The Salt Lake Tribune - "Malonis was prepared to present more evidence about why she wants Jeffs's mother to keep the girl away from Jessop, including apparently e-mails they exchanged. But, as urged by Walther, attorneys avoided a hearing by negotiating an agreement that extends a restraining order issued Friday for another 90 days."
Apparently the compromise that resulted involved the following;
"Walther granted Malonis' request that Jeffs be reunited with her mother and siblings under special restrictions, making her the only child governed by such an order.
The order says Jeffs may have no contact with her father or a man named Raymond Jessop. She also is prohibited from living at the YFZ Ranch - and today Walther also turned down the girl's request that she be allowed to spend the night at the ranch before making her grand jury appearance.
Jim Schmidt, an attorney for Texas Child Protective Services, said that doing so would be 'counterproductive for what we are trying to do' and not in Jeffs' best interest. Instead, Jeffs and her mother stayed at a hotel. "
Is it just me or does it seem to you that it's OBVIOUS they don't care about the "child?" It's "COUNTERPRODUCTIVE FOR WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO?" I thought this was about the children.
"Afterward, on the courtroom steps, Malonis said: 'Life goes on. I'm happy. I'm just exhausted.'"
Who cares if YOU'RE happy? Putting this teen through this torture should tear you up, even if you ARE right you IDIOT. (I was temped to use another word, but I restrained myself.)
Sphere: Related Content
2 comments:
'counterproductive' for what CPS is trying to do .
Yeah, they want to keep her nerves frayed and sleep deprived (not sleeping in her own bed tonight, is she?), so that she will be more prone to trip over words that can be twisted by others, or emotionally break down on the witness stand.
They don't care about her best interests at all. They want to charge any man with a crime, at any cost. So they can say "SEE, we TOLD you!"
Hi Hugh!
Who is that Natalie?
*** A ***
Superstar!!
Here’s Natalie’s claim to fame.
May 14, 2008
…CPS attorneys filed a notice of non-suit for Pamela Jeffs Jessop, the mother of 14-day-old Jonathan Jessop, releasing her from state custody after reaching an agreement with her attorneys.
"As far as we're concerned, it's been indisputable that she's not a minor," said Natalie Malonis, a Flower Mound attorney appointed to represent Jessop when she was considered a child.
Three days later, she’s still bragging on it.
May 17, 2008
…Jessop also was named a possessor and a conservator over her child, said her attorney, Natalie Malonis.
"It's a rather large victory," Malonis said Friday. "A possessor and a conservator under the family code has certain rights that, as far as I know, none of the other (FLDS) parents are enjoying right now. She has rights to information and rights to participate in the child's life — and those are enforceable rights."
But Jessop's battle to win custody of her two children is just beginning. As she sat in court, she was served with papers by a constable, notifying her of the upcoming status hearings for her children.
But we see it really makes little or no difference. The nursing mothers get their baby, the same battle stood for Pamela concerning her other children when the CPS reclassified her as an adult, AFTER giving birth. I’d imagine if we read any agreement, there was more signed away by the mother than the newspapers have to report to us.
Then the tide starts turning, a bit more information is evidently being shared.
May 19, 2008
…Family plans
Numerous family service plans obtained by the Deseret News are essentially identical, from the allegations of abuse to the requirements for the parents to be reunited with their children.
"Interviews with underage girls at the ranch revealed a pattern of underage girls being 'spiritually united' with adult men and having children with these men," the plans say. "The department's investigation has found an apparent practice of training young girls to submit to this behavior…"
CPS claims a large number of girls, ages 14-17, have children, are pregnant or both.
"Not every allegation applies to every family. It's going to vary from family to family," said Natalie Malonis, a lawyer for Pamela Jeffs Jessop, 18, who recently won some rights involving her newborn baby.
….There are at least 24 young women the state believes are minors, but the FLDS claim are adults. CPS recently conceded that Pamela Jeffs Jessop and another woman, 22-year-old Louisa Jessop, are adults. Both women's babies remain in state custody.
Louisa gets the reclassification Natalie fought so hard for in Pamela’s case, or, maybe it was not such a hard battle after all..
SUPERSTAR!!
May 19, 2008
Make note of this date, as a SUPERSTAR was born. Ms. Natalie Malonis makes it on to the Nancy disGrace program, where any and all “persons of interest” are guilty. She didn’t get to say too much, but she is a star now. If she’d of had 2 more minutes, she’d have told the world how she’s going to teach ALL the children they are VICTIMS!
The Appeals Court puts a damper on the plans, so HER true colors come into focus!
May 26, 2008
… With that decision now before the nine-justice Texas Supreme Court and status hearings canceled at least through Tuesday, attorneys are now left to guess again what the state's elected judges will do.
"At this point, it gets pretty political," said Flower Mound family attorney Natalie Malonis.
Legally, Malonis said, she would not be surprised by a second reversal in the case, with the Supreme Court ordering the appellate court to vacate its opinion, which ordered Walther to vacate her April 18 ruling that the children should remain in state custody.
With an added opinion released soon after, the ruling technically affects just 41 of the roughly 160 mothers involved in the case and about 124 of the more than 450 children.
The appellate court's strongly worded opinion - which wiped out large portions of the state's case against the FLDS parents - was perhaps too strong, said Malonis, an attorney for a mother and several children in the case.
"Just looking at the ruling from the Court of Appeals, there are a lot of gaps," she said. "The Court of Appeals had some very strong language. I could see a (higher) court taking issue with it."
For example, she said, the three justices who issued the opinion - W. Kenneth Law, Bob Pemberton and Alan Waldrop - said the state presented "no evidence" of physical harm. In fact, a CPS witness testified at length during the April 17-18 hearing that children were at risk of hampered brain development under the authoritarian sect lifestyle.
Walther herself seemed to object to the ruling's arguments that the state should have presented evidence only focusing on immediate physical harm to the children, saying during a related hearing Friday that, "I believe it's in the statute" that emotional abuse should be considered.
This looks like someone is fighting the case for the CPS to me. Who is that “someone”? Does that show clearly what her position is, or was she just looking to be in the media, or both?
The experienced SUPERSTAR, she feels open to freely convicting suspects on the disGrace program. A kiss is “sexual abuse”? She’s just getting started in her effort HELP all children see that they are VICTIMS.
May 28, 2008
GRACE: Natalie, what, if anything, do these photos mean to you as you`re representing Pamela Jessop?
NATALIE MALONIS, ATTORNEY AD LITEM FOR FLDS MOTHER: …Now, you know, under the laws of the state of Texas, this is sexual abuse. So it affects every child.
What’s her goal here?
GRACE: Back to Natalie Malonis, if you had to choose right now, what do you do with the children that you are representing? What are you asking the judge to do with them?
NATALIE MALONIS: Well, if I had to make a decision right now today on the children I represent, I would have a great deal of trouble sending them back to their parents. I don`t think I could make that recommendation.
“Yes, that’s correct” to all disGrace said!
GRACE: But the state of Texas is not being given an alternative because they`ll be going back into homes where these systematic child bride marriages, abuse of little boys, broken bones, is ordinary.
MALONIS: Right. That`s correct. And one of the big problems in this case is that the victims really don`t consider themselves victims so they`re not -- it`s difficult to help them.
Lets just quote a few of her lines at disGrace discussing the SCOT ruling.
May 29, 2008
- The way that the opinion is written, it does give the trial court an opportunity to make other orders.
- I don`t think any of the children are going to be returned until the DNA tests come in.
- beyond that, there are a number of orders that the court can enter.
- I was very surprised to initially hear the ruling. (so she took time out to re-write it in her own mind!)
- Once I read the opinion, this is really a very middle-of-the-road opinion.
- I`ll say this. I don`t think any of the children are going back to the compound right now, and maybe ever.
- It`s saying there was not enough evidence at the 14-day hearings to keep every one of these -- children in custody.
- there`s a lot of evidence that was not presented in … (SECRETS?)
Now it’s time to take prisoners!
June 2, 2008
Natalie E. Malonis, a [attorney] ad litem who represents a child who is also a mother in state custody, has filed an emergency motion to prevent the return of her client, saying the court's order will cause "immediate and irreparable harm to the physical safety and welfare of the child."
The threat, she said, is because the female is an identified victim of sexual abuse.
… complaint “…because her client is a mother to a child in custody being cared for by another person." …await the outcome of DNA results ..."
HELLO WORLD, MY NAME IS NATALIE MALONIS, I’M A SUPERSTAR, AND I REPRESENT AN UNDERAGE MOTHER HIDING HER BABY FROM ME.
The article notes that all this fighting is to be reviewed in how many days from now? About NINE DAYS it looks like, if that “30 days” applies. Will we see an extension filed? LOL!!
OH MY!, A clue WHO Malonis has accused Teresa of having sexual relations with and giving birth to his child.
June 4, 2008
…the order, signed by Judge Barbara Walther, who is overseeing the sect case, bars the girl from having “any contact, in any form,” with Mr. Jeffs and another man, Raymond Jessop.
The girl’s lawyer, Natalie E. Malonis… declined to say anything about who Mr. Jessop is or his relationship to the girl, or how he might be reached for comment.
Yeah, right! NOTHING to say at this time, except…
Why has the story changed?
June 4, 2008
…The judge may impose additional restrictions, Ms. Malonis said.
"She was very concerned about, 'Will the parent be able to protect her?' " Ms. Malonis said of Judge Walther.
Ms. Malonis said CPS and law enforcement had evidence that the girl was sexually abused, though they don't believe she's ever been pregnant.
Is this a re-write? She doesn’t have a baby. But was SEXUALLY ABUSED (we just need enough time to convince her she is a victim!).
On the record for added protection?
June 5, 2008
…"This child is an identified victim of sexual abuse," Natalie Malonis wrote in court papers.
"It is ordered that the respondent shall prevent the child from being within 1,000 feet of the location known as 'YFZ Ranch' in Eldorado, Texas."
Here’s a quiz:
June 20, 2008
…sources close to the case have indicated that the girl is expected to be asked to testify before a Schleicher County grand jury, which next week will begin hearing the state of Texas' criminal case against FLDS members.
…''I believe that (the girl) was avoiding service [of a subpoena] because of coercion and improper influence from Willie Jessop,'' the request states.
Who is that “source”?
Convenient assumptions here, from the Victim Whisperer.
June 20, 2008
"Based on my dealings with Willie Jessop, I believe that he exercises a great deal of control over (the girl), and I am certain that he is interested in protecting the church's interests and the interests of certain influential male members as opposed to (the girl's) legal interests,"… Natalie Malonis wrote…
We get more media exposure, and a clue or two.
June 20, 2008
Malonis and Gawain [guardian ad litem] allege that Jessop has intimidated and improperly influenced the 16-year-old girl, encouraging her to seek a new attorney and to avoid service of a subpoena to appear before a grand jury next week in Schleicher County.
Malonis says in her motion the girl is a ''material witness with information relevant to a pending criminal investigation against certain male FLDS members.''
It also says that Malonis learned from Texas Child Protective Services and law enforcement that the girl had been spiritually sealed to an adult male just after she turned 15.
"From the tone and the content of the e-mail communication, I believe that it was not [the girl] who was communicating with me" or she is being coerced, Malonis said in the filing.
Clue 1. Gawain works for the Child Advocacy Center in San Angelo. Malonis must have a better chain of communication with her, and who that CAC gets it‘s check from, than she has with the CLIENT!!
Clue 2. We’re getting more Grand Jury information from the attorney ad litem than we can ever DREAM of getting from the Attorney General.
Clue 3. Teresa is “spiritually sealed”. Not sure what to believe of that, but the fact Teresa will turn SEVETEEN YEARS OLD soon, means the state couldn’t do anything about it if she decides she wants a baby then, UNLESS the state still has control of her. Solving the Texas teenage pregnancy, one step at a time, in the media.
More secrets the Attorney General can’t tell us!
June 22, 2008
A 16-year-old girl at the center of a legal fight has finally been subpoenaed to testify before a Texas grand jury investigating members of the Fundamentalist LDS Church…
the girl's court-appointed attorney told the Deseret News.
"Oh, Natalie, please don't make this case harder," [Teresa’s] e-mail says. "Shut your mouth up and quit calling me a victim of sexual abuse.”
Malonis said she still believes she can still maintain a working relationship with her client, and worried that the publication of the e-mails may have created a new problem by having the girl waive her attorney-client privilege.
And Natalie is fairly certain she can still help show Teresa that she IS a victim.
She could convince Teresa she’s a VICTIM, if Willie wasn’t so nice to her!
Jun 21, 2008
"I believe that (the girl) was avoiding service because of coercion and improper influence from Willie Jessop," the request stated.
More evidence of a victim that doesn’t know it, yet.
Jun 22, 2008
…"The most help you will be to me now is for you to step aside and let me get a different lawyer that I feel like can help me," Jeffs wrote in the e-mail.
…"I am so sick of being called that when I am absolutely not a victim of sexual abuse and you have no evidence to prove that I have ever had sexual relations," she said in her e-mail to Malonis.
Since I have 50+ separate media records of Malonis in my files, I was set back for a moment after reading this.
Jun 22, 2008
"I'm trying to help her," Malonis said. "It's really not in any child's interest to waive their attorney-client privilege. I'm not going to fight with her in the media."
Sometimes she must feel like CPS, child advocates agencies and judge walthers are the only ones that will agree with her.
June 23, 2008
Malonis and Tim Edwards, a San Angelo attorney who represents the girl's mother, have been working today to see whether they can head off a hearing.
"My thoughts based on what's happened the last few days," Malonis said, "is no one's willing to agree to anything."
Clarification?
June 24, 2008
"It's not that I hate the FLDS," said Malonis, "I'm doing my job. Each case is different."
"If (the girl) wants to have me removed or disqualify me, that's not a freely chosen preference."
To “confirm” something, somebody has to tell about it first. The question is WHO told about it first? Who appears to be in contact with ALL of the media?
June 24, 2008
Natalie Malonis confirmed to the Deseret News she has received death threats…
*****"I've been getting death threats and I am being provided a security detail," she said this morning. "That was not even at my request. Law enforcement recognized the need for it."*****
She has shown us she can trade hats, though she has been stuck wearing only CaPS since her first Nancy disGrace appearance, back on May 19th.
June 24, 2008
Malonis also is set to appear as a grand jury witness, according to attorneys for Annette Jeffs, the teen's mother - and part of the reason they tried unsuccessfully to get 51st District Judge Barbara Walther to disqualify Malonis as the teen's lawyer.
Malonis is "trying to wear two hats, which she can not do," said attorney Tim Edwards, which goes to the "very heart of the problem the court is facing today.
Cream on top!! An email response from Natalie to Teresa:
June 24
"Writing that letter to the Judge was about the most foolish thing you could have done. The Judge is now convinced that you are not able to make good decisions for yourself, and she is convinced also that your mother is not able to make proper decisions for you either Teresa, the Judge wants to take you back in custody and what's worse is that these
poor choices may end up with your siblings back in custody if the Judge and CPS think your mother is not able to reign you in. The judge would probably not allow me to withdraw right now even if I requested it because the Judge sees me as the only person who is looking out for what is in your legal interests."
And I thought it was a problem that Natalie was communicating too little with her client and too much with Gawain (guardian ad litem). Sounds like there is either too much communication between Natalie and the Judge, or she was a total liar in that email response to her CLIENT. Either way, it’s not good!
She sure has built up some momentum since finding the first reporter that would listen to her.
What we have witnessed in Malonis’ conduct, throughout her involvement in this case, has shown us a complete 180 degrees of transformation, from one that appeared to jump on board to help the families, into a person evidently working on an agenda that USES a client.
Who is she helping here?
(some updated links may no longer be available, sorry)
Post a Comment