Another bombshell in Texas
Connie Gauwain, guardian ad litem for Teresa Jeffs, has ensured that all the world now knows at least some of the evidence being presented to the Schleicher County Grand Jury, which meets again on Tuesday.
Gauwain filed a report with 51st District Judge Barbara Walther that showed Teresa Jeffs was married by her father to a 34-year-old man a day after the girl turned 15.
Gauwain included photographs, diaries, a dictation by Jeffs, and a marriage record in her report to bolster her view that any attempt by Teresa to have Natalie Malonis removed as her attorney is ill-advised.
The report is dated July 17, but according to news reports was not filed in the Tom Green County Court until late Friday, in preparation for a hearing that was supposed to take place Monday.
Malonis had asked for the hearing so that Teresa could speak directly with Walther about why she wants a new attorney.
That hearing was postponed on Thursday, for reasons no one seems to know.
Nevertheless, a day later Gauwain's report was filed and obviously leaked to the media. The Houston Chronicle, which broke this story, said a court clerk contacted midafternoon on Friday did not know whether the report had been filed.
The newspaper said Malonis confirmed it had been filed.
The Houston Chronicle quotes Malonis as saying: ''I hate that it's come to this but hopefully now my client and I can get our relationship away from public scrutiny and back on track and start going forward.''
Adding to the intrigue about the hearing: According to a court document filed by a defense attorney representing Teresa in the grand jury proceedings, the girl did sent Walther a letter in June asking that Malonis be replaced. Teresa did not, however, ask Malonis to set up a private meeting with the judge, which was the primary purpose of Monday's hearing. Her letter ''should suffice,'' her attorney said in this filing.
The filing also states that any private meeting between the judge and Teresa is riddled with land mines for Teresa, given that she is a witness in the grand jury proceedings and the judge may later preside over any criminal trial that results from those proceedings.
All of that aside, the new revelations show why the criminal and child welfare investigations of the FLDS are ongoing.
A ''dictation'' by Warren Jeffs submitted in Gauwain's report provides astonishing details about Teresa's marriage as well as two others.
Gauwain's report and documents included with it imply that Teresa had an intimate relationship with her ''husband.'' Teresa has publicly denied that.
Even if the marriage was never consummated, Texas authorities appear to have solid evidence that a number of FLDS members participated in her illegal marriage.
Warren Jeffs, of course, heads the list. He presided over the marriage, which took place July 27, 2006, at the YFZ Ranch. That is the same day Warren Jeffs was married to a 13-year-old daughter of Merril Jessop. Leroy Jessop, Merril's son, also was apparently married that day to a minor daughter of Wendell Nielsen and his wife Sally.
Others who would now fall in the scope of the investigation because they were present at these ceremonies or consented to having minor girls married: Annette Jeffs, Teresa's mother; Raymond Jessop, the man who was married to Teresa; Merril Jessop, who also conducted Warren's marriage; Wendell Nielsen; Barbara Jessop and Sally Nielsen, who consented to their minor daughters' marriages.
At the time these marriages took place it was a third degree felony for a parent to consent to a marriage involving a child under the age of 16. Other laws make it a crime to participate in an unlawful marriage.
Here is the applicable section of one law, passed by the Texas Legislature in 2005:
(h) A parent or judicially designated managing conservator or guardian of an applicant commits an offense if the parent, managing conservator, or guardian knowingly provides parental consent under this section for an applicant who is younger than 16 years of age or who is presently married to a person other than the
person the applicant desires to marry. An offense under this subsection is a felony of the third degree.
Gauwain filed a report with 51st District Judge Barbara Walther that showed Teresa Jeffs was married by her father to a 34-year-old man a day after the girl turned 15.
Gauwain included photographs, diaries, a dictation by Jeffs, and a marriage record in her report to bolster her view that any attempt by Teresa to have Natalie Malonis removed as her attorney is ill-advised.
The report is dated July 17, but according to news reports was not filed in the Tom Green County Court until late Friday, in preparation for a hearing that was supposed to take place Monday.
Malonis had asked for the hearing so that Teresa could speak directly with Walther about why she wants a new attorney.
That hearing was postponed on Thursday, for reasons no one seems to know.
Nevertheless, a day later Gauwain's report was filed and obviously leaked to the media. The Houston Chronicle, which broke this story, said a court clerk contacted midafternoon on Friday did not know whether the report had been filed.
The newspaper said Malonis confirmed it had been filed.
The Houston Chronicle quotes Malonis as saying: ''I hate that it's come to this but hopefully now my client and I can get our relationship away from public scrutiny and back on track and start going forward.''
Adding to the intrigue about the hearing: According to a court document filed by a defense attorney representing Teresa in the grand jury proceedings, the girl did sent Walther a letter in June asking that Malonis be replaced. Teresa did not, however, ask Malonis to set up a private meeting with the judge, which was the primary purpose of Monday's hearing. Her letter ''should suffice,'' her attorney said in this filing.
The filing also states that any private meeting between the judge and Teresa is riddled with land mines for Teresa, given that she is a witness in the grand jury proceedings and the judge may later preside over any criminal trial that results from those proceedings.
All of that aside, the new revelations show why the criminal and child welfare investigations of the FLDS are ongoing.
A ''dictation'' by Warren Jeffs submitted in Gauwain's report provides astonishing details about Teresa's marriage as well as two others.
Gauwain's report and documents included with it imply that Teresa had an intimate relationship with her ''husband.'' Teresa has publicly denied that.
Even if the marriage was never consummated, Texas authorities appear to have solid evidence that a number of FLDS members participated in her illegal marriage.
Warren Jeffs, of course, heads the list. He presided over the marriage, which took place July 27, 2006, at the YFZ Ranch. That is the same day Warren Jeffs was married to a 13-year-old daughter of Merril Jessop. Leroy Jessop, Merril's son, also was apparently married that day to a minor daughter of Wendell Nielsen and his wife Sally.
Others who would now fall in the scope of the investigation because they were present at these ceremonies or consented to having minor girls married: Annette Jeffs, Teresa's mother; Raymond Jessop, the man who was married to Teresa; Merril Jessop, who also conducted Warren's marriage; Wendell Nielsen; Barbara Jessop and Sally Nielsen, who consented to their minor daughters' marriages.
At the time these marriages took place it was a third degree felony for a parent to consent to a marriage involving a child under the age of 16. Other laws make it a crime to participate in an unlawful marriage.
Here is the applicable section of one law, passed by the Texas Legislature in 2005:
(h) A parent or judicially designated managing conservator or guardian of an applicant commits an offense if the parent, managing conservator, or guardian knowingly provides parental consent under this section for an applicant who is younger than 16 years of age or who is presently married to a person other than the
person the applicant desires to marry. An offense under this subsection is a felony of the third degree.
118 Comments:
Isn't it ironic that Malonis is the person most likely to have 'leaked' to the press, certainly the one who confirmed the events for the press, and yet Malonis is the one saying "but hopefully now my client and I can get our relationship away from public scrutiny"
I'm certainly torn about the idea of young women as young as this getting married.....
On the other hand, I am flabbergasted, appalled, horrified, thunderstruck....you get the idea...at the disingenuous way Malonis is behaving...and the Court allowing.....and further, I am scared to death for all of us seeing how easily those civil rights and liberties we all hold so dear can be usurped if the power structure chooses....
We keep hearing about the Patriot Act, and how it tramples on our freedoms....well folks....here is what we have done to our democracy, in living, breathing color!!!!!!!
Cultural practices that are harmful, or potentially harmful, can be addressed in many ways....The FLDS has already made steps to correct some of the problematic issues....
But how do we even begin to undo the total abrogation of civil liberties we have inflicted on this group of people????????
It seems that on one hand Texas, wants to recognize a spiritual marriage as a legal marriage for the purpose of prosecution, but are not inclined to recognize it as a legal marriage for the purposes of declaring a young woman a legal adult by their own laws.
If the information leaked to the press is correct, Ms. Jeffs was a willing participant to the marriage. Is it the intention of Malonis and the court to drag her into court with a huge red V sewn to her chest proclaiming her a victim despite her protestations that she is not a victim? Is it the policy of the Texas court system to force those they claim to be victims to testify against their will. And where is the Texas Bar Association? Exactly how far does Malonis get to go with her actions against her client before they will step in? Malonis chose not to have the court records sealed with the full knowledge that without doing so they, like so much other information regarding Ms. Jeffs, would leak to the press. If anything, it shows that Malonis will go for her pound of flesh for Ms. Jeffs hiring independent council that will consider a clients rights and wishes above those of CPS and the State of Texas.
Malonis told the press many things about her client that were proven untrue, but has yet to be sanctioned for her actions. She also has said she would not fight her client in the press, but has gone on to do exactly that with no repercussions for her actions. Her latest statement to the press said, "I hate that it's come to the point that any of this has to be an issue. I certainly wish that we didn't have to do this. I wish she'd been left alone and that there weren't other attorneys and community members trying so hard to persuade her to influence her against her own attorney." At what point will she admit that she is her clients own worst enemy? At what point will the Texas Bar Association also realize this and take appropriate action?
Wow, talk about a bombshell.
As soon as Brooke turns this into an article on the Trib the comments pages will go into triple digits within a day.
I can't hardly wait...
Brooke,
Why are you not listed as the author of the Trib article?
http://www.sltrib.com/Polygamy/ci_9933165
Or is an update in the works for the Sunday or Monday hard copy?
-Dale-
"The CASA report contradicts both interviews the girl and members of her church, The Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, have given denying that she was ever placed in a "spiritual marriage" ..."
Where have I missed this at?
I have seen it claimed she was not FORCED in to a "spiritual marriage", but do not recall ever seeing any marriage denied by her or members of her church (in the news anyway).
Note: This is from the Trib's staff report on it, that used the articles from Langford and her sidekick.
Don't you love reporters with an agenda or two!
"...imply that Teresa had an intimate relationship with her ''husband.'' Teresa has publicly denied that."
Is that based on her having denied that she was a victim of "sexual abuse"?
Regina,
Do you have any evidence that Malonis leaked the information? Or is this just another shot based on your biases against a much maligned attorney who is attempting to act in the best interests of the child? Are you claiming that it is good and proper for a 16 year old girl to be returned to a mid-30s male for marital relations?
There is no evidence, other than the hatred you have for those that are trying to protect the children, that Malonis had anything to do with the release of the report.
You are correct that cultural practices can be addressed in many ways. How do you suggest that you address felony offenses? Ignore them? Continue to allow underage girls be illegally married and raped? What part of the felony that was committed are you alright with? The fact that the victim was willing?
At first I thought that you were just of a differing opinion over the search and removal, but you are starting to show that you have bought their line of propaganda, lock, stock and barrel. You obviously don’t care about the children that have been abused, your protestations to the contrary notwithstanding.
There is clear and convincing evidence that the FLDS spokesmen do not speak the truth. They even call it ‘lying for the Lord.’
Unless you can come up with something that shows that you do actually care about the offenses committed against these innocent victims, I’m afraid that you have just become another member of the PPSG, along with Hugh, Bill, and JL, all of whom believe that anything that the FLDS do are say is ‘gospel’ and anything from the state is wrong. I’m sorry to see that, because I had believed that you were reasonable, abet misguided. Now we see that you are just another shill for the abusers.
JJ,
Did it ever occur to you that Malonis was acting in the best interest of Teresa, who, along with the FLDS leaders, lied to everyone?
There is a transcript available of Warren Jeffs talking about the marriage. It shows that those with him knew that he was a wanted fugitive, yet they concealed him, provided aid, and harbored him while he was wanted. They spoke of phone calls looking for Jeffs, but they hid him – and their acts in doing so are a third degree felony under Texas law. It’s called Hindering Apprehension or Prosecution.
You can trust those that have repeatedly lied, deceived, and misled others, while committing numerous felonies, or you can believe the evidence.
The law in Texas spells out the responsibility of Malonis, and she followed it to the letter.
wAcKy waLtHEr NEEDS TO BE REMOVED!
Any objective judge would clearly see the Malonis/CPS agenda and that the client rights and wishes are being TOTALLY VIOLATED.
Again the kindreds MISS THE FRAKKIN' POINT! IF something illegal happened, how can you ILLEGALLY PROSECUTE IT???!!!!
My God, have IQ's in this country dropped that LOW?????
Listening to TXBlues makes me see the arrogance of the CPS. You see, seeded in his message is a premise that Teresa is too stupid to know what is good for her. There is a distinct CPS condescension in what he writes.
Answer your own question TX BLues...
How many illegal searches, rights violations, and law breakings will it take before you realize that JUSTICE IS NOT BEING DONE?
You seem learned TXBLUES, but apparently not that intelligent.
TxBluesMan,
I'm sure you would prefer to just get a length of rope and finish this whole Mess with Texas at the nearest tall tree.
But this is the America of today not of the Confederacy.
Anyone who read Reg's comment can plainly see that she is concerned about protecting civil rights.
Reg said "...I'm certainly torn about the idea of young women as young as this getting married.....
On the other hand, I am flabbergasted, appalled, horrified, thunderstruck....you get the idea...at the disingenuous way Malonis is behaving...and the Court allowing.....and further, I am scared to death for all of us seeing how easily those civil rights and liberties we all hold so dear can be usurped if the power structure chooses...."
I can see the point she is making. Why are you so dense that you cannot see it yourself?
If what we end up with IS a "marriage" that involves an "intimate sexual relationship" and Teresa Jeffs is in that "relationship," look at the route we had to go to get to that knowledge.
Texas had no business at the YFZ ranch in the first place, but if you grant it was an honest mistake they still had no evidence of a crime.
At the beginning of this whole affair I questioned the value and legality of turning out everyone's drawers and diaries to discover if any crime had been committed.
It would be as if Texas bugged all the rooms of the YFZ Ranch with cameras and microphones. The premise being that if they had documentary evidence of all events and all behaviors involving all members of YFZ that they could find a crime.
Not that they had EVIDENCE of a crime, because they had none going in and they saw nothing once at YFZ but that they knew if they kept digging in everyone's lives everywhere all the time, something would turn up.
That is appalling. What is being said is that any state agency can now barge into your house, break down doors, make accusations and go through all that you own and KEEP doing it until they find something illegal. It is now more important that the State be able to retroactively justify invading people's homes than it is for them to have justification up front.
I cannot emphasize enough that if Texas had STOPPED their investigation of YFZ at the point where we KNEW they had no evidence of a crime, and where THEY knew they had no evidence of a crime, that we would not be discussing this now.
Two or three "spiritual marriages" performed by a man who will likely DIE in Jail and by a man who WAS in Jail at the time of the raid is not balance enough for the trampling of rights that occurred to get this evidence.
Having said all that I still think Teresa Jeffs is a virgin. That would make all of this horribly silly at best.
TBM
There is no hard evidence Malonis leaked this information, but there are a few facts that build quite a case of circumstantial evidence that indicates she was involved:
1. Judge walthers has kept the media out of that stack of pleadings in her office that she has ignored since before the 14 day hearing;
2. The filings Malonis submits all mysteriously leak clear down to Houston or San Antonio, where Langford and her sidekick get to soak the resulting articles with their own little agendas;
3. There is only one Child named in the 440 suits that has been degraded through lies and had her entire life put on display for the world, all by the attorney whose job it is to represent her;
4. There should be little doubt that walthers blessed Malonis with her permission to leak the information, for I feel certain Malonis already knows she's facing complaints at the State Bar for her conduct in this case, and would not have dared such without CYA from above.
If calling groups liars is a sport you like, a challenge you would lose is to see which side we can make a longer LIAR's LIST for, Texas or the FLDS, and those associated with them. I know I'd start at the SCOT's magic Commission and work my way down!
When you question whether we can "trust those that have repeatedly lied, deceived, and misled others, while committing numerous felonies", most of us have made it clear we do not trust them, nor the balance of those working for the State of Texas that are helping those criminals.
Ramblings of a Felon,
First, there have been no illegal searches. Show me one court that has thus ruled - you can't.
Second, there have been no rights violated. Show me one court that has thus ruled - you can't.
Third, we are working on the lawbreakers, and I am confident that the Grand Jury will issue indictments for various members of the FLDS.
kbp,
Well, if you don't trust us, I wouldn't move here.
I'm sure that the citizens of this state will be heartbroken over that.
Ramblings of a Felon? Sorry, that's the bill of rights.
I do expect indictments Blues, that doesn't mean conviction. Often Grand Juries indict, they feel like they've been told to do so, so they do. Often those indictments result in no convictions.
I wonder why Texas went back to get more DNA in a case the other day. Don't you?
1. The validity of the searcgh has not been tested in the courts...ergo no ruling on the same.....
argument is moot....currently....
2. Let's see....everyone who participated as 'stations' on the underground railroad should have been arrested as felons????
all the slaves returned to their "owners"?????
3. Marriage of teens.... particularly young teens...under the age of 18-19, irrespective of whether it is a formal, or informal marriage, and irrespective of the age of the husband, is an issue we as a society have to look at....
I am sure there are rare instances where it is appropriate. I am also sure that ordering current "marriages" of this type 'undone' is stupid and futile.
Prevention is the way to go. Education and opportunities and a change in attitude from the community will make a difference. Not judicial rulings or outsider's contempt.
If, as these young women who are in 'marriages' get older and wiser, they decide that early marriage was not a good idea and they no longer want to be in the marriage, the community surrounding the young woman, need to be there to help....and I am sure, given what we have seen in recent times, the FLDS community and the mothers particularly, would be that support system....
4. We all change and grow and evolve....naturally.....The FLDS community is not an exception to that dynamic....how things have been handled in the past is not necessarily an indicator of the future. With new leadership comes new ideas and new ways of 'seeing' situations. I am confident that, given what folks have learned, that if a young women came to her mother, or her bishop, or any of the many adults available for cousel, and told them that she no longer wanted to be in her marriage, that adult would help guide her and help assure that if the marriage was to end, it would be done in a way that caused the least harm to all involved as possible, and that each involved would be supported in repairing their lives.
5. I don't "KNOW" that Ms. Malonis was the actual 'leak'. I do know, from press reports, she said nothing about being dismayed, upset, or agrieved at the 'leak'. And, she willingly made statements based on the 'leak'. She made statements that completely disregarded her client's wishes.
There is this mystique that surrounds lawyers and doctors that creates a belief system that those so designated are a bit 'smarter' than the rest of society...same thing for many scientists and scholars....but all it is is smoke and mirrors...and language...each discipline has a language unto itself. Lawyers and doctors having probably, the most complex and alien languages....yet the ones most apt to intertwine with everyday folks....
Reality is that lawyers and doctors come in all shapes and sizes and I.Q.'s....
Clearly Ms. Malonis needs some intensive re-education about good and appropriate lawyering.....and a healthy dose of education about human development, evidence based practices, and current research on adolescent behaviors. And she seems to need some intensive instruction in humility...
She comes up way short in many aspects of good counsel......
6. Perhaps all of this needs to be moved away from the purview of the current players. Folks who are deeply commited to a particular religion, or set of religious beliefs are rarely known to be the most tolerant people when it comes to those who do not ascribe to their particular belief system.
West Texas...and much of Texas in its entirety is known to be "Baptist" country...or "Bible Thumping Country"....certainly an area that is intrinsically tied to mainstream, protestant, christianity. The FLDS are equally zealous in their belief system and practice thereof. Since the very zealous 'bible thumping protestants' are the empowered class, and the FLDS have beliefs and practices that fly in the face of all that the bible thumpers call 'holy', perhaps a search for some folks who hail from less biased perspectives need to be arbitors of this boondoggle??????
As much as it offends folks like the bluesman, and probably other Texans, as well.....maybe the money being spent on a legislative inquiry would be better spent sending in some folks who do not have any agenda other than to fairly arbitrate and be solution oriented....with solutions being those actions and changes on everyone's part that will allow life to return to a normal state and all of these folks to live in some sort of harmony as neighbors....
7. As much as folks piss and moan about the 'full court press' that all of this is getting, it is probably the saving grace for the FLDS. Were it not for the press...good and bad...staying atop this, folks who support reasonable behavior and are willing to fight for the rights of the FLDS would have no way of knowing about the ongoing travesties....
It would be just like all of the injustices that go on, unheralded, everyday in this country.....and as harmed as some have been by this, it would be much worse without the scrutiny of the entire country...despite what the bluesman says......
And to Brooke, and the FLDS who have been willing to share with her, we owe a huge debt....without them, we wouldn't even have the tools to know about the bias....
So, again, I appologize for my crappy spelling and long windedness....and I thank you all for allowing me to speak my piece....
I'm sorry if it all seems disconnected...my brain is racing with such a combination of emotions and ideas it is difficult to write....
by the by, blusey....iffen you reread what I originally wrote, I said "most likely" concerning Malonis as the 'leakee'....
And, just who in the hell is Malonis and the Casa folks to believe they know this child's best interests better than her 'other' atty. or her mother and those who love her?????
This kind of 'high-handedness' is contrary to everything being promulgated as 'best practice' when dealing with children and adolescents...but I guess all the research is wrong and Malonis and Walther are right???????
And bluesman....you really don't want to go down the avenue of asserting that the search was legal...you know full well that search, given what we now know the rangers and walthers either knew, or had the ability to have known, was far from legal....and it WILL be challenged...and the state WILL lose that one....
So don't, once again, presume to know more than others of us on this blog....your assumptions have proven wrong, time and again.....
And...until you have walked in my shoes, don't you dare make judgments about what I do or don't care about...especially concerning children and families facing extraordinary challenges....
As for being 'reasonable', go back and read what I have written over the last several months....I am one of the few voices of temperance involved in this discussion....you particularly, not being one of them....
"balance" seems to be an alien concept for you.....except when it comes to a cause you personally ascribe to....
you're not unlike the 'thumpers'...blind and unwilling to wear corrective lenses....
Thing is...you'd be amazed at how beautiful the world is when you can see a bit more clearly......and if you could see it in its beauty, you'd fight like hell to keep it that way...it all its' diversity and wonder....
Go out an play for a day.....squiggle your toes in some wet grass and smell the roses....
Rericson:
I read your comment also:
"I'm certainly torn about the idea of young women as young as this getting married.....On the other hand, I am flabbergasted,appalled, horrified, thunderstruck..."...at the disingenuous way Malonis is behaving..."
Torn usually suggests 2 ways of seeing things. Does this mean that you see a 15 year old girl being married off by her parents 2 different ways? My own feelings about this are exactly the reverse. I am "torn" at the public persona Natalie Malonis has adopted in this matter, and something like appalled, more saddened, at the reality that this child's relationship with G-d has been usurped to justify a pyramid scheme for social control.
Hugh,
You are a shill for the FLDS, and have been since before Warren Jeffs was arrested. How many boards have you been kicked off of?
Your statements have no value, and your comments that you "haven't met a Bible believer" unless they believe exactly as you do give an indication of the same old tired rhetoric of the witch-burners in Salem or the Catholics in the Catheri genocide of the 1300s.
You admit in other boards that you have been a bigamist - why should we listen to you know?
In other words, you believe as the child abusers do, and will say anything to defend them.
Regina,
Is that based on your extensive legal education or is it just more propaganda in support of the child abusers?
When information is put out in the public view showing specific examples of abuse, you choose to ignore it in favor of going after the AAL, CASA, and the state.
Despite what you have said, it is clear that you don't care about the abuse, but are merely another one that tacitly supports it.
Blues,
You've lost it. I'm on record as actually LOATHING Warren Jeffs prior to the YFZ raid.
http://fellowship-hall.com/viewtopic.php?f=58&t=4141&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=135#p30487
There ya go blues.
First, there have been no illegal searches. Show me one court that has thus ruled - you can't.
Nor has there been a challenge to suppress anything seized in a criminal case yet.
Second, there have been no rights violated. Show me one court that has thus ruled - you can't.
The Appeals Court of the 3rd ruling establishes that the action of the CPS & crew did NOT meet the requirements set in the Family Code, and the adults held in custody are an even bigger problem for the Texas pocketbook. All will be decided in a federal court when the civil complaints yet to be filed are resolved.
Your technical gibberish means nothing on either of those two topics.
**************
...Well, if you don't trust us, I wouldn't move here.
Looks like you put a lot of thought went into that NON-response TxBluesMan! You're slipping, all while it's you that has the "evidence of proof" to brag about.
When do you think we will find out how the circle of co-conspirators associated with Malonis leaking that information to, of all people, Langford at the Chron (and past leaks!)?
- Will it be the PIA request is submitted, asking for copies of the "PIA requests" that Langford submitted to the Clerk of the Court at the 51sr District, and none are found?
- Will it been in the discovery of any criminal case associated with the client Malonis is supposed to be representing? or
- Maybe not until discovery in ALL the civil complaints starts to come rolling into a federal court case?
Makes one wonder if that Texas crew seized those "SHREDDERS" that they ran to tell the reporters about!
You seem to be inferring you have an 'inside track' to the evidence in this mess, how they doin' on pasting back together all that incriminating evidence from those "shredders"?
LOL! ;)>
Bluesman...
You're doing it again...twisting and spinning....
Do I think every instance of May/December committed, heterosexual relationships are instances of abuse? No. Are some? I'm sure there are some that are extraordinarily abusive. I'm equally sure there are many that fall in the middle.
Do I think there are elements of coersion within the FLDS? Of course. Coersion, in all its complexities runs throughout human societies.
I think there is something insipid, fed by lies and fears of the unknown, going on in West Texas.
And I think if it can go on there, it can go on anywhere. I think when we allow our government to behave this way, unchallenged, we set the stage for this kind of behavior to grow and become the norm.
I do believe the FLDS have the need to address some areas of their culture that, based on knowledge we did not have about human development when their group 'formed', are no longer the best way to operate. I think they, themselves, have already internally acknowledged that and have begun to address many of those issues.
I think if CPS and the Texas power structure really want to make a difference, they should consider putting the same energy and money into a few of your really scary pockets of rural poverty, or your really scary pockets of urban youth run amok.....
My gosh! Do you have any idea the impact a sudden infusion of 10+ million dollars could have on your statewide teen pregnancy prevention efforts????????
In communities where we know, where we have hard, long term data, that teen pregnancy leads to school dropout rates climbing, welfare dependancy, heightened child mortality rates, poor infant nutrition, etc., etc., etc.
You keep ignorring the premise that Texas has some really bad laws on its' books....
It's one thing to violate laws that there is no disagreement concerning their validity as laws.
It is quite another when the law supposedly broken may or may not be a just law.
Now I certainly agree that young women, especially those as young as fourteen or fifteen, should limit their sexual explorations and activities to a little petting and kissing....
On the other hand, I live in the real world. A world where girls of that age are regularly, up and down the social scale, sexually active. Are they victims? Some, perhaps...but most are only victims in the sense that they were born into 21st century America where we've been selling them sex and drugs and rock&roll for two generations now, from the cradle.....
So do I think it's okay to ignore our systemic issues and focus on the social norms of a small group of people who may have practices I disagree with, but are fundamentally not terribly different, and perhaps, because of their structure and religious tenets a bit more likely to have good outcomes, despite bad genesis, than the rest of society??????
I think a good number of your home grown bible thumpers ought to look in their own closets before they join your lynch mob.....
and....
Silver....you aren't as clear as I would like, in order to form a response to you....however, if you are talking about the FLDS creating "a pyramid scheme for social control".....well I'd look again at the bible thumpers of the country....they put good ole G.W. in the White House....they've done everything they possibly can to assure that our government is run based on very parochial religious beliefs and not as a democracy of all it's people....
I've never been so ashamed in my life as I have been in the last seven+ years of this country. We truly are "The Ugly American", both abroad and right here at home.
We all have a right to believe whatever we want. But we all also have an obligation to protect others right to do the same. We have no right to sit quietly by and allow our government to selectively choose whose beliefs are 'okay' and whose are not and persecute those they have deemed to have the 'wrong' beliefs!!!!!!!!
And Bluesman....my thoughts and opinions are based on a compilation of my education, my life's experiences, and what I learn new, everyday of my life....and my ability to think critically.....
And, most importantly, my ability to think independently. I do not need to be told how or what to think....and I am old and savvy enough to not be impressed by any one person's c.v.
Bluesy,
Now I see why people say that your sting has lost its venom.
Your arguments are weak. When you are unable to counter someone elses arguments you stamp your feet like a child. You cry "Abuse, Abuse, you support abuse".
Nobody here supports child abuse bluesy...except maybe you.
It was child abuse to take those 400+ children without any evidence of wrong doing. It was abuse against the rights of adults to hold them against their will even after they had proven their ages with drivers licenses, birth certificates, etc.
These are the things you support.
Clearly, Bluesy, you do nothing but support abuse.
I have been involved with child welfare, on and off, for the better part of twenty years. I have seen some horrific things.....I have befriended some horrific parents who really have been extremely abusive.....
I have been in homes where there was a six inch cushion on the floor of refuse and feces throughout the home....
I have never, ever, not once, even when the police were involved in the removal of the children, seen the homes searched and papers, pictures, diaries, etc. removed.
I have never seen that outside of a criminal investigation with a proper search warrant, based on probable cause and reasoned belief.
Even if, and that is a doubtful "if", the police, cps, and the rangers, were acting in good faith that physical abuse was happening or imminent, that did not give them the necessary probable cause to search and seize property. And Bluesman, you can ramble on your caca till the cows come home...it isn't going to mean didley in court....or at least in the higher courts....your local jurists seem to be wanting a bit...*smile*
txbigotman says:
"Third, we are working on the lawbreakers, and I am confident that the Grand Jury will issue indictments for various members of the FLDS"
Hey bigotman, you talk about the searches not being determined by a court to be illegal and then you turn around and call people that you don't know and have never met "lawbreakers". Which court did you consult with to determine this? Was it a court of law or the court of public(bigoted)opinion? BTW I guess in YBO(your bigoted opinion)it's only those whining soreheads that bring the charges to the GJ are the ones that always tell the truth right?
Rericson:
Agreed, the State raid was unambiguously wrong, and the ramifications will not soon end.
My previous post reflects my point of view about this raid. However, I'm not sure to what extent the FLDS actually depends upon these horrible events for their sense of religion to survive. Anne Wilde states that it would be "paradise" (or something like that) if polygamy were decriminalized. I'm not sure that is how it would actually work out. The exaltation that Fundamentalist Mormon polygamists are yearning for and sacrificing for, seems so intricately bound up with being victimized, misunderstood, and persecuted, that I'm not sure the drive for it would survive the loss of steam produced when the pressure of illegality is gone.
silver...
I'm not so sure that is accurate...
Remember, these folks have been in Texas for four years and not even their closest neighbors knew how many folks were living at the ranch.....that's pretty low profile from where I stand...
Yet I seriously doubt they spent their days sitting around a campfire wonderring how to get in the limelight as victims....
Building homes and industry and farming and cheese and other dairy production and cutting limestone and gardening and baking and so on and so forth seem to have taken quite a bit of someone's energies.....
For crying out loud, these folks hadn't even registered to vote! No one was on the dole....except, as I understand it, a couple of folks with disabilities and a couple of older, retired folks who were collecting social security...which isn't "the dole" as one has to have contributed in order to collect....
So where's the role of victim...I mean prior to the April raid?????
Maybe in other communities....And yes, seems like some of the group identity is tied up with the 1953 raid...but I don't know that the 1953 raid was even often discussed or brought up publically until this all happened....
And perhaps, Ms. Wilde saying it would be "paradise" simply meant that she and others wouldn't have to constantly look over their shoulders......and could get on with their lives without having to fear being victimized by an unjust law......
Brooke, you're INTERVIEWING THE WRONG PEOPLE.
The following two testimonies come from people that have signed the petition today for equal and fair representation for the FLDS at the one-side REID WITCH HUNT. This first one is about Carolyn Jessop and I flavor it with some commentary of my own at the top. To wit:
This woman claims that Carolyn Jessop's OWN father was abusive to her; not Carolyn's husband, Merrill
And that would certainly explain the following:
* why Carolyn's daughter accused CAROLYN of being physically abusive
to her for YEARS; and
* why Carolyn's daughter went BACK to her father and the FLDS the
minute she turned 18. To wit:
***************************************************************************
Amber Jessop Jul 20, 2008 4:58 pm
Nevada
The difference between the FLDS men and the corrupt political society that surrounds us is that the FLDS men admit and live with those they sire their children with and thus acknowlege their precious offspring by claiming their duty to support and sustain them. I would like to ask Mr. Reid how much sexual corruption exists or has existed within his close family circles. I am privileged to be married to a good man that honors his marital covenants as well as his spiritual convictions. I know Carolyn Blackmore (it is a disgrace for me to call her a Jessop when she is not one) and the extremely abusive issues that existed within her own fathers family. I went to school with her younger siblings and my heart cries out to all the people of this nation that this lady came from an abusive family and she CANNOT classify the rest of our religious society as being abusive. I worked for her father and with her mother. Let's bring up the facts about her father and see if she has a leg to stand on so to speak. Her father was a very physical abusive man. I knew this family very well. I know that the God of heaven is watching people like Carolyn and it makes my heart ache to contemplate the day she stands before her God and His witnesses. Carolyn, Becky Musser, Elise Wall and all you other darkened people who have literally crushed the hearts of your parents, have you not thought of this?? What are you going to say when you stand there before this Holy Tribunal at that great day?? My husband has taught me that we don't know the extent of the terrible things we will do or say if we were to turn against that bright testimony of truth and betray our spiritual covenants. I pray for mercy upon their dark souls.
# 2 This one talks about Flora Jessop:
Val Anthony Jessop Jr. Jul 20, 2008 3:13 pm
Idaho
I have seen both sides of the coin. I know right from wrong.
I lived in colorado city for about fourteen years. In one of, if not
THE, most peacful times in our religions history. Our people were
taught and trained for years to go through experiences and tests like
these. We were warned A test was coming. And its here.
I was thrown Right into the middle of it all. Like a tornado our
little town went from Peace to, scattered across the land.
The persecution had started. I was Kidnapped by Flora (Mae May?)
Jessop AKA, jessie, along with all her political brainwash victims/bed
buddies. Where my little brother, older sister, two younger sisters
and my Mother were forced to stay in Phoenix Arizona, Through lies and
psychological weapons (if you will)by Flora. The whole time being
subjected to predujice mainstream media(also flora's buddies). While
Flora used my mother for fundraisers in the name of "Escaping
Polygamy, and to smear our faith, Mother never saw a penny.
My father on the other hand was doing everything in his power to get
his wife and children back, going to the kangaroo courts fighting
child support nonsense that Flora had made without mothers permission.
Of course he was getting nowhere with what felt like the whole United
States Government against him.
Mean time, Flora tried everything she could do to get me to fight her
so I would go to jail. But fighting went against everything I was
taught. So she, after putting me in a behavioral school, Sent me to
Saint Lukes Behavioral health center. After two weeks there she had me
stay at her place.
Her double wide was nothing like I had ever seen before. IT WAS
ABSOLUTELY DISGUISTING. The way Flora, her "husband", and two
daughters lived was deplorable. While I was there I got just a sample
of their lives. Her daughters took up her habbit of drinking and
smoking. Were out at night alot and were doing marijuana.
I think if any children need saved from thier parents hers do.
Anyway My mother got sick of Flora, took us five children and ran to
father. We lived in Canebeds Arizona For little over a year in
moderate peace till more persecuters came after us.
An illegal felony arrest warrant was put out for my mother. So we
dropped everything and left with nothing but a change of clothes and
our minivan. Local scavengers stole everything. 5 vehicles and
personal items just to name a few.
But that is just a small loss for family.
That is what our religion is based on, family.
So after being through all this and more to come. I think I know good
people when I see them.
All we and our people want is peace and representation.
If we can't represent ourselves I know that our Just God will.
***********
These and many more can be found at the PETITION (sign it and pass it on to EVERYBODY):
http://www.voicesforthechildren.org/viewpetition.php?id=3&page=1#signatures
Hugh,
You really are a piece of work. You have one line that alleges that you find Jeffs abhorrent, then you have five paragraphs explaining why the charges are not any good.
You are also on record as stating that you are a bigamist, in the same thread. I can understand why you fight so hard to make it look like your fellow bigamists did nothing wrong, unfortunately your arguments aren’t any better here than they were on the other boards that kicked you off.
KBP,
The PIA won’t mean anything, since Texas law specifically excludes the judiciary. The rest of your statements deal with information that is protected under various clauses.
Regina,
First, let me address your position on religious beliefs. This is not a case of religious beliefs, it is a case about criminal actions. I could care less what their beliefs are, I don’t go to church, I don’t particularly care for the various Christian Churches, especially the Baptists, since I believe that they are intolerant.
Why should we change our laws? We like them. For example, let’s take the death penalty. Since 1976 your state has executed a total of 3 people, we have executed 407. Obviously we believe that some people need to be executed and we are not afraid to do so. I’m sure that the family of Danny Faulkner would rather that his killer was in Texas, rather than Pennsylvania. Of course, we don’t allow our death row inmates to be commentators in the media, either.
We don’t think that the prohibition on Bigamy is a bad law, nor the law preventing the Sexual Assault of a Child, nor the law prohibiting underage minors. It seems that Pennsylvania agrees, as your state also have some of the same laws (Bigamy is a criminal offense, as is Statutory Sexual Assault), but you apparently don’t have any concerns over underage marriage as there is nothing in place to enforce violations of your laws against it.
Of course, given your lack of condemnation of the FLDS for the violations that have been shown thus far, it is easy to see that you prefer that they walk than be held accountable. Why is that?
Do you want those that have violated felony laws to be held accountable or not? It is a simple question, and I’m interested in what you have to say about it.
Dale,
There was evidence of wrong-doing, and the decisions of both the 3COA and SCOT never said that there wasn’t. The court said that all of the requirements were not met, and the dissent clearly indicated that there was evidence of abuse.
Of course, if you wish be deny it, that’s your choice. But, as the one of the books you claim to study says, “Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.” (Matt. 23:24)
Isn’t that what you are doing? Worrying about some possible minor procedural errors, while you defend the illegal marriage of underage girls, the statutory rape of those same girls?
Hey Cheesebrain,
Aren’t you the one that said there had been no underage marriages? Just a day or so before this story broke?
We read about Warren Jeffs giving his teenage daughter to a 34 year old and taking on the teenage daughter of a friend for a sexual relationship (as is apparent from his dictated journal) -- and some people on this blog find Malonis to be the Great Evildoer worthy of comment and offer up not a word condemning what Jeffs has done. Unbeleivable.
Blues, Blues, Blues. I have two intersections of interest with the FLDS. One is their practice of polygyny, which I believe to be a wholly righteous estate. We disagree on the reasons for practicing polygyny since I don't think your state of marriage or lack thereof has anything to do with your place in heaven. The FLDS and LDS believe in Celestial Marriage which is a bit different than my view since I am a conservative Presbyterian.
The other intersection of interest with the FLDS is an interest I share with all citizens of this country. That has to do with their rights under the US Constitution. Their rights have been violated in such a shocking way that it qualifies as a Constitutional Crisis. It is imperative for us all that they win.
I can dislike the FLDS religion and it's doctrine and find even some of their practices abhorrent and not want to stick my bony nose into their bedroom window. I find the charge for which Warren was convicted to be incredible and amazing. I cannot bring myself to believe in such a travesty of justice to this day.
Apparently you can't separate personalities and beliefs from issues of rights and laws.
As far as the boards I've been kicked off of? I do better with my own blog than some of those boards do as far as traffic and reach so I'm rather pleased with the development. I speak to more people I am in agreement with, have less arguments and don't have to put up with people who think I'm evil simply because I advocate the acceptability of polygyny.
Amazing, Hugh, you're so incredibly civil, I can't imagine anyone ever kicking you off any board.
I've only been kicked off one, and everybody knows that, like John McCain, I was voted Miss Congeniality. ;)
John, Anabaptists (from which we get the Amish and other sects) practiced polygyny during the reformation in Muenster Germany.
They were executed and their bodies hung in cages around the church in Muenster. Their bones have long since been removed, but it's my understanding that the cages are still there.
Western society wishes to kill polygynists. They've been doing it for a while. I suppose getting thrown off a Fundamentalist Christian discussion board or two is a small price to pay.
More recently we burned polygynists at Waco. I sincerely believe they were ready to do that again in Eldorado.
Hugh, I really, really REALLY have had a life long FETISH for Muenster cheese.
And you just had to go ruin it...
;)
TBM
Texas is hard! It seems the court rules it's own records! Maybe that is better actually, as it relates to the ethics involved...
Explain to a non-attorney what can and cannot be shared as public record and how you obtain it from a court.
Are all pleadings open record unless sealed by the judge or possibly a preset rule in certain types of cases?
Can attorneys selectively leak whatever they want, once it is filed?
I'd like to know, but either way, the point on topic remains that if the clerk did not have the record, then that looks to only leave 3 sources for Langford... to have gotten them from:
1. Malonis,
2. CASA / CPS, or
3. walthers.
Since Malonis is quoted in numerous interviews by only the different reporters that evidently had copies, the best guess is none other than ?????
I must admit it could have been a coincidence, but then I wonder why the reporters that do have that "report" and attachments were so conveniently able to all reach Malonis.
Then I also wonder how Malonis will be celebrating Teresa's 17th birthday? Seems lame for any to argue that Teresa would be subject sexual abuse after that day.
Maybe that is why the hearing went away, possibly scheduled ONLY to leak that "report" before they canceled the hearing that was never really going to happen.
Just a thought, but something like that wouldn't surprise me in this mess.
I think I'll add a bit to that last theory.
I'd said before I felt permission came from walthers BEFORE the "report" leaked out to the press.
That would fit well in that last theory.
There have been quite a few that questioned why the hearing was scheduled considering the age Teresa is approaching.
I doubt I'll ever know if that theory is accurate... and probably won't know if it is not either.
Well, well, for a newcomer making only the second post here, I was relatively sure that the "TEXAN" was a legitimate force to be reasoned with from the few postings I have read. However, I recant. You are an illiterate, bigoted moron. I feel kind of ashamed that I sucked up to your supposed authoritative ramblings previous to discover you have absolutely no merit to anything you say because you refuse to listen to both sides of the argument. That make you and your commentary worthless.
Quote from you, bluesman:
First, there have been no illegal searches. Show me one court that has thus ruled - you can't.
Second, there have been no rights violated. Show me one court that has thus ruled - you can't.
Tell me since when was it mandatory that justice and judgment coincide in today's legal system? Very seldom. Just look at OJ. But then you believe him. Right? How many violations of civil rights should I cite against black Americans in the early south? Courts at the time ruled they were not violated. You are saying just the contrary here. How many illegal searches were performed in pre-war Europe? At the time, courts said none, even authorized them. Again you would disagree. Your reasoning says they were justified simply because they had the backing of a corrupt legal system. You are a poor excuse of an American. Sorry that is too harsh. Your are a poor excuse of a human being.
Let's say your neighbor has a suspicion you pilfered his Harley based upon another neighbor's accusation. You deny it. He doubts your reasoning, busts down your door, finds his Harley, and for good measure beats the crap out of you too. Of course, your pissed, sue him for all he's worth, but the court sides with him and you are left in the lurch, banged up and penniless.
Now in your warped opinion, was there an illegal search? The courts said no. You said yes.
Were your rights violated? Courts said no. You whined yes.
You see, was justice served? Not in your opinion. Was a judgment rendered? Most certainly. So O Holy Illiterate Moron of Texas, because a court rules no rights were violated and no illegal searches were performed DOES NOT MAKE IT SO any more than you getting the crap justly beat out of you and losing your court case over it.
I have my suspicions and doubt you are even a lawyer at all, just a charlatan with google at your fingertips scamming all of cyberspace with pretended knowledge.
Until you start believing as most fair minded Americans do, that we are innocent until proven guilty, your opinions, your legalese, your accusations and your supposed knowledge are all for moot. You are a phony and a poor one at that.
If you want some validity in your lame arguments, swallow your damned Texan bigotry and listen to the people that were illegally searched and who did have their rights violated. Until you can make yourself do that, you are nothing more than a damned coward donning the arrogance which you have professed to be so proud of.
I, like many others, have spoken to both sides of the issue, and believe you me, there are more behind the scenes violations of human and civil rights yet to be revealed from this case than you will ever acknowledge.
I am even more convinced as I stated earlier, you are very insecure, not nearly as arrogant as you boast, just insecure and in need of professional help. Do us a favor and seek it. Until then please disappear or grow up old man!
Txbigotman:
"This is not a case of religious beliefs, it is a case about criminal actions. I could care less what their beliefs are, I don’t go to church, I don’t particularly care for the various Christian Churches, especially the Baptists, since I believe that they are intolerant."
Ol Blue, you have NO IDEA how hard I laughed at that comment! Thank you for the comedy, anything else Mr Yogi Berra?
Can you not see your own bigotry? Just read that again as if it came from the old west and the person was talking about an Indian who had been accused of stealing a horse and is about to be strung up without a trial.
"This is not about racism, this is about criminal actions. I could care less what tribe he is from, I aint an injun, I don't care for any of the injuns, especially the Cherokees because they don't like the white people"
You like the law unless it is against the Indian tribes, but a religious belief that has been around since the 1840's should stay outlawed? You must have felon you head!
Bluesman....
At some point one would think that it would dawn on you that your arguments have lost credibility.
You have been trained to objectivate. You have been trained to comprehensively examine each "side" of an issue in order to best serve your client(s). If you are not able to, through thorough examination, 'know' the issue(s), how can you anticipate, or project, what may occur and be prepared?????
Either you are a piss poor attorney or, in the alternative, you have some very deep, personal stake in this that obscures rational thinking.
Either way, and irrespective of either alternative, you do, through your poorly formed ramblings (and that is what your statements have become!), provide the opportunity for the rest of us to reiterate our positions of support.
It also affords us the opportunity to form and clarify our thinking in a forum of predominatly friendly voices, whereby we can then take a unified argument forward into less friendly venues.
Over time that has proven to be one very effective tool in shifting the general opinion across this country. Shortly after the awful day in April, better than 85% of folks from Utah who were polled approved of the actions in Texas. Now that approval rating is less than 40%.
Despite the mainstream media losing interest in this issue, folks like us, with you as our "prod", have allowed this to be a major blog issue, with new forums taking up the subject, daily.....
As Obama has shown, the internet is a real force to be reckoned with!
So...keep on keepin' on, as the saying goes...You're doing us a solid!!!!!!!!!!!!
And, by the by.....I am very secure in my beliefs, my sense of right and wrong, and my position that moral, ethical behavior is the standard to live by, irrespective of subjective 'laws'.
Your attempt to attack me personally is not worth the cyber-space it takes up....Now, if you want to assume responsibility for my mortgage, my grocery bills, we might have something to talk about.....but until that time.....I don't give a tinker's damn what you think about me.
One other thought....Some call the choice to ignore laws like the Texas bigamy statute 'civil disobediance'. Civil disobediance has a time honored place in the American social landascape. But that's a discussion for another day, eh?
oops...meant to refer to the Texas polygamy statute(s)....sorry.....
According to a blog specializing on Texas law and injustice, TxBluesMan is a lawyer who represents crooked cops. From cops who plant evidence on innocent people, demand sex instead of a traffic tickets, to uniformed dope-dealers who secretly murder and bury their opposition: Those are his clients. Whether he's representing a cop involved in this raid or he's branched out to defend underhanded social workers too, I don't know.
If you believe in MOs –modus operandi-- TxBluesMan is posting here because there's money in it, and it's from shielding shady public employees who abused somebody's rights. It's a job, defending the crooked in a state that tops all others for legal corruption.
The funny (ironic) thing is that by posting here at all, TxBluesMan verifies that corruption; the fact that Texas authorities violated legal boundaries.
But . . . TxBluesMan may or may not be bigoted; it may be that his clients are. Trying to reason with him is a waste of time, he isn't here to reason, the sole purpose is to prejudice people against the very people who got abused by his clients.
Bigoted? That's an understatement. The guy and HIS DAD walk around with Nazi Youth Hilter badges. No joke. To wit:
http://www.omsa.org/forums/showthread.php?t=933
My previous posting is easily proven; this comment is speculative and getting off-topic.
It's beyond coincidence that whenever TxBluesMan posts something easily and/or soundly refuted, 'JohnLester' always posts.
'JohnLester' posts screeds so long and so unreadable --or so outrageous-- that it squashes any coherent replies.
This is so regular and predictable that the only conclusion is that 'JohnLester' is a fake account managed by TxBluesMan.
Case in point above. It makes no difference whether a persons parents were bad people (nazis) or not. 'JohnLester' tars TxBluesMan as a nazi based on an item his father once owned, and in the past 'JohnLester' made bufoonish accusations of KKK.
None of that is relevant to what TxBluesMan claims or says, and nobody believes that TxBluesMan is truly a nazi or KKK. The end result is that TxBluesMan is validated, and his opposition as not-so-rational.
The point is that 'JohnLester' always attacks TxBluesMan, and always does it so that normal people roll their eyes and turn away.
Maybe 'JohnLester' is real, a seperate person from TxBluesMan. But he's done more to support TxBluesMan --and prejudice ordinary Americans against the FLDS-- than any other person could.
Anon,
First you are comparing apples and oranges. A search by law enforcement officers under a duly issued search warrant is not comparable to the intentional tort committed when a neighbor breaks into your property. One is under the 'color of law' and may be redressed by a suit under Sec. 1983, while the other is a matter for state tort law.
Second, from a legal standpoint, the validity of the warrant is not going to hinge on whether the initial call was a hoax or not, but whether, based on the information available to both the officers and the judge at the time supported a finding of probable cause. See Massachusetts v. Upton, 466 U.S. 727 (1984), stating that when an anonymous informant (later identified as someone who wanted to "burn" the defendant) provided a tip, and the police corroborated the information provided, that there was sufficient information at the time that the warrant was issued to support a finding of probable cause. The appellate court is limited to reviewing the information before the issuing judge, and is not allowed to conduct a de novo review.
For similar cases, see also Alabama v. White, 496 U.S. 325 (1990) and Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (1983).
Second, 'Evidence obtained pursuant to "objectively reasonable reliance on a warrant" will not be suppressed "even if the warrant is subsequently invalidated."' see Alvarez v. United States, 451 F.3d 320 (5th Cir. 2006), reversed on other grounds.
There is a reason that I have repeatedly questioned those that allege an illegal search - and it is based on the law. In this case, a Texas Ranger took an anonymous tip, corroborated the information in, and reduced it to a sworn affidavit presented to the judge. The judge reviewed the information within the four corners of the affidavit and determined that there was probable cause to issue a search warrant. The officers then subsequently executed that warrant in good faith that it was valid.
All of the other information that throws a questionable light on the warrant came after it was issued, and most of it came after it was executed. The courts have repeatedly held that the officer's and judge's actions are reviewed based on what they knew at the time, not what was subsequently learned after the fact.
While you may not like the way that the law reads on this issue, and while there is certainly room for a motion to suppress, I don't think that it will be successful at the trial court, nor do I believe that it will be successful on appeal.
If you can come up with a reasoned argument, supported by case law, that the evidence will be suppressed, I am more than willing to listen. So far all I have heard is unsupported statements that it was illegal and that rights were violated, with no apparent basis for the statement other than a wish to support what the FLDS is doing.
John Lester is a very real person, got a perfect 800 on the quant portion on his GRE, is a genius at least intellectually speaking, and can be found right here:
http://groups.google.com/group/fatherabrahamschildrentogether
PS Now that you've been proven wrong, Subpatre, perhaps you're not as bright as you think of yourself. ;)
PPS And it ain't bragging if it's true and VERIFIABLE. ;)
The probability that TexasBluesMan is a Neo-Confederate is 100%.
The probability that he is a KKK-sympathizer is 99%.
The probably that is a Nazi-sympathizer is 99%.
The probablity that he is a KKK member is 80%.
Evidence abundantly supplied in the past.
Refutations aren't offered because it's generally impossible to successfully refute most anything I write.
;)j
And my board is MAINLY composed of FLDS members, by the way.
Not a SINGLE ONE OF THEM have *ever* unsubscribed.
And while I've had my public FLDS detractors, I've noticed that MOST of those detractors have been men that the FLDS banned.
I work closely with men that have direct daily email, phone and face to face contact with the HIGHEST LEVELS of FLDS leadership.
If the FLDS was pleased to me, Willie Jessop would either tell his COUSIN with whom I work with closely to tellme to knock it off or Willie would just skip that and contact me himself.
He hasn't.
What Willie HAS DONE is carefully read a lot of my stuff.
Maybe you should just let the FLDS speak for itself. Even on Brooke's blogs, I've had FLDS stand up to their apostates that have challenged me and told me to, quote, "follow my heart."
And that's what I'll continue to do.
Not everybody likes the Bill Medvecky (sic) or John Lester styles, but plenty of people DO.
And in the marketplace of free ideas and free expression, that's all that matters.
I always seriously question people that find it necessary to say that someone else isn't an effective proponent of any particular idea.
That always sounds to me like the person that they are attacking is recognized by them to be a superior and they're trying to knock them down a peg or two thinking that that's the way that they'll climb.
I don't believe in doing that kinda stuff.
I don't have too...
...so instead, I focus on my real opponents, real enemies, and that's the Godless feminist goverment of which Blues is a card carrying effeminate member. ;)
This post has been removed by the author.
Mr. Lester,
I have been reading your comments on this blog and others, particularly on Gritsforbreakfast, for a long time now.
People don't "refute" you, or even respond to you because it isn't worth their time.
You post these long, boring posts, over and over.
You think if you say the same thing enough times and no one bothers with you, it then makes whatever you say true. Not!
You're a blowhard. And you say stupid things and your "proof" of your stupid things is even stupider.
Like Txbluesman possibly being the owner of some collectible Nazi medals making him a Nazi sympathizer. I own several old "Aunt Jemima" items. Does that make me a racist? Or does it make me the owner of some valuable collectible items of "Americana"?
You are a blowhard, a sexist(from your repeated slanderous comments about women and femminism), and a braggart. All attributes most of us find repugnant.
Stop wasting people's time with your nonsense.
You know, I've always noticed that the people that state that other people shouldn't pay attention to somebody else are always the ones that pay most attention to the person that they say shouldn't have any attention paid to them.
When I'm participating on a blog, I read everybody's posts and consider everyone's opinions.
That's what intelligent, mature people do.
I
NEVER
in
MY LIFE
have
EVER TOLD ANYBODY ON ANY MESSAGE BOARD ANYWHERE
to not pay attention to anyone else.
And never do.
I always just let the free marketplace decide.
I have confidence in the marketplace. In the LONG run always.
You know, when you constantly attack someone, and ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU BEG OTHERS TO IGNORE SOMEONE, all you do is enhance their stature and their credibility.
Blues knows that which is why he's been eating up all the attention that you've been paying to him.
With Blues, for the most part, I just let his perfect, unblemished track record of calling every part of this FLDS fiasco SO FAR speak for itself.
Tomorrow MAY be the first day that he gets SOME satisfaction.
But in the long run, he'll have that snatched away too.
As far as you're concerned, POST AWAY, SAY
ANYTHING THAT YOU WANT ABOUT ME,
it's a free country (kinda) and I believe in FREE AND OPEN EXPRESSION.
God Bless Ya and Love Ya! ;)
TBM
You boldly slipped in a fact-less line or two there!
"...and the police corroborated the information provided, that there was sufficient information at the time that the warrant was issued to support a finding of probable cause."
AFFIDAVIT:
- Noted property location and size details (700 man sized!)
- Noted contacts at ranch (never called them)
- Noted Child Sex crime reported in call (avoiding any life threatening crime reported by Sarah)
- Provided general details of the criminal and what all they HOPED to find at that "SINGLE HOUSEHOLD" (source = Sarah).
- "Corroborated" that someone took the calls and details Sarah reported to them (oh wait, back to square 1)
Is there something I missed?
With that FIVE DAY DELAY, walthers issuing CPS an order for investigation, a 2nd and 3rd SW affidavit within days, the AG seeking new warrants... I'd say there's a better chance of at least the first SW being suppressed than your comment indicates.
What a politician's non response Blues. Yawwn! Maybe you are a lawyer--at least you sure are good at talking around the issue and ignoring the question.
I was not addressing the situation as a matter of law, but as a matter of basic civil and human rights.
Clearly I explained that judgment does dot always coincide with justice. While you keep googling support for you opinion from available precedent setting cases of law, does NOT always signify that justice was fairly served, only that based upon the arguments of legal representatives, a judgment was rendered. Courts have gone from distinguishing between right and wrong to awarding favorable judgments to the most presentable or theatrical legal team. It's about egos, and money and dog eat dog more than what is best for the people.
Your unwillingness to even suppose those opposed to your opinion have a right to be believed puts you on very shaky ground to say the least, and puts you on hate crime territory to put it bluntly.
Oh, you're googling fast now to reference what denotes a hate crime and how I could interpret you guilty of such. Save your fingertips. I already did the search and you fit much of the criteria. You are publicly and blatantly denigrating a specific group, culture or ethnicity based upon a linear viewpoint.
So as long as you continue to ignore the opportunity to listen to the FLDS side of the story without labelling them liars, you have prejudged. Again, that makes you are a coward, or a hate crime apostle, unwilling or afraid to hear them out. You can believe whatever you want, practice whatever you want and even hate whomever you wish, but you cannot publicly practice or share those sentiments to demean or discriminate against them. Even free speech has its limitations. You proudly profess to have none.
Based upon your legal reasoning, you support the holocaust because it was legally acceptable at that time by a corrupt system. You would deny their rights were abused based upon the rules of law, not the rules of civility and human rights. Your warped cohesiveness to accepting what the courts decide against minority groups as always being right, puts you in some very distinguished company of hate crime proponents.
Here's the true test case: Could you sit across the table from FLDS spokespersons and objectively listen to them speak? I say you are too cowardly, too judgmental, and on a personal pilgrimage to destroy, or possess a vendetta against them. Has hate crime written all over it.
TXBlues, I would like to see cross examined Ranger Long, Doran, Flora and others directly involved in getting the raid started. If it can be found that they in fact acted recklessly, deceitfully, or otherwise in bad faith in getting those overly broad warrants, then all the evidence gathered can and will be thrown out as fruits of a poisonous tree. Some of that evidence may have even been planted.
A big red flag, I believe, that might point out the culprits among LE/CPS is the fact that Rozita Swinton knew details about the raid as it progressed, details that could have only been known by persons present. For example, she recounted on the phone to shelter personnel regarding the toys that were being handed out, the timing of rainfall, the name of the person in charge at the colliseum, etc. Obviously someone taking part in the raid was feeding Rozita inside information. Rozita might be able to point out who that was, and if it was Ranger Long, then, well, that's proof of bad faith and a crime.
I did check out your website Lester, and that of Medvecky, and others who post their web address. A truely colorful cast of characters on this blog.
Did you happen to notice that my client for 3 years now, Dan Truman (who just happens to be the keyboardist for one of the greatest country music band of all time, Dianond Rio with 13 Grammy nominations and a lot more than just that too), is stopping by my new place this Friday here in slc? He's flying in at 11 pm tonight.
IF you like Diamond Rio, c'mon
over and I'll introduce you to Dan their keyboardist. They also wrote
what probably still is the biggest INTERNET hit of all time. This one
right here, I've seen them perform it live, people go crazy over it,
especially a few years ago after 911. The number of hits that you see today in the hundreds of thousands are just MERE ECHOES of the millions of hits this song got shortly after 911. To wit:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiYgpPB1kwU&feature=related
and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamond_Rio
It was his idea to get together again and he just contacted for the third or fourth time in the past few months. I now he's trying to recruit me into something he's doing.
And by the way, he already knows about my "crazy" religious ideas.
He's LDS Mormon, and he just laughs them off...says I remind him of
some of his crazy BYU roommates back in college that were REALLY into theology.
Anybody want to meet a bonafide CELEBRITY/COUNTRY MUSIC STAR?
C'mon over, I'll introduce you to him! He won't mind the company, he's a great guy.
Here's ANOTHER one you've failed to INTERVIEW, Brooke. If you're a reporter after TRUTH, and you're the BEST one that we have (but you could do far better), these are the people you need to be speaking to and not the TALKING LYING HEADS pimping for the cameras and for book sales. Dan Fisher's 79-year-old OWN MOTHER calls him a LIAR too! To wit from the Reid Hearings Online Petition signing:
Rachel Zitting Fischer Jul 21, 2008 1:39 pm
220 East Jessop Avenue, Hildale, UT 84784-0445
I believe in justice and liberty for all, as long as they don't take the rights of others. Some have worked up a hate against people to the injury of those people.
Dan was sweet and obedient as a child. He later let bitterness into his heart, and it grew. Dan Fischer has not told the truth, to the hurt of the FLDS People, including the Prophet.
His Mother, Rachel Zitting Fischer
Resume:
Age 79, mother of 12 natural born children and mother of many more. After raising the family, I taught elementary school for 12 years and taught home school for 3 more years. My first love was family.
Silver,
I have to take exception to your characterization of those of us who post our websites as "colorful"....I take great pride in my lackluster, grey.....
John Lester,
I know that your efforts seem right to you, and that you believe that the FLDS should be proud of you for your efforts, but I am not proud of personally attacking anyone. I have done it in the past, and it was as productive as carrying water in your cloth pouch; you just get all wet.
If you learn anything from the FLDS, learn how to be at peace, forgive, and repent... I have a long way to go myself. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" Came right from the devil.
But as far as ol' Blue, I have to laugh at his religious beliefs:
"I don't think that it will be successful at the trial court, nor do I believe that it will be successful on appeal."
Pray harder, o ye of little faith, he hasn't heard you so far!
Pliggy, you must be reading different Scripture than what I read.
I read in Eccelessiates that there is a time for peace; and a time for WAR.
I read elsewhere that there is a time to beat our plowshares into SWORDS.
I also read that Jesus Christ comes back and fights a BLOODY WAR at Armageddon.
I believe in OFFENSE and not DEFENSE.
I believe that you and I disagree on this subject. ;)
-J
Ya know, the best evidence that I
MUST
be doing God's will is that I get it
CONSTANTLY
almost EVERY DAY from both sides...but mostly from the anti-FLDS side.
Strangely enough, now that I think about it, though, TRUTH is, the ONLY time I ever get it from the pro-FLDS side is when I come on Brooke's blog. Right now I have no idea why that is...it does NOT happen from the pro-FLDS on the Trib comments area nor anywhere else from pro-FLDS.
But frankly, in case you haven't noticed, I DON'T CARE.
Here's my FIRM policy.
When somebody complains about my volume, I TURN UP THE KNOB HIGHER. ;)
-J
PS Recent statements from FLDS leaders and FLDS attorneys indicate that they are FINALLY LEARNING that they have to FIGHT.
And besides, WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU FEW HERE WHINING ABOUT ANYWAYS?!
CAN'T YOU READ? cackling
YOU'VE BEEN BEATING THE ABSOLUTE HELL OUT OF BLUES IN GANG TACKLING MOB WARFARE FOR DAYS!
JUST BEATING THE HELL OUT OF HIM!
And I've been sitting back here and enjoying it for days and I post one little short note on a Nazi badge site which is actually some of the best evidence offered here regarding the nastiness of Blues apart from his own posts and
SEVERAL OF Y'ALL HAVE A HISSY FIT!
Y'all are just JEALOUS OF ME, and are just cheesy WHINERS!
Whine, whine, WHINE!
Want some CHEESE with that wine? ;)
*tickle*
-J
I post one little short note on a Nazi badge site which is actually some of the best evidence offered here regarding the nastiness of Blues
It's not evidence of anything. By that logic, you'd characterize lots of museum curators as evil. Your attacks on TBM are frequently nonsensical, such as your insistence that someone from his background would be an eager member of the Klan. Your musings on his secret identity are contradictory.
Sorry, but that's not a refutation.
go over to Grits, find every single post, respond to every single linked argument.
Then that MIGHT be a refutation.
But, in your case, highly doubtful.
Your posts? You mean like the ones in which you insist he was probably Sheriff David Doran? Don't want to. For one thing, your posts there were so repetitive that he warned you to keep yourself to three posts per day.
For another thing, you've gone back on some of your assertions. He's no longer David Doran, he's someone with the initials J.S., according to you.
lucille,
I think it was the ones where ol' blue is afraid to post because the MOST POWERFUL Mr Lester has him on a short leash. (cackle!, just kiddn maaaaan)
Have a great life, Mr Lester! I am not attacking you, just showing that personal attacks (like me saying "Txbigotman") gets more mud on me than he. And is rather counterproductive.I lose credibility and and usefulness.
I appreciate people defending the FLDS, don't get me wrong. It is the false idea that the FLDS NEEED you to do it. Especially by calling people Nazis and KKK based on some relics they have.
I would call it the War of Northern Aggression also, had not foreign countries wanted the split to, slavery was abolished in all of Europe without a war. It was much less about slavery than states rights, even ask Lincoln.
"My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union" -Abe
Again, it's very simple. And it falls under the RULES of debate.
Over on Grits, I put forth an extremely detailed analysis with numerous links.
You either CAN refute it or not.
Lucille can't.
Can anyone else?
No one has been able to yet. ;)
And, by the way, I've NOT gone back on my assertion that he's Sheriff David Doran.
That's a non sequitur ASSumption based on insufficient information on your part.
And Pliggy, take your states right argument and shove it where the sun doesn't shine.
The RIGHT that those states WANTED was the right to practice slavery.
Only idiots make that fig leaf argument.
Y'all wanted to practice slavery. At least have the guts to admit it.
Scripture doesn't ban slavery.
However, that doesn't mean you have to practice it.
I personally have no desire to own a slave.
Folks, there are people ALL over these boards that will WARN you NOT to argue with me UNLESS you want your arses publicly kicked so bad you'll have to pull your own nose out of your own butt JUST TO SNEEZE.
But, if that's what you want, step right up...grins.
PS What really amazes me is when they try to argue Scripture with me.
PPS What was the original article about here anyways? I forgot. Must have been about John Lester, obviously. ;)
By the way, regarding "honest" Abe, that quote reveals what a hypocrite he was, like virtually all politicians.
On the one hand, he decries slavery as one of the "twin relics" of barbarism.
But in pliggy's statement, he really reveals his true feelings. He does't really give a tinker's damn about it one way or the other.
Now, ask yourselves, if you thought something was truly BARBARIC, would you make the kind of statement that "honest" Abe made?
I know I wouldn't. Which is one reason why I made the following post on FACT the other day. To wit:
I've read with my own eyes the "preacher" John MacArthur call Father Abraham an ADULTERER cuz of his Polygyny. Never mind that Jesus told us to DO the works of Abraham. But I've decided to UP THE ANTE. President Abraham Lincoln revealed himself to be an UNscriptural CARNALLY MINDED SINNER...
...when he coined the phrase "the twin relics of barbarism, slavery
and polygamy."
If it were up to me, for that reason alone, the statues we have in America of Abraham Lincoln would come down. NOW.
I'd replace them with statues of Father Abraham, Polygynist.
Hebrews 11:16
But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly:
wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath
prepared for them a city.
Patriarchally yours,
John Lester
PS By the way, that CITY referred to in Hebrew 11:16 below is the same
NEW JERUSALEM
that you'll find described in GREAT detail in Revelation 21 and in
Revelation 21:12
you'll find that the 12 gates of THAT city is guarded by the
polygynous fruit of the 12 sons produced by the polygynous marriage
between the man Jacob/Israel (grandson of Father Abraham) and his 4 wives.
PPS America calls itself a "Christian" nation and yet HAS NOT THE FIRST CLUE what is actually in the Bible it claims it reads but mainly sits on most people's shelves gathering dust. And even those in America that DO READ IT read it with their warped 21st Century Western Culture minds and NOT the Patriarchal Cultural Mindset in which it is written.
The Christian New Testament
COMMANDS
us to conform our MINDS to the CULTURE of the Bible (Romans 12:1-2); NOT conform the Bible to our CULTure.
PPPS And, by the way in case you didn't know it,
THAT CITY IS HEAVEN.
A 1500 cubic mile object that descends from heaven hovering over a NEWLY REMADE EARTH according to Revelation 21. Twelve thousand
furlongs equals 1500 miles.
>>>And finally, Pliggy, as an underview, DO YOU REALIZE HOW STUPID YOU LOOK, as a person who WAS KICKED OUT OF THE FLDS (you were kicked out of the FLDS, correct, or am I thinking of another person), saying some of the things that you do?
I've never been kicked out of any church. I'd have enough SENSE to either abide by their rules or HONORABLY LEAVE in advance if I couldn't or wouldn't.
Dude, if ya wanna mess with me, I'm GONNA mess ya up...grins.
John,
No one bothers to refute you because it simply isn't worth the time, nor energy it takes. You are closed minded and behave like a three yr. old having a tantrum. You bog down the discussions and make people reluctant to participate. You berate people and say silly, petty, unsubstantiated things about individuals.
Txbluesman may be problematic. He is most assuredly wrong in many of his assertions. On the other hand, he is generally polite, and he serves a purpose. He keeps conversation going. You do not.
And frankly, I don't think anyone here really cares, in this context, who he REALLY is. It is of no consequence in this forum.
In polite society there are boundaries respected. Rules of behavior that are paramount to civil discourse.
You ignore boundaries. Ergo, you show nothing but contempt for civil discourse.
You want to dictate and shout. You want to be rude and meanspirited.
No one appreciates that kind of behavior.
You drive people away and force the loss of an important forum. If that is your goal, you are successful.
Despite your rantings, this issue is not one of religious tenets, or biblical dictates. Albeit having its genesis in those beliefs, it is about civil rights, constitutional protections, societal mores vs. small group practices, etc. It is not about scripture.
And blog discussion is not bound to the "rules of debate". In fact most people are not even aware of those rules, nor do they give a hoot about them. You do not set the rules. I'm sure that there are rules concerning language, tenor, etc. of postings. I don't know because I just don't seem to need to read the rules to be in conformity. People who are generally polite usually fall WITHIN most rules.
Your arguments are spurious, at best. Outright ridiculous most of the time. You engender more contempt than good, critical thinking.
If you are as bright as you constantly tell us you are, you will start to rethink your methods, that is if you truly want to be an effective change agent, and not just a ranting, raving lunatic.
Your garbage about Abraham Lincoln is just one small example. The quote from Lincoln that Pliggy posted is not prima facia evidence of him being a hypocrite. In fact much of what he said, over time, shows he was clearly, on a personal level, opposed to slavery. However, in the quote, he was talking about what he would, or would not do, to preserve the union of the United States. He was seperating his personal beliefs from his role as a leader and one responsible for decisions. A quality we deliberately seek in our leaders. One that most fall short of. Yet it is one that is abjectly necessary in the issues at hand concerning the FLDS.
It is abjectly necessary that our leaders put aside their personal feelings about any given aspect of this sect's belief system and look at the issues raised concerning constitutionality......
I have often said, as have many other folks who find themselves defending the FLDS, that I do not personally agree with all that they believe in. I do, however, believe in their right to choose their belief system. And I have an obligation to defend that right.
Please, give thought to what you are doing. Get beyond your visceral reaction to being told you are behaving badly and THINK about what you want to accomplish. If generally being ignored and thought of as a buffoon is your goal, well you're doing a spendid job. If, on the other hand, you want to help change how detractors and antagonists think, you are not going about it n an effective manner.
On that note, I will resume my practice of collapsing all comments in order to ignore yours.
To those others reading this post, now is the time to storm the heavens and the energies around us with our prayers, hopes, wishes, etc. that this congressional foray does no further harm......
Hey, REGS, SIT DOWN AND SHUT UP.
I have watched you HYPOCRITES attack Blues for DAYS!
Viciously.
YOUR HYPOCRISY KNOWS NO BOUNDS.
What disturbs your type MOST is how SEVERELY HONEST I am.
Now,
I
am
NOT
the person here that has STARTED THIS.
But I WILL BE THE PERSON THAT FINISHES IT if that is what YOU DESIRE.
YOu want to RUMBLE?
Let's go.
I'll focus on the ARGUMENTS if YOU WILL.
You want to FIGHT because you
CANNOT
CANNOT
CANNOT
defeat me in pure argumentation.
Period.
So what will it be ARGUMENTS or a FOODFIGHT?
I've been watching you HYPOCRITES foodfight with BLUES for DAYS.
Hypocrites.
That is about as PERSONAL as I will make it.
Hypocrites.
I'm not here to "win friends or influence people."
I'm here to TELL THE TRUTH as I seee it.
You can either LIKE IT or you can LUMP it.
What you will NOT do is SILENCE me.
Capiche?
I have said it before, and I will SAY IT AGAIN,
SAY WHATEVER THE HELL YOU WANT TO SAY.
Doesn't bother me in the least.
If I don't like it, I'll simply refute it.
I won't stamp my feet like an angry little girl and say, NO FAIR!
Whiners, whiners, whiners, whiners, WHINERS!
If I
BEAT YOU
in
EVERY SINGLE ARGUMENT
that does not mean that I am a bully,
IT MEANS THAT YOU ARE WRONG!
You CANNOT BEAT ME in an argument.
That's YOUR PROBLEM, NOT MINE.
I'll fight EVERY SINGLE PERSON ON THIS FORUM AND I'LL DEFEAT EVERY SINGLE ONE OF YOU IF THAT IS WHAT YOU WANT.
LET'S GO! grins
And I will say ONCE AGAIN, the
LAST TIME I CHECKED this
ARTICLE
IS NOT ABOUT JOHN LESTER.
YOU HAVE turned the FOCUS upon ME, NOT I.
IF YOU WANT TO FOCUS ON ME INSTEAD OF THIS ARTICLE,
THAT
IS
YOUR
CHOICE.
You should ask yourselves, however, why?
I will go in the DIRECTION THAT YOU CHOOSE.
Which will it be, children? ;)
It's like being a SUPERIOR ATHLETE.
If I have the PHYSICAL ABILITY to STOMP YOU INTO THE GROUND, should I STOP PLAYING TO MY FULL POTENTIAL jut because you are NOT AS GOOD?!
Hell no!
THAT IS NOT THE AMERICAN WAY!
It is YOU that MUST BECOME BETTER TO MEET MY CHALLENGE!
Not *I* that MUST PLAY DOWN TO YOUR LEVEL.
Meet the competition or be beat.
It's that simple.
I WILL NOT OPERATE AT ANYTHING LESS THAN MY FULL GOD-GIVEN ABILITY.
It would DISHONOR THE GOD WHO CREATED ME TO DO ANY LESS.
I do NOT ASK YOU to DO LESS
I ASK YOU TO DO MORE.
But that's YOUR CALL. ;)
And besides, Regs, you're just PISSED because you joined my forum and tried to debate me on Scripture and I publicly KICKED YOUR ASS all over the board. ;)
PS Unarmed people shouldn't fight trained commandos. But don't feel bad, you're about woman # 5 or # 6 that has made THAT mistake. They're all memorialized in the archives. You lasted no longer than any of them did. :)
PPS The one thing I will, metaphorically speaking, fight one to the DEATH over is Scripture. Don't even go there with me.
The
PROOF
that I am a
PROPHET
are the NEVER ENDING ATTACKS.
It is a prelude to MURDER that ALL TRUE PROPHETS EVENTUALLY SUFFER.
And your CHARGES ARE BULLSHIT, Regs!
Here's the PROOF!
You tell me to SHUT UP!
The ONLY TIME I TELL YOU TO SHUT UP IS WHEN YOU HAVE TOLD ME TO SHUT UP!
What is MY CONSISTENT MESSAGE?
Speak your heart.
Speak your mind.
SAY WHATEVER THE HELL YOU WANT TO SAY.
If I disagree with it, I will REFUTE IT.
Can you cite me EVER IN THE HISTORY OF THIS PLANET ever tell
ANYBODY TO NOT LISTEN TO ANYBODY?
I AM THE PERSON THAT ALWAYS TELLS EVERYBODY TO LISTEN TO EVERYBODY!
I even listen to an IDIOT, like you Reg.
AND I WILL CONTINUE TO LISTEN TO AN IDIOT LIKE YOU REG.
Now, keep it up, or I'll tell you what I REALLY think! grins ;))
John, You're an idiot.
You most certainly did not "beat me" in any argument. I CHOSE to stop arguing because it is futile.
I showed you quite clearly how your argument(s) were wrong.
I joined the group at the invitation of another member, not knowing you had anything to do with it. Had I known, I would not have joined.
I left because you behave so badly.
And, by the way, I had several personal emails from your members telling me they both appreciated my argument and substantiation and were amused with my handling of you.
You are a blowhard.
I sincerely hope that others do not shy away because of you, rather, they just collapse the comments and ignore yours.
It was a great idea that Grits had in limiting you to three comments per day...the rest of us then did not have to suffer you intermidably, daily...
It's not a non-sequitur. You said a few threads down that his initials are J.S. That is incompatible with the claim that he's Doran. You're looking sillier by the moment.
Now, are we going to talk about ME all day long?
Or are we going to talk about the article? and REASONABLE tangents that slightly deviate from the article like all discussion slightly deviate.
Here's a prayer that I posted on my blog today. To wit:
Pray today that the San Angelo MAJORITY BIGOTS on the Grand Jury will be SHOUTED DOWN by the decent minded minority that will HOPEFULLY and PRAYERFULLY be present.
It's not a non-sequitur. You said a few threads down that his initials are J.S. That is incompatible with the claim that he's Doran. You're looking sillier by the moment.
>>>False information. What I stated still stands.
You have INSUFFICIENT information.
I have a high-placed FLDS source who has told me that a REPORTER thinks that Blues is a certain university law professor whose initials are JS.
I've been playing with Bluesy trying to test his reaction to that theory.
Because that university law professor specializes in FAMILY LAW, I think it is
INCOMPATIBLE
with Bluesy's public claim of being involved in LABOR LAW on behalf of police officers.
I have access to multiple information sources, grapevines, etc that you're simply not plugged into my dear.
For you to take a single sentence or two and try to EXTRAPOLATE successfully from that is rather foolish.
And when I want to let you in on everything I know or have access to, I'll let you know.
But don't hold your breath. ;)
Reggie, you're not the only woman on my board that
DEFIES SCRIPTURE IN YOUR MIND AND YOUR HEART
regarding Scripture's plain and uneqivocal view of women from Genesis to Revelation.
I know that women on my OWN BOARD (as well as a few men)
PRIVATELY BITCH AND MOAN ABOUT THAT
but their argument is with God and not me.
The interesting thing is is that they never seem to UNsubscribe.
In fact, if I'm not mistaken, YOU are still subscribed at this VERY MOMENT.
You were at least the last time I checked.
I'll check again here in a second.
JL, no one is talking about yourself more than you are.
There's a difference between criticizing someone for his comments and being so obsessed that you try to dig up imaginary skeletons in the closet. Your behavior is the latter. Scot on Grits For Breakfast told you to cut it out - that should have been a clue. No-one sensible cares about his secret identity, only about the arguments he's making. If you are really digging into learning who he is, that borders on stalking.
Yep. There you are, your renami address, STILL SUBSCRIBED.
;)
PS There isn't a TRUE PREACHER ALIVE that doesn't have SOME or ALOT of his congregation quietly grumbling about him at some time or another about some subject or another.
GOES WITH THE TERRITORY.
If you want somebody who will NEVER OFFEND YOU then go listen to JOEL OSTEEN.
I am NOT JOEL OSTEEN and PROUDLY SO!
I will say it AGAIN and AGAIN and AGAIN.
It is YOU that are making this ABOUT ME.
I will defend myself and I will COUNTERATTACK as long as you continue to attack me.
If you want to focus on the article, and if you want to focus on arguments, hey, I'm all for that...
Lucille, I haven't been obsessing about his identity on this thread.
You have been.
I posted one brief post on it.
Is it that time of the month for you two?
MUST BE. ;)
How do you know I'm not post-menopausal? ;p
And Reg, tell the REAL TRUTH.
After your VICIOUS email to me in which you called me EVERY UGLY NAME IN THE BOOK, what was my response to you?
I waited a whole day to respond to you.
Then I wrote to you THAT I LOVED YOU.
I think that that is probably what actually angers you the most.
lucille...
****FIVES****.......and a hearty laugh
Post menopausal can oftentimes be the worst
Hot flashes can produce LITERAL MURDERS for years after as the hormones are settling down...
;)
Anybody who knows anything about women is that MOST of them LOVE to argue and FIGHT (verbally, although some even physically).
Most men don't want to do that because their fight or flight hormones produce to much of a powerfl negative reaction in them.
Well, I deal with it, and FIGHT ANYWAYS.
That's why women like Regs and Lucille ADORE ME.
But they'll never admit it.
There are entire comic strips written about women LOVING to fight.
I'm trying to remember the one...wasn't it called ROSE?
Yeah, that was the comic strip, ROSE, Rose would
CONSTANTLY BITCH AND COMPLAIN ABOUT HER HUSBAND BECAUSE HE WOLDN'T FIGHT WITH HER.
Guys, I'm just making these crazy women HAPPY. ;)
http://www.comics.com/comics/roseisrose/
>>>Look thru enough of these Rose daily comics, and I
GUARANTEE YOU
that eventually you will find one of Rose saying of her husband,
EWWWWWWWWWWWW! He won't FIGHT WITH ME!
>>>as it was and I'm sure still is a recurring theme with Rose in that comic strip.
John,
Just in case you've forgotten what I wrote to you,and you must have because I was really quite civil to you, despite your claims, here's a cut and paste of the text of my note;
John,
Just for the record;
I am not going to participate on your forum any further.
You have some sort of serious control issue(s) that cause you to be a rude, mean-spirited, crazy person.
The world is made up, and made beautiful, by all sorts of folks...everyone of whom is entitled to be treated with respect.
I get to choose, for the most part, who I interact with, and when. I CHOOSE to not interact with you, or anyone else who doesn't have a clue about how to behave in a socially acceptable manner. You are a bully and a braggart...two things I am personally repulsed by.
I gave you the benefit of the doubt. I thought perhaps you could actually have a civil conversation without using your bullying tactics. Clearly you can't.
Consequently, I want no part of your ridiculous power games.
You are no prophet! You are a pitiful swaggering hoax......
Cordially,
Reg, that's the interesting thing.
That which you accuse me of, I DO NOT DO.
That which you accuse me of, YOU DO DO.
I don't attack someone UNLESS THEY ATTACK ME FIRST.
Or someone or something I love.
You can maintain that opinion. THAT is your right.
But you couldn't produce a link here proving it TO SAVE YOUR LIFE.
I could go down the list and name person after person after person after person.
Who attacked first? Pliggy or John Lester?
Pliggy attacked me first.
Weeks ago. He knows that that is true.
Just one day out of the blue just took a swipe at me.
Just like he took a swipe at his religion and his Prophet when he screwed up the first time.
Just continuing on true to form.
You go find me a link where I go around, out of the blue, just attacking someone.
I don't do it.
You'll expire of old age before you can prove it.
But as I *always* say, you are ENTITLED TO YOUR OPINIONS. ;)
PS And I STILL LOVE YOU Reg. And that is a SINCERE FEELING on my part. It's not contrived or designed to make you mad or any sch thing. It's what is IN my heart. ;)
To JL -
The God I know is a God of peace, love and patience (something He needs a lot of when it comes to you). His Prophet is not a bragging, vulgar, rude, offensive and basically all-around disrespectful, disgusting smartassed person named John Lester.
Mr. Lester, when you read the scriptures, why don't you concentrate on the CHARACTERS of the Prophets. All are men of peace and modesty and yet they managed to get what God required of them done without a bunch of foul mouthed language and without bragging.
Sure you can fling back alot of bad-mannered, uncouth, discourteous, unrefined, rude, ill-mannered, rough, loutish, and boorish language at me, but what good would it do? It wouldn't make me feel any better...and I KNOW it doesn't make you feel good about yourself no matter what you say.
"The Spirit of God is the Spirit of Peace and the spirit of unrest is the spirit of the devil" That quote is from the Prophet of God. You are a very fine example of unrest! Satan, too, can inspire and give revelations.
Reg, I didn't bully you on my board.
I refuted your poor Scriptural presentation and "interpretation" with a vastly superior one.
My arguments were so overwhelmingly more effective than yours, and so well documented, coherent, precise, POWERFUL, etc. that you stamped off like a temper tantrum-ed little girl.
And you're still behaving that way now.
The ONLY thing that you could POSSIBLY complain about in the arguments that I made to you was that I defined you,
AND I STILL DO,
as a Secular Atheist Humanist.
And I don't care IF you say that you DO believe.
Whatever you believe in, it certainly isn't in the Patriarchal God of Scripture.
Perhaps you're a pagan or a Wiccan or something.
Maybe sometime you'll let us know what you believe in...
...what it is, I'll probably re-sum it up as what I summed it up as before.
Secular Atheism Humanism.
Again, THAT CLAIM OF MINE is the only thing that I wrote that you could POSSIBLY call "rude," and I will
NEVER
retract that statement until I see some evidence from you that changes my opinion of you on that matter.
So guess what, Reg?
IT'S NOW ALL ABOUT YOU!
We're talking about YOU now, Reg.
Apparently that's what YOU wanted.
I certainly didn't.
Shall we get back to talking about the article?
Nice weather out today here in SLC.
;)
You need to read both your Scripture and your JOSEPH SMITH better.
Both prove that what you call "swear words" are NOT sin and are NOT NEGATIVE REFLECTIONS of personal character.
You want the analysis? I have already provided that on my board.
In FACT, Joseph Smith states QUITE PLAINLY that usually the "godly men" that DECRY an honest man that IS SO CONFIDENT OF HIS RIGHT RELATIONSHIP WITH GOD that he doesn't have to make a pretentious show of false "holiness," are always the POOR EXAMPLES of True Christianity themselves.
I refer to them as LDS CHOIR BOYS. And I'm not saying that in a complementary way either.
I have found SOME of them in the FLDS.
However, generally speaking, I find the FLDS a MUCH heartier lot.
And there's just as many Evangelicals that fall into that category as well.
BUT BY FAR THE WORSE IS THE LDS.
Most of them are SO PRISSY they almost make me want to VOMIT.
You want the quote from Joseph Smith? I think I put in on my board.
I originally read it while in an old book store in St George about two weeks back.
As far as me speaking well of myself,
IN CASE YOU HAVEN'T NOTICE I LOVE MYSELF AS SCRIPTURE COMMANDS.
If you watch me carefully, however, I say GOOD THINGS ABOUT OTHER PEOPLE CONSTANTLY.
When they deserve it.
If you want to see examples of that, come to my blog.
I do it DAILY.
My NATURE is to LIFT UP, NOT TO TEAR DOWN.
When I find falsehood, however, THAT MUST BE TORN DOWN IN ORDER TO BE BUILT UP.
Here's your quote:
I love that man better who swears a stream as long as my arm yet deals justice to his neighbors and mercifully deals his substance to the poor, than the long, smooth-faced hypocrite. (Joseph Smith, History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 7 Vols. 5:401)
Where is the board you keep referring to? Maybe you could add a link in your blogger profile.
Keep watching the blogger profile, Lucille, because I'll be adding a full-blown blog to my Google Group.
Lucille, Here's the link...hope it works...if it doesn't, email me and I'll send it to you through email...
http://groups.google.com/group/fatherabrahamschildrentogether/topics?hl=en&start=
Further proof that I'm not here to promote me, or my group, or anything else about me, if you want to find my Google Group, you'll have to find it on your own.
Ordinarily, I will, on rare occasion, post links to it on other blogs.
Because I've been falsely accused of false self-promotion here (when in reality it has been self-defense), I won't link the Grop on this thread.
Find it yourself. It's called
Father Abraham's Children Together.
FACT.
Now I've got the people claiming that I was trying to make this blog about ME posting
LINKS TO MY BLOG
when I refuse to do so.
Now, tell us again, WHO here is obsessed with me?
*chuckling*
One of our FACT members posted (in a complementary way) that I am
THE REAL SLIM SHADY. To wit:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99HdRxlJzV4
>>>And so I am.
I don't give a FLYING ---- what ANY long-faced dour hypocrite religionist (as Joseph Smith would put it) thinks or says about it.
I will SPEAK THE TRUTH, I will speak the truth to "power" and I will DIE SPEAKING THE TRUTH about Scripture and what it plainly says.
I AM THE REAL SLIM SHADY.
AND I STAND UP EVERY DAY.
Enimem ROCKS! I have always loved him...wish he would COME BACK! But genius appears and does as it pleases. ;)
What that proves is the character of Joseph Smith! That he was generous, loving, kind and honest.
Bleu, when you study Joseph Smith as much as I have, and when you understand him as well as I do, then you will even LOVE HIM as much as I DO.
But regarding the subject of "swearing," as deep a revelation as Joseph Smith received on it, I have an even deeper revelation of what it is and what constitutes "corrupt communications."
Except the revelation really isn't mine.
It's what the Apostle Paul plainly teaches about CORRUPT EVIL COMMUNICATIONS.
Religionists engage in EVIL CORRUPT COMMUNICATIONS every single day in
GROSS VIOLATION OF HOLY SCRIPTURE
without ever uttering a "swear" word (which is NOT prohibited by Scripture).
In fact, egregious examples of it have been occuring here both before and after my appearance.
Regarding myself, I can HONESTLY SAY BEFORE GOD, I do
NOT
say
ANYTHING
to
ANYBODY
without a
POSITIVE PURPOSE OR INTENT
behind it. You may question it's accuracy, but you will never be able to successfully question its sincerity in desiring to administer GOOD AND POSITIVE REFORM in the minds and souls and spirits of the hearer.
Now, I'm fully aware of the verse that says SPEAK THE TRUTH IN LOVE.
Notice the ORDER, however.
SPEAK THE TRUTH.
Then, when they're sitting there DAZED, ADD THE LOVE. ;)
Now, I am
GETTING BORED TO DEATH TALKING ABOUT ME.
Shall we talk about someone else?
Joseph Smith?
Teresa Jeffs?
Etc?
Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go, Dan Truman, keyboardist for 13-time-grammy nominated Diamond Rio, a friend of mine is coming over to my place tomorrow night.
And yes, he knows about my "crazy" religious ideas. He laughs and says that I remind him of his "crazy" roommates at BYU that were "really into theology."
Dan IS COOL. :)
never argue with a fool or a drunk.both are incapable of logic or reason.
I was goint to talk about the fact that Abe Lincoln did not coin, or use, the "twin relics" phrase. His (third) party did as part of their platform, but lost the election, four years before he ran. And that ending slavery wasnt included in the war goals until a year after the Civil war started. And that slavery didn't end for several years after the war... basically that war was not necessary to end slavery, which I also obhore.
Mr Lester, I would accept a debate challenge from you any day, on any subject except your personal life. The only condition is you can't be the judge of who wins too.
But I know your personal self esteem is low, or you wouln't need to tell anyone when to clap.
HAVE
A
HAPPY
DAY
Regina, Lucille,
Thanks for the support, even if we do disagree on most of the issues.
I would ignore JL if I were you - he's not worth the time or effort.
actually ol' blue,
you love him posting because he makes you look "good"
you are wrong-er than he.
Whimpering leftovers of both recent and past public ass whoopings...
;)
You people are pathetic narcissisits who must have no lives whatsoever. There is not one of you posting here that is an above-average intellect. Get over yourselves and stay on topic.
So, Frimble, you got so fired up over the comments you registered with Blogger just to let us know how you felt.
I love you too.
"Blessed is the man who, having nothing to say, abstains from giving us wordy evidence of the fact."
Post a Comment
<< Home