Thursday, March 05, 2009

The San Angelo Archipelago?

Teresa Steed is off to a psychiatric exam it seems, at a gulag.
She's going to be 18, in 5 months. This is an interrogation, and attempt to discredit. A rationale for child custody, if of course Mom is evaluated to be deficient, or in custody when the child is found. Shades of the Soviet Gulag.
The San Angelo Standard-Times - "She did not appear in court, where 51st District Judge Barbara Walther granted state attorneys' requests for the testing but rejected their efforts to cancel a March 17 custody hearing."
She then goes on to prompt John Dolezal as if he were a bad actor who had forgotten his lines.
"If we're just doing testing without any idea of what you're going to do, what's the point?" (the Judge) said to CPS lead attorney John Dolezal.

"Testing is needed to decide what we're going to do," he replied.
Any pretense that the state knows what it's doing, or what it wants evaporates here. Walther knows what she wants. A mom in custody so that she can blackmail mom with threatened state custody, when Teresa Steed does not cooperate.
"My client would very much like her daughter to go along with the psychological evaluation," said Dallas attorney Cornelia Boyea. "But she's 17-and-a-half years old and has a mind of her own."
And there is no way, short of finding the child and threatening to take it from Ms. Steed, that she will move her. Cornelia is right. She's 17 and a half. She has a mind of her own. This is ridiculous.
"Walther also dismissed the case of Joseph Jeffs, a son of sect leader Warren Jeffs who has been raised by his aunt, Annette Jeffs."
I guess publicity is what boys are made for. No qualms are exhibited here about a young man, underage, who's name we do not need to know. Say "hi" to Joseph Jeffs.

Sphere: Related Content


ztgstmv said...

Golly, Texas must be the most backwards, medieval place on earth.

"Testing is needed to decide what we're going to do,"

Is this what passes for practicing law in Texas? Sure it might make sense to a novice or biased observer. But isn't there a little thing called "probable cause" and isn't that needed before taking action? Here they are coming right out and saying, "We don't have probable cause to do anything to this girl [they can't even mention the child or shouldn't because her child is not the subject of the case], but if you'll let us examine her with a handpicked shrink, we probably could come up with a good reason to intervene in some way or fashion."

It's nuts. If they can do this, they can grab anyone on the street for no reason and require they submit to a psychological exam. I'd like to see the transcript of this proceeding to see what reason they proferred for demanding the exam, and whether it was for the girl's sake or her child's.

Silver Rose said...

The only reason they want to test Teresa is to declare her unfit so they can take the baby. If they can push this through, CPS may end up with 2 children at a cost of over $10 million each out of this raid.

If Teresa DOES go to the psychological evaluation, I hope she brings her attorney and they have their own psychologist in tow and that it is videoed so we can see what kind of nasty, degrading, sexually implicit, filthy, prying questions the 'psychologist' asks and WHY Teresa refuses to stoop to that level to answer them is documented.

They are looking for people to punish and, since they can't touch the parents or leaders, they've chosen two sacrificial lambs.

Seriously - can Teresa have her attorney and another psychologist present?

Lucille said...

It's for her child, of course. They're digging for an excuse to take the child, or at least have the baby under supervision - and just as they found a way in Louisa Jessop's case (never mind they had to lie about her age to do so), and just as they claim Merriane Jessop is in terrible danger from a man in prison hundreds of miles away, they'll find some excuse. Psychology is one of the more imprecise disciplines, after all, and lots of things can be twisted into signs of bad parenting.