Yeah. I have VERY VERY mixed feelings about all of this. Makes me wonder what political aspirations Judge Walthers has, actually.

Agreed on both counts.

I think it is very important for adults to follow the law, when there are minors involved. Young people need protection from predators and they need a good example. With that said, it is just as important for law-enforcement to follow the law if we are to hold our Constitutional Republic. Thus far, I am extremely disturbed with how law enforcement, child protective services and the judicial branch are handling this matter.

There were many things that I found troubling about the LDS, and the banning of Polygyny over political purposes was one of them. It's really sad that the FLDS is facing a similar possibility. I come from a culture where concubinages, though not legally recognized, were simply a part of the extended family and not at all abnormal (though frowned upon.) Even elementary schools taught about Christopher Columbus and his multiple Taino wives as if it weren't that big of a deal.

Bravo!
*stands on chair and applauds*

Thank you!

I'm in agreement with this article's take on the situation.

When the raid occurred (whether or not the original call was a hoax, the authorities were bound to act on it), they found evidence of pregnant teenagers and teens with babies. They needed to take the children into custody to try to find out what was going on, and to protect them from further sexual exploitation.

While I'd like to see the children reunited with their mothers, these are the same mothers who didn't protect them from abuse -- so I'm not sure that setting up a women-and-children compound is the answer.

I really hope that some solution can be found that allows families to be reunited to a certain extent, but I am totally against any kind of forced marriage or forced/coerced sex, whether or not it comes under a "spiritual" banner.

As you know, I'm all for gay marriage, multiple marriage, etc. -- but all of these things involve CONSENTING ADULTS -- and whether or not it's religious in basis, the FLDS is fucking and impregnating girls too young to protest, who have been raised to learn that it's their duty.

Religious freedom is one thing, child abuse is another.

-- A :(

The really hard part about it is how this case has been handled. I don't believe that child protection services will have any problems dealing with the kids' well-being. However, if the FLDS do decide to cooperate with child protection services, but then argue that the cooperation was coerced when the criminal cases are ready to go forward, my big fear is that many of the criminal cases might get thrown out on a technicality.

The part that galls me is that law-enforcement had strong suspicions of institutionalized abuse already, yet decided to haphazardly follow a hoax lead. Instead of a proper investigation to justify a raid that was carried out in flagrant violation of the due-process. If the ACLU decides to jump on that angle, it is not going to end well.

I agree 100% on the adult marriage part. I don't think kids should be forced to marry under any circumstance, neither cultural nor religious. With that said, many cultural and religious groups such as Indians, Muslims, Hmong do practice plural arranged marriages, in some cases with minors, in spite of our American prohibitions against the practice. These practices are not secret. Does this mean that as a society we are entitled to raid mosques, homes and temples based upon unverified heresay targetting specific individuals rather than the group as a whole? As far as I know, that's not even legal. From what I understand not every individual in these groups practice or even condone arrange child marriage, so why not focus on individual cases rather than casting such a wide net?

To me, this isn't even an issue of religion. It is an issue of law-enforcement trampling the Constitution and jeopardizing its own ability to do its job. What if these cases get thrown out in a higher court? Are precedents that may jeopardize the ability of law-enforcement to rescue children from cults in the future, really worth a successful raid?

This happened before in the 50's, when people were more likely to obey the government without question. It is my understanding that the only thing that raid succeeded in doing long-term was create resentment among the FLDS members who simply grew up, returned to compound life and created rules that made their religion even more secretive and oppressive. I think that it is wonderful that women and children were saved from that hell then and now, but one has to wonder if there is a better way to encourage change within such an organization in a legal manner that will have long-term effects, rather than a temporary band aid that destroys civil liberties.

I think that something the law could do would be to legalize plural marriage (among ADULTS), so that groups which practice plural marriage aren't automatically underground -- it's the fact that they MUST be secret that encourages this kind of bunker mentality.

I'm not sure what kind of investigation would be "proper" in this case -- normally, if a teenage girl called and reported a rape, the police would come to her home to investigate. In the case of a closed compound, the police had to enter it in order to find the rape victim. When she couldn't be found, and when obvious evidence of multiple rapes and child abuse were observed, I'm not sure how they could NOT have taken the women and children into protective custody.

I was seriously worried that the caller had been caught and hidden or killed, and I think that the local authorities felt the same way. If it's a hoax, then I think the hoaxer should certainly be pursued/prosecuted (and since she's apparently mentally ill, she needs treatment), but that doesn't negate the state's responsibility to at least attempt to find the girl who they believed had been raped and impregnated.

How was the raid in violation of due process, since there were abused children and pregnant teenaged girls visible to the naked eye upon entry to the compound?

-- A <3

I think that something the law could do would be to legalize plural marriage (among ADULTS), so that groups which practice plural marriage aren't automatically underground -- it's the fact that they MUST be secret that encourages this kind of bunker mentality.

That I completely agree upon.

I'm not sure what kind of investigation would be "proper" in this case -- normally, if a teenage girl called and reported a rape, the police would come to her home to investigate.

Therein lies the problem, there was no teenage girl. She hasn't been found and probably will not be found, if she even existed, because the Barlow warrant was dropped. The woman suspected of calling had done this before and was calling from Colorado, if memory serves right. Caller ID would've resolved that issue. Also, as I said before, the child custody issue is a done deal. Those kids are out of danger for the time being. What I am more worried about is that the criminal case against those who raped the girls, might end up getting dropped because of a technicality, even if it is obvious that they are guilty.

What boggles my mind is why in the hell, they didn't try to do something about the fact that CONVICTED REPEAT child rapists lived in that compound with children. Do they not have sexual predator registry laws in Texas that prevent children from being in contact with repeat sex offenders? Law enforcement also knew of the underage forced marriage issue before the phone call. Why did they wait so damn long? Would it have killed them to do a proper investigation and search procedure beforehand, to prevent the potential of getting the case throw out? Now, I am very happy that a lot of children have been saved from this cult. I am not happy that sloppy police work that violates the Constitution, might end up backfiring and allowing a bunch of sexual predators to get off scott-free.

The police had no reason to suspect that it was a false report, though -- and putting caller ID on a rape-crisis hotline is a great way to discourage people from making reports or calling for help. You're promised anonymity if you call, unless you choose to give your name/etc., and I'm honestly a bit distressed that they DID search down the phone number of the original report (although obviously they had to, since they thought a girl was missing), because I think it damages the credibility of the rape-crisis center in terms of preserving the privacy of its clients.

I'm not sure how the criminal charges could be weaseled out of -- there are babies with the maternal DNA of 14- and 15-year-olds and the paternal DNA of 40- and 50-year-old men . . . how can they get out of statutory rape charges, when it can be proven that they fathered children on these girls?

-- A <3

You have an excellent point in regards to the confidentiality matter at the rape-crisis hotline. Frankly, it is not one that I had considered and your insights are greatly appreciated. Unfortunately, according to Texas Family Code Chapter 261, they really had no choice but to turn over that information.

How can a bunch of scumbag pederasts who manipulate girls weasel out of credible charges, even with the best of evidence? For the same reason the successful Operation Candyman raid, was hampered by a massive amount of evidence being thrown out upon appeal. If the wrong judge decides that law-enforcement didn't follow the law to the letter, the most obvious chunks of evidence can be thrown out of court without so much as a second thought.

I didn't it say it was fair...