Judge Walther: Why so long for FLDS evidence hearing?

Thank God for someone with sense. What would it be if such a judge was in charge of this fiasco. Ms Walthers should scare every rational person who is following the FLDS case, whether they are for or against the FLDS religion.
M.E.

OOPS! That last sentence should end “…, evidence which may help the mother’s cases?”

How can the evidence be un-”objection”-able because it was not found at her residence, which is how it became “evidence” in the first place?
M.E.

Julie Worth made a good point at the gosanangelo board:

“Walther overruled the objection, questioning how Jessop could have standing to dispute the seizing of documents not contained in her home.”

—————-

The state wants it both ways, apparently. Either these are legally separate homes, are the aren’t. CPS and the judge have been acting like they’re all one unit, so that one warrant could cover them all. But now the judge just ruled the other way, undermining the warrant and all the evidence collected.

I may just be dense, but how can Mrs. Jessop NOT be able to challenge documents that are being used to accuse her? I don’t get it…or is it not just me?

So who owns the temple? That is where they got the documents from. If Merril Jessop is the head of the FLDS Ranch doesn’t he control that property? As his wife can she not protest? No one lives there so no one can protest? Gee I need to study law.

TXbluesman you are biased as your judge. Its hard to see why Barbara Jessop cant challenge the legality of the search. These documents were obtained in an illegal search are being used against her. Plus by suspending the right of discovery, CPS and their judge have conspired to stack the case against her.

Using TBM’s theory there, they could run an illegal search at a some place like a Planned Parenthood clinic, for a fishing expedition, and no patients, or men responsible in a pregnancy, could succeed in suppressing the evidence.

Could that also work in a parentage test in which the father did not have custody of the child? Illegally obtain swabs from the child & mother to use against the father?

Or maybe even all records held by a governing entity, like the IRS?

I think I’d have to see a SCOTUS opinion to follow how that theory works.

First, the arrest warrant naming the on probation RoZita uses a “Z”, so I assume they are correct. Not a spell check here by me (that would be the pot calling the kettle black!).

The point of the delay in even scheduling a hearing on suppressing any evidence, 5 months after motions were filed, should have nothing to do with whether or not Rozita is available from out of state. The Texas Rangers should be available, unless they are still in Colorado investigating Rozita!!

Maybe walthers can use that “still under investigation” line I keep seeing to justify the delay. It seems we may have an entire orchard before we can find out if that first tree was poison.

ROn In Houston, this whole thing began with a hoax. The state of texas, which is prosecuting the FLDS, doesnt want to remind the public that this began with a hoax call that was deliberatly not investigated. Ron , Mothers have reported that their children cry and hide whenever the doorbell rings. If Texas were really in pursuit of justice and with the resources available to the state, extriditing Rozita Swinton would not present a big problem. Please do no try our patience with a faux argument.

Ron, Rozita was already on probation from a previous conviction when she made her infamous calls to San Angelo. She has since picked up a second conviction not related to the FLDS case. The state has indicted 6 FLDS men from the evidence taken in the raid. Meantime they are dagging their feet on Ms. Swinton. I am not charging conspiracy. But the authorities from Rick Perry to Angie Voss are playing diry. I am not a conspiracy theorists. I think Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone.

I think Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone.

… and the Twin Towers were not controlled demolition jobs.

I see TBM skipped over the “privacy” topic.

Padilla looks like it points out “a reasonable expectation of privacy that was invaded by the search”, into private church or medical records using a faulty SW is an issue that is of concern. Add to that concern any journals taken from the homes of the accused.

The point of the evidence - all of which resulted from that initial BS search warrant - is that it should NOT be something left “why so long…” unattended by the judge UNTIL after it is used in suits that take any children from their mother.

I’m sure that in walther’s mind she again assured them “You have not waived ALL of your rights… You still have the FINAL hearings…”, while she was playing with the timing of discovery and hearing the motion for suppression (along with all others) in this hearing for TEMPORARY custody.

My reaction is the reaction of Charles Dickens. The law is an ass. it is fundemnentally unfair to use illegally seized evidence. The law never should have had this evidence in its posseson. Mothers in this case have reported that their children are so traumatized that they report that their children run and hide when they hear the doorbell ring. A spokesman for the CPS says they intend to take dozens more children. These children need to be protected from CPS. I dont know law but I recognize injustice. A horrible act of injustice has perpetrated against innocent children. They were taken out of good homes and thrown into the Fort Concho concentration. The children arrived healthy and left sick. CPS doesnt just want a handful of juveniles involved in underage marriages. They want dozens.
Explain why you excuse this injustice. A powerful sense of anger rises inside me when I recognize the harm CPS wants to do to dozens of innocent children.

kbp

I assume this motion is in connection with the criminal investigation and indictments. You don’t file “Motions to Suppress” in family cases since they are civil matters and the exclusionary rule does not apply. You might file what’s called a “Motion in Limine” to prevent that evidence being used in a final trial.

What you’re saying is just utter nonsense. These parents can object to any evidence based upon privilege at any hearing.

HAA! I really like your reasoning kpb. Lightened my day!!
To bad you are not anti-flds then we could use it as evidence in court!

Are the courts reconizing flds “spiritual marriages” as legal or are they using the common marriage law against them?

Thomas, I can’t trust this judge with any sanity at all. She has proven again and again her crusade against the FLDS is stronger than her belief in law.
M.E.

Thomas,

Do not expect Texas to challenge whether or not boys can be brides. They’re not doing too well in that area!!

The point I was making about it being so confusing - walther NOT taking the boy - is the whole argument is the mother was not seeing to the safety of the children.

It’s odd enough that there is nothing requiring them to show the mother created danger, but if there is a problem that indicates she did not provide enough for the safety of the daughter, how was the son safer?

lol Ron, Im an FLDS WOMAN! BS to the dominated s…tuff
Females are subservient to what? if you know of which you speak, i would take it a little more seriously.
M. E.

Ron

“It’s not too hard to hear the FLDS talk about the “patriarchal scriptures.” It’s very clearly a male dominated culture where females are subservient…

Now if the FLDS had the same beliefs as the ancient Greeks…”

So it’s the beliefs that are the problem!!

cricker critter

Yes or no. Is the priesthood is an all male organization?

I don’t believe you for a second. Women are taught to “be sweet.” “Obey your husband.”

If I really wanted to respond to your drivel, I could pull numerous quotes from Uncle Warren that refute your claim.

Gee, Chai Tea–Did someone put witch brew in your tea this a.m.? Maybe his server is down, or he has the flu, or he is swamped at work or all of the above. Maybe there was a death in the family or he broke his typing finger. Maybe the guy just has a life once in awhile. . .Maybe he has a boss to report to once in awhile. (Yes, someone put witch brew in my tea, but face it, Kurt is not a god.)

pliggy

You are clearly subservient to the prophet. That’s why you’re on the outside son without your family. If you had any real cojones you’d wouldn’t have allowed that to happen. You’ve basically allowed your life to be destroyed by some felon in Utah.

Cricker critter

I suspect you’re just an internet troll. If you’re not then you’re failing your people by not “keeping sweet.”

Outside the mad ravings of Carolyn Jessop, there’s no evidence that the FLDS practice female infanticide.

Judging from all the concerns identified by the
affidavit of the case worker,
(pages 11 thru 13) the state contends the children would be safe with the mother IF Barbara would sign the AGREEMENT to NEVER allow any form of contact with the fathers.

The main problem identified of the fathers is they may have participated in, approved of, and/or witnessed numerous marriages involving older men and underaged brides, including any that were legal at the time.

Barbara refused to NOT visit her sister at the ranch, where contact with those men, mainly Merrill in the AGREEMENT, MIGHT take place.

Evidently the state does NOT anticipate removing those fathers by convicting them of a crime, they can only make allegations of some acts that are a SAFETY concern. I guess a restraining order to prevent the fathers from contacting the children is not an option for some reason or another.

So this is an indication Barbara will not see to the safety of her children, but the son is OK with her. The bigger concern is that the 14 YO daughter might be put in danger.

The really confusing part is IF the daughter is married to a man miles away in a prison, how is the SAFETY of that daughter of concern if Barbara will not agree to never take her to the ranch to visit her aunt?

I want to make it abundantly clear that I don’t believe the FLDS engage in any sort of infanticide. Kurt asked for evidence of differing risks to females in a patriarchal society.

Evidently the state does NOT anticipate removing those fathers by convicting them of a crime, they can only make allegations of some acts that are a SAFETY concern. I guess a restraining order to prevent the fathers from contacting the children is not an option for some reason or another.

Interesting, huh? Why?

So this is an indication Barbara will not see to the safety of her children, but the son is OK with her. The bigger concern is that the 14 YO daughter might be put in danger.

There are so many contradictions in this fiasco, it’s difficult to keep track.
If boys aren’t “at risk”, why were any males taken in the CPS raid in the first place?
I’ve also read that CPS considers the boys at risk due to their patriarchal conditioning.
Is that no longer the case? Being the “matriarch” of the community, seems they would view her son, of all the boys, most likely to be conditioned?

Bottomline, someone was willing to ignore the law, rather hatch a plan to get around the law and gain access to the community. Then cost Tx tax payers $14 million to acquire $110,000 worth of DNA evidence from mothers and children. Which apparently is being matched against the men’s as they round them up and demand samples.

“The really confusing part is IF the daughter is married to a man miles away in a prison, how is the SAFETY of that daughter of concern if Barbara will not agree to never take her to the ranch to visit her aunt?”

Why isn’t anyone involved in the legal aspect of this asking rational questions and taking action. Does anyone care. The thing just keeps marching on as if everything was done by the book. It sickens me that CPS, Walthers, and whoever hatched the plan will get away with this.
It’s such a joke. They go in and remove the alleged “victims”, putting them through pure hell, and leave the alleged perpetrators.
Couldn’t be done in reverse. CPS had to lead the way, based on a bogus abuse call- if it happened at all. Can’t go in and “charge” the perpetrators without a complaint.
It’s the scam of all scams.
And most aren’t even paying attention, or don’t care.

Maybe off topic, but a Mrs. Jessop and others previously have claimed that the state has threatened to take her children away if she doesn’t comply.

A Federal court has ruled this kind of coersion is unconstitutional:

“A federal judge ruled that Illinois families were deprived of their constitutional rights when state child welfare officials threatened to separate parents from their children during abuse investigations.”

http://www.constitutionalconcepts.org/pallmeyer.htm

SKK the issue before us is underage marriages.The FLDS have been accused of forcing underage girls into marriages. There havent been any allegations of underage marriages involving underage boys. Therefore, the chance of the boy being involved in an underage marrriage is zero. Besides, CPS got its hands on its preferred hostage, the alleged child bride of Warren Jeffs.