Texas Polygamist Raid: Unjustified Persecution?

[CaptainQuasar]

Okay, is anyone else starting to look askance at this http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/life/religion/5682336.html" raid thing? There's been a couple days of reportage on this now and still no journalists are stepping up to the plate with explicit reasoning concerning what justifies taking 401 children away from their parents.

Taking a child away from his or her parents is a pretty drastic step and obviously "The parents are polygamists!111!" is by no means sufficient justification to do that. My hope is that this is all just sloppy journalism but it looks mighty suspicious to me that they're now unable to find the girl who made the phone call. Particularly when that phone call is being paraded around as if it amounts to justification to take the other kids.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_Jeffs" is obviously a bad guy but this is too serious a step to be taken without well-thought-out and well-articulated justification, it's an action that would be very prone to guilt by association and religious discrimination. And even if the doctrine of this fringe Mormon group was fundamentally illegal - which no one seems to be in a hurry to demonstrate - that still isn't grounds to take the children of the religious adherents. Frankly it seems pretty unAmerican to me.

Especially since Mormonism is the only religion in the history of these United States which has had a government http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extermination_Order_(Mormonism)" issued against it, which wasn't overturned until 1976, we ought to be treading more carefully around actions which amount to religious persecution if they're unjustified. Personally I'm inclined to think that if this was a group of hippie free-love polygamists, or a group of Muslim polygamists, this action would not have been as gung-ho and cavalier and blithely covered as it appears to have been.

 

[lisab]

It does seem extreme...

But I can see it from the authority's point of view, too.

I saw an interview of a woman who left this offshoot of the Mormon church several years ago. Her story of abuse was pretty shocking. She painted a picture of a closed society where the men, the older men, had all the power. Women were not allowed to make their own life choices, and not allowed to talk to people outside of their society. She said there was rampant child abuse. Girls are routinely forced to marry older men.

Granted, this is the one-sided story from one person.

Given the nature of this closed society, how were the authorities supposed to procede? The girl who made the call deserves the same protections as any 16-year-old girl.

But I can see your point. And I have no problem with polygamy per se, as long as the people who choose to live that way are adults. And that's the crux of the problem: how true is it that the female children are forced to marry older men?

Also, as I understand the story, they didn't take just the children; they took their mothers, also.

In the interest of full disclosure, my dad was raised Mormon. It didn't "take." But as I grew up we had a lot of contact with the Mormon church. I have no issues with mainstream Mormonism.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

it looks mighty suspicious to me that they're now unable to find the girl who made the phone call. Particularly when that phone call is being paraded around as if it amounts to justification to take the other kids.

I don't understand all facets of this thing. However, the accusation she makes is a serious one and the authorities have no choice but to investigate.

The dayslong raid on the sprawling compound built by the now-jailed Jeffs was sparked by a 16-year-old girl's call to authorities that she was being abused and that girls as young as 14 and 15 were being forced into marriages with much older men.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23993440"
Is the purpose of this sect is to provide children as sexual objects to adults? It sounds like it.

 

[CaptainQuasar]

My point is, I'm wondering if the girl who supposedly made the phone call even exists at all. Given the information that has surfaced so far the phone call being fabricated (with or without the knowledge of the authorities) seems just as feasible to me as the idea that she is subject to some sort of Mafia-style sequestration by this fringe Mormon church, which is a theory I have heard advanced on the news (with basically no supporting evidence).

Thanks for the MSNBC link jimmy, it's much more informative than many of the reports I've seen.

lisab - there isn't a single Mormon church. The LDS headquartered in Salt Lake City is the largest one but it's one of many.
[EDIT] re-reading your comment, you obviously realize this, sorry. Based on the name these guys sound like an offshoot of the LDS but there are other churches too that grew up from the early post-Joseph-Smith community that developed separately from the Utah LDS.

As far as how the authorities were supposed to respond - they should be a lot more explicit about why they're separating the children from their families - so many of them! - rather than just mentioning the single phone call and the criminal acts of a few people who happen to be coreligionists of these families. If there's sexual abuse going on that obviously needed to be stopped but I'm concerned that authorities had an itchy trigger finger over this. Child sex abuse is definitely just about the paramount crime below murder (probably worse than murder in some people's eyes and I might go along with that) but the thing is that persecution of an entire religion is pretty far up there too, especially under Really Bad Things the Government Does.

As far as I'm concerned the Mormons are pretty whack but ever since I read about the Missouri Extermination Order I've taken more notice of how societal condemnation of them is a bit overdone and in many cases unjustified or prejudicial. "Ha ha, silly Mormons" is one thing but taking their children, unless it's done with a rock-solid justification and completely by the book, is right out, and it seems pretty clear to me that at least the public explanation of this action did not receive due attention from the authorities who planned this raid.

 

[CaptainQuasar]

I'm also curious, if anyone comes across it, whether the 401 kids are all of the children in the community.

I really hope I'm wrong to question this, that it's really stopping child abuse and not the equivalent of invading an Amish or Mennonite community and taking all their children.

 

[lisab]

I really hope I'm wrong to question this, that it's really stopping child abuse and not the equivalent of invading an Amish or Mennonite community and taking all their children.

No, I don't think it's wrong to question the authorities. After all, ideally "the authorities" are simply the eyes, ears, and hands of all of us.

I see both sides of this...it's extreme to remove all the women and children, but since it's such a closed society I don't know how else the authorities could deal with this.

Amish and Mennonite societies aren't mainstream but they're not closed, as far as I know. We have a few Mennonites here in Seattle, they send their kids to public school.

 

[CaptainQuasar]

Amish and Mennonite societies aren't mainstream but they're not closed, as far as I know. We have a few Mennonites here in Seattle, they send their kids to public school.

There are some Amish and Mennonite communities that are like this. I visited a Mennonite community in Montana once that was a self-contained farm and a group of large buildings that were a communal residence, like this place in Texas, where they had their own school. I believe some Amish communities in Pennsylvania are like this as well. (Though many of the Amish are private land owners and private businessmen who simply have a tight-knit community.)

 

[TVP45]

Children and Youth Services (or whatever the local names are) in most localities have, by law, a prime directive: protect the children. In most cases, this means that, if there is an allegation of serious harm (pedophilia counts), they immediately remove the children, then investigate. It doesn't matter if it's 400 FLDS children or 1 Baptist child.

And, most Mennonites are quite mainstream. Except for the Old Order ones who wear distinctive clothing and drive buggies, it's very difficult to even distinguish most Mennonites.

 

[Gokul43201]

Given the information that has surfaced so far the phone call being fabricated (with or without the knowledge of the authorities) seems just as feasible to me as the idea that she is subject to some sort of Mafia-style sequestration by this fringe Mormon church, which is a theory I have heard advanced on the news (with basically no supporting evidence).

If you think that sequestration and abuse of women is a rarity amongst fundamentalist Mormons, I'll be happy to provide you with links that demonstrate how far this is from the truth.

Here's a recent piece: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/24008870#24008870
PS: In the words of a Child Protective Services spokesperson:

"We had enough information to show a judge that many of these children had in fact been abused and others were in jeopardy."

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2004333934_poly08.html

 

[Art]

From what I have read there is no evidence of systematic child abuse. So far there seems only to be the one case involving the guy Barlow. Unfortunately every social grouping has it's share of pedophiles so at first sight it does seem a little over the top to seize every child in the community because of one rotten apple.

If that scatter gun approach, where the many are assumed to share the criminality of the few, was adopted in main stream society there wouldn't be a child in the country left living with their parents.

It doesn't matter if it's 400 FLDS children or 1 Baptist child.

and therein lies the difference. If it was a baptist child only that one would be taken into care not the entire community's children.

 

[BobG]

Children and Youth Services (or whatever the local names are) in most localities have, by law, a prime directive: protect the children. In most cases, this means that, if there is an allegation of serious harm (pedophilia counts), they immediately remove the children, then investigate. It doesn't matter if it's 400 FLDS children or 1 Baptist child.

I don't think this falls in the normal realm of Children and Youth Services. For your more normal situations, an allegation of serious harm to one child doesn't result in a search warrant to search an entire town and remove every child in the town.

An allegation of an underaged runaway being forced into prostitution wouldn't result in an entire neighborhood being searched, let alone an entire city.

I'm not sure whether the action is right or wrong, but even attempting to compare this to anything "normal" is fruitless. (In fact, using El Dorado as a precedent for actions in more "normal" communities would be extremely disturbing.)

 

[BobG]

From what I have read there is no evidence of systematic child abuse. So far there seems only to be the one case involving the guy Barlow. Unfortunately every social grouping has it's share of pedophiles so at first sight it does seem a little over the top to seize every child in the community because of one rotten apple.

If that scatter gun approach, where the many are assumed to share the criminality of the few, was adopted in main stream society there wouldn't be a child in the country left living with their parents.

and therein lies the difference. If it was a baptist child only that one would be taken into care not the entire community's children.

I think they have a slightly different definition for pedophile than the rest of the country. They might not rape pre-pubescent girls, but their acceptable age for marriage is lower than 18.

In other words, Barlow isn't unusual and isn't even considered a pedophile within their own community.

 

[Art]

I'm a little concerned by some of the comments coming from Marleigh Meisner. They smack more than a little of zealotry

"We are dealing with many victims, and of course, the setting is different than we're accustomed to," said Marleigh Meisner, spokeswoman for CPS.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23964357/

Victims? There has been no evidence presented so far that any crime has even been committed much less who the victims are and yet she seems to have jumped past all due process in announcing all the children are victims.

And this doesn't fill one with confidence either

Children's Protective Services spokesman Marleigh Meisner, who said she was also involved in the 1993 siege of the Branch Davidian compound in Waco.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23993440 What a disaster that turned out to be.

She comes across as one of those 'all men are rapists' type of feminist.

 

[TVP45]

This may in fact be Texa size over-reaction, but the removal (they were not seized) of the children is in line with what happens everyday across the US following an allegation (Note: in most locales, it only requires an allegation to trigger this). As a society, most of us decided long ago that the safety of children warrants a several day suspension of adult rights.

 

[Art]

This may in fact be Texa size over-reaction, but the removal (they were not seized) of the children is in line with what happens everyday across the US following an allegation (Note: in most locales, it only requires an allegation to trigger this). As a society, most of us decided long ago that the safety of children warrants a several day suspension of adult rights.

The US Court of Appeal and Supreme Court says otherwise

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit said it best, "The government's interest in the welfare of children embraces not only protecting children from physical abuse, but also protecting children's interest in the privacy and dignity of their homes and in the lawfully exercised authority of their parents." Calabretta v. Floyd, 189 F.3d 808 (1999).
snip
The Fourth Amendment itself spells out the evidence required for a warrant or entry order. No warrant shall issue but on probable cause. The United States Supreme Court has held that courts may not use a different standard other than probable cause for the issuance of such orders. Griffin v. Wisconsin, 483 U.S. 868 (1987).

If a court issues a warrant based on an uncorroborated anonymous tip, the warrant will not survive a judicial challenge in the higher courts. Anonymous tips are never probable cause.

http://www.hslda.org/research/docs/200404020.asp

 

[lisab]

Here's an article I referred to in an earlier post:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24009286/

Again, it's just one woman's story. But since it's a closed society, that may be all the insight we're going to get.

The part where she talks about what sounds like waterboarding infants made me cringe. I wonder, was it widely practiced, or just that one sadistic b@astard?

 

[TVP45]

Calabretta v. Floyd makes it clear that child protective workers can't do this without a warrant, except in an emergency. In Calabretta, there was a significant period of time (I think more than a week) between the allegation and the home entry.

In this vein, you might find the Texas law relevant:
http://www.dfps.state.tx.us/Handbooks/CPS/Files/CPS_pg_5250.asp

And, by the way, I should disclose a personal bias. I consider sex with a child, say under sixteen, by an adult to be deserving of the death penalty. That point of view colors anything I post.

 

[Art]

Calabretta v. Floyd makes it clear that child protective workers can't do this without a warrant, except in an emergency. In Calabretta, there was a significant period of time (I think more than a week) between the allegation and the home entry.

In this vein, you might find the Texas law relevant:
http://www.dfps.state.tx.us/Handbooks/CPS/Files/CPS_pg_5250.asp

And, by the way, I should disclose a personal bias. I consider sex with a child, say under sixteen, by an adult to be deserving of the death penalty. That point of view colors anything I post.

First federal constitutional law trumps state law and in the case cited it says except under exceptional circumstances a warrant is required and that warrants cannot be issued on the basis of anonymous calls. If an anonymous call is insufficient probable cause to obtain a warrant then it is definitely insufficient to claim emergency intervention. Also from your link

or on information supplied by another source and confirmed by the worker

so where was the confirmation??

I agree pedophiles are a blight on society but that doesn't justify discarding due process.

 

[Art]

Here's an article I referred to in an earlier post:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24009286/

Again, it's just one woman's story. But since it's a closed society, that may be all the insight we're going to get.

The part where she talks about what sounds like waterboarding infants made me cringe. I wonder, was it widely practiced, or just that one sadistic b@astard?

Or is she just trying to sell her book??

In a newspaper article she also claimed nobody can leave the community - ever. And yet she's living proof that statement was at the very least an exaggeration.

 

[TVP45]

Calabretta is about a warrantless entry after a significant time period. It has nothing to do with this case.

In your second quote, did you notice the "or"?

 

[jaap de vries]

First of all the children and women are not forcefully removed but and are free to go back which many of them probably will. This is not a religion but a cult and the main definition of that is power over people, usually women.
Now, in almost any other cult you can see that this power over women/children creates abuse also on other areas. I am sorry but I think the authorities are handling it very well so far, they are very carefully and do not wait until its too late and the people start drinking cool aid or put themselves on fire.

 

[Evo]

Okay, is anyone else starting to look askance at this http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/life/religion/5682336.html" raid thing? There's been a couple days of reportage on this now and still no journalists are stepping up to the plate with explicit reasoning concerning what justifies taking 401 children away from their parents.

There seems to be some misunderstanding, 133 mothers left VOLUNTARILY WITH THEIR CHILDREN and are all staying TOGETHER at a location provided by the authorities.

Some 133 women left the ranch voluntarily with the children and were being housed at a historic fort here while authorities conduct interviews. Dressed in ankle-length dresses with their hair pinned up in braids, the women milled about Monday as the children played on the fort's old parade grounds

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080408/ap_on_re_us/polygamist_retreat .

 

[Art]

First of all the children and women are not forcefully removed but and are free to go back which many of them probably will. This is not a religion but a cult and the main definition of that is power over people, usually women.
Now, in almost any other cult you can see that this power over women/children creates abuse also on other areas. I am sorry but I think the authorities are handling it very well so far, they are very carefully and do not wait until its too late and the people start drinking cool aid or put themselves on fire.

Hmmph someone else who doesn't believe in due process. The old 'Kill them all and let God sort them' out seems very medieval these days.

If the children are free to return to their parents who in turn are free to return to the compound then why is the CPS in the process of placing the children with foster parents?

 

[lisab]

First of all the children and women are not forcefully removed but and are free to go back which many of them probably will. This is not a religion but a cult and the main definition of that is power over people, usually women.
Now, in almost any other cult you can see that this power over women/children creates abuse also on other areas. I am sorry but I think the authorities are handling it very well so far, they are very carefully and do not wait until its too late and the people start drinking cool aid or put themselves on fire.

Good point. Imagine that this were to come to a point of mass homocide / suicide (as cults sometimes do). If it was revealed that a girl had made a despirate call for help some months previous, all hell would break loose.

The authorities would certainly have some 'splaining to do.

 

[Art]

Good point. Imagine that this were to come to a point of mass homocide / suicide (as cults sometimes do). If it was revealed that a girl had made a despirate call for help some months previous, all hell would break loose.

The authorities would certainly have some 'splaining to do.

Anybody can 'imagine' anything no matter how farfetched which is why it is important to follow the law.

If the law proves to be inadequate then change it but to simply ignore it is a very dangerous slippery slope to start down.

 

[TVP45]

Hmmph someone else who doesn't believe in due process. The old 'Kill them all and let God sort them' out seems very medieval these days.

If the children are free to return to their parents who in turn are free to return to the compound then why is the CPS in the process of placing the children with foster parents?

There was a warrant. Due process was followed.

There was a court order giving CPS temporary custody. You are confusing short-term foster care with long-term foster parents.

 

[Art]

There was a warrant. Due process was followed.

I've already provided a link to a Supreme Court ruling that anonymous tip offs are insufficient to justify a warrant.

There was a court order giving CPS temporary custody. You are confusing short-term foster care with long-term foster parents.

There was a suggestion the children had not been separated from their parents I was pointing out that was not the case in which context whether the separation is short term or long term is irrelevant.

This whole business seems to me to smack of a fishing expedition by the Texas CPS led by a zealot.

 

[CaptainQuasar]

If you think that sequestration and abuse of women is a rarity amongst fundamentalist Mormons, I'll be happy to provide you with links that demonstrate how far this is from the truth.

I am in no way saying it's impossible that the girl exists and is sequestered - all I'm saying is that the reportage I've seen of that theory seems to have little basis in facts and that there's little citation in general of facts or specific allegations that would appear to justify taking the children of a set of families based upon those families' religious beliefs. If cheerfully fact-free speculation is the order of the day in this case then it would be appropriate to also wonder, as I have above, that perhaps the phone call may have been a fabricated pretext to invade that community.

I am sick of government officials overly impressed with their own valiant righteousness sloppily fabricating pretexts to invade places. If you think that's a rarity I'd be happy to provide my own links.

Now it's quite possible that it's both a fabricated phone call and a case of genuine widespread child abuse in the community; but in that case the individuals fabricating the phone call have seriously screwed up the possibility of justice being done in this situation (and probably damaged the welfare of the children involved), will have hardened the resolve of fundamentalist Mormons that the beliefs of wider society are prejudicial and persecuting, and will probably have jeopardized the welfare of children in future situations like this. As long as we're wildly speculating about the guilt or innocence of the players involved here.

 

[Evo]

I've already provided a link to a Supreme Court ruling that anonymous tip offs are insufficient to justify a warrant.

Art, did you read the link he posted to The Texas Department of Family and Protective Services

Emergency Removal Without a Court Order

http://www.dfps.state.tx.us/Handbooks/CPS/Files/CPS_pg_5250.asp

There was a suggestion the children had not been separated from their parents I was pointing out that was not the case in which context whether the separation is short term or long term is irrelevant.

The mothers and children are together while the authorities are trying to determine what is happening at the FLDS compound and if it is safe for them to return.

 

[lisab]

I've already provided a link to a Supreme Court ruling that anonymous tip offs are insufficient to justify a warrant.

In the eyes of the law, is a call from a victim considered an "anonymous tip"?

 

[CaptainQuasar]

There seems to be some misunderstanding, 133 mothers left VOLUNTARILY WITH THEIR CHILDREN and are all staying TOGETHER at a location provided by the authorities.

Evo, if you're worried about misunderstanding of the facts here you're only increasing the misunderstanding with that statement. The mothers (who I didn't mention in the statement you quoted) left voluntarily, yes, but the children are in state custody whether or not they're with some of the mothers:

"Officials on Monday announced that 534 women and children — more than twice as many as had been earlier reported — were removed from a polygamist compound and that all 401 children have been placed in state custody because a judge deemed them in imminent danger of physical abuse."

(http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23993440" )

I would infer (without having seen any definite statements in regard) that not all of the children have a parent with them.

 

[Art]

Art, did you read the link he posted to The Texas Department of Family and Protective Services

Emergency Removal Without a Court Order

http://www.dfps.state.tx.us/Handbooks/CPS/Files/CPS_pg_5250.asp

The mothers and children are together while the authorities are trying to determine what is happening at the FLDS compound and if it is safe for them to return.

Evo did you read the link I posted? As I have already stated the Constitution trumps state law as upheld by the US Supreme Court.

A source told KXAN Austin News an emergency e-mail went out to foster families across the state Friday afternoon, asking for volunteers to help house some of these girls.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23964357/

They are in the process of being forcibly separated from their parents.

 

[CaptainQuasar]

The key thing about the children being in state custody, rather than their leaving the community being a voluntary matter, is that it means that the mothers who left may simply have wanted to stay with the children, rather than having their own desire to leave the community.

Like I said above the journalists covering this story are not being very clear or digging very deep. This story is being spun to play on emotions, not to investigate or inform, and facts are taking a back seat to sensationalism as is so often the case these days.

 

[Evo]

Evo, if you're worried about misunderstanding of the facts here you're only increasing the misunderstanding with that statement. The mothers (who I didn't mention in the statement you quoted) left voluntarily, yes, but the children are in state custody whether or not they're with some of the mothers:

"Officials on Monday announced that 534 women and children — more than twice as many as had been earlier reported — were removed from a polygamist compound and that all 401 children have been placed in state custody because a judge deemed them in imminent danger of physical abuse."

(http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23993440" )

I would infer (without having seen any definite statements in regard) that not all of the children have a parent with them.

The mothers and children are in state custody together at that fort.

 

[CaptainQuasar]

The mothers and children are in state custody together at that fort.

From what I've been reading the presence of the mothers sounds as if it's entirely voluntary and that they could return to the community if they wished.

What jaap [POST=1680559]said there[/POST] about the children being free to return to the community, right before your initial comment, is not true.