tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post5503104060262153939..comments2024-03-25T20:06:39.794-05:00Comments on Grits for Breakfast: Bill targeting FLDS larded with unintended consequencesGritsforbreakfasthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10152152869466958902noreply@blogger.comBlogger23125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-3047063044922530582009-05-01T17:33:00.000-05:002009-05-01T17:33:00.000-05:00Of course if it passes, then Texas may find itself...Of course if it passes, then Texas may find itself ineligible for federal aid. The federal aid statute requires they provide service before removal whenever reasonable, without that provision Texas is ineligible to receive the aid.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-26004089562311716872009-04-17T07:14:00.000-05:002009-04-17T07:14:00.000-05:00Good point, Michael. I thought about that later up...Good point, Michael. I thought about that later upon re-reading this post and the comments, and you may be right. At the least, both provisions are offensively, almost comically bad public policy on several levels.Gritsforbreakfasthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10152152869466958902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-62593211264796813042009-04-16T23:41:00.000-05:002009-04-16T23:41:00.000-05:00Grits, with due respect, the most egregious sectio...Grits, with due respect, the most egregious section of 4255 is the addition of new section 161.001(c), which would allow CPS to remove children from a home WITHOUT a court order and WITHOUT showing that it made reasonable efforts to avoid the removal.Michaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06800907780727476826noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-57890801835907127972009-04-15T12:57:00.000-05:002009-04-15T12:57:00.000-05:00Sorry if I'm wrong. You just sound a lot like the ...Sorry if I'm wrong. You just sound a lot like the person I mentioned.<br /><br /><I>If facts are eery things</I>Heh. What "facts" might you be referring to?<br /><br />Would it be your insubstantiated claim that "There is NO HOAX caller", perhaps? (And since you think "there is no hoax caller", are you claiming the calls were real?)<br /><br />Or maybe you're referring to your similarly unsubstantiated claims that "There is no proof, so no charges were/are brought", and "the Texas Rangers interest in your supposed caller is never going to result in any charges."<br /><br />Neither of those are "facts", either, just speculation and guesses on your part.<br /><br />So just what are those "facts" that I find "eery" [sic]?Lucillehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03225011724349777456noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-8288360203814307122009-04-15T11:25:00.000-05:002009-04-15T11:25:00.000-05:00WC and TPD123 both agree that there should be be t...WC and TPD123 both agree that there should be be tougher penalties for making false reports.<br /><br />Does this mean all false reports or just those that are politically correct false reports?TxBluesManhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15008395777633969757noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-58856365034856850242009-04-15T10:22:00.000-05:002009-04-15T10:22:00.000-05:00Lucille who are you? I don't know anyone who posts...Lucille who are you? I don't know anyone who posts here by that name.<br />If facts are eery things to you then I guess that accusations, circumstantial evidence, unproven facts and baseless conjecture are preferred by you as acceptable and fair. Sorry, to read that you prefer darkness to light.<br /><br />I am unfamiliar with anyone who posts as 'Lucille', touche`.Jam Innhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03142701264128096656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-56515226496227355272009-04-15T07:16:00.000-05:002009-04-15T07:16:00.000-05:00Hazzbinns, is that you? Eerily similar arguments, ...Hazzbinns, is that you? Eerily similar arguments, writing style, and determination not to hear or process facts you don't like or don't fit your preconceived ideas...Lucillehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03225011724349777456noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-40292506800317383012009-04-14T20:39:00.000-05:002009-04-14T20:39:00.000-05:00Jam Inn: are you smoking anything unusual?Jam Inn: are you smoking anything unusual?Donhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16902834245861000386noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-56737654145181319692009-04-14T20:27:00.000-05:002009-04-14T20:27:00.000-05:00Taxed123 you shouldn't believe everything you read...Taxed123 you shouldn't believe everything you read and the Texas Rangers interest in your supposed caller is never going to result in any charges. Seems you have made a bad connection or tend to blame people with criminal history? How is it you can support a church whose Leader is incarcerated. No, there hasn't been any proof just circumstances and that's not factual evidence to base a charge. You seem to have skipped the trial and claim guilt, haven't you jumped to conclusion?Jam Innhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03142701264128096656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-27851482654294633082009-04-14T18:40:00.000-05:002009-04-14T18:40:00.000-05:00A good model for how to handle situations like the...A good model for how to handle situations like the FLDS case referenced is the way the Callahan Co. Prosecutor's Office is in the process of ending years of abuse inside the House of Yahweh.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-37246236686461997662009-04-14T18:32:00.000-05:002009-04-14T18:32:00.000-05:00I agree with stiff punishments for people who inte...I agree with stiff punishments for people who intentionally make false reports. I don't think it would have had any effect on this woman, though, who seems really messed up in the head. Wasn't there some indication a while back, too, that Carolyn Jessop (the most public ex-FLDSer critic) was somehow involved with this woman or was that just gossip?<br /><br />I have to say that I am pleased that they made that holier than thou woman who heads the agency take back her "we made no mistakes, and, if it happened again, we'd do exactly the same thing" nonsense that she spouted at her press conference. Really? Nothing wrong. A state appeals court and the state supreme court said that you broke the law when you removed those children without sufficient cause. The last time I checked, state agents breaking state law (I'm not alleging they acted criminally here, but they did violate the law) was doing something wrong. It's actually contemptuous of the court to say what she did, and truly unbefitting of the head of a government agency who is bound by the rulings of the state supreme court.123txpublicdefender123https://www.blogger.com/profile/16074278445586583355noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-25604475301667310542009-04-14T15:25:00.000-05:002009-04-14T15:25:00.000-05:00There needs to be stiffer penalties for unsubstant...There needs to be stiffer penalties for unsubstantiated calls and false accusations. Having penalties for not reporting abuse makes the likelihood that this will happen again greater. These lawmakers are true idiots.WChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05252775461467176208noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-10376229166701744972009-04-14T13:16:00.000-05:002009-04-14T13:16:00.000-05:00No, I don't "prescribe" to a conspiracy theory. I...No, I don't "prescribe" to a conspiracy theory. It has been clearly shown, however, that the call was made by this mentally ill woman who has a documented history (including a criminal conviction and other pending charges) of making false reports to the police, including in cases involving FLDS. So, please, give it up.<br /><br />I make no judgment on the merit of the criminal charges. Grand jury indictments mean nothing. If they plead guilty, or once I see the evidence that is presented in open court, then I can say how I feel about those. It is entirely possible that those charged are guilty. That doesn't change the fact that the initial call was 100% false, and the CPS workers fell for it, hook, line, and sinker, without bothering to check it out at all. A simple trace of the call to someone in a completely different state would have let them know it was bunk.123txpublicdefender123https://www.blogger.com/profile/16074278445586583355noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-84274113992770270372009-04-14T12:47:00.000-05:002009-04-14T12:47:00.000-05:00Taxed123 There is no proof, so no charges were/are...Taxed123 There is no proof, so no charges were/are brought or maybe you prescribe to a conspiracy theory. I guess the forlorn hope is riding on overturning the search warrants, after all the records are so incriminating, they might, as well, go states witness and hope for a lesser charge.Jam Innhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03142701264128096656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-66786083544846368742009-04-14T12:27:00.000-05:002009-04-14T12:27:00.000-05:00Jam Inn, you really do lose all credibility when y...Jam Inn, you really do lose all credibility when you insist that the initial caller was not a hoax. It's plainly clear that it was. Here's some "proof" for you: http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,705289354,00.html<br /><br />Or, maybe that's you, "Sarah"?123txpublicdefender123https://www.blogger.com/profile/16074278445586583355noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-37737595727381809512009-04-14T12:14:00.000-05:002009-04-14T12:14:00.000-05:00Lose the Truth
There is NO HOAX caller
There are h...Lose the Truth<br />There is NO HOAX caller<br />There are hundreds of residents<br />"Dirty Dozen" will be convicted!Jam Innhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03142701264128096656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-57369772602651344232009-04-14T11:41:00.000-05:002009-04-14T11:41:00.000-05:00@ Jam Inn
MOO MOO the cattle call is sounding, he...@ Jam Inn<br /><br />MOO MOO the cattle call is sounding, head off little one.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-52972220089660637392009-04-14T11:15:00.000-05:002009-04-14T11:15:00.000-05:00Grits,"...hundreds of armed men"?
What on earth a...Grits,"...hundreds of armed men"?<br /><br />What on earth are you talking about?<br />The majority of LE on April 3, 2008 were off the ranch and held in reserve and numbered in the dozens and not hundreds? What numbered in the hundreds was the hidden ranch population, which was only exposed because of the attempted CPS Removal, otherwise the tactic of moving 550+ covert residents onto the YFZ Ranch would never have been known or exposed.<br /><br />You have no proof that the hotline phone call was a hoax and make reference to it like it affirms your baseless assertion that the CPS Removal was unwarranted, even though it has lead directly to 12 Grand Jury indictments. If this was such an unwarranted 'fishing expedition', can you explain why so many indictments resulted from the search warrants? Shouldn't there be little to no charges brought, to give breath to ypur position?Jam Innhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03142701264128096656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-38361832109689450362009-04-14T10:34:00.000-05:002009-04-14T10:34:00.000-05:00I hope that people recognize that even with the la...I hope that people recognize that even with the language in Hildebrand's bill, a male child in the El Dorado ranch would not and could not have been found to be in "immediate danger." <br /><br />This bill is still vague on this, but the Gates ruling seems more clear with regard to considering the special circumstances in the family. E.g. in the case of El Dorado, if it appears only teenage girls at the most were in "immediate danger" (still a stretch especially for those not yet married and no evidence of imminent FLDS marriage), any other children outside this category were not and could not be removed.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-74024568042091082212009-04-14T09:00:00.000-05:002009-04-14T09:00:00.000-05:00Power corrupts absolutely. The children of Texas ...Power corrupts absolutely. The children of Texas might be safer if the whole agency was dissolved and NOTHING done.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-66492767565751281832009-04-14T08:58:00.000-05:002009-04-14T08:58:00.000-05:00I am wondering how this will affect Home schoolers...I am wondering how this will affect Home schoolers, as the article states. My kids find a better education through my wife and I than any public school in Texas. Is this an attempt to criminalize a stated right?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-67811238944379155922009-04-14T06:54:00.000-05:002009-04-14T06:54:00.000-05:00We might have a better idea about that after today...We might have a better idea about that after today's hearing.Gritsforbreakfasthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10152152869466958902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-5124771495400072252009-04-14T06:49:00.000-05:002009-04-14T06:49:00.000-05:00Any idea on the chances of either of these bills g...Any idea on the chances of either of these bills getting anywhere? I'm glad, at least, that they have invited the representative from TRLA to testify. He can talk about the horrible abuses by CPS.123txpublicdefender123https://www.blogger.com/profile/16074278445586583355noreply@blogger.com