Teresa Jeffs hearing transcripts

Thanks for providing them, Kurt.

There are criteria for when an AAL may substitute judgment. You quoted it. The only way to get around the problem you describe is to have no attorney-client privilege so every communication and action can be policed.

Kurt - I posted this on another article. Here is the May 30 excerpt if you want to include it in your collection of Malonis transcripts.

may 30 - Get more Business Documents

I guess I ought to go read the Nancy Grace transcripts again, and maybe we should inspect every pleading Malonis has filed…has an attorney-client relationship ever had this much scrutiny?

SKK, I think Teresa would be more than happy to give up her “attorney-client privilege” if it would get Malonis off her back.

-If that is indeed the only thing that prevents checks and balances, effectively making the AAL god, with the ability to decide whether the teenager is truly incapacitated and no one with standing to challenge her discretion.

“AAL may determine…” — that just gave the AAL unchecked powers. It’s unconstitutional.

SKK You think that any objections by the Mother who loves the child should be ignored and she should be treated as an adverse party. That is one of the big problems with CPS is that they regard parents and children as adversaries. Natalie Malonis said falsely in open court that Teresa Jeffs had had a baby. Natalie is in fact representing the point of view of CPS, who is her true client. Enough bias for you? The judge did not replace Natalie because she is herself biased,

That May 30 excerpt shows all Malonis was rather weak on more case knowledge than just that nonexistent baby.

I saw NO bias, in any of the transcripts. Judge Walther is dealing with each motion with law!

Malonis was supportive of Annette.

17 THE COURT: Ms. Malonis?

18 MS. MALONIS: I would like address to — this

19 service plan, as it’s been said, is very general. And the

20 requirements are really not even possible right now with Ms.

21 Jeffs driving all over the State. I mean, I think she’s

22 probably spending most of her time in her car. So, certainly,

23 we are going to need to see some revisions.

24 I don’t have a suggestion for what those are,

25 other than consolidate, you know, getting these kids together

56

1 so that she is not — right now I think she’s set up to fail

2 under the service plan. I just don’t think it’s possible for

3 her to do those things while she’s driving around.

4 So that’s my concern. I want her to have the

5 best chance to be able to do what is — because I know that

6 she’s willing. And I want her to have the best chance to be

7 able to do that, because Teresa wants to be with her mother.

8 And I want that to be a real possibility.

Lets talk about Susan Hays, who was on Nancy Grace several times, and CNN for interviews. She was representing children to. Everytime I turned on CNN Susan Hays a Texas Attorney Ad litem was on.

Abby are you from Texas? Why don’t you folks give the FLDS a break without raiding them and hauling off their screaming children at gun point; having group kangeroo court hearings wherein 80 or so families are convicted of civil abuse without individualized evidence; dispersing siblings to the four winds; telling the parents if they jump through hoops they might get their kids back in a year or so; giving them all the same service plan that says their guilty and forcing them to sign on threat of losing their children permanently all as standard CPS [terror tactics] procedure; telling distraught mothers in the colliseum that their kids are not theirs; and employing a supposedly neutral party CASA to serve as a check against CPS brutality, when the chief feminazi, Ms. Voss, is a CASA affiliate and a CPS agent, making CASA in fact not neutral.

Wow, Joey, you couldn’t have described the terror regime better if you had actually been there. I totally agree that the treatment that YFZ dwellers received was un-American, un-Constitutional, and grossly inhumane. Those who have suffered at the hands of unchecked Governmental officials throughout America are watching closely to see what Texas will do as this tragic mess plays out. “When the wicked rule, the people mourn…”

I have told you before that I am unable to access that file at this time. I dont trust your version. I will read as soon as i can. If true that part about Annette jeffs driving all over Texas is a point in Natalie’s favor.

Even juveniles who have parents on death row are allowed to visit their parents. Yet thanks to Natalie Malonis, Teresa cant even write to her father. When Willie Jessop tried to remind her of her duty to represent her client, she obtained a restraining order against sa him. You and your favorite attorney refuse to believe that Teresa has a mind of her own.

How were these people’s right’s violated? A peacedful community is invaded by heavily armed police units based on nothing. CPS and their armed goons seized every single child these people despite the fact that this was supposed to be about underage marriages. Over 5oo women and children were marched out of their homes at gun point and thrown into the Fort Concho concentration camp. At the 14 day hearing, the 40 day hearing and the Merrainne Jessop custody, CPS stacked the case to its advantage. This is just a few that the people of the FLDS had their rights violated.

PROOF OF RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION: 1. Before the FLDS moved to Texas, the people had no problems with 14 year olds getting married. The law was changed soley becuase of the FLDS. religious persecution 2. CPS justified its seizure of of 400+ by launching repeated attacks on the FLDS belief system. religious persecution. 3. Large numbers of small children have been traumatized by their experiences. Yet the law continues to investigate the FLDS and not their oppressors at CPS. Indict Angie Voss 4. While the FlDS children were in captivity, CPS refused to allow the FLDS to conduct religious services for the children. Religious persecution. 5. The purpose or the raid was either the destruction of the FLDS or to drive them out of Texas. Religious persecution. The people were the target of a horrendous act of injustice. I will continue to attack their oppressors. You have my permission to be sick about it.

Who’s the architect of the FLDS persecution?
Probably the same cabal that got us into the war in Iraq.
The illuminati, as their sometimes called.
They are speculated to be the Counsel on Foreign Relations.
They’re behind the Federal Reserve.
They control the media.
They are also known as Big Brother.
They leverage governments and taxation to control the people.
Those who resist this control are systematically annihilated.

I could understand “substituted judgment” if Teresa was 13 or 14 & not 16 going on 17. She’s almost an adult, for crying out loud, and had she been charged with a criminal offense, she would be considered an adult. But no, in family law, she’s still considered a “child” and a “victim” so she is unable to think for herself.

WOW!
I’m lost on how what Susan Hays has done alters the judgment of conduct by Malonis. If Susan has been on Nancy disGrace more often, that is no reason to forget what Malonis said while on that program.

YFZ is a ranch. Perhaps it was considered ONE homestead because it was never declared a community in itself. YFZ has ONE post office box in Town, under the name of YFZ LLC. a corporation , a business.
The head or owner of the ranch identified himself as Merrill Jessop.
No one had a clue of how many people actually lived on the ranch, or how many children were there.
Yes there were lots of buildings on the ranch, yes some ranches have several buildings. And yes some ranches have separate housing for ranch hand families.
However, This ranch had 9 dormitory style buildings with as many as 30 people or more living in each building.
Its possible this is why this particular ranch was considered ONE.
And since we now know that the minor Keate has a baby and her mother was assuming she was the babys mother, maybe thats why Natalie Malonis suspected there were children of other minors, being assumed by older mothers.
We have the fact, that Dr. Barlow admitted to CPS that he had deleivered many babies to under age girls, not only on YFZ ranch but in other places as well, and yet he didnt report it, but the law in Texas requires doctors to report it.

Thomas , Yes I do want you to read the affidavits, instead of drawing unfounded conclusions.

Abby, says “I do want you to read the affidavits, instead of drawing unfounded conclusions” but right a couple paragraphs before, she says it’s perfectly reasonable for Malonis to draw wild conclusions from pure speculation; i.e. that “well since another family at the ranch has had an underage pregnancy, that means Teresa’s probably been pregnant too! Gee…I think I’ll put this excellent logical reasoning down in an affitdavits so the whole world can know the powers of my deductive reasoning.”

BTW, Abby, thank god Texas has a few appeals courts that can tell the difference between a corporation and a household. Apparently the rest of the Texas citizenry are a bunch of low-IQ idiots, and couldn’t tell the difference.

kdp, Is Judge Walther still handling this case? Did the SCOT remand her in any way? Tell her to recuse herself from this case?
No, they didnt.
As far as the law changing in 2005, most texans dont care that it was changed. They actually agree the law for marriage should of been older.
That being said, FLDS also knew the change in the law. Did they abide by the new law? No, maam they didnt.
Is that CPS, CASA, Judge Walther’s fault? No
Whose fault is it? Flds, who blatantly disobeyed the law.
Why did FLDS chose Texas? Because in 2003 our marriage law was 14. Utah and Arizona had already changed their marriage laws.
FLDS has never registered as a religious institution. Why?
Therefore, the temple was just another building, like any other building on the premises. The search warrants were given to the supposed head and owner of the YFZ ranch, Merrill Jessop. Im dont think of this issue in terms of emotional issues. Just law.

Do you have any clue how many “intentional communities” there are, in and around Austin and the Hill Country? Google “intentional communities” + austin or texas. And that won’t include the “religious communities”.

Since when does anyone have to divulge their intentions for a piece of property. Provided they follow code with their design, it’s nobody’s business.

I lived down the road from a religious community that many times had to defend against attempted unlawful intrusions. After the Waco disaster, helicopters slowly flew over their place several times a day.

WOW! I just googled that community, “Barsana Dham” and discovered that the founder of that community, following a 10 month “investigation”, was was arrested 25 April and charged with “groping two girls under 17″, twelve years ago between 93-95.
Ironically, no one seems to know where the girls came into contact with him. Hmmm. Will these claims turn out to be hoaxes as well.

Coincidence? What’s going on in Texas?

Back to Eldorado- Is anyone not concerned about the number of welfare mothers this plan could create, provided they ever did get their kids back? Stripped from a “lifestyle” that was self sustaining, forced to live seperately from their spouses, how many of the new single mothers would end up applying for government assistance for food, medical, housing, utilities? Then would come the complaints they were “bleeding the beast”. It’s a loose/loose situation for them, no way to win.

kbp and Curious Texan –

there were four ad litems at that hearing and Malonis was the only one who brought up the impossibility of the mother complying with the service plan because of all the time she spent driving.

Also notable is the fact that Malonis was the ONLY one who asked that the father be included in the process and asked that TJ be exempted from the policy disallowing pictures of WSJ.

Face it - Malonis is not the fire-breathing ogre you want her to be.

A CPS wish?
More than half of young mothers give birth out of wedlock”
“Think of it as a new “normal” in American family life.

After creeping slowly and steadily upward most of the last 50 years, the number of babies born to young unmarried women quietly crossed a troubling threshold in 2006.”

kdp,
Not inaccuracies. I just dont read into affidavits whats not there as you and many others do.

4 BY MS. MALONIS:

5 Q. Good morning.

6 A. Good morning.

7 Q. Would you state your name, please.

8 A. Adriana Pineira.

9 Q. And are you Teresa Jeffs’ child worker?

10 A. Yes, ma’am.

11 Q. How much contact weekly do you have with Teresa?

12 A. Any — anywhere between two to three times a week.

13 Q. Okay. And she is placed in Midland; is that correct?

14 A. Correct.

15 Q. All right. Has — has an educational assessment been

16 done for Teresa?

17 A. Yes, ma’am.

18 Q. And do you have any preliminary or final results from

19 that testing?

20 A. We do not have the results yet. However, the persons

21 who conducted the ARD, the admission review dismissal report,

22 did express that the children that are in the home were well

23 beyond target.

24 Q. Okay. And does — just as far as your observations of

25 and interactions with Teresa, does she appear to be an

41

1 intelligent sixteen year old?

2 A. Yes, ma’am.

3 Q. Have you noticed any kind of deficits in her intellect

4 or — or education that would give you concern?

5 A. No, ma’am.

6 Q. Have you had any contact or — have you had any

7 contact with or has anybody at that facility that you’re aware

8 of had contact with Teresa’s father?

9 A. No, ma’am, not to my knowledge.

10 Q. Have there been any discussions about how to include

11 him in this process?

12 A. Nothing’s been discussed as to what services or how

13 we’re going to incorporate his feedback with the children’s —

14 you know, child plan of service. That still hasn’t been

15 disclosed.

16 Q. Okay. Have there been any discussions about

17 contacting him or at what point he’s going to be included in

18 the process?

19 A. No, ma’am.

20 Q. Do you — do you have any — do you have an idea when

21 that might take place?

22 A. No, ma’am, I don’t.

23 Q. Is there a plan to include him?

24 A. Yes, ma’am.

25 Q. Generally?

42

1 A. Generally, by policy we are to contact both birth

2 parents.

3 Q. Okay. Do you — at what point did you learn who —

4 the identity of Teresa’s father?

5 A. My first initial visit she did disclose to me that her

6 father was Warren Jeffs.

7 Q. Okay. And is there a reason that he has not been

8 contacted?

9 A. I have no reason for that.

10 Q. Okay. Are there any particular policies at the

11 Midland facility with respect to Mr. Warren Jeffs?

12 A. As far as what? I’m sorry.

13 Q. Are — are there any policies at all at the facility

14 regarding Mr. Jeffs?

15 A. I was advised by the persons who are overseeing the

16 project that we were not allowing anything depicting Warren

17 Jeffs.

18 Q. Does that apply to all of the children?

19 A. Yes, ma’am. However, I do want to mention that some

20 of the items that both — that Teresa has, I’m not going to

21 force those things and pry those things away from her, which

22 include a photo album of her father.

23 Q. Okay. And what is your understanding for this policy

24 not to allow pictures of Mr. — of Teresa’s father?

25 A. Well, due to the fact that he is currently

43

1 incarcerated for sexual assault to a minor. Therefore, by

2 policy, it is not in the children’s best interest to continue

3 to have contact regarding the perpetrator.

4 Q. And would that be a — a policy that would be

5 Department wide, not just specific to this case?

6 A. That is correct.

7 Q. Does that present particular difficult issues with

8 respect to Teresa?

9 A. Very much so.

10 Q. And is there — is — has the — has the staff and —

11 discussed with you a way of dealing with that, with those

12 difficulties?

13 A. We do have a therapist that addresses any issues at

14 any point of time if they wish to speak with — with Jay

15 Holguin, (sic) who I believe is the therapist. However, it’s

16 to their discretion as to what they’re going to disclose.

17 Q. Okay. Has Teresa participated in any type of

18 counseling related to that issue in particular?

19 A. No, ma’am.

20 Q. Has she spoken with you personally about that?

21 A. Yes, ma’am, very impersonal, though.

22 Q. What is her — what is her demeanor?

23 A. Well, she’s really wanting to have pretty much

24 everything: her own CDs, the Ipods, that it also includes

25 sermons regarding Warren Jeffs and so forth. And she would

44

1 like to continue to have things that are about him.

2 MS. MALONIS: Objection, non-responsive.

3 Q. I asked you about her demeanor, her mood —

4 A. Oh, I’m sorry.

5 Q. — with respect to that issue.

6 A. Oh, well, she did get upset.

7 Q. Okay. Would — would you agree that it’s important to

8 have a — a particular plan in place for dealing with that

9 particular difficulty with respect to Teresa?

10 A. Yes, ma’am.

11 Q. Okay. Is that going to happen as far as you know?

12 A. Yes, ma’am.

13 Q. Okay. Would you also agree that the — that the

14 service plan as written would be difficult for Teresa’s father

15 to carry out?

16 A. I’m not sure.

17 Q. Okay. You have the service plan for the parents,

18 correct?

19 A. I don’t have that with me.

20 Q. And I don’t either.

21 MR. EDWARDS: May I provide one?

22 THE COURT: It’s your copy or the Department’s.

23 Let’s let the Department provide theirs.

24 MS. MALONIS: Thank you.

25 MS. GRIFFITH: Your Honor —

45

1 THE COURT: Yes.

2 MS. GRIFFITH: — may I address the Court on this

3 issue? We are aware of the problem in regards to the specific

4 children of Mr. Jeffs. And once the DNA testing is returned,

5 the Department, program staff and legal staff are working on

6 developing what the limitations will be. I’m not sure how much

7 this caseworker can address the specifics of that.

8 MS. MALONIS: Okay.

9 THE COURT: And is it that you’re trying to take

10 into account the fact that he is the biological father; and so

11 even if he is a convicted sex offender, he might have different

12 rights than he would as just a member of — of an extended

13 family, is that —

14 MS. GRIFFITH: As to his own children, yes,

15 there would be different rights in regards to his contact with

16 his own children or photographs or things they could receive

17 regarding him.

18 THE COURT: So the Department, from what the

19 caseworker testified, it sounds like they’re making some

20 exceptions in that she’s been allowed to keep the family album

21 that has pictures, whereas other children that have been

22 removed from — from the ranch, if they are not biologically

23 related to Mr. Jeffs are not being allowed to keep that type of

24 documentation.

25 MS. GRIFFITH: That is correct.

46

1 THE COURT: Okay.

2 MS. MALONIS: Okay. May I approach the witness,

3 Your Honor?

4 THE COURT: Yes, ma’am. If you want to just kind

5 of hand it across.

6 MS. MALONIS: I would like to.

7 Q. (MS. MALONIS) I’m handing you what the Department has

8 just handed me, which is the — which is the service plan for

9 Annette Jeffs and Warren Jeffs with respect to Teresa Jeffs.

10 If you’ll just glance through those tasks for a moment.

11 A. Okay.

12 Q. Would you agree that there’s going to be varying

13 ability to comply with that with respect to Annette Jeffs and

14 Warren Jeffs, as far as seeking job training, and because of

15 their living situations?

16 A. In reference to — to Mr. Warren Jeffs, yes.

17 Q. Okay. So just because their names are both listed on

18 the service plan, and the service plan is exactly the same,

19 that doesn’t mean they’re going to be treated the same; is that

20 correct?

21 A. That is correct.

22 Q. Okay. Have you met Ms. Annette Jeffs?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Have you — how much time have you spent with her?

25 A. I visited with her approximately two or three times

47

1 during her visit with two of her children.

2 Q. Okay. And how many visits has she had with Teresa?

3 A. Approximately two or three.

4 Q. Okay. Has she visited every opportunity she’s had?

5 A. Yes, ma’am.

6 Q. That she’s been permitted to?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Is Teresa receiving any type of — of education?

9 A. At this time they just completed the assessments and

10 so we’ve asked Midland Independent School District to take —

11 to make an assessment of her school materials. And they’re

12 going to decide what approach they’re going to take from there

13 on out.

14 Q. Okay. How — how soon do you anticipate or what is

15 the soonest you anticipate some type of education being given

16 to the children in High Sky?

17 A. I don’t want to give you an approximation, because I’m

18 not sure as to when that’s going to take place.

19 Q. Okay. Has Teresa stated to you what her priorities

20 are as far as her goals in this process?

21 A. Yes, ma’am.

22 Q. And what are those?

23 A. One of the goals is that she wants to be placed with

24 her siblings. And another goal that she’s mentioned to me is

25 that she wants to go back home.

48

1 Q. Okay. When — when Teresa says “go back home,” is it

2 your understanding that she means live with her mother?

3 A. Yes, ma’am.

4 Q. And that does not specifically mean go back to the

5 Ranch; is that your understanding?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Okay. Would you say that it is — it is equally or

8 near equally important for Teresa to be reunited with her

9 siblings as it is with her mother?

10 A. Yes, ma’am.

11 Q. Okay. Do you think that’s a goal that — that should

12 be looked into as far as trying to get that accomplished for

13 the well-being of Teresa and her siblings?

14 A. Yes, ma’am.

15 Q. Will you work for that to happen?

16 A. Yes, ma’am.

17 MS. MALONIS: Okay. I pass the witness.

12 [MALONIS]: You said a citation had been issued

13 for Warren Jeffs. Do you have a plan to get him served fairly

14 soon? I would like for him to have the opportunity to

15 participate.

Strange that Ms Malonis was the attorney ad litem for one of the women who was considered a minor, and yet Ms Malonis proved she was an adult.
Oh yeah, shes a BAD woman and attorney…… NOT!!

I am just amazed by anyone that can prove an adult is not a child!!

NOT

And the order of the testimony taken makes Malonis’ questioning on the same topics irrelevant when trying to prove she did some good for Annette, Warren or Teresa.

Nice try.

That’s because Doran’s informant had never been on the ranch, didn’t know who lived on the ranch, and only wanted to stir up a hornet’s nest for the FLDS.

Let me see…for one millstone for every one of these ‘offended’ children is over 400 millstones for Flora.

Nice.

You didnt SKK, I posted the latest story in Desert News today. I mentioned Rebecca Musser.

old young one –

TJ was not “thinking for herself” when the letter was written. Her mother admitted that it was written by several adults (as if that wasnt obvious). As far as Malonis’ response, it sounds like she is trying to keep TJ out of custody, not put her back in.

SKK, these people are going to beleive anything other than facts!

So I can know, too these things you hold to be true.

No one at the Ranch wants anything to do with Becky Musser.

Of course Teresa can’t think for herself! She’s a “victim.” Child victims have no brains, even when they’ll be turning 18 in 10 months. However, if Teresa had committed some kind of crime, the story would be otherwise. There was a very interesting Newsweek article by Dahlia Lithwick, entitled “When Age is Just a Number” discussing this.

What cracks me up with Malonis in the transcript is that she acts all concerned that Mr. Jeffs be notified as to the service plan so he can ‘PARTICIPATE’ and her next step is to have him banned from Teresa’s life.

Yea. Nice.

Oh…so Musser is Elissa Wall’s sister.

Well, there goes her credibility!

LOL LOL LOL

Annette is the mother of Teresa Jeffs and Barbara Jessop is the mother of Merrianne Jessop.

Chai Tea
The fact you dont know the difference after this length of time who Annette Jeffs is, and who Barbara Jessop is, is laughable… lol

Abby: Rebecca Musser was never at the XYZ Ranch. People who leave any religion have a vested interest in emphazing the negative. Their current testimony will reflect their role as anti-poygamy activists rather than their actual experiences within the FLDS. Lastly, name the women, who have actually been at the XYZ Ranch, who have testified about alleged abuses at the Ranch.

Thomasl, Yes I did find them confusing at the begining, but there are plenty of documents and lists online of families, you do figure out who belongs to who. And since Annette Jeffs and Barbara Jessop have been two mothers in the news so much lately, with thier daughters Theresa and Merrianne, I would think people would realize who they were talking about.
Kurt, I have no intention of what your saying, “bringing anyone to my way of thinking”
As far as Chai Tea goes, I was just explaining her ignorant remark back to her, that communications at YFZ were cell phones and computers. Some family members have since YFZ has been established talked to other family members who were excommunicated.
Although truth is , they havent seen them, doesnt mean they havent communicated in some way. I find your blog interesting but realize not everyone is interested enough to do the reasearch. They just fall on one side or the other.

Funny. If Musser had so much inside info, why is it that she didn’t tell Doran an accurate (not even ballpark) number of people living on the ranch?

Barbara
My guess as to the confusion of “Barbara” and “Annette” is that Annette’s late sister is Barbara, who was mentioned numerous times in the transcripts Kurt so kindly shared, as was Barbara walther.

As for Musser’s credibility, who appears to be Sheriff Doran’s main informant, doesn’t anyone find it hard to believe anyone who told Doran that men older than 17 YO used to temple bed to boink girls on a regular basis!!

Just a point of information:

The Barbara referred to in the news articles and court transcripts is Barbara Jeffs, not Barbara Jessop.

Barbara Jeffs is Annette’s sister and sister-wife (also married to Warren Jeffs). She is deceased; Annette is the legal guardian of her children.

Barbara Jessop is Merrianne’s mother and Merrill Jessop’s wife. She is referred to in a different set of news articles and a different set of court transcripts.

Huh?
Her name has been spelled Theresa and Teresa in both news stories and documents.
Just as in documents Suzanne Jeffs, wants to called Susan.

The woman who died of cancer was one of the wives of Warren Jeffs. If this were about justice, they would indict Angie Voss. The real child abuse has been committed by CPS.

I apologize to you to Chai Tea, I shouldn’t of been sarcastic back. Just one of those days:)

Everyone posts on politics, only a few people follow the FLDS story - and even fewer post balanced information.

Pliggy, Becky was seen at the Coliseum, running around telling the women she was there to “free” them.

Kurt,

I read Interested’s comment as a compliment to YOU for all you post on the YFZ mess.

Well, Rozita did make calls to a Washington State shelter or abuse hotline (need to read that affidavit again) & gave the address of an apartment in Everett, which is just north of Seattle. One begins to wonder what Becky Musser’s address is?

SKK: Its not that she is not credible. Some of us are not as gullible as you are. During The few days of the raid, some one may have been feeding information to the unarrested Rozita Swinton.

SKK,
In order for me to PROVE she is not credible to you I have to take into consideration the fact that YOU are a lawyer, and an adversarial lawyer to me. Thus my burden of proof must be qualified by your judgement according to some arbitrary statute.

Becky is not credible only to anyone with COMMON SENSE.

SKK

The only reason Becky is a topic of discussion is because she was an informant for Sheriff Doran.

If you wonder why “[s]omeone said she was not credible”, read all that that was attributed to Doran’s “informant” in the affidavits.

If she was the “informant”, as the documents say she was, she was NOT credible.