![]() ![]() |
![]() |
| |
|
Court Sides With PolygamistsPosted on May 22, 2008Government agents had no legal right to seize hundreds of children from a Mormon fundamentalist compound in Texas, an appeals court has ruled. The government argued that the children were suffering abuse, but the court decided the children had been in no immediate danger.
Previous item: McCain's Cuba Policy: The Same Old Stuff Next item: Oil Hits New High, Again Elsewhere: . CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. Add Your Comment |
By Conservative Yankee, May 23 at 5:27 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Actually your distaste or resentment should be placed where it belongs. Far from resting on “technicalities” the judge said:
The Texas CPS failed to present any evidence to indicate children were in jeopardy. This does not mean they were safe, it simply means that the TEXAS CPS used opinion rather than facts to remove children.
Before you go out on your pure white horse, you might wish to find out how the majority of children in Texas’ foster care fare!
http://www.ahrp.org/infomail/04/11/13.php
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/texas southwest/stories/032307dntexcps.3e702e7.html
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/region/legislatu re/stories/05/07/7foster.html
Need more, I’ll be happy to provide further links!
Report thisBy kath cantarella, May 22 at 5:33 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
His name should be in this article. Name and shame.
The third appeal court? Does this mean that the case passed two lower courts before being overturned (on this technicality) or what?
The trouble with some judges is that they believe they are there to preserve the legal technicalities of the law, instead of upholding the spirit of the law through wise interpretation. The trouble with other judges is that, for various reasons, they are not impartial.
Report thisBy kath cantarella, May 22 at 5:04 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
‘no immediate danger’ is a legal technicality. If i am bigoted towards certain religionists, it’s self-defence. They were bigotted towards my kind first, or i wouldn’t have a problem with them, believe me.
Report thisBy Regan Republican, May 22 at 2:33 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
These people were a part of a cult. The danger was, which I was surprised wasn’t taken into consideration, that they wanted to separate the polygamists from their children before they are brainwashed on the situation and the case completely lost. The womanizing is unacceptable and like their brother cults such as Scientology, they have a strong legal team that is going to be hard to overcome (and the state department knows that). I wish we could have Texas justice in New York!
Report thisBy MDC, May 22 at 1:58 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Everything Texas CPS alleged about this group has turned out to have been hyperbolic. I am so glad someone in Texas was willing to take a logical look at this sorry episode. I hope the families get just compensation for this outrage. I also hope all the zealots involved in this are punished harshly; the Judge, the CPS workers, the false accuser and the bitter ex-FLDS members.
These parents had their children seized simply because they were a member of a religious minority; textbook religious discrimination.
Report thisBy Conservative Yankee, May 22 at 1:32 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
The court rules there was no justification for removal of the children, BUT fails to order them restored to their parents..
Texas justice, Gotta love it!
Report this