But it's starting to get INTERESTING again

My first involvement with the FLDS, YFZ, Warren Jeffs and the rest had to do with a certain commonality of purpose. I lost interest and couldn't advocate for anyone when fissures began to appear within the FLDS over the whole matter. Warren made it worse by being guilty of a few genuine crimes, and then falling on his sword, stupidly and publicly. So I thought I was out. Now I'm "pulled back in" by the sheer fascination of the ongoing hypocrisy and "Inspector Javert" quality of Texas' pursuit.

Fredrick Merril Jessop was a very bad man, and a very bad man was he.

Right?

The San Angelo Standard-Times - "When his eligibility date arrived, the parole board already had voted against releasing (Merril Jessop).

But:

"The parole panel voted in October against releasing Jessop, Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles spokesman Harry Battson said. Such pre-emptive actions are not uncommon."

Merril's crime, you know, the thing he was convicted of doing?

"Fredrick Merril Jessop, 76, is serving a 10-year sentence, which along with the $10,000 fine levied against him is the maximum penalty for the third-degree felony of performing an illegal ceremony."

A third degree felon is in essence an "accessory before the fact," Merril is said to have "said words" that motivated others to commit felonies. He had an opinion. He expressed it. He didn't cause anyone to do anything, that is anything for which he is imprisoned.

The FIRST Amendment to the US Constitution?

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

I frequently cite and quote Wikipedia though I have deep issues and differences with them regarding methodology and content. Wikipedia is a supreme example of Hegelian "synthesis" in real life. Whatever most people think is "the truth" according to the Wiki people. This is exacerbated when people with a cause masquerade as hundreds of people and "stuff the ballot box" of synthesis so as to send truth sliding into the ditch.

It thus (oddly) becomes useful to quote Wikipedia or cite them because often it is good to use a source that agrees with you, even though their every inclination is to disagree. It's sorta like the apostle Paul asserting that even heathens know better than to do some things, in his letters to the Corinthians.

The point? Merril is a very bad man from Wikipedia standards*, but you can still glean much from their heavily biased description. Namely, that he doesn't have much, if any, in the way of a criminal past.

He's not eligible for parole again until next year, in October, and he's in jail for an opinion, openly expressed and supposedly stated in our constitution, to be a protected form of speech coupled with a free practice of religion. It would appear that because Merril is in jail and is saddled with a staggering monthly child support bill, that if he ever gets parole, he's going straight back into the hoosegow for contempt. Effectively, he is at 76, being jailed for life for having a constitutionally protected opinion. (Qatar anyone?) At 76, and being jailed now for a while, he may not have the wherewithal to write a large 6 figure check.

When your freedoms are all gone, remember, this is the way they were lost.





*An example: The way the Wikipedia article on Merril is edited/written, we end up with this result: "Merril Jessop (born December 27, 1935[1]) was believed to be the de facto leader of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (FLDS Church) after its former leader, Warren Jeffs, resigned when he was convicted as an accomplice to rape in 2007..."

Who was convicted of rape? Merril or Warren? A reader might come away with an impression that Merril was. In addition, though it is literally true that Warren was "convicted as an accomplice to rape in 2007," Warren's conviction was overturned, in large part due to the fact that it was later found a star witness had perjured herself. Utah has no plans to retry the case, because a conviction is impossible per the Utah Supreme Court's opinion on the matter.

More →

Sphere: Related Content

Here we go again, Christians BEWARE

In a move that should frighten every "Fundamentalist" Christian in the country, Texas wants to take the Yearning for Zion ranch away from the FLDS and it's resident members:

The San Angelo Standard Times - "The Texas Attorney General's Office on Wednesday filed search and seizure paperwork in 51st District Court in Schleicher County, seeking to take over the 1,600-acre YFZ Ranch owned by the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints."

Of course, Texas isn't trying to render FLDS members homeless, no.....

"The Office of the Texas Attorney General doesn't know how many people still reside at the ranch, Strickland said. Nevertheless, the seizure 'is not an eviction notice,' he said. He said he didn't want to speculate on what might happen to the ranch if the state succeeds in seizing it."

It does look like the residents knew something was afoot earlier this year:

"It's uncertain how many people still live at the ranch. In 2008, more than 400 children were taken from the ranch before appellate courts ordered them returned to their families. Over the past year, massive building projects began to crop up around the ranch.

Then earlier this year, a huge tower that resembled an airport control tower was toppled shortly after it was finished, and work has halted on an amphitheater-like building larger than the temple on the property."

Supposedly, the way the money was brought in to finance the acquisition of the "Yearning for Zion" Ranch was illegal. Are you really sure than you're exempt? Just parceling the money out in a way that the government doesn't like, is illegal it would seem:

Fox News - "In the affidavit, prosecutors allege that sect members illegally structured financial transactions and that Jeffs personally toured the ranch before the land was purchased."

But no one has been charged with a crime, yet, just like before:

"To support prosecutors' claims that FLDS leaders financed the property through money laundering, one section in the affidavit lists 175 deposits, almost all of which are just less than $10,000, made at San Angelo banks over the course of two years and staggered by only a few days each. The total is about $1.5 million.

Prosecutors say the series of four-figure deposits -- which financial investigators call 'structuring' -- are typically done to evade federal reporting requirements.

However, the Texas attorney general's office, however, has not formally charged any FLDS members with any financial crimes."

Yup, a bunch of child molesters, who cares? Right? Except if you haven't read this blog, or others like it over the last four years, you probably think you know things about the YFZ affair that never happened, such as there being a bunch of pregnant teenage girls wandering around YFZ during the raid in 2008. To this date Texas has never said WHO they saw that was pregnant and "underage" when they raided YFZ, and only one girl out of all the underage girls on the ranch might have been visibly pregnant. That's wholly unremarkable in today's America.

This tactic can be used against YOUR church. The YFZ ranch is a FLDS church trust holding, and the church is being treated like a sort of organized crime syndicate. With as many laws as this country has, all they need to do is pick one your church members seem to violate, and start combing through your church's finances, and declare that you did something illegal to buy your land, and on it, you engaged in "crimes."

The smaller you are, the more conservative your beliefs, the greater the danger.

Just remember how they got the documents that they are using to seize the property:

The San Angelo Standard Times - "The ranch had been created with the intent of illegal activity, the affidavit alleges. The civil document liberally quotes Jeffs from his sacred documents, recovered from the ranch in the 2008 raid."

But the basis for the raid was a hoax call:

Fox News - "Texas Rangers raided the ranch following a call to a domestic abuse hotline that turned out to be false, and took 439 children into state custody."

The hoaxer now is completely forgotten in the narrative, as she was so obviously NOT genuine. Fox even forgets to mention that none of the kids were kept by Texas, but at least San Angelo's paper did remember:

"In 2008, more than 400 children were taken from the ranch before appellate courts ordered them returned to their families."

Go back to sleep now.

More →

Sphere: Related Content

As long as it's SERIAL polygyny, it's OK, isn't it? (UPDATED)

She's 16, he's 51. Why isn't he sharing a bunk with FLDS men in Prison?

Because he has the "decency" to abandon previous spouses, before tapping a blonde 16 year old, that's why. From E!

"Doug Hutchison, a character actor best known for roles in The Green Mile, Lost and The X-Files, married aspiring country singer Courtney Alexis Stodden on May 20 in Las Vegas.

He is 51. She is 16."

Well, he's a YOUNG looking 51, and she's a MATURE looking 16, so I guess it's OK. Maybe we oughta ask Bruce Jenner about his step daughter again. You know, she LOOKS older.

The lesson? Plow the field with all the young girls you want. Make sure you MARRY them first, or make sure someone else has and make sure it's one at a time and then YOUR genitalia won't offend or damage HER genitalia. You might want check with your lawyer, but if I understand it correctly, you can bop all the 16, 15, 14 and whatever age girls you want, two and three at a time, as long as they're like Mrs. Hutchinson in that they're married to SOMEONE already.

No, really, it's magic! A marriage license takes all the sting away from your thing (and every other thing) and makes it (them) friendly!

If not and you have RELIGIOUS reasons for thinking plowing with a 16 year old heifer is alright, and if you use RELIGIOUS language in "marrying" her, you're worse than a murderer (in terms of prison sentences meted out).

UPDATE: They're now getting a divorce.

More →

Sphere: Related Content

Backing away from the FLDS

You'll have to trust me that I almost wrote this post before recent developments with Warren and William E. Jessop. Friends can tell you that behind the scenes I've been saying Warren has gone "Gadhafi" on us and is snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. What stopped me is literally not having the time to do it, until this very moment, after the story is out. Warren's own Religion is moving on him to get rid of him.

The Deseret News - " 'It is an attempt to preserve ... the church,' (William E.) Jessop, 41, said in an interview with The Associated Press."

And so there you have it. Either they're rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic or fighting in the proverbial burning building.

I'll bottom line it for you and say that you can't have a Prophet who isn't a Prophet. If you do, you have a False Prophet and the FLDS now admits they followed a false prophet. In an authority based religion led by rule of prophets, you simply can't do that. The Catholic Church went down that path years ago when fighting over primacy among the various "Seas" of the Christian Faith and ended up bestowing "Called by Christ" Apostolic office on their bishop. They made him Pope. Popes speak without error and they are merely men, as all FLDS/LDS "prophets" are. Over time their errors snowball and you end up with a mess. This is where the FLDS is now.

I have many friends in the FLDS that I love and respect. I even still admire Warren for trying to be true to his vision, which is sadly false. He's following his vision to it's logical conclusion and it's going to get him locked up for the rest of his life.

So here we go with the shoe to drop.

I was beginning a task years ago when I started this blog, to which I now return. You'll note that I had mentioned a forum. The forum was hosted by another friend, and no longer exists, so I'll have to explain. The forum was called "New Reformation," and that was the task I was starting. I diverted into the FLDS issue because it is closely related to the issue of Legal Polygyny.

With my expulsion from an Orthodox Presbyterian Church in Vermont, I have embarked on the journey of finding a tolerant denomination, or starting my own. Of the two unlikely prospects, the latter has the best chance. That was the purpose of the forum. That is what I return to doing.

Because of all these things, the internal fight amongst the FLDS and it's leadership, and my desire to devote what little time I now have to pursuing my original purpose, I am doing what I would not do all along because of my friendship with those in the FLDS faith.

Friends in the FLDS: It is known by some of you that I respect your right to practice your religion free and unfettered in this country. I share a roughly equivalent view of marriage with you. I don't have qualms like the rest of society has, with regard to polygyny and with regard to eligibility for marriage when it comes to age. Your fight in that respect, has been my fight. I have defended you without emphasizing what I disagree with. I wanted you to win, and still do.

Because I cannot take it seems, an active role in this fight any longer, I must tell you what I have politely refrained from telling you these three years.

Yours is a false religion, a false faith.

While you may not respond positively, I will call you out none the less, out of that false faith, into the light of Christianity. I fully realize that some of you in the FLDS may indeed be saved and be believers in Christ, but the tenets of the LDS or FLDS faith preclude you from embracing the religion of the Latter Day Saints and Christianity at the same time. One excludes the other.

Your God is not my LORD. My LORD is unbegun and eternal. His only begotten Son is Jesus Christ, of David, of Nazareth and also, Son of God who is the complete and only means of Salvation. Your God is a graduate of the "God Academy" as it were, and someday the men of your faith believe that they too can be like God. This is the lie Satan told Eve in the Garden. Come out of this faith. Embrace Christ as God and Son of God, the only God, the LORD, Alpha and Omega, for he says to you:

"I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me: That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else. I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things."

Isaiah 45. If your respond, know that there is a place for you, a church, that will accept you, your families and all your wives and children.

More →

Sphere: Related Content

Greg speaks to me, in public (UPDATED)

Just when you think you're out of it. (UPDATE, Greg acknowledged in a phone call today 02/19/11, that the comment at the UNT newspaper site was in fact his)

They pull you back in again. The former peace officer and UNT Sgt, Gregory Jack Prickett:

"Hugh,

Here are the facts about the Gus Elliott case.

In 2004, a 19-year old student was stopped for a traffic violation and was determined to have been drinking alcohol, including the use a field breath test which showed the presence of alcohol. Elliott admitted during his deposition that he had been drinking alcohol all night and had lied about it at the time of the arrest. When he failed the field sobriety tests, he refused to comply with instructions and then turned, taking a posture as if he were going to fight or to flee. Since he would not comply, it was necessary to restrain him, during which time Officer Linnell suffered a laceration over his right eye, for which he later received medical treatment. During the course of taking him into custody after this, Elliott suffered a chipped tooth and a lacerated chin. Elliott made a plea deal to avoid going to trial for DWI, and plead “no contest” to another charge, paid $871 in fines/costs and served 12 months “deferred adjudication” probation.

He then sued and asked for $250,000 in damages. The case went to trial in 2008. After the DPS Crime Lab broke down the video to 30-fps, you could clearly see Elliott begin to turn away from the other officer and myself before we ever moved. The jury came back with a verdict that we had not violated Elliott’s rights nor used excessive force.

Even more telling was that at the conclusion of the trial, but before it went to the jury, Elliott’s attorney dropped one of the claims that he had made against me, apparently realizing that he had not proven his case.

This is my first post on this thread, and although much of your information is incorrect, I don’t intend to go through a point by point rebuttal or debate over it."

My reply:

"We can clear things up a great deal if you answer the following, this of course assumes that you are Gregory Jack Prickett, the subject of the above article:

1.) How did you obtain the address PO Box 10485, Bozeman, MT?

The next several questions all are to be answered assuming a date of July 2010 or BEFORE.

2.) Were you associated in any way with the blogging identity 'TxBluesMan' who posted at all or one of the following blogs: 'Grits for Breakfast,' 'Modern Pharisee,' 'Coram non Judice (blogger version),' 'Coram non Judice (wordpress version),' any of the blogs of Brooke Adams of the Salt Lake Tribune, or the wordpress blog 'FLDS Texas?'

3.) Did you know who I was prior to (or during) July of 2010?

4.) Had you ever communicated with me (on or before July 31st of 2010)?

5.) Did you ever contribute to articles on the FLDS, and/or YFZ and/or Warren Jeffs at Wikipedia (this assumes that simply posting material written by others would be a 'contribution')?

Since you have now weighed in on the topic Greg, no other discussions are relevant unless you can and do answer the above questions, and in particular the last 4, with 'yes,' or 'no.'

I may have follow up questions."

Does he dare answer the last four with "yes" or "no?"

More →

Sphere: Related Content

Tulsa Time

Appologies to Danny Flowers.

Danny wrote Tulsa Time, which is most popular in our memories as a song either by Don Williams or Eric Clapton. Danny was born in Henderson North Carolina. I was born in North Carolina. I was just in Henderson a few weeks ago. But I digress. I intend to digress more than one time in this post.

This is going to be one of those catch-all/catch-up messages, intended to let you know what's going on in life with me, and more or less why I haven't been blogging. Trucking, (I am now a Over the Road trucker) has not lived up to it's promise as far as free time to write and blog goes. Probably an experienced trucker would have told me this had I asked. I asked (it appears), the wrong experienced trucker.

First of all, on my absence of comment on the FLDS and Warren. Warren signed the 120. I thought he was winning. Maybe all Warren is trying to do is stay out of the General Population in a Texas Prison as long as he can. Warren Jeffs has been made into the moral equivalent of a Jeffrey Dahmer. Warren, the media narrative goes, consumes the virgin flesh of young girls to satisfy his sick sexual appetites. Jeffrey ate people.

Jeffrey Dahmer was a trophy kill in prison. I sadly think Warren may be lined up for the same fate. I think Texas knows this. Given that Warren may not survive in prison, it may not matter how long he spends there. He won't be freed on appeal and the railroad style trial that Judge Walther would give him puts him in the crosshairs long enough to die. Perhaps this is Warren's thinking. Maybe his defense team knows something we don't that is a game changer. I don't think so.

The FLDS no longer talk to me and what is in the media is all I know. I've peaked behind the curtain on two ends. Rozita Swinton and "TxBluesMan." It doesn't seem to interest them. I'd be vitally interested in the FBI communications network that seemed to exist before Rozita was "discovered." So far the FLDS have only paid lip service to interest in that topic.

TxBluesMan had extraordinary access, sometimes posting court documents before the Judge seemed to see them or approve them. I seem to know who TxBluesMan is. That's interesting. The FLDS again give lip service to being interested in the topic. That's all though. Proving any conspiracy leading up to the invasion of YFZ may well let all the FLDS men go overnight. They don't seem to care. I don't know why. Maybe they have looked. Maybe I had good couple of leads that didn't pan out. I don't know.

On to what's happening with me.

I continue to pursue several paths that seem at least theoretically open to me.

In short, I propose a business/religion empire based on family and a spine of trucking.

How romantic.

I've "proposed" that anyone interested could contact me and the starting position of the business would be staffing one truck with two wives/drivers and me. That would mean you would get ten days off in a row, away from the cranky old Pharisee, and ten days with him. If I'm too much to take, maybe I wouldn't be in tiny doses.

Those of you who think the current Mrs. Pharisee doesn't know of this proposal are wrong.

A number of things would have to work out for the above to be the path.

The end result would be part ownership in a diversified business that had trucking as part of the enterprise. Driving the rest of your life is not part of the idea. Driving part of your life away, would be.

Follow the above link for more details.

Another path is the formation of a denomination, which continues to be my interest. This continues to progress. It is agonizingly slow. People are in addition, just too stubborn to admit that the best way to do things is simply to agree with me.

Odd, isn't it?

Then there is the sort of Methodist/Presbyterian circuit riding polygynist preacher. I need people to pony up for that one. It's quite simple. Support the effort monetarily and I will use my far ranging truck driving profession to show up on occasion, preach, take your money and deliver the sacraments, which for a reformed venue is pretty much baptism and communion.

The last is the least complex. I can make free time as a solo trucker. I do range about the country from one end to another. If I derived an income as a preacher the truck is just my wandering taxicab. It also would serve the denominational goal but from a slightly different angle.

I haven't mentioned the other path.

That's giving up, closing up shop, declaring bankruptcy, and shouting "Bah, Humbug" into some anonymous box canyon and retiring from public view. That would be after beating my head against the wall now for more than 20 years and coming to the conclusion, as I rapidly am beginning to seriously entertain, that no one at all, cares.

So what about Tulsa Time?

It appears that Tulsa does have it's own time standards. It is laid back. No one works in this industrial park on weekends, well one merchant does. Several of the commercial buildings are empty. They remind me mysteriously of the abandoned ABM site east of Conrad Montana. Melting snow drips. It's accumulated in places you would expect people to clear out. The ABM site was like that.

I hoofed it for about a mile round about my delivery site which won't take my cargo until tomorrow morning. There were no laundromats. There were no bars. There were no churches. There was a church TV station. There was a 24 hour a day pawn shop that redeemed gold and silver. It was busy.

Eventually I went back to the "receiver" of my freight and looked again for an outlet to plug into for my laptop. There were none. I continued to be nervous about the fact that there was what appeared to be an abandoned "tractor" (the term for the "truck" portion of an eighteen wheeler, it had expired plates and hadn't moved for a while and was backed up to the "dock"). The whole dock area showed only marginal signs of use. The snow was cleared away from the dock which was comforting, but I saw no signs of life at all. No security (it is Tulsa though) and no noises. Finally I did get an angle on the roof cooling unit and could hear it running. I felt better.

I have been sent to wrong locations before. It now appears this was not one of them. It's just sleepy. Tulsa time you know.

So I'm sitting on a loading dock of an adjoining business that does have plugs, and lighting, and listening to the snow melt dripping. It was 70 when I got here, it's in the 50's now. The snow is melting quickly but there was a lot of it to melt in Tulsa. It's still melting. Water is running everywhere.

This brings me to the digression (in part) of another reason I haven't been blogging.

There is the issue of no one giving a rat's hiney. It's hard to keep banging on the door when no one is home. It bruises your hands.

There is the issue of depression.

This is a depressing job when you're not moving or sleeping. I don't like hanging out in a truck. It is turning out to be very hard for me to compose a thought, and then follow through with putting it into print when the overwhelming thought is "oh, never mind," because when the truck stops moving, and you're not making the dough, and you're not sleeping, it's really really REALLY depressing.

I got into this business to be with a friend and to set about the activity of forming a new denomination.

I am now alone.

I never go home.

I miss my wife.

I'm not making enough money to justify doing this as a solo driver. I keep putting the pencil to it and can't make it work.

I do have one or two ways to make "soloing" work better that I've been trying. We'll see.

I try to be honest about who I am and what my faults are. I try to set things in front of you all so that you know me as well as you can know anyone you haven't met, or may have only met briefly.

There are drawbacks. It's the issue of "Pearls before Swine."

"Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you."

They do rend.

Most of what I encounter to my posts on both of my blogs now, is that rending.

Alone, I must tell you, it is extremely painful.

There are those that trample. They lie. They rend. They twist everything you say and yes, it hurts a great deal.

I don't mind saying so as I continue to try to be honest about who I am and what I am. Just saying the above will let me in for another round of jeering and ridicule. The only vague interest I have in that trampling and rending is what bizarre twist will my words be subjected to when I hear them read back to me, modified.

So I'm here in Tulsa. I may be here until Tuesday. Clock-wise, as a trucker, I have about four hours left to spend before Tuesday. I cannot go too many places in four hours. I certainly can't go on from that place to another. I may visit the local service center for my "tractor" and see if they can diagnose some odd things that are occurring with old blue. We'll see.

I think if I want to write, and to blog, I need to get out of the truck. It helps a lot.

More →

Sphere: Related Content

You doubted me? Just read the latest.

Oh, you doubted me did you? You thought I was spinning a wild yarn of male bovine manure reading too much into the details of yesterdays arraignment of Warren Jeffs? Just read how the local rag immediately characterized Warren's arrival in Texas. I mean, they LEAD with the verbal version of the negative photo op, as if it means anything:

The San Angelo Standard-Times - "Warren Jeffs, the leader of the polygamy sanctioning Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, walked into the Tom Green County courthouse for an arraignment with a gray sweater tucked into the chains that surrounded his waist, covering the top of the bright orange jumpsuit."

If you're BLIND you're going to get the message. If photos don't make that big an impression on you, you're going to get the message. If you read a text version or a print only version or some reprinted version of the story emailed to you without a picture.

You're going to get the message.

Warren was in a gray sweater (sweatshirt) and a BRIGHT ORANGE jumpsuit. About the only thing left to the imagination is WHO wears BRIGHT ORANGE?

Most of us reading the article know it's a PRISON INMATE.

You're supposed to look at Warren and think of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

Not like Khalid wants you to see him, but as a criminal. And we all know that criminals are unshaven, disheveled and have just been rousted out of bed.

Granted, Khalid is guilty, he confessed. In addition Khalid does not have the rights of a US Citizen, because he's not one (Warren is). If you want to know the remaining stereotype that no racial group or gender will ever give up it's "good looking" vs "bad looking." We want to believe that the disheveled and slovenly in appearance look that way because it's a reflection of their true moral character. When we go out in public, we put on our best for the most part. If he ever goes to trial, Khalid will try to appear as he wants to be seen, so will Warren but neither man is how they appear at their best or worst. They are what they are.

An American, like Warren, is entitled to be pure as the driven snow in front of the law, until it is proven otherwise. We need to remember that, and not what the Government/Media complex wants us to believe.

More →

Sphere: Related Content

Cost is NOT a factor, including your freedoms....

The Three Piggies and Warren

Does Government not care what rights or treasure of yours it takes to expand it's power? Does a former drill instructor make a really bad therapist?

The money, while it is probably a prodigous amount, is not important to the State of Texas.  Texas thinks it's probably some amount YOU would think is inappropriate, considering the lack of prosecutorial success (vs Warren) elsewhere.

How do we know it's too much?

They'd tell you if it was cheap.  (Either that, or they don't know, which ought to bother you as well.  Strickland says he doesn't know.)

It doesn't matter to Texas, they got their desired photo op. Not Warren as depicted in the last post, but Warren in prison sweats and prison orange with what looks like a bit of a 50+ five o'clock shadow, in irons, flanked by fat pigs dressed in their best.

Oh.

You think I meant something pejorative?

Those guys aren't a bit porky looking to you?

Considering Mr. Jeffs is more or less a cardiologists ideal by comparison, Texas did need to "weight" (sorry, no, not really) the photo op in their favor.  I've been driving through Texas a lot recently and they are the most cliché bound bureaucracy I know of. "Don't Mess with Texas" one Government billboard preaches, and yet another declares; "the Eyes of Texas are upon You."

So when it comes to whether or not Texas will spend infinite amounts of Tax Payer $$$ to get a picture of Warren looking his worst with a three overweight cowboy wannabes flanking him like he was going to shoot his way out of the "joint," or be rescued by "King Willie, the Thug," gangster style, they spare no expense.

The San Angelo Standard-Times - "Jerry Strickland, spokesman for the Attorney General’s Office, said they flew Jeffs into San Angelo from Utah at 9 p.m. Tuesday night and then drove him to Big Lake.

'Attorney General Abbott and his office his prosecutors have been handling the prosecution of cases related to the YFZ ranch,' Strickland said, as he walked into the courtroom Wednesday morning. '... Today 7 of 12 men have been convicted of sexually assaulting children. This case stems from that action.'

When asked about costs related to trying Jeffs in Texas, Strickland said he doesn’t have specific numbers, but that cost is not a factor.

'What I do know is, Attorney General Abbott is committed to protecting children in this state,' Strickland said. 'You cant’ put a price tag on protecting children and because of that, this case will be handled with prosecutors (from) the AG’s (attorney general’s) office.' "

The great difficulty is that they are not just spending your tax dollars (and with the "co-mingling" of Federal and State money that is Revenue Sharing, yes, it's yours too), they're spending your freedom as well.

Texas wanted to make this "statement" as you see above, and Texas wanted their picture. Now they've got it. In the process they ran roughshod over Warren's right to a "speedy trial" (it doesn't matter if he didn't want it before, he wants it now) and they got to treat him like a fugitive. No one in Texas wanted a Dapper Warren Jeffs showing up in wing tips and business suit, with stylish coiffure, fatherly appearance, etc, walking through the front door and surrendering to authorities, they wanted to fly him out and drag him around much like Achilles is supposed to have done with Hector after defeating him in battle.

Well, there you go Texas. And America? There went your money, though granted, it was mostly Texas dollars (except they won't account for it), and there went your freedom, with Warren. You have to decide: Does the prosecution of a man for crimes Texas probably can't prove warrant the setting aside of the rights your founding fathers insisted on having for each citizen PRIOR to signing our Constitution in favor of the rights of the State to extradite?

I think you know my answer. What's yours?

More →

Sphere: Related Content

Why you want Warren to Win his appeal, even if you want Warren in Jail forever.

It's quite simply, the sixth amendment of the US Constitution.

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.

During this business in Texas, I have heard, unchallenged, the assertion that the State (in this case Texas) has the "right to a fair trial." No such right exists for the State. The State is not a person, people have rights in the United States. The State? It has none.

I have also heard, as an obscene echo of the "Borking" of Clarence Thomas (and other political figures), that the "seriousness of the charges" somehow outranks the less serious charges in Utah.

In short, I hear a lot of what amounts to "horse feathers" and myth in regard to the rights of the State in the matter of "The State of Texas VS the FLDS."

I was not a big fan of Warren in the past, but even in my most loathing stage of Warren Jeffs dislike, I disliked even more the way in which Utah, the United States and various other states were trying to "get" him. I believed from the outset that Warren should not be convicted, and when he was, I saw it as a travesty of justice.

So taking a page from "the time when I thought Warren was a creep," I recommend that you too put aside personal dislike and deal with what is really at stake for you, in the way Warren is being treated.

Warren, per our US Constitution, has Sixth amendment rights. If his are not adequately defended, if the existence of Sixth amendment rights are said to be compromised by a State right to a "fair trial" or a superiority of "Serious Charges" (charges that Warren must be regarded as "not guilty" of until proven otherwise), you lose. You lose big.

Arguments that Texas must have Warren before charges in Utah are resolved (because Texas' charges are more serious) are nowhere found in the US Constitution. The argument that Texas might need him now, so as to better prosecute him and obtain a "fair trial" for Texas, this argument too is nowhere found in the US Constitution.

Warren's Sixth Amendment rights are YOUR Sixth Amendment rights. You cannot compromise them without compromising your own. You might need them. A loved one of yours might need them. Warren needs them and if you don't let him have them, you won't have them. At least, you won't have a full version of them.

The practical upshot of Warren winning his appeal is quite simple. There will be no new trial in Utah. Warren will "go free," and summarily be arrested by Texas in some way shape or form, and go to Texas. You, who hate Warren, will be deprived only of one thing. The illusion that Warren Jeffs is being sought for rape in Utah, and the illusion that Warren Jeffs was on the "FBI Ten Most Wanted" list for a crime that he was actually guilty of.

You still get Warren in Texas. He is still tried in Texas. He's just tried as Warren Jeffs, who has never done anything wrong (so far as we know) in his life. If he has done something wrong, you'll get your chance to prove it.

In the meantime, by rooting for him briefly, you'll do yourself a big favor.

More →

Sphere: Related Content

Warren ain't goin' NOWHERE...

At least for the next two days:

The Salt Lake Tribune - "(Warren) Jeffs will remain in Utah at least until Nov. 17, when the state’s response to Jeffs appeal is due. The court will likely take a day or two to make a decision on the case, said Utah State Courts spokeswoman Nancy Volmer."

That answers THAT question.

More →

Sphere: Related Content

Is Warren off to Texas now?

Honestly, I don't know, but it looks like it:

The Salt Lake Tribune - "3rd District Judge Terry Christiansen sided with prosecutors who argued once a governor signs an extradition orders, courts can only decide whether the papers are in order.

'I don’t believe it’s proper for this court to substitute its judgment for that of the governor,' said Christiansen in making his ruling Monday.

Defense attorneys are appealing the decision. Neither prosecutors nor defense attorneys immediately knew when Jeffs might be moved to Texas.

The 54-year-old Jeffs appeared in court wearing a dark suit, smiling at times and acknowledging some people in the courtroom gallery.

Jeffs was convicted in Utah of forcing a 14-year-old girl to marry her 19-year-old cousin in 2007, but that conviction was overturned by the Utah Supreme Court earlier this year. The justices cited faulty juror instructions.

Washington County prosecutors have not yet decided whether they will re-try Jeffs."

What I don't know is; do defense attorneys appeal this decision while Warren is still in Utah, or can they react speedily enough to do so, or does he simply go to Texas? If the decision is appealed and if Warren's attorney's prevail and he is in Texas, what happens then?

As far as I know he's on an executive jet flying over Texas right now in the custody of Texas Rangers. If there is time granted for the filing of an appeal and Warren can't leave until that window expires, that's a different story. Again this is where my limited expertise (extremely limited) falls short.

I know that constitutionally it doesn't sit well with me. Warren has a right to a speedy trial. The Governor of Utah, and in fact no Governor in any state has the right to abbreviate that right or eliminate it, or modify it to suit themselves. Then however, we get into the realm of judicial mechanisms and they may in fact be designed in such a way as to not provide for the protection of Warren's rights under the Constitution.

If you ask me what happens if Warren is successful, my answer is quite simply that he still goes to Texas, but the circumstance changes. If Warren wins, without going to Texas (something that may be too late to do anything about), Washington county DROPS the charges, and quickly. Texas still gets him.

The assembled persecutors of Warren Jeffs are so petty and prone to prejudicial tactics though, that they want him going to Texas not as a free man arrested in Utah, but as a man under the charge of rape in Utah, even though it is known by all involved that the charges will never see the light of day in another Utah court.

More →

Sphere: Related Content

That's less than Michael Emack Bargained For!

A big expensive trial, and one of the longer ones if I recall correctly, from gavel to verdict. What does the state of Texas get for it's trouble? Less time for Keith Dutson Jr. than Michael Emack plea bargained to get and not even a decent "perp walk," that's what:

The San Angelo Standard-Times - "Keith Dutson Jr. was escorted out of the Tom Green County Courthouse, his hands uncuffed, showing a pleasant demeanor despite having just been sentenced to six years in prison and fined $10,000 on a conviction for sexual assault of a child."

Of course real victory would have been an acquittal or "jury nullification," but you take what you can get. As I observed above, this is better than Michael Emack "bargained for."

" 'None of us can presume to know the mind of the jury,' Eric Nichols, the lead prosecutor, said outside the courthouse after the sentence."

Read that as: "I would have plea bargained this earlier this year, had I known."

"Dutson, 25, is the youngest member of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints to be sentenced out of the seven who have undergone prosecution on evidence seized in the raid on the FLDS-owned Yearning for Zion Ranch in Schleicher County."

Face it, he's younger and the "ick" factor is lower. Our society has taught us to believe in "dirty old men" which is a form of age discrimination, but no one wishes to see it that way.

I'm going to make a graphic comment that I have made before.

So don't read anymore if you don't want to read graphic sexual detail.

To be truthful, I have NO idea what sort of damage a 50 year old penis does that a 16 year old penis wouldn't do as well. In fact, I'd hazard a guess to say the 50 year old "tool" so to speak, does less damage on average, at least in these cases.

My reasoning is as follows. 16 on 16 sex is rarely "committed." What I mean is it's more illicit and along the lines of fornication than permanent. Without going into great detail I know of two people in a church I once went to who had illicit relations who later got married. He was older, though not as much as Keith was, and she was the same age as Keith's bride. They were stupid. They tried to conceal the "deed" and for some reason, because she says she did not "clean up" afterward and tried to conceal the act from her parents, she contracted a vaginal/uterine infection. Not an STD mind you, an infection relating to inexperience, concealment and then continued concealment of the illness she had contracted.

They are married now, and that is good, but she is damaged.

Keith and his wife were not "concealing" their relationship from their community. Sexual relations were expected. There were plenty of other women available to advise his bride. The same goes for any bride of any man regardless of age in the FLDS community.

An older man doesn't want sex as often, particularly if the older man has other wives. I know I'm going to be called sexist but I frankly hear of more younger men complaining that their wives won't "put out" than I hear of younger women complaining of the same. There are recent studies that say that many women simply don't prioritize sex as much as men. They are comforted by it, they find it to be "expected," and they like the closeness, but on average, research and anecdote tell us that women just aren't as hot to trot as guys.

If we're looking for physical hardship coming from sexual activity, I'm afraid the older man is probably kinder to the younger woman than someone her own age. He's less experienced, he's more "physical" in his "love making" and he wants it more. To be blunt, if we're concerned with the younger woman's health, then give her an older more experienced man. On average, it's a better deal.

Nevertheless, it is the impression of society that sexual exploration among the young who are going to "do it anyway" is better than sexual commitment by a younger girl to an older man. I say horse feathers. As stated before, a vagina doesn't know how old a phallus is, and if anything, the tool itself is less damaging and used less often with more skill. By less damaging I'm trying to be as delicate as I can in a very blunt discussion.

Really what it's all about, as said before, is the "ick" factor. We don't want, collectively, as a society, to see a wrinkly old man mounting a 14 year old girl. We'll go to the movies and revel in tales of lost virginity that are rated "R" and pitched to those same 14 and 15 year olds as we say are harmed by older men, and we seem to like seeing Joe Sixteen mount Jill Fourteen. We pay to see younger looking 21 year old actors and actresses hump like bunnies and get vicarious thrills out of it, but if Joe Sixteen is Sixty instead, it's a horror movie.

To those of you reveling in the long sentences of FLDS men, stop being such hypocrites.

"The raid was provoked by a call claiming abuse at the ranch, a call later determined to be a hoax."

Yes Rozita, you were never there, and the call was a hoax, and you were the hoaxer.

More →

Sphere: Related Content

On not blogging and blogging again (Wazzup?)

It is fair to say, "I told you so."

On July 29th I said I was probably going to be "out of it" or take a "hiatus" for a bit. Of course the characterizations of that post began immediately. In some quarters it was said I "quit." Other people simply didn't read down the page. In the latter case I realize I'm not the beginning and end of their day, so I get it. Pretty much outside my immediate family, I'm not the beginning or end of anyone's day. In the former case, all I will say is "you wish."

As far as months go to take a dive into the idle side of the pool in blogging, August is a good one. Government never illustrates how important it is in our lives than in August when those bums decide to take time off. Having injected themselves into every aspect of our lives, when they take a vacation (no one can interrupt their plans, you see both how annoying they have become (that's the importance part) and how useless they are.

If you're moldering in Jail, you're going to keep doing that, if you need a Government agency which has made themselves a Machiavellian necessity, you're out of luck. In short it's clear in August how much Government dominates our lives and the news, and in some ways it reveals tragically how little they are really necessary. It's a great time to not be blogging and I wasn't.

Your Modern Pharisee will (God willing) successfully transition from an Automotive Finance Manager to "Something Else" by about the third week of this month. The end date for my training is a little murky. It sorta depends on my progress and the availability of work which my employer really doesn't want to discuss in detail with me. That's ok.

Once again to the great disappointment of my detractors, I have cleared the hurdles of background checks that were in this case the most extensive I have ever endured and come out smelling like a rose. No my dear opponents, there's nothing criminal in my past lurking around waiting to be found. It was kinda fun in retrospect to deal with the one issue of "my arrest" in Ocala Florida back in the 90's. It ended up with Florida saying "what arrest, there ain't no stinking arrest." Someone had listed a bogus arrest in a database by a company that has it's headquarters in....

....wait for it....

Dallas Texas.

Hmmmmm.... Maybe I didn't remember "my arrest" because it never happened.

Ya think?

You think, I'll wonder.

I keep warning that the focus of the Modern Pharisee will be shifting, and then I kinda don't shift. There are reasons.

For one, I love politics but it's so futile. I've promised to write on the topic, so I guess I should, but again, it's so futile.

For another, the pickings in the FLDS cases are now slim. The phase of appeal in Texas will begin soon as some of the plea bargains facilitated appeal, since they preserved the right of appeal. Men "convicted" of their crimes in those cases plead "no contest" and essentially agreed with the state that if the state were allowed to present certain evidence a jury would convict them and it was useless to fight that inevitability. They did however state that they'd like the benefit of appeals, and since the transcript of a plea bargain is short, those cases have gone straight to appeal. As with the cases of the children where one favorable ruling sent all the children back, one successful appeal of the warrant in any FLDS case will void every conviction obtained so far.

That brings me to the nascent status of Warren Jeffs as a victim or martyr or even hero. He could go either way at this point. Essentially a martyr is a victim of a particular narrow variety. Warren could just be another wave tossed victim drowning in his oppression, or he could be a martyr for his cause. I hope at least for the latter. Increasingly Warren S. Jeffs whose trail of dismissed charges and overturned convictions is looking like a man wronged.

Without meaning to insult his legal help, he doesn't have what is generally recognized as the best legal minds in the country helping him. They are good lawyers to be sure, and they may even be great lawyers. His religion's pilfered coffers don't offer the image of a man with unlimited funds hiring the best attorneys money can buy who in turn would produce an OJ/Johnnie Cochran type verdict. His attorneys' track records are poor in his case in the first few rounds. They lose, and then they fight back. Then they start winning.

The bottom line is that Warren can be portrayed, if portrayed skillfully, as being downtrodden, victimized, persevering and being willing to suffer martyrdom for a cause. That cause can be extended in it's relevance to all of us, again, if the portrayal of Warren and his travails are accurate and if they are sold to the media in terms of what he does for all of us. Warren Jeffs can be everyman fighting the limitless power of the state to bend laws and processes for the purposes of destroying both a man and the faith he represents. If this can be done, he is at least a martyr. If he can live through this, and win, he can be a hero. Ultimately most of us need heroes, not martyrs. Martyrs die for a cause, Heroes win and allow us to believe we can "fight the power/the man/city hall" and live to tell about it. Really, that's what most of us want to do. If forced to fight for a good cause we want to win or have our champion win and live so that we can go back to living our anonymous lives. Anonymous lives of personal freedom. That in a nutshell is what Warren and the FLDS represent at this time. A focal point for personal and religious freedom in a free country.

The last matter of housekeeping is the progress of the "new denomination." I am beginning to transition into a "pastoral" role but the denomination is not formed yet. The small group of people I am involved with want urgently to remain in the places we were planted and seek and pray to God that this be so. This involves submitting to the existing authorities in the churches we are attending if we are still in them. The process that a month ago could have taken a week or two weeks has stretched out into a much longer period of time, but seems to be entering an end game that will have a nucleus of persons in those churches, "unchurched." That will be when we start.

As a consequence the new denomination will begin, again, God willing. It will begin as essentially a cloned version of the Orthodox Presbyterian denomination with a rewrite of the Westminster Confession of Faith's chapter 24 and a sort of WCF convention call to address other perceived deficiencies of the Confession. The proposed new wording of point one in Chapter 24 will be: "Marriage is to be between one man and one woman. It is it lawful before the LORD for a man to have more than one wife, but not for woman to have more than one husband, at the same time." The old wording was: "Marriage is to be between one man and one woman: neither is it lawful for any man to have more than one wife, nor for any woman to have more than one husband, at the same time." Other unisexed language with regard to divorce will be changed and screeds against "Papists" will be deleted. Other than that the WCF will remain intact and the Book of Church order used by the OPC will be adopted. Everything will be examined ultimately, but that is the first order of business and the basis of our separation from existing denominations. As soon as the denomination is large enough, the "Convention" to examine the WCF and book of church order will be held.

This will become my primary task. My job will become for funds, not personal fulfillment (though I do like my new job) much as Paul was a tentmaker. I will follow and comment avidly with interest and commitment when it comes to FLDS cause. It think it has widespread impact in preserving and restoring our liberty if the cases go their way. I have committed to the FLDS to be in prayer for Warren's release and the overturning of the convictions of the men in Texas. I will offer them up in prayer to God that this be done, if it be his will. I think if it is not his will to do so, the days will be dark for all of us.

More →

Sphere: Related Content

Not Monday, but Friday for Jeffs

Next Friday, that is.

The State of Utah will a hearing Monday to appeal the unanimous ruling of the Utah Supreme Court, but there will be time to digest whatever ruling comes out of that hearing, file whatever motions must be filed and raise whatever objections there will be.

The Salt Lake Tribune - "Walter F. Bugden, one of Jeffs’ attorneys, said he will file a habeus corpus motion opposing the extradition until there is a resolution in the Utah case.

'It is not only a question of fairness but of constitutional proportion to shuttle him back and forth between states,' Bugden said. 'I think that the decision should be made and shouldn’t just be left pending until after he has a trial in Texas. I think it is fundamentally unfair to not finish what they started.' "

This gives Wally the maneuvering room to make whatever objections he will make is an indication his arguments have basic weight. This is provided of course, Utah's Supremes do not "reconsider" their decision. In addition, there is no "Constitutional Right" of Texas to dispose of "more serious charges" but there is a Constitutional right to a speedy trial. Offhand that would seem to trump any claim Texas has to Warren for the time being.

Of course Utah could always just drop the charges and clear the way for Texas to take Warren, and that is what I expect will happen if nothing changes Monday. The whole purpose of the hearing Monday is to re-instate Warren's conviction so that he has no right to a speedy trial, having already had a trial. Utah then hopes (as does Texas) to send Warren to Texas a Guilty man, not an innocent one. Once in Texas, Utah and Texas both don't care if the Utah Supremes reaffirm their decision because Warren will then be in Texas. They figure he can argue a speedy trial in Utah all he wants from Texas, while he is waiting for trial in Texas. Speed does not help Warren in Texas.

This is such a cynical move that even I was mildly surprised by it. Utah has no hope at all of retrying Warren and gaining a conviction, but the political pressure on the Utah Supreme Court is now immense. They've already whined how their clear, correct and unanimous decision forces hardship on the "victim" of a nonexistent crime. The pressure is now to "reconsider" their decision, even though everyone knows the only change in outcome would be whether the decision was unanimous or not. All the move on Utah's part does if successful, is to void Warren's request for a new trial.

Texas does not want an innocent Warren in their courts, which will raise the issue of whether he deserves bail or not. Texas wants the prejudicial effect of his conviction to still be in place when they do try Warren. Texas doesn't want to grant Warren bail. Texas is not in the slightest, interested in Justice.

More →

Sphere: Related Content

Krakauer: "I'm Stupid."

Thanks there Krak, we knew that:

From Peg McEntee's column at the Salt Lake Tribune - "(Jon Krakauer) said he made a 'stupid comment' when he blamed the high court’s 'close ties to the LDS Church' and the 'political basis' of the judgment.

'I apologize to the justices,' he said. 'That was not fair.'

But he still believes the ruling, which means a new trial for Jeffs if prosecutors decide to go that way, was a 'terrible decision.' "

So he admits he gets worked up and shoots his mouth off in an emotional way and says things he later regrets.

So, Jon, about that tape. Did you HEAR the tape? Did you see the transcript of "the tape?" How can you assure us it was genuine or did you just hear or see something that you didn't verify, and then shot your mouth off?

Krak also says he's "emotionally invested in these victims," when referring to former FLDS members. He's simply telling us he has lost all objectivity, and is rationalizing his behavior.

"Krakauer (also) thinks the evidence in (the Texas) case (against Warren Jeffs) 'is bomb-proof, riveting and disgusting. I think things look really good there. Texas should and will prosecute.' "

And so Peg becomes the second "journalist" to not ask Jon how he knows that, or to question the objectivity of his assessment.  And to give him a clean shot and a platform to make his assertions.

More →

Sphere: Related Content

Jeffs' "Squeeze Play"

Since we know Utah won't "retry" Warren, but instead will pretend to want to try him, what's up with the "Speedy Trial" request?

Let's go to the Texas Tribune for this quote:

"Paul Murphy, a spokesman in the Utah Attorney General’s Office, said Utah has not yet decided whether to seek a new trial — and that officials there probably won’t make the call until after he’s prosecuted in Texas."

Warren is saying, "Make the Call Paul."

Utah then has to either drop the charges now, because Warren wants his speedy trial, not later, after Texas has had their turn at him, or Warren will stay in Utah for the new trial and Teas can't have him until Utah is done with him.

The "New Trial" proceedings would work well for Warren because the fist of several appeals may well have been heard already by the time the "New Trial" is figured out, to have a new trial, or not to have one.

If ultimately it's "Not a trial" instead of a trial, then Warren goes to Texas a free man and an innocent man. In the meantime, with a bail reduction hearing, Warren walk at least for a little bit before he heads for Texas.

All of this is iffy, but Warren and his lawyers are forcing the hand of Utah so that they can't play Paul Murphy's card. Utah will have to try him again (and they'll lose this time) or Utah will have to dismiss the charges. Either way Warren wins something. I'm betting he'd like his trial again in Utah. That takes more time.

More →

Sphere: Related Content

Warren moves "Speedy Trial" request to Monday the 23rd.

I guess no one likes Wednesdays

The Salt Lake Tribune - "The hearing will be Aug. 23 at 9 a.m. before 5th District Judge James Shumate. A court spokeswoman said attorneys in the case requested the scheduling change."

It's still less than a month from the day the New Trial was ordered. That's pretty speedy.

More →

Sphere: Related Content

Cooper - Krakauer - (Carolyn) Jessop - Toobin

I'm glad I watched the Arizona Attorney General's interview first (Terry Goddard). This interview oscillates between pathetic, to unbelievable to people simply emoting because they did not get their way. They're appalled, stunned, bewildered, blah, blah, blah. The decision was UNANIMOUS folks.

Watch it, then follow the link back and watch the Terry Goddard interview. The key thing AG Goddard says is that the Utah Supreme court decision was right, even though he is "disappointed."

I'm really convinced that a large portion of the behavior of both Arizona and Utah in prosecuting Warren is to protect Elissa Wall. She lied under oath and manufactured evidence She cannot go back to court without being tried (eventually) for perjury. Ok, it's not JUST to protect Elissa Wall, it's also to protect those who offered her as a credible witness and built the world's strangest prosecution around her.

Now go watch the Terry Goddard interview. Another thing, I wouldn't trust Anderson Cooper farther than I could throw him, he's clearly bought in as well. Why does NO ONE ask Jon how he knows about this "tape?" Why is he accepted as "Mr. Expert on the law and everything else under the sun?"

I'm going to repeat what I have said elsewhere. Upon reflection the decision of the Utah Supreme Court was codespeak for the fact that there should have been a directed verdict of "Not Guilty" after the prosecution rested. There was no case. Since the Judge failed to grant that motion, the Utah Supreme Court said that the Jury should have been instructed that what they (the Jury) saw as the prosecution's case was no case at all. The prosecution was trying to peer into Warren's soul, and absent Warren's public confession of what his state of mind was, there simply could be no determination of "Guilty."

More →

Sphere: Related Content

Worth Watching, interview with Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard

It's worth watching because he makes occasional sense, including stating that there were procedural errors and we can't disobey the law to bring someone to justice. For that Terry Goddard gets high marks. He's "disappointed" but it's clear Terry knew the conviction was sorta out there.

The interviewer is clearly "Anti," and AG Goddard is no friend, but he's honest in the respect that he seems to see the Utah Supreme Court Decision as justified.

If I had a transcript, I'd fisk it. I'll try to hunt one up. You'll notice if you watch, the usual myths crop up. Terry does say it's "not about Warren Jeffs." Well, I hope not. It should be about the Law.

Mike Watkiss is from KTVK.

More →

Sphere: Related Content

Darth Krakauer strikes back! Warren made a Porn!

Darth Krakauer

Brooke Adams has a transcript of the "Anderson Cooper" program, in which Jon Krakauer makes an interesting and startling claim:

"The Polygamy File:

KRAKAUER: Right. The one — the one silver lining in this is if Texas — if Utah decides not to retry Warren, he will be more quickly extradited to Texas, where he faces very serious charges, much more serious, not as an accomplice to rape but an actual rapist.

And the evidence, in the raid of 2008, they uncovered a treasure trove of evidence, including a tape recording and a transcript of Warren raping a 12-year-old girl. Actually, she had been 11 until 24 days earlier.

She had been forced to marry Jeffs. She was raped in the temple on a special bed. Two of Jeffs’s older wives participated in the rape. It was tape recorded. Every grunt and perverted prayer and command to this girl.

And that, and a lot of other evidence is likely to convict Warren, put him behind bars for life — for four life terms, I think, to face the charges.

TOOBIN: Texas and Utah now have to sort out what’s going to happen. It seems likely to me that this decision will scotch this case. This girl — [Elissa] will no longer have to testify. They’ll just move the whole operation to Texas and bring those more serious charges there. But –

COOPER: Do you think politics played a role in this, in Utah?

TOOBIN: You know what? I don’t know. I mean, I just don’t know enough about the Utah Supreme Court.

But, you know, this is a very unusual ground to overturn a conviction. Jury — jury instructions have to be correct, but judges usually, you know, give trial judges a certain amount of latitude here.

COOPER: Right.

TOOBIN: And given the magnitude of these charges and given the fact that these jury instructions didn’t even relate to the core issue in the case, I am bewildered by this decision. And it certainly bears looking into, whether there is some political connection between these judges."

One of my first reactions is this opens a whole "chain of evidence" issue. Jon Krakauer is a filmmaker. Filmmakers are expert at making the unreal, seem as if it happened.

Get my drift?

This is the new offensive. Warren Jeffs is such a monster we can't let him out. Everything must be done to keep him in jail. The rights of all must be suspended. The pressure will mount on the Texas judiciary to bypass the law. The pressure was on Utah's Supreme Court to bend the law, the pressure on Texas' Supreme Court will be enormous, if in fact there is such a tape.

This also puts pressure on supporters. Is there such a tape? Is it real? I'm a parental consent guy, if there was parental consent then I have to consistently state that there was no moral wrong in giving a girl in marriage. There would be no moral wrong from a legalistic standpoint based on that act alone.

There is the question of love. I'd have a hard time seeing it as a loving act, to put it mildly.

There is the question of law. It's illegal. Period. There was never a need to do it and doing it flouts the law, and that's the barest way to put it. Why would you do that?

There is the obvious stupidity of Warren (if this is true). He would be the modern day Richard Nixon squared. Cubed even. Recording yourself having sex with a barely 12 year old girl? That's a death wish. Again, why WOULD you do that?

This brings up the other question of timing. If this tape existed, it's been leaked before. The whole business of the "sex bed" is more understandable in that light. Texas knew what it was looking for. But again, if they KNEW this, why wasn't it a basis for the raid? You have a sex tape with a 12 year old being "persuaded" to have relations, that's probable cause. It revives the idea of Doran's confidential "Informant" as real, and it places that informant very close to Warren.

That too raises a chain of custody issue.

Apparently this tape has been circulated among the "anti's." Unless it's a videotape though, I don't know how you prove anything with it. We'll see I guess.

Oh, and this is one thing for sure, Krakauer is an idiot to suggest that Utah jail Warren for a crime that he couldn't commit against Elissa, because of a crime he seems to have committed (in Jon's ears), to a girl in Texas.

More →

Sphere: Related Content