Polygamists MUST unite NOW.

First Harry said yes, then he said no. But he meant YES. The pet I probably loved more than any other was my Siberian Husky, Valena. What a wonder. She even taught me something new about sales. Valena would position herself askance in doorways and place her head between her forepaws and only her eyes would move. She was watching our feet. Our feet told her what we would do next. Don't listen just to what they say, watch what they do.

WASHINGTON-(The Salt Lake Tribune)- "A senior Justice Department prosecutor will work with Utah, Arizona and Nevada to review how the federal government can help attack polygamy related crimes.
That revelation comes in a letter penned by Senate Majority Harry Reid.
Reid, writing this week to Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff and Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard, said that U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey has appointed a senior, career prosecutor to work with the Western states' officials on how federal authorities might help "tackle this complex problem" of crimes in polygamous sects.
The move is essentially seen as a preliminary step toward a federal task force on polygamy.
'Working together, I believe federal and state authorities can do even more to address the epidemic of lawlessness in polygamous communities throughout the southwestern United States,' Reid wrote."

Sure, no war on Terror. We got some terrorizing at home to do. Political action requires money. If I get into any, I'll start some sort of Political Party or Political action group.

I have no illusions that a Political Party based on the values of Polygynists is going to elect Presidents, but it does serve as a tool to get the message out. I'm open to advice on the subject. I'll take the steps to get the job done. There's a narrow window of opportunity here for us to protect ourselves.

I do not have two wives. My polygyny days are over, at least for now. I can make myself a target and there's not as much to come after me over as there may be with others. I volunteer. But I need help.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

FLDS Women are Brainwashed, Inbred, Cowed?

In an Austin American-Statesman article entitled "Polygamist sect work takes toll on social workers", Terry Secrest is quoted as saying;

"'It was wrenching to pull children away from their mothers.'

Secrest says she is troubled by what she sees as misconceptions about the FLDS mothers.

They're not brainwashed, she says. They're not zombies. Each woman has her own personality. Some are funny. Some are quiet. All seem strong and independent.

They don't see themselves as victims, Secrest said. They see themselves as women with choices.

'This is the most delightful group of women,' she said. 'You can't put on TV or in the paper how individually funny they are, how kind and generous. They are very, very nice women. I am amazed they have been able to keep their sense of humor the way they have.'"

You mean they are NOT all on Haldol and Thorazine like Flora Jessops would have you believe? They're not duking it out for supremacy in the family unit, a sort of FLDS steel cage match for the favor of the Dominant Male? They have PERSONALITIES and HUMOR and can express themselves?

"The intense work has taken its toll on Secrest. At night, she frets about the heartbroken mothers. She worries about the kids. She fears that their mother-child bond has been damaged."

It's called GUILT. Terry feels guilty for being a part of this. More →

Sphere: Related Content

A New Media Front opens on the FLDS Fiasco. The Austin American-Statesman.

Yup, learn how you get a reporter in front of you, and you THINK they're telling your story, and they're not. Since it's now at the State Level, with a Special Persecutor (sorry, Prosecutor) the Austin American-Statesman just EXPLODED with articles, after having been largely silent. The paper quotes an Isaac Wyler.

"'We are adding up the number of men who may be going to prison,' said Isaac Wyler, 42, the eldest of Wyler's 34 children, who was examining the list Sunday to see which men may have had wives under the legal age when they married."

That was not smart Isaac. I'm not even sure Mr. Wyler knows how many men could go to jail in Texas. In theory at least we're talking no more than 3. Two of the men with potentially underage brides are in fact very young themselves, and monogamists in practice, at the moment.

The article goes on to say that changes are being made. Subtle ones that may produce the unintended consequence of making it harder to conduct another raid such as happened in Eldorado.

"But as the raid's impact is digested there, individual FLDS families are making new decisions, too. In the past month, dozens of families have come forward to cooperate with a court-appointed officer and sign documents that could allow them to stay in their homes, most of which are owned by a trust once controlled by Warren Jeffs. Jeffs, the FLDS leader, is in prison after being convicted last year of being an accomplice to the rape of a 14-year-old."

There is a clear attack on FLDS ways, with property now being apportioned in some way to individuals. While it is probably not the goal of those who are trying to break Warren's control over the FLDS, it may do them some good. Documenting individual residences will make it harder for someone to serve and execute a search warrant on the scale they did in Texas. More →

Sphere: Related Content

Revisiting the questions...

I continue to muse about Rozita Swintons past. I have little capability to investigate beyond the ordinary internet user. In truth my discussion with Paula Underwood at the "Westview", I got what I regard to be unsatisfying answers.

An author named "Kate Rosemary" who her publisher claims is a "Pen Name" almost certainly is a pen name and is offered as Rozitas "Foster Mother." Excerpts from her published work "Raising Shane" were offered to KRDO in Denver and apparently name Rozita. I'm waiting to get copies of those pages and may have order the book to get them. Expensive in my present situation. "Kate" is said to be by her publisher, unwilling to give her real name because she wishes to protect foster children.

Right.

So you connect yourself to a national news figure whose involvement may be so deep in the case that she will be in the news for months. Because you want to protect the identity of foster children.

No.

I don't buy it. It was either dumb or a deceitful answer. No one can know reasons for the deceit, if it is that. Westview is also the publisher for "Kate Rosemary" and they're now touting a new work "After Disclosure" and "Kate" is said to be "working on a novel." That doesn't sound as if the author is trying to keep her charges protected. So if that is NOT the case and "Kate Rosemary" IS trying to capitalize on the Rozita Swinton mess, why would she conceal who she is? No one has interviewed "Kate Rosemary" even with in a "voice altered" "face pixelated" format. She hasn't called. Not to my knowledge.

Who is Kate Rosemary? At two am a little while ago I stuck the name out for some bites, and didn't get any. There is a reporter trying to help on this issue who has more resources, but I have not heard back from him. The media outlet he works for had a site update on her story today, but the content is the same as it was a week or two ago.

"Kate Rosemary" is Merry Cate Noel. The first work by "Kate Rosemary" was under that name and called "The Feminization of Job." This book has been rapidly repackaged by her publisher and touted even before that repackaging as one of the works referring to Rozita Swinton and being by "Kate Rosemary." It is now called "After Disclosure" and no reference is made to it's former author, Merry Cate Noel. If you scroll down, you can see that evidence in an earlier post. Book cover and all. So the owner of the property referring to Rozita Swinton is now trying to market that book by declaring loudly that she is in it, but saying we can't meet the author, because that might "harm the children" she had in her charge. Normally, that's a pile of something. I have fairly good information at the moment that there is a Merry Noel who is actively involved in foster care and adoption issues. It could be that Merry Noel is yet another pseudonym. In any case it smells. Merry Noel, if she exists as THAT person did foster care work most likely in Tennessee and most likely, is still there. Somebody see if you can find her. She is a public figure now, having published books and having tried to gain velocity from another public figure, Rozita Swinton. Find her. I know someone can.

The other question I have now that we have a lull in the action, that lull coming from the appointment of the Special Persecutor is partly answered by a reader. I got an email but not a post. Quoting from the email;

"The arrest warrant you address as being canceled was that in which Affidavit to Search and Arrest Warrant
# M O8 OO1 S was produced. It included warrant for the crime of Sexual Assault of a Child, Texas Penal Code Section 22.011, naming Dale Barlow to be arrested.

The second warrant in which Affidavit to Search and Arrest Warrant # M O8 OO2 S was produced, included Sexual Assault of a Child, Texas Penal Code Section 22.011 and Bigamy, Texas Penal Code Section 25.01 as charges directed at UNKNOWN individuals."

The writer goes on to mention the "fruit of the poison tree" issue. The second warrant is for bigamy and sexual abuse of a child. I'd think they have no evidence of bigamy. By this time they have been able to put that issue to rest. More →

Sphere: Related Content

The Common Room

When someone says it better than you, you just point. All the FLDS can do now, is roll over. More →

Sphere: Related Content

Why the Election is Over for me.

IMAO points to the "Onion." I don't care about Barack or Hillary. The election is over for me. If it's close in my state, I'll vote for McCain. There are plenty of laughs along the way though.

If it's not close in my state I'll consider some conservative party candidate or the Libertarian Party candidate, whoever that might be. Heck, I might even swallow hard and vote for Ron Paul, if he's on the ballot. More →

Sphere: Related Content

Um, we don't know what we're going to charge someone with.

Ain't it grand when someones kids are locked up for a month and law enforcement plays hot potato with the case? Go ahead, just sign up for updates for the Salt Lake Tribune. Really, if it wasn't for this paper, everyone would be locked in a dungeon somewhere and we'd have stopped caring a long time ago.

"Jerry Strickland, a spokesman for Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, did not know what type of charges the office would consider, but said: 'Our office has been in communication with law enforcement as well as prosecutors."'

And in the biggest news to come out of Texas since Waco, all they say is they've "been in communication?" I know I'd be real comfortable in my tomato patch this morning, having been bussed all over and imprisoned and deprived of my children knowing that the best Jerry Strickland and Greg Abbott can do is communicate.

"Texas Child Protective Services (CPS) has said there is evidence adult FLDS men were having sex with underage girls. Officials also have said 41 of the 464 FLDS children in custody had histories of broken bones, but have acknowledged that it has not been determined whether any of those injuries were the result of abuse."

So, it's SIX now? I thought that was five. That's ok. ARREST THEM. Give the other children back. Part of the function of law is and the punishments associated with them is deterrence. You don't stroll into the Two Dot Bar (there is such a place) and arrest everyone because one of them is drunk. Arrest the drunk, scare the rest. Besides, if they can only find six in all that group either you shut down all the high schools in Texas or you give the rest back.

"Two men arrested for allegedly interfering with police during the raid have not been charged."

Duh. and don't forget they were NOT charged with a crime of sex or violence.

"CPS said Tuesday it is assessing the FLDS children to develop individual education plans.
It is planning for children to be taught in foster care facilities, not public schools, the agency said."

Texas has been singularly unsuccessful instilling good values and behavior in children. Oh please don't make me link to it. It's systemic, not anecdotal.

Too funny. The article in "GoSanAngelo" starts THIS way;

"With evidence sorted and the state Attorney General's Office called in to help, the prosecution of the historic YFZ Ranch child-abuse case needs just one thing - a suspect."

More →

Sphere: Related Content

Lull (it's time for bed)

I continue to get calls but little in the way of action. So far a major market major network affiliates anchor called. A newspaper or two has called. All of them think I know more than I do, but generally aren't willing to pursue the leads I give them.

Except for one so far. I will mention no names because I don't drop names.

Now for the name drop.

I got mentioned on the "Daily Paul." Boo yah...

Seriously though, for those of you who do, pray that justice is done in this whole sordid mess. Pray for other bloggers trying to call attention to the injustice. Pray for me, please. I'm gonna hit the sack for the evening. If something breaks tonight, I'll be the last one on it in the morning.

I need a job, when you get around to praying for me. Either that or someone can send me the winning lotto ticket. More →

Sphere: Related Content

Christian or Biblical Polygamy

He's on it every bit as hard as I am. LINK. More →

Sphere: Related Content

Political action on Polygamy, Marriage contracts.

Polygamy is associated with the LDS faith, and Mormons and splinter sects of the LDS like the FLDS. That shows you what a short attention span we have and how deep the national consciousness is on the subject. It's got all the depth of dew on pavement. Polygyny has been practiced by Christians and endorsed by it's theologians dating back to Augustine and Luther. We've never gone away, we're just really unpopular, and yet let the LDS practice it for less that 50 years, and it's, well, Mormon.

I am not "Mormon". I am a very conservative Presbyterian. I refer to myself as being "Reformed" and "Hyper Calvinist" in my outlook. Doctrinally I am very far apart from the FLDS. In the past I have rejected offers to investigate and work with LDS factions still practicing polygamy and with other groups such as Muslims because I believe there is no intersection between Christianity and those two religious groups. I've also said that when it got to the political arena, I would ally with those groups to gain passage of legislation permitting or reinforcing polygynous practice.

Now there. I did it again. I said a word that a lot of you don't use. Polygyny. I did not typo either. What the FLDS practice and what Muslims practice and what a small minority of Born Again Bible Believing Christians practice is polygamy in the larger sense, but it's similar to saying we practice "humanity." We're all humans, but that doesn't distinguish male from female for instance. In terms of ADVOCACY, the group of Christians I am part of, the FLDS/LDS and Muslims advocate and practice POLYGYNY, not polygamy.

I have on more than one occasions pointed this out to major publications in letters to the editor, I've debated the topic frequently enough in some internet venues to get the language changed for the duration of the discussion, but people always lapse back to saying polygamy, not polygyny. This shows an entrenched misunderstanding that is a good part of the battle. I know the editors of those magazines have a dictionary. I know they check, yet every time you discuss the topic with them they call you a polygamist or polygamy advocate. I've dealt with it so long it's swear word to me, by the time an educated person in the topic gets to the third syllable of the word my blood pressure bumps ever so slightly upward.

The legalization of Polygamy is on it's way. I am convinced that the egalitarians in the media and intellectual community insist on using the word because they refuse to accept what is really being told to them. I, as a Christian and Muslims as Muslims and the FLDS/LDS as well, do not, will not and are not going to practice polygamy. We don't think women can have more than one husband. We think men can have more than one wife. This brands us as throwbacks and sexists. I am convinced that a good portion of the knowledgeable opposition continues to use the word polygamy because they are egalitarean and will not accept what they see as a narrow view. Sure, that group will allow polygamy some day, but never just polygyny.

So, we have a need for solutions that fit us, and fit other groups in the population at large. Solutions that will PREVENT the state from breaking up marriages and prosecuting husbands on the basis of paedophilia. A word with lots of impact, but in practice, a thing that is used to demonize men who are simply older than their brides, and committed to them. It's just that they are committed to more than ONE of them. Thus FLDS polygynists are characterized as lechers and paedophiles only because they choose to have more than one bride and occasionally marry young girls. Monogamists can step out of marriage all they want, and have a 14 year old bride, and be just as OLD as a polygynist can be. What they do though is more dangerous, less commited and not illegal.

I propose MARRIAGE CONTRACTS. A marriage contract could be constructed to preserve and protect the things that people already choose to do. Right now the bulk of what we can accomplish in terms of marriage contracts is in the area of prenuptial agreements. We should go a step further. Create an agreement that once entered into, could not be altered by the state.

Imagine for a moment a sort of "Sub Chapter S" corporation that was a marriage. A charter is drafted, shares are issued, and so on. Bylaws are made. I for instance would have a marriage contract that would have only one husband and however many wives. Divorce conditions would be outlined in the bylaws, who is in charge would be defined and all the wealth of the "family" would be a corporate asset and wives would have shares based on a roughly Biblical model of dowry and bride price.

The state would insist that I allow wives to exit the arrangement for reasons I would not, but there would be a penalty clause for breaking the arrangement specified in the marriage contract.

There are of course, more details to work out but I propose this would work for polygamists of all stripes, the FLDS, the Muslims and persons such as myself. It would unfortunately work for gay marriage and communal marriage (several men and several women) and polyandries as well.

I am not concerned with what the unsaved do with their lives. They will in fact do it anyway. It doesn't justify it but we will end up facilitating it along with our preferred style of life brought about by our beliefs. If we want the rest of the world to live like us, we must convert the world willingly to the way we believe. Until that time, I wish to protect my family, my life (based on my faith) and keep the busybodies of the world at bay. I propose we legalize polygyny and all that comes with that as a consequence, and legalize marriage contracts. If we don't, the courts will eventually do it for us, and we're not going to like what they come up with at all. More →

Sphere: Related Content

Warrant Inactive, Warrant Active. More Fun with CPS Follies.

Clearly you can't rely on Texas.  It pays to skim every story on a subject, something new falls out.  Either a new lie, or confirmation of an old one or confirmation that someone didn't know what they were talking about.  From "GoSanAngelo";

"No arrests have been made in the case, although the one issued arrest warrant - for 50-year-old Dale Barlow - remains active, (Allison Palmer) said, rejecting previous reports that it had been dropped.

'I don't think that's the correct term,' she said. 'We want to complete this investigation and evidence review' before making a decision on the warrant, which many believe was the result of a hoax phone call that sparked the April 3 raid on the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints compound."

Or maybe Allison doesn't know what she's talking about.  This is why they need a Special Prosecutor.  It's easier to keep the story straight if one person tells it.  Warrant, warrant, who's got the warrant?  

More →

Sphere: Related Content

Questions and answers arising out of the FLDS Special Prosecutor Order.

We know ONE warrant has been canceled. What's the other one? I don't offer this as a great new insight, except I've never heard exactly what the other warrant is about. It's a "search warrant" but what can they be searching for if there is no Sarah? Why can it still operate? Is it still operating? From the updated Salt Lake Tribune article.

"The judge instructed the Texas attorney general to consider all cases arising from two search warrants served on the YFZ Ranch."

All I know of is the one canceled warrant for Dale Evans Barlow.

I am sure that other people already knew this as well, but the child custody issue, is civil.

"Legal experts have said any criminal prosecutions could be jeopardized by the apparently-faulty information contained in the original warrant served on the ranch. But lawyers also have said inaccuracies will not be an issue in the civil proceedings determining child custody."

I did not know that. SHOULD have, but I did not. So now I know. This is one of my great gripes about the evolution of American Jurisprudence. You can conduct a civil action which depends on facts that should create a criminal action, but you don't have to establish criminality to proceed with the civil action. In this case that means, children are being treated clearly as property. A suit is filed, custody of that property is argued, and God help the FLDS because there is a huge highly funded lawyered up state agency plodding mindlessly towards one goal. Keeping custody of the property. The kids.

Possession is also 9 tenths of the law. The state HAS the kids and it's going to be like trying to get past a wolverine in its den, to get them back. It's not because the state cares, it's because they are a mindless and ill tempered animal.

The kids are also property in the sense that they are EVIDENCE. The state will fight to keep them because they represent the treasure trove of information on which they will build cases they do not know about yet. Be ASSURED, they know of no case they can prosecute, because they are not.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

FLDS gets SPECIAL PROSECUTOR

When the subject is too hot to handle PUNT. That's two possessions now for the state of Texas, and TWO PUNTS.

"SAN ANGELO, Texas -Salt Lake Tribune- A judge has ordered the Texas Attorney General's Office to appoint a special prosecutor to handle any criminal cases arising from the raid on the FLDS polygamous ranch in El Dorado."

It is really starting to bother me that these big moves come under the cover of other news stories. Agreed that Myanmar could not have been planned, but this came out when key primary elections were scheduled to dominate the news. Texas continues to allege horrible crimes and skulk around in the shadows during bigger distractions.

Special prosecutors are appointed when someone doesn't want the aftermath draped all over them after it doesn't work out or when there is no evidence and they need to find something. They are also appointed when it is felt the issue is too politicized for any of the parties now involved on the judiciary side, to make decisions that do not appear motivated by political reasons. Sometimes they are appointed for ALL of those reasons.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

The Bishops Record

Brooke Adams of the Salt Lake Tribune who has been very even handed in this whole matter, examines the "Bishops Record." Some key passages from her article.

"Texas officials focused on five girls who conceived when they were 15 or 16, all of whom then gave birth recently when they were 16 or 17. According to the bishop's record, three of those teenagers are in plural relationships with men who are 28, 35 and 40. One teenager, who is pregnant, is not listed on the records."

Again I repeat, there are no charges, yet. Texas is focusing on five girls the article says, who conceived when they were 15 or 16. Again Texas blurs the record in their favor and it may very well end up being in their favor, but what is "15 or 16?" Because we now know this for certain.

"Until 2005, Texas allowed girls as young as 14 to marry with a parent's permission; in September of that year, the age was increased to 16. In Texas, residents can legally consent to sex at age 17."

This is confirmed by a kind and knowledgeable Texas poster on this blog who thankfully commented and left me that information. Under the statute they CAN marry at 16 so which is it, 15 or 16? I'm still trying to clarify if they can marry informally, but it looks like they may not, despite what former Hamlin Texas Mayor Tom Avant says. But more important is WHEN a 15 or 16 year old girl GOT pregnant. If it was August 2005, it doesn't matter. So we come to the next variable phrase in murky Texas CPS lingo. They gave birth "recently" when they were 16 or 17. Was that a year ago? 18 months ago? If you're 17 when you gave birth in May of 2006 it means you were 17 or 16 when you conceived the preceding year and 19 now. Texas has historically given us ranges when they don't have much to stand on. Frankly, it's not important what ages they were when they "first conceived", it is important WHEN they first conceived and how old they are NOW. Everything else is a smokescreen.

"The bishop's records do not include marriage dates or information about whether the marriages are legally recorded and, in all but a few instances, do not match children's names to their mothers."

Since we know that legal marriages of 14 year old girls occurred in 2006 in Texas after SB6, this is a hugely important thing to determine. Personally, I think they're not recorded. But they could be and Texas STILL doesn't know if they are. That means there STILL is no evidence of a crime. They continue to dig, but they don't have the evidence yet.

"The wives' ages ranged from 16 to 39, with an average age of 21. There are two 16-year-old females listed as wives of men who were 19 and 22. Those two couples were among six young pairs shown as having no children. Most of the monogamous couples are close in age, with the biggest age spread being four years."

These are MONOGAMOUS relationships.

"The records for 24 polygamous families tell a different story: The age discrepancy between husband and wives is greater and most have a large number of children.
The average age of the husbands was 38, but ages ranged from 24 to 67. One 54-year-old man is listed as having six wives, including one who is 17. A 56-year-old man has four wives, including one who is 19.
Wendell L. Nielsen, now in his late 60s and part of the FLDS hierarchy, is listed as having 21 wives, who ranged in age from 79 to 24, and 36 children. That count does not include Nielsen's children who are older than 21 and not at the ranch."

Ok then, there are your old men bending over 13 year old girls. Um, they're my age, and the girls are of age. 17 & 19.

I think the FLDS dispute the age of the two 16 year old brides, but if their marriages are legally recorded, end of story there.

As near as I can tell the raid to stop an old man from raping and beating and imprisoning a young girls is going to end up with prosecutions of a 19 year old and a 22 year old man. Monogamous men. Men who could have gotten a piece of paper to solemnify their relationships yet now stand the chance of going to prison for life for not doing something that amounts to putting a license plate on the car they drive. That car being synonymous with their marriage.

One step further. 16 year old brides, two. Monogamously wed. 17 and 19 year old brides, polygynously wed. Four. Oh, hear she is.

"One teenager, who is pregnant, is not listed on the records."

Five. And the age of that "Teenager" is not given. Teenagers CAN be 19 you know. If the four brides who gave birth at 15 or 16 are these girls, and they pretty much have to be for it to matter, they are 16 now, so they recently gave birth but are in monogamous relationships. The ones in polygynous relationships are 17 or 19 and if they were 15 when they gave birth did so in 2004 and 2006, meaning they probably got pregnant in 2003 and 2005. The statute went into effect late in 2005. Hmmm...and we have no arrests.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

CNN still drinking Kool Aid. Find out the TROOF about the FLDS.

When you go to CNN's FLDS section, the lead story is still this one.

Records point to four teens who could be "Sarah"

There is no Sarah you MORONS. She died when she set the charges for the destruction of the twin towers, for George Bush. No really, it's the TROOF.

Then there is this one.

(CNN) -- "In the secretive, illegal world of American polygamy, life has been good to 67-year-old Wendell Loy Nielsen of Eldorado, Texas."

No, it's not illegal, or there would have been an arrest or arrest warrant. People are still reading this section of CNN and think there is still a "Sarah" and still think Polygamy is illegal, and it's not. As Flora Jessops, a rabid anti Polygamy activist and FLDS opponent says herself, "Polygamy is not illegal, Bigamy is."

"By his own account, Nielsen has 21 wives -- and 36 children.

His oldest wife is 13 years older than he is, and his youngest wife is 43 years younger -- she's just 24."

Because cohabitation is legal among adults, since any statute of limitation or "repose" has gone by, Nielsen cannot be charged with anything. And he hasn't been. IF IT WAS ILLEGAL YOU MORONS, WHY IS HE NOT UNDER ARREST?

"His oldest child is 21 years old, and his youngest is a 6-month-old baby."

Well, good for him.

"That's one of the longer, single-family genealogies uncovered in a CNN review of the 'Bishop's List' -- a series of documents listing the age, marital status, children and address of the members of the Yearning for Zion polygamist ranch in Eldorado, Texas."

And yet no one is charged, with anything. Maybe that will happen later today, this year, this decade.

Now, what I want to know is still, was the pregnant girl that was "underage" that they saw after they entered the compound one that they now regard as potentially underage by their hyper scientific eyeballing method one of the girls they now say is "underage" and pregnant. Folks, they may have NO underage girls they know ARE pregnant.

Was she carrying around a sign that said "I have the Bishop's Record, Take it from me?"

At least they admit, at the end.

"No formal criminal charges have been filed in the case. The next court hearing regarding the state's custody of 463 sect children is set for later this month."

"Formal Charges?" Isn't that a bit redundant? I was not aware of being able to hold people against their will on "INFORMAL charges." More →

Sphere: Related Content

Flippin' Great. Genocide defined and applied to the FLDS

I will LINK to it, and you can go to "Save the FLDS Children" and read it there. Here's an excerpt.

"I don’t want to defend the FDLS Church, because it is obvious it is quite flawed. They are said to expel teenage boys so they won’t be competition for the older men for the women. The community doesn’t seem quite right for a lot of other reasons.

But they still deserve due process and equal protection of law, because this is America.

Instead they’re getting genocide."

See why it's TRUE.

More →

Sphere: Related Content

As of this moment...

If you think this is interesting (this blog), there are 478,612 sites more interesting than mine, in the last week, that is. Maybe I will have my 15 minutes of fame after all. That's based on my one week Alexa rank. As of this moment. More →

Sphere: Related Content

Interesting Texas Marriage Statistics.

To bolster my claim that you can marry in Texas at young ages, I present the following, which you may check for YOURSELVES at the website Texas provides. Texas has not yet posted 2007 statistics, so I offer you the following.

Texas recorded two marriages in 2005 involving a 13 year old girl. One may have been the recording of an "informal" marriage as Texas statute calls it, that had been established years earlier, but one for certain in Starr county occurred for a girl at the age of 13, in 2005.

I haven't counted the total of 14 year old girls for that year, but using the same conservative methodology, Texas recorded five marriages of 14 year old girls in 2006, the year after (maybe) SB6 (2005) was passed. The effective dates on SB6 are murky. Those marriages occurred in Cameron, Gonzales, Lamar, El Paso and Angelina counties.

Without doing the manual counting required, I theorize that the age of 15 probably gets more hits, and 16 likewise. It is entirely legal to marry and thus entirely legal to have sex with someone when you are 13 or 14 or 15. After 16 there seems to be increasingly less clamor regarding youth and creepiness. By the time someone gets to 18 the age difference involved in some marriages merely draws sustained clucking and criticism. More →

Sphere: Related Content

I could be wrong. UPDATE, (Not entirely)

Based on what Christoph has so kindly pointed me to, I could be wrong about combining informal marriage laws in Texas with underage marriage. My previous belief had always been that underage marriage always required civil (read legal) registration of marriage. I had been researching it, and have downloaded and read what I thought were significant portions of Texas law.

Law is quite difficult, not because the concepts are, but because of the way it is written. When taking for instance "Montana Law Changes" for licensing requirements that I have in the state where I reside, I find that they are often written this way: "It is resolved in legislative session for 2006 that lines 4-6 in statute 323.48a be stricken and in line 9 the word and be changed to or. Effective date 10-01-06."

Whole portions of law can be quoted to you that if you read further, are no longer relevant. I don't know if this is the case with Texas law regarding common law marriage. I've been LOOKING for that statute and hadn't found it.

When looking for the changes made by Harvey Hilderbran's "SB6" in April of 2005, I have encountered a lot of confusion. Some of what I read pointed to an effective date for changes in Harvey's Law which he openly confessed to be drafted expressly to "get" the FLDS suggest the law didn't go into full force until last fall. If that's the case it's not a surprise that Texas moved when they did. It would mean that a lot of the acts that Texas is complaining about though would be moot. They would be covered by an older age of consent law.

There is other language that suggests that the law changes went into effect in the fall of 2005, either in September or on November the 1st. I haven't been able to clear that up, I've been looking, scanning articles and checking legal blogs in Texas to find out. I had a working theory that common law statute might cover it, and then The Abilene Reporter News published Mayor Tom Avant's column. I went with it.

Now, I have always proposed fall back positions. A good defense of any situation is usually several, not single. If in fact all that is needed to understand Texas Statute is contained in what Christoph sent and posted then that defense seems to fail. I would still point out that Texas nor any of it's counties have issued a warrant for the "Child Bride's" 4 year older husband with whom he has other children. He has confessed that deed with his mouth, that he has other children with her, and she just gave birth to another. The time frame makes his other children apparent violations of statute. At this point they do not need DNA and CPS DESPERATELY NEEDS a crook to hang their hat on. So why haven't they arrested or charged him? As of this writing, they have not.

Texas has the problem that they simply stay, look at everything and continue to dig for evidence, even now. At some point they HAVE to start coming up with a reason to stay. If you don't pay, eventually the Hotel manager comes around and asks you to leave or pay up.

Right now we don't know if our recent mother who just gave birth was the "pregnant girl" they saw when they were at YFZ and I'm going to continue to harp on that. They haven't said one way or the other. That's the next defense. Based on the assumption that Texas did in fact legitimately and not maliciously enter their homes, Texas can say, "oops, sorry 'bout that, but what about THIS?" and get away with it. I am in fact in favor of such allowances.

So far though, they are shot down on everything and have not proposed why (formally) they continue to hold children and keep property and evidence. If there isn't anything they can charge this young mother's husband with, exactly what is the crime they have seen that they are investigating?

Another thing. Has the statute of limitations run out on any crime the "husband" could be shown to have committed? They aren't going to get help from her or him, they'll have to prove it.

Assuming that this young couple is evidence of a crime, what we have is a case where someone has been driving without a license. No really, that's what it is. A 15 and a 19 year old that COULD have gone and "gotten a piece of paper" and been OK, completely. He has no other "girlfriends" or wives. The crime he commits makes him register as a "sex offender" and potentially he goes to jail for life. Does that make sense? His "wife" is happy, he is happy, and the kids need a mom and a dad. Will Texas seriously push that issue. As I have said, and continue to point out, there is no law that prevents what they have documented now to have happened. Namely, a 19 year old (or even a 50 year old) from having sex with a 15 year old. It simply has to occur in a certain context. I even contend that in parts of this country you can do so when the girls is 13. You might want to check statutes in Minnesota, and Missouri.

UPDATE. New Jersey Recorded 4 marriages of never married under 15 year old girls (that would be 14, 13, 12 or lower) in the calender years 2003 and 2004.

Marriage Statistics for the State of New Jersey
Bride's Previous Marital Status: Never married
	Year
	2003	2004	2003&2004
Bride's Age	Number	Number	Number
<15	1	3	4
Rotate		Download

More →

Sphere: Related Content

Walther has had enough?

Judge Barbara Walther apparently doesn't want to get any more "on her" as it were. Just as the Apostle Paul kept getting bumped up the ladder for someone else to deal with the problem, Green County and Walther just don't want to look at it anymore.

The Salt Lake Tribune - "Attorneys for FLDS parents say they are striking out in getting any issues raised before Tom Green County Judge Barbara Walther - even as state officials say there is widespread confusion about the purpose of hearings set to begin in two weeks.
Patrick Crimmins, a spokesman for the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, said the 60-day hearings that begin May 19 are to review service plans developed for each child, check medical care and hear how the children are faring in foster care.
'This is not going to be a redo of whether abuse or neglect occurred,' Crimmins said."

Of course not. If we had to do that, no one would be in state custody. But tomorrow should be interesting. Tomorrow, is another day.

"The next legal move may come at the 3rd Court of Appeals in Austin, where Texas RioGrande Legal Aid is seeking to have children returned to their mothers while the state's investigation continues. The state's response to that motion is due Tuesday."

The 6th. Tomorrow.


More →

Sphere: Related Content