Texas Appellate Court rules against CPS

A

Al Norris

Moderator Emeritus
This just in: Court rules against seizure of polygamist kids

A state appellate court has ruled that child welfare officials had no lelgal reasoning to seize the more than 400 children who had lived in a fundamentalist LDS Ranch.

More details upcoming.

ETA:
Appellate court overturns polygamist sect custody decision
© 2008 The Associated Press

SAN ANGELO, Texas — A state appellate court has ruled that child welfare officials had no right to seize more than 400 children living at a polygamist sect's ranch.

The Third Court of Appeals in Austin ruled that the grounds for removing the children were "legally and factually insufficient" under Texas law.

Child welfare officials removed the children on the grounds that the sect pushed underage girls into marriage and sex and trained boys to be grown-up predators.

The appellate court ruled the chaotic hearing held last month did not demonstrate the children were in any immediate danger, the only measure of taking children from their homes without court proceedings. The ruling came as judges were signing off on individual custody plans in San Angelo.
Click to expand...
The above from the Houston Chronicle.
 
W

wingman

New member
While I certainly do not agree with this group I thought Texas was making huge errors in the process, I certainly would like to know who made the decision to handle it in such a manner and the reasoning behind it. One thing is certain it will cost Texas taxpayers huge amounts of money and other children may suffer in the process.
 
W

Wildalaska

Moderator
The judicial system, flawed as it may be since it is run by humans, again demonstrates how it stands as a shield between the Government and the citizen.

Another example of why the USA is truly as bastion of freedom, and another example of why the screechers lack a fundamental understanding of how our system works.


WildkudostothemAlaska TM
 
E

Eghad

New member
Govt Agencies have to follow the law just like everyone else. They cant just do something because they think something is going on. Its called probable cause. Now if some wrong doing was done they have endangered any future cases by going off half cocked.
 
P

Playboypenguin

Moderator
The judicial system, flawed as it may be since it is run by humans, again demonstrates how it stands as a shield between the Government and the citizen.

Another example of why the USA is truly as bastion of freedom, and another example of why the screechers lack a fundamental understanding of how our system works.
Click to expand...
I agree...and I also agree with both the courts decisiona nd the initial action of CPS.

In the case of small children being in danger, it is better to react first and then to evaluate.

I agree with the court that the children are not in immediate danger. The MO of this cult is not the random rape of small children (although I have heard accounts that it happens and is harshly dealt with by other members). There MO is the forced marriage of young teen girls...often to close relative or much older men. That is not something that happens spur of the moment or in the cover of darkness.

While that is still pretty repugnant, it does not show a desire to harm the smaller children and is easily monitored while the investigation progresses while leaving the small children in the care of their parents (as long as parents can be identified) and only taking young teen women who are actively engaging in a sexual marriage while underage into protective custody.
 
W

Wildalaska

Moderator
Justice!
Click to expand...

No, it's called Rule of Law. The two concepts do not always coincide, and one does not always lead to the other, although the best way to achieve justice is through Rule Of Law.

I'm sure you applaud the decision for different reasons than I, but the result is the same.

WildmyreasoningissetforthAlaska ™
 
T

toybox99615

New member
just one small issue

this part of the overall case is just one small issue among many. I would not be rejoycing over the decision at this point. There are still a lot of other issues to be dealt with. I'm sure this decsion will affect some other parts of the case. However I doubt it will be the end of the entire fiasco.
 
S

STAGE 2

New member
In the case of small children being in danger, it is better to react first and then to evaluate.
Click to expand...

But doesn't that allow the state the excuse of being able to say that "we think they are in danger" and then take someone's kids away?
 
P

Playboypenguin

Moderator
But doesn't that allow the state the excuse of being able to say that "we think they are in danger" and then take someone's kids away?
Click to expand...
If there is reason to believe a child is in danger I will err on the side of a child's safety any day.

A person has to be a real anti-government wacko to think that people who go to college for 4-8 years and then take low paying child services jobs because of there affection and compassion for children are somehow "out to get them."
 
J

JWT

New member
The rulling shouldn't be a surprise. The state of Texas clearly overstepped their bounds as far as the law is concerned.
 
D

divemedic

New member
In the case of small children being in danger, it is better to react first and then to evaluate.
Click to expand...

Be careful what you wish for, or else anyone who owns those EEEVVIIILLL guns in the same house with a small child could get a warrantless visit, what with it being for the CCCHHHHILLLLDDDRREEEEN and all.
 
P

Playboypenguin

Moderator
Be careful what you wish for, or else anyone who owns those EEEVVIIILLL guns in the same house with a small child could get a warrantless visit, what with it being for the CCCHHHHILLLLDDDRREEEEN and all.
Click to expand...
Please, I would hope rational adult people would be above such extreme slippery slope statements based on nothing more than rampant paranoia.
 
M

Mr. James

New member
Perhaps if these CPS folks have such "affection and compassion for children," they would be better served having and actually raising their own, rather than enduring long years of study and thankless, low-paying civil service jobs interfering with other citizens' lives.

I suppose there is, regrettably, a need for such bureaucrats in this fallen world, but they most definitely need to be kept on a short leash.

Bob James
 
P

Playboypenguin

Moderator
Perhaps if these CPS folks have such "affection and compassion for children," they would be better served having and actually raising their own, rather than enduring long years of study and thankless, low-paying civil service jobs interfering with other citizens' lives.
Click to expand...
You mean like how they interfere with thousands of people each year that rape their children, physically abuse their children, pimp out their children, neglect their children??? Is that the type of interference that offends you so much? :barf:
 
W

Wildalaska

Moderator
You mean like how they interfere with thousands of people each year that rape their children, physically abuse their children, pimp out their children, neglect their children??? Is that the type of interference that offends you so much?
Click to expand...

damned if they do and damned if they dont. When Social Services leaves little Johnny alone to be continually raped because they don't want to interfere in the family unit, little Johnny late sues the state for not protecting him. When the State moves in to protect little Johnny, the cries of "jackbooted thugs" rings out......

WAs Rule of Life 27.5 (k)(2)...For every action there is an equal and opposite second guessing or complaint

WildbacktoyourregularlycheduleddebateAlaska ™
 
S

STAGE 2

New member
If there is reason to believe a child is in danger I will err on the side of a child's safety any day.

A person has to be a real anti-government wacko to think that people who go to college for 4-8 years and then take low paying child services jobs because of there affection and compassion for children are somehow "out to get them."
Click to expand...

Abuses/mistakes from cps happen all the time. There doesn't need to be an 'anti government' wacko anywhere. The government has to have a warrant based on PC to come in and search your home. A child isn't simply a piece of property, its a human being. Therefore if you're going to take a kid from their parents, you'd better have a damn good reason and damn good evidence to support said reason.

You see there is a flip side here as wrongfully taking a kid away from their parents is incredibly harmful for both the kid and the parents.

I'm not saying that cps doesn't serve a purpose or shouldn't step in if the conditions warrant it. What I am saying is a anonymous phone call by itself is NEVER sufficient to take kids from the home.


Please, I would hope rational adult people would be above such extreme slippery slope statements based on nothing more than rampant paranoia.
Click to expand...

You poo poo this, but things are changing. Doctors now ask patients whether they have guns in the home. The medical community has stated that firearms are now a health hazard. Kids in schools are taught that firearms are bad and administrators encourage kids to share whether there are firearms in the home.

Furthermore, it doesn't take much to get the authorities over to someone's house. Case in point, over on calguns a thread is being discussed in which one of the members had their house raided by the sheriff. Nothing illegal was found. The basis for all of this was a phone call by a disgruntled neighbor who called in and said that he saw "lots of guns" and people coming and going at weird hours.

Caring for children is fine, but 'erring on the side of children' isn't necessarily consistent with our rights.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top