More on ''Stolen Innocence''
As someone noted on the other post, Elissa Wall will be on Oprah today to talk about her book ''Stolen Innocence.'' The show followed Elissa to Texas, where she met with Texas Rangers and Child Protective Services after they raided the YFZ Ranch. Expect to see some of that footage on the show.
She has apparently filmed a segment about her life with 20/20, too, and other national media interviews are on tap. You will be hearing a lot about Elissa in coming days.
The book closely tracks what we learned about Elissa during the Warren Jeffs' trial. She was the key witness in Utah's case against Jeffs, who conducted Wall's 2001 marriage to Allen Steed. She was 14, Steed was 19. They are related through a common grandfather.
Elissa vehemently disliked Allen and objected to marrying her cousin. For those unfamiliar with the string of events that led to the marriage and its aftermath, the book will be riveting reading.
Elissa says she was motivated to be the witness against Jeffs to help other girls avoid similar marriages, in particular her younger sisters. She plans to put some proceeds from the book into the MJ Fund -- named after the pseudonym she used in civil lawsuit pending against Jeffs and the FLDS church -- to help them leave the sect.
Here are some highlights from the book, with more to follow:
1. By 2002, five of Elissa's siblings had left the sect, including Rebecca Musser. Elissa refers to Rebecca as ''Kassandra'' in the book. Elissa uses pseudonyms for most FLDS members and her own family, both those in and out of the sect.
The exception: Elissa provides real names for her mother Sharon Steed and two sisters, Ally and Sherrie, who are still in the FLDS.
2. Two years after her 2001 marriage to Allen, Elissa was working as an aide for a disabled infant, as a dressmaker and as a sales associate for Saladmaster. She also began working at the Mark Twain restaurant in Colorado City.
I ate there a time or two before it closed and thought the food was excellent.
3. Here is what Elissa says Warren Jeffs told the couple in June 2003, when her husband asked for a meeting with the prophet to discuss their marital troubles. Jeffs asked if they had tried to have children. Elissa had had several miscarriages by then, which she initially hid from her husband and even from her mother.
Jeffs, apparently, is unaware of this. He tells the couple that having children might help them get their marriage on track. He says: ''Because when you have children, your responsibility changes. You are not selfish. It's not about you. It's about children and raising them up to be good, obedient, faithful priesthood children. Sometimes, having children changes everything. And it makes people fall in love because they have another life on earth together. . . . You need to do this so that you can grow in love and have a life together.''
4. In her effort to avoid her husband, Elissa begins hanging out with other FLDS teens after work in ''the Sticks,'' where they ''build a fire, turn on music, drink beer and act like typical teenagers.'' She did this, Elissa writes, even though she knew she risked a ''severe reprimand'' if caught.
Her favorite bands were Bon Jovi and the Backstreet Boys. She and a friend would sneak down to St. George to watch movies -- ''Pirates of the Caribbeean'' was a favorite -- and buy CDs.
Allen was oblivious to all this, she said.
5. Elissa describes several instances where her husband slapped or hit her, including once when she was about two months pregnant. She describes Allen as ''odd'' and says that his testimony during the Jeffs' trial was full of ''misinterpretations and at best half-truths.''
His testimony was ''shaky and hard to believe.''
And this: ''His smile and the weird look in his eyes began to make me gag.''
Elissa says that when Allen told the jury that they referred to sexual intercourse as ''in and out'' she ''swore never to eat at an In-N-Out Burger again.''
And this: ''Even if the words he spoke had been believable, his behavior -- his mumbling, his standing, his nervousness -- seemed off-putting enough to alienate even the most objective juror.''
Allen was charged with rape after testifying in Jeffs' trial and is awaiting trial. Allen's attorney believes the book and the publicity tour now under way will make it impossible for his client to get a fair trial in Utah.
6. Elissa flew to Oregon during the summer of 2003, where her sister Rebecca and several other siblings who had left the faith talk to her about leaving the sect.
7. Elissa met Lamont Barlow, who would become her ticket to love and out of the sect, in November 2003. She had fled her home after a fight with Allen and then ended up with a flat tire in the desert. Lamont found her there and helped fix the flat.
8. They met again on the slopes of Brian Head during a ski outing. He begins frequenting the Mark Twain and their friendship grows.
9. Lamont got hooked on methamphetamines during the mid-1990s. The drug was being smuggled into the community, Elissa says.
That is interesting. I have heard little bits and pieces about this drug problem in the community; it is surprising because it doesn't fit the isolated, naive portrait painted of the FLDS teens.
10. In February 2004, Elissa mets some friends in Las Vegas. Lamont comes along though things stay chaste, according to Elissa. Months later, they are in love and by July she is pregnant with his child. She sees avoids Allen as much as possible.
11. It is not until October of 2004 that Allen figures out something is going on and shows up at at a birthday party for Lamont looking for his wife.
12. A month later, she is called to a meeting with FLDS officials and told the marriage is over and she is to return to her father's home. She calls Lamont and leaves the community for good.
13. In February 2005, Elissa gives birth to a son fathered by Lamont. Months later, her sister Rebecca and a brother begin pressuring her to speak to law enforcement about her marriage to Allen. Jethro Barlow, Lamont's uncle and one of a number of men exiled from the faith by Jeffs, also pushes her to speak to investigators.
Elissa writes: ''They were working hard to remove Warren from power, and I was viewed as someone who could help them.''
14. She says she was turned off by the heavy-handed approach taken by an unnamed Mohave County investigator.
The only investigator working the case for the county was Gary Engles.
15. By May 2005, Salt Lake Attorney Roger Hoole had contacted Lamont, too, to encourage Elissa to come forward as a witness in a criminal case against Warren Jeffs.
One side note: Lamont's aunt is Lennie Fischer, the wife of Dan Fischer, an ex-FLDS member and backer of the Diversity Foundation. The foundation helps teens leaving the sect. Dan Fischer hired Hoole to represent several teens who sued the FLDS church.
Of Hoole, Elissa writes: ''They needed a witness to file criminal charges against Warren, and that, they hoped, was where I would come in.''
16. The pseudonym ''Jane Doe IV'' was used in the criminal case to ''throw off the priesthood'' and lead them to believe a number of victims were coming forward against Warren Jeffs.
17. Elissa and Lamont married shortly before the birth of their second child. Washington County prosecutor Brock Belnap helped Lamont picked out her wedding ring. He attended the ceremony, as did his deputy Jerry Jaeger.
18. In January 2007, Warren Jeffs broke down during a jailhouse visit with his brother and claimed he was not a real prophet. Elissa and her husband watched the videotaped conversation and wanted it ''revealed'' to the FLDS. A Utah judge ruled it was too inflammatory to be used during Jeffs' September trial.
The jailhouse conversations were made public shortly after Jeffs was sentenced. His attorneys descredited the pronouncements, saying they were due to a breakdown caused by fasting and months of incarceration.
During tours of the YFZ Ranch, portraits of Jeffs were everywhere, signaling that he still is regarded as the sect's prophet.
19. Woohee, defense attorney Tara Isaacson really got on Elissa's nerves. Tara cross-examined Elissa during the trial.
Elissa writes: ''Her demeanor was cold and her exterior impeccable. She never had a strand of hair out of place, and her eyes reminded me of a villain from an old Superman movie who could shoot deadly laser beams at her enemies with a simple glance.''
20. Elissa says she was surprised that the defense used Jennie Pipkin ''as a tool'' in Jeffs' defense.
Well, fair is fair. See 13 and 15 above.
She has apparently filmed a segment about her life with 20/20, too, and other national media interviews are on tap. You will be hearing a lot about Elissa in coming days.
The book closely tracks what we learned about Elissa during the Warren Jeffs' trial. She was the key witness in Utah's case against Jeffs, who conducted Wall's 2001 marriage to Allen Steed. She was 14, Steed was 19. They are related through a common grandfather.
Elissa vehemently disliked Allen and objected to marrying her cousin. For those unfamiliar with the string of events that led to the marriage and its aftermath, the book will be riveting reading.
Elissa says she was motivated to be the witness against Jeffs to help other girls avoid similar marriages, in particular her younger sisters. She plans to put some proceeds from the book into the MJ Fund -- named after the pseudonym she used in civil lawsuit pending against Jeffs and the FLDS church -- to help them leave the sect.
Here are some highlights from the book, with more to follow:
1. By 2002, five of Elissa's siblings had left the sect, including Rebecca Musser. Elissa refers to Rebecca as ''Kassandra'' in the book. Elissa uses pseudonyms for most FLDS members and her own family, both those in and out of the sect.
The exception: Elissa provides real names for her mother Sharon Steed and two sisters, Ally and Sherrie, who are still in the FLDS.
2. Two years after her 2001 marriage to Allen, Elissa was working as an aide for a disabled infant, as a dressmaker and as a sales associate for Saladmaster. She also began working at the Mark Twain restaurant in Colorado City.
I ate there a time or two before it closed and thought the food was excellent.
3. Here is what Elissa says Warren Jeffs told the couple in June 2003, when her husband asked for a meeting with the prophet to discuss their marital troubles. Jeffs asked if they had tried to have children. Elissa had had several miscarriages by then, which she initially hid from her husband and even from her mother.
Jeffs, apparently, is unaware of this. He tells the couple that having children might help them get their marriage on track. He says: ''Because when you have children, your responsibility changes. You are not selfish. It's not about you. It's about children and raising them up to be good, obedient, faithful priesthood children. Sometimes, having children changes everything. And it makes people fall in love because they have another life on earth together. . . . You need to do this so that you can grow in love and have a life together.''
4. In her effort to avoid her husband, Elissa begins hanging out with other FLDS teens after work in ''the Sticks,'' where they ''build a fire, turn on music, drink beer and act like typical teenagers.'' She did this, Elissa writes, even though she knew she risked a ''severe reprimand'' if caught.
Her favorite bands were Bon Jovi and the Backstreet Boys. She and a friend would sneak down to St. George to watch movies -- ''Pirates of the Caribbeean'' was a favorite -- and buy CDs.
Allen was oblivious to all this, she said.
5. Elissa describes several instances where her husband slapped or hit her, including once when she was about two months pregnant. She describes Allen as ''odd'' and says that his testimony during the Jeffs' trial was full of ''misinterpretations and at best half-truths.''
His testimony was ''shaky and hard to believe.''
And this: ''His smile and the weird look in his eyes began to make me gag.''
Elissa says that when Allen told the jury that they referred to sexual intercourse as ''in and out'' she ''swore never to eat at an In-N-Out Burger again.''
And this: ''Even if the words he spoke had been believable, his behavior -- his mumbling, his standing, his nervousness -- seemed off-putting enough to alienate even the most objective juror.''
Allen was charged with rape after testifying in Jeffs' trial and is awaiting trial. Allen's attorney believes the book and the publicity tour now under way will make it impossible for his client to get a fair trial in Utah.
6. Elissa flew to Oregon during the summer of 2003, where her sister Rebecca and several other siblings who had left the faith talk to her about leaving the sect.
7. Elissa met Lamont Barlow, who would become her ticket to love and out of the sect, in November 2003. She had fled her home after a fight with Allen and then ended up with a flat tire in the desert. Lamont found her there and helped fix the flat.
8. They met again on the slopes of Brian Head during a ski outing. He begins frequenting the Mark Twain and their friendship grows.
9. Lamont got hooked on methamphetamines during the mid-1990s. The drug was being smuggled into the community, Elissa says.
That is interesting. I have heard little bits and pieces about this drug problem in the community; it is surprising because it doesn't fit the isolated, naive portrait painted of the FLDS teens.
10. In February 2004, Elissa mets some friends in Las Vegas. Lamont comes along though things stay chaste, according to Elissa. Months later, they are in love and by July she is pregnant with his child. She sees avoids Allen as much as possible.
11. It is not until October of 2004 that Allen figures out something is going on and shows up at at a birthday party for Lamont looking for his wife.
12. A month later, she is called to a meeting with FLDS officials and told the marriage is over and she is to return to her father's home. She calls Lamont and leaves the community for good.
13. In February 2005, Elissa gives birth to a son fathered by Lamont. Months later, her sister Rebecca and a brother begin pressuring her to speak to law enforcement about her marriage to Allen. Jethro Barlow, Lamont's uncle and one of a number of men exiled from the faith by Jeffs, also pushes her to speak to investigators.
Elissa writes: ''They were working hard to remove Warren from power, and I was viewed as someone who could help them.''
14. She says she was turned off by the heavy-handed approach taken by an unnamed Mohave County investigator.
The only investigator working the case for the county was Gary Engles.
15. By May 2005, Salt Lake Attorney Roger Hoole had contacted Lamont, too, to encourage Elissa to come forward as a witness in a criminal case against Warren Jeffs.
One side note: Lamont's aunt is Lennie Fischer, the wife of Dan Fischer, an ex-FLDS member and backer of the Diversity Foundation. The foundation helps teens leaving the sect. Dan Fischer hired Hoole to represent several teens who sued the FLDS church.
Of Hoole, Elissa writes: ''They needed a witness to file criminal charges against Warren, and that, they hoped, was where I would come in.''
16. The pseudonym ''Jane Doe IV'' was used in the criminal case to ''throw off the priesthood'' and lead them to believe a number of victims were coming forward against Warren Jeffs.
17. Elissa and Lamont married shortly before the birth of their second child. Washington County prosecutor Brock Belnap helped Lamont picked out her wedding ring. He attended the ceremony, as did his deputy Jerry Jaeger.
18. In January 2007, Warren Jeffs broke down during a jailhouse visit with his brother and claimed he was not a real prophet. Elissa and her husband watched the videotaped conversation and wanted it ''revealed'' to the FLDS. A Utah judge ruled it was too inflammatory to be used during Jeffs' September trial.
The jailhouse conversations were made public shortly after Jeffs was sentenced. His attorneys descredited the pronouncements, saying they were due to a breakdown caused by fasting and months of incarceration.
During tours of the YFZ Ranch, portraits of Jeffs were everywhere, signaling that he still is regarded as the sect's prophet.
19. Woohee, defense attorney Tara Isaacson really got on Elissa's nerves. Tara cross-examined Elissa during the trial.
Elissa writes: ''Her demeanor was cold and her exterior impeccable. She never had a strand of hair out of place, and her eyes reminded me of a villain from an old Superman movie who could shoot deadly laser beams at her enemies with a simple glance.''
20. Elissa says she was surprised that the defense used Jennie Pipkin ''as a tool'' in Jeffs' defense.
Well, fair is fair. See 13 and 15 above.
47 Comments:
Soon, we'll start seeing posts from FLDS supporters aghast at the idea that Elissa will profit from her book.
The men in the FLDS are afraid that when women like Elissa and Carolyn Jessop make money on their own, the "priestholders" and "prophets" will lose control over them.
Hooray for Elissa.
"...profit from her book" and the suits. She may "remove Warren from power" all by herself and take down the church while she's at it.
...and spend happily ever after.
Truthfully, if such could happen, it would not effect or bother me.
RunningRich,
Seeing as how many FLDS women do hold jobs and do make money on their own, and some even own their own small businesses (gasp!), I think your statement is hilarious and quite indicative of how very little you know about these people.
Nice try, though!
Okay...so here's another area I'mn unclear about....
The church's assets are held in trust...the trust has a court appointed conservator....
the assets belong to the entire membership. yes? no?
does the church carry insurance for harm resulting from acts of malfeasance(sp?) committed by its clergy/rulers???...or is the church, as an institution, self insured? and is that self insurance backed by the assets, and are those 'assets' the trust?...so does every member stand to lose their shirts if someone sues, wins, and is awarded money????
and do the members who have been harmed by the 'irreperable damage' to their reputation caused by the various books, documentaries, and 'exposes' have the right to sue, or counter sue those parties who have written/filmed these things?
And can an argument be made that as a direct result of the stories the State of Texas and its agents were so biased that they acted in a harmful, irresponsible way after the initial report of abuse was made concerning the YfZ ranch????
Anyone have any answers...I'm feeling a bit muddled here...trying to see the forest for the trees, in a manner of speaking....
A crucial mistake made by so many critics of the FLDS is in thinking that polygamy is about sex.
Polygamy, polyandry, polygyny, and monogamy are family constructs, and as such, relate to family economics and support, the rearing and education of children, the division of labor, and the development of individuals within the group.
Elissa Wall's book is more titillation for a voyeuristic public who unfailingly focus on the intimate details of sex within polygamy.
In Texas every year there are over four hundred girls under the age of fifteen who have abortions and many times that number who carry their babies to term.
This social nightmare is occurring in our monogamous society - a society that compels public "education", mandates vaccination, teaches tolerance for sexual perversions, saturates our children with TV, "educates" grade school children about condoms, sexually transmitted diseases, drugs, and abortion.
This monogamous society of ours has about a 50% failure rate for marriages, millions of children without fathers, millions of working mothers, and substandard daycare.
In this monogamous society of ours, sex has become completely disengaged from nature, i.e. reproduction. Sex has become nothing more than recreation and has led thousands of young women to waste their best childbearing years on dead-end "relationships."
Perhaps an honest discussion of sex within monogamy is in order.
I live in Texas and being able to put a face to the issue here is a huge help.
We are all wondering how we can help families and children caught-up the issues, maybe Elissa's story will give us some clues.
(No, not about sex stuff, or the politics of polgamy.)
I'll be reading Elissa's story with an open mind.
Don't bother reading it you will just want to slap yourself(and Lamont)when you're done. Lamont(the 23 year old druggie) was having sex with a sixteen year old(who by the way was married with her parents approval to another man who wasn't old and that by her own free will)so who should be in jail. Lamont?
I am happy for Elissa. The courage that it took to come out and bring justice to her life, and possibly prevent the future abuse of underaged teens, is awesome. However my mind just can't ignore this alarming fact; in Elissa's own account, her sexual relationship with LaMont started as early as 16 and by 17 she was pregnant with his child, outside of wedlock too. All this by her choice! No one was forcing her and LaMont together. Now wrap this next idea around your head: take the relationship with Allen out of the picture. OK. Now, put Elissa and LaMont at the YFZ. Her child would be in CPS care and abuse charges would be considered against LaMont even as we speak, for this relationship that produced a child while the mother was under the age of 18. Just something to think about. So I suppose that to Americans in general, this "irrisponsible and abusive" behavior, teens getting pregnant, is "acceptable" so long as it by choice?!?
Gee, why is it that when Elissa left Colorado City to go visit her family in the Northeast, she "fled"? She didn't "leave", but she "fled"?
Why is it that Elissa was "forced" to marry Allen Steed, yet was "pressured" by her siblings to testify against Warrren Jeffs? Why wasn't she "forced" by her siblings and "pressured" to marry Allen Steed by her parents and the "priesthood"?
Just how exactly was she "forced" to marry, and how exactly did she "flee" to go visit her family in the Northeast?
Wait a minute. Is it true that Lamont was 23 when he got involved with 16 year old Elissa? Doesn't that make him older than the boy she married? Isn't this legally at least statutory rape? Why isn't Lamont also in jail?
I understand the difference between choosing Lamont and feeling pressured, at 16, to marry her 19 year old cousin.
But I don't get the double standard that gives a 23 year old Lamont a pass for playing around with a 16 year old.
Sorry, I meant feeling pressured, at 14 to marry her 19 year old cousin.
I do not agree with marrying off 14 year old girls.
But I also disapprove of 23 year old men having sex with 16 year old girls, and I think it's illegal.
If it is, why isn't he in jail, too?
Regina,
In answer to your questions, yes, every member stands to lose everything if a suit results in a judgment against them.
As to your second question, anyone can sue over anything, whether it is based in fact or not. A lawsuit against any of the former members would be extremely difficult to pursue. First, if the defendants (authors) can prove that the material that they wrote is true, it is an absolute defense against libel. Second, statements that are made in good faith and that the writer believed to be true are generally treated as true statements, although the court will look at whether the belief was reasonable or not. In addition, if the statements were presented as opinion instead of fact, it is a defense.
A second part to the question of a libel suit is that the defendant would be able to obtain records and to depose the members of the FLDS as part of discovery. Any stonewalling, deception, or withholding of evidence would be subject to sanctions, and the material that is gathered would be available for any criminal trials. For example, the defendant could obtain records of spiritual marriages, require the plaintiffs to answer under oath to polygamous marriages, and then turn those records over to law enforcement for criminal prosecution.
A lawsuit would not be in the best interest of the FLDS.
I believe that all three, no all five should have had charges brought. Lamont for statutory rape, her husband/cousin for statutory rape, Jeffs and both parents for accesory to rape.
Eduk8 states.....So I suppose that to Americans in general, this "irrisponsible and abusive" behavior, teens getting pregnant, is "acceptable" so long as it by choice?!?
That couldnt be more untrue. My husband has been an investigator at our Sheriffs office for 12 years.He has made, arrested, and convicted countless cases of statutory rape. Willing or not!Some where there was a large age diffrence and some where the child was underage and the offender was older by mere months.They also will wait until babies are born and obtain DNA and make arrests from that. In the eyes of the law it is not acceptable and if they can find the father and there was a crime then charges are brought. I dont feel the FLDS should not be held accountable because of their religious beliefs or because there parents said it was okay, if they broke the law they should be arrested.
You have to know where Elissa and Lamont had sex and that state's statutory rape laws, before you can draw conclusions regarding Lamont. I believe that in Utah he had to be ten years older than a 16/17 year-old for statutory rape to have occurred, but am not positive. You'd need to talk to a lawyer who practices in Utah.
Allen Steed has been charged with first-degree felony rape.
In the case of Elissa's relationship with Allen Steed, it's important to remember that she was never legally married to him. He was ordered to rape her by Warren Jeffs(the reason Jeffs was convicted of accessory to rape), he allegedly forcibly raped her, and it would have been a criminal act, regardless of her age. However, the law is often written with stiffer penalties for the rape of a minor.
TXBluesMan makes excellent points. All major publishers vet books before publication with a team of lawyers, who flag material that could be considered libel or susceptible to lawsuits. They will recommend that real names be changed to fictitious names and demand re-writes that help to prevent lawsuits.
Am I the only one that finds it weird that the state would convict someone as an Accomplice before ever even charging someone for the same crime? Logic says there is something fishy here. How credible is this Elissa? There are way too many un answered questions for me to cast any stones at anyone Elissa or Jeffs.
Haven't we all been told that all of the FLDS young underage girls are forced to marry at 13 or 14? Haven't we all been told that they have no choice, no childhood, that as soon as they hit puberty they get married off to an old coot against their will? Isn't that the whole crux of the State of Texas's actions: that 13 and 14 year old girls are forced to marry?
Why then, does a Trib story* about Elissa Wall's attempt to cash in say the following:
The article says, quote: "Wall was stunned to learn from [her step father, Bishop Fred] Jessop that she was to be married at age 14. All of her sisters had been 18 when they wed, except for one that married at 17. "I hadn't heard of anyone getting married at fourteen for some time," she writes."
Whoops! Elissa, YOU BLEW IT!
Don't you know "the party line" is that ALL 13 and 14 year old girls are forced into marriage with old men?????
Didn't you get the memo from Flora that you're supposed to repeat, at every opportunity, that every girl in the FLDS must be married by 14?
And here you go and tell the truth: that you were STUNNED to be asked to marry at 14 (if this was an every day occurrence as we are led to believe, you should have been expecting it!); and that everyone you knew got married at 18, except for one at 17.
Oh great, Elissa. Now what are the anti-FLDS muckrakers going to do now that YOU LET THE TRUTH SLIP!!!!
Darn you, Elissa! Darn you to heck.
*reference: http://www.sltrib.com/ci_9251450
I know of no thinking people who believe that all FLDS girls are forced to marry at fourteen or before, r. The reports coming out of CPS in TX were that 31 teens from the Zion group were pregnant.
I can tell you what does seem to be the thread in everything I read regarding the FLDS, and it's that they build isolated and totalitarian communities in which a teen who is being pressed into marriage would not have clear means by which to refuse the marriage.
That is one of the major reasons that I support the Texas raid. It is clear to me that the the FLDS policies regarding arranged and sometimes forced marriages, the incestuous environment where step-fathers routinely marry daughters and every other relative marries every other relative, the many reports and proven instances of pedophilia and child abuse(which is a natural derivative from incestuous environments), the reports and proven instances of physical abuse, the reports and proven instances of inadequate schooling, and the reports and proven instances of child labor 32must be subject to investigation and intervention, in order to protect the children and other unempowered members of the community.
There are no religious rights that supercede the human rights of children grow up with advocates and a means to assure safety. There are no religious rights that can deny members basic human rights. There are also no religious rights that can supercede the laws of a state or our country.
txbluesman,
Thank you for answering some of my questions...
One question is still outstanding;
When CPS receives a complaint, or report of abuse, they have several options open to them as to how to move forward.....obviously, all information available to them has to be considered and weighed in making that decision.....and I would imagine that, unless there is the instant threat of life threatening harm, there has to be some level of due dilligence employed to verify the veracity of the complaint or report, correct????
So, if it can be shown that either, a. "due dilligence" did not occur, or b. the perspective that authorities were operating from was so biased as to egregiously impact their jusgment, do the persons from the YfZ Ranch have actionable redress????
I understand that there is, what amounts to, a 'hold harmless' clause in the regulatory/legislative language, but I would assume, as it does elsewhere, that even that is held to a standard of 'reasonable', no????
I realize that this is a matter for the courts, that the task at hand is to address the immediate need for reunification....however, from a lay perspective it would seem that there are several courses the FLDS members have open to them, legally, or as 'causes for action' to begin to make whole what they have lost. Do you agree?
Playing 'devil's advocate', what actions do you see?
CPS has acted completely legally, regarding the raid. The only way they would be open to legal redress regarding the phone calls, is if there was evidence that they, themselves, had perpetrated the hoax.
You must remember that, once entering the compound legally and with good cause, they saw other signs of child endangerment, on which to launch an investigation.
If FLDS children were to be harmed while in custody, due to CPS negligence, that might be a venue for legal recourse.
What evidence of child endangerment did they see? Angie Voss says she saw pregnant teens. On April 29th Darrel Azar from CPS said that CPS had two pregnant teens in custody.
Both have now given birth.
Both are adults.
I've never read the hearing transcripts nor CPS docs, but the news stories indicate that one of the things they are investigating is whether or not both pregnant teens and teens who have given birth were within the legal age limit to marry or have sex with an older man. CPS also has also made it clear that they are investigating physical and sexual child abuse, in the reports regarding broken bones and molestation by older boys.
The age of consent in Texas is 17. A minor may not have sex with someone more than three years older, or it constitutes statutory rape. And I hope TXBluesman will weigh in, because most of my knowledge pre-dates the legislative changes in 2004/5 that he outlined.
Please keep in mind that this is an investigation, based on the appearance of child endangerment/abuse. No one has been charged with anything and won't be until the investigation is completed.
Early accounts stated that CPS was investigating 31 teens who had given birth or are pregnant.
Don't you know "the party line" is that ALL 13 and 14 year old girls are forced into marriage with old men?????
Didn't you get the memo from Flora that you're supposed to repeat, at every opportunity, that every girl in the FLDS must be married by 14
Flora Jessop doesnt claim she was being forced into a marraige at 13 or 14. She tried to bring charges against a family member for sexual abuse when she was 13. She claims to have fled a forced marriage to her cousin at the age of 16. Jeez, whether shes telling thwe truth or notr, can we get some of the facts straight?
Truth and an elimination of some of the emotionalism would be nice.
And womankine, unless you're a practicing member of the bar, I would suggest that you stop trying to put forth opinions you may hold, or types of practice you may have witnessed, as fact...or law, or regulation....because from where I sit, it is nothing but your interpretation or perspective of past events...
txbluesman, on the other hand, despite whether I agree with him or not, asserts that he is an active and practicing member of the Texas bar...which, unless proven otherwise, gives him claim to a set of expertise/knowledge of the law....
From some of your posts, certainly not all, you appear to be of, at least, average intelligence, ergo, you have the capacity to discern between opinion and fact....for the sake of intelligent discourse, could you please attemp to do that....
I happen, in my personal opinion, to disagree with many of the practices and beliefs of the FLDS...or the LDS, for that matter....but that has absolutely nothing to do with how I operate as an advocate and a person who fundamentaly believes that in oder to be fair, honest, and uphold the sacredness of individual integrity, one must put aside personal opinion and address issues from an objective perspective. The other personal tenet I hold dear is the fundamental belief in the goodness of people, and the love parents hold for their children.
I know from many years of personal experience that people, in general, will rise to the level of expectations of them. Conversely, they will also stoop to previously unheard of lows, if that is what is expected...
Human beings behave in a fixed and predictable set of ways;
self preservation, or preservation of one's position
protection of one's property, or that which is part of oneself, i.e. family
with love, or
with hate
those are based on experiential variables...
but most of the spectrum of human behavior is both predictable and can be manipulated....
Manipulation works best with honesty, forthrightness, and willing complicity of all the parties...
If you want to elicit change, change that has at least a reasonable probability of being sustained, you have to show someone "why" the change is good, how the change can be done in a safe and reasonable way, the tools to make the change, and the support to sustain the change....
And in the instant situation this is true not just for the FLDS, but also for the power structure of CPS and other authorities involved.
And, when public entities screw up, and we all know that buracracies 'screw up', it is in the nature of the beast...we have to a. hold them accountable for the screw up, and b. help them remedy whatever damage ensued...
Often bureaucrat's hands are tied...for all sorts of reasons....and the courts are often the only entity that can untie their hands..
I have a friend who is a Secretary of Public Welfare in an Eastern state. That friend often says, quite publically, "Sue me!!! That is what will give me the room I need to make the changes that are needed!"
It is toward an equitable end that I need to clarify my own thinking and knowledge base....
If not an equitable end, at least clear thinking on my part....
Whether the 'ends justify the means' or not, my thinking is 'what are the avenues that can be explored that will get to the end?'.....and getting to the end may very well be an exploration of the 'means'....an exploration of any errors that CPS may have made...perhaps that is a starting point for 'what do we do now?'
How do we assure a good ending and not a fear/bias/anger driven set of dictates?????
One more thing...
It has been demonstrated over and over that this particular sect of Fundamental Mormons are very, very private people..... that is no big revelation. That is a commonly known fact about them. We have learned that privacy and not having public displays is something that they have been raised with for generations.
Doesn't that stand as an explanation for why some of those who have left, but do not have any need for notoriety, have not poured forth with counter-comments???? If they have spent their entire lives being private people, why would leaving the community, or changing their religious beliefs make them any less private????
And perhaps there are people who are speaking out, saying good things about the community they have left. Perhaps we just aren't hearing from them because the media gravitates to the lurid and sensational....
I've heard bits and pieces from residents of Centennial Park who have had very positive things to say about their neighbors.....and for the most part, all of the Centennial Park folks were part and parcel of the same group and they made a CHOICE to leave.....
And I have heard much commentary from folks who say they have no problem with the FLDS, it is Warren Jeffs, and not the other members, who is problematic....and that has been from both ex-members and people closer to the group than most of us....
"Early Accounts" include:
Rod Parker, speaking for FLDS, said the "state's own documents show that just two teenagers in custody are pregnant."
He said he based this "on a list that was given to him by an unnamed source who said the document was generated by Texas Child Protective Services.
Of the three teenagers listed as pregnant, Parker said, one is about to turn 18 and another refused to take a pregnancy test, he said.
"That leaves us with one," he said."
Try none? Unless others have turned up since then, the one who was about to turn 18 is the Jeffs girl who gave birth on the 29th of April. The other would be the 22 year old Louisa Jessop who gave birth on Monday.
Another 'early account,'
And a story today reports that: "'Two teenage girls are pregnant, and although identities and ages have been difficult to nail down, CPS officials say no more than 30 minor girls in state custody have children."
And another one:
We're getting a clearer picture of how CPS is determining the ages of these young women (emphasis added):
"Child Protective Services spokesman Darrell Azar said 31 of 53 girls ages 14 to 17 have children, are pregnant or both.
"This includes that group of girls that once claimed they were 18 or older," he said. "It was determined they were not adults."
He said some women acknowledged being younger and the age of others was determined by their attorneys or by looking at the women.
"I have seen them myself," he said, "and I don't see any that look like an adult to me."
Azar said he did not know how many girls are pregnant, but said it is a small number. CPS has previously said that three teenagers are pregnant."
Or there's this one:
"Chris Van Deusen, a CPS spokesman, said, "The only thing we can say is we're aware that there are 20 girls who became pregnant, and they were between the ages of 13 and 16.
Not "We have twenty pregnant girls, but there are 20 girls 'who became pregnant." In case that's not clear:
"That's not to say that there are 20 now, but at the time they conceived, they were 13, 14, 15 or 16," he said. "That establishes that there is some sexual abuse here."
"At the time they conceived," which may have been in another state than Texas- the ranch has only been there for around four years. Texas only raised the age of consent from 14 to 16 in 2005- three years ago. FLDS' lawyer AND Brooke Adams have both looked at the records from court and they say that CPS is talking about at least some pregnancies that did occur before the group ever got to Texas and were not even considered under-aged when they happened- and the sole example of a 13 year old pregnancy is from the 1990s:
One CPS document reviewed by The Salt Lake Tribune lists just three pregnant teenagers. The court document, also reviewed by The Tribune, includes women who became mothers before the FLDS' move to Texas or before the state raised the age of marriage, with parents' permission, from 14 to 16 in 2005.
And yet, at the very same time:
Azar was telling the press something very different from what CPS would say in court
Among the YFZ Ranch children are "dozens" of minors, he said, who have children or who are pregnant.
And then there's this one:
A total of 53 girls between the ages of 14 and 17 are in state custody after a raid 3 1/2 weeks ago at the Yearning For Zion Ranch in Eldorado. Of those girls, 31 either have children or are pregnant, said Child Protective Services spokesman Darrell Azar. Two of those are pregnant now, he said; it was unclear whether either of those two already have children.
Two adult women have just given birth this week. Will there be others? Are there others? If they are, will Judge Walthers order DNA tests of all the men in the foster care homes where the girls are living?
The initial warrant was founded on a hoax. The subsequent warrant was reportedly because CPS workers saw pregnant teens.
Were these two adults the pregnant teens Angie Voss thought she saw?
As for the other 'under-aged' mothers, I would think a genuine feminist would be appalled CPS tactics to get them:
Here's what happened in a nutshell: Before the kids were herded onto the buses to be taken away from the San Angelo sports arena where they were initially held, their moms were told that only mothers who were underage could stay with their kids (see, e.g., this DFPS press release saying the agency planned to "keep the teenage girls and their children together"). In order to stay with their children, 26 more women announced they were minors, boarded the bus with their kids, and there's your 31.
In other words, as a commenter at The Volokh Conspiracy put it, "CPS' placement strategy intentionally skews the reported ages of mothers by withholding placement with their own children unless they lie."
So it still looks to me like the best number for currently pregnant 'teens' CPS could come up with is three. And two of them are adults.
As for the rest of their numbers, right up until they said that if a woman let CPS call her a minor, she could stay with her kids, they had 5 under-aged mothers, and 15 women who had been under-aged when they became mothers applying 2008 legal standards, but they might well be sixty now.
In response to jenniferjoy175 and Flora Jessop:
Flora does indeed have a torrid past. She started out by selling her young body to one of Truman Barlow's sons for forty dollars. The community fathers tried to rehabilitate her from her prostitute ways but to no avail.
Hiding from her shame she left the community and ended up as a topless dancer to support her cocaine habit.
She later found this gig of sensationalist media "informant" to be a profitable, ego boosting career, supporting her congenital lying neurosis. She likes the attention and income derived from her unending, selacious fabrications, which continue to grow more outragious with each telling. She is the perfect fit for Nancy Grace and her ilk . . .
Both Utah and Arizona AG's offices have long since discounted her credibility and she has turned to sensationalist media to feed her face and her nuerosis.
Socrates, I think you need to go back a little further. You say she "started out by selling her young body to one of Truman Barlow's sons for forty dollars. The community fathers tried to rehabilitate her from her prostitute ways but to no avail."
But by all accounts she started out by being the victim of abuse at the hands of her father. You may not realize it, but when children are sexually abused they typically find it so degrading, so horrific an experience that they believe they are worthless and deserve whatever happens to them. It is not uncommon for them to go on to be promiscuous, very confused, and wild. The accounts I hear of her subsequent behavior are perfectly in keeping with the confused, painful lashings around of a deeply wounded child trying to come to terms with the violation she suffered at the hands of the man who owed her protection, cherishing, nurturing care, and instead stole her innocence and child hood.
What she needed was for other members of the community to recognize the ways her father's actions damaged her, just as surely as a head wound might cause the victim to behave differently from before, and love her and cherish her and convince her of her value in God's eyes and of the inexcusable wrong done to her by her father.
I don't 'blame' Elissa or Flora. I don't think they are liars just out to get innocent people. I think they have been so traumatized by their experiences, however, that they may not be the best judges of what is 'normal' for every single member of the FLDS community.
Elissa's mother is clearly not ordinary for the community- she sought this match for her 14 year old daughter and pushed it for all she could, even though by Elissa's own account marriage at 14 was virtually unheard of. Not even her sisters had married so young. Why did her mother single her out this way? How would that make a 14 year old feel?
It's obvious her circumstances were not typical of FLDS practices, or we'd not see her being so surprised at learning her mother had arranged for her to get married.
And since there were no brides under 16 and few of them, at YfZ, I think it's really unfair to take Eliss's experience and use it as justification for taking away 400 children from families who didn't have any child-brides.
Regina said:
"I realize that this is a matter for the courts, that the task at hand is to address the immediate need for reunification....however, from a lay perspective it would seem that there are several courses the FLDS members have open to them, legally, or as 'causes for action' to begin to make whole what they have lost. Do you agree?
Playing 'devil's advocate', what actions do you see?"
I don't see any realistic recourse. First, you have to prove that the action was unreasonable, and on its face it is not. Lets look at the facts...
1. An anonymous call came in that alleged physical and sexual abuse of a child, who was forced into an illegal bigamous marriage and who could not escape due to guards and the fences. Law enforcement verified the information that they had, including the sex offender status of the individual named in the call, took it to a judge, who decided that there was probable cause for a warrant. What happened after the fact to show that the call was a hoax is moot - the standard is what they knew at the time.
2. On arriving at the ranch, the FLDS was non-cooperative, moving children around, etc. One 18 year old 'spiritual' wife of Lee Roy Jessop made a statement that showed that she was in a bigamous marriage and had been impregnated while she was a minor child, both of which are felonies.
3. The CPS workers requested the judge issue an order for the immediate removal of all the children, which order the judge signed.
4. You cannot sue a judge, they have absolute immunity for any judicial acts.
5. To sue the officers and CPS workers, you have to get past qualified immunity, which means that you must show that no reasonable officer in the same situation would have taken the same action. I don't think that you can meet that standard in this case. If you can get past qualified immunity, then the fun really begins.
6. If the FLDS sues, a close friend of mine who works for the Attorney General's Office will get to play. The first thing that he will do is to depose each and every member and former member of the sect as to the age of marriages, plural or bigamous marriages, etc. He will go to the ranch, and look at everything. Living quarters, papers, etc. He will demand, thru discovery, everything in the sects possession, both in Texas and elsewhere that relates to the case.
7. Anything that is discovered thru this process may be turned over to the DA for prosecution of any crimes.
8. Refusal to answer may be punished by contempt. Answers which are shown to be a lie may be prosecuted as perjury.
I don't think that the FLDS really wants to go there. My friend is eager for the chance, but he doesn't think that the FLDS attorneys are that stupid.
I did not say Flora did not have a past, or that she was an angel. I was responding to a post that stated that Flora claimed to be forced into marriage. My response was that was untrue, she claimed it was 17. It amazes me that her claims are so easily dismissed , true or not.
Isn't that how rape victims are sometimes viewed. I guess because she sold her body whether that's true or not that if it happened she deserved it or the fact that she was alledly was promiscuous means she's also a liar.
txbluesman,
I keep coming back to the 'due dilligence' piece of this....
From the public accounts, CPS and others were aware of this accusation of abuse for several days prior to going to the ranch. It's not as if they heard of the multiple calls one afternoon, were told they were of such a desperate nature that the "child" was in a life threatening circumstance...and they simply acted to protect...
They knew in advance....did they make any atempt to verify any of the 'facts' that had been relayed to them? Did they do any kind of call record check on the phone number of the shelter where the calls came in?
I'm not trying to be obtuse, here....it's just that as more and more of the true facts come out, the more puzzled I become.
I have been involved with our state's equivelent of CPS for many years, and I know of many, many instances where gross abuse of power has occurred. I also know of the many truly good things and lives saved because of them....
But I was very ready to believe that the first time CPS went to the ranch it was based on good faith that the report(s) of abuse were real...and I assumed, because of the magnitude and anticipated press coverage, that all the I's would be dotted, including 'due dilligence'...but it is seeming otherwise....
Then to top it off we start hearing that the authorities consulted with some very outspoken anti-FLDS folks prior to 'going in'...folks who clearly have an axe to grind, ergo cannot be considered unbiased or reliable...
It just gets muddier and muddier....
Also, time after time I see agents of the state, whether it is in the education system, child welfare, juvenile justice, whatever, count on the small folks to feel such fear and have so much leveraged against them, that they don't institute actions that would most probably go in their favor...and they have folks like you, or me, or others, depending on the circumstances, "spinning" that fear and reprisal factor....
Everyone keeps saying these girls have no way to ask for help, no idea of the outside world, etc.
Hello??? Did any of you actually read this book? Even read the article?
Maybe when they sneak to town between going to the movies and shopping for CD's they could make a stop and tell somebody they want to leave or need help. They should do it before they make the beer run and head out to "the sticks" to party though.
What a load of crap.
This post has been removed by the author.
Response to jenniferjoy175 regarding Flora Jessop:
Flora has a well earned reputation for lying about facts and events she claims to be an expert on.
For example, the baby cemetary in Hildale. There used to be a cemetary in Hildale where stillborn and late term fetuses were buried to provide a place for grieving mothers to process their sorrow and dissapointment, rather than throwing the lifeless bodies into the dumpster or incinerator like the local hospitals do.
Flora has twisted the purpose of that cemetary into her story of a disposal ground for bodies that have been sacrificed by some kind of ritualistic "blood atonement."
She had Gary Engles (Mohave County Investigator) investigate her hypothesis and he determined that it was in fact a baby cemetary for stillborn and miscarried fetuses.
She later accused Officer Engles of complicity with the FLDS Church and has been lying about him ever since.
There are numerous examples of stories like this where Flora has taken some fact and shaped it into something that Nancy Grace would be proud of . . .
I did not have to go through a great deal of consideration before I started a blog in support of this FLDS group. Hopefully, this travesty will soon be sorted out... with all of the prejudice and hate exposed for what it is -
a bunch of hypocrites who wish use the law to impose their views and
values on others. Many like to speak about "tolerance"and "diversity"...while only pretending to accept such concepts for sake
of political correctness - while knowing that those concepts are not really their true convictions.
Please feel free to visit my blog: www.truetells.blogspot.com: also a
broader site on this subject is: www.gritsforbreakfast.blogspot.com
If,indeed, the purpose of removing
those children from their loving mothers was to "protect" the children
,you need to read how those despicable CPS workers are treating those captive children under their
custody.To add to their fear and guilt (thinking they did something
wrong)the CPS does not show them any compassion or love, whatever. They treat them hatefully. This is verified by the only other official
group allowed to interact with those children(the mental health
department employees). Those employees are so upset with this
abusive treatment of the kids that a number have quit and the rest are filing a joint letter to the Texas governor urging his intervention.
So much for you boobs who approve of the CPS taking custody of those children.
Read about it on:gritsforbreakfast.blogspot.com
or go to my blog:www.truetells.blogspot.com
"Maybe when they sneak to town between going to the movies and shopping for CD's they could make a stop and tell somebody they want to leave or need help."
CO City and Hilsdale are "out-in-nowhere". Very isolated. The population is nearly all FLDS. The schools were run by FLDS, as were the police, although the state of AZ has attempted to recently change this. Elissa worked in an FLDS owned and operated restaurant. They are taught since infancy that non-FLDS are evil and untrustworthy. Additionally, Rulon Jeffs was reported to have had a spy system that rivaled the KGB.
During the years Elissa was there, non-FLDS could drive into town and end up being followed by a police car, if they were too interested.
So who was she going to tell? It's not very realistic that a sixteen-year-old, who has been trained to think the outside world will seriously harm her, will leave and drive to safety.
Incidentally, Elissa was asked this very question on Oprah. Her response was that if she went to the police, they would take her back home.
"Incidentally, Elissa was asked this very question on Oprah. Her response was that if she went to the police, they would take her back home."
Womankine, according to Elissa's book it was St. George, UT she was sneaking to when she went to the movies, etc. not Colorado City or Hilsdale. St. George is hardly an FLDS enclave. I actually lived there for a year about 15 years ago.
She wouldn't drive to the outside world for help out of fear the outsiders would harm her? She wasn't afraid to drive to the outside world (St. George) to go see a movie or shop for CD's. Nor was she afraid to venture into the outside world to go to keggers out in the sticks with LaMont and other outsiders.
The claim of being afraid of outsiders or unable to get out from under the thumb of FLDS owned and operated town doesn't wash given the stories Elissa herself tells in her book.
I always listen to what people are saying but try to watch their feet too. You know ... they're talking the talk but are they walking the walk? In this case Elissa's actions tell a completely different story than what she's saying.
If she's not quite honest about this then how do we know she's being honest about everything else?
"Elissa flew to Oregon during the summer of 2003, where her sister Rebecca and several other siblings who had left the faith talk to her about leaving the sect."
This just blows me away. We're to believe Elissa is a young, helpless victimized girl with no way to "escape" a nightmare life among the FLDS. Yet, by her own admission she flew out of state to see family who had left the sect. She's away from her parents, Jeffs, Allen and is miles away among family who she knows and loves who have been living on the outside. Family members who coincidentally don't agree with the FLDS lifestyle and want her to leave it.
Oh, soooooo many questions this brings up!
Where did she get the money for an airline ticket? Who took her to the airport? Her "captors" maybe? Why didn't she stay in Oregon insead of returning to Utah?
Once again Elissa's feet don't match the talk coming from her mouth.
You can't tell me that in OREGON she would be put in a police car and returned home if she told anybody. She had a support system on the outside in her sister and other family members. If she wanted to escape she'd already done it.
I haven't read the book, but do know, from working with abused women and children, that there's a major difference between being around people to whom WE think they could confess abuse and being around people to whom THEY think they could confess abuse. In other words, I don't think that you can or should assume that there is any dishonesty involved, on the part of Elissa Wall.
An important element in the process of abuse is the mental and emotional isolation fostered by the abusers, which, from reports, sounds like it was parents and an entire powerful cult.
Do you doubt that she was "spriritually" married off to Allen Steed at 14? Do you not find that to be abusive?
"Elissa and Lamont married shortly before the birth of their second child. Washington County prosecutor Brock Belnap helped Lamont picked out her wedding ring. He attended the ceremony, as did his deputy Jerry Jaeger."
Oh that is just so sweeeeet! Men sworn to uphold and enforce the law helping Lamont pick out a ring so he can marry his victim ... er, I mean bride. Wasn't Elissa under the age of legal consent when she conceived Lamonts first child?
I guess in that jurisdiction they pick and choose how they deal with rapists. Both those men should be out of jobs and disbarred.
Wasn't it Lamont they approached first about Elissa testifying for them? I wonder how that conversation went. We want the 16 year old girl you are guilty of raping to testify against someone else for rape and we want you to talk her into it. I'm sure they would never do something like make a deal with them not to pursue charges against Lamont in exchange for Elissa's testimony.
Pure speculation on my part but how else do you explain Lamont not being charged with his crimes? I mean the AG and his deputy were both aware of the relationship and a baby is pretty damning evidence.
Please read my above post, WWJD?. (And it might be a good time to change your user name.) Lamont probably doesn't qualify for statutory rape charges.
"You have to know where Elissa and Lamont had sex and that state's statutory rape laws, before you can draw conclusions regarding Lamont. I believe that in Utah he had to be ten years older than a 16/17 year-old for statutory rape to have occurred, but am not positive. You'd need to talk to a lawyer who practices in Utah.
Allen Steed has been charged with first-degree felony rape.
In the case of Elissa's relationship with Allen Steed, it's important to remember that she was never legally married to him. He was ordered to rape her by Warren Jeffs(the reason Jeffs was convicted of accessory to rape), he allegedly forcibly raped her, and it would have been a criminal act, regardless of her age. However, the law is often written with stiffer penalties for the rape of a minor."
"You have to know where Elissa and Lamont had sex and that state's statutory rape laws, before you can draw conclusions regarding Lamont.----
Odd. That's what people keep pointing out about the CPS list of 31 women who allegedly were pregnant under-age. That list includes cases over 10 years old, and goes back to times when those 'girls' were in a different state when the laws were different.
The double standards here are so twisted some people must be able see themselves walk away.
What double standard? Texas is not saying that they will prosecute, if a woman was impregnated in another state, they are simply saying that they must INVESTIGATE what appears to be child abuse and determine where the women were impregnated.
You are citing info that has come out in reports since the initial raid and has never been confirmed by a court process.
Because the FLDS worked to deceive in the initial investigation, it puts the onus on Texas to confirm information.
You also need to consider that what you call a "double standard" is the difference among the states in enforcing their laws. AZ and CO and UT have largely ignored the FLDS and allowed them to break polygamy laws and abuse children. Texas is saying that they don't intend to allow it.
I have read this book and I recently read "Escape". Everyone needs to read these books to better understand the abuse that is going on in thse communities.
Post a Comment
<< Home