Nevada Father Submits DNA, Lashes Out At Raid

[High Plains]

Source: Salt Lake Tribune

ELDORADO, Texas - A 32-year-old Nevada man drove 1,200 miles with a photo album of his children and said he would provide a DNA sample to Texas authorities Tuesday to prove paternity and get his three sons out of state custody.

David J. Williams, a former member of the FLDS polygamous sect, whose ranch was raided by authorities earlier this month, called the siege "an injustice" perpetrated by "unhonorable bastards."

The boys - Parley, 9; Jacob, 7; and Teral, 5 - were among the 437 children rounded up after a Texas judge signed an order saying the children were exposed to a lifestyle that made them either perpetrators or victims of abuse.

The raid was sparked by calls to a domestic violence shelter by a teen who said she was being abused at the ranch. Investigators have not located the girl and are investigating whether the calls were a hoax. Meanwhile, authorities launched an effort to conduct DNA screenings of children, mothers and fathers to determine family ties. Parents who do not provide DNA samples risk being held in contempt of court, said Janice Rolfe, a spokeswoman for the Texas Attorney General's Office.

Read more: http://www.sltrib.com/ci_9023236

---

I saw this guy on CBS's morning news show today. He's not too happy having his kids stolen by the state.

By the way, what ever happened to the original alleged complainant?

All you folks in favor of anonymous allegations triggering raids like this, please provide your real names and home addresses so you can get a taste of what it's like. I'm sure you have nothing to hide.

[Warpy]

1. How happy was he when Warren Jeffs stole his kids

and moved them to Texas? What did he do to get them back THEN?

Pardon me if I shed few tears for this man over his paternal rights.

[pnwmom]

11. I suspect he's speaking out now because

he's hoping that if he's a good little boy, Jeffs might allow him to come back into the fold.

[musette_sf]

25. agreed, i was thinking that yesterday

when i heard about this guy. oh pleeeeeeez Prophet, let me come back!

[LisaL]

100. If it was so bad why would people want back in?

[pnwmom]

115. He didn't leave voluntarily. He was kicked out, to "repent" outside.

Why would he want to go back in? He's got dozens or maybe hundreds of relatives there that he's been cut off from. That's plenty of reason.

[saigon68]

118. Maybe Jeffs will let him "Date" a few 13 year old girls

[JerseygirlCT]

43. Exactly. If he wants his kids so badly, what the hell were they doing there? nt

[CoffeeCat]

2. These children should have been taken away...

Law enforcement found documentation that revealed several underage girls had been
impregnated--and had children. It was reported that one was as young as 13.

The law is the law.

These people are hiding behind religion in order to perpetuate the molestation of children
and the physical and emotional abuse of women and children.

Just because you want to sequester yourself in a secret society--and break the law--doesn't
mean you are above reproach.

The police are correct in getting the DNA, and determining which men sexually abused and
impregnated underage girls.

It is justice--to sort this out.

It would be immoral, unjust and A CRIME to do nothing.

[Speaker]

17. So........

Law enforcement found documentation that revealed several underage girls had been
impregnated--and had children. It was reported that one was as young as 13.


If someone in your church abuses their children, the government should be allowed to take your children, and all of your fellow parishioner's children, even absent evidence they have been abused? You should be punished because your neighbor committed a crime? Your children should be sent off to mainstream protestant group homes to be brainwashed into a different religion that is more acceptable to the majority? If this is what democrats believe, god save our republic.


Apparently, the Talibornagain ain't all Republican.


Edit: formatting.

[CoffeeCat]

41. You're completely deluded...

Good luck with that.

[uppityperson]

69. Poor comparison. Try this one.

Sorry, the 2 don't compare. My church is completely different than this community is.

Here is a more valid comparison. If someone in your household abuses their children, the government is allowed to take all the children there, even absent evidence they have been abused.

[Richard Steele]

98. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about, and thus appear foolish. nm

[kestrel91316]

3. As you WELL KNOW and have been told ad nauseum,

the original complainant became MOOT as soon as the officers on the scene saw evidence of abuse with their own eyes.

How long have you been a member of FLDS?

[CoffeeCat]

7. No kidding....who would EVER support these pedophiles?

Law enforcement clearly had probable cause when they went in. A minor
called the police and revealed that she had been abused.

When the police walked onto the campus, they saw underage pregnant girls.

They then began an investigation.

The police followed the letter of the law. They responded to someone reporting
a crime.

If a little girl, living in a suburban home, called the police and told them she
was being abused---would it be wrong for the police to show up and investigate?

The OP needs to stop his inane enabling of pedophiles. Just because they live
in their own community, and just because they don't like it when the outside world
breaks up their little molestation nest--is no reason to turn on the waterworks for
these criminals who use religion to molest and abuse women and children.

Glad to see others are tuned into reality on this one.

[High Plains]

24. Do you even know what a pedophile is?

Just try googling it for the standard definitions. I've posted them before.

Despite your hyperventilating emotionalism, pedophilia is not adults having sex with teenagers.

Criticize them for what the actually did, don't sling shit.

[CoffeeCat]

42. LOL!!

You want to split hairs when it comes to children being raped?

Ok, fine then...they're not pedophiles...they're child rapists.

There, that better?

You're a piece of work.

[kestrel91316]

47. I like how the FLDS and their apologist sockpuppets like to claim,

too, that it's all perfectly legal for those men to have sex with the girls because of the age of consent for MARRIAGE is 16 - forgetting that, because polygamy is illegal, none of those girls (or only a tiny percentage) are legally married. The rest are just minors being raped by adults.

Of course they all claim they're REALLY NOT MARRIED and are all "single" mothers when it comes time to collect welfare.

So which is it, guys? Are they married, or are they not? Either way, FLDS is totally screwed.

[High Plains]

52. I like how the witchburners are so quick to resort to name-calling.

Yes, polygamy is illegal.

Yes, sex with teens under the age of consent is illegal.

If I were king of the world, I'd tell these folks to wait until the teens are old enough to marry, and if they want to do polygamy, polyandy, or whatever, I wouldn't persecute them.

[kestrel91316]

65. Welfare fraud is illegal, too. These are good, obedient little

FLDS girls getting pregnant, supposedly as a result of "marital" sex with somebody. How is it, then, that they can claim the father is unknown and get welfare benefits? If they told the truth about the fathers, the state would be collecting child support from THEM instead of the taxpayers.

And don't try to tell me all those girls are actually promiscuous sluts so they don't KNOW who the fathers are.......

[kestrel91316]

66. If those Viagra addicts hadn't messed with underage girls I wouldn't personally

give a damn HOW many women shared their beds.

Well, there is the welfare fraud issue and the (male) child abandonment issue and the infant torture issue - they need to lay off ALL this creepy, abusive crap.

[LeFleur1]

79. And Then...

...would you also allow them to be kept there against their will as many are?
They have to sneak away. They know nothing of the outside world and have been brainwashed since birth, yet some want to get away and take dangerous chances to escape.

[High Plains]

51. No, that's just as stupid and inflammatory.

They're not "children," they are post-pubescent teenagers.

Are they being "raped"? That conjures up images of violent sexual assault. I don't know that that is the case. Do they go willingly to the marriage bed because that's what they've been taught to do, or are they coerced? I don't know.

One could argue that it is rape because no teenager can give consent to sex, but I don't buy that argument. It flies in the face of reality--teens have sex all the time (although, granted, not usually with older men) and it infantilizes teenagers. (Although again, one could argue that the whole FLDS experience also infantilizes them).

I find it odd that people think teens are are too childish to consent to sex, but have no problem charging them as adults if they commit a crime, but that's another topic...

Anyway, instead of the emotionalized "children being raped" language, we would be better served by "post-pubescent teens submitting to arranged marriages."

And you're a piece of work, too.

[kestrel91316]

67. What part of "statutory rape" is so difficult for you to understand, you

DISGUSTING freak??

[uppityperson]

72. They are being raped. Statutory rape is illegal, whether you believe in it or not.

No. Statutory rape. That is what is going on and not the euphemism "post-pubescent teens submitting to arranged marriages"

[CoffeeCat]

82. It's illegal for a grown, adult man...

...to have sex with a teenager.

It's called rape.

It's a crime.

[uppityperson]

70. OK. Let's call it statutory rape and rapists. That's more accurate.

Who would support rapists?

[High Plains]

81. "Statutory rape" and "statutory rapists" would be even more accurate.

Rape is sexual contact against one's will.

Statutory rape is a status crime, not necessarily against one's will.

You wouldn't suggest that being violently sexually assaulted or even coerced is the same thing as being a 16-year-old Texas girl having sex with her 19-year-boyfriend, would you?

Granted, in the FLDS case, it's not the teenage love affair. I recognize those differences, but I will continue to argue for precision in describing what happens in the face of the onslaught of the screamers.

[uppityperson]

85. Stat rape and rape are both crimes, can be different, can be combined

Violence disguised as sex is rape. It can be between those whose age difference puts it into the "statutory rape" designation, or it can be between people of the same age into the "rape" designation.

You wouldn't suggest that an 8 yr old coerced into sex by her father is the same as a 16 yr old having consensual sex with her 19 yr old boyfriend, would you?

I agree though that calling it pedophilia is the wrong designation. Statutory rape is the right one.

[High Plains]

87. Right. You can be an adult raping an underage person.

That would be both rape and statutory rape.

And no, I wouldn't suggest that your two examples are the same thing.

[uppityperson]

88. Thank you.

What happens between consensual adults is up to them.

[High Plains]

16. Born in Salt Lake City, but never a Mormon.

Heard rumors of polygamists when I was growing up, including one that there were 20,000 of them in the Salt Lake valley. I have no idea if that's true, though.

I'm sorry, I just can't agree with taking every kid in that place because of allegations some teenage girls were married.

I also have a healthy skepticism about Texas CPS and their constant leaks of information designed to make them look good and justify their actions.

How long have you been a "survivor" of FLDS? You really ought to try to get out of the gutter with your insults and insinuations. We can argue like grown-ups. Or not.

[kestrel91316]

48. Texas CFPS isn't "leaking" info, lol. They are issuing press releases

and testifying in open court.

But you go right ahead and keep trying to defend your child rapist buddies........

[High Plains]

59. I guess it was DPS who leaked the "cyanide poisoning document,"

for example.

I don't know who you think my buddies are. I've never even met an FLDS member as far as I know. You're not serving your cause by these repeated slanders, but I'm sure you're too insane with outrage to stop.

Edit: changed "looked" to "leaked" in the subject line.

[juajen]

4. Surely, you jest!

NT and none needed.

[izquierdista]

5. Hoax call

More like a hoax girl. The local authorities knew exactly what was going on at 'the ranch' and wanted to put a stop to it. Lacking any sort of 4th amendment justification, they dreamed up an abuse call to give them carte blanche. They were right. In all the indignation about what was going on there, nobody has stopped to ask whether the people's constitutional rights were violated. It will make it all that easier next time when they want to raid someone else.

When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

[pnwmom]

8. The police didn't dream up an abuse call. The calls were made,

and it has still not been determined whether the original call to Texas was real. It certainly is possible that it was real, since other girls at the ranch have said they had seen the girl the previous week. In other words, it is possible that the 33 year old got only got involved after the fact, making copycat calls.

But that doesn't really matter. The point is that the CPS and the police didn't cause the call to come in, and they were required to investigate it.

[High Plains]

18. Well, that's kind of the point I was making about anonymous

denunciations and using them as a basis for actions like this.

Yes, I'm aware they developed additional "evidence" once they went inside. But for me, the fact that there may be evidence of teenagers having sex and getting pregnant does not justify taking every kid out of that place.

[LanternWaste]

63. It is a legal obligation the state has

"does not justify taking every kid out of that place."

It is a legal obligation the state has to remove and an all children from an environment suspected of being abusive. So yes-- it does justify taking them all out of the compound.

[pnwmom]

122. The FLDSers were refusing to name themselves, their spouses, and

and their children -- and to name the men who had impregnated the young girls.

I think if they had been cooperative from the beginning things may have been handled very differently. As it was, the CPS was unable to determine which child belonged to which family, and who was responsible for the pregnancies.

[LisaL]

102. They've linked the phone numbers to their person of interest.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/04/23/polygamy.arrest/index.html
Girls at the ranch saying they've seen the girl was a hearsay testimony from the CPS worker, I believe.

[raebrek]

112. And another link

http://www.sltrib.com/polygamy/ci_8981951

Raebrek!!!

[CoffeeCat]

10. You have absolutely no proof of what you are saying...

You are speculating.

Why are you making the police out to be the bad guys in this situation--and stating
scenarios for which you have no proof?

[High Plains]

26. That's right, I said I was speculating. That's all any of us can do

until and unless they produce that original complainant.

As for speculation, I've seen an awful lot of around this issue. I've seen the FLDS accused of everything but fucking cows. Some of it may even be turn out to be true, but right now it's just the lynch mob slinging shit.

[High Plains]

28. If Texas CPS wants to go after pregnant teenage girls...

They don't need phoned in complaints. All they have to do is drive down the street in any town in Texas. There's about 80,000 of them a year.

[LanternWaste]

56. Yet a complaint needs to be lodged prior to an investigation taking place.

Yet a complaint needs to be lodged prior to an investigation taking place.

[High Plains]

84. So you're driving along in the CPSmobile and see a pregant

11-year-old walking down the street and you do nothing? Direct observation doesn't count, but unknown phone calls do?

Interesting.

[LanternWaste]

116. When did I see a pregnant 11 year old?

When did I see a pregnant 11 year old and make a decision to make an unknown phone call? Or are you reduced to hypothetical again...? (I'm betting five bucks you're reduced to hypothetical...)

On edit-- CPSMobile-- you're reaching for those one-liners again, too.

Hypothetical s, one liners and bumper sticker philosophies-- you've quite the imagination. Not grounded in the reality of the here and now, but still... quite an imagination.

I'll have to remember that-- CPS Mobile. Very clever.... :eyes:

[pnwmom]

124. And every single one of them that involved statutory or criminal rape -- as

these cases did -- should be prosecuted.

[Uncle Joe]

39. I don't know about that, the hamburger from last night's dinner had a funny aftertaste.

:evilgrin:

[CoffeeCat]

44. Well, normal people....

...are outraged when law enforcement finds several pregnant teenagers, who have been
sexually abused by middle-aged men.

Why is your reasoning so stunted?

You appear to have more outrage for DUers who express outrage against child rapists---than you
do for the child rapists.

Why is that?

Normal people recoil when it is discovered that children have been sexually abused by serial
child rapists.

Your reaction is a bit off. No...make that... A LOT off.

[LanternWaste]

54. Kind of like...

Kind of like...

"I've seen CPS accused of everything but fucking cows. Some of it may even be turn out to be true, but right now it's just the you slinging shit."

Six of one, half a dozen of the other, bub.

[dmallind]

12. That has to be a Godwin corollary

There is nothing wrong with communists (other than a limited view of economics maybe). So there is no reason to "come for" communists.

There is nothing wrong with social democrats so there is no reason to "come for" social democrats.

There is nothing wrong with trade unionists (other than occasioanlly short-sighted demands) so there is no reason to "come for" trade unionists.

There is nothing with Jews so there is no reason to "come for" Jews.

There most definitely IS something wrong with pedophile predators even hiding behind religion, so they damn well need to be "come for" and hauled away and prosecuted whenever thay can be found.

[StudentThinker]

23. yes

dmallind you are correct about the quote. It is from Martin Niemöller, a pastor in Germany during the Third Reich. It would help, izquierdista, if you gave the attribution.

Generally I don't mind Godwinisms, but I do find this one a bit extreme. Intervention like this when child abuse is the issue is not the same as a Nazi raid - even if the response MAY have been (I do not say was or was not) extreme. While I don't hold with raids rounding up hundreds of children on the basis of anonymous calls, I also don't hold with religion being used as an excuse to molest them and it seems clear that abuse did occur in some cases. I haven't read much about this story so I won't comment further on my take on it yet.

[izquierdista]

Will that prosecution

Follow the laws of the land? Or since the crime is heinous in the minds of the public, would they be better served by having impromptu firing squads?

If the accused criminals here are the men with multiple and underage wives, why do I see women and children being rounded up and transported off? Was this ranch not their home? Do they not have a constitutional right to be safe and secure in it?

I'm so glad you can insert the "other than" into the quotation. It shows that you can be swayed by a dynamic public speaker with a funny mustache, it's just a matter of time and persuasion.

[dmallind]

57. What?

Where did I even imply these folks should not receive a fair trial and every civil right I claim for myself? Remember none of these people have been convicted or sentenced. It is very normal for victims and material witnesses to be held until the facts can be ascertained. It's not like we're hanging them. You don't even have a constitutional right to stay in your home if it's a crime scene when you weren't even present at the time, let alone when you may be personally involved. I do not consider them guilty. I consider them under investigation and with probable cause of serious crimes that some of them will have to answer to. Others will be exonerated and returned to their homes with no loss of life or liberty. If a bloodtsained corpse (or a pregnant 13 year old claiming I'm the father) is in my house when I return and the cops show up I fully expect I'll not be just waving them off with a "thanks officer" either.

And the laughable and ever so subtle insinuations about "other than"? Boy anybody with a passing knowledge of Occam, or even English, would instead have correctly concluded that I find something lacking at times in the approach of communists and trade unions. But heck if you think my saying some group is imperfect and may have some flaws means that I'm ready to troop them all off to the gas chambers then hey that's your insanity not mine so welcome to it.

[PSPS]

13. Non-sequitur

You forgot one:

When they came for the child molesters,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a child molester.

Doesn't sound quite right, does it?

It still amazes me to see defenders of sexual preditors so numerous on DU.

[Uncle Joe]

30. Not in 1930's Nazi Germany.

There was no difference.

As this mass group of people haven't been to trial yet, I must assume they're innocent until proven guilty.

[LisaL]

99. Well, maybe it's cause they haven't come for any child molesters.

They just took the kids.

[girl gone mad]

108. Maybe NAMBLA posted a link to the board?

:shrug:

[Uncle Joe]

27. According to this recent Supreme Court ruling thread, I don't believe the 4th amendment

means anything anymore, kind of a cosmic coincidence, this ruling coming down when it did.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3280215

Supreme Court says police may search even if arrest invalid

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

32. They have found violations of the law

that is the point.

We have a communal living group near where I live-The Endtime Handmaidens. They keep to themselves, as they are getting ready for Jesus to come again. They don't impregnate underage girls (they disapprove of sex outside of marriage and only have one spouse), they don't stockpile weapons, they don't trespass on other people's land, do drugs, etc. etc. There have never been any complaints filed with the sheriff's department (in a small county with a weekly paper that lists EVERYTHING called into the sheriff, you know), and there have never been any raids. If groups wish to live off by themselves and are law-abiding, this stuff just doesn't happen.

[raebrek]

113. I think you live in my neighborhood. n/t

[provis99]

49. since these Mormon nuts are closer to Nazis than anything else you listed,

don't you think your list is ass-backwards. Anyways, its a derogatory and insulting comparison comparing people who are worried about child rapists to Nazis.

[izquierdista]

68. Not at all

The compound has been depopulated with all the efficiency of a Nazi relocation effort. Even to the point of putting the children where they can receive a proper upbringing, as was done with obviously Aryan children that they found in the conquered Eastern territories.

I'm afraid that in the zeal to root out "child rapists", there is going to be a lot of psychological trauma to the children in the group. These child welfare workers need to think about that part of the physician's oath that says "first, do no harm" and think about how it should apply to them. The effects of the Nazi relocation and adoption program for Aryan children are still being felt today in Eastern Europe.

[LanternWaste]

74. trauma to the children will most likely come from their formative years at the compound.

The trauma to the children will most likely come from their formative years at the compound.

Hey-- if you're a tough guy and want to compare Child Protective Services to Nazis, go right ahead-- you illustrate you your working knowledge of CPS rather well when you do.




But then again, maybe you're right!!!! Maybe when I worked for CPS and saw an abused child with a broken arm, both eyes blackened, and bruises on the front and back of the torso of this ten year old put there by his father, I simply should have though to myself "...but if I take this kid away, I'm a Nazi!!!"

Maybe every time I saw an abused child, I should have simply left her in that environment and simply hoped and wished that it would stop. That those burn marks on her arm are just magic markers. That the gash on her forehead was "just a pump into the wall" as mom said... 'cause we all know that abuse only happens by the state, right? :sarcasm:

Or (and I find this much more likely) there's just another ass-hat poster who doesn't know what the hell he's talking about, and simply has a knee-jerk reaction to any damn thing the state does and labels it BAD or EVIL to conveniently avoid context and nuance of situations, organizations and people in his continued quest of the trendy and edgy neo-anti-authoritarianism (of which, you probably have the t-shirt, too)


But yeah-- you're an expert on THE STATE. So we should defer to your emotion-laden, over-dramatized, reads-like-a-bad-manifesto post


Asshats.

[LisaL]

101. Take a look at the photos of these children. They don't have

broken arms or black eyes. So, what are all those claims of abuse based on?
The phone call from the supposed 16 year old is most likely a hoax.
The person of interest doesn't live in TX, is not a member of FLDS, is not pregnant, and allegedly has a history of making false claims pretending to be an abused girl.

[girl gone mad]

109. Those kids are brainwashed from birth.

The psychological damage has been done.

Comparing this raid to Jewish relocations to concentration camps just makes you look flat out stupid.

[Trajan]

96. When they came for the 'Social Democrats' ...

They werent perpetuating a culture of rape against children ....

I think there is more than a general consensus among Progressives: The 'marrying' and 'consummating' of underage teen girls by middle aged men has a name: Statutory Rape ...

While I am no law and order guy: I happen to believe that kids SHOULD be allowed to be kids, and not forced to be parents ....

Call it what you may: Since kids cannot give consent, it is called RAPE by most everyone ....

[pnwmom]

6. The allegation was not anonymous. The caller stated a name, an age, and a

location. There was no way for CPS to know whether it was legitimate or not without following up on it.

[High Plains]

19. Actually, you are correct. It was not anonymous.

That's a stronger case for going in. But until and unless someone produces that complainant (or her body), this smells like a set-up by foes of the sect.

[High Plains]

33. On second thought: It might as well have been anonymous.

Anyone call can CPS and say I'm so-and-so and I'm being abused at such and such a location.

Kinda of a scary thought, ain't it?

That would be a nice trick to play on your hated neighbor, wouldn't it?

[izquierdista]

38. You're getting the drift

Mass media advertising has reduced Americans to compliant saps who nod in agreement when they hear an assertion. The rightly crafted accusation to the authorities is like a rock thrown at a hornet's nest.

In the McMartin preschool case, the later truth was vastly different from the original accusations. I wonder what the truth is in this case. I wonder if the children and their mothers (their actual biological mothers) will ever have a normal family life.

[uppityperson]

73. It happens. It happened to me.

Fortunately the police responding figured out why the caller called and that there was no problems going on.

[pnwmom]

92. What if an abused child called 911 and no one responded?

That's the really scary thought.

Erring on the side of the child is the way to go.

[raebrek]

114. I can give you an example of when this went bad for a friend of mine.

Military story from when I was stationed over seas. Friends daughter wanted to go to a party. He told her she couldn't go. She called base security and told them that her father was abusing her. Security picked up father. Daughter went to party.

Raebrek!!!

I hope that this is not something that happens often but I know it happened just this once for sure.

[LanternWaste]

117. Sure-- if you want to go to jail on a felony charge...

"That would be a nice trick to play on your hated neighbor, wouldn't it?"

Sure-- if you want to go to jail on a felony charge...

[LisaL]

103. How about checking an area code from where the call was made?

[acmavm]

9. He's just because maybe now he'll have to actually raise and

support his kids.

[pnwmom]

14. I suspect he's hoping Jeffs will allow him back into the church

if he supports the church publicly now.

[High Plains]

22. It is really disheartening to see everyone assume the worst

motivations for these people.

It's not enough that the father is seeing his kids vanish into the tender mercies of the state of Texas?

Of course, it's easy to an anonymous internet smart-ass.

[LanternWaste]

58. Almost as disheartening to see you assume the worst of

"it is really disheartening to see everyone assume the worst motivations for these people."

Almost as disheartening to see you assume the worst of CPS.

Six of one, half a dozen of the other (again), bub...

[High Plains]

60. I'm sure CPS has the best of intentions.

You know, like the ones the road to hell is paved with.

[LanternWaste]

64. And there it is.

And there it is.

So I'm going to hell because I did my damnedest to stop children from getting abused when I worked for CPS?

C'mon, smart guy-- you have your marks, but start working on the dialog. The old John Wayne one-liners are getting stale. Try something new. Something less dramatic. Something with substance and validity...

[High Plains]

83. You misunderstand, willfully perhaps.

I don't think CPS workers are going to hell, although I personally know a couple who should reside there.

I do think the outcomes for these kids placed into the custody of the state are in question, and that the CPS efforts to "save" them may end up doing them more damage than their community did. But, hey, I could be wrong.

[LanternWaste]

119. You said "road to hell...". Hard to misinterpret that.

You said "road to hell...". Hard to misinterpret that. Although I imagine a weasel-y kind of guy would attempt to say , "hey--- that's not what I meant...!"

However, if you think that CPS will do more harm to children getting raped, hey-- your opinion-- enjoy it! I'm sure you get some visceral satisfaction out of it whilst simultaneously validating your really nifty anti-state positions...

[enlightenment]

105. And it is just as possible that this man

left the FLDS voluntarily but was unable to remove his children. If they were quite young, which they probably were, he may have believed they were better off with their mother/s.

It is just as possible that he is using this as an opportunity to get hold of his kids and get them OUT of that situation.

You're making assumptions, also.

And you are deliberately refusing to apply what is readily researchable and known about the FLDS in an attempt to make them innocent victims of the state? I suppose you could argue that what is known is biased - that 50+ years of smoke doesn't indicate so much as a flicker of flame.

I don't believe the individual members of the FLDS have the "worst motivations." I do believe that they are, collectively, dangerously deluded. They keep most of their members in utter ignorance of the world and teach them to fear everything that doesn't come from the lips of their "prophet." The females exist to serve one function - breed more children. Are they evil? I don't think so. They are, however, not fit to parent. Abuse comes in many forms and whether you like it or not, it is largely defined by the society and culture in which it is found. Take, for example, female genital cutting. In the countries that accept this as a cultural practice (it is not a religious practice), it is not considered abuse. In other countries, including the US, it is considered mutilation - and most certainly, child abuse.

In the US, we have certain cultural standards; among them are education, freedom of thought, and freedom of movement. The freedom to choose our mates, freedom to choose to have children - or not. You can agree or disagree, but they are widely accepted cultural standards in this country. The FLDS is preventing children from even realising that those standards exist. They are not being given choices in any way. They are not receiving anything beyond the most basic and cursory education - how could they be, when they are being taught by women who have had little more education themselves? Freedom of thought? That requires some knowledge of the world. Freedom of movement? They are not allowed to leave the compound unless they are escorted by a male. Freedom to choose a mate or choose to breed? Don't make me laugh.

[LisaL]

106. I don't know what guarantees "freedom of thought."

But freedom of religion is a constitutionally guaranteed right. And using your logic, CPS can start removing children from many religious groups, cause they won't be up with your "cultural standards."

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

15. If the guy left the cult, why didn't he sue for custody?

I'm sure a Texas court would have considered awarding him custody--and will probably give the boys to their dad if he can prove that he's their father and has been trying to get custody of them.

[High Plains]

20. I don't know. Do you?

You sound a bit naive about fathers' rights in child custody cases.

[StudentThinker]

29. while

from my experience (as someone with divorced parents and relatives and friends whose parents have been divorced) paternal custody rights and so on seem to vary somewhat by state, I know that in PA the law makes it very difficult for a father to get custody. There are also laws about charges of child abuse that automatically give custody to parent A when parent B makes charges of abuse against parent A that aren't subsequently proven (again, this is PA, I don't know the law in Texas or Nevada.)

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

35. No, I don't know. I was speculating

As a child of divorced parents, and wife to a man who was married before, I have some ideas of a father's rights. If a father wants to have custody of his kids, he has to usually sue for custody. I do know that a father can gain custody in most states if the mother is breaking the law by using drugs, abusing the child or allowing the child to be abused. I know that if a father has tried to gain custody before and is current in his child support payments he is more likely to get a sympathetic hearing from a judge.

[High Plains]

36. Yes, there seems to a presumption the kids should stay with mom.

[LanternWaste]

120. Much like you sound about CPS...

"You sound a bit naive about fathers' rights in child custody cases"

Much like you sound about CPS...

[fed_up_mother]

86. The father is still speaking well of "the prophet"

It sure looks to me like he's one of the men who has been kicked out for some infraction or other, and is hoping to get back in. Meanwhile, his kids have been sent to "Zion." Who knows where their mother(s) is/are.

[lumberjack_jeff]

104. They were all boys. They'd kick 'em out before they reached puberty anyhow. n/t

[DiverDave]

21. So, when the boys are older, will they be thrown out?

Was that what this moron was waiting for?.
Or is it the 'hey, look at me' syndrome?

The state DOES have the right to take those kids...
But the thing that I don't hear is, What happened to all the boys?


'Lost Boys'?, How many just vanished?

[Beaverhausen]

31. So, he lives in Nevada but his kids are in Texas? and he's a former member of the church

This is very strange

[High Plains]

34. Uh, people get divorced. People move.

Apparently, even FLDS people. Who knew?

[Beaverhausen]

37. He cared so much about his kids that he lives 1200 miles away?

Actually, I hope he gets custody and raises them outside this cult.

[High Plains]

40. Yeah, nobody else has divorced and moved.

I think that's kind of a cheap shot, just one among the thousands on this topic, and a relatively mild one at that.

[Beaverhausen]

50. I'm guessing the truth will be that his kids were taken from Nevada to the Texas compound

I guess we will see as this story plays out.

[Blue_Tires]

45. i'm interested to know why he left the ranch 3 years ago...

and what their mother has to say about this...

[PassingFair]

125. Mother or MOTHERS?

Maybe she/they were reassigned to other men.

It happens.

[pattmarty]

46. "Kids stolen by the state", are you out of your fucking mind?

The so called state nowadays is supposed to protect interests that are unable to protect "themselves". "His kids", were getting whatevered by these sick motherfuckers, oh, and leave me YOUR address for a friendly visit.

[High Plains]

55. I'll leave you my address it you leave me yours. You first.

His kids are young boys. Is getting "whatevered" really sufficient to seize them?

[pattmarty]

71. In this case a big fucking YES. Are you really that stupid or is this a bad attempt at satire?

[girl gone mad]

110. They're really that stupid.

Lizzy, High Plains, and Wizard777 all spend countless hours on the board defending the child rapists. 3 sides of the same demented coin.

[LanternWaste]

53. A dad is bummed that his children...?

A dad is bummed that his children have been removed from a hostile and abusive environment?

Anyways, the kids were not stolen-- that would imply illegal action. All actions taken by the state were legal. (But way to throw in some melodrama in place of valid arguments....)

You're losing this one, bub. You're losing this one badly.

As for providing names and addresses-- the state already has mine, I was a CPS worker. What's your excuse-- chicken or just an old fashioned hypocrite? (I'm going with you're simply a chicken. That means coward...)

[High Plains]

61. Okay, now that I've whipped the lynch mob into a frenzy...

...I have to go. I actually have other things to do. But I'll be back later for my fair share of abuse.

[LanternWaste]

62. You do tend to leave just as I show up in these threads...

You do tend to leave just as I show up in these threads...

I understand. But I'll keep showing up on these threads. I'll keep asking you the questions you never answer. I'll continue maintain you have nothing other than an emotional, knee-jerk knowledge of what's happening until you can illustrate otherwise...

(I imagine your response (if any) to this particular post will happen at a very odd hour...)

[pattmarty]

76. Hey, his "home page" is a drug page. Not that I'm against drugs, but......

.......I do tend to get not too serious when I'm high.

[LanternWaste]

78. I noticed that too.

I noticed that too.

Probably just another, "Everything-the-state-does-bad", neo-anti-authoritarian. I doubt he's seriously advocating that the FLDS has been abused-- he's just biased in his hatred of government action-- whether for good or ill.


And I'm not against the responsible use of marijuana-- but our friend should try out that "responsible" part of it for once, step away from the bong, read the TX CPS manual (they're available online and spell out policy, procedure and protocol), write his post and *then* fill his pipe up...

[High Plains]

80. Hey, I'm back briefly, had to respond.

Uhm, that's called an argument ad hominem. Try addressing my arguments.

And there you go with your infantile insults again.

Also, you know, I've never felt the need to go try to investigate another DU poster because I disagreed with him. I guess your police state tendencies know no bounds, eh?

And no, LanternWaste, I'm not running from your arguments. It's just that I have a life, like I imagine you do. I don't give you crap for not immediately jumping into my thread, so please don't give me crap for not immediately responding to you.

Okay, back to work. The Drug War Chronicle waits for no man.

But hey, I am covering another sex abuse story. It'll show up on Friday in our weekly corrupt cops feature (there is never a shortage):

In Arapaho, Oklahoma, <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080418/ap_on_re_us/sheriff_sex_charges" target=_blank_>the Custer County Sheriff resigned April 16</a>as state prosecutors filed a 35-count indictment charging him with coercing and bribing female inmates to participate in sex acts. Now former Custer County Sheriff Mike Burgess faces 14 counts of second-degree rape, seven counts of forcible oral sodomy, and five counts of bribery by a public official, among other charges. A federal lawsuit filed by 12 former inmates alleges that Burgess and his employees had them participate in wet T-shirt contests and gave cigarettes to inmates who would flash their breasts. He also allegedly had sex with a female drug court participant after telling her she would be sent to prison if she didn’t satisfy his sexual demands. Another prisoner alleges she was given trusty status after agreeing to perform a sex act on Burgess, but lost that status when she later refused. He also faces two counts each of sexual battery, rape by instrumentation, and subornation of perjury. It being Oklahoma, Burgess now faces 467 years in prison.

[uppityperson]

89. Profile pages are to give info, search is available so we can search.

they are part of DU for a reason. If you don't want to use them, don't. But "I guess your police state tendencies know no bounds, eh?" is one of those insults you seem to dislike.

[High Plains]

90. Yeah, you're right. Shame on me.

I just find it creepy when people do that, hoping they can dig up some "dirt" on someone they're arguing with.

[pattmarty]

91. Hey, you're just an authoritarian ass hole, what else can anyone here say?

[High Plains]

94. Well, that's a new one, the authoritarian part, I mean.

I'll refrain from replying in kind.

[girl gone mad]

111. Oh, come on now..

it can't be news to you to hear that you're an authoritarian.

You certainly are when it comes to the rights of those FLDS children.

Good thing the state no longer agrees with that authoritarian patriarchal notion that children and wives are the property of their fathers/husbands and must submit to the will and discipline of their fathers/husbands regardless of their own personal safety and desires.

[LanternWaste]

121. You don't have any arguments!!!

You don't have any arguments!!! That's the g-d'ed point!

You're second guessing the motivations of CPS and that's the BEST you have...

[knitter4democracy]

75. I've been investigated for an "anonymous" phone call.

Cop knocked on my door late at night to check it out. She wasn't allowed to tell me who made the call, but she knew who it was.

When she knocked, she woke up our toddler daughter, so when I waddled out (I was 9 months preggers and delivers two weeks later) in my bathrobe to see who was there that late at night, she saw me hugely preggers and in a couple of minutes, saw my toddler daughter in her nighttime diaper and nothing else. She looked into our front room, saw that it was cluttered but clean, saw that my daughter was smiling and healthy, and apologized for taking up my time and waking up my daughter.

If they show up and don't find anything, they don't even file a report. If they show up and find evidence of neglect or abuse, then the original reason doesn't matter. The laws for taking kids into custody aren't like other laws in that they have more wiggle room on the warrant (at least in Michigan they do).

So, yeah, I know how it feels to be judged and to know a neighbor has it in for me, but I also know that, even if she'd come in and looked around and talked with my daughter, she wouldn't have found abuse or neglect. The FLDS mothers can't say that.

[uppityperson]

77. About the same thing that happened to me, except I wasn't pg at time.

"So, yeah, I know how it feels to be judged and to know a neighbor has it in for me, but I also know that, even if she'd come in and looked around and talked with my daughter, she wouldn't have found abuse or neglect. The FLDS mothers can't say that."

Yup.

[darue]

93. well why didn't his mighty GOD prevent it then? asshole n/t

[ConcernedCanuk]

95. Interesting thread HP - I'm impressed with your bated responses to obvious insults.

.
.
.

And I have a question for those that blindly support the state's removal of ALL the children.

When will we hear from the 400+ children that were removed from their home?

I see all sorts of accusations of abuse and neglect, but I don't see any statements from the "children" themselves.

It's sorta like the Gitmo people, ya never hear from them, just their "representatives".

I want to hear the children's' take on this

I don't trust the gubment.

[Richard Steele]

97. Another day, another High Plains attempt to defend child-raping slaveholders. nm

[Frank Cannon]

107. Well, you know, it's such a slippery slope from investigating child fuckers

to putting us all in concentration camps.

I absolutely cannot believe some of the shit I'm reading on these boards in regards to these FLDS assholes.

[superconnected]

123. Well, well put. :)