse from family or abuse from Texas Children's Protective Services. [/*]

I'm beginning to believe there is no 16-year-old that called.And if there is,she probably feels guilty to have caused these kids to be separated from their mothers.

spydernweb2006

04-16-2008, 12:22 AM

Originally posted by Freebird

I'm beginning to believe there is no 16-year-old that called.And if there is,she probably feels guilty to have caused these kids to be separated from their mothers. [/*]

Lets just for fun play devil's advocate here. Even IF there were no 16 yr old that called or IF she was already moved by the FLDS by the time the LE got to the compound it would NOT matter.

The LEGAL reason being:

LE went in on a PROBALE CAUSE warrant. Once they got to the Eldorado Compound they saw abuse. Once they saw abuse, and the reports here in TX so far say they saw underage pregnant girls, they had enough legal action to remove all the children for their safety.

Let me give you another scenerio that may help you understand. Lets say having apples are a crime, and squeezing oranges are another separate crime. LE gets a warrant to go into a person's home based on probale cause of a person/s having apples was reported to them. While in the home they found/saw evidence of another illegal activity such as a buch of orange rinds, a juice squeezer and a glass with OJ residue in it. They can at that point legally take action for the other OJ activity eventhough they went in to get apples but found oranges and/or proof of OJ making. Now had they come in and not seen any other illegal activity they couldnt have done diddly squat except for the apples in the original warrant.

I hope that clears it a bit for you. It legally does not matter if they go into a home/area for one thing and find other illegal activity. They are bound by the Law here in TX to act if they find ANY illegal activity. The next step/s are the court hearings.

The FLDS made their big mistake by comming to TX, if they wanted the illegal by TX law life they choose to live. They will now be treated as any other child abuser. The kids are removed from the Parental Figures, a through investigation is underway and it will all play out in a courtroom, not in the media.

I fully expect a huge boohoo propaganda attempt by the FLDS, but for me personally it holds no water. My concern is for the kids their actions hurt. For the FLDS the game is over, they danced the dance and now it time to pay the fiddler.

JMHO

Hugs,

Spyder

evalles

04-16-2008, 01:27 AM

Originally posted by Carol25

I think LE rarely gives out all of the evidence before they go to court, especially while the investigation is still going on. They have to get DNA tests done. All of that takes time.

They also have to establish a rapport and get the confidence of 400 children before they can ask them questions and expect them to answer them truthfully. [/*]

The only court hearing scheduled is in family court. LE doesn't investigate, CPS does. IMO this is the problem. There was no evidence, there was an anonymous phone call. 416 children have been uprooted and forced to undergo sexual examinations because of a phone call. If no sexual abuse is found, who are the real abusers ? The father's want to leave so the mom's & kids can be home. They don't even care if CPS is there to make sure there are no men there. CPS won't agree. Who really cares about what's best for the children ? If there's proof, why isnt anybody in jail ?

evalles

04-16-2008, 01:36 AM

Originally posted by spydernweb2006

Lets just for fun play devil's advocate here. Even IF there were no 16 yr old that called or IF she was already moved by the FLDS by the time the LE got to the compound it would NOT matter.

The LEGAL reason being:

LE went in on a PROBALE CAUSE warrant. Once they got to the Eldorado Compound they saw abuse. Once they saw abuse, and the reports here in TX so far say they saw underage pregnant girls, they had enough legal action to remove all the children for their safety.

Let me give you another scenerio that may help you understand. Lets say having apples are a crime, and squeezing oranges are another separate crime. LE gets a warrant to go into a person's home based on probale cause of a person/s having apples was reported to them. While in the home they found/saw evidence of another illegal activity such as a buch of orange rinds, a juice squeezer and a glass with OJ residue in it. They can at that point legally take action for the other OJ activity eventhough they went in to get apples but found oranges and/or proof of OJ making. Now had they come in and not seen any other illegal activity they couldnt have done diddly squat except for the apples in the original warrant.

I hope that clears it a bit for you. It legally does not matter if they go into a home/area for one thing and find other illegal activity. They are bound by the Law here in TX to act if they find ANY illegal activity. The next step/s are the court hearings.

The FLDS made their big mistake by comming to TX, if they wanted the illegal by TX law life they choose to live. They will now be treated as any other child abuser. The kids are removed from the Parental Figures, a through investigation is underway and it will all play out in a courtroom, not in the media.

I fully expect a huge boohoo propaganda attempt by the FLDS, but for me personally it holds no water. My concern is for the kids their actions hurt. For the FLDS the game is over, they danced the dance and now it time to pay the fiddler.

JMHO

Hugs,

Spyder [/*]

They witnessed all 416 children being abused ? If my neighbors abused their kid, can CPS take mine ? After all, we live in the same neighborhood. Even if you don't agree with their lifestyle, how can you justify such blatant disregard for their civil and god given rights. It's scary to think judges issue warrants based on a phone call that wasn't even made to the police by a person that didn't give her last name and that they're unable to locate. Is this really the definition of probable cause. I'm not a member of the FLDS, I'm a Christian, but I'm guessing you work for Texas CPS.

walton

04-16-2008, 01:45 AM

nsm

04-16-2008, 01:45 AM

Originally posted by Debb

I agree completely. These women do not know what constitutes child abuse. They don't understand what is considered inappropiate and how could they if they have no outside contact and that is what they are taught from birth?

I saw a reporter ask one of the women today if there were actually 13,14, and 15 girls getting married on the compound and she said "This is about the children." Indicating that she doesn't consider the 13,14, and 15 year olds children. I'm not sure why the reporter didn't ask her that.

Then another lady said they were living in Zion. She said in a soft, dreamy manner like someone on drugs. Very scary. But, I don't think these women have the skills, knowledge or means to really deprogram themself and then their children. [/*]

I saw that and it was hard to watch. It was the stepford wives in a time warp. very creepy.

walton

04-16-2008, 01:50 AM

Originally posted by Carol25

Walton may be able to address this. Some may have to have social workers work with them for a couple of years to help them understand fundamental elements of living on their own. I believe there are social workers that do this kind of work for the mentally challenged. [/*]

There are programs out there that would help them help themselves.

walton

04-16-2008, 01:55 AM

Originally posted by nsm

I saw that and it was hard to watch. It was the stepford wives in a time warp. very creepy. [/*]

Have you ever seen the movie the Village?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0368447/plotsummary

'The Village' depicts the thrilling tale of an isolated town confronting the astonishing truth that lies just outside its borders. At first glance, this village seems picture perfect, but this close-knit community lives with the frightening knowledge that creatures reside in the surrounding woods. The evil and foreboding force is so unnerving that none dare venture beyond the borders of the village and into the woods. But when curious, headstrong Lucius Hunt plans to step beyond the boundaries of the town and into the unknown, his bold move threatens to forever change the future of the village.

lotty

04-16-2008, 01:59 AM

Details

04-16-2008, 03:24 AM

LE doesn't, and isn't supposed to try it's case in the media - and a week is such a short time in the scope of an investigation like this. They went in legitimately. They say (and there's sure no reason to doubt them) that they saw abuse and neglect - pregnant little girls, babies unattended, etc. When an officer sees that - they are required to take action. Period. Even if they never find the person who made the original call.

Freebird

04-16-2008, 03:32 AM

Originally posted by evalles

The only court hearing scheduled is in family court. LE doesn't investigate, CPS does. IMO this is the problem. There was no evidence, there was an anonymous phone call. 416 children have been uprooted and forced to undergo sexual examinations because of a phone call. If no sexual abuse is found, who are the real abusers ? The father's want to leave so the mom's & kids can be home. They don't even care if CPS is there to make sure there are no men there. CPS won't agree. Who really cares about what's best for the children ? If there's proof, why isnt anybody in jail ? [/*]

ITA...If these kids were abused,then why take the kids but leave the abusers? They didn't even arrest Barlow when they had the chance. There is no way these kids will trust the outside world now.

Freebird

04-16-2008, 03:36 AM

Carol25

04-16-2008, 04:17 AM

johnielee333

04-16-2008, 04:53 AM

johnielee333

04-16-2008, 04:56 AM

Originally posted by Details
LE doesn't, and isn't supposed to try it's case in the media - and a week is such a short time in the scope of an investigation like this. They went in legitimately. They say (and there's sure no reason to doubt them) that they saw abuse and neglect - pregnant little girls, babies unattended, etc. When an officer sees that - they are required to take action. Period. Even if they never find the person who made the original call. [/*]

i agree.

juliekan

04-16-2008, 05:05 AM

Originally posted by walton

Have you ever seen the movie the Village?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0368447/plotsummary

'The Village' depicts the thrilling tale of an isolated town confronting the astonishing truth that lies just outside its borders. At first glance, this village seems picture perfect, but this close-knit community lives with the frightening knowledge that creatures reside in the surrounding woods. The evil and foreboding force is so unnerving that none dare venture beyond the borders of the village and into the woods. But when curious, headstrong Lucius Hunt plans to step beyond the boundaries of the town and into the unknown, his bold move threatens to forever change the future of the village. [/*]
Wonderful example of what they are doing, I remember this movie. Everyone should see this to understand how groups of people can "fashion" how their followers think. Thanks:)

johnielee333

04-16-2008, 05:06 AM

spydernweb2006

04-16-2008, 09:59 AM

Originally posted by evalles

They witnessed all 416 children being abused ? If my neighbors abused their kid, can CPS take mine ? After all, we live in the same neighborhood. Even if you don't agree with their lifestyle, how can you justify such blatant disregard for their civil and god given rights. It's scary to think judges issue warrants based on a phone call that wasn't even made to the police by a person that didn't give her last name and that they're unable to locate. Is this really the definition of probable cause. I'm not a member of the FLDS, I'm a Christian, but I'm guessing you work for Texas CPS. [/*]

FYI I do NOT work for TX CPS. I do have expirence with CPS from when my daughter was abused by a babysitter. In ALL cases the the 1st thing CPS does is ensure the safety and wellbeing of ANY kids involved in the situation.

As I see it the main reason all the kids were removed from the YFZ Ranch was largely caused by LE seeing abuse and the inability to know WHO these kids legally belong too. LE/CPS cannot even ID alot of the kids so they can address each individual family and any abuse within those families.

I agree if a certain family has no abuse, no evidence of abuse or ANY legal reason to not have their kids they should and will get their kids back. But until ALL the kids can be identified and the Parents and kids evaluated this cannot happen. Sadly it could be a few abusive people causing harm for the many.

IF these people TRULY wanted their kids back they would cooperate with any investigation fully. They refuse too so they will have to answer to that in a court of law as our constitution demands. They will have their day in court and it will be a fair hearing.

Investigations are NEVER handled publically. These children have rights to privacy that will not be broken due to a mass propaganda blitz by the FLDS. TX is acting correctly to not make it a public media battle. TX has kept everyone informed in a legal and correct manner. You will not see TX CPS get on camera and name names or exploit the plight of these kids in the media. I assure you TX will not allow these kids to be abused in any shape or form while in their care.

FLDS created this mess when they refused to protect any child in their care, then cry because they are removed as ANY child suspected of abuse by a Parent/Guardian. They WILL get their day in court, which is where the case belongs, not in the media.

JMHO

Hugs,

Spyder

AmyO

04-16-2008, 12:52 PM

Did anyone hear that one FLDS woman on Fox News just a few minutes ago say something about their plight being worse than a concentration camp?? Um - WHAT?? WORSE than a concentration camp?? Yeah - I'm sure it's horrible. Maybe if they kept their young daughters from being raped they wouldn't have to worry about it. Burns me up! :flamemad:

Roux

04-16-2008, 12:57 PM

AmyO

04-16-2008, 01:55 PM

Originally posted by Roux

Didn't see that but I absolutely did not believe the one yesterday prattling on about how her daughter with 2 mo. baby needing water. Supposedly they asked for but were denied water because it was after 9:30 PM. There is NO WAY I will believe that they weren't held in decent conditions. Maybe not as comfortable as a Hilton or Hyatt but certainly not a concentration camp. [/*]
Yeah, not great conditions (aren't they in a colliseum?) but what can you do with that many people? If money were no object....

John7878

04-16-2008, 03:55 PM

Originally posted by Roux

There is NO WAY I will believe that they weren't held in decent conditions. [/*]

I have to ask why you would NEVER believe this???

Especially after seeing the conditions women & kids were put in after Katrina in a stadium.

:confused:

Mimi428

04-16-2008, 04:14 PM

Originally posted by John7878

I have to ask why you would NEVER believe this???

Especially after seeing the conditions women & kids were put in after Katrina in a stadium.

:confused: [/*]

How many women & kids were IN that stadium? How many other places were available to them, during that natural disaster?

Sorry, I can't see the comparison to this situation.

Roux

04-16-2008, 04:15 PM

Originally posted by John7878

I have to ask why you would NEVER believe this???

Especially after seeing the conditions women & kids were put in after Katrina in a stadium.

:confused: [/*]

The Katrina disaster was a totally different set of circumstances, including the number of people to be cared for and the governmental authorities involved. One would have to assume that the Texas authorities knew full well that they'd be under a microscope and that there would be huge media coverage. And from the people I saw speaking yesterday at the press conference -- sorry I don't remember the names but congressman/senator and the spokesperson for CPS -- I believed what they said and thought them to be much more credible that the women from FDLS that I saw.
O/T but remember that Houston helped many thousands of people evacuated from the hurricane and those people publicly stated that they received excellent care and attention.

SavannahStar

04-16-2008, 04:19 PM

StickyBeak

04-16-2008, 04:22 PM

Originally posted by AmyO
Did anyone hear that one FLDS woman on Fox News just a few minutes ago say something about their plight being worse than a concentration camp?? Um - WHAT?? WORSE than a concentration camp?? Yeah - I'm sure it's horrible. Maybe if they kept their young daughters from being raped they wouldn't have to worry about it. Burns me up! :flamemad: [/*]

Yes, the woman Kathleen who was also married to that jessup, she said she has a college education and compared their plight to the holocast. In Fact, Anderson Cooper, shook his head and asked her if she even knew what she was comparing this too.
Another of the women claimed they had to sleep on cots with light blankets, made it sound like sleeping on concrete. Their children are now exposed to terrible physical examinations and are being questioned relative to abuse without their mothers being there. I agree these women look hazed, very rehearsed.
I wish the girl who called could be found, hope they did make her drink cyanide kool aid.
Horrible, they claim there is no abuse or rape, but if they are told this is natural and the way, what would they think abuse is? JMO

awareness

04-16-2008, 04:29 PM

Originally posted by John7878

I have to ask why you would NEVER believe this???

Especially after seeing the conditions women & kids were put in after Katrina in a stadium.

:confused: [/*]

LOL way to stretch it...

Katrina was a natural disaster, no one was in control at the Superdome and other places where people converged. Their toilets stopped working and started to overflow - guess what?There was no one there to fix them! What a horrible example to compare this to IMO.

Here's a positive one. Last fall out in Southern California there were the worst wildfires on record. Thousands of acres burned, many homes destroyed. Air quality was awful for days. Qualcomm Stadium near downtown San Diego opened up for many people. Was it home? No, but it was a safe place, everyone kept their cool and it went smoothly.

JMO/IMO

tisamystery

04-16-2008, 04:36 PM

While some of these mothers may be loving, caring women, let's not overlook the dark side. In Carolyn Jessop's book "Escape" she talks about how some women would beat and abuse their sister-wive's children.

tisamystery

04-16-2008, 04:39 PM

Originally posted by Roux

Didn't see that but I absolutely did not believe the one yesterday prattling on about how her daughter with 2 mo. baby needing water. Supposedly they asked for but were denied water because it was after 9:30 PM. There is NO WAY I will believe that they weren't held in decent conditions. Maybe not as comfortable as a Hilton or Hyatt but certainly not a concentration camp. [/*]

There is no doubt in my mind that the women are dramatizing the situation.

awareness

04-16-2008, 04:46 PM

Originally posted by tisamystery
While some of these mothers may be loving, caring women, let's not overlook the dark side. In Carolyn Jessop's book "Escape" she talks about how some women would beat and abuse their sister-wive's children. [/*]

True, because some other sister-wives were jealous of the others for whatever reasons. Its also said the first, legal wife usually runs the show for the other wives, and uses her power to influence the husband.

JMO/IMO

Mimi428

04-16-2008, 05:08 PM

Originally posted by tisamystery
While some of these mothers may be loving, caring women, let's not overlook the dark side. In Carolyn Jessop's book "Escape" she talks about how some women would beat and abuse their sister-wive's children. [/*]

You bring up a very important point. People who are living in a totalitarian environment with such chasms between those who HAVE power & those who don't will resort to a variety of behaviors that are anything BUT altruistic.

The FLDS gives a great deal of power to a select few - the prophet being the one with the most power. The prophet surrounds himself with a small handful of male toadies who know their privileges & their comforts will be yanked completely away from them if they display anything other than slavish loyalty.

The inner circle toadies have their own group of people below them who ALSO know, by viewing the conditions of those who are the most UNfavored, what the future will be for them if they do not toe the line.

Every adult male - even those not in great favor with the more powerful is, by comparison, in a position of power over every female.

If tattling on your peers means you get a nicer place to stay & much less negative attention - you learn to tattle. If making up lies saves you from punishment - you learn to make up lies. The whole 'big brother is watching you' mindset teaches them to behave & to say EXACTLY what Orwell described -

'Sometimes,' she said, 'they threaten you with something -- something you can't stand up to, can't even think about. And then you say, "Don't do it to me, do it to somebody else, do it to So-and-so." And perhaps you might pretend, afterwards, that it was only a trick and that you just said it to make them stop and didn't really mean it. But that isn't true. At the time when it happens you do mean it. You think there's no other way of saving yourself, and you're quite ready to save yourself that way. You want it to happen to the other person. You don't give a damn what they suffer. All you care about is yourself.'

'All you care about is yourself,' he echoed.

'And after that, you don't feel the same towards the other person any longer.'

'No,' he said, 'you don't feel the same.'

http://www.george-orwell.org/1984/22.html

JMO

lotty

04-16-2008, 05:23 PM

IMO/JMO Like the ex-communicated Fathers. The Lord revealed to Warren Jeffs these men's sins. Only if they could write a list of sins that matched the Lord's list could they come back. Some men tried to make a list that would match...imagine the dirt Warren had on them then.

IMO/JMO No one could ever write a list that would match the one Warren Jeffs had.

http://www.childbrides.org/evict_azcent_exmember_assails_sect.html
"Before he was booted, Chatwin, who advocates polygamy but has just one wife along with six children, was ordered by Jeffs to write down a list of his sins. That list would be matched with a list of Chatwin's sins compiled by Jeffs and based on what Jeffs called a vision from God, Chatwin said."

As always IMO/JMO

tisamystery

04-16-2008, 05:48 PM

Mimi, that is amazing! I never thought about the Orwellian parallel. How true!

And as for the "list of sins", what a clever way to get dirt on your followers. They end up confessing to things you didn't even know about. Or perhaps even admitting to sins they haven't committed. All this just creates a bigger and better hammer with which to batter them.

Carol25

04-16-2008, 05:55 PM

Originally posted by lotty
IMO/JMO Like the ex-communicated Fathers. The Lord revealed to Warren Jeffs these men's sins. Only if they could write a list of sins that matched the Lord's list could they come back. Some men tried to make a list that would match...imagine the dirt Warren had on them then.

IMO/JMO No one could ever write a list that would match the one Warren Jeffs had.

http://www.childbrides.org/evict_azcent_exmember_assails_sect.html
"Before he was booted, Chatwin, who advocates polygamy but has just one wife along with six children, was ordered by Jeffs to write down a list of his sins. That list would be matched with a list of Chatwin's sins compiled by Jeffs and based on what Jeffs called a vision from God, Chatwin said."

As always IMO/JMO [/*]
I would like to see this man show up for the trials when they start.

lotty

04-16-2008, 06:49 PM

Originally posted by Carol25

I would like to see this man show up for the trials when they start. [/*]

Wouldn't it be nice if some the fathers that have been "ex-d" if they had a child(ren) at YFZ could show up to claim their children. 2002 - 2003 I think that is the right time frame. Could be possible that a child could be in Texas and the father no longer a member of FLDS. Had not thought about...could be.IMO/JMO

evalles

04-16-2008, 07:08 PM

Originally posted by Carol25

Probable cause was the phone call. Evidence of a crime was when the police saw very young pregnant girls. They collected evidence:

http://www.childbrides.org/ItemsSeizedAtYFZ.pdf

Take a look at the 88 pages of what they found and what they have to go through. Do you think this can be analyzed and documented in a couple of days? On the list are several cell phones. I would assume they would be able to tell if a phone call was made from one of those phones. Although you would think if they discovered her, they would have disposed of the phone. They discovered tons of records, birth records, records that included father and mother's names and geneaology records. So, so much. Even mail from "hiding houses"....wouldn't really call that a real wholesome neighborhood..JMO [/*]

How about an anonymous call that you stole an unknown person's property. Is this evidence that justifies a warrant to come in and trash your house looking for it ? Does it seem strange that the mother's were forced to leave their children AFTER complaining about the conditions their children were living in? A father complained that the cell phones were taken in retaliation for the mother's reporting these conditions. CPS isn't any better than FLDS.

John7878

04-16-2008, 07:16 PM

Originally posted by lotty

Could be possible that a child could be in Texas and the father no longer a member of FLDS. Had not thought about...could be.IMO/JMO [/*]

This has puzzled me. The members that 'got out', but were a part of this at one time.

Why haven't they brought them in to answer questions or help out in questioning others, who would be more inclined to talk to one of their 'own'???

:shrug:

evalles

04-16-2008, 07:20 PM

Originally posted by spydernweb2006

FYI I do NOT work for TX CPS. I do have expirence with CPS from when my daughter was abused by a babysitter. In ALL cases the the 1st thing CPS does is ensure the safety and wellbeing of ANY kids involved in the situation.

As I see it the main reason all the kids were removed from the YFZ Ranch was largely caused by LE seeing abuse and the inability to know WHO these kids legally belong too. LE/CPS cannot even ID alot of the kids so they can address each individual family and any abuse within those families.

I agree if a certain family has no abuse, no evidence of abuse or ANY legal reason to not have their kids they should and will get their kids back. But until ALL the kids can be identified and the Parents and kids evaluated this cannot happen. Sadly it could be a few abusive people causing harm for the many.

IF these people TRULY wanted their kids back they would cooperate with any investigation fully. They refuse too so they will have to answer to that in a court of law as our constitution demands. They will have their day in court and it will be a fair hearing.

Investigations are NEVER handled publically. These children have rights to privacy that will not be broken due to a mass propaganda blitz by the FLDS. TX is acting correctly to not make it a public media battle. TX has kept everyone informed in a legal and correct manner. You will not see TX CPS get on camera and name names or exploit the plight of these kids in the media. I assure you TX will not allow these kids to be abused in any shape or form while in their care.

FLDS created this mess when they refused to protect any child in their care, then cry because they are removed as ANY child suspected of abuse by a Parent/Guardian. They WILL get their day in court, which is where the case belongs, not in the media.

JMHO

Hugs,

Spyder [/*]

If CPS can't find any evidence of abuse, they'll create it. How do you know they'll get a fair trial ? Family court hearings are closed, there's no way of knowing if the hearings are fair. IMO, this is to protect CPS, not the children. Were the mother's removed to keep them from influencing the children ? Who's going to keep CPS from influencing them. I can hear it now. "Honey, you can't go home til you tell us that your daddy did bad things to you. If you want to see your mommy, just tell us what we want to hear."

Freebird

04-16-2008, 07:33 PM

Originally posted by lotty

Wouldn't it be nice if some the fathers that have been "ex-d" if they had a child(ren) at YFZ could show up to claim their children. 2002 - 2003 I think that is the right time frame. Could be possible that a child could be in Texas and the father no longer a member of FLDS. Had not thought about...could be.IMO/JMO [/*]

Couldn't it be possible these men too are abusers?

awareness

04-16-2008, 07:35 PM

Originally posted by evalles

How about an anonymous call that you stole an unknown person's property. Is this evidence that justifies a warrant to come in and trash your house looking for it ? Does it seem strange that the mother's were forced to leave their children AFTER complaining about the conditions their children were living in? A father complained that the cell phones were taken in retaliation for the mother's reporting these conditions. CPS isn't any better than FLDS. [/*]

While I have some sympathy for their cramped quarters where they all were - I feel the women are over dramatizing it a bit. Example is them comparing it to a "concentration camp" - that's an insult on the thousands of people who have died in horrible places like that. FLDS is all about secrecy since they feel its no ones business what goes on in their homes and temples.

Did you ever stop to think CPS separated the mothers & children so they could get a more honest and complete picture of what's going on at the ranch? With their mothers standing by right there, Im sure some of them felt pressured to not come forward with what they would have otherwise.

In terms of comparing CPS to FDLS - that's ludicrous IMO... CPS isnt marrying off young barely teen girls to much older men, making them have babies at 15/16, casting young boys out on the streets... FLDS is.

JMO/IMO

awareness

04-16-2008, 07:38 PM

Originally posted by evalles

If CPS can't find any evidence of abuse, they'll create it. How do you know they'll get a fair trial ? Family court hearings are closed, there's no way of knowing if the hearings are fair. IMO, this is to protect CPS, not the children. Were the mother's removed to keep them from influencing the children ? Who's going to keep CPS from influencing them. I can hear it now. "Honey, you can't go home til you tell us that your daddy did bad things to you. If you want to see your mommy, just tell us what we want to hear." [/*]

CPS is there to PROTECT the children. Not tell them they can go home but only if they tell CPS what CPS wants to hear. Get a clue!

What about the possibility of mothers standing nearby when CPS was trying to talk to the kids? So the kids would be intimidated into not being 100% honest, or being evasive - so the full truth couldnt come out?

JMO/IMO

evalles

04-16-2008, 07:41 PM

Originally posted by lotty

Their living arrangement is different...If they saw a girl that looked 15yo and expecting, siblings have to go with her. Who are her siblings? No one will say...lots of confusion...lack of cooperation. Now what? Say it was just one family, but they are moving kids from house to house, and no one can or will tell you who the parents are. How do you enforce the law in that situation. All things being equal...we are all human and capable of mistakes. EVERYONE. If they have a warrant for your neighbors house to be searched...while they are performing the search your neighbor runs to your house opens the door and steps into your house...guess what! [/*]

If I'm standing outside my neighbor's house, can they still raid mine because I know them ? If they witnessed teens with babies, why didn't they remove the teens and arrest the perps that abused them ? They could then investigate the family members of the victims. I also thought that to remove a child there needed to be imminent risk. IMO the children at risk would be those over 11 or 12, but they took all 416 kids. If the men were willing to leave, wouldn't it have been better for the kids to remain in their homes with their mother's during the investigation? So many children are abused while in state custody, I'm not sure they're any better off.

Mimi428

04-16-2008, 08:06 PM

Originally posted by evalles

CPS isn't any better than FLDS. [/*]

<snipped>

If you are aware of a history of CPS forcing adolescent girls to submit to sexual activities with males they are NOT interested in having sex with - post a link.

If you can't do at least that much, then I think I'm going to keep my opinion that the FLDS is far, far worse. Because FLDS DOES have a history of forcing young girls to submit to RAPE.

Carol25

04-16-2008, 08:20 PM

Details

04-16-2008, 08:33 PM

Details

04-16-2008, 08:41 PM

Originally posted by evalles
If CPS can't find any evidence of abuse, they'll create it. How do you know they'll get a fair trial ? Family court hearings are closed, there's no way of knowing if the hearings are fair. IMO, this is to protect CPS, not the children. Were the mother's removed to keep them from influencing the children ? Who's going to keep CPS from influencing them. I can hear it now. "Honey, you can't go home til you tell us that your daddy did bad things to you. If you want to see your mommy, just tell us what we want to hear." [/*]I've seen plenty with CPS. This is all nonsense. Not a word is true. Takes so much to get them to come out. Takes even more for them to act.

Oh, and if they raid your neighbors house, and you run over and help your neighbor move things from their house to yours during the raid - then, yep, yours will be searched too. If you have a bunch of cocaine out on the coffee table, or a room of unattended neglected babies, then they'll see it, and you'll be charged with the crime. FLDS tried a gamble - they started a shell game of trying to move and hide children to keep Sarah from being found - so the police had to check everywhere.

Carol25

04-16-2008, 10:59 PM

Originally posted by John7878

This has puzzled me. The members that 'got out', but were a part of this at one time.

Why haven't they brought them in to answer questions or help out in questioning others, who would be more inclined to talk to one of their 'own'???

:shrug: [/*]
I wonder about that at first as well. Then i thought that it could be misconstrued to say they were trying to :convert" the girls to give up information and leave the cult. they might even be accused of telling the girls to make up things to tell the investigators.

I understand they are helping the investigators understand the ladies and how they have been brainwashed.

Speaking of being brainwashed. I heard on of the Ex FLDS members on tv today. She helped 84 ex member acclimate to life outside of the compound. One of the children said to her one day, "You say you love me but I know you don't! You haven't hit me once!"

evalles

04-16-2008, 11:29 PM

Originally posted by Mimi428

<snipped>

If you are aware of a history of CPS forcing adolescent girls to submit to sexual activities with males they are NOT interested in having sex with - post a link.

If you can't do at least that much, then I think I'm going to keep my opinion that the FLDS is far, far worse. Because FLDS DOES have a history of forcing young girls to submit to RAPE. [/*]

CPS has a long history of placing children where they are hurt or killed. Is subjecting teenagers to sex with older men worse than placing small children (including infants) where they are raped and beaten to death ? If all 416 children were abused, the parents should be tried in criminal court. Because CPS does have a history of placing or leaving children in dangerous homes and destroying entire families I'm definitely going to keep my opinion that CPS is far, far worse.

wandering

04-16-2008, 11:41 PM

dicee

04-16-2008, 11:48 PM

Originally posted by evalles

CPS has a long history of placing children where they are hurt or killed. Is subjecting teenagers to sex with older men worse than placing small children (including infants) where they are raped and beaten to death ? If all 416 children were abused, the parents should be tried in criminal court. Because CPS does have a history of placing or leaving children in dangerous homes and destroying entire families I'm definitely going to keep my opinion that CPS is far, far worse. [/*]

If CPS does place kids into foster homes which abuse the kids,then CPS should be held accountable.

evalles

04-16-2008, 11:53 PM

Originally posted by Carol25

Show me a link where that has ever been done. Of course they could always match them up with aliens for the next ride to the pooloo universe, too.
When you show me a link for your claim, I'll show you a link for mine. :rolleyes: [/*]

http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/072801/met_6805029.html

http://www.wisn.com/news/836136/detail.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/16/us/16foster.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2008/apr/12/30gtdcf-social-worker-arrested/
Also, a Georgia Senator, Nancy Schaeffer conducted a 5 yr study on CPS, her report says it all.
http://fightcps.com/pdf/TheCorruptBusinessOfChildProtectiveServices.pdf
Now, send me yours.

wandering

04-16-2008, 11:55 PM

Originally posted by evalles

http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/072801/met_6805029.html

http://www.wisn.com/news/836136/detail.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/16/us/16foster.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2008/apr/12/30gtdcf-social-worker-arrested/
Also, a Georgia Senator, Nancy Schaeffer conducted a 5 yr study on CPS, her report says it all.
http://fightcps.com/pdf/TheCorruptBusinessOfChildProtectiveServices.pdf
Now, send me yours. [/*]That doesn't mean it happened in this case.

DRJAN

04-17-2008, 12:04 AM

My problem with this is the that they have no problem abusing the welfare system. I am so upset that they will use their religion to break the law then get tax exemption. When there are families that need support can't get it. And not one of these women I guarantee have not paid any taxes. This has gone way too far.

juliekan

04-17-2008, 12:08 AM

Originally posted by evalles

CPS has a long history of placing children where they are hurt or killed. Is subjecting teenagers to sex with older men worse than placing small children (including infants) where they are raped and beaten to death ? If all 416 children were abused, the parents should be tried in criminal court. Because CPS does have a history of placing or leaving children in dangerous homes and destroying entire families I'm definitely going to keep my opinion that CPS is far, far worse. [/*]
So you think children should be left with rapists? Their own family rapists are better than maybe a decent family?

evalles

04-17-2008, 12:11 AM

Originally posted by dicee

If CPS does place kids into foster homes which abuse the kids,then CPS should be held accountable. [/*]

Please check out the links on my last post, especially the investigation by Sen Schaeffer. I have 3 children and when my 16 year old got mad after losing some priveledges (cel phone, car, internet) I was introduced to Missouri's CPS after she had the grandfather of a friend call the hotline. A 28 yr old with no children decided that she must be emotionally abused. She lied in the report, and placed my kid where she wanted, with a family that has an extensive criminal history and numerous CPS investigations. I had neither. The worker didnt do the state mandated home study. I was hardly allowed to speak in court and they threatened my other children when I refused to sign what they wanted. The worst they could say about me after a yr was that I was sarcastic. If they would have taken my smaller kids, it probably would have destroyed me. My daughter decided she wanted to come home after a year and I learned even more disturbing things about this agency. The sad thing is, there's no accountability. I even sent taped conversations to the supervisors and nothing was done.

Details

04-17-2008, 12:13 AM

CPS, once in a while, places a child with a bad family - rapist or abusers. And out of the hundreds of thousands of placements, we naturally only hear of those few bad ones. But most are good - and far more monitored than the children with their natural parents, some of which also are abusers and rapists. But of course, the children CPS places were already with the bad parents. A foster family means the chance - and a very good one, of having not bad parents. Sometimes very good ones, sometimes indifferent, sometimes bad - but better that than the certainty of a bad parent that they come from.

evalles

04-17-2008, 12:19 AM

Originally posted by juliekan

So you think children should be left with rapists? Their own family rapists are better than maybe a decent family? [/*]

Maybe a decent family ? How can you call them rapists when no one has been convicted or even charged with rape ? Do you not believe in innocent until proven guilty ?
How about a compromise, let the state keep any child that's been raped. Charge the rapists and execute them for all I care. If there is no evidence that a child has been abused, he should be returned to his family.

evalles

04-17-2008, 12:22 AM

Originally posted by wandering
That doesn't mean it happened in this case. [/*]

It doesn't mean it didn't either. Did you read the report by Sen Schaeffer ?

evalles

04-17-2008, 12:23 AM

Originally posted by Details
CPS, once in a while, places a child with a bad family - rapist or abusers. And out of the hundreds of thousands of placements, we naturally only hear of those few bad ones. But most are good - and far more monitored than the children with their natural parents, some of which also are abusers and rapists. But of course, the children CPS places were already with the bad parents. A foster family means the chance - and a very good one, of having not bad parents. Sometimes very good ones, sometimes indifferent, sometimes bad - but better that than the certainty of a bad parent that they come from. [/*]

How do you know this ?

juliekan

04-17-2008, 12:26 AM

Originally posted by evalles

Maybe a decent family ? How can you call them rapists when no one has been convicted or even charged with rape ? Do you not believe in innocent until proven guilty ?
How about a compromise, let the state keep any child that's been raped. Charge the rapists and execute them for all I care. If there is no evidence that a child has been abused, he should be returned to his family. [/*]
How do you think the underage girls got pregnant...immaculate conception? They reported that underage girls were pregnant when they met them on the compound. They supposedly were never allowed to leave the compound, who got them pregnant? And there's no way around it, there were girls under 16 years of age with THEIR own babies when they came in.

evalles

04-17-2008, 12:29 AM

Originally posted by DRJAN
My problem with this is the that they have no problem abusing the welfare system. I am so upset that they will use their religion to break the law then get tax exemption. When there are families that need support can't get it. And not one of these women I guarantee have not paid any taxes. This has gone way too far. [/*]

A Texas official said that their property, appraised at over $21 million was the forth highest taxed in the county. They only get exemptions for the structures that are used for worship. I haven't seen any evidence that they're receiving welfare, but I've heard the speculation.

Details

04-17-2008, 12:29 AM

Originally posted by evalles
How do you know this ? [/*]Plenty of personal experience, on all sides of the system - trying to report a bad parent, children who have been in the system, etc.

There can be a bad CPS, just like there can be a bad anyone else. But when there is plentiful evidence (and I don't know how you are ignoring that plentiful evidence when it's been reported on every channel, every article - how many pregnant 16 year olds do you need to figure out that they're being molested underage? How do you miss that pregnancy is evidence of sex? How can you ignore all the people who are not in the cult, who have escaped from the cult telling the same story of how those children got pregnant?) - they have to, and should act.

wandering

04-17-2008, 12:32 AM

Originally posted by evalles

It doesn't mean it didn't either. Did you read the report by Sen Schaeffer ? [/*]It's clear you are biased, because of your situation. I am so sorry you went through this, but I know some very loving foster families.

:rose:

dicee

04-17-2008, 12:34 AM

wandering

04-17-2008, 12:34 AM

Originally posted by evalles

A Texas official said that their property, appraised at over $21 million was the forth highest taxed in the county. They only get exemptions for the structures that are used for worship. I haven't seen any evidence that they're receiving welfare, but I've heard the speculation. [/*]They call collecting welfare "Bleeding the Beast."

The women who aren't legally married are collecting for their children.

Carol25

04-17-2008, 12:39 AM

Originally posted by evalles

Please check out the links on my last post, especially the investigation by Sen Schaeffer. I have 3 children and when my 16 year old got mad after losing some priveledges (cel phone, car, internet) I was introduced to Missouri's CPS after she had the grandfather of a friend call the hotline. A 28 yr old with no children decided that she must be emotionally abused. She lied in the report, and placed my kid where she wanted, with a family that has an extensive criminal history and numerous CPS investigations. I had neither. The worker didnt do the state mandated home study. I was hardly allowed to speak in court and they threatened my other children when I refused to sign what they wanted. The worst they could say about me after a yr was that I was sarcastic. If they would have taken my smaller kids, it probably would have destroyed me. My daughter decided she wanted to come home after a year and I learned even more disturbing things about this agency. The sad thing is, there's no accountability. I even sent taped conversations to the supervisors and nothing was done. [/*]
How horrible! :cuss: Can't you go further up the chain?

evalles

04-17-2008, 12:40 AM

Originally posted by juliekan

How do you think the underage girls got pregnant...immaculate conception? They reported that underage girls were pregnant when they met them on the compound. They supposedly were never allowed to leave the compound, who got them pregnant? And there's no way around it, there were girls under 16 years of age with THEIR own babies when they came in. [/*]

Why haven't they arrested anyone ? Look, I'm not pro- polygomy and I think the men who had sex with these minors should be prosecuted. I'm pro civil rights, it's what made this country great.
Unfortunately, I see the government trashing the rights of it's citizens on a regular basis. I'm hoping, that at the same time this polygomous sect is exposed, government abuses will be also. I'd rather have a guilty person go free than an innocent one be persecuted. I think CPS ignored other options. The men were willing to leave and let officials make sure they stayed out while an investigation was done. IMO, that was reasonable and would have traumatized the children much less. Maybe they should put all the men in jail, this would remove all supposed risk and would be better for the kids.

juliekan

04-17-2008, 12:41 AM

Originally posted by dicee

Then why are their abusers still walking free? [/*]
Because they've all been threatened that telling the truth...a man over 19 had sex with them, or they aren't 16, so cannot legally be married in the state of Texas. Both are illegal.

evalles

04-17-2008, 12:43 AM

Originally posted by dicee

Then why are their abusers still walking free? [/*]

Excellent point.

juliekan

04-17-2008, 12:43 AM

Originally posted by evalles

Why haven't they arrested anyone ? Look, I'm not pro- polygomy and I think the men who had sex with these minors should be prosecuted. I'm pro civil rights, it's what made this country great.
Unfortunately, I see the government trashing the rights of it's citizens on a regular basis. I'm hoping, that at the same time this polygomous sect is exposed, government abuses will be also. I'd rather have a guilty person go free than an innocent one be persecuted. I think CPS ignored other options. The men were willing to leave and let officials make sure they stayed out while an investigation was done. IMO, that was reasonable and would have traumatized the children much less. Maybe they should put all the men in jail, this would remove all supposed risk and would be better for the kids. [/*]
Simply, that is not how CPS works. You remove the children from an environment that is supposed to be bad for the child.

lotty

04-17-2008, 12:46 AM

Did anyone see on LKL that there was a picture of Warren Jeffs in each room they showed? Talk about intimidating.:no:

juliekan

04-17-2008, 12:48 AM

Originally posted by lotty
Did anyone see on LKL that there was a picture of Warren Jeffs in each room they showed? Talk about intimidating.:no: [/*]
I saw that when they did a show on Colorado City...:eek:

evalles

04-17-2008, 12:51 AM

Originally posted by Carol25

How horrible! :cuss: Can't you go further up the chain? [/*]

I'm trying, but life is just returning to normal and we're still recovering. As far as the chain, I found the worker's my-space and realized that her supervisor that I'd sent my grievances to was a friend on her site. And what a site it is.

Check out the my-space site of the woman who's in charge of making decisions for Missouri's children.

http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=91561821

The Marni on her friend's list is her supervisor. The day that I mentioned it to someone higher on the food chain, the supervisor blocked her site.

evalles

04-17-2008, 12:59 AM

Originally posted by wandering
It's clear you are biased, because of your situation. I am so sorry you went through this, but I know some very loving foster families.

:rose: [/*]

I'm sure the ones that are in it for the right reasons are fine. You're right, I am incredibly biased. Unfortunately I'm not the only one that's been hurt by this agency. I belong to several online family right's groups, TAF united, CPS Watch, and child protection reform to name a few. My case was mild compared to most. There are many foster parents that are aware of the abuses within the system and honestly want to help the families. The ones that bother me are the ones that turn against the parents for no other reason except they want to keep their child.

lotty

04-17-2008, 12:59 AM

juliekan

04-17-2008, 01:01 AM

Originally posted by evalles

I'm trying, but life is just returning to normal and we're still recovering. As far as the chain, I found the worker's my-space and realized that her supervisor that I'd sent my grievances to was a friend on her site. And what a site it is.

Check out the my-space site of the woman who's in charge of making decisions for Missouri's children.

http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=91561821

The Marni on her friend's list is her supervisor. The day that I mentioned it to someone higher on the food chain, the supervisor blocked her site. [/*]
I see a law suit in your future...

evalles

04-17-2008, 01:01 AM

Originally posted by skytalk

This disturbs me that you have posted this myspaceprofile. [/*]

I'm sorry, I havent posted alot ? Is this against the rules ?
There are no last names given

juliekan

04-17-2008, 01:14 AM

Wow, did that kill the action on this site or what:o
thanks Sky...I agree

evalles

04-17-2008, 01:16 AM

Originally posted by skytalk

By naming actual people who work in a government agency it is very easy to find out who these individuals are.

This may violate TOS. I suggest you ask Coldwater. You may want to have the posts deleted. [/*]

I sent her a message. I'm going to bed now, so I won't be ticking anybody else off til tomorrow

wandering

04-17-2008, 01:16 AM

Originally posted by wandering
The phones were taken away so that the mothers could not tell the children what to say during the questioning. That's also why the mothers were sent home, because they were interfering with the investigation. Just heard all that on NG. [/*]Here's the NG transcript.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0804/16/ng.01.html

Details

04-17-2008, 03:56 AM

Originally posted by dicee
Then why are their abusers still walking free? [/*]Because who did the abuse is not proven. Do you have a magical DNA X-ray that can look at a pregnant child and tell who the father is?

Here we have someone. And once a week, once a day, someone comes along and beats or rapes that person. Do we leave them chained there, because we do not know who did it, or are not yet sure we heve the evidence to arrest and press charges? Or do we remove them, stop the abuse, stop the rape, then worry about how we make the court case, when we are ready to arrest the person. Any person in danger is to be saved, whether or not the information is yet present to press charges. Whether or not the victim is yet ready to identify her attacker. Whether or not the victim accepts their assault.

Our justice system requires proof that not only was a crime committed, but that we have reason to be pretty sure it was this person, before we will arrest them. However - we are not such fools that we leave the victim in danger, allow them to continue to be assaulted just because we aren't ready yet to arrest their assailant.

tisamystery

04-17-2008, 04:41 AM

I can't post links, but I have read a lot about the FLDS and lived in AZ for 10 years where the subject would come up often and where many of the Lost Boys ended up. There have been several references to "Bleeding the Beast", from many, many sources. Like you, SadieMay, I'm a stickler for accuracy and I respect posters who try to clear up facts and "guesses". However, I have no doubt of this welfare fraud.

withay

04-17-2008, 05:05 AM

My understanding is that in the compounds in the previous states, that welfare fraud (called "bleeding the beast") was very prevalent. However, now that the government knows about it, they are not doing it as much and they have never done it at the Texas ranch. They have a new, more profitable way of getting government money. They have companies that bid on government contracts and because they either underpay or don't pay their employees (who are residents, frequently those teenaged boys) they are able to underbid all other companies. I have read that they have several multi-million dollar contracts.

tisamystery

04-17-2008, 05:45 AM

Originally posted by withay
They have a new, more profitable way of getting government money. They have companies that bid on government contracts and because they either underpay or don't pay their employees (who are residents, frequently those teenaged boys) they are able to underbid all other companies. I have read that they have several multi-million dollar contracts. [/*]

Yes, I heard about a multi-million dollar government contract just recently. Yeah, I said government.

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=148&sid=3084399

John7878

04-17-2008, 09:55 AM

Originally posted by evalles

If CPS can't find any evidence of abuse, they'll create it. How do you know they'll get a fair trial ? Family court hearings are closed, there's no way of knowing if the hearings are fair. IMO, this is to protect CPS, not the children. Were the mother's removed to keep them from influencing the children ? Who's going to keep CPS from influencing them. I can hear it now. "Honey, you can't go home til you tell us that your daddy did bad things to you. If you want to see your mommy, just tell us what we want to hear." [/*]

Thats why I think there should be a neutral third party to watch out for the kids.

Once CPS says there has been abuse, even after they can't find the original caller, they are going to be inclined to trample over anyone to find some.

In fact there may have been a abuser, heck the whole place might be full of them....in fact....or in opinion.

From what I see most people on here wouldn't think the CPS would influence kids like you suggest.
But I just can't help thinking about the last time they raided a "cult" and ended up killing all the women & children.

If the authorities can kill them, I wouldn't think abusing them is out of the question, let alone influencing them.

2cents

Rainkiss

04-17-2008, 10:16 AM

A quick Google search:

http://www.apologeticsindex.org/f/f39ad.html
http://humaniststudies.org/enews/?article=1&id=243

As for why the abusers are still walking free... The police have evidence of abuse, yes. (As I've stated elsewhere, pregnant girls under the age of 18 are, pretty much by definition, evidence.) However, due to the practice of silence, they're likely having some issues identifying the specific abusers. It's going to take some time. As I understand it, you can't arrest someone on "I think you abused a child," the charge needs to be, "We have evidence to believe you abused Sally Jones, on or about this date."

The lawyers for the children are there to help watch out for their rights.

walton

04-17-2008, 10:39 AM

Originally posted by sadiemay62

That is NOT true! If you found something, credible, to substantiate that statement, please supply it for the rest of us. However, I am saying that is NOT true as far as I know. They have never sought government funding. There is a major reason for that too! CPS has the right to, and does, get involved when they seek that assistance. They do NOT want the government involved in anything they do.

With regard to your phrase of "legally married", they do not marry within the normal sense. Their ceremonies are performed within their own temples, and compounds. They wouldn't be able to have all of those wives if they were seeking "legal" marriages. Please note, that all of those very young girls are married (such as it is) before there is any sex, or pregnancies. jmo [/*]

http://thehopeorg.org/taxes.html

From June 2002 through June 2003 the Arizona Attorney General's office reports 8 million tax dollars in welfare services have gone to support polygamy.

During this year, 80% of Colorado City has received food stamps totaling 2.3 million dollars.

5 million dollars in free healthcare and an additional 660 thousand in tax dollars were funneled in to the community.

In total the residents of Colorado City, the entire community, only paid 72 thousand dollars combined in taxes.

Much more at the link.

evalles

04-17-2008, 02:34 PM

Originally posted by skytalk

I am truly surprised that it is acceptable to put a link to someone's myspace account, describe who this person is (in real life) by describing the individual's job, place of employment and supervisor and to defame this person's reputation without her knowledge and consent.

Wow.

I am so glad I have not created a blog or a myspace account. Anyone can come along and say whatever they wish to about you to an entire forum with complete license.

This social worker cannot defend herself because of confidentiality. She cannot discuss the case. [/*]

I dont see how her rep has been defamed. Her myspace is public and if it's not appropriate, she's defamed herself. She has my permission to talk about my case. Let her justify not conducting the required criminal background check and placing my teen w/ people that have lots of criminal charges, including 5 assaults w/in the last 4 yrs (guilty pleas), a drive by shooting( plead guilty to assault w/ a deadly weapon in 2003) drug charges, possession of firearms and much, much more. I have no record and no previous history w/ CPS. I made the worker angry when I stood up for myself, so she told multiple lies in her report. IMO, she was aware of their records, which is why she req records from a city in which they didn't live instead of the check mandated by the state. I plan on suing her for slander & defamation of character.

Details

04-17-2008, 04:38 PM

Originally posted by sadiemay62
I hate this cult as much as you do, but you are incorrect; they do not get anywhere near the welfare system. Never have. ...[/*]You are incorrect, and 30 seconds of search online would have shown you that. Just for the first link, of many I found with one search:
http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/anderson.cooper.360/blog/2006/05/how-polygamy-affects-your-wallet.html
"Their religious belief is that they'll bleed the beast, meaning the government," said Mark Shurtleff, Utah's attorney general. "They hate the government, so they'll bleed it for everything they can through welfare, tax evasion and fraud."

It makes some sense. Polygamists have multiple wives and dozens of children, but the state only recognizes one marriage. That leaves the rest of the wives to claim themselves as single moms with armies of children to support. Doing that means they can apply for welfare, which they do. And it's all legal.

"More than 65 percent of the people are on welfare ... compared with 6 percent of the people of the general population," Shurtleff said. 65% - not zero, as you stated. And this has been going on forever. It's part of their philosophy - bleed the beast. They think America is wrong, welfare is one little way to hurt us.

Details

04-17-2008, 04:42 PM

This is a really good article from Texas, long before the raid, when the sect first opened up shop there.
http://www.austinchronicle.com/gyrobase/Issue/story?oid=oid%3A281915

Roux

04-17-2008, 05:03 PM

I just now took the time to read the letter they sent to Gov. Perry and it states that 15 women were away from the compound when authorities arrived. Where were they and what were they doing in the outside world? I thought they didn't even go out to buy groceries and they sure as heck weren't at the hair salon! Maybe they were at the welfare office?

Rainkiss

04-17-2008, 05:20 PM

Originally posted by whyohwhy08
It is obvious the moms are clueless and brainwashed. How does a mom let their young preteen girl or girls screw around with an old geezer? that is beyond sick and these moms should have their children taken away from them if they continue to live at that pervert community. [/*]

Agh, now I'm going to have to change gears and play defender...

I am NOT saying it's right... however, please try to remember, this is the only life these mothers have ever known. They've lived their entire lives being told that, not only is this the only way to live, but that anything anyone NOT of the faith says is just an attempt to seduce them to damnation. Not so long ago, these moms WERE the preteen girls being married to men four times their own ages.

I repeat, I do NOT think it's right... but I know that if, say, the Martians invaded, claimed Earth, and told us all that we had to all take a spouse of the same sex, and I had to never speak to my husband again, under pain of law, how I'd feel. An extreme example? Maybe... but I bet that's what the women who've been raised in that faith feel about what they're being told now.

Carol25

04-17-2008, 05:24 PM

Originally posted by Roux
I just now took the time to read the letter they sent to Gov. Perry and it states that 15 women were away from the compound when authorities arrived. Where were they and what were they doing in the outside world? I thought they didn't even go out to buy groceries and they sure as heck weren't at the hair salon! Maybe they were at the welfare office? [/*]
Think they were being hidden because they were obviously too young to be mothers of the children? Or the mothers were 15 and obviously very pregnant again?

Carol25

04-17-2008, 05:28 PM

baywench

04-17-2008, 05:34 PM

Originally posted by Rainkiss

Agh, now I'm going to have to change gears and play defender...

I am NOT saying it's right... however, please try to remember, this is the only life these mothers have ever known. They've lived their entire lives being told that, not only is this the only way to live, but that anything anyone NOT of the faith says is just an attempt to seduce them to damnation. Not so long ago, these moms WERE the preteen girls being married to men four times their own ages.

I repeat, I do NOT think it's right... but I know that if, say, the Martians invaded, claimed Earth, and told us all that we had to all take a spouse of the same sex, and I had to never speak to my husband again, under pain of law, how I'd feel. An extreme example? Maybe... but I bet that's what the women who've been raised in that faith feel about what they're being told now. [/*]

I was sexually abused by my father for many years. I did not know that it was wrong until I went to school. Children have many things in their lives that they do not like so I thought it was just another unpleasant part of childhood, like having to be in bed at 7:30. If this all they know, it is all they know, and even though it is inconceivable to us it is home to them and not a place of abuse. Does that make sense? JMO

Rainkiss

04-17-2008, 06:37 PM

Originally posted by baywench

I was sexually abused by my father for many years. I did not know that it was wrong until I went to school. Children have many things in their lives that they do not like so I thought it was just another unpleasant part of childhood, like having to be in bed at 7:30. If this all they know, it is all they know, and even though it is inconceivable to us it is home to them and not a place of abuse. Does that make sense? JMO [/*]

Precisely, Baywench. (Thanks for sharing, by the way, I know it's not easy.)

evalles

04-18-2008, 12:47 AM

Originally posted by skytalk

May I never incur your wrath. [/*]

Sorry, but CPS reform is my obsession. I've spent over a year pouring over information on this organization. I've read hundred's of stories about victims of the system.
I don't trust the system to make good choices for these children.
The power CPS has over families is frightening. If you're not June Cleaver they can create a case against you.
There are no clear definitions of abuse or neglect, its up to the discretion or bias of the worker and there is no accountability when they err.

My selfish hope is that at the same time the guilty parties in this sect pay for their crimes against children, the public becomes aware of the unbridled power and corruption of CPS.

John7878

04-18-2008, 08:41 AM

Originally posted by evalles

Sorry, but CPS reform is my obsession. I've spent over a year pouring over information on this organization. I've read hundred's of stories about victims of the system.
I don't trust the system to make good choices for these children.
The power CPS has over families is frightening. If you're not June Cleaver they can create a case against you.
There are no clear definitions of abuse or neglect, its up to the discretion or bias of the worker and there is no accountability when they err.

My selfish hope is that at the same time the guilty parties in this sect pay for their crimes against children, the public becomes aware of the unbridled power and corruption of CPS. [/*]

Originally posted by baywench

I was sexually abused by my father for many years. I did not know that it was wrong until I went to school. Children have many things in their lives that they do not like so I thought it was just another unpleasant part of childhood, like having to be in bed at 7:30. If this all they know, it is all they know, and even though it is inconceivable to us it is home to them and not a place of abuse. Does that make sense? JMO [/*]

I agree with both of these. And I'm not sure if it makes sense, but just the way I feel.

Keep up the fight against abuse evalles.

And thanks for the different slant/view baywench.

:patriot:

Rainkiss

04-18-2008, 09:02 AM

Originally posted by evalles

Sorry, but CPS reform is my obsession. I've spent over a year pouring over information on this organization. I've read hundred's of stories about victims of the system.
I don't trust the system to make good choices for these children.
The power CPS has over families is frightening. If you're not June Cleaver they can create a case against you.
There are no clear definitions of abuse or neglect, its up to the discretion or bias of the worker and there is no accountability when they err.

My selfish hope is that at the same time the guilty parties in this sect pay for their crimes against children, the public becomes aware of the unbridled power and corruption of CPS. [/*]

I can certainly understand that point, it's hard to give a group of people, and they ARE people, for the most part trying to do the right thing, one would hope, the power to help children who need it, without giving them the power to step over the line and interfere where they're not needed.

However, I hope people can see that, in this case, they WERE needed. It's a rotten situation.

The biggest problem at the moment is the uncertainty... Sure, some of those kids could be the children of women who are over the legal age, and who are not being abused... but if the court can't tell WHO a child's parent is, how can they release that child?

Let's take a purely hypothetical situation... They removed ALL the children from a 10-block area of New York City. They KNOW that some of the kids have been abused, but none of the kids will tell them exactly which kids have been abused, or where they live. Every parent is standing in a line outside the courthouse saying, "Return the kids... but we won't tell you which kid is whose. Just turn 'em lose, we'll sort it out." What would you expect 'em to do?

evalles

04-18-2008, 02:30 PM

Originally posted by skytalk

As both a child who was abused and a social worker I know that CPS can NOT build a case just because you're 'not June Cleaver'.

I agree with you that there are problems with the system and that worker biases and agency mismanagement occur.

I only worked for CPS for three months after being a social worker for over 20 years working with adults. I did not enjoy my job which explains my short time there. I prefer to build a therapeutic alliance--not be a pseudo cop. I do not care for the child welfare system because it criminalizes families.

That said--there is a serious problem in families with drug abuse, domestic violence and mental illness. Parents do endanger their children when those conditions are present and untreated.

As to your claim that there is no clear definition of abuse and neglect--IMO that is not true. There are definitions of abuse and neglect, it is up to a court to determine whether what happened in a family fits that criteria or not.

I am sorry for the helplessness and anger you feel in your situation with CPS and your children. In my experience, a good lawyer tends to make mincemeat out of bad social workers. Find yourself a good advocate and stay connected with your children. I support doing whatever allows your mind and heart to heal and moving forward as quickly as possible for the sake of your own and your children's well being.

Take care. [/*]

I have 3 children and the only one removed was my 16 yr old daughter, who the worker claimed was tjhe targeted child. What 16 yr old doesn't feel that way. I was never accused of physical abuse, the the application for federal funding stated my daughter was a victim of every type of abuse listed ( I'm assuming to get the max $$) People that actually know our family think that my daughter was spoiled, she had a cell phone and lap top and she didn't own an article of clothing that didn't have a brand name. Quite simply, she got grounded and the cel & laptop were restricted. I admit there were some screaming matches in which I was a participant, but I hardly think that justified 12 court dates in 12 months. I described the history of the family she wanted to stay with. Plain and simple, I made the worker angry because I thought I had rights and asserted them. My daughter came back home a couple months ago (she says the worker was angry that she wanted to come home )and the case is closed, but the things I've experienced over the past year will stay with me forever.
IMO, good people can't stay with CPS for long, which is why you left.
My relationship w/ my daughter is permanently altered, the interference threw me into a depression, the court dates and insincere svcs almost cost me my job and took time away from my younger children I'll never get back ( my youngest just started kindergarten when this began). I feel like I was a better mother before they intervened, I'm always second guessing myself now.
I can't seem to get back into a normal routine.
IMO, children should be w/ their natural family whenever possible and I don't see that as the goal of CPS in most cases.

Details

04-18-2008, 03:18 PM

One bad CPS experience doesn't make them bad. And they are far too focused on returning children to natural mothers - they do so when the abuse is clear and physical. Nor do CPS workers get money for taking kids away. They're underfunded and overworked. If you got a bad one - that's all it was - a bad one. But you can look in the papers and see story after story of when they return children that should never have been returned, leave children in abusive households when they should have been removed.

They've got a very difficult job, mistakes are horrible, but inevitable. It's a very thin line they have to follow to do it right - going a little too far on one side (take child away that could have stayed) or the other (leave child that is in danger) is incredibly difficult. Especially with the abusive parents lying to keep their child, guilting the child into lying about abuse, telling the child all kinds of horror stories so they will fear leaving the mother, etc.

But here - here we talk about this case. Where they've got 400 children in a child abusing cult. They have to help them all, they have to sort out the abusive mothers from those who might be convinced to stop abusing the child (allowing your underage child to be married to an old man is abuse, allowing your teenage son to be kicked out underage is also abuse), they have to find out what really happened, and they have to find enough homes to hold these children while they piece that together for each of the 400 children. It's an immense task.

Rainkiss

04-18-2008, 03:40 PM

And, here's a detail for you...

What do you do when you find out one of these 14 year old girls isn't the half-sister of one of the babies, but her mother? CAN they tell that from DNA, anyway?

Details

04-18-2008, 04:09 PM

Originally posted by Rainkiss
And, here's a detail for you...

What do you do when you find out one of these 14 year old girls isn't the half-sister of one of the babies, but her mother? CAN they tell that from DNA, anyway? [/*]Yes - they can. It'll be interesting. Mitochondrial DNA might be the same, but full DNA workup, you'll see the maternal relationship - the mother gave the 14 year old half her DNA, but the other half is from the father. So - if the mother is ABCDEF, father is RSTXYZ, the daughter will be ABCDXYZ. When they test the daughter's daughter, her DNA will come out ABMNXYJ - showing her to be the daugther of the 14 year old.

Did they get the DNA tests ruled on? I think that would help a ton, and is probably necessary even if all the kids are let go, to figure out who the parents are to release them to.

Rainkiss

04-18-2008, 04:51 PM

Originally posted by Details
Yes - they can. It'll be interesting. Mitochondrial DNA might be the same, but full DNA workup, you'll see the maternal relationship - the mother gave the 14 year old half her DNA, but the other half is from the father. So - if the mother is ABCDEF, father is RSTXYZ, the daughter will be ABCDXYZ. When they test the daughter's daughter, her DNA will come out ABMNXYJ - showing her to be the daugther of the 14 year old.

Did they get the DNA tests ruled on? I think that would help a ton, and is probably necessary even if all the kids are let go, to figure out who the parents are to release them to. [/*]

But how well will that work with neither parent stepping forward to claim their children? And the children are changing their OWN names during interviews with authorities, naming multiple mothers... It's goign to be a wreck.

walton

04-18-2008, 04:56 PM

Originally posted by Rainkiss

But how well will that work with neither parent stepping forward to claim their children? And the children are changing their OWN names during interviews with authorities, naming multiple mothers... It's goign to be a wreck. [/*]

What if some kids are left unclaimed? meaning no parent comes forward?

Details

04-18-2008, 05:02 PM

IMO, most of these kids will be better off if no mother and no father comes forward. That'd leave them in foster care, free of the cult, maybe even free to be adopted by a real mother.

I also won't be surprised if some of the infants turn out to be the children of some of the children. So we may have DNA for some of the mothers already.

Even with all the children have been taught about lying about parents, birthdays, not helping outsiders - they can't change their DNA. I'm sure they're keeping track of the kids, no matter how much names change.

Carol25

04-18-2008, 05:09 PM

Some of the children could have been brought from other compounds without their parents to mix the gene pool. So, some DNA tests will not come up with a mother or father. That's okay,too.

KatyDid

04-18-2008, 09:25 PM

Originally posted by walton

What if some kids are left unclaimed? meaning no parent comes forward? [/*]

I think the state is already making arrangements if that should happen so the children can be adopted.

Freebird

04-18-2008, 11:40 PM

Originally posted by KatyDid

I think the state is already making arrangements if that should happen so the children can be adopted. [/*]

I guess then those with known parents will go back to their parents.

jessie

04-19-2008, 03:13 PM

Originally posted by walton

If someone calls in for a fire do they also need to give first and last names? Do they send out a guy with a squirt gun or send the fire truck with whistles blowing?

Heck here in cyber-land none of us use our real names and we don't even have the threat of eternal damnation.

Sara could be a real person that did not use her real name. Sara could be in Mexico for all we know. Sara could be Lucy for all we know. The call was made and the authorities acted on it. [/*] Sara could also have been beated to death for making that phone call. I hope not.

evalles

04-19-2008, 05:11 PM

Originally posted by Texanne
So it is a combination of being pedophiles AND a greed for our tax dollars that drives the dirty old men? I think I may get sick. [/*]

The state of TX stands to gain a ton of federal funding by the removal of these children.
The federal govt pays for foster care and all svcs for foster kids through Title IV funding. It comes from our social security $$. If there's no social security when we retire, Title IV will be the biggest factor. If the perps are put in prison and children are kept w/ the nonviolent parent, this is not only less traumatic for the kids but also for tax payers. I don't believe our prisons are funded with our social security $.

baywench

04-19-2008, 06:03 PM

Originally posted by skytalk

evalles--

It is the goal of CPS to keep children with their natural families. This certainly is not what happened for you and your children, and I am sorry to hear of the pain and suffering you and your children went through in the past and continue to feel the effects of today.

May you and your children have every advantage now and in the future for health and well being. [/*]

I hope that CPS will understand the special circumstances of these children and not throw them directly into a foster care home. I may not be thinking too realistically but if they could take them through some indoctrination to society as a group I feel that would be so much more comforting for the children than "everyman for himself". They would need to think outside the box and of course, CPS is not known for that. I feel they are setting up for failure if they seperate them and do not address their special needs. CPS does try to keep families together when placing them but obviously if you have 40 brothers and sisters there is a problem. I'm sure the older children played a huge part in the daily upbringing of the smaller ones and the little ones would be abandoned (in their eyes) on so many levels. JMO

msgatorslayer

04-19-2008, 06:07 PM

I'm tired of hearing these Mom's say that their kids are being traumatized by being held with outsiders and therefore they should be given back to them.

These kids are no different than any other child in this world who are taken from the parents by DCF. They're are all traumatized.

Welcome to the real world!!

evalles

04-19-2008, 07:07 PM

Originally posted by msgatorslayer
I'm tired of hearing these Mom's say that their kids are being traumatized by being held with outsiders and therefore they should be given back to them.

These kids are no different than any other child in this world who are taken from the parents by DCF. They're are all traumatized.

Welcome to the real world!! [/*]

It's great to hear people acknowledge that CPS traumatizes children.

Devotion

04-19-2008, 07:12 PM

Originally posted by dsmith
I can understand the mothers wanting their children back. But what I can not see is now that the law is involved, giving the children back to mothers who will return to the "compound" to continue raising the children to live with these beliefs.
Religion is fine. That is your choice, but to do what has been done to these children in the name of religion is against the law.

I wonder because of the inbreeding just what kind of sickness there is.

How many of the children have been abused.

How many can read and write. So many ? so few answers. [/*]

It seems the LAWS of man and the laws of ALL Bibles were being ignored and broken......jmo

Details

04-19-2008, 07:22 PM

Originally posted by msgatorslayer
I'm tired of hearing these Mom's say that their kids are being traumatized by being held with outsiders and therefore they should be given back to them.

These kids are no different than any other child in this world who are taken from the parents by DCF. They're are all traumatized.

Welcome to the real world!! [/*]Yep. They're traumatized by being at their home, the lesser trauma of finding out about the real world is still a trauma, but a good one. Like the trauma of getting your childhood shots, like the trauma of a dentists visit.

Devotion

04-19-2008, 07:22 PM

Originally posted by essiemadge

just read about a new way that the cult bleeds the taxpaper.

social security will pay a father who is retired so much a month for each child he has until the children reach 16 years of age.

these dirty ole men have quite a few with their teenage, younger and younger women.

so all they need is social security retirement and a bunch of young girls to impregnate to get more INCOME from the TAXPAYERS..... [/*]

Seems THEY get the taxpayers, government money in alot of different ways.

My understanding is that welfare fraud (called "bleeding the beast") was very prevalent, but now,

they have a new, more profitable way of getting government money.

They have companies that bid on government contracts and because they either UNDER PAY or DON'T PAY their employees, who are residents, frequently those teenaged BOYS, they are able to UNDERBID all other companies.

I have read that they have several multi-million dollar contracts.

Correct me if I'm wrong......jmo

Devotion

04-19-2008, 07:50 PM

Originally posted by lotty
IMO/JMO
"Keep sweet" those two words have vast conotations to these people (FLDS).
Eternal damnation...the children suffer for the parents to save their own souls.

No laughter is allowed, emotions are bad. I have a real problem with the whole "they won't let us see our children issue."

This religion has no problem with separating children from their biological parents, paternal or maternal.

Misbehave, off you go to Bountiful, or who knows where else.

There are missing people in this religion...MISSING...IMO/JMO [/*]

Good point....What is the defination these OLD MEN have for being SWEET?

Where are ALL the OLD people, grandmothers and grandfathers over 65?

When people HIDE and LIE and do not answer questions honestly, they are definately hiding wrong doing....
is this living by the 10 commandants of the BIBLE?......jmo

Freebird

04-19-2008, 09:40 PM

Originally posted by baywench

I hope that CPS will understand the special circumstances of these children and not throw them directly into a foster care home. I may not be thinking too realistically but if they could take them through some indoctrination to society as a group I feel that would be so much more comforting for the children than "everyman for himself". They would need to think outside the box and of course, CPS is not known for that. I feel they are setting up for failure if they seperate them and do not address their special needs. CPS does try to keep families together when placing them but obviously if you have 40 brothers and sisters there is a problem. I'm sure the older children played a huge part in the daily upbringing of the smaller ones and the little ones would be abandoned (in their eyes) on so many levels. JMO [/*]

I wonder how many foster parents will understand the special circumstances of these kids(religion.clothing.diets,etc...).

evalles

04-19-2008, 11:59 PM

Originally posted by Details
Yep. They're traumatized by being at their home, the lesser trauma of finding out about the real world is still a trauma, but a good one. Like the trauma of getting your childhood shots, like the trauma of a dentists visit. [/*]

What were the results of the physical exams performed on the children ?

KatyDid

04-20-2008, 01:46 AM

Originally posted by evalles

What were the results of the physical exams performed on the children ? [/*]

Wouldn't those be sealed since they are minors in the custody of the state? Privacy laws and such?

xray ra

04-20-2008, 02:07 AM

Originally posted by evalles

I have 3 children and the only one removed was my 16 yr old daughter, who the worker claimed was tjhe targeted child. What 16 yr old doesn't feel that way. I was never accused of physical abuse, the the application for federal funding stated my daughter was a victim of every type of abuse listed ( I'm assuming to get the max $$) People that actually know our family think that my daughter was spoiled, she had a cell phone and lap top and she didn't own an article of clothing that didn't have a brand name. Quite simply, she got grounded and the cel & laptop were restricted.
[/*]

You said it yourself, Your daughter was spoiled. Now, how did she get that way? Don't make the same mistake with your other children. Let them know (from a very young age) that there are consequences to their actions.
I very seldom spanked my kids and NEVER hit them in anger. But they knew from age 4 or 5 who was in charge. And it was because I loved them and wanted them to grow up to be responsible, respectful men. I told them that also.
I confess, that I did once threaten that if they did not follow the house rules, ie. curfew, "smart mouths", responsibilities.,ect.. that they would go to a "Foster Home".
They always chose option "A". They are now 28yrs and 24 yrs. and have worked and gone to college on their own since High School. BTW, It was not easy to let them make mistakes . But they have grown up to be responsible, respectful men.
Keep the faith. and let them know that all your rules are because you LOVE them.:rose:

evalles

04-20-2008, 02:14 AM

Originally posted by KatyDid

Wouldn't those be sealed since they are minors in the custody of the state? Privacy laws and such? [/*]

That's the way it's supposed to work.
So, why is everyone stating all these children were raped or abused if they haven't seen any facts ?
Are these statements made based on media reports only ?
We all know those vary w/ the reporter.
However w/ the magnitude of this case and the number of involved parties, I think it would have come out.
There's a report that quotes the CPS worker's testimony.

Under cross-examination, state child-welfare investigator Angie Voss conceded there have been no allegations of abuse against babies, prepubescent girls or any boys.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080418/ap_on_re_us/polygamist_retreat

But her agency, Child Protective Services, contends that the teachings of the FLDS — to marry shortly after puberty, have as many children as possible and obey their fathers or their prophet, imprisoned leader Warren Jeffs — amount to abuse.

I thought this was about abuse, but there was none alleged. They also said it wasn't about their religion, but the agency contends that it's about FLDS teachings ?

But earlier in the same report,
The children were seized this month in a raid on the desert compound because of evidence of physical and sexual abuse, including the forcing of underage girls into marriage and childbearing.
When questioned by the defense lawyers the state's experts acknowledged that the sect mothers are loving parents and that there were no signs of abuse among younger girls and any of the boys.
This makes no sense to me, but then again, we are talking about the government. :patriot:

Details

04-20-2008, 02:27 AM

A child cannot consent - all those underage were raped. Without even seeing any report other than the fact that all these children have had children.

Beyond that, we hear some pieces of evidence, without them telling us which child (to maintain confidentiality) from the courtroom.

So, yes, it is an established fact.

As to the abuse - there is no conflict between the two reports. The report of no signs of abuse is exactly what you expect from an honest reporter - they only saw the children- you can't spot any bruise covered by clothing, and you can't spot a destructive mindset being instilled. But, with interviews, the psychiatrist can come to a whole different conclusion.

evalles

04-20-2008, 02:27 AM

Originally posted by xray ra

You said it yourself, Your daughter was spoiled. Now, how did she get that way? Don't make the same mistake with your other children. Let them know (from a very young age) that there are consequences to their actions.
I very seldom spanked my kids and NEVER hit them in anger. But they knew from age 4 or 5 who was in charge. And it was because I loved them and wanted them to grow up to be responsible, respectful men. I told them that also.
I confess, that I did once threaten that if they did not follow the house rules, ie. curfew, "smart mouths", responsibilities.,ect.. that they would go to a "Foster Home".
They always chose option "A". They are now 28yrs and 24 yrs. and have worked and gone to college on their own since High School. BTW, It was not easy to let them make mistakes . But they have grown up to be responsible, respectful men.
Keep the faith. and let them know that all your rules are because you LOVE them.:rose: [/*]

I think eventually my daughter is going to be fine. While she was spoiled, I tried to teach by example, honesty and charity and empathy for others. Unintentionally on my part, she learned by example to be stubborn and strong-willed.
She will most likely have to learn everything the hard way.

Carol25

04-20-2008, 02:29 AM

Originally posted by evalles

That's the way it's supposed to work.
So, why is everyone stating all these children were raped or abused if they haven't seen any facts ?
Are these statements made based on media reports only ?
We all know those vary w/ the reporter.
However w/ the magnitude of this case and the number of involved parties, I think it would have come out.
There's a report that quotes the CPS worker's testimony.

Under cross-examination, state child-welfare investigator Angie Voss conceded there have been no allegations of abuse against babies, prepubescent girls or any boys.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080418/ap_on_re_us/polygamist_retreat

But her agency, Child Protective Services, contends that the teachings of the FLDS — to marry shortly after puberty, have as many children as possible and obey their fathers or their prophet, imprisoned leader Warren Jeffs — amount to abuse.

I thought this was about abuse, but there was none alleged. They also said it wasn't about their religion, but the agency contends that it's about FLDS teachings ?

But earlier in the same report,
The children were seized this month in a raid on the desert compound because of evidence of physical and sexual abuse, including the forcing of underage girls into marriage and childbearing.
When questioned by the defense lawyers the state's experts acknowledged that the sect mothers are loving parents and that there were no signs of abuse among younger girls and any of the boys.
This makes no sense to me, but then again, we are talking about the government. :patriot: [/*]
Perhaps we may see the word "neglect" show up in the hearings as well. With all of the the special needs children we've heard about, have the parents met their needs? Do they have specially qualified teachers for those youngsters? For that matter, do they have qualified teachers at all? Or do they just pick someone to be teacher?

When we see an environment without any toys, books, personal items for each child, would that contribute to neglect? Is just feeding and clothing considered nurturing? When a child cannot tell who his mother is, wouldn't that be neglect?

Isn't it interesting that no one that we have heard about in any of these compounds have needed surgery or paramedics for any emergencies? Who are they using as doctors? Shouldn't their qualifications be looked at and determined valid? For some reason, I can't imagine them letting anyone from their compound go out of their sight for college and a medical degree, not to mention going into hospitals for residency. They wouldn't come back. And very few would pass the rigorous education and training.

No one had appendicitis? A heart attack? a broken neck? A gall bladder attack and needed it to come out? A c=section? Who's doing the anaesthesia? Do they all have all of the machines they need for x-rays, ekg's, blood tests, etc to make diagnosis?
Many questions of neglect, IMO.

xray ra

04-20-2008, 02:32 AM

Originally posted by evalles

I think eventually my daughter is going to be fine. While she was spoiled, I tried to teach by example, honesty and charity and empathy for others. Unintentionally on my part, she learned by example to be stubborn and strong-willed.
She will most likely have to learn everything the hard way. [/*]

I hear ya. LOL:)

Details

04-20-2008, 02:32 AM

Originally posted by Freebird
I wonder how many foster parents will understand the special circumstances of these kids(religion.clothing.diets,etc...). [/*]Every foster child has special circumstances. I understand the psychiatrist - she's going to ask for the best - but we all know there are some abused kids sent to foster care who have far worse situations they are leaving.

For the rest - this is not that abnormal for foster care - different religions, different diets, different clothing.

evalles

04-20-2008, 02:49 AM

Originally posted by Carol25

Perhaps we may see the word "neglect" show up in the hearings as well. With all of the the special needs children we've heard about, have the parents met their needs? Do they have specially qualified teachers for those youngsters? For that matter, do they have qualified teachers at all? Or do they just pick someone to be teacher?

When we see an environment without any toys, books, personal items for each child, would that contribute to neglect? Is just feeding and clothing considered nurturing? When a child cannot tell who his mother is, wouldn't that be neglect?

Isn't it interesting that no one that we have heard about in any of these compounds have needed surgery or paramedics for any emergencies? Who are they using as doctors? Shouldn't their qualifications be looked at and determined valid? For some reason, I can't imagine them letting anyone from their compound go out of their sight for college and a medical degree, not to mention going into hospitals for residency. They wouldn't come back. And very few would pass the rigorous education and training.

Many questions of neglect, IMO. [/*]

Come on, first they're physically abused and raped and when there is any testimony to contradict that it changes to maybe they were neglected ? Not going to college is not neglect and home schooling is not illegal.

No it's not intersting that we haven't heard about surgeries or paramedics. We would only hear about this if it were an issue.
Because you don't see any toys, they're neglected ??
If you saw toys, and they weren't what you deemed appropriate, would that be neglect ? You're fishing just like CPS. IMO.
Do you really have a document w/ your doctor's qualifications listed ?
I take my kids to a local pediatrician that came highly recommended.
Man, I thought because everyone called him Dr and he worked in a Dr's office that meant he was a DR.

One of the women on TV said she had a college degree.

evalles

04-20-2008, 02:54 AM

Originally posted by Details
A child cannot consent - all those underage were raped. Without even seeing any report other than the fact that all these children have had children.

Beyond that, we hear some pieces of evidence, without them telling us which child (to maintain confidentiality) from the courtroom.

So, yes, it is an established fact. [/*]

It's a fact that all these children have children ?
What about the CPS workers statement that you just read.
There were 5 teenagers that were pregnant but there were over 400 children removed.
Again:
Under cross-examination, state child-welfare investigator Angie Voss conceded there have been no allegations of abuse against babies, prepubescent girls or any boys.

Why can't they keep the abused kids, arrest the perpetrators and send the others home ?

Details

04-20-2008, 03:03 AM

You haven't been following then. There's a 16 year old child with 4 children, and pregnant again. All the pregnant 16 year old girls - guess what - few if any are legally married, so all of those will be statutory rape unless their husbands happen to be a serious exception and also very young. And pregnant 16 year old - are they really that old? And how old were they at conception? But the one with four children alone is plenty of proof. The fact that there are so many, that the children say there is no age too young to be married, that ALL - EVERY LAST ONE - cult escapee, says that underage girls are routinely married to old men. That's what the Jeffs trial (where he was found guilty) testified to, that's what all of the escapees testify to, that's what many of them have experienced.

Details

04-20-2008, 03:04 AM

Originally posted by evalles
...One of the women on TV said she had a college degree. [/*]The woman with the college degree didn't know what happened in concentration camps in the Holocaust - she brought them up, but obviously hadn't the faintest idea of what happened there. Sounds like another lie to me.

Freebird

04-20-2008, 03:22 AM

Details

04-20-2008, 03:30 AM

Originally posted by Freebird
Guess that 16-year-old can say goodbye to her kids. [/*]Why? She didn't commit the crime - her pedophilic husband or husband's (if she's been reassigned) did. She hasn't even yet handed a child over for marriage/rape yet. She's committed no crime so far.

evalles

04-20-2008, 03:34 AM

Originally posted by Details
You haven't been following then. There's a 16 year old child with 4 children, and pregnant again. All the pregnant 16 year old girls - guess what - few if any are legally married, so all of those will be statutory rape unless their husbands happen to be a serious exception and also very young. And pregnant 16 year old - are they really that old? And how old were they at conception? But the one with four children alone is plenty of proof. The fact that there are so many, that the children say there is no age too young to be married, that ALL - EVERY LAST ONE - cult escapee, says that underage girls are routinely married to old men. That's what the Jeffs trial (where he was found guilty) testified to, that's what all of the escapees testify to, that's what many of them have experienced. [/*]

One with 4 children is plenty of proof to take over 400 ? I'm trying to understand that logic.
400 uprooted and taken from their mothers and it's sufficient to you that 1 has had 4 children. This isn't fact based on a caseworker's statement. There still has to be documentation or they can take anybody's children.
It should not be easy to take someone's children away from them.
They should not be able to say something is true without documentation to back it up and have it accepted at face value in family court.
Why is it illogical to you, that the only children that are removed are the ones in which there is evidence to support their abuse.
The abusers should be barred from the compound. They could at that point tell the mother's that if they allow the perpetrators access to the property or their children that their children will be removed.
If the risk is removed, why shouldn't reunification be the goal ?

I understand that the only proof you need is the 16 year old mother, but could you please answer my question ?

Details

04-20-2008, 03:36 AM

Will you actually consider the answer? Thus far you've proven otherwise. The time I have to waste is mostly used up. And some 20 articles that would answer your question have been posted over the last few days.

evalles

04-20-2008, 03:39 AM

Originally posted by Details
Why? She didn't commit the crime - her pedophilic husband or husband's (if she's been reassigned) did. She hasn't even yet handed a child over for marriage/rape yet. She's committed no crime so far. [/*]

You're confusing me. None of these mothers are accused of sexual abuse and there are over 400 children that haven't been handed over for marriage/rape yet, but you've repeatedly stated that these children shouldn't be allowed to go home to their mothers.
CPS will take her children. They'll say it's in their best interests.

evalles

04-20-2008, 03:44 AM

Originally posted by Details
Will you actually consider the answer? Thus far you've proven otherwise. The time I have to waste is mostly used up. And some 20 articles that would answer your question have been posted over the last few days. [/*]

You never answered my question. You said over and over again that the pregnant 16 year old was all the proof you needed.

That's not what I asked.

One with 4 children is plenty of proof to take over 400 ?

Why is it illogical to you, that the only children that are removed are the ones in which there is evidence to support their abuse and that their abusers be removed also ?

If the risk is removed, why shouldn't reunification be the goal ?

evalles

04-20-2008, 03:46 AM

Under cross-examination, state child-welfare investigator Angie Voss conceded there have been no allegations of abuse against babies, prepubescent girls or any boys.

Freebird

04-20-2008, 03:48 AM

Originally posted by Details
Why? She didn't commit the crime - her pedophilic husband or husband's (if she's been reassigned) did. She hasn't even yet handed a child over for marriage/rape yet. She's committed no crime so far. [/*]

It's just not whether or not she committed any crimes but also the fact that a teen is simply too young to be a mother.It makes no sense to allow her to keep her kids while not allowing the older mothers to keep their's.In this case,I can see the mother and kids being separated.I hope she and her kids go into separate foster homes so she can be a normal teenage girl.

Details

04-20-2008, 04:06 AM

Originally posted by evalles
You never answered my question. You said over and over again that the pregnant 16 year old was all the proof you needed... [/*]I've said far more than that - so obviously there's no point in repeating it if it hasn't sunk in after so many repititions.

evalles

04-20-2008, 04:11 AM

Originally posted by Details
I've said far more than that - so obviously there's no point in repeating it if it hasn't sunk in after so many repititions. [/*]

You're right, there's no reason to keep asking you questions you refuse to answer.

Like

One with 4 children is plenty of proof to take over 400 ?

Why is it illogical to you, that the only children that are removed are the ones in which there is evidence to support their abuse and that their abusers be removed also ?

If the risk is removed, why shouldn't reunification be the goal ?

Devotion

04-20-2008, 03:58 PM

Rainkiss

04-20-2008, 09:21 PM

Originally posted by evalles

You're right, there's no reason to keep asking you questions you refuse to answer.

Like

One with 4 children is plenty of proof to take over 400 ?

Why is it illogical to you, that the only children that are removed are the ones in which there is evidence to support their abuse and that their abusers be removed also ?

If the risk is removed, why shouldn't reunification be the goal ? [/*]

If it's "routine" for thirteen year old girls to be given to older men as "spiritual wives," would you leave twelve year old girls there? The eleven year olds? How about the ten year olds?

And, the reason stated for taking the boys, that they're being raised and groomed to abuse young girls... Can you say you agree with leaving them there?

There's something else that has struck me... I read somewhere (I'd have to search for it, or hope someone else remembers the link) that even the oldest children are testing around a second grade reading level. These kids aren't being sent to school, and their home-schooling methods, if sixteen year olds can't handle material meant for seven and eight year olds, obviously aren't up to standards. Does anybody know what the laws on home-schooling in Texas are? I'm betting they've got a massive truancy case, here, as well... Can it be considered neglect to deliberately deny your children the education to which they have a right?

Rainkiss

04-20-2008, 09:23 PM

Originally posted by Devotion

Good points.....
does their definition of being married mean a sexual-act?
or does this girls "husband" live and sleep in their home daily, year round, and help raise the 4 children? IF not why?

a 16 yr. old with 4 children and pregnant again should definitely know who has been sleeping/molesting her all these years...

Wouldn't she have been either 10 or 11 years old when she got pregnant with the first child ???..jmo [/*]

If I understand it correctly, the young woman gets at least some sort of ceremony handing her off to her new "husband" before the "marriage" is consumated.

I'm sure these girls know who has fathered their children... They just don't claim them in paperwork, it would make them less eligible for government benefits.

evalles

04-20-2008, 10:04 PM

Originally posted by Rainkiss

If it's "routine" for thirteen year old girls to be given to older men as "spiritual wives," would you leave twelve year old girls there? The eleven year olds? How about the ten year olds?

And, the reason stated for taking the boys, that they're being raised and groomed to abuse young girls... Can you say you agree with leaving them there?

There's something else that has struck me... I read somewhere (I'd have to search for it, or hope someone else remembers the link) that even the oldest children are testing around a second grade reading level. These kids aren't being sent to school, and their home-schooling methods, if sixteen year olds can't handle material meant for seven and eight year olds, obviously aren't up to standards. Does anybody know what the laws on home-schooling in Texas are? I'm betting they've got a massive truancy case, here, as well... Can it be considered neglect to deliberately deny your children the education to which they have a right? [/*]

I'd start by removing the potential risk, in this case the men,while the case was investigated. Then place security at the gate to make sure they stay out. Determine what children have been abused and who their abusers are, arrest the abusers and then determine what the best course of treatment was for the victims. I would then tell the mothers that if they coerce or allow anyone to coerce their teens into marriage, they would risk losing all their children. It's not fair to criminalize all the mothers until we have the facts on each individual case.

Details

04-20-2008, 10:42 PM

Originally posted by evalles
I'd start by removing the potential risk, in this case the men,while the case was investigated. Then place security at the gate to make sure they stay out. Determine what children have been abused and who their abusers are, arrest the abusers and then determine what the best course of treatment was for the victims. I would then tell the mothers that if they coerce or allow anyone to coerce their teens into marriage, they would risk losing all their children. It's not fair to criminalize all the mothers until we have the facts on each individual case. [/*]Ummmm - so you'd confiscate private property, kick the owners out, criminalize AND make homeless the MEN without any evidence saying which have and which have not broken the law, and make this new US Gov't run compound a jail so the children cannot be removed?

The right way to do this is to remove the children. And with abuse, all parties are responsible - the one committing the abuse, and the one allowing it to happen. This is nothing new - only the scale is unusual. You can't kick the parents out, and the home itself may be nothing but bad memories, so you take the children, give them a new home for awhile while everything gets sorted out. The reverse just doesn't work - here you've got a single parent, or married, suspected of abuse, a child suspected of being in danger. You can kick the parent(s) out of their own house, along with any of the children that are staying with their parents, or you can make a new place for the one child to be safe.

evalles

04-20-2008, 11:37 PM

Originally posted by Details
Ummmm - so you'd confiscate private property, kick the owners out, criminalize AND make homeless the MEN without any evidence saying which have and which have not broken the law, and make this new US Gov't run compound a jail so the children cannot be removed?

The right way to do this is to remove the children. And with abuse, all parties are responsible - the one committing the abuse, and the one allowing it to happen. This is nothing new - only the scale is unusual. You can't kick the parents out, and the home itself may be nothing but bad memories, so you take the children, give them a new home for awhile while everything gets sorted out. The reverse just doesn't work - here you've got a single parent, or married, suspected of abuse, a child suspected of being in danger. You can kick the parent(s) out of their own house, along with any of the children that are staying with their parents, or you can make a new place for the one child to be safe. [/*]

If I worked for CPS, I could do whatever I wanted.
I guess it would be wrong to force the men out,when the've already said they would leave voluntarily.
If they left voluntarily, the children would be safe during the investigation.
I don't think making all the men leave is right, but I think it would be better for the children to be in a familar place with their mothers than with strangers.

I find it interesting that you said this,
criminalize AND make homeless the MEN without any evidence saying which have and which have not broken the law

I agree that there isn't evidence against all these men.
That's why I can't understand why they would take all their children.
The ones that weren't abused shouldn't be given new homes.
The physician's testimony showed the children to be very healthy and well cared for.
These mother's of children that haven't been abused are being destroyed.

Details

04-21-2008, 01:08 AM

CPS works under the rules just like everyone else - no, they can't just kick a whole group out of their homes. Where did you get that idea?

No, the children aren't safe without the men - the women are also part of the problem in many of the cases - and in this case. That's why they had to separate them - the women were stifling the children from speaking honestly.

There is evidence of abuse - plenty of it. Who is committing the abuse cannot be so easily established. When we see an assault victim, bleeding and dying on the floor, we don't have to wait to figure out who assaulted them before transporting them to safety. When there's a gas leak and the building might blow up, you don't wait until you can blame someone for the leak, you don't wait until the explosion happens, you evacuate first, investigate second. When we see an abused child, we don't tell LE to wait until they know which person is abusing the child before they take it out.

Sorry - but to me this is incredibly obvious. When there's reason to believe a child or children are at risk of abuse:

FIRST - you get the children to safety.
SECOND - you find out all the details
THIRD - you arrest the abusers and return the children to the non-abusive parents.

This is the only order that makes sense to me. You don't leave a child you think is being abused in the home to be abused more. You don't make stereotypical assumptions about who is committing what abuse.

There's plentiful evidence against the cult, but no penalty - such as being deprived of your property can happen until there is a trial, due process. But you don't leave people in danger while that happens - not when there's sufficient evidence to show that they are indeed in danger.

Rainkiss

04-21-2008, 07:08 AM

Originally posted by evalles

If I worked for CPS, I could do whatever I wanted.
I guess it would be wrong to force the men out,when the've already said they would leave voluntarily.
If they left voluntarily, the children would be safe during the investigation.
I don't think making all the men leave is right, but I think it would be better for the children to be in a familar place with their mothers than with strangers.

I find it interesting that you said this,
criminalize AND make homeless the MEN without any evidence saying which have and which have not broken the law

I agree that there isn't evidence against all these men.
That's why I can't understand why they would take all their children.
The ones that weren't abused shouldn't be given new homes.
The physician's testimony showed the children to be very healthy and well cared for.
These mother's of children that haven't been abused are being destroyed. [/*]

Just a couple of quick questions... Setting aside, for the moment, that it would be against the law to just toss the men out of their homes... Assume, for a moment, that CPS could take their word that they would leave. How would you ensure they'd STAY away? During the raid, they were attempting to hide children by moving them from house to house. They're fairly sure they got all of the children, but I wouldn't bet my house on it. It's a BIG ranch... The idea of moving just the children and women back to the ranch was brought up in court, and the judge stated that there was no way to secure an area that large. (There are some aerial photos at http://cryptome.org/flds-ranch/flds-ranch.htm if you want an idea of the scale of the place.) Who'd pay for the big fence around it, and the guards to patrol it while all this is going on? And then who'd be screaming about putting women and children in some sort of concentration camp?

evalles

04-21-2008, 02:04 PM

Originally posted by essiemadge
unfortunatly one poster here has had a bad experience with a cps office where she lives.
but this is not the place to conduct a crusade against any and all cps .
i am very pleased with all the efforts by the local and state government in texas and the cps office and the judges there as well.
their mission, protect the children. if the parents are honest and cooperate with the authorities they should have no problem. but parents who consistently lie to the authorities or refuse to answer reasonable questions and are trying to influence the children to lie as well cannot be trusted with children.
please stop attacking the cps in this case. it has nothing to do with your problems. [/*]

You're right, it has to do with every parents right to raise their children without government intervention.

Why is it ok for you to praise CPS and not ok for me to criticize it ?

Lets talk about these particular children. Was removing them the only option ? Is there sufficient evidence that all the children were abused ? If the only goal is the children's safety and happiness and the parents are willing to do whatever is necessary to have their families together, why can't they go home ?
Is it the government's job to permanently separate families ?
I thought they were supposed to strengthen families and work to keep them together.
The destrucion of families will be the destruction of society.
Children are supposed to be removed if the are at imminent risk of death or serious physical harm.
Not because the child might be at risk 5 or 10 years from now.
Do you not feel any sympathy for these mothers or their children?

Rainkiss

04-21-2008, 02:08 PM

Originally posted by Tennessean
It would appear, based on information I saw on TV this morning, that the whole thing was a hoax, by a 38 year old black woman that had nothing to do with anyone in the FLDS church. [/*]

Doesn't matter, at this point, if the whole thing originated from a prank call. They found, in the course of an investigation, evidence of crimes. The investigation was based on, from what they knew at the time, a legitimate call for help. (Me, I'd rather the cops knock on a door and search if I've called to tell them I need help, not play, "Well, is this a REAL call?" games.) The child welfare had the right to remove the children, based on what they found. (Upheld by the court hearings.)

If someone calls the police and says they're being held captive in your basement, and the cops (with a warrant) come check your basement, and find no captive, but a meth lab, you're still going to jail for that meth lab, even if the original call was a hoax. The cops may have to block off your house, get a new warrant to be able to remove that lab, and THEN prosecute, but you're going.

evalles

04-21-2008, 02:09 PM

Originally posted by Details
CPS works under the rules just like everyone else - no, they can't just kick a whole group out of their homes. Where did you get that idea?

No, the children aren't safe without the men - the women are also part of the problem in many of the cases - and in this case. That's why they had to separate them - the women were stifling the children from speaking honestly.

There is evidence of abuse - plenty of it. Who is committing the abuse cannot be so easily established. When we see an assault victim, bleeding and dying on the floor, we don't have to wait to figure out who assaulted them before transporting them to safety. When there's a gas leak and the building might blow up, you don't wait until you can blame someone for the leak, you don't wait until the explosion happens, you evacuate first, investigate second. When we see an abused child, we don't tell LE to wait until they know which person is abusing the child before they take it out.

Sorry - but to me this is incredibly obvious. When there's reason to believe a child or children are at risk of abuse:

FIRST - you get the children to safety.
SECOND - you find out all the details
THIRD - you arrest the abusers and return the children to the non-abusive parents.

This is the only order that makes sense to me. You don't leave a child you think is being abused in the home to be abused more. You don't make stereotypical assumptions about who is committing what abuse.

There's plentiful evidence against the cult, but no penalty - such as being deprived of your property can happen until there is a trial, due process. But you don't leave people in danger while that happens - not when there's sufficient evidence to show that they are indeed in danger. [/*]

Is there plenty of evidence that every child of the 416 taken were abused ?
A physician that examined them testified that they were health and well taken care of.

evalles

04-21-2008, 02:16 PM

Originally posted by Rainkiss

Doesn't matter, at this point, if the whole thing originated from a prank call. They found, in the course of an investigation, evidence of crimes. The investigation was based on, from what they knew at the time, a legitimate call for help. (Me, I'd rather the cops knock on a door and search if I've called to tell them I need help, not play, "Well, is this a REAL call?" games.) The child welfare had the right to remove the children, based on what they found. (Upheld by the court hearings.)

If someone calls the police and says they're being held captive in your basement, and the cops (with a warrant) come check your basement, and find no captive, but a meth lab, you're still going to jail for that meth lab, even if the original call was a hoax. The cops may have to block off your house, get a new warrant to be able to remove that lab, and THEN prosecute, but you're going. [/*]

Family court works very differently than criminal or civil court.
I can't imagine in any other court that a Dr that examined the children could testify that they were healthy and appeared well cared for, that a CPS worker could testify there were no abuse allegations against the parents and that the psych evaluator could admit that his expertise regarding the FLDS came from the media:lol: and a judge would still detain 400 children.
I'm trying to understand, but I cant.

Rainkiss

04-21-2008, 02:23 PM

Originally posted by evalles

You're right, it has to do with every parents right to raise their children without government intervention.

Why is it ok for you to praise CPS and not ok for me to criticize it ?

Lets talk about these particular children. Was removing them the only option ? Is there sufficient evidence that all the children were abused ? If the only goal is the children's safety and happiness and the parents are willing to do whatever is necessary to have their families together, why can't they go home ?
Is it the government's job to permanently separate families ?
I thought they were supposed to strengthen families and work to keep them together.
The destrucion of families will be the destruction of society.
Children are supposed to be removed if the are at imminent risk of death or serious physical harm.
Not because the child might be at risk 5 or 10 years from now.
Do you not feel any sympathy for these mothers or their children? [/*]

Different points of view are a good thing, and I'd be the last person to blindly take the government's word that everything they do is for my personal benefit.

I do feel sympathy for these mothers and children. However, I think most of us differ with you on just exactly what constitutes harm to children. Every day these children spent with their families was another day to hammer home the belief that what they have been doing there is the only one, true, correct way.

Let's take a different angle. Rather than saying that the early teenage girls being married off was their cultural difference. Let's say CPS went in there, and found that every child, on his or her tenth birthday, was expected to take another selected "bad" ten year old child off into the temple and sacrifice that child on an altar. (Yes, I use extreme examples to make points, I'm aware of this.) And, of course, if you've been selected as a "bad" child, you're expected to go and lie down without a struggle, since being sacrificed will save your soul.

Which kids would you remove? The eleven year olds are past the danger point, however, they're all murderers, and believe what they did not only was their rite of passage, but saved the "bad" child's soul... and, if needed, they believe they can do it again to save another "bad" person. Would you leave the nine year olds? They've got time, after all.

You may not agree with CPS in this case, but I have to say they did the right thing. I've got a little experience with the mainstream Mormon faith, and have seen what happens to the kids in a family with one father and one mother, and the belief that the more kids, the better, and even THAT isn't pretty.

Rainkiss

04-21-2008, 02:30 PM

Originally posted by evalles

Family court works very differently than criminal or civil court.
I can't imagine in any other court that a Dr that examined the children could testify that they were healthy and appeared well cared for, that a CPS worker could testify there were no abuse allegations against the parents and that the psych evaluator could admit that his expertise regarding the FLDS came from the media:lol: and a judge would still detain 400 children.
I'm trying to understand, but I cant. [/*]

Frighteningly enough, that's about the only way to get enough experience to testify on a couple of days' notice. These are very secretive people, given that at least one facet of their lives breaks the law. (I'm referring to the polygamy, not even getting into the underage issue, here.) They're taught from the cradle that ANY interaction with the outside world will taint their souls. (That's the same outside world, by the way, that they dump most of their male children into, so that the most faithful men can have three, ten, or twenty wives!)

The ACLU is involved, now, and will be keeping an eye on things. And, believe me, they're more than capable of raising holy heck if they think things are out of whack.

evalles

04-21-2008, 02:36 PM

Originally posted by Rainkiss

If it's "routine" for thirteen year old girls to be given to older men as "spiritual wives," would you leave twelve year old girls there? The eleven year olds? How about the ten year olds?

And, the reason stated for taking the boys, that they're being raised and groomed to abuse young girls... Can you say you agree with leaving them there?

There's something else that has struck me... I read somewhere (I'd have to search for it, or hope someone else remembers the link) that even the oldest children are testing around a second grade reading level. These kids aren't being sent to school, and their home-schooling methods, if sixteen year olds can't handle material meant for seven and eight year olds, obviously aren't up to standards. Does anybody know what the laws on home-schooling in Texas are? I'm betting they've got a massive truancy case, here, as well... Can it be considered neglect to deliberately deny your children the education to which they have a right? [/*]

The state is denying these children their parents to which they have a right.
If thirteen year old girls are given to older men as "spiritual wives, those children ahould be removed and the offending parties prosecuted. I'm waiting to see the evidence before I judge all of them. I don't think all these children were abused and I think there are some good mothers that deserve to be with their children. I read that the parents weren't even given the paperwork stating why their children were abused. This is supposed to be provided to them.
I just heard on CNN that the attorneys for the children are fighting the foster care placement. They want them returned to their parents. IMO, this is significant. The parents aren't paying these attorney's, they work for the children. They have first hand knowlege of the individual child they're working for.

Rainkiss

04-21-2008, 03:01 PM

Originally posted by evalles

The state is denying these children their parents to which they have a right.
If thirteen year old girls are given to older men as "spiritual wives, those children ahould be removed and the offending parties prosecuted. I'm waiting to see the evidence before I judge all of them. I don't think all these children were abused and I think there are some good mothers that deserve to be with their children. I read that the parents weren't even given the paperwork stating why their children were abused. This is supposed to be provided to them.
I just heard on CNN that the attorneys for the children are fighting the foster care placement. They want them returned to their parents. IMO, this is significant. The parents aren't paying these attorney's, they work for the children. They have first hand knowlege of the individual child they're working for. [/*]

Here's the problem... The court can't just say, "send these kids back to the ranch." They need a properly identified parent to release each child.

The parents aren't claiming individual children. There aren't birth certificates for many, if ANY, of the youngest. The kids are changing their names when asked, and either can't or won't state who their mother IS. I've seen a couple interviews, and have seen, "Give us our children..." but not one mother saying, "Please let Mary come home."

xray ra

04-21-2008, 03:10 PM

Originally posted by Rainkiss

Here's the problem... The court can't just say, "send these kids back to the ranch." They need a properly identified parent to release each child.

The parents aren't claiming individual children. There aren't birth certificates for many, if ANY, of the youngest. The kids are changing their names when asked, and either can't or won't state who their mother IS. I've seen a couple interviews, and have seen, "Give us our children..." but not one mother saying, "Please let Mary come home." [/*]

Exactly. That is the main problem with returning the children. The DNA testing will be critical. I truly hope that the ACLU doesn't try to stall the testing of the parents, as that will only delay the reuinification of the families that are not involved w/abuse.

Carol25

04-21-2008, 03:16 PM

Originally posted by evalles

Family court works very differently than criminal or civil court.
I can't imagine in any other court that a Dr that examined the children could testify that they were healthy and appeared well cared for, that a CPS worker could testify there were no abuse allegations against the parents and that the psych evaluator could admit that his expertise regarding the FLDS came from the media:lol: and a judge would still detain 400 children.
I'm trying to understand, but I cant. [/*]
Evalles, you are living proof of what is wrong with that compound. Look at what you are able to do. You are able to read and evaluate situations from what you have read and what you have researched and experienced. You can articulate and debate your thoughts. You have been priveleged enough to have the education to do all of this. Your mind has been stimulated and open so you can evaluate, make decisions and synthesize. None of the women have been awarded such upbringing and education. They haven't been allowed to think. You've seen these women talk. They appear as robots. You can see that as well.
Although the children are well fed and are physically healthy, their development is being thwarted by their upbringing. They can't go back to that environment and thrive as a normal thinking human being as we are. Abuse takes many forms.

evalles

04-21-2008, 04:05 PM

Originally posted by Carol25

Evalles, you are living proof of what is wrong with that compound. Look at what you are able to do. You are able to read and evaluate situations from what you have read and what you have researched and experienced. You can articulate and debate your thoughts. You have been priveleged enough to have the education to do all of this. Your mind has been stimulated and open so you can evaluate, make decisions and synthesize. None of the women have been awarded such upbringing and education. They haven't been allowed to think. You've seen these women talk. They appear as robots. You can see that as well.
Although the children are well fed and are physically healthy, their development is being thwarted by their upbringing. They can't go back to that environment and thrive as a normal thinking human being as we are. Abuse takes many forms. [/*]

Part of me agrees. I'd hate for anybody to be able to force me to shut up. On the other hand, I think kids today are exposed to too much too soon. If they're teaching them to break the law by allowing sex w/ minors or practicing bigamy,that needs to be stopped.
Other than that, I don't think the govt should intervene with a parent instilling their beliefs in their children.

KatyDid

04-21-2008, 04:16 PM

Originally posted by Rainkiss

Here's the problem... The court can't just say, "send these kids back to the ranch." They need a properly identified parent to release each child.

The parents aren't claiming individual children. There aren't birth certificates for many, if ANY, of the youngest. The kids are changing their names when asked, and either can't or won't state who their mother IS. I've seen a couple interviews, and have seen, "Give us our children..." but not one mother saying, "Please let Mary come home." [/*]

:beer:

If young girls are being married off as soon as they hit puberty, it is against the law. The state must take all children to make sure they are not subjected to this illegal activity. The young boys stand the chance of being put out of the cult once they reach puberty, thrown into a world they know nothing about, with little skills to deal in that world.

Rainkiss

04-21-2008, 04:40 PM

Originally posted by evalles

Part of me agrees. I'd hate for anybody to be able to force me to shut up. On the other hand, I think kids today are exposed to too much too soon. If they're teaching them to break the law by allowing sex w/ minors or practicing bigamy,that needs to be stopped.
Other than that, I don't think the govt should intervene with a parent instilling their beliefs in their children. [/*]

Imagine being forced to not just shut up, but to never display any emotion. Imagine a child's tears being considered a doorway to the devil. Imagine a child's LAUGHTER being considered a doorway to the devil.

I agree a parent should be allowed to pass on their beliefs... however, I'm a big fan of personal choice. My parents hauled me to church every Sunday, and that's fine. When I was old enough to make an informed choice, it was my decision not to continue to attend. This country was based, in part, on freedom of religion. How much freedom to choose do you have if you're deliberately kept ignorant of your choices?

awareness

04-21-2008, 05:13 PM

Originally posted by Rainkiss
<snip>The ACLU is involved, now, and will be keeping an eye on things. [/*]

I didn't hear that... where did you hear that from? Have a link, just cause Im curious as to what they're looking into.

JMO/IMO

Carol25

04-21-2008, 05:16 PM

Just thinking here...how many of us as mothers would let others be called "mother" of your child? How many of us would not let our children know that "I am your mother" and I love you dearly.

Due to their upbringing, do they really know "love"? Or is their brainwashing so intense that they know their roles as "baby makers" and mere caretakers?

It would be interesting to have psychiatric evaluations of the adult females to determine what their inherent emotions really are.

Are we substituting our emotions on these women where these emotions may be absent in them?

Have you ever heard any of these women say I love my children, I want them back? Ever hear the word "love"?

juliekan

04-21-2008, 05:26 PM

Substituting our emotions...interesting idea Carol

Roux

04-21-2008, 05:33 PM

Originally posted by juliekan
Substituting our emotions...interesting idea Carol [/*]

I think perhaps a lot of posters have been projecting their feelings as a mother onto these women. But unfortunately, IMO, they are not like the rest of us and I don't think we can truly put ourselves in their shoes.

Details

04-21-2008, 05:52 PM

Originally posted by evalles
You're right, it has to do with every parents right to raise their children without government intervention.... [/*]No, parents do not have the right to raise their children any way they want without interference. They have a lot of leeway - a ton. But when it comes to abuse, absolutely parents have no rights to do that. Your children are not posessions to use and destroy as you see fit, they are people you are entrusted with, to care for. When you violate that trust, society needs to step in. And thus, as a society, we create laws to say where abuse is, and what we will do when there is evidence of abuse to protect the child.

But I see this time and time again - people who seem to think parents have a right to do whatever to their children. Just because it comes from their body, just because they created it, doesn't give them the right to destroy it, harm it, neglect it - nor to raise the child, teaching it that child molestation is a good and proper fate.

Devotion

04-21-2008, 06:03 PM

Originally posted by AnnieBean
quote:
----------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Rainkiss
[*
Here's the problem... The court can't just say, "send these kids back to the ranch."
They need a properly identified parent to release each child.

The parents aren't claiming individual children.

There aren't birth certificates for many, if ANY, of the youngest.

The kids are changing their names when asked, and either can't or won't state who their mother IS.

I've seen a couple interviews, and have seen, "Give us our children...
" but NOT ONE mother saying, "Please let Mary come home." [/*]
---------------------------------------------------------------

Could it possibly be that they just might NOT KNOW who their chidren are?

Maybe all newborns are kept together by a few 'wet nurses' like the olden days....
and the bearing women are then turned out for more impregnancy quicker...

a good way to build a society of people who listen to you w/o question all in the name of 'religion'. God? Pah! They worship Roulon Jeffs....etc.

The women are so brainwashed that nothing they say should be given ANY credence IMO except to prove how truly brain washed they are.

The kids also, imo, since the kids are giving ever-changing names.

I tried to get my grandson who is 8 to let me call him another name just kidding around with hijm since he was a teeny thing- one day I will say "Hey, let me calk you Sam!" and he will giggle and say no, my name is XXXX. One day I said "Let me call you Ishmael" and he said thats not a name, and it gave me a grart opening to read him the poem about Ishmael...etc,

anyway the point is what do you say to a kid that will make it ok to give false names and not claim or be able to claim their own mothers?

I lived on a commune in Tennessee in the 70's. I have posted about it before. every child there knew exactly who their mothers and father was. The communal lifestyl;e was good, women cooked together, women worked also on the farm, some were dentists (with degrees IRL) teachers lawyers doctors nurses
carpenters horse people farmers all walks of life.

There were NO communal sex things going on.

Families of 15-20 people lived togther in one home- that would be like parents and thier own kids. Communal kithcen, communal hang-out areas.

Private bedrooms.

No religion, no person we thought was our king...FGS...
Just posting this to make a point, communal living does not equal kids not knowing their name or who their mothers and fathers are.

Theres alot going WRONG inside those sects and its time for it to be put to a STOP.

FOREVER. .

NO tolerance for this, period.
In any part of the United States of America. [/*]

JEFFS PICTURE was the only picture on the walls in each room.....
no childrens pic's, no crosses, no angels, no Jesus, no bible, no mother & father or grandparents, no pets, just JEFFS picture in every room....so it leaves little doubt WHO they worship.
...imo

evalles

04-21-2008, 06:32 PM

Originally posted by AnnieBean

I agree and don't trust CPS and the system to do the 'right' thing 100%, but honestly what other choice is there? What do you do with 416 children, some of whom are pregnant, when you can't send them back to their abusers or the people to are ACCOMPLICES to their abuse, their mothers. Are the mothers crying at the gate when the pubescent sons are carried away- and 'dumped' out in a society wheich they were reaised to hate and distrust? What becomes of those children? They can't have any competetion and can't have those yound girls falling in love with a boy their own age...no no no that would really put a fly in the ointment, wouldn't it?

Whnat in the world do you do with 416 kids destined for more of the same this cult is dishing out, how do you provide for that many kids emotionally, spiritually, menatlly, physically...where do you put them? In loving homes? what does the law say?
This one is really a mess... [/*]

I don't have all the facts. I don't know these people personally. I haven't read enough to know that the lost boys didn't just rebell against their parent's belief's.

That said, I cant imagine cutting one of my children out of my life.
I'm very suspicious that the woman arrested for making false police reports was communicating w/ Flora Jessop before making them.

evalles

04-21-2008, 06:34 PM

Originally posted by Carol25
Just thinking here...how many of us as mothers would let others be called "mother" of your child? How many of us would not let our children know that "I am your mother" and I love you dearly.

Due to their upbringing, do they really know "love"? Or is their brainwashing so intense that they know their roles as "baby makers" and mere caretakers?

It would be interesting to have psychiatric evaluations of the adult females to determine what their inherent emotions really are.

Are we substituting our emotions on these women where these emotions may be absent in them?

Have you ever heard any of these women say I love my children, I want them back? Ever hear the word "love"? [/*]

As long as the psych evaluations weren't done by state employees.

Carol25

04-21-2008, 06:50 PM

Another thing I thought of. From the people who have escaped, we've heard that crying is not allowed. Not from the children and certainly not from the adults. Yet, we see the women holding their tissues, dabbing their eyes and crying for the cameras. Instructions again?
Yet, as Annie Bean has said, they never say "I want Mary back" and when showing the children's bedroom, they merely said this is the "children's" beds... not Jimmy's bed, Carolines bed or Jeff's bed. Did they know the names of the children who slept there?

Carol25

04-21-2008, 06:52 PM

Originally posted by evalles

As long as the psych evaluations weren't done by state employees. [/*]
I believe everyone has to be certified by the state, but they could use those in private practice. Deal!:D

evalles

04-21-2008, 07:01 PM

Originally posted by Details
No, parents do not have the right to raise their children any way they want without interference. They have a lot of leeway - a ton. But when it comes to abuse, absolutely parents have no rights to do that. Your children are not posessions to use and destroy as you see fit, they are people you are entrusted with, to care for. When you violate that trust, society needs to step in. And thus, as a society, we create laws to say where abuse is, and what we will do when there is evidence of abuse to protect the child.

But I see this time and time again - people who seem to think parents have a right to do whatever to their children. Just because it comes from their body, just because they created it, doesn't give them the right to destroy it, harm it, neglect it - nor to raise the child, teaching it that child molestation is a good and proper fate. [/*]

I'm talking about parents that don't abuse their children.

evalles

04-21-2008, 07:03 PM

Originally posted by Carol25

I believe everyone has to be certified by the state, but they could use those in private practice. Deal!:D [/*]

Certified by the state, yes. As long as they're not paid or chosen by the state. YAY:beer:

Details

04-21-2008, 07:30 PM

Originally posted by evalles
Is there plenty of evidence that every child of the 416 taken were abused ?
A physician that examined them testified that they were health and well taken care of. [/*]Yep, there is.

Tons of evidence. Physicians only see evidence of physical abuse - and only that right after it happens - bruises disappear. The abuse here is in raising the girls to be peodphile fodder, in raising the boys to be pedophiles - if they're lucky. At least, that's one of the abuses.

So - the evidence - first - a bunch of underage pregnant girls. That's plenty right there. That's the evidence they used to get a search warrent (which is not based on the "Sarah" phone call) to get the records, which show a huge pattern of underage births and underage marriage to older men. Then there's all the testimony in the recent Jeffs trial where he was convicted of being an accomplice to the rape of a 14 year old girl for making her have sex with her husband when she didn't want to. All of this evidence backs up the testimony of every person who has ever escaped the FLDS cult, male or female, who have described the underaged marriages (or rather - supposed marriages - not legal, no license - just a spiritual marriage), as well as the other abuse - waterboarding infants, child labor, etc.

Then there's the child labor also described by lost boys and others who have escaped FLDS - they've been cited and in trouble for it several times, and the photos say they sure aren't stopping it.: "Another FLDS-linked company, Paragon, was hit with a permanent injunction a few weeks ago by a federal judge. It was for "repeatedly and willfully" violating child labor laws. " - http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=2709009
http://www.childbrides.org/abuses_spec_Hildale_labor_violations.html

I had more - but computer went and crashed. But - yes, there is plenty of evidence to make it entirely reasonable that CPS and LE and the judge and the psychiatrist are all worried about these kids, fear they are being abused and will continue to be abused.

evalles

04-21-2008, 10:13 PM

Originally posted by Details
Yep, there is.

Tons of evidence. Physicians only see evidence of physical abuse - and only that right after it happens - bruises disappear. The abuse here is in raising the girls to be peodphile fodder, in raising the boys to be pedophiles - if they're lucky. At least, that's one of the abuses.

So - the evidence - first - a bunch of underage pregnant girls. That's plenty right there. That's the evidence they used to get a search warrent (which is not based on the "Sarah" phone call) to get the records, which show a huge pattern of underage births and underage marriage to older men. Then there's all the testimony in the recent Jeffs trial where he was convicted of being an accomplice to the rape of a 14 year old girl for making her have sex with her husband when she didn't want to. All of this evidence backs up the testimony of every person who has ever escaped the FLDS cult, male or female, who have described the underaged marriages (or rather - supposed marriages - not legal, no license - just a spiritual marriage), as well as the other abuse - waterboarding infants, child labor, etc.

Then there's the child labor also described by lost boys and others who have escaped FLDS - they've been cited and in trouble for it several times, and the photos say they sure aren't stopping it.: "Another FLDS-linked company, Paragon, was hit with a permanent injunction a few weeks ago by a federal judge. It was for "repeatedly and willfully" violating child labor laws. " - http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=2709009
http://www.childbrides.org/abuses_spec_Hildale_labor_violations.html

I had more - but computer went and crashed. But - yes, there is plenty of evidence to make it entirely reasonable that CPS and LE and the judge and the psychiatrist are all worried about these kids, fear they are being abused and will continue to be abused. [/*]

You're speaking about FLDS as a whole. I'm talking about each individual child and their mother.

Details

04-21-2008, 10:30 PM

Originally posted by evalles
You're speaking about FLDS as a whole. I'm talking about each individual child and their mother. [/*]Each individual child and mother are in the compound where these abuses happen to all of the children.

It'd be irrational to assume that one child was immune. To be removed, they simply need to be in danger. We don't have to wait until AFTER they are raped, abused, or thrown out to act, not when there's ample evidence of what has happened and continues to happen to the children. For each individual child, mother, father, etc. - that's what court is for - as the evidence develops, then it's time for the court case.

But every single mother - every last one - lived in that compound where it is routine and standard to assign the children to a marriage. That is abuse, simply living in that compound. Some of them may not have had a choice - although most went back when they had a choice to go somewhere safe or to the compound. They were victims - but they are also the abusers. They're brainwashed that treating children like this, handing them to pedophiles is just fine. So long as they believe that, will teach their children that, will let them be handed off - they are abusers.

evalles

04-21-2008, 11:01 PM

Originally posted by Details
Each individual child and mother are in the compound where these abuses happen to all of the children.

It'd be irrational to assume that one child was immune. To be removed, they simply need to be in danger. We don't have to wait until AFTER they are raped, abused, or thrown out to act, not when there's ample evidence of what has happened and continues to happen to the children. For each individual child, mother, father, etc. - that's what court is for - as the evidence develops, then it's time for the court case.

But every single mother - every last one - lived in that compound where it is routine and standard to assign the children to a marriage. That is abuse, simply living in that compound. Some of them may not have had a choice - although most went back when they had a choice to go somewhere safe or to the compound. They were victims - but they are also the abusers. They're brainwashed that treating children like this, handing them to pedophiles is just fine. So long as they believe that, will teach their children that, will let them be handed off - they are abusers. [/*]

By condemning them as a whole,it's boiling down to religion & beliefs and not specific cases of abuse.

evalles

04-22-2008, 12:27 AM

Originally posted by skytalk

Whenever possible, a child should not be separated from his mother.

If a child lives with a mother who is a prostitute, even then, unless the prostitute is exposing the child to harm by bringing johns to the house, this would not necessarily be an unsuitable parent.

If a child is living in a home with known sex offenders, then even if that child is living with his mother, his mother is not protecting him from danger. If the mother is unwilling or unable to remove the source of harm from the child, then the mother is in a weak position to defend her parental rights. JMO. [/*]

Were there registered sex offenders on the ranch?
Jeff's is in prison for his crime's. I am disturbed by all the pictures of Jeff's.
They're not known sex offenders because the media says they are. I'm waiting to see the facts before I group all these mothers together. any mother that knowingly allowed her child to be abused should be in jail with the abuser.

Details

04-22-2008, 02:18 AM

Originally posted by evalles
By condemning them as a whole,it's boiling down to religion & beliefs and not specific cases of abuse. [/*]It's about beliefs all right - the belief that it's OK to have sex with little girls.

Imagine this. There's a group of families that is insisting on living on top of a pretty predictable volcano. They and all of us know that it will erupt, and kill or maim them all, sometime between now, and 5 years from now - any time. But the parents have a religion that believes being consumed by a volcano is a divine experience. They teach their children to come running when the volcano rumbles. Teach them not to try to escape, not to resist.

Should we let them stay? After all, they're not dead yet. Or maybe we just let the women take the children.... still with their belief that it's a good and right thing to live on top of a volcano - they'll just keep teaching the kids to be perfect volcano fodder, find a new volcano to sit on.

They are treated as a whole because they are a whole. They all live in the compound ruled absolutely by someone who gives little girls to old men, ruled absolutely by someone who discards little boys when they get inconvenient, ruled absolutely by someone who tosses any dissenting father out of there, and reassigns his wives to a new man. The compound is the problem. Everyone in it is in the same situation.

lotty

04-22-2008, 02:23 AM

Originally posted by Details
It's about beliefs all right - the belief that it's OK to have sex with little girls.

Imagine this. There's a group of families that is insisting on living on top of a pretty predictable volcano. They and all of us know that it will erupt, and kill or maim them all, sometime between now, and 5 years from now - any time. But the parents have a religion that believes being consumed by a volcano is a divine experience. They teach their children to come running when the volcano rumbles. Teach them not to try to escape, not to resist.

Should we let them stay? After all, they're not dead yet. Or maybe we just let the women take the children.... still with their belief that it's a good and right thing to live on top of a volcano - they'll just keep teaching the kids to be perfect volcano fodder, find a new volcano to sit on.

They are treated as a whole because they are a whole. They all live in the compound ruled absolutely by someone who gives little girls to old men, ruled absolutely by someone who discards little boys when they get inconvenient, ruled absolutely by someone who tosses any dissenting father out of there, and reassigns his wives to a new man. The compound is the problem. Everyone in it is in the same situation. [/*]

:beer: ITA!

Rainkiss

04-22-2008, 07:08 AM

Originally posted by awareness

I didn't hear that... where did you hear that from? Have a link, just cause Im curious as to what they're looking into.

JMO/IMO [/*]

Of course:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/04/20/polygamy.sect/

Sorry, was on the front page of CNN when I posted originally, so I didn't include a link. At this point, I believe, they still haven't stated any particular violations in removing the children. But, they'll be watching. (Given, however, that these are the folks that have, in the past, defended NAMBLA and that whackjob preacher who has his church picketing military funerals and saying that soldiers are dead because the US tolerates gays, I have a few small issues with them... Here's hoping they have someone with the children's interests at heart, rather than getting headlines.)

Rainkiss

04-22-2008, 07:11 AM

Originally posted by stptheracket
If that child lives on the FLDS compound they are being abused. A few years back the leader of the cult asked that about 200 children be moved from one compound to another. The "mothers" bundled up their little ones and shipped them off with out batting an eye. [/*]

Do you have a link for that one? I'd be interested in the story. Sort of puts a kink in the "we need our children" line.

Has anybody asked them what they "need" their children FOR? Just a simple, "Why?" I'd like to hear the answer to that one... If they just need the boys for child labor, and the girls so they can be married off to the old men...

Freebird

04-22-2008, 09:06 AM

Rainkiss

04-22-2008, 09:27 AM

Originally posted by Freebird

It matters alot. [/*]

Could I ask you to please expand on your post?

Had, say, a police officer made the calls in order to have an excuse to make a raid, with no probable cause, then, absolutely, they'd be in deep water. I haven't seen the original warrant, however, at least one judge believed that the information received by the police office from the women's shelter who received the calls was probable cause to search. In the course of that search, the police and CPS found cause to remove the kids.

Poochie Pie

04-22-2008, 01:17 PM

Originally posted by Rainkiss

Could I ask you to please expand on your post?

Had, say, a police officer made the calls in order to have an excuse to make a raid, with no probable cause, then, absolutely, they'd be in deep water. I haven't seen the original warrant, however, at least one judge believed that the information received by the police office from the women's shelter who received the calls was probable cause to search. In the course of that search, the police and CPS found cause to remove the kids. [/*] Absolutely correct, Rainkiss.... "probable cause" is a very important and far reaching term... I believe we are all aware of the fact that if we are stopped by LE for a burned out tail light and our eyes are all glassy, our Vehicle WILL be searched, one way or the other.. And rightly so.. And if drugs are found inside it, we ARE going to jail... It doesn't really matter now on what terms the Compound was raided... CPS and LE DID find "probable cause" to remove those children... IMO

Poochie

Poochie Pie

04-22-2008, 01:28 PM

Originally posted by Freebird

It matters alot. [/*] Freebird... I do understand the point you are making... Being an avid "Law & Order" Fan, LOL.... Evidence CAN absolutely be thrown out by a Judge if it was obtained Illegally... No doubt about that... However, It is my honest opinion that LE, in this case, "covered their butts" very well... I also believe that they had a lot more to go on than just questionable phone calls... In this Case, I do believe that "the end WILL justify the means"... IMO

Poochie

KatyDid

04-22-2008, 01:37 PM

Originally posted by Freebird

It matters alot. [/*]

The general consensus of the TH attorneys both defense and prosecution is Texas LE did exactly what they should have done in this case. They did it by the book. LE was already building a case against persons on the compound. They did not NEED this call to the abuse hotline to proceed.

The fact a child might be in danger and might be sexually abused prompted Texas LE to take swift action to remove 'that child'. Once they entered the compound and became aware of other possible abuses, they took action on those as well.

Poochie Pie

04-22-2008, 01:43 PM

Originally posted by KatyDid

The general consensus of the TH attorneys both defense and prosecution is Texas LE did exactly what they should have done in this case. They did it by the book. LE was already building a case against persons on the compound. They did not NEED this call to the abuse hotline to proceed.

The fact a child might be in danger and might be sexually abused prompted Texas LE to take swift action to remove 'that child'. Once they entered the compound and became aware of other possible abuses, they took action on those as well. [/*] ITA..!!

Poochie

evalles

04-22-2008, 02:17 PM

That's not what the court order says.

Details

04-22-2008, 02:32 PM

What isn't what which court order says? I don't see what you're referring to, and there have been plenty of court orders in this case you might be referring to.

juliekan

04-22-2008, 02:38 PM

www.gosanangelo.com/news/2008/apr/22/san-angelo-coliseum-locked-down-as-buses-on/

San Angelo coliseum locked down and there are buses with food and water in the parking lot! Officials have no comment

evalles

04-22-2008, 02:39 PM

Originally posted by Details
What isn't what which court order says? I don't see what you're referring to, and there have been plenty of court orders in this case you might be referring to. [/*]

That the original search warrant was based on anything besides the phone calls.

evalles

04-22-2008, 02:43 PM

Details

04-22-2008, 03:07 PM

Originally posted by evalles
That the original search warrant was based on anything besides the phone calls. [/*]The original search warrent, to go find a girl named "Sarah" was based on the phone calls. That's not the search warrent the poster is talking about. While searching for Sarah, the police saw a bunch of underage pregnant girls. Based on that information, they requested and got a separate search warrent. That's the one we're talking about here. Again - just like the meth lab in the basement, when the police are on a search warrent, and see a different crime, that different crime is prosecutable.

It's easy to see which families are on top of the volcano - the compound is the volcano. Which one will be abused next - not so easy to see. And, of course, there's the continual low level abuse going on - the teaching that it's right to die in a volcano (or be married off to an old man at any age), child labor, and all of the other stuff described by so many FLDS escapees - every last one!

CPS can be wrong - anyone can be wrong. But the FLDS I know plenty about. They sure are not wrong here. And most of the time they do get it right, in my experience. I see them mostly getting it wrong by being too ready to leave a child in an abusive home, by being too willing to reunite a child with their abuser too easily, too quickly. That's where I've usually seen them make their mistakes. They do make mistakes on the other side at times, taking a child when they shouldn't, waiting too long to reunite, keeping a foster parent who should never have been a foster parent - but that's not the case here, not even remotely.

Rainkiss

04-22-2008, 03:30 PM

Originally posted by evalles

That the original search warrant was based on anything besides the phone calls. [/*]

The original CPS search was NOT based on anything but phone calls. See Poochie Pie's excellent example:

"probable cause" is a very important and far reaching term... I believe we are all aware of the fact that if we are stopped by LE for a burned out tail light and our eyes are all glassy, our Vehicle WILL be searched, one way or the other.. And rightly so.. And if drugs are found inside it, we ARE going to jail... It doesn't really matter now on what terms the Compound was raided... CPS and LE DID find "probable cause" to remove those children... IMO

In most states, and I have to assume Texas is no exception, all CPS needs is reasonable belief that a child is being abused to open an investigation. They had the phone calls... And, if the phone calls aren't enough, factor in the fact that CPS was very aware that this was an FLDS compound, and that their prophet is currently sitting in a prison cell for forcing an underage girl to marry an older man (and her cousin, if the ick factor of age isn't enough).

The first search was for a specific girl. In the course of that search, they found evidence that other children were being abused, so all of the children were removed. I can't find the link at the moment, but I believe the CPS investigation began on the 3rd, and it took four days for them to remove all of the children (even the number of which has been changing, as they're starting to figure out who's who and the age of some of the young mothers). The police had their second warrant late in the evening on the 6th, before CPS was finished, to search for the records and other evidence.

What, in your opinion, would be enough evidence for them to begin a search? Call me crazy, but if I call the police to ask for help, I'd rather they don't take the time to trace the call to come!

KatyDid

04-22-2008, 05:52 PM

Originally posted by LissaCan
I haven't posted on here in quite some time but since I have some experience with the foster care system and CPS,I thought I would throw my 2 cents in. One particular poster has obviously had a horrible experience with CPS and for that I feel really bad for her. But you can't brush the entire agency as bad though.There are good and bad in almost everything.Nothing is exempt. I have 2 cousins that are foster parents and there is nothing abusive about them. One has even adopted 2 of her foster kids. They have been thru things that would make your blood run cold.
Now my experience with CPS wasn't a walk in the park either. My son was a preemie,he only weighed 2 lbs 8 oz when he was born. I lived at the hospital with him during his time in the niccu,I couldn't leave his side.Now when he was six months old he fell off of the bed.Entirely my fault,I thought he was too small to fall and when I turned my back for a second to grab some clothes from the dresser to change him into,thats exactly what he did,fall. He had a horrible bruise on the side of his head,I didn't see it but think he hit his head on the broad wooden frame on the side of the bed.It was a waterbed frame with a regular mattress in it. I took him to the emergency room and we saw the emergency room Doctor.Right from the start he copped an attitude with me and I knew he didn't believe me.He said my son had a skull fracture.NONE of the other Doctors he called in saw a fracture. He called it in to CPS. They weren't nice either.They told me immediatly that they could take my baby away.I was living at my Dads at the time and he was livid.Started giving them a hard time. What I told my Dad is what I tell everyone.Those CPS workers don't know me.They don't know I would die for my son and almost literally did,thats another story. They see horrible abuse on a daily basis and were only doing their job. I cooperated fully. My son had to be restrained and ex rayed full body to check for old injuries,to see if I had abused him before.Did I like it,NO. I didn't take it personally.I gave them numbers to everyone ,even my ex husband.The staff at the hospital in Dallas where he was in the niccu in Dallas.Anything they asked for or wanted I gave it to them. Guess what,I was cleared.I didn't cop an "How Dare They kind of attitude"
The state of Texas,which I live in,has to investigate these abuse allegations. The Mothers are not cooperating.CPS has a duty to take these children out until they can figure it out. The so called Moms could make it shorter and easier if they would cooperate,so I feel no sympathy for them.Why all the forged documents?Birth certificates? Somethings wrong and CPS would be remiss if they didn't act on it. And men who would have sex with these children are pedophiles and last time I looked that was against the law,and any mother that would knowingly allow it doesn't need her children back. You can't harm your children and claim freedom of religion. [/*]

:beer: :beer: :beer:

evalles

04-22-2008, 08:51 PM

Originally posted by KatyDid

:beer: :beer: :beer: [/*]

Was his skull fractured ?

evalles

04-22-2008, 09:06 PM

Originally posted by Rainkiss

The original CPS search was NOT based on anything but phone calls. See Poochie Pie's excellent example:

In most states, and I have to assume Texas is no exception, all CPS needs is reasonable belief that a child is being abused to open an investigation. They had the phone calls... And, if the phone calls aren't enough, factor in the fact that CPS was very aware that this was an FLDS compound, and that their prophet is currently sitting in a prison cell for forcing an underage girl to marry an older man (and her cousin, if the ick factor of age isn't enough).

The first search was for a specific girl. In the course of that search, they found evidence that other children were being abused, so all of the children were removed. I can't find the link at the moment, but I believe the CPS investigation began on the 3rd, and it took four days for them to remove all of the children (even the number of which has been changing, as they're starting to figure out who's who and the age of some of the young mothers). The police had their second warrant late in the evening on the 6th, before CPS was finished, to search for the records and other evidence.

What, in your opinion, would be enough evidence for them to begin a search? Call me crazy, but if I call the police to ask for help, I'd rather they don't take the time to trace the call to come! [/*]

CPS conducts investigations all the time without actually removing the children. In some cases that are substantiated,(NOT SEXUAL ABUSE) maybe a bruise on the butt involving an obviously remorseful parent without previous history, the children are left in the home and services are provided to the families. I've read about a lot of cases where the mother was given a choice of leaving the abusive father, or where the father left so the kids could stay with their mother while everything was sorted out.

Rest assured though, whether these parents are guilty of abuse or not, I don't think these kids will ever be returned home.
If no abuse is found against a specific family, after the child has been with another family, CPS will argue that it would damage the child to be removed from their foster parents (especially if the want to adopt). They can say that the child has bonded w/ the foster family and and it wouldn't be in his best interests to be returned to his mother who he no longer recognizes because he wasn't allowed to see her for 6 months.
So everyone can stop worrying about the children's fates. Even the innicent mother's will lose their children.

evalles

04-22-2008, 09:09 PM

Originally posted by Details
The original search warrent, to go find a girl named "Sarah" was based on the phone calls. That's not the search warrent the poster is talking about. While searching for Sarah, the police saw a bunch of underage pregnant girls. Based on that information, they requested and got a separate search warrent. That's the one we're talking about here. Again - just like the meth lab in the basement, when the police are on a search warrent, and see a different crime, that different crime is prosecutable.

It's easy to see which families are on top of the volcano - the compound is the volcano. Which one will be abused next - not so easy to see. And, of course, there's the continual low level abuse going on - the teaching that it's right to die in a volcano (or be married off to an old man at any age), child labor, and all of the other stuff described by so many FLDS escapees - every last one!

CPS can be wrong - anyone can be wrong. But the FLDS I know plenty about. They sure are not wrong here. And most of the time they do get it right, in my experience. I see them mostly getting it wrong by being too ready to leave a child in an abusive home, by being too willing to reunite a child with their abuser too easily, too quickly. That's where I've usually seen them make their mistakes. They do make mistakes on the other side at times, taking a child when they shouldn't, waiting too long to reunite, keeping a foster parent who should never have been a foster parent - but that's not the case here, not even remotely. [/*]

I was at the high school today and I saw a bunch of underage pregnant girls.

KatyDid

04-22-2008, 09:15 PM

Regarding pregnant teens in high school:

At least in high school kids get sex education and know they have a choice. They make stupid choices knowing the consequences. They know what sex is and they know they can get pregnant.

I recall the testimony of Elissa Wall at the Warren Jeffs trial. She didn't know what sex was. Her sister had to tru and explain it to her the evening before she was forced to marry her cousin.

LLaFren

04-22-2008, 09:20 PM

Originally posted by evalles

I was at the high school today and I saw a bunch of underage pregnant girls. [/*]

My daughters best friend had a baby this past w/e, she's 16, Dads 15, to put it nicely, their protection broke. Both sets of grandparents supportive, but providing help and education as to how not for this to happen again.

her 16/him 15 w/unreliable protection (understandable)

FLDS

her (12-16)first menses/him whoever is in the best light (19-60 years old) (RAPE by law)

As foster parents, you see lots of scenerios, as the parent of six kids you see even more.

Incest and rape are the worst, especially when the child has been taught that this is normal family life.

This is one of the reasons we only take in emergancy short term care any more.

edit - :flamemad: spelling errors:D

evalles

04-22-2008, 09:25 PM

Originally posted by KatyDid
Regarding pregnant teens in high school:

At least in high school kids get sex education and know they have a choice. They make stupid choices knowing the consequences. They know what sex is and they know they can get pregnant.

I recall the testimony of Elissa Wall at the Warren Jeffs trial. She didn't know what sex was. Her sister had to tru and explain it to her the evening before she was forced to marry her cousin. [/*]

The parents don't have a choice as to when their children are introduced to sex education.
OMG, I don't want a teacher to give my 13 year old a condom.
Thank God Jeff's is in jail where he belongs.

LLaFren

04-22-2008, 09:39 PM

Um, just for clarifaction, sex ed is a state by state thing, in Florida you have to sign a consent for your child to take sex ed, it's done in gender same classes and taught by an RN. My high school freshmans take - "OMG - Mom at least you made is sound like something you might want to do at some point, but like ewww, it's totally messy!" "and do you know that's where the baby comes out?? (loudly and with feeling) EEEEWWWWWW"

LLaFren

04-22-2008, 09:44 PM

Originally posted by GollyGeeWhiz

This is entirely supposition on your part, and is born of your incredible hatred for CPS.

No matter how many times other posters here have politely, gently and respecfully tried to help you understand that THERE ARE NO INNOCENT PARENTS in the FLDS compound, you turn a blind eye and a deaf ear to their explanations.

Snipped with the utmost respect!!!

[/*]

GREAT POST

:beer: :beer:

LLaFren

04-22-2008, 10:05 PM

Originally posted by GollyGeeWhiz

Thanks. Had to do it. Was getting an ulcer. :flamemad: [/*]

I find it hard when it comes to foster parents, as one' I have found that the CPS workers and Probation Officers I know, well the majority seem to have the kids in mind.

Are there those who don't care? Sure they're are, but that's where the foster parents come in.

evalles seems to see everything with the experiences she/he has had.

As someone who has dealt with both sides, grey is a normal color in the CPS world.

evalles

04-22-2008, 10:44 PM

Originally posted by GollyGeeWhiz

This is entirely supposition on your part, and is born of your incredible hatred for CPS.

Your subject switch in your last paragraph is very revealing, IMO. You are trying to look sympathetic toward the FLDS children, but your sympathy actually lies with their mothers. And more specifically, this is really only about you and what happened to you, as a mother.

I'm not sure how you think it's in any way comparable or appropriate to compare what happened in your case to what's happening in Eldorado, but after reading dozens of your posts I've come to believe that for you, this isn't about those 437 children. Or even their mothers. This is about you, grinding your ax in post after post after post after post against CPS. This has become a platform for you to rail against CPS. Period.

No matter how many times other posters here have politely, gently and respecfully tried to help you understand that THERE ARE NO INNOCENT PARENTS in the FLDS compound, you turn a blind eye and a deaf ear to their explanations.

You insist upon complaining that the FLDS situation needs to be taken case-by-case, when the WHOLE PROBLEM is that the abuse is INSTITUTIONALIZED - every adult living in that compound is guilty of child abuse. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM. IF there is anyone over the age of 18 in that compound who has not yet either abused a child or served one up for abuse, it's simply a matter of time. The sect STAYS IN BUSINESS by abusing its children - it's not just a matter of lifestyle, it's a matter of their SURVIVAL.

I realize that you will ignore everything you choose to about my post, just as you've ignored the FACTS offered you, the LOGIC offered you in every other opposing post, but I just had to get this off my chest. [/*]

You're assuming that my post had something to do with my situation. None of that happened in my case.
My case involved my angry 16 year old, who after losing her cell phone and laptop. She decided that she wanted to live with her aunt and her family of criminals ( I'm talking assaults, drugs, weapons and even a drive-by shooting). I have no criminal record.
The worker found none of this, in spite of the fact that it was on the couunty's own website.
I made her angry, as I've obviously made you angry.
I thought that the lies and deceit that was rampant in my county office was restricted to my county office.
I joined several groups for advice and I learned that it wasn't just me. I've read hundreds of stories( my groups' numbers are in the thousands). My case was so very mild compared to most.
I haven't ignored the facts. Guilty or innocent, the powers that be went about it the wrong way. I want my tax $$( and I paid a ton) to help people, not destroy them.
It seems that some posters are very selective in choosing their facts. I posted these facts before, but nobody cared.
The fact is, the physicians testified that the children were healthy and well cared for, the CPS worker testified there were no allegations of abuse, and they psychiatrist gained his expertise of the FLDS through the media. Anywhere other than family court, and some of these msg boards, these facts would matter.
These mother's could have been given the option of leaving the sect to be with their children and therapists could be working with the mom's so they could keep their kids instead of with total strangers.
These children are hurting and confused right now. That's what matters to me. The probably feel like they're the ones being punished.

Details

04-22-2008, 10:47 PM

You've ignored every fact that contradicted the conclusion you selected. The pregnant teens, the marriage and birth records, the statements from the children who while they say they are not abused, they also say there's no age too young for marriage and sex and babies, ignored the rest of the psychiatrists report - the interviews with the children, the mothers, the parts that are not from the media, ignored that the media does report the facts - source does not deteriorate the truth.

If the kids matter to you, then every single person who has ever escaped or been kicked out of the FLDS would tell you that they are right where they should be right now. Flora Jessup has expressed her sympathy for the mothers, knowing how they feel, and said that even so - even though they don't know it, this is what they need, this is right, for right now.

evalles

04-22-2008, 10:56 PM

evalles

04-22-2008, 11:02 PM

Originally posted by Details
You've ignored every fact that contradicted the conclusion you selected. The pregnant teens, the marriage and birth records, the statements from the children who while they say they are not abused, they also say there's no age too young for marriage and sex and babies, ignored the rest of the psychiatrists report - the interviews with the children, the mothers, the parts that are not from the media, ignored that the media does report the facts - source does not deteriorate the truth.

If the kids matter to you, then every single person who has ever escaped or been kicked out of the FLDS would tell you that they are right where they should be right now. Flora Jessup has expressed her sympathy for the mothers, knowing how they feel, and said that even so - even though they don't know it, this is what they need, this is right, for right now. [/*]

The facts I posted were from court testimony.
Many have also said they should help the children and the mother's. I doubt if either were asked, they'd feel like they were being helped.
I haven't heard that the statements of former members were provided as evidence and if not it doesn't have any bearing on the state's actions.

evalles

04-22-2008, 11:14 PM

Originally posted by LLaFren

I find it hard when it comes to foster parents, as one' I have found that the CPS workers and Probation Officers I know, well the majority seem to have the kids in mind.

Are there those who don't care? Sure they're are, but that's where the foster parents come in.

evalles seems to see everything with the experiences she/he has had.

As someone who has dealt with both sides, grey is a normal color in the CPS world. [/*]

As a foster parent, you weren't exposed to all sides.
If it's a good foster parent. There was a local case recently where a CPS worker was arrested for smoking pot with the foster parents. I thought like most of you a year ago, what bothers me the most is the total devastation it can cause when families that shouldn't be separated are torn apart.

evalles

04-22-2008, 11:37 PM

Originally posted by GollyGeeWhiz

ITA. As a general rule, people go into CPS careers for a reason - and it's not to rip functioning families apart, or to give children away for the heck of it, or to punish the innocent. And they're sure not in it for the money or the glory. :rolleyes: [/*]

It makes sense, if someone chooses to go into this field that as human beings they're going to bring their own baggage and biases with them. If a worker was sexually abused, she might be quicker to decide, that a child has been sexually abused and if she's wrong, the effects could be devestating for all involved.
There have been enough abuses of the hotline by angry ex's that most workers understand that it's a common tactic in custody battles.It's all so confusing, the worker that's abused might believe it before walking in the door, while another might have seen a couple cases of spousal revenge and be inclined to leave a child that is actually being abused. It's a no win situation .
It's the same for a parent when a worker makes a wrong decision, they seem to hold tight to their original decision, regardless of any evidence the parents might provide in contradiction. I think the biggest problem is the lack of accountability, if there's a bad worker she can cause a lot of destruction and there are really no checks and balances. I was describing what happened w/ my 16 year old to a CPS worker that I met at a Tae Kwan Do meet and before I had finished, she knew what county I was in. She said the workers in my county are really good at cleaning up their messes and gave me a number to someone at the federal level.

evalles

04-22-2008, 11:44 PM

Originally posted by GollyGeeWhiz
I can't imagine how anyone who has sympathy for the FLDS children because they've been separated from their mothers and 'uncles,' doesn't have sympathy for adolescent girls who are being sent to bed with men 3 times their age as soon as they hit puberty. What, in God's name, do you suppose a little girl feels as some much older 'uncle' takes her virginity from her?

How do you suppose those adolescent and teen 'lost boys' feel as they're driven from the only home they've ever known, by their very own mothers and 'uncles,' and dumped into the world utterly unprepared?

Those are just two examples of many that are worthy of sympathy. When those things happen to those adolescent boys and girls, it signals the end of any hope they might have of a normal life.

In the case of the 400+ Eldorado children, their removal from the compound and into the care of people who are not guaranteed to use and abuse them, signals the BEGINNING of the hope that they might have a normal life. [/*]

Those children are the ones I saw being herded on a bus today.

Today, my sympathy lies with them.

lotty

04-23-2008, 02:05 AM

Originally posted by evalles

One more thing, it proves my point. You don't know me well enough to judge me. To say I'm more concerned with the mother's would be like saying you're more concerned with CPS. If you cant politely, gently and respecfully force me to agree with you, you attack my character and make these unfounded accusations against me as if they are fact.
These kids and their mother's are hurting right now, and you don't seem to care at all. Don't assume to know where my sympathy's lye. [/*]

I love a great debate, there aren't many things that will come to light as they will in a great debate. Post links from reputable papers, articles by respected journalist that say these terrible things don't happen in this religion. I beg you please do that, since I learned about this group over a decade ago, I would love to hear that these are all rumors and lies, that children have not been hurt, mentally or physically. Give me links that show CPS in Texas just runs around at will enforcing their will and not the law. I beg you to please show me proof that all of this is untrue. It is surreal sometimes for me to even think of these things. I thought this was the Polygamist Sect Kids thread. I think that is what we need to deal with, the issues at hand on this situation.

I am sorry for your pain and from your posts I can tell you are in a great deal of pain. Your experience is valuable and so is your insight, just like so many others who post here that have also had terrible tragedies in their lives. Sugar, you got your daughter back, some people don't.

Freebird

04-23-2008, 04:44 AM

Originally posted by GollyGeeWhiz
I can't imagine how anyone who has sympathy for the FLDS children because they've been separated from their mothers and 'uncles,' doesn't have sympathy for adolescent girls who are being sent to bed with men 3 times their age as soon as they hit puberty. What, in God's name, do you suppose a little girl feels as some much older 'uncle' takes her virginity from her?

How do you suppose those adolescent and teen 'lost boys' feel as they're driven from the only home they've ever known, by their very own mothers and 'uncles,' and dumped into the world utterly unprepared?

Those are just two examples of many that are worthy of sympathy. When those things happen to those adolescent boys and girls, it signals the end of any hope they might have of a normal life.

In the case of the 400+ Eldorado children, their removal from the compound and into the care of people who are not guaranteed to use and abuse them, signals the BEGINNING of the hope that they might have a normal life. [/*]

"Normal life" can mean different things to different people.To them,they probably thought they had a normal life.I don't know where it is written that "normal life" has to mean going to the mall,playing videogames,eating at McDonalds,etc...To them, "normal life" could have meant what they were doing.

Rainkiss

04-23-2008, 07:19 AM

I tried posting these links before, and they didn't work...

Link to the second warrant, which was used by law enforcement to sieze birth records, marriage records, and the rest of the evidence.

Smoking Gun: Polygamy (http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2008/0410081polygamy1.html)

The warrant was signed at approx. 10:00 PM on the 6th of April. At this time, if I have the timeline correct, CPS was still in the process of searching for children. (Here's your irony, if they'd loaded all the kids on the bus on the 3rd when CPS arrived, and let CPS search, they would have had a couple days to get rid of the evidence.)

Some interesting bits... Apparently Mr. Jessop informed law enforcement that around 250 people lived at the ranch. (With over 400 children removed, you have to wonder exactly who he believes are "people," or if lying is just a reflex.) The statement was made on the 4th, while the search was ongoing.

There are several interviews with CPS summarized in the warrant, with young girls with children... and girls who don't know their own ages (or are lying about it). One girl looked at Mr. Jessop after being asked her age. He told her "you are 18," and she repeated that as an answer to the CPS worker. (She's got a baby, and is his 4th "wife".)

Also, and this one was a little harder to find, the original warrant:

First Search Warrant: State of Texas Courts Website (http://www.courts.state.tx.us/yfzranch/pdf/Afft4SearchArrestWarrant.pdf)

Yes, it appears that this warrant was based on phone calls... Several, LONG phone calls (40 minutes to an hour), in which an accusation was made against a convicted sex offender known to be associated with the FLDS. It sounded reasonable enough to the judge to issue the warrant.

walton

04-23-2008, 08:10 AM

:seeya: Morning Rainkiss

Could you please post those links in the link thread as well?

Great find!

Rainkiss

04-23-2008, 09:05 AM

Done! Good morning, Walton, and all!

Details

04-23-2008, 03:57 PM

Originally posted by Freebird
"Normal life" can mean different things to different people.To them,they probably thought they had a normal life.I don't know where it is written that "normal life" has to mean going to the mall,playing videogames,eating at McDonalds,etc...To them, "normal life" could have meant what they were doing. [/*]To an abused and molested child, having sex every night with Daddy is a normal life. Just because they might think it's normal doesn't mean we condemn them to continue living with abuse.

evalles

04-24-2008, 12:48 AM

Originally posted by lotty

I love a great debate, there aren't many things that will come to light as they will in a great debate. Post links from reputable papers, articles by respected journalist that say these terrible things don't happen in this religion. I beg you please do that, since I learned about this group over a decade ago, I would love to hear that these are all rumors and lies, that children have not been hurt, mentally or physically. Give me links that show CPS in Texas just runs around at will enforcing their will and not the law. I beg you to please show me proof that all of this is untrue. It is surreal sometimes for me to even think of these things. I thought this was the Polygamist Sect Kids thread. I think that is what we need to deal with, the issues at hand on this situation.

I am sorry for your pain and from your posts I can tell you are in a great deal of pain. Your experience is valuable and so is your insight, just like so many others who post here that have also had terrible tragedies in their lives. Sugar, you got your daughter back, some people don't. [/*]

I would never want the life that these women have/had. Nor would I for my kids. I think this cult should be shut down.
I also think there is hope for these mothers who I also see as victims.
I think it was on NG, but the lady at the church that took the kids in( I was as shocked as she was that they used disposable diapers) said that the children didn't know what crayons were and neither did the mothers. She said she hopes that the children and the mothers get the help they need. Separating them permanently is going to enforce their idea that outsiders cant be trusted. IMO, some of the older mothers are lost causes, but I think the younger ones can be retrained and with help save themselves and their children in the process. IMO, children that aren't with their mothers seem to lack something that I can't put my finger on. I'm 37 and I lost my mom when I was 29 and I feel there's something missing. Think how empowering it would be for the mother's to break away from this cult, think how strong that mother & child bond would be knowing that she left life as she knew it for her child and think how important that child would feel knowing that their mother did it all for them.
I'm really getting delusional now, aren't I ? But it's a nice dream.
If they don't give the mother's the opportunity, they're victimizing them all over again.
These mother's could have been given the option of leaving the sect to be with their children and therapists could be working with the mom's so they could keep their kids instead of with total strangers

dicee

04-24-2008, 01:10 AM

Originally posted by Freebird

"Normal life" can mean different things to different people.To them,they probably thought they had a normal life.I don't know where it is written that "normal life" has to mean going to the mall,playing videogames,eating at McDonalds,etc...To them, "normal life" could have meant what they were doing. [/*]

There is no such thing as "normal".Each person's life is different.

Shell0724

04-24-2008, 03:11 AM

Originally posted by evalles

I would never want the life that these women have/had. Nor would I for my kids. I think this cult should be shut down.
I also think there is hope for these mothers who I also see as victims.
I think it was on NG, but the lady at the church that took the kids in( I was as shocked as she was that they used disposable diapers) said that the children didn't know what crayons were and neither did the mothers. She said she hopes that the children and the mothers get the help they need. Separating them permanently is going to enforce their idea that outsiders cant be trusted. IMO, some of the older mothers are lost causes, but I think the younger ones can be retrained and with help save themselves and their children in the process. IMO, children that aren't with their mothers seem to lack something that I can't put my finger on. I'm 37 and I lost my mom when I was 29 and I feel there's something missing. Think how empowering it would be for the mother's to break away from this cult, think how strong that mother & child bond would be knowing that she left life as she knew it for her child and think how important that child would feel knowing that their mother did it all for them.
I'm really getting delusional now, aren't I ? But it's a nice dream.
If they don't give the mother's the opportunity, they're victimizing them all over again.
These mother's could have been given the option of leaving the sect to be with their children and therapists could be working with the mom's so they could keep their kids instead of with total strangers [/*]

It would be the best solution if the mothers decided to avail themselves of help to reenter the real world, but, I think it's a lost cause. These women believe that Jeffs is a prophet, and they embrace all their whacky doctrines. It fills the void for them. They are probably not unhappy. They think this is the way to Paradise.

They may be more zealous than the men, because, the men have a sexual incentive to stay in the cult, whereas women seem to have the worst burdens, yet, stay when given the opportunity to defect. That shows me that their commitment is probably stronger than most of the men, who can come and go, and live like kings.

I was involved in an Exit Counseling ministry, (deprogramming,) and it's a tough, sometimes futile job to convince those who have sacrificed so much for a belief, to disavow their lives in that cult. If they admit to any of it being on the wrong path, they have to admit their whole life is a lie and all their suffering was in vain. They end up fighting a crusade, which ironically validates their beliefs under perceived persecution.

Details

04-24-2008, 04:01 AM

Give the mothers the opportunity - sure - but instantaneously? Don't wait for any investigation, don't give them any time to show sincerity, no time for paperwork, no time to find out if they even are the mothers - CPS is evil, so we must let the children suffer the results of our experiement in instantaneous deprogramming of a cult member?

Rainkiss

04-24-2008, 09:28 AM

Originally posted by Shell0724

It would be the best solution if the mothers decided to avail themselves of help to reenter the real world, but, I think it's a lost cause. These women believe that Jeffs is a prophet, and they embrace all their whacky doctrines. It fills the void for them. They are probably not unhappy. They think this is the way to Paradise.

They may be more zealous than the men, because, the men have a sexual incentive to stay in the cult, whereas women seem to have the worst burdens, yet, stay when given the opportunity to defect. That shows me that their commitment is probably stronger than most of the men, who can come and go, and live like kings.

I was involved in an Exit Counseling ministry, (deprogramming,) and it's a tough, sometimes futile job to convince those who have sacrificed so much for a belief, to disavow their lives in that cult. If they admit to any of it being on the wrong path, they have to admit their whole life is a lie and all their suffering was in vain. They end up fighting a crusade, which ironically validates their beliefs under perceived persecution. [/*]

Thanks for bringing your experience to the board.

Heck, just look at the number of women who aren't in cults who are abused at home, and believe it's THEIR fault that their husbands beat them. :(