Sunday, January 11, 2009

Keeping Up with Rozita's "Flexible" court dates

On the Associated Press calender, Rozita is scheduled to appear tomorrow

Castle Rock, Colorado - "Probation revocation hearing for Rozita Swinton, a person of interest in hoax calls that triggered Texas polygamy raids, on her conviction in an unrelated false reporting case in Colorado."

Her attorney is twisting and turning and employing every trick and skill he has to keep her probation from being revoked. If she goes back to jail, she's not quite so "sequestered." I still wonder where the money is coming from. A 33 year old single woman who didn't have the wherewithal to buy a home is now effectively unemployed for 9 months, employing a relatively pricey piece of local legal talent (effectively), and getting extensive, perhaps even more expensive, mental health treatment and evaluation.

Let me tell you something based on my extensive experience as a lay person trying to sort out the "mental health system" mess. You do not stay in mental hospitals as long as Rozita has unless you're already in jail. Rozita is free on bond. Someone is paying a lot of money to keep her out of jail, off the street and in a mental health care facility. Yet no one has written story one on this throbbing sore thumb detail. Not word one.

It does appear that the Associated Press thinks THIS appearance is significant enough to put it on their calender.

Sphere: Related Content


artlover said...

What is your obsession with this woman? What has she done to you? Do you realize you are giving her all the power? Is name calling necessary? I’m just curious why you speak of her so often!

The Pharisee said...

I'm not obsessed with her, she keeps getting a pass, and Texas won't officially acknowledge she touched off the YFZ raid.

She's a loser that has nothing that is getting extensive mental health treatment not usually available to the average person, it would seem that the reason is to keep her away from scrutiny.

If her name was Biff Barf and she was a he I'd be just as interested if the circumstances were otherwise the same. Why are you interested in defending someone who could very well have been responsible for the loss of hundreds of lives, assuming the FLDS had resisted? She's an arsonist.

artlover said...

I have not heard any report of her killing anyone or even trying to kill anyone. When did she set a fire? How do you get your information? Do you have someone on the inside feeding you information? You come across as if you have the inside scoop. I’m just curious that’s all. How much time will she get if convicted of the charges.

The Pharisee said...

It's allegorical. If you research her story in the Colorado Gazette and the local TV stations, she would go around on her cell phone in her car while watching the police conduct house to house searches for her while she was pretending to be a young teen beaten abused pregnant mother. They caught her the first time because they saw her driving around talking on her cell phone.

It's on my blog. If you think I'm obsessed with her, then you should know this already.

As to the allegorical arsonist comparison, certainly you remember Waco. The very same people were involved with the YFZ raid as with Waco. They went to YFZ armed. Rozita is sitting at home watching police scurry on her TV just as she did when driving around in Castle Rock in her car. Had there been any confrontation with heavily armed police because the residents of YFZ chose to correctly resist invasion (correct, because the story was utterly false) then there would have been the potential for massive loss of life, just like setting fire to a building with people in it.

Hence, I call her an arsonist.

artlover said...

It seems to me that everything appears to be one sided. No one has talked to her or even interviewed her. I wonder why? So why would you believe every thing LE have said in her case in that castle place or where ever they said it, so it appears you are on there side. But then when it comes to the LE in Texas then you don’t believe what they say or like them. It’s confusing to me. Do you like LE or not? How do you decide when to believe them? Is it only when it suits your needs? I’ve notice from looking at your blog that only one person has commented before in regard to her, and it appeared they were defending her. Then that upset you and you block anonymous blogs on your blog and accused them of being her. It’s funny to think something that minute could aggravate you. I will be watching for your blogs on her. It’s just very interesting to me on what your conclusions are about her. It seems like no one else cares but you. I do not feel the need to read every little thing about her or anyone else for that matter. So I admit I don’t know everything that’s being said about her or anyone else in the spotlight or media. I do have a life besides sitting around obsessing about what others are doing or not doing. In some of your writing you come across as racist and someone who likes to degrade strong and powerful women by calling them names. Examples: The judge in Texas, the female CPS workers, and that foster mom to Swinton. Does this make you feel like a MAN when you do this?

The Pharisee said...

She's refused interviews artlover. That might be one reason why no one has talked to her.

As far as Castle Rock? She's plead guilty in exchange for deferred sentencing twice now in Colorado. That means her conviction and sentence would be laid aside, if she behaves herself. Her Monday hearing, which I am not sure she went to, and I don't know the result of, was for probation violation. If she is shown to have violated her probation, then her conviction stays in place, and she is sentenced for the crime. It's not a question of believing her or LE, It's a not a question, they agree. She did it.

And yes, I have blocked anonymous blog comments. That appears to have been a good decision. If what a poster says can't traced, even in the smallest way, I don't want to keep track of the posts, or comments.

As far as she goes? She would do well to fess up to everything she's done, that is moral and correct. She endangered the lives of hundreds, has effectively abused children psychologically, some of whom may never fully recover, and her foster mother shields her like a she's some sort of victim/saint. At this point she's neither, she's a 34 year old adult that nearly became a mass murderer by proxy and that concerns me. More people could have easily died by her hand than died on flight 93 on September 11th, 2001. Yes, THAT CONCERNS ME. As far as my obsession goes? Newsweek saw fit to do a whole article on her. They also have not been able to crack the wall around her protecting her.

Doesn't it make you curious when an adult woman of small means who has been essentially unemployed for 9 months gets expensive legal help, goes off for long term psychiatric treatment (expensive) and has a book publisher mother protecting her and participating in the cover up of her life? The Anthony girl's mother in Florida has had more people talk about her than Rozita has.

Racist? LOL. I've asked women who aren't white to marry me. So there you go. Besides, we elected Obama, there is no more racism in this country. It's no more an important category than my preference, or lack thereof, for blonds.

What's your interest artlover? Do you know Rozita?

artlover said...

I will attempt to address everything you have said. You stated “she refused interviews” so why hasn’t anyone been able to get her on camera and saying no comment or I refuse? Obvious it’s not that big of a deal, because if it was you can easily catch someone going to court like the famous people you can’t escape going in and out the doors it appears to me no one is trying because she is not news.

I did not read anything that said she plead guilty twice for a deferred sentence so I don’t know where that is coming from. So since I’m not aware of the facts of those cases I can say yeah or nah. You stated “she would do well to fess up.” My understanding is that no one has been charged with the call. It has been reported that she is a “person of interest” wouldn’t it be easy to do a voice analysis to clear up if she did it? You have already convicted this woman in your mind without any proof. The only place I’ve seen anything about the foster mother is on your blog and the Newsweek. Why do you think people are protecting her? It does not make since that so many people would protect the person you describe. The media has always been good at getting people to talk about someone in the spotlight whether it’s good or bad. As you mentioned the Florida case that involved murder this is not the same. It appears to me that she has no enemies due to no one coming forward people normally want to put there opinion in. The big question is why is no one coming forward? This is what puzzles me!

I am curious about her because nothing seems to make since to me. I don’t believe your theory, but I do agree that something is fishy about this person. Personally I don’t know anything about her but what I read so I don’t know where she gets expensive legal help or treatment. Maybe she’s a trust fund baby, hell I don’t know.

Just because you ask someone who is not white to marry you does not mean you are a racist. We are all racist it’s whether we acknowledge it or not. We all have our stereotypes and beliefs and that is what makes us racist in my eyes. You stated “we elected Obama” So you voted for Obama? I never said I voted for him. My interest is curiosity and no I don’t know her. If I knew her I wouldn’t be asking you the questions.

Did I hit a nerve or something? It appears you posted the Obama thing because I commented on a blog of yours. Is this how you deal with debates? Or people who don’t see it your way? I believe you would attract more people to your blog if you were nicer to the ones who want to challenge your thoughts. How does attacking the person we are talking about hurt me? Because I don’t agree with you then you attack another person. That is very mature of you.

The Pharisee said...


As to refusing interviews, Rozita sent her roommate to the door of her apartment when a camera crew showed up to talk to her, she was not seen.

She then slipped into the courtroom early, very early, on another occasion, avoiding the press, they were able to review tape and found her image later, but did not talk to her. She then skipped another court date and was briefly an official fugitive before her lawyer intervened.

When Newsweek profiles a person, they are news.

Deferred sentencing occurs only when someone pleads guilty to a charge. You don't have probation violations for things you are not convicted of. Her hearing on Monday was for probation violation.

Repeating again, it is not common for people to be found to have considerable assets when they rent an apartment, it's not unheard of, but it's uncommon, Rozita is a renter. Her lawyer is pricey. Her mental health treatment is pricey. Believe me, I know, having been involved with the managed mental health care failure in Montana in the mid 90's. I was one of the advocates for the mentally ill on the outside, saying the plan would fail and would not work, and the only thing I was wrong about, was the speed with which that happened. It happened much more quickly than the group I was with, thought it would. I would say I'm qualified to make the evaluation of how expensive that treatment is.

Since it is rumored that Rozita got her mental health treatment and evaluation out of state, and since she is unemployed at the moment, she did not go to a State hospital for evaluation, so it's costing someone, and costing them quite a lot. All superficial signs are that she does not possess the capacity. Again, that's a guess, but a good one.

As to her being a "trust fund" baby, that too is not impossible, but also unlikely. Her father is a convicted murderer from whom she is estranged. Her brother Courtney is a convicted street drug dealer, this does not speak to a situation of family money.

Texas does not WANT to know Rozita made the phone calls, they haven't cleared her and they're still "investigating" and running "tests." By now if they had wanted to know, they would know. It is in the extreme interest of Texas to prove she did not make the calls, and they have had ample time to do so, but have not eliminated her. Does this mean she is guilty? No, but the likelihood is very high.

The motivations of Mary Catharine Nelson are of interest for several reasons. One, she's a book publisher, albeit a minor one. She's published two books that mention Rozita and did so prior to the whole YFZ incident. She rushed to publicize their connection, and then backed off pleading an arrangement with her lawyer. There could be a variety of reasons for backing off other than a book deal, but it smells like a book deal as well.

Mary Catharine Nelson's blurbs about Rozita were so saccharine that they would pass for near romantic interest. It's hard to see her as objective. It's also amazing that she protects Rozita who abused hundreds of children through wrongful incarceration and separation from their families, and Mary Catharine, who has worked with abused children, has not done more to expose her as an abuser, and instead protects her. Mary Catharine would also have the wherewithal to fund Rozita's legal defense and Mental Health Treatment.

As far as my racism is concerned, if you say we are all racist then I am absolved. I am a racist just as you are, end of story. The only thing we can do is compensate for our innate racism. Being willing to entertain marriage with two black women, one of whom was extremely serious, it's hard to see me as "uncompensated" with regard to my own "innate" racism that you claim we all possess.

Voting for Obama? This is a sociological remark. If 52% of the country votes for an African American then the country is not racist, that's what I mean by "we." I supported Alan Keyes in the primary. Alan Keyes is the descendant of slaves. Obama is as white as he is black.

It seems I have hit a nerve with you, as you seem to be the same poster I had on this blog in June. My name, and my interest in the situation is extremely clear. Nothing about your interest is clear. You do not need to tell us who you are, but it is significant that I am very open about who I am. It would be helpful to know if you know Rozita or have any close connection to her.

As far as the popularity of this blog? I am trending strongly towards a top 100,000 "Alexa" rank in the United States. If anything, a wish to grow more popular would tell me not to change anything regarding content, just to do it more often, and tweak the tech side of my blog, which I am doing.

artlover said...

I hate to break it to you but this is the first time I’ve ever posted on your blog. Also I was not aware of you in June. I ran across your blog by looking at other blogs. I am interested in this person just like you are, but I’m looking at it at a different angle. I don’t know as much as you know about her. I would like to come to my own conclusion without any conspiracy theories and I will try to use facts when I do that. I’m not convinced I have the whole story yet I think there is more than meets the eye. I find your theories interesting though. I’m interested in unique stories not the norm. This person and story interest me since no one seems to know what is going on.

Why are you focusing on whether she rents or buys? To me that doesn’t mean anything. I own a house and property in states other than where I live and I’m a renter in the state I live in due to my travels. The key is I’m still a homeowner so I believe renter or not is irrelevant to determine her financial status. There are people who have what we call old money (that would be me) and we have people who have new money (people who want people to know they have money so they live large). If she does have some one financing her attorney and her treatment then that brings me back to why? What is so important about this woman that people are protecting her? That is the question that needs to be answered. It’s as though she is in the witness protection program so no one can get to her. How important is she?

If you were truly an advocate for the mentally ill then why are you so hard on some you believe to be mentally ill? I agree I am a racist as you are at least we both agree on something. This country will always be racist we have just become better at hiding it.

Why is who I am significant? You have chosen to have a blog so yes you are open about who you are and that was your choice. I’m a poster on your blog so I am not obligated to tell you who I am. Sorry, I cannot help you with inside connections because I don’t have any I’m just as curious as you are. Congratulations on your rank and yes you defiantly could use help on the tech side that would be two things we agree on. Maybe I will send you some ideas/suggestions at a later date since that is my area. I must catch my flight now. I’ve enjoyed our discussions. Thank you for taking the time to respond to my post this week. Chat with you soon.

The Pharisee said...


Some of your comments strongly resembled remarks made by another poster over the May - July time frame. I'll take your word for it, that you are not the same person, additionally I will take your word for it that you have no "inside" connections to Ms. Swinton. Those comments, as nearly as I could tell, seemed to come from the Colorado Springs area, so I was curious.

As far as conspiracy theories go, there is a greater and greater likelihood as time passes that Rozita was spoon fed some of the information that she used to create the fake phone call, either that or Sheriff David Doran knowingly lied. It was his contention, at the gate of YFZ, in remarks that were witnessed, that the caller knew so much about the interior of YFZ, that she had to have been there. That then became the justification for entry into YFZ after it was learned that the supposed perpetrator, the man she claimed to be her "husband," had not been there recently, and likely, had never been there.

That leaves us with a short list of possibilities.

One, Doran was simply an idiot. There's no accounting for what comes out of an idiots mouth. As an older man that succeeds in getting reelected by overwhelming margins to his office, I find this hard to believe, but nonetheless, it has to be recognized as a possibility.

Two, he's simply lying. He wants into YFZ and will say anything to justify it, including concocting the fable that Rozita's knowledge was special, so she had to be a real member of YFZ. That lends itself to one kind of conspiracy theory that Rozita is not involved in, but is being used to forward. She is guilty of a crime, but not party to the conspiracy to use that crime in the way it was used, but in this formulation, there is a conspiracy of Law Enforcement.

Three, David Doran knows that in fact the details of the compound are only possessed by those who have been there. This means that he, being one of the few that are not FLDS that set foot into YFZ, fed the information to someone. This means he knows that intimate details of the layout of YFZ are known to others, and he knows who they are, they could include Rozita Swinton, or someone who passed that information to her.

Last, someone inside, or someone who had been inside YFZ as a member of the FLDS fed that information to someone outside YFZ, either David Doran, or someone else. Add this to the variations described above. David has mentioned having an inside informant, and then retracted that statement. This is a conspiracy not involving Law Enforcement and the most likely candidate is Flora Jessop.

As to her being a renter? It increases the likelihood that she cannot foot the bill for expensive attorneys and non state sponsored mental health care. Every state I know of sends it's criminal mental health evaluation cases to the state mental hospital. Persons who are ordered a psychiatric evaluation are sent to State Hospitals if that order is in connection with a crime. On rare occasion they provide their own evaluation, but the state wishes to independently vet the nature of the illness and generally orders it done at that hospital. Stays are about 6 weeks as a rule. It would seem that Rozita has been under "Treatment" for the better part of the last 6 months.

Her background is also clerical. She was a foster child that aged out of the system and was cared for by Mary Catharine Nelson. All of this suggests she has not accumulated wealth.

It is as though she is part of a "witness protection" program. That should be fascinating to everyone interested in the case. I would want to know why no one seems to want me to know. The answer may be frightfully dull and disconnected to the case, but I'd want to know. I am a member of the press, I can say so confidently since my site outranks those of some of the smaller newspapers covering the story. I've done some reporting myself, originating some of the facts you may read about the story, either here, or elsewhere. I want to know. My readers want to know.

As an advocate for the mentally ill, I can tell you that they're not crazy. Crazy is in fact a myth. Affected by their illness? Yes. Judgment skewed by "facts" only they see as a result of their illness? Yes. Irrational? Not as a result of their illness. This is a long discussion which I would be happy to have with you.

Mentally ill persons who do not abuse drugs are less, not more likely, to become involved in crime. Thinking you see someone or hear something you do not, does not make you immoral. As a consequence, I do not readily excuse the behavior of the mentally ill because they are ill. It is insulting to the mentally ill, who may possess a better moral compass than we do, to suggest that their illness causes them to do bad things. As a consequence, I, as an advocate, and many of the mentally ill resent this mischaracterization when they are often braver and more moral people than we can imagine being. Leaning on a supposed illness as Rozita does to rationalize away her behavior is offensive.