Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Texas Appeals Court Says Removal of FLDS Children Was Unjustified
A Texas appeals court has ruled that the state acted improperly in removing more than 450 minors from the FLDS Church's Yearning for Zion Ranch in Eldorado and placing them in foster care. An attorney for the children's mothers told the Desert News:
CPS was not justified in removing these children. They did not provide any evidence that the children were in danger, and they acted hastily in removing the children.
The story does not include details of the decision, and the paper says "it is unclear if the children will be returned immediately to the ranch or what impact this will have on ongoing status hearings."
Here is my column arguing that the state overreached and a followup post on its attempts to retroactively justify seizing the children.
Update: CNN has more:
"The existence of the FLDS belief system as described by the department's witnesses, by itself, does not put children of FLDS parents in physical danger," the three-judge panel said.
The state's Department of Family and Protective Services "did not present any evidence of danger to the physical health or safety of any male children or any female children who had not reached puberty," the judges ruled.
According to the ruling, the mothers said the state should have proved that the children's health or safety was in danger; that there was "an urgent need for protection" that required immediately separating the children from their parents; and that the state made "reasonable efforts" to avoid removing the children.
Because no such proof was presented, the mothers argued, the District Court -- which backed the department's seizure of the children -- "was required to return the children to their parents and abused its discretion by failing to do so."
"The legislature has required that there be evidence to support a finding that there is a danger to the physical health or safety of the children in question and that the need for protection is urgent and warrants immediate removal," the ruling said.
It concluded, "Evidence that children raised in this particular environment may some day have their physical health and safety threatened is not evidence that the danger is imminent enough to warrant invoking the extreme measure of immediate removal prior to full litigation of the issue."
The full opinion is here.
|5.22.08 @ 2:31PM|#
Almost exactly what I hoped they would rule.
There are actually other grounds for kicking out the seizure of
most of the children, on both due process (c'mon, one hearing for
460 kids?) and substantive grounds (seizing 460 kids was the least
intrusive method of ensuring their safety?).
|5.22.08 @ 2:31PM|#
That was fast, CNN just put the story up. It's about time the courts stepped in and told the state "Enough!"
|5.22.08 @ 2:37PM|#
Whether or not they overreached they certainly acted hastily and
sloppily, perhaps to the point that any evidence of actual
wrongdoing will be inadmissable.
Blech.
Abdul|5.22.08 @ 2:41PM|#
Who could ever complain about the speediness and fairness of the
Texas Appellate Courts?
Well, aside from death penalty defendants.
Neu Mejican|5.22.08 @ 2:42PM|#
Evidence that the system works to correct errors.
Imagine.
Good for the system.
|5.22.08 @ 2:47PM|#
"Evidence that children raised in this particular
environment may some day have their physical health and safety
threatened is not evidence that the danger is imminent enough to
warrant invoking the extreme measure of immediate removal prior to
full litigation of the issue."
Damn those activist judges!
An Honest Question|5.22.08 @ 2:49PM|#
Is sanity coming to America's justice system? Or am I being too hopeful? I await the decision regarding the rights of DC residents to defend themselves with 19th century technology.
|5.22.08 @ 2:53PM|#
To Tonio and all other commenters with similar ideas: Get a
grip! Get over it! Just because there is a group of people who
believe and behave differently than you think they should does
not mean any child abuse is ocurring! Tonio, the
law should not be going around looking under every stone in every
house if there is anything happening that could be construed as
"wrongdoing".
RC, I agree with you. But, pray tell, why do we always have to wait
until some court sees fit to rule the obvious on narrow legal
grounds, the ruling affects only 38 out of the almost 500 kids:
This whole affair and many thousand smaller ones across the country
stinks. Another abuse of power tolerated by way too many people.
And we will see more of it when CPS and their enabler fight tooth
and nail to escape accountability. Child Protective Service, what a
sick outfit!
ktc2|5.22.08 @ 2:56PM|#
I'll believe it when all the kids are with their parents until then it's just a bump in the state's railroad job. I'm sure the state will hammer it out flat or take a detour around to complete the railroad.
kinnath|5.22.08 @ 3:01PM|#
Huh. The State is useful after all?
No, sometimes the state is self-correcting.
|5.22.08 @ 3:01PM|#
Yee Haw! It's par-tay time! Them little gals woant be able to
run fast enough when wese FLDS manly-men gets a hankerin' fur some
young love! And now wese gits our sons back to hep ketch 'em.
Y'all libbertarianses send us yore young'uns. If'n we cain't gets
the post-pubers, we'll jest have to settle for the preemies!
You Sull'um, we skull'em, if'n you gets mah drift.
Elemenope|5.22.08 @ 3:05PM|#
Well, at least as far as the law is concerned this seems the
proper thing (R C Dean pointed out the obvious absurdities), but I
won't exactly be jumping for joy.
The world does not need more Mormon fundie extremist spawn, and
there was some evidence of bona fide abuse which would be
cause for significant concern. However, the law is not a justice
machine, and even in the best of times it can only ever attempt to
equitably weigh competing interests imperfectly stated and acted
upon.
Ah well.
Elemenope|5.22.08 @ 3:07PM|#
Juts to be clear, the world would do better without fundie extremist spawn of any flavor, lest you get the impression I think LDS is somehow worse than any other sort of religious/ideological fundamentalism.
|5.22.08 @ 3:08PM|#
Is sanity coming to America's justice system? Or am I being
too hopeful?
No, one is not a trend.
Yes. But I find myself inexplicably optimistic from time to time as
well.
|5.22.08 @ 3:11PM|#
Evidence that the system works to correct errors.
"Here's a band-aid for that bullet-wound, kid. Walk it off."
I find the FLDS creepy to the extreme, but 460 kids in foster care
is not evidence the system works, just that it knows when to cut
its losses. Sort of like still going on no-knock raids, but trying
to not kill everyone in the house because of the bad
press.
|5.22.08 @ 3:14PM|#
I guess that Libertarians are for legalizing sex with
children after all.
I see this notion fills you with glee. I bet you're dreaming of a
fat boy's ass right now, aren't you...
Please stop using our comment board to exercise your sexual
fantasies.
|5.22.08 @ 3:17PM|#
Pardon me all, but I have that irresistible urge to speak out
the truth:
Elemenope, you are an A#1 idiot and a troll to boot! Go open your
own blog, idiot-proof instructions here.
You'll get rich to boot. I'll be in touch to collect my %% for
telling you the secret.
|5.22.08 @ 3:21PM|#
Martin,
Get a grip! Get over it!
Thanks for defining my needs. Always an effective communication
strategy.
Just because there is a group of people who believe and behave
differently than you think they should does not mean any child
abuse is ocurring!
Er, when did I say there was?
Tonio, the law should not be going around looking under every
stone in every house if there is anything happening that could be
construed as "wrongdoing".
And I agree with you on that. However, I don't see how you could
reasonably construe my post as saying they should.
Please read for comprehension, and unless you know the poster don't
assume anything other than the plain text of the post.
Neu Mejican|5.22.08 @ 3:24PM|#
Sugarfree,
I disagree.
Checks and balances of power were built into the system, and they
worked just as designed this time. One branch over-reached, the
other responded.
Now CPS will have to go back and do what it usually does...work
case-by-case and provide evidence of harm before removing kids.
Steve|5.22.08 @ 3:24PM|#
I guess that Libertarians are for legalizing sex with
children after all.
130 kids are under the age of 5, what is the evidence they were
being sexually abused? Some of the kids are actually adults and/or
at least above the age of consent in that state, so not illegal for
them to marry and have children. There is no evidence that any of
the hundreds of boys were being sexually abused.
So if your 3 year old son and married 17 year old daughter are
kidnapped by the state and plced into a group home, wouldn't you be
a little upset?
The cause for the raid turned out to be a hoax, the "broken bones"
that were widely reported were actually a lesser percent than the
national average for childhood injuries.
Where's the abuse?
Now if there is an 11 year old girl who is pregnant, that's cause
for concern and that should be investigated, but that not a reason
to take the other children of that girl's neighbors is it?
Unless you have evidence that a kid is being abused, it's wrong to
take them into custoday because other people's kids are being
abused, you have to have evidence specific to my kid. That's why
the appellete made it's decision and it's the right one. Take in
the victims and prosecute to abusers, don't just throw a blanket
over everyone at the ranch without evidence.
The sad thing is because they didn't follow the law, some of the
abused kids might not get the help they need and some of the
abusers might get off.
MikeB|5.22.08 @ 3:25PM|#
My God anyone see this article.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24777095
I don't have any children and never feared the CPS until reading
this
Earlier Thursday, attorneys for Child Protective Services said
15 of the 31 mothers authorities had put in foster care as children
have now been declared adults, including one who is 27.
I guess I could be forced in to an abusive foster home even at my
age of 40.
Neu Mejican|5.22.08 @ 3:33PM|#
Sugarfree,
re: I see this notion fills you with glee. I bet you're
dreaming of a fat boy's ass right now, aren't you...
I am confused. Is it preference for shaved pussy, or support for
judicial oversight that makes libertarians pedophiles?
Steve|5.22.08 @ 3:34PM|#
Earlier Thursday, attorneys for Child Protective Services
said 15 of the 31 mothers authorities had put in foster care as
children have now been declared adults, including one who is
27.
Bet she sues for false imprisonment?
|5.22.08 @ 3:34PM|#
Neu Mejican,
I think checks and balances are a great idea, and a month or so of
foster care is not going to destroy these kids lives, but checks
should not only correct mistakes but keep them from happening in
the first place. 460 kids in foster care should have never been a
reasonable option.
Just like a falsely convicted prisoner, the "check" part of the
system eventually gets him out of jail, and he might get a little
money, but I remain outraged it happened in the first place.
I hope this leads to reforms, but I won't bet the (creepy,
cult-occupied) farm.
(We really don't disagree, here it seems. I'm just angrier.)
|5.22.08 @ 3:36PM|#
Tonio, nothing personal, aimed more at any future posters. I
should have made that clear.
You didn't say the law should be looking indiscriminately. But you
did express concern that if they had found anything it would now be
inadmissible. Well, they clearly went fishing. they shouldn't have
been there to begin with.
Sugarfree:
Wouldn't you say that the the system only works if it doesn't
overreach in the first place? Nothing more and nothing less.
|5.22.08 @ 3:37PM|#
Neu Mejican,
They seem to be having a hard time making up their minds, don't
they...
Wow, I get so tired of drive-by anonymous insults.
Abdul|5.22.08 @ 3:38PM|#
Earlier Thursday, attorneys for Child Protective Services
said 15 of the 31 mothers authorities had put in foster care as
children have now been declared adults, including one who is
27.
It gets worse, of the 15 pregant mothers, it turns out 7 of them
were male.
I'm kidding, but at this rate, I might only be predicting.
ktc2|5.22.08 @ 3:39PM|#
Hmmmm....I like shaved pussy AND judical oversight. Somebody better call the cops!
|5.22.08 @ 3:41PM|#
Wouldn't you say that the the system only works if it
doesn't overreach in the first place? Nothing more and nothing
less.
I won't say it only works in that context, but I will say it works
best when it doesn't pee on the floor without a rolled newspaper to
the nose. Maybe an attitude of "what's best for this situation?"
rather than "what can we get away with?" But that would require
someone to have a little humility, wouldn't it?
MikeB|5.22.08 @ 3:47PM|#
I may be new here, but I submit Abdul as the thread winner
It gets worse, of the 15 pregant mothers, it turns out 7 of
them were male.
|5.22.08 @ 3:48PM|#
They sure don't have any humility. They are criminally
negligent. Next they will testify in court that it is only natural
and easy to mistake a 27 year-old for underage. CPS: a bunch of
lying, power-drunk, incompetent bunch of morons.
We can't even get our police and prosecutors in check, it will be a
long time before CPS will get reined in. Too many people just seem
to lose any sense of perspective when children are involved. One
could think it is 1608.
Elemenope|5.22.08 @ 3:50PM|#
Pardon me all, but I have that irresistible urge to speak
out the truth:
Hilarity inevitably follows from any sentence that ends that
way.
Elemenope, you are an A#1 idiot and a troll to boot!
I wasn't exactly pining for your esteem, but I hesitantly ask, what
part of my post was a troll: the part where I begrudgingly note
that the law was functioning as it should, though it may have
negative consequences for some kids, or the part where I shit all
over ideological extremism?
Go open your own blog, idiot-proof instructions here. You'll
get rich to boot. I'll be in touch to collect my %% for telling you
the secret.
No thanks, too busy/lazy.
Neu Mejican|5.22.08 @ 3:55PM|#
I won't say it only works in that context, but I will say it
works best when it doesn't pee on the floor without a rolled
newspaper to the nose. Maybe an attitude of "what's best for this
situation?" rather than "what can we get away with?" But that would
require someone to have a little humility, wouldn't it?
It is that occasional newspaper to the nose that restrains action
the next time. Unfortunately that lesson can only be learned in the
context of a puddle of piss on the floor.
FWIW, I believe the problem in this situation was actually based on
"what's best for this situation?" rather than "What can we get away
with?" Those rules about what you can and can't get away with are
designed to restrain context dependent decisions...this is both
their strength and their weakness.
Steve|5.22.08 @ 3:56PM|#
Juts to be clear, the world would do better without fundie
extremist spawn of any flavor, lest you get the impression I think
LDS is somehow worse than any other sort of religious/ideological
fundamentalism.
They have their place, it's just that sometimes they forget what
their place is. It's sort of like how we need insanity to order to
define insanity, i would never want to be rid of fundies, they are
the warning signs to tell the rest of us how far is too
far....
my personal opinion of course.
|5.22.08 @ 4:00PM|#
Beg your pardon Elemenope, I misjudged you. I just thought that
calling several hundred distressed kids "Mormon fundie extremist
spawn" was idiotic.
I now see that you didn't get my drift, my bad. No point in again
trying to enlighten you. Sadly, lights are out.
|5.22.08 @ 4:05PM|#
@2:53 PM: To Tonio and all other commenters with similar
ideas[...]
@3:36 PM: Tonio, nothing personal, aimed more at any future
posters.
Sounds pretty personal to me when you start your post with my name
and use me as an exemplar of a class. Your backpeddling and denial
of responsibility is worthy of Sen. Clinton.
[T]hey shouldn't have been there to begin with.
Regardless of whether they should have been, they were. I can't
change that reality. My comments addressed the current situation,
not what (arguably) should have been.
|5.22.08 @ 4:07PM|#
The world does not need more Mormon fundie extremist
spawn
Glad you finally got that appointment as "sole judge of who is fit
to reproduce", LMNOP. I'm sure you'll use those new powers
fairly.
/sarcasm
Steve|5.22.08 @ 4:07PM|#
Any one else dying to hear what Nancy Grace will say about the latest developement? lol
Dello|5.22.08 @ 4:12PM|#
Neu,
"I am confused. Is it preference for shaved pussy, or support for
judicial oversight that makes libertarians pedophiles?"
Shaved pussy would indicate the (prior) presence of pubic hair. WAY
too old for my tastes....
|5.22.08 @ 4:12PM|#
Martin,
Elemenope, you are an A#1 idiot and a troll to boot!
Er, Martin, Elemenope is a thoughtful and regular poster here. You,
not so much on either count. If you want the respect of the
community, you'd do well to emulate Elemenope.
Fluffy|5.22.08 @ 4:16PM|#
a month or so of foster care is not going to destroy these
kids lives
A single day of foster care would have destroyed my life, if it was
against my will.
Because I would have burned the place down.
Off to reform school for Fluffy.
|5.22.08 @ 4:22PM|#
I am confused. Is it preference for shaved pussy, or support
for judicial oversight that makes libertarians
pedophiles?
The preference for judicial oversight, for sure! [rimshot]
Seriously, shaved pubes on women have often been criticized by the
screechier feminists as evidence of crypto-pedophilia. Shaved pubes
and large breasts are also part of the mommy fetish since women who
have recently given birth have those characteristics.
|5.22.08 @ 4:26PM|#
Juts to be clear, the world would do better without fundie
extremist spawn of any flavor, lest you get the impression I think
LDS is somehow worse than any other sort of religious/ideological
fundamentalism.
The solution to bad spawn is more spawn, my friend. Libertarians
who use condoms and birth control, or masturbate to pictures of the
Lobster Girl, have no standing to criticize those who do
reproduce.
|5.22.08 @ 4:28PM|#
The world does not need more Mormon fundie extremist spawn, and there was some evidence of bona fide abuse which would be cause for significant concern.
If there is evidence of abuse, why have no charges been filed or
arrests made?
|5.22.08 @ 4:31PM|#
Shaved pubes and large breasts are also part of the mommy
fetish since women who have recently given birth have those
characteristics.
So why aren't more guys attracted to fat women, since that's also a
characteristic of women who've recently given birth?
I suspect the breast and hip things have more to do with the
advantage of having a mate who could more easily give birth and
produce enough milk for the offspring to survive.
|5.22.08 @ 4:31PM|#
"what's best for this situation?" rather than "What can we
get away with?"
Well of course. It's always about Best Intentions.
I do hope that this is only the first step in correcting this
wrong. Some serious consequences are in order.
|5.22.08 @ 4:32PM|#
I think checks and balances are a great idea, and a month or
so of foster care is not going to destroy these kids lives, but
checks should not only correct mistakes but keep them from
happening in the first place. 460 kids in foster care should have
never been a reasonable option.
Don't be a bit surprised if allegations of foster care abuse comes
out of this chinese fuck story. You may ask "Why would J sub D say
that?"
I'm TLTG, but you can start your own research here.
It's for the children. The road to hell ...
Please don't misunderstand me. I'm well aware that abusive,
neglectful and unfit parents are out there. I readily concede that
state intervention is sometimes required. My position is that the
CPS system is out of control with NO
accountability for the state actors. I'm starting to have doubts
that they prevent more harm than they cause.
I wish foster care abuses had it's own Radley Balko.
|5.22.08 @ 4:33PM|#
The solution to bad spawn is more spawn, my
friend.
To defeat the enemy, you must become the enemy.
|5.22.08 @ 4:37PM|#
All right Tonio, I guess I hurt your feelings.
I submit that you don't know a damn thing about me except one for
sure: I have never called anybody "Mormon fundie extremist spawn".
Especially not some child. I would be ashamed if I did!
And you suggest I should emulate someone who did just that? Speaks
volumes about you, but not me.
Steve|5.22.08 @ 4:38PM|#
If there is evidence of abuse, why have no charges been
filed or arrests made?
BINGO!
15 women (not underage girls)were taken into custody by the State
simply because they looked youngish and had or were going to have
children. no allegations of abuse were made against them or their
spouses.
How any libertarian could justify rounding up an entire communities
wives mothers and children (boys and girls) based on a phone call
made by one girl (who turned aout to be a hoaxer) about one abuser
(a husband who it turns out doesn't exist) i don't
understand.
When they round up your kids, they'll have a good enough excuse for
the press as well.
"well there were anonymous allegations made a cousin of the mayor's
wife's neighbor, who incidentally we can not produce at the moment,
that there might have been a 13 year old smoking a joint, so of
course we quarantined the entire town and took everyone's DNA in
for analysis...."
|5.22.08 @ 4:39PM|#
I have never called anybody "Mormon fundie extremist
spawn"
Everyone has their failings.
Zeb|5.22.08 @ 4:44PM|#
A month or so in foster care is sure as hell not going to help anyone who is not in danger of being beaten, raped or killed.
MikeB|5.22.08 @ 4:48PM|#
Based on the fact that they are holding 460 hostages, a no-knock warrant at the CPS HQ in Austin would be appropriate.
MikeB|5.22.08 @ 4:52PM|#
I am very curious about how the teenage children were held? In
Cells?
I am certain that if this happened to me as a teenager, I would
have escaped, made a call, got money wired to me, and took a bus to
anout-of-state relative's house.
Zeb|5.22.08 @ 4:54PM|#
"Mormon Fundie Extremist Spawn" may not be the most delicate way to describe these children, but it is pretty damn accurate. Lets see, the name of their church justifies "Mormon fundie" (Fundamentalist is the first word in its name). They are among the more extreme Mormon groups, so "extremist" seem fair enough. "Spawn" makes me thing of fish more than Mormon fundie extremists, but is technically an accurate way to describe these children.
|5.22.08 @ 4:55PM|#
A month or so in foster care is sure as hell not going to
help anyone who is not in danger of being beaten, raped or
killed.
On the other hand it might help them get beaten, raped or
killed.
|5.22.08 @ 5:00PM|#
I'm amazed the court didn't mention something about the first and fourteenth amendments. The state was essentially claiming that it could deprive people of legal custody because of religious beliefs.
|5.22.08 @ 5:01PM|#
And just theoretically, could the state pass a law taking all children from a certain religion to crush it?
|5.22.08 @ 5:03PM|#
Martin, Martin, Martin,
I submit that you don't know a damn thing about me except one
for sure: I have never called anybody "Mormon fundie extremist
spawn".
Sorry, but I don't actually know that about you, only that you
haven't posted that in this thread using the name Martin. Strict
rules of evidence, and all.
I would be ashamed if I did!
And you suggest I should emulate someone who did just that? Speaks
volumes about you, but not me.
Duly noted. [yawn]
kinnath|5.22.08 @ 5:05PM|#
I have never called anybody "Mormon fundie extremist spawn".
Especially not some child
Could have been written more clearly, but I would have interpreted
this as:
spawn of extremist, fundamentalist Mormans
The adjectives modify Mormans, not spawn.
Steven Rinehart|5.22.08 @ 5:55PM|#
Unbelievable! There are actually non-bigotted, honest judges on the Texas appelate court! Unforntuately, there don't appear to be on the trial level or in CPS.
David Friedman|5.22.08 @ 5:59PM|#
A poster writes: "and there was some evidence of bona fide abuse
which would be cause for significant concern."
What evidence?
For those who have not been following the case:
1. The 16 year old abused FLDS wife who made the original phone
call turns out to be a 33 year old Colorado woman with no
connection to the FLDS outsider her own imagination and a history
of bogus phone calls.
2. The Child Protective Service asserted that out of 53 women age
14-17, 32 were pregnant or mothers. According to the court, the
actual number is 5. Given what is known about their ages, it is
entirely possible that all five were legally married when they
conceived.
3. The Child Protection Service asserted that X-ray's of fractures
provided evidence of abuse. The number of children with fractures
was slightly under ten percent of the total number in their
custody--almost certainly below the average fraction of children to
have at some point broken a bone.
Is it really credible that, if a quarter of the allegations made
against the FLDS were true, the CPS, with all of the children in
their custody for six weeks, wouldn't have been able to find at
least a little evidence to support them?
When the case started I assumed that the FLDS really did engage in
a fair amount of illegal sex with underage girls. On the evidence
so far available, there is no reason to think it is any more common
than with people who aren't FLDS.
Elemenope|5.22.08 @ 6:24PM|#
I find it utterly hilarious that half this thread has been spent
by people trying to parse my "Mormon fundie extremist spawn" so as
to determine whether it is offensive, whether it should be
offensive, and whether anyone should give a damn one way or the
other.
Just to make doubly, espeically, completely clear, I have no huge
problem with the Church of LDS. I *do* have a problem with
extremism of most sorts. When a child is brought up in a secluded
compound and taught nothing but an extreme and rarefied brand of
what their parents believe, *and nothing else*, I do not believe it
to be unfair to call them "spawn"; that after all is clearly what
their parents intend them to be (else, why seclude them?).
Sure, it was insensitive, but then again (as many around here have
noted) people are generally oversensitive when it comes to calling
a thing what it is, and so I see no need to massage that which is
repugnant to me to soothe those who identify with it and so might
take offense.
p.s. Reinmoose, I never have, and hopefully never will have any
sort of power over who can procreate, but I wasn't making a
normative statement in any case, only an observation. That is, I
wasn't saying "someone ought to stop those Mormons from breeding",
only that the world did not *need* any more right-field fundies,
e.g. the world would not be *improved* by their introduction. I am
certainly entitled to an opinion about the state of the world and
what may or may not improve its condition over the long run, aren't
I? :)
|5.22.08 @ 6:36PM|#
But I find myself inexplicably optimistic from time to time
as well.
Just wait. Radley will take care of that for ya.
Just talked to one of the lawyers involved in this - he said that
all the hearings scheduled for the next couple of weeks have been
cancelled. He wasn't sure yet what was going to be done in terms of
unwinding some or all of this mess.
I am very curious about how the teenage children were held? In
Cells?
Nope. In barracks at Fort Concho, a very scenic frontier fort on
the banks of the Concho River in downtown San Angelo.
Elemenope|5.22.08 @ 6:49PM|#
Just wait. Radley will take care of that for ya.
Yeah! I just can't wait for my optimism to be kicked in the teeth
again. What will it be this time? Drug War? Police harassment? It's
hard to predict in this day and age.
|5.22.08 @ 7:34PM|#
Neu,
Evidence that the system works to correct errors.
Your concept of "error" is creepy, to say the least. This was a
knowingly and blatant violation of people's rights, from the
beginning. Such "errors" would not be committed had the CPS
officials at least a modicum of decency and knowledge of
Constitutional law. Instead they acted the same way as thugs, with
tactics akin to the Geheime Staatspolizei.
|5.22.08 @ 7:42PM|#
How any libertarian could justify rounding up an entire
communities wives mothers and children (boys and girls) based on a
phone call made by one girl (who turned aout to be a hoaxer) about
one abuser (a husband who it turns out doesn't exist) i don't
understand.
I am a Libertarian, and I did not justify it from the very
beginning, at all. There was certainly something odd about the
massive taking of children, the way the investigation was done and
how police made use of military tactics and quasi-military vehicles
to enter the "compound" (or rather, the measly ranch). Looked
immediately like typical bureaucratic overreaction.
Neu Mejican|5.22.08 @ 8:26PM|#
Francisco Torres,
Your concept of "error" is creepy, to say the least. This was a
knowingly and blatant violation of people's rights, from the
beginning.
Your concept of the meaning of the word "error" seems shaky.
Let's go with American Heritage:
er·ror Audio Help (ěr'ər) Pronunciation Key
n.
1. An act, assertion, or belief that unintentionally deviates from
what is correct, right, or true.
2. The condition of having incorrect or false knowledge.
3. The act or an instance of deviating from an accepted code of
behavior.
4. A mistake....
You may think that the word "error" is restricted to 1 & 2
above, but I was thinking more along the lines of 3 & 4.
Neu Mejican|5.22.08 @ 8:30PM|#
FWIW,
I am sure RC Dean could school Francisco on the various legal
"errors" and might be able to give a more precise name to the error
committed here.
Manifest error?
Plain error?
I ain't no lawyer, so I ain't sure.
Neu Mejican|5.22.08 @ 8:37PM|#
Francisco
Such "errors" would not be committed had the CPS officials at
least a modicum of decency and knowledge of Constitutional
law.
You are speaking as if the CPS was operationally in charge of the
raid. They were not the ones with the guns. The execution of the
raid was a police operation. CPS may have set the ball rolling, but
there were many in law enforcement that needed to cooperate for
this to occur in the way that it occurred. I am sure somewhere
along the way someone with knowledge of constitutional law was
involved.
This case highlights the need for disinterested oversight, checks
and balances, and robust and independent judicial review...the fact
that all of those were built into the system, and played a role in
the current outcome show the difference between the system in place
in Texas and the "Geheime Staatspolizei."
Looked immediately like typical bureaucratic
overreaction.
overreaction, sure, but typical, nah...I would say this was
atypical.
|5.22.08 @ 11:35PM|#
I am sure RC Dean could school Francisco on the various
legal "errors" and might be able to give a more precise name to the
error committed here.
Glad to oblige:
Click
and
Learn!
The technical legal term for the type of error committed by CPS and
the local courts is "clusterfuck", BTW.
UM|5.23.08 @ 9:29AM|#
How does one aim turds at oneself by the way, or do you just get them all over your hands while trying to throw them at others?
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245