The overnight media reports are beginning to bring into focus some very troubling aspects of Texas’ case against the FLDS mothers and fathers. First, of course have to the be the reports that a 33 year old woman in Colorado Springs has been arrested for making prank telephone calls to police about false abuse claims. The Deseret News reports:
Police in Colorado Springs have arrested a woman for investigation of making a false report to authorities that may be connected to the Fundamentalist LDS Church’s raid on the YFZ Ranch in Texas.
The woman allegedly has a history of making calls while pretending to be a young girl.
Rozita Swinton, 33, was arrested on a warrant charging her with false reporting to authorities, a misdemeanor, the Colorado Springs Police Department confirmed in a brief statement issued late Thursday. Swinton was arrested at her home on Wednesday in connection with an incident that occurred in Colorado Springs in February, police said.
“The Texas Rangers were in Colorado Springs (Wednesday) as part of their investigation involving the compound in Texas. They left and have not filed any charges on Rozita Swinton as of this time,” Colorado Springs police said.
Colorado Springs police refused to release any other details, saying that the affidavit for the arrest warrant is sealed.
The woman, Rozita Swinton is now apparently free on $20,000 bail, while over 400 children are still separated from their mothers and fathers, and remain in Texas state custody. Of course, authorities have not conclusively tied this woman into the original call that sparked the FLDS raid; however, Texas is interested enough in her arrest to have sent Texas Rangers to Colorado, who apparently participated in her arrest.
The Salt Lake Tribune has a similar report:
A 33-year-old Colorado woman was arrested Wednesday for allegedly making false reports to law enforcement authorities. Texas Rangers, in Colorado as part of their investigation involving the polygamous FLDS compound in Texas, took part in the arrest, according to the news release from the Colorado Springs Police Department.
The woman, Rozita Swinton, was arrested at her Colorado Springs home at 6:45 p.m. and has been transported to the El Paso County Criminal Justice Center, according to the news release. Police say the arrest is related to a February incident in Colorado Springs.
Colorado Springs police offered no other details on the arrest, but ABC News is reporting Swinton was arrested after calling authorities and claiming to be a girl locked in a basement who was being abused.
Texas authorities were alerted to Swinton after Flora Jessop, a former member of the Fundamentalist Church of Latter Day Saints, told them she recently had been receiving calls from a girl claiming to be Sarah, the girl whose calls to authorities sparked the raid on the FLDS’ Texas ranch, according to ABC News.
CNN’s report is here.
The Denver Post reports here.
So, what does this mean? Too early to tell. Since Ms. Swinton hasn’t been arrested or even charged in the FLDS case there probably is no immediate impact for the Texas case; however, Texas–or better yet, even the FBI should certainly continue to investigate what involvement if any she has to the original call resulting in the Texas raid.
What about the trial itself? What facts have we learned thus far? This, to me, is the most troubling aspect of Texas’ case.
The Salt Lake Tribune’s lead story on Texas’ officials testimony yesterday:
SAN ANGELO, Texas – A child abuse investigator who led the initial foray into a polygamous sect’s west Texas ranch said Thursday that children are not safe there because their parents have a belief system that “turns boys into perpetrators and girls into sexual assault victims.”
Angie Voss, a supervisor with Texas Child Protective Services, spent six hours in an unprecedented custody hearing testifying about why the state took 416 children two weeks ago from the YFZ Ranch, owned by the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
Voss said one minor is pregnant and four have children. “There are young girls who feel the pinnacle of their existence is to get married whenever they are told and have as many children as they can have,” she said. Even infants and children in monogamous homes are not safe on the ranch, she said. “It’s not about religion. It’s about child abuse,” Voss said, drawing laughter from many of the 100 or so FLDS members in the audience.
A phalanx of attorneys from across Texas questioned how Voss could justify keeping the kids when she acknowledges they are healthy, loved and likely to be traumatized by the continuing separation.
“I don’t see how . . . on the evidence presented so far she [the judge] can do anything but send these kids back,” Kenneth Fuller, an attorney for six children, said outside the court.
I have to agree with Attorney Kenneth Fuller–and he is representing six children–not the mothers or the fathers. If the best Texas can do is claim that some future bad acts, or conduct might occur, therefore all 400 plus children must remain in Texas custody and control–I think the Texas case has major substantive problems. They want to keep these children from their mothers and fathers, and their homes because of a belief system. Not because of any physical or sexual abuse or conduct that has actually occurred–but because of a belief system. This is beyond troubling.
The Deseret News reports similar factual testimony:
SAN ANGELO, Texas — A child protective services supervisor acknowledged Thursday that the majority of children taken during a raid on an FLDS ranch showed no signs of physical or sexual abuse but should still remain in state custody because they are “at risk.”
“They will continue to grow up in an environment where young women have sex with older men, and young boys grow into adult men and have sex with young children,” said Angie Voss, with the Department of Family and Protective Services.
Her testimony was the pivotal highlight during Thursday’s 10-hour custody hearing that will continue today and may spill over into Saturday.
Voss, under cross-examination by attorney Amy Hennington, defended the agency’s contention that the adolescent boys and young babies should not return to the ranch because young boys are groomed to be predators and young girls are destined to be sexual assault victims.
“They are living under this umbrella belief that having a child at a young age is a blessing — any child in that environment would not be safe,” Voss said.
She said women may have had children when they were minors, some as young as age 13. At least five girls who are younger than 18 are now pregnant or have children, Voss said.
So, the vast majority of these children show no signs of abuse–despite the pre hearing media hysteria to the contrary–yet Texas believes they are better off in Texas CPS custody or the Texas foster care system. Wow!
The cross examination (greatest engine for the discovery of truth) continued:
Hennington, hired to represent some of the fathers, pointed out that babies would not become sexually active for years and that the agency, in essence, is taking action on what could happen 10 to 12 years down the road.
“So based on the supposition that this may happen one day in the future, 400 children should not be with their families?”
Voss replied, “Yes ma’am.”
Another attorney grilled Voss late in the evening on the options that could have been considered short of taking the children from their homes.
“What did you consider other than the death penalty? That is the equivalent of removing them from their homes. Tell me one reasonable thing you did to avoid taking the kids out of their homes,” said Kim Fuller, an attorney representing five children.
He also asked what harm she thought might result if there had been a hearing prior to their removal.
“I think we have just discovered the tip of the iceberg. There is abuse, there is neglect at the ranch. It is too soon to return any children back to parents,” she said.
This testimony is just mind boggling. Texas should keep the children because what might happen in the future. I’ve linked to the Texas Family Law statutes, allowing removal of children from their homes and I did not see anything that remotely allowing removal based on the facts we are from this court testimony. Rather, Texas must show “there is an immediate danger to the physical health or safety of the child or the child has been a victim of neglect or sexual abuse and that continuation in the home would be contrary to the child’s welfare.”
There seems to be a disconnect from this testimony and what the law actually requires. The other testimony I found intriguing was about the minor children and sexual abuse. From these reports as well as this one from the Salt Lake Tribune, Texas is focusing on a very small number of children, who may or may not be younger than what Texas law allows for marriage:
Earlier today, initial testimony focused on a sect membership roster and other records taken from a safe in the office of Richard Barlow at the ranch.
One document details the names, ages, and family relationships of sect members representing more than 30 families. Questioning a Texas Department of Public Safety sergeant who participated in a search of the ranch, attorneys representing the state focused in on 10 women between the ages of 16 and 19 listed as married to older men. Five were listed as having children.
On cross-examination, attorneys from legal aid groups representing FLDS women pressed the sergeant to admit many women were not listed as underage wives. The sergeant testified the list is also unclear on mother-child relationships.
So far, none of these women would be under the legal marriage age in Texas. It is unclear how old they might have been when they were originally married, or how old they were when they had their own children–assuming they have their own. This is a far cry from the media sensationalism of routine child brides and forced sexual abuse.
If I’m presenting the Texas case to the judge, I want my most persuasive and damaging testimony against the FLDS community presented up front–first thing–hold nothing back. If Texas has done that–if this is their most damaging, best evidence they have to keep these children from their mothers, fathers, then I think they will fail to meet their burden. In the United States of America, and even in Texas, you don’t get to punish people for their belief system. Certainly the relevant Texas statutes do not appear to contemplate such a possiblity.
Other Coverage worthy of note:
Grits For Breakfast (more on the Colorado arrest connection)
Previous FLDS Raid Posts
April 18, 2008 at 6:28 am
How many junior high schools in Texas with 416 students have no young mothers? The label “baby daddy” wasn’t coined to describe FLDS behavior!
April 18, 2008 at 6:35 am
The Texas AG was on the Today Show this morning. He said he’s not concerned with finding Sarah and the current case has no relationship with the current custody battle.
April 18, 2008 at 6:56 am
Ardis–Careful–don’t give the Texas CPS any further ideas!
Tim J--Yes, I can see why the Texas AG would say that on national TV, particularly in light of the facts now coming to light.
April 18, 2008 at 6:56 am
Dedicated do-gooders can be scary. This is the same woman who said she felt afraid at the FLDS compound because there were men around … even though the men were cooperative and were fetching the children so the CPS investigators could talk to them. And she thought it was creepy that when the FLDS bishop advised the adults (who initially were hesitant to help the CPS investigators … can’t imagine why) to cooperate … they immediately complied. To the CPS, you see, cooperation indicates guilt. Failure to cooperate indicates guilt.
And they see nothing wrong with this sort of thinking. Let’s hope someone in Texas does.
April 18, 2008 at 6:59 am
Dave,
Yeah, I as a bit amused with her characterizations of the ranch. She thought it was scary when she first went there. How scary was it when armored personnel carriers and storm troopers with automatic weapons appeared to take away all the children?
April 18, 2008 at 7:07 am
“In the United States of America, and even in Texas, you don’t get to punish people for their belief system.”
Well now you do. Even if they do return these kids I cannot imagine what kind of damage they have done to them and their parents and in my opinion NOTHING the state could ever do could make that right. Not that they would even try or care. They have shown no concern for anything other than being right this whole time. Try telling that to Marleigh Meisner and you will get an email from her saying “Every step we have taken in this process has been consistent with our policies and the law.” Yeah, right. Thanks for taking time out of lying to the world to lie to me personally.
April 18, 2008 at 7:20 am
“They want to keep these children from their mothers and fathers, and their homes because of a belief system.”
Guy – This overstates your case. Polygamy is illegal in Texas as a third degree felony. The FLDS not only believe in polygamy, they practice it as a community.
Along these lines, I’m wondering why the sole focus seems to be on abuse (for which there is little evidence) and not on the obvious violations of the Texas bigamy law. What do you think?
April 18, 2008 at 7:27 am
ECS,
I think it foolish to concentrate on the polygamy aspect–and, so do the attorneys general of Utah and Arizona, both of which have infinitely more experience with the FLDS community than does Texas. Both Utah and Arizona have wisely chosen to prosecute individual cases of abuse as they arise.
Taking these children away from their parents, is not the answer to the polygamy problem. Dumping these children in the Texas or any other foster care system is not a good resolution. I’m a bit surprised you think that would be good for these children.
And, it’s not my case–it’s Texas’ case. This is the evidence they have chosen to present at the hearing. From what I have read, their case boils down to beliefs, not conduct. This does not meet the statutory requirements in Texas.
April 18, 2008 at 7:31 am
How would one legally prove Polygamy?
April 18, 2008 at 7:33 am
“I think it foolish to concentrate on the polygamy aspect–and, so do the attorneys general of Utah and Arizona, both of which have infinitely more experience with the FLDS community than does Texas.”
Guy, regardless of your personal opinion, polygamy is an illegal activity in Texas. The state of Texas is free to prosecute people who violate the law and to punish them by fines and imprisonment if they are found guilty of their crime. I’m just wondering what the strategic value of focusing on the allegations of abuse rather than on the fairly obvious criminal activity of polygamy is. If you’re not interested in speculating about why, that’s fine.
April 18, 2008 at 7:37 am
Oh, I don’t think foster care is, on the whole, “good” for the FLDS children. Their parents, however, ran the risk of their children being removed from their homes and taken into state custody when their parents violated Texas law by cohabitating under the appearance of being married. The parents share much of the blame here for engaging in criminal behavior in the first place.
April 18, 2008 at 7:58 am
ECS,
So? I haven’t seen any evidence yet, that any of these FLDS kids are being abused or have been abused. Texas CPS officials have essentially testified the majority of children taken from their homes show NO signs of abuse. That’s what the Texas statutes address in terms of removing children from their homes. Violation of the Bigamy statutes does not appear to justify the removal.
I know you know that homosexual conduct was once illegal in Texas as well. Then, along came Lawrence–which will likely be used to eventually over turn the Texas Bigamy statutes.
And, it’s not just my personal opinion. As I’ve pointed out several times, its the considered legal opinion of the chief law enforcement officers of states where more polygamists live than anywhere else on the planet.
You’re kidding right? One reason is that Texas is not authorized to remove children from their homes for violation of the bigamy/polygamy statutes (which are likely unconstitutional anyway). If you can point me to some specific Texas statutory scheme suggesting otherwise–I would like to see it.
Further, if children are being abused, Texas apparently feels it appropriate to remove the children. They have enshrined that public policy in their family code. Remember, this is Texas’ case–not mine. They have chosen to remove over 400 children on abuse allegations–not polygamy. I suppose if you want to engage in speculation about why–you’ll have to address that question to the Texas CPS authorities.
Then why would you want them removed from their homes if their parents are arrested and convicted if that were actually to occur?
Well, so far Texas hasn’t been to successful in making that case in a court of law.
April 18, 2008 at 8:07 am
If you try and arrest them strictly on polygamy you are risking overturning Reynolds v USA I believe this is reason for not trying it.
Easier to avoid it rather than have it legalized by the surpreme court as an “alternative lifestyle choice”.
April 18, 2008 at 8:29 am
I think it would also be a tougher sell to the public.
April 18, 2008 at 8:34 am
As bad as this is, after the SL Trib article yesterday, I have to admit praying that something like this was the case.
April 18, 2008 at 8:41 am
Voss is looking very, very bad. I said it evidence came out of Texan malfeasance I’d join the chorus attacking them. If that’s the best they can do then consider me singing with the chorus.
April 18, 2008 at 8:46 am
Clark,
I have to agree with your assessment of Voss. She is not a good witness. I suppose it is possible Texas has better evidence, more substantive evidence; but, if so, I’m baffled why they didn’t present it right up front. Should be in interesting second day of testimony and evidence.
April 18, 2008 at 9:09 am
This kind of reminds me of “Minority Report”.
April 18, 2008 at 9:15 am
If the woman in Colorado is the caller “Sarah” then Ms. Voss has perjured herself.
Ms Angie Voss who testified today against the FLDS as a Texas State CPS investigator is ALSO a member of the Board of Directors for the Children’s Advocacy Center of Tom Green County a 501c(3).
http://www.cactomgreen.org/page.php?kei=7
Mission: Hope house is a facility that provides a warm, home-like environment for the children who are brought here for the interview process upon making an outcry of abuse or neglect.
and here’s what it takes to make that happen;
http://www.cactomgreen.org/index.php”
HOW TO HELP:
Recent events have unfolded before our eyes regarding the children and their mothers from the compound in Eldorado. This situation has brought to our collective attention that our nation truly has a heart to help those in need. The Children’s Advocacy Center of Tom Green County has received hundreds of calls asking the same question over and over, “How can I help?” While it is not possible to speak as to how to aid these individual situations, there are ways to help. The Children’s Advocacy Center has been caring for children in abuse or neglect situations for more than 15 years, and the process is always costly both in terms of money and personnel.
They need MONEY and they have a direct link for you to contribute to their “cause” on their front page http://www.cactomgreen.org/index.phpfront
Conflict of interest much?
April 18, 2008 at 9:22 am
Follow this from their fall 2005 Newsletter http://www.cactomgreen.org/files/newsletter_05_fall.pdf
“Voice for a Child”, by JoAnn Sellman, CASA caseworker
” Her name was not really “Sarah” but her story is real and best illustrates, among hundreds of children I have seen in the system,
why we are here to give these children a voice. “Sarah” was one of my first CASA cases as a volunteer.”
Does the name sound familiar? It’s the same name of the “victim” in this case.
“I was stunned at her quick dismissal of any risk if Sarah were placed back with her mother and her firm intention to do so without my input.
Granted, the worker had a lack of evidence on the mother and a duty to reunify the family; however, she had also made only a perfunctory
investigation.”
Read the whole “story” from their 2005 newsletter and the similarities are eerily familiar.
The lies of Texas are upon you and this plot gets thicker everyday. IMHO – These folks were beginning set up when they first rolled into town.
April 18, 2008 at 9:38 am
related video
TEXAS BAPTISTS RESCUE ABUSED FLDS CHILDREN
April 18, 2008 at 9:42 am
To make matters far worse, the Texas Foster Care system is horrible. Heavily medicating children with drugs is a common practice. See video at:
http://dayofpraise.blogspot.com/
As long as voters give the state power, power will be abused.
April 18, 2008 at 9:43 am
They want to keep these children from their mothers and fathers, and their homes because of a belief system. Not because of any physical or sexual abuse or conduct that has actually occurred–but because of a belief system. This is beyond troubling.
Amen. And thanks, as always, for the excellent coverage, Guy.
April 18, 2008 at 10:03 am
[…] 04/18/2008 11:03AM: Guy Murray at Messenger and Advocate has an even better rundown on the weakness of Texas’ case after the first day of […]
April 18, 2008 at 10:20 am
“But the judge decides to let the psychiatrist’s testimony go on, much as she would like to shorten the hearing, because she says she thinks it’s helping her in her decision.”
He just admitted to getting his info from the media and only interviewed a couple of girls!
Don’t experts have to prove their statements with things they documented from the group? (Like on 4/x/08 at 11:23 during my interview I observed name doing this or name said this?)
April 18, 2008 at 10:34 am
I’m confused by something that maybe some of you lawyer types can help me with:
Texas’s age of consent law allows individuals age 16 or older to be legally married. So the existence of pregnant 16-year-olds who are legally married is not prima facie evidence of rape. But what if the 16-year-old is not legally married to the father of her child and he is an adult? Is a 16-year-old legally able to consent to sex with an older man with whom she is not married? Is the age of consent for marriage the same as the age at which statutory rape no longer comes into play? I’m guessing that some of these pregnant teens are not legally married to the fathers of their children.
April 18, 2008 at 10:36 am
“After a little more than an hour, the judge dismissed Voss from the witness stand, cutting off questioning from the attorneys for the children.”
Don’t they have a right to question her for as many questions as they have? Why is she giving time for the psychiatrist narrative and not more time for the attorney’s to question Voss? Why isn’t each child’s lawyer allowed to question?
April 18, 2008 at 10:37 am
“I know you know that homosexual conduct was once illegal in Texas as well. Then, along came Lawrence–which will likely be used to eventually over turn the Texas Bigamy statutes.”
Not so fast. Despite Justice Scalia’s dissenting parade of horribles, the Lawrence majority was very careful to limit its opinion to: (1) overruling Bowers and (2) private conduct. In fact, the majority specifically carved out “public conduct” (i.e., marriage) from its opinion.
As long as the U.S. Supreme Court continues to recognize Reynolds as good law, the Texas bigamy statutes are legal and constitutional. I hope you don’t suggest to your clients that they are free to disregard laws that are “likely” unconstitutional. 🙂
Let me clarify, however, with respect to the removal of children born of polygamous marriages. If their parents are tried and convicted under the Texas bigmay statute and imprisoned, then these children will become wards of the state unless a suitable caretaker is found. Their cohabiting/polygamous parents are apparently living in violation of Texas law, and unfortunately the children may
reap the consequences of their parents’ criminal activity.
April 18, 2008 at 10:41 am
ECS
They can’t covict a wife of that, can they? It would only be the husband, mom would be around for the kids.
April 18, 2008 at 11:04 am
“As long as the U.S. Supreme Court continues to recognize Reynolds as good law…”
Maybe that should read, “As long as the U.S. Supreme Court refuses to recognize Reynolds as bad law…”.
April 18, 2008 at 11:17 am
Mark N. – heh. I’m not so sure this Court, particularly, has the appetite to overrule Reynolds. Indeed, the Court has cited to Reynolds approvingly over the years. I think only Justice Douglas ever directly criticized Reynolds – and that was in his Yoder dissent. After Yoder, the Court relied on Reynolds in Smith, and perhaps in more recent cases – I’ll look and get back to you if you’re interested.
April 18, 2008 at 11:17 am
ECS,
Well, if I had an arsenal of Texas Rangers with automatic weapons and armored personnel carriers I could probably be as cavalier about the law as is the Texas CPS; however, it is not so.
Well, I’m not certain I am clear. Are you advocating Texas take this position, i.e. prosecute the families for bigamy so that these children can be taken from loving homes where the are apparently well cared for, and placed in the Texas CPS system to suffer who knows what kind of abuse? It sure seems like it from your post over on fMh, and I am a bit surprised if that is your position. It seems a bit odd for a feminist to be advocating the state to steal mothers’ children from them without evidence of abuse, simply because Texas (or anyone else for that matter) doesn’t like the FLDS belief system.
April 18, 2008 at 11:34 am
Guy, on the contrary. Feminists are all for stealing children and indoctrinating them into the monolithic Cult of Feminism. 🙂
I’m not advocating that children be taken away from a good home. I’m not advocating that the state of Texas enforce its bigamy laws, either. I can’t say I’m comfortable, however, with young girls being isolated from the outside world, being taught that God wants them to become a plural wife, and then these girls being assigned to have sex with older men as a plural wife.
We’re not talking about consenting adults here. We’re talking about young girls being groomed to accept a lifestyle that the state of Texas has deemed criminal.
(I’m also not comfortable with young boys being abandoned in cities where they don’t know anyone because the older men have been promised all the young girls.)
I think you’re assuming too much when you say that the FLDS children will be left to languish in abusive foster homes. That’s an insult to good foster parents everywhere.
Anyway, I can agree with you that the state of Texas has really screwed up here. Lawyers should be falling all over themselves to represent the FLDS polygamists in a 1983 action against the state of Texas. (Until the state retaliates by throwing the polygamists in jail for breaking the bigamy laws, that is).
April 18, 2008 at 12:03 pm
ECS,
I don’t know. Being isolated from the cesspool we call the outside world may not be such a bad thing. We’re supposed to be in the world, but not of it. How ’bout young boys–same discomfort level?
Fortunately the child removal statutes are based on specific conduct of abuse and not our individual comfort levels of child rearing. I can’t say I’m comfortable letting any CPS system decide whether a child remains at home based on someone’s (not just yours) comfort level of how someone else may raise their children.
Again, that in an of itself is likely a protected First Amendment right parents enjoy. The FLDS religious belief system may not be my or even your cup of tea (section 89 prohibition notwithstanding), but, to condition the removal of children from their homes on what religious beliefs one choose to teach them is not where I want the State to go.
I can only assume you mean the subject case in Eldorado. I don’t think we’ve seen evidence of that. And, if there is evidence of criminal conduct–you have no argument from me on what should be done. But, unless and until there is credible evidence sufficient to allow the State to remove the children–they should not.
So, we should allow Texas to round up the young boys before they get to that age–to save them from their families? I’m not comfortable with that practice either; however, it sounds like criminal behavior that should be prosecuted. Not something to use as a pretext to take children away from their mothers.
I’m sure there are some good foster parents in the system. The fact is that most, if not all of these kids are de facto being abused by Texas for what they have done to them, and the conditions in which they find themselves now. But, to suggest–based on what we know thus far–these kids will all end up in better more loving homes than from whence they were kidnapped under color of law, I think is a bit of a stretch.
On the 1983 action–yeah–I’ve been thinking about getting a fight out to West Texas as soon as possible 😉
April 18, 2008 at 1:16 pm
Here’s why I think the state is focusing on abuse instead of polygamy/bigamy laws (besides the fact that the burden of proof for abuse means they can get away with saying just about anything):
Texas raised the age from 14 to 16 in 2005- and legislators admit that they passed this law deliberately to forbid the practices of this religious group. So marriage for 14 year olds was perfectly acceptable to state legislators, just not marriage for 14 y.o. FLDS members. They also strengthened laws against polygamy, making it a felony, also specifically to target FLDS groups (by their own public admission). Furthermore, the laws are so draconian that the only person arrested for polygamy so far is not charged with practicing it, but with teaching it. Freedom of speech, anybody? He’s not with the FLDS group, and his trial is in September. His lawyer says the law is badly worded and confusing, and offers two different penalties for precisely the same act.
I also think that legally the FLDS members are not actually married to more than one woman- they don’t get a license and have a civil ceremony. So for the state to prosecute them, they’d have to prosecute every adulterous or cohabiting couple in the state.
They know how messy their law is, and they would probably lose.
April 18, 2008 at 2:35 pm
The story about the 16 year old “Sarah” should have been suspictious to CPS. Reportedly she was pregnant and had fractured ribs from being assaulted by her “husband”, indicating she went to a doctor. But doctors and nurses are “legal reporters” and a doctor confronted with a teenager in a situation like that would have certainly called the police. This would have led to the arrival of an officer and a social worker from CPS, and there would be a record of it. CPS knows this is how it works so why would they stage an armed raid on that community based on an anonymous recorded phone call?
Thank you Guy Murray for a VERY informative website.
April 18, 2008 at 2:54 pm
The strategic value of focusing on abuse is that it allows the seizure of children.
If someone commits a crime they do not lose their parental rights in the same way they do if they have abused their child.
Children have the highest value to the FLDS so taking their children is the swiftest way to gain control over the sect.
April 18, 2008 at 4:01 pm
Laura, given the distinctive way the members of the community dress and do their hair, you’d think the hospital that cared for ‘Sarah’ and her broken ribs would have really remembered her, wouldn’t you?
I think CPS knew going in that there was a high probability there was no ‘Sarah.’
April 18, 2008 at 5:40 pm
Texas DCFS spokesperson Marleigh Meisner looks like a total slut. I’ll bet she has at least four tattoos.
Amazing how those whorish, ciegerette butt stinking, tattoed up manhaters who kill their own babies think they have the right to tell normal people how to raise their kids.
I hope that beast comes down with a case of virulent brain cancer. It would serve her right.
And furthermore, this whole episode reeks of Utah’s own AG Caiphas Shurtleff. He leave a stench whereever he goes.
April 18, 2008 at 11:38 pm
To me the valid argument here is the same as that when DCFS takes a child from a known drug home environment even if the parents are not participating drug users.
The FLDS group is in essence if not literally one big family.
A child does not have to have been given drugs to be taken. The child’s parents don’t have to be drug users for the child to be taken. It could be another family member living in close proximity to the child.
The cases are similar and justified because if the parents knowingly neglect the child by keeping them in a harmful and abusive environment they relinquish a portion of rights of parenthood. Why should that not hold true with a sexually abusive environment, if it does hold true in a drug abuse environment?
April 19, 2008 at 3:10 pm
“truth’’s comment (number 39) does no one a service, least of all him/herself.
I wonder if the whole point of this action isn’t that Texas knows it will fail legally, but they are trying to deliver a big “f*** you” to the FLDS and harass them to the point that they will leave the state…
April 19, 2008 at 10:17 pm
The Tribune article states, “But the shelter has little more than notes from the call taker to check into the veracity of the original call, … Only one line at the shelter has caller identification, and “Sarah” did not call on it, … Calls into the shelter are not recorded.”
How can the state of Texas justify a military style invasion (body armor, M16s, armored personnel carrier, helicopter) on this basis? Can someone with legal background explain that to a layman like me?
This reminds me of President Buchanan’s sending Johnston’s army into Utah to suppress the Mormon rebellion which never existed.
April 19, 2008 at 10:23 pm
As the news of the original invasion broke, numerous reports circulated of multiple pregnant 14 year olds — proof of statutory rape. Yet there were also reports of no birth certificates. Can age be medically determined without records? If the authorities cannot prove the age of the girls, how can they “prove” child rape?
April 20, 2008 at 12:15 am
An online search reveals that Rozita Swinton (32) has a possible roommate/associate named Christal R. Frakes (39) and/or Virgina Rosamond Morgan (44). A Google search on Christal Frakes is associated with Ecofeminism. My guess is that Rozita Swinton may have been motivated by her feminist associates in the CPS community. The media keeps portraying the FLDS as intolerant of outside views, but it seems to me the group most intolerant are the radical feminists who hate men more than they love either women or children. The feminists and family court lawyers and judges have built an entire industry around their campaign to minimize men in the lives of their children. When other women don’t cooperate with the feminist agenda, the CPS, Police, Public Schools and Hospitals get involved and present a threat of removing even helthy, well-balanced children from their homes and placing them, in some cases, with known pedophiles. Other beneficiaries of the feminist industry include Planned Parenthood and owned politicos. There is no doubt in my mind that these hundreds of innocent children are in MUCH GREATER DANGER of being physically, emotionally and sexually abused in the homes of complete strangers acting as so-called foster parents than back in their FLDS community. Texas has a terrible history of foster care and juvenile center abuses, and anyone should question the qualifications of foster parents, their background checks, motivation, financial reward, etc. From what I’ve seen on television, these kids look very clean, well fed, polite, and peaceful. Would it be better to convert the girls into anorexic, gang bang saddle tramps? Or to turn the FLDS boys on to Ritalin, violent games and pop culture? I would say the odds are 80% or better that the next news we hear on television is that one of the young girls has been raped by her foster mom’s boyfriend or husband or that one of the babies has been shaken to death by a CPS-friendly child care worker. All the court needs to do is just prosecute any FLDS man who has married an under-age 17 year old. Leave the rest of the community alone. Return these beautiful, healthy, godly children to their parents. Stop trying to usurp the role of parent for the sake of a feminist-run family court industry.
April 20, 2008 at 12:33 am
This CPS industry is so large and powerful that our only hope of defeating it is that it will no longer receive tax-funding when our our entire economy collapses due to ststemic corruption at the highest levels, moral bankruptcy, destruction of the American family, and enormous debt-funding associated with costs of the miltary, welfare, family court and prison-industrial complex. I hope Texas is the first state to go bankrupt, and I hope it’s this case that is the straw to break the camel’s back.
April 20, 2008 at 9:18 am
George I did not understand why people were concerned about them being in baptist or catholic home because a difference of religion when they are in danger of being raped and abused in foster care, if the foster family is safe the religion is my LAST concern.
Being exposed to a catholic family who crosses themself before prayer or having to attend AWANA with a baptist family and coloring a sheet with a bible verse printed on it not emphasized in FLDS doctrine doctrine but who will keeps them safe doesn’t even compare to the living nightmare these kids may face of a being repeatedly raped and abused in the state’s care.
April 20, 2008 at 1:27 pm
Rozita Swinton is a HERO! This mess is about child abuse. Not religious rights. The FLDS lives in the USA, and must abide by at least the minimal of child protection laws. Let them straighten up their act, then give them the kids back. Children must be protected. May God bless and keep Rozita Swinton.
April 20, 2008 at 9:01 pm
If Rozita Swinton is a hero, let me ask everyone this: Who would you have babysit your own child, Ms. Swinton or a FLDS mother? Looking at Rozita Swinton, the only way I’d let her watch my child is with a SWAT team in the closet and a hidden nanny cam. She looks to me like one sick twisted beyatch.
April 21, 2008 at 5:05 pm
The fact is that these children have no choices and never will. America is called the land of the free, not the land of the compound with guard towers and 10-foot walls. These kids have never seen the outside world, and if left as is, never would. Now, you might think that’s ok, and if they chose that route then fine. But these people are way past religion – they’re promoting a way of life that destroys free will. And it’s not fair that those kids have to live in that compound for the rest of their lives – especially the girls. (The boys get out – because they’re thrown out to make more wives for the old men.)
Good for Texas – do what needs to be done to give these kids an opportunity at a real life.
April 22, 2008 at 1:52 pm
1) PLEASE COMPLAIN IN WRITING
To send a real complaint against Judge Barbara Walthers not just an internet rant – link over to State Commission on Judicial Conduct and please fill out the form.
She has purposefully ignored TX law to the detriment of children & the benefit of TX CPS. Judge Dean Rucker is her boss – rant to him – bombard his phone (432.688.4390) line about Ms. Walthers horrible rulings.
2)Contact the Texas ACLU. (512) 478-7300 Boy do I hate them – but they could actually do some good in this case – A REAL CIVIL LIBERTIES VIOLATION Of ALL OF OUR PARENTAL RIGHTS. Insist they help, not just listen on the sidelines.
Please help these poor babies who are going to be ripped from their mothers gentle breast – the system is not defending them but abusing them for its own political scorecard!
April 22, 2008 at 9:04 pm
This ranch was raided with shaky probable cause, trumped up warrant, and rabid CYS workers. From DAY ONE, the CYS workers spoke ADOPTION. That is just unbelievable. How would you know enough then to say you are taking these children for adoption?
The local sheriff has had an insider there getting all the info on the sect. That is because they dont want all those men and women turning into voters. Then they would be out on their ass. A tank and swat teams? WRong wrong wrong. Those children should have been sent back home, or better yet, never been taken.
April 27, 2008 at 3:58 pm
It is official.
There are just three girls under the age of 18 that the state thinks may be pregnant from FLDS.
One will be 18 years old in a month, one refused to take a pregnancy test and one whose age is yet to be determined.
Among many references to this account: The Salt Lake Tribune 04/26/2008 05:14:10 PM MDT
Bingo, no abuse, no arrests, no adults detained, no underage pregnancies. (By Texas law, underage is “under 16”).
But the State is still refusing to release the kids. Two children under two years of age are now missing by the State of Texas’s own admission! (Though I am sure some logical explanation will come up) Three or more little children are hospitalized as of Friday; one is in critical condition because he is an infant that could not adjust without his mother’s milk. CPS admits that many have contracted chicken pox, measles, diarrhea, flu, viruses and other diseases they were not inoculated for now that they are exposed to the “mainstream” and are blaming it on the parents. And of course, as we all now know, (providing you have some education on the subject), the State of Texas has now concluded that the original call was a hoax.
Those of you who judged and made accusations should hope someone other than a person like yourself is around to defend you should you have the misfortune of having your life torn apart if someone should take your child.
Tragic.
http://origin.sltrib.com/news/ci_9056589
April 29, 2008 at 2:20 pm
The lawyers for the parents should file in the Hague against the governor of Texas on the charges of genocide.
Below are the criteria for genocide to be present according to the United Nation.
Article II: In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
That would be very interesting and I am sure the europeans would love the publicity for the Hague.
April 30, 2008 at 12:42 am
Please help these babies, children, mothers, and fathers who are being tortured by the State and CPS.
The litigation, just to get back your own child, is expensive, never mind the lawsuits which must be brought against CPS, etc., (and which will benefit all of us who oppose tyranny) will be very costly. These people need help. Anything you can give would be helpful:
http://www.captivefldschildren.com/
Mrs. Johnson,
vancouver, Canada.
October 1, 2018 at 11:41 pm
carpentersville
Texas FLDS Custody Hearing