Here’s the FLDS quote of the day. The Herald News Daily (have no idea from what hamlet in Texas) reports that one of FLDS mother, when asked to sign a CPS “safety plan” requiring her to keep her and 9- and 10-year-old daughters away from what CPS calls “men involved in underaged marriage,” refused to sign, telling a caseworker she felt it was “an insult to common sense.” My feelings exactly. When given the chance to showcase its ability to craft an intelligent, family-specific safety plan, Texas CPS instead retrogresses to a caveman, one-size-fits-all, biggest-bully on the block approach. Pathetic. Stupid. Typical.
Schulzke Brief- For the good of investors, FASB should withdraw its loss contingencies disclosure draft
- Citigroup bows out of Wachovia talks . . . finally
- Why is Judge Ramos pushing a Wachovia-Citigroup marriage?
- Wachovia responds: Citigroup violated confidentiality agreement
- Wachovia-Citigroup letter: Non-binding agreement to agree
{ 18 comments… read them below or add one }
TxBluesMan 08.05.08 at 8:39 pm
Actually, it was appropriate. The CPS already knew that the mother was a liar, since she told them that she was single, had not been married to Merril, and the investigators were looking at the FLDS marriage record for the two…
Plus, with Warren marrying an 11 and a 12 year old, 9 and 10 aren’t that far off.
If you lie to the investigators about your marriage, your phone number, and living arrangements, don’t expect to be able to negotiate a better safety plan…
If you also compare all of the affidavits, the safety plans are all individually applied.
Kurt, you wanted them to get individual attention - surely you didn’t think that ALL of the cases would be non-suited like the other 32 were today?
CPS is clearly looking at each case individually, will present each case separately, and will be given custody on an individual basis.
I would expect more non-suits and more motions for custody, as well as more indictments.
Kurt Schulzke 08.05.08 at 8:56 pm
TBM —
You didn’t need a crystal ball for that. But thanks just the same.
Making some big assumptions about “lying,” aren’t you? Or do you have access to information not in the public domain?
K
Thomas Forguson 08.05.08 at 9:45 pm
CPS could say the sky was green and Texasbluesman would agree.
ztgstmv 08.05.08 at 10:16 pm
It’s so obvious to see the ruse CPS is trying to play, i.e. so obviously stacking the deck in these motions against the mother. It’s just laughable. She got it right, it’s an insult to common sense.
First they’re accusing her abandonment because she’s leaving her children with strangers.
Then they accuse her of lying because the stranger she left her daughters with was actually her spiritual husband.
Well which is it? Can’t have it both ways CPS, it’s so obvious they’re being disingenuous. But perhaps it’s taylor made to the bigot Walther who doesn’t pay attention to details in this case.
Do they not get the reason the mother doesn’t spell out her relationship to Merril is because she doesn’t want to admit to bigamy?
I thought it was an elegant touch by the way, how she insisted CPS stay on topic, i.e. the under-age marriage and how her daughters weren’t in one. Also insisting that they only forbid her from contacting convicted child sex offenders, rather than those who are merely alleged or suspected. A professional, intelligent woman, she is. I think she’s going to rip CPS a new one.
Doran Williams 08.05.08 at 10:26 pm
Nothing, not a damn thing, that tx wrote in his 8:39 post above involves abuse or neglect of the children in that family. tx is doing exactly what I predict CPS will do: rely on criticism of religious practices, innuendo, suggestion, smears, and demonizing of the parents.
TxBluesMan 08.06.08 at 12:04 am
Kurt,
I’m basing it on the affidavits that were attached to the motions.
Links are at my website or at the gosanangelo.com site.
Thomas Forguson 08.06.08 at 7:26 am
All this informan is supposed to be confidential. Funny how information ceases to be confidential when the FLDS is concerned.
TxBluesMan 08.06.08 at 8:35 am
Thomas,
It’s only confidential if it is sealed, which these were not.
DeputyHeadmistress 08.06.08 at 11:20 am
I didn’t think she said she’d never been married (although CPS said she did)- when the CPS worker quotes her, she says she’s not legally married. This is true.
DeputyHeadmistress 08.06.08 at 11:21 am
PS- it’s even more true than I realized at first- I am not sure she’s ever even lived with Merrill. Is it possible this poor woman is one who has been ‘repenting from afar?’
Kurt Schulzke 08.06.08 at 11:23 am
I’m virtually certain she is one who has been repenting from afar.
kbp 08.06.08 at 11:38 am
TBM
“It’s only confidential if it is sealed, which these were not.”
Another spin!
The difference is that the clerk was instructed the pleadings filed by the parents are NOT open to the public, A directive from walther straight out of the clerk’s mouth.
BUT, it’s just fine if the state files their pleadings with the media before they make it to the court clerk.
Thomas Forguson 08.06.08 at 11:41 am
Txbluesman are you protecting San Angelo-El Dorado from the infamy it deserves?
TxBluesMan 08.06.08 at 1:36 pm
LOL - no need to defend it…
Things are going well, and the matter is proceeding to a result that will protect the children and hold the abusers accountable…
Karateka 08.06.08 at 3:04 pm
So it sounds like you agree a civil rights lawsuit is in order, and proceeding well, so Texas and other states will follow the constitution instead of rumor.
“Things are going well, and the matter is proceeding to a result that will protect the children and hold the abusers accountable…”
TxBluesMan 08.06.08 at 5:21 pm
Yup, Karateka, they are - 6 of the abusers have been indicted, will be given a fair trial, and then hung….
able eddy 08.06.08 at 5:55 pm
Does anyone ask CPS to prove statistically that removing a child and putting them in THEIR care is safer than where they are right now? Statistically, no CPS agency in the country is as safe, statistically, as the child’s own parents, including families against whom complaints have been filed. CPS is a dangerous place. They need to be forced to prove they are a better bet. Which to this point in time, they simply cannot do.
Xorphshire 08.06.08 at 11:23 pm
Excellent point, able eddy.
Real statistics are a big problem here. I’d love to somehow get all the facts and figures on the points you made. But I know already that CPS would lose.
Now that Texas has totally abandoned common sense, it’s all a save face campaign. From about mid-April on, we can easily replace lines like, “in the children’s best interest” with, “to help us not look like such jackasses.”
If these children died in their CPS “care” it wouldn’t matter. They’d likely spin it to look like it was the fault of the parents.
One small paragraph from Truth Will Prevail sums it up:
“What we are seeing here is not a genuine concern for the welfare of children but a blatant attempt to justify the earlier unwarranted action of removing all of the children from the YFZ community. “