Depositions in Texas
Here is the story from Paul Anthony we ran today about Natalie Malonis' deposition of Merril Jessop yesterday in San Angelo.
FLDS leader wants to plead the Fifth Sect
Jessop's attorneys argue he shouldn't have to answer financial questions.
By Paul A. Anthony
San Angelo Standard-times
Updated: 01/23/2009 09:14:07 PM MST
San Angelo, Texas
Even after eight hours in a Schleicher County courtroom Friday, the deposition of YFZ Ranch leader Merril Jessop may not be over.
Attorneys for the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Later-Day Saints elder and his alleged teenage daughter-in-law will argue in court Monday over whether Jessop should be able to plead Fifth Amendment protection to a series of questions regarding the polygamous sect's financial structure.
"There are quite a few [answers] that are in controversy," said Natalie Malonis, the Denton, Texas, attorney representing a 17-year-old daughter of FLDS leader Warren Jeffs. "He answered some of it. I hope that on Monday when we have our hearing,[the judge] will compel answers."
District Judge Barbara Walther set the hearing, Malonis said, after compelling testimony in a 30-minute telephone proceeding on some efforts by Jessop to plead the Fifth, which protects witnesses from being forced to give answers under oath that could incriminate them.
The sect's own documents describe the girl as having been married to Jessop's 36-year-old son. Jessop, 72, has been indicted by a Schleicher County grand jury on charges of orchestrating an illegal marriage ceremony involving a different underage girl.
Malonis said she has not contested all of Jessop's Fifth Amendment pleadings, but that she asked Walther to compel testimony on questions of the sect's
Advertisement
finances.
"He may be the only person who can answer that information," she said.
Malonis has said she is looking for ways to provide her client with financial options once she turns 18 in July.
Jessop's criminal attorney, Amy Hennington of San Angelo, who represented him during the civil deposition, could not be reached for comment.
Testimony began about 9 a.m. and the gaggle of attorneys, representing Jessop, the state's Child Protective Services agency, the girl and her mother, Annette Jeffs, left the courthouse just before 5 p.m.
Jessop has been the leader of the ranch since the Jeffs' 2006 arrest and has long been considered the self-styled prophet's chief deputy. The reclusive figure is one of 12 FLDS men indicted on evidence seized in a weeklong April raid on the ranch by CPS investigators and the Texas Rangers.
Authorities removed 439 children from the ranch, and although most have been returned, a handful of custody cases, including the one involving the 17-year-old girl, remain pending in Tom Green County district court.
FLDS leader wants to plead the Fifth Sect
Jessop's attorneys argue he shouldn't have to answer financial questions.
By Paul A. Anthony
San Angelo Standard-times
Updated: 01/23/2009 09:14:07 PM MST
San Angelo, Texas
Even after eight hours in a Schleicher County courtroom Friday, the deposition of YFZ Ranch leader Merril Jessop may not be over.
Attorneys for the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Later-Day Saints elder and his alleged teenage daughter-in-law will argue in court Monday over whether Jessop should be able to plead Fifth Amendment protection to a series of questions regarding the polygamous sect's financial structure.
"There are quite a few [answers] that are in controversy," said Natalie Malonis, the Denton, Texas, attorney representing a 17-year-old daughter of FLDS leader Warren Jeffs. "He answered some of it. I hope that on Monday when we have our hearing,[the judge] will compel answers."
District Judge Barbara Walther set the hearing, Malonis said, after compelling testimony in a 30-minute telephone proceeding on some efforts by Jessop to plead the Fifth, which protects witnesses from being forced to give answers under oath that could incriminate them.
The sect's own documents describe the girl as having been married to Jessop's 36-year-old son. Jessop, 72, has been indicted by a Schleicher County grand jury on charges of orchestrating an illegal marriage ceremony involving a different underage girl.
Malonis said she has not contested all of Jessop's Fifth Amendment pleadings, but that she asked Walther to compel testimony on questions of the sect's
Advertisement
finances.
"He may be the only person who can answer that information," she said.
Malonis has said she is looking for ways to provide her client with financial options once she turns 18 in July.
Jessop's criminal attorney, Amy Hennington of San Angelo, who represented him during the civil deposition, could not be reached for comment.
Testimony began about 9 a.m. and the gaggle of attorneys, representing Jessop, the state's Child Protective Services agency, the girl and her mother, Annette Jeffs, left the courthouse just before 5 p.m.
Jessop has been the leader of the ranch since the Jeffs' 2006 arrest and has long been considered the self-styled prophet's chief deputy. The reclusive figure is one of 12 FLDS men indicted on evidence seized in a weeklong April raid on the ranch by CPS investigators and the Texas Rangers.
Authorities removed 439 children from the ranch, and although most have been returned, a handful of custody cases, including the one involving the 17-year-old girl, remain pending in Tom Green County district court.
250 Comments:
This post has been removed by the author.
It is none ones buisness how Teresa will be supported after she turns 18.
Wille nor Merril Jessop is her er legal guardians and her father is in jail. They can't hold them accountable for her financial well being.
She is make a demand of how Teresa is going to be supported after she is 18?
Does CPS do this to all 18 year old clients whose fathers are in jail?
I am absolutely speechless...
I am just shocked!
What is Molonis going to do get a child support order from Willie or Merril to put Teresa through college?
I am totally shocked as to how far these people are pushing their authority to get into FLDS financial affairs.
Rubytuesday said...
I am just shocked!
What is Molonis going to do get a child support order from Willie or Merril to put Teresa through college?
---------
If she does, you can be sure Malonis will be in charge of the money, making decisions on how Teresa can spend it and bleeding it dry like Wisan.
Someone say somthing!
Does anyone think all these arrests are going to leave woman like Teresa better off? Does anyone think she will have a better future now that CPS has saved her?
If she does, you can be sure Malonis will be in charge of the money, making decisions on how Teresa can spend it and bleeding it dry like Wisan. - First Amendment
-----
They are not her legal guardians so how is that possible? That woman is really....really exerting her authority way too far.
Rubytuesday
CPS is her legal guardian and Malonis can file a lawsuit on her behalf.
Whether any of this will make things better is anyone's guess. No one can predict the future....
This post has been removed by the author.
I am going to be honest....I have never heard of such insanity in my entire life.
1. The judge thinking of taking nursing babies away from mothers. (Has anyone ever heard of one species of animals that would do that to each other?)
2. I have never heard of an animal being guarded so that a newborn baby can be taken away as soon as it is born.
3. Going after religious leaders for child support for a 18 year old just made the top 3.
Rubytuesday
It wouldn't be for child support, it would be some sort of civil suit against the FLDS for damages.
The odds of ever getting anything are small. However, folks with dirty laundry will sometimes pay to keep people from digging in their drawers.
They most loathe these people as if they are the scum of the earth.
I hope someone steps in here soon, no group of people deserve these kinds of violations.
This is all for money and nothing else.
As far as I am concerned Molonis just stooped to a new low.
Ron, when she said "They are not her legal guardians", I think she might have meant Merrill Jessop. I really wonder how FLDS leadership even remotely have any legal duty to provide for Teresa.
And, like Rubytuesday, I'm wondering, "Does CPS do this to all 18 year old clients whose fathers are in jail?" I've never heard of such a case.
This post has been removed by the author.
Dang... maybe while they're at it they can get the USCCB to pay for my brother and sister to go to college.
Lucille
You're right there is no legal duty. It would have to be a civil suit for damages.
As to your "does CPS do this..." comment, remember, this is not CPS driving this pony.
Let me revise my last statement:
As far as I am concerned Molonis just stooped to a new level of low.
Oh come on folks...
Hypothetically don't you think that abusers should pay the people they victimize?
How many folks here think the FLDS should sue the pants off CPS and win? Come on - don't be shy - raise those hands....
Before all you folks fly into fits of faux outrage remember Malonis sees her client as a victim and the FLDS as the abuser.
She's not advocating for a position any different that all you folks that raised your virtual hands.
Geez, glass houses....
A suit for damages, eh?
1 - is Malonis qualified to handle tort (do I have the term right?) claims?
2 - What, exactly, would the 'damages' be awarded for?
3 - Does Malonis have a chance of ramming this through in a couple months before Teresa severs ties with her for good?
Hypothetically don't you think that abusers should pay the people they victimize?
She was abused by Merrill Jessop?
Oh, yeah - and who would be set up as the manager of the trust?
Ron, do you really, honest and truly feel that Teresa feels as though she was victimized? HONESTLY?
Can you possibly imagine being a 17 year old prophets daughter going through this?
Seriously?
Rubytuesday said...
Let me revise my last statement:
As far as I am concerned Molonis just stooped to a new level of low.
------------
Malonis has already set the bar so low that it's hard for even her to get under it. Appearing on the Nancy Grace show, telling the world that her client is married and has hidden a child. Only some form of sentient slime mold could go lower.
Does Malonis have a chance of ramming this through in a couple months before Teresa severs ties with her for good?
--------
I can't even imagine what it would be like to be in these gals shoes. She must be absolutely livid!
Malonis has already set the bar so low that it's hard for even her to get under it. Appearing on the Nancy Grace show, telling the world that her client is married and has hidden a child. Only some form of sentient slime mold could go lower.
------------
I feel bad for her..I truly do. I hope she can stay focused throughout all this. It has to be tough to be her. This is a going to have a tramatic effect on her for the rest of her life.
This should be interesting...
Every child in alternative placements that are about to age out of the system should be lining up their ad litems to go after daddy's pennies...
right....I see that happening...
I said it the other day, I'll say it again...I think this is other folks using Malonis as a back door to info they can't otherwise get, at least not yet..
It's not about Teresa...it's about wanting a crack at Merril and Willie Jessop earlier in the game than their own hearings and trials....
So what we already read it. Why not post some information we don't already know, like Malonis' reasoning behind the relationship behind the YFZ ownership and one of its tenants. Is she still under the impression that they all were not only one household, but one family and Merril was the father? Boy Malonis must be becoming a convert to the idea of patriarchy.
Or maybe she's just waging a war for the heart of Teresa Jeffs. The Pervert.
Malonis likes the spotlight. Keeping the circus going keeps the spotlights lit.
Ron: Oh come on folks...
Hypothetically don't you think that abusers should pay the people they victimize?
Ron, Malonis didn't mention filing a civil law suit for damages. She said Trust Fund. That doesn't sound like a law suit to me. Where do you get the idea of a lawsuit for damages? You've been reading too many ex-FLDS books.
Nothing is more pitiful than trying to save someone who doesn't want saving.
Malonis is going by the book that says abused don't leave their abusers and when they do leave, most return to the abusive relationship. So no matter what anyone says, Malonis is going to keep trying to "save" Teresa.
At what point does the "savior" become the abuser. AT WHAT POINT can the AAL be charged with harrassment or stalking?
Regina said:
I said it the other day, I'll say it again...I think this is other folks using Malonis as a back door to info they can't otherwise get, at least not yet..
It's not about Teresa...it's about wanting a crack at Merril and Willie Jessop earlier in the game than their own hearings and trials....
I'm not so sure about the "using Malonis" part, but obviously Malonis' actions are going to be used by a number of folks in various ways. It's a definite factor, I just don't know if it's the primary reason.
Ron, Malonis strikesme as one of those folks who would never see herself as a pawn. So I'm guessing she has some b.s. rationale for what she is doing, and someone with other purposes pumped her up to believe she had a snowballs chance at prevailing....
If Walther rules that Merrill or the UEP or anyone else is responsible for setting up a trust for her support after she turns 18, I really hope every ad litem in the country jumps on this for every kid where there ever was a finding of abuse or neglect.....
I could be wrong...but I don't think even Walther wants to open up that can of worms...and I cannot, for the life of me, figure a way she could create a rational construct that would assure this remains uniqe to Teresa...no way.....
Rubytuesday asked:
Ron, do you really, honest and truly feel that Teresa feels as though she was victimized? HONESTLY?
No, I don't think she feels victimized. I'll bet once again she's none too pleased with her ad litem.
I'm just not shocked or outraged over it. If I were the lawyers for the other side, I'd be making a lot of noise about how 1) what she's asking is not relevant (at this time) and 2)what a colossal fishing expedition the whole thing is.
Sounds like they're going to have some sort of court hearing over whether they need to answer some of the questions, so I guess we'll see what happens.
Regina
I think your analysis is pretty sound. I do wonder if Walther will shut down this ring of the 3 ring circus. We'll see pretty shortly.
On the story posted by brooke, there were parts left out. Amy Hennington representing Merrill Jessop and Willie Jessop in court, originally said, she would need to postpone the depositions because she would be unavailable.
But in the second article written today by Paul Anthony,this is what occured.
*****************************
In her motion to compel the men's testimony, Malonis said attorneys for the mother, Annette Jeffs, had listed them as potential witnesses in a trial scheduled for March.
"Once somebody told us they had us as a witness, we were more than happy to comply," Hennington said. "Then it was just my issue."
So, it seems Annette Jeffs is working with Ms Malonis. Maybe she doesn't want to go back to Flds with her children, maybe Teresa doesn't want to return either, Therefore Ms Malonis is trying to get a trust fund set up, so the mother and children can live on their own.
Harley, Where, out of what is written, not your imagination, do you get that Malonis and Annette are working together??????
Hmm, well lets see Rericson,, The article said, Attorneys for Annette Jeffs, Teresa Jeffs, and Merrill and Willie's attorney Ms Hennington were all there during the questioning.
It was Annette Jeffs that put the two of them down as witnessess.
Testimony began about 9 a.m. and the gaggle of attorneys - representing Jessop, the state's Child Protective Services agency, the girl and her mother, Annette Jeffs - left the courthouse just before 5 p.m.
And I'll ask you again, where do you get the idea that Malonis and Anette are working together????
There is absolutely nothing, zip, zero, nada, that indicates that Malonis and Anette are working together.
Annette has asked for the trial. She intends to call both Willie and Merrill Jessop as witnesses. So her atty. would obviously be present at a deposition.
Willie and Merrill are under indictment for charges related to the same set of events. Clearly they are going to be represented.
Malonis, as ad litem for Teresa, whose custody is at issue in the trial asked for by her mother, is the one wanting to depose Willie and Merrill Jessop, ostensibly to garner a 'heads up' on what the testimony at trial of these gentlemen will be. Also to get their testimony on record to assure they do not perjure themselves during the trial.
Ad litems for the other children may also have been present. As well as counsel for CPS...
Where, in any of that, do you get that Malonis is working with anyone, much less Annette????
What do you mean Merrill has nothing to do with this case, He was a witness for the marriage of Teresa to His son.
Harley, you pulled that one straight out of your derierre....no one has even suggested that Merrill is not a party to this.....
Rericson, Annette Jeffs and Teresa were in court themselves friday.
Why do you think its far reaching to think Annette Jeffs may be working with Malonis???
What do you mean Annette has asked for a trial? I saw nothing like that?
Uh...maybe because Malonis has done everything in her power to ruin Teresa's life, from hers and her mother's perspective??????
Maybe because Malonis has done nothing but lie about Teresa from the onset....
Being in the same courtroom, being involved in the same case, breathing the same air, are not the makings of allies.....
This is a civil deposition, Not a criminal one
Please give me your source that Annette Jeffs has ask for a trial Rericson??
Well, unless I have completely missed the boat, and it wouldn't be the first time...I thought Annette was the one who asked for a trial to determine custody of all her minor children.....
I don't follow every little nuance so I may be wrong...but then what is the upcoming trial?????
Well then if annette wanted a trial, it wouldn't be malonis calling for a deposition, it would be Annette Jeffs lawyers.
No, Harley...Annette's attys provide other counsel with a list of the witnesses they intend to call. Any of the other attys can depose the witnesses prior to the trial....
It's almost never done in this kind of action, but Malonis decided she wanted to depose them.....
Regina
I think your analysis is pretty sound. I do wonder if Walther will shut down this ring of the 3 ring circus. We'll see pretty shortly.-Ron
-----
I doubt it. Teresa wanted to get rid of Molonis months ago and Walther wouldn't hear of it.
There is a great deal of heat and someone is going to get burned.
I mean let's get real, they took every record those people had and they are still prying for more financial information, what does that tell you?
I have to admit I did not read all the comments here yet.
Any theory involving a civil suit for Teresa's sake runs into the problem of her turning 18 before the case makes it through discovery.
"He may be the only person who can answer that information," she said.
So what? Just because he's allegedly "the only one" who knows something, that means we can suspend his Fifth Amendment rights? I guess I missed that section of the Patriot Act. Can we torture him too?
Malonis has said she is looking for ways to provide her client with financial options once she turns 18 in July.
Start a charity fund, Natalie.
"So what? Just because he's allegedly "the only one" who knows something, that means we can suspend his Fifth Amendment rights? I guess I missed that section of the Patriot Act. Can we torture him too?"
lol, you're hyperbole knows no bounds does it? A deposition is the same as TORTURE? hahahaha Or is it just the part where they get to go back before the judge to determine whether or not he has to answer those questions.
Ooooh, you've asked me something I don't like -- How DARE you violate my 5th Amendmant right? lol
3 - Does Malonis have a chance of ramming this through in a couple months before Teresa severs ties with her for good?-Lucille
I believe guardianship, for parents anyway, can be extended beyond 18. I'm not sure what has to be proven, but that's a scarey thought.
I think this is other folks using Malonis as a back door to info they can't otherwise get, at least not yet.-R
Just as LE used CPS to get DNA and other 'evidence' they couldn't have gotten otherwise. The pattern repeats.
It's not about Teresa...it's about wanting a crack at Merril and Willie Jessop earlier in the game than their own hearings and trials....
May be that Malonis is attempting to set a precedent- get money from someone other than a parent and then set herself up as the fiduciary.
What happens to funds in a trust that aren't used for the purpose the fiduciary has required. Say there's 40K in there for college, but the recipient doesn't desire to attend college. What then? What if the requirements are so narrow that the recipient never benefits from the trust?
I had a friend who threatened to sue her mother for mishandling her fiduciary responsibilities regarding a trust her father left her. The money was there, but momma held the purse strings and manipulated hell out of her daughter.
Religion Can Not Actually Be Patriarchal
The True Trinity: Mother, Son, and Absent Dad
Excellent essay, Rebeckah. Have a read and see if anything makes a shift in your disgust of men.
Excerpt.
Now let's begin to put all of this together to see why Religion cannot actually be patriarchal. When I was still living in Arlington, VA, an acquaintance of mine - a brilliant man by the name of Raymond Skinner - introduced me to a concept that I have since termed the number-one axiom for the entire world and for all time: “Mother gets to the children first!” Every mother that has ever existed has been virtually unchallenged and uninhibited from having direct control and influence over infants and small children. And in Erskine and Moursund's 1998 book Integrative Psychotherapy in Action we read that “Freud, in asserting that the experiences of infancy and early childhood form a foundation upon which the adult personality is based, blazed a trail for later therapists to follow” (40). And I assert that because Mother gets to the children first, it will be to Her that they remain primarily loyal throughout their lives. Consider the one thing that everyone in the world wants: to have as many accepting, devoted, and unquestioning followers as possible. I have already shown that people are the primary part of our environment that we need to control in order to maintain our personal power quota. (In other words, the townsfolk storming your castle door with torches and pitchforks is a bad sign.) Mother gets her loyal followers by default from absent fathers. This has been from the beginning. And over the epochs, our world society has accordingly been shaped and controlled, not by our fall guy the “Patriarchy,” but by Collective Motherhood. It has been a simple matter during child rearing for Mother to reinforce in small male minds that their position in life excludes the raising of small children. (Also forget two lies: the in utero symbiotic relationship formed between mother and child, and the irreplaceable necessity of breast milk which throughout history has been substituted by other nutrients when women found it convenient). The males have always been relinquished to doing the dirty work for Her Majesty the Queen, and have been brainwashed into believing that “it's a man's world,” just so that when the shit hits the fan, the men have to take the blame and responsibility for it....
...So then, in a nutshell, the world scene of humans consists of “goddess” mothers competing with each other for the biggest loot, and employing their “reincarnated god”-sons in something resembling a back-alley dogfight. Whichever goddess wins the match also gets a free bumper sticker that says, “My god beat up your honor student”! And remember how I told you that everything is just the opposite of what it appears to be? Well, the Mother's Son, who has been told all his life that he is a GOD, is really nothing more than Her well-trained guard DOG! (Of course, I say this not to the shame of men, but of mothers.) And the mother who can concoct the most powerful “religion” will be the one to gain the edge over the others. For instance, the group of mother-allies that can convince a mindless sacrificial male that he will be glorified forever by driving a truckload of explosives into the “enemy” Mothers' sons' compound and blowing it and himself to smithereens will be among the top-pick goddesses. The same goes for other irrational (I told you this “0-2 years” stuff was powerful!) acts, such as diving your plane and torpedo into a big, hard boat for the glory of the Emperor (really the Empress in disguise: remember - the will of the Son is the will of the Mother)....
...Now, just because Junior is playing the expendable, mindless sacrificial male doesn't mean that he's stupid. He knows, somewhere simmering on the back burner of his mind, that he is being used. But at the same time, he is driven by this irrational fear (from the childhood amnesia days) that he feels he dares not try to articulate. However, at certain crisis points in his life (the heat of battle, for instance) he begins to formulate ideas for a better way to live. When enough expendable males get this epiphany at the same time, revolt is the result. Let me give you a couple of examples of this, spanning a vast amount of time, so that you will see that male anxiety over women's position in life is not a recent phenomenon, but has occurred throughout the existence of Homo sapiens. In Joseph Campbell's first volume of The Masks of God, Primitive Mythology, he tells us that: .....
Technically here's how it went down...
1. CPS is pushing this to trial apparently either seeking to terminate Annette Jeffs rights to her children or seeking permanent conservatorship over the children.
2. Someone sent discovery to Annette where she listed Willie and Merrill as witnesses. It could have been CPS who sent the initial discovery or it could have been Malonis. This makes them fair game to be deposed.
3. Questions regarding finances of the FLDS or YFZ are pretty far out in left field. With no lawsuit on file or any claim having been made, I'd say Willie and Merrill are on fairly solid ground in resisting answering those questions.
Ron. I thought there was supposed to be a 120(?) day review and CPS had said they were asking for termination, or permanent conservatorship and Annette exercised her right to have that determination by trial???
I think I also read that the initial CPS motion was only for Teresa but the boys would also be covered at trial....
Also, where did this 'post majority' support thing come from? Has Malonis actually said that is what she is seeking or is this 'gossip'?
Regina
It's CPS' case so they determine if it goes to trial or not. The parent can make the judge/jury decision but that's about it.
They didn't remove Annette's boys since they didn't have the "immanent danger" ground. I'm assuming the upcoming trial is for all the kids, but I'm not certain.
The post majority support idea came from Malonis herself. It's how she's justifying the questions about the finances. Whether that was really her idea or the idea of others in the case is the big question. I'm sure folks in the AG's office are following this quite closely.
I guess I think of a mandatory review as a 'hearing' and not a 'trial'. I think I also read where this had been expedited, at CPS' request.
Although I understand it is the respondent's right to request a jury...
So Malonis only disclosed this post majority support thing when challenged about the nature and scope of her queries?
And did Merrill and Willie refuse to disclose citing the fifth amendment, or is that a bit of editorial license? Did their atty just advise them to refuse to provide that info because it exceeds reasonable inquiry?
I would think that ad litems for the younger boys would have a better chance of getting financial info, at least financial from Jeffs, in a support suit, post determination....
Malonis better take a long hard look at who she's had even casual chit-chat with abut this...and who responded how...'cause her chain is most certainly being yanked...and she's the one who's going to have doo doo all over her feet.....
Unless she is independently wealthy in her own right, she might better serve her own interests and get out of the limelight as quickly as she can...this isn't a place for setting precedents.....the more her name is attached to this mess the uglier she looks....She isn't someone I would seek out for representation.....
Ron, on the day of the raid Texas took all of FLDS computers, personal and financial records. From what I understood there was also going to be a criminal financial investagation done by another government agency. Some have compared FLDS financial corruption to that of the MAFIA. You can bet those records have been gone through with a fine comb and they have come up with nothing. If they had we would most certainly heard about it by now.
As stated in this thread Molonis has done everything in her power to destroy Teresa including publically accusing her of hiding her baby. Teresa has asked the judge to remove Molonis. We all know the judge said, NO! In my eyes it is as if Teresa has been kidnapped. She is being used to infiltrate FLDS. She is currently being held against her will as a hostage for ransom.
I wonder who is going to come to her rescue?
Regina
Yes, review "hearing" and then "final trial."
My understanding is that Willie and Merrill claimed Fifth Amendment privilege on the finances. I might have played the cards differently. I'd probably first instructed them not to answer since the questions weren't relevant and were overly intrusive. Only once that was overruled would I have used the Fifth Amendment.
I'm not so certain about your perception of "do do." I'm sure that's the perception of many on this blog, but in the public at large, I'm just not so sure.
Annette has 6 bio kids and has 4 nieces and nephews (her sister died of breast cancer). On Friday, CPS non-suited 5 of her bio kids (Teresa the 17 year old remains) and the 4 non bio kids remain. So what is up here? This really isn't making sense to me at all. Why are they holding on to the 17 year old, but drop the other 5 (of whom, 2 were girls).
Rubytuesday
You might be right about the financial records; however, there is no substitute for putting folks under oath and requiring them to answer questions. If nothing else you can try to get them to lie their way into a perjury charge.
TexasMom
With the info you provided about the nonsuits it doesn't make a whole lot of sense. My guess is perhaps CPS feels it doesn't have enough to remove the bio kids but feels she's not good enough material for the non-bio ones (CPS has lower standards to remove the non-bio ones - that is - assuming no formal adoption).
Then again, the whole case is just structured insanity.
Ron...yeah...my instinct was to simply refuse based on the questions exceeding reasonable scope, and go from there...
Public perception of this issue may be on the side of CPS, generally, in your parts...on the other hand, if I'm Jane Q. and I need an atty for anything beyond a summary offense, I'm going to look at whatever I can find in the public record about an individual, and if I see where this person made this big public stink, and didn't find a way to quietly resolve the issue with her client, it's not someone I'm going to trust with my most personal and private business....
And I think with stunts like this latest, she loses alot in the eyes of her colleagues...
I mean that's just my lay perspective from afar....
Since even with the raid and expansion from "sarah" to multiple "crimes against children", the scope was certainly expanded, but would it allow for a forensic examination of fiscal records? Seems a bit of a reach...but then Texas seems to feel pretty expansive in this case....
Rubytuesday
You might be right about the financial records; however, there is no substitute for putting folks under oath and requiring them to answer questions. If nothing else you can try to get them to lie their way into a perjury charge.
------
That is why I am saying Molonis has stooped to a new level of low.
Teresa needs a white knight to rescue her!
Ron....
Brings me back to this not being about Annette and Teresa...it's back-dooring....this is all about egos and criminal prosecutions, both known and potential....
This is as close as they get to the top of the pile...Merrill, through a back or side door....this is preemptive discovery....or presumptive discovery....
Regina
Yeah, if I were TJ I'd also be highly pissed about my attorney going on the TV and talking about me.
From a professional standpoint, I don't think it was very prudent.
I would think that with this snag about the fiscal questions and scope of inquiry, there is a crack where ACLU could submit an amicus brief....
Not much wiggle room for a Knight to get in.....
I'm having a really hard time trying to figure out Malonis' motivation(s)...I mean she doesn't strike me as stupid...overly zealous, strongly biased, but not stupid....so why hasn't she backed up and gotten to know her enemy?
I would have played this very differently if I was her....
This has to have some payoff at the end....she's got something that is worth something to her, personally, to play it this way....she provides the chink in the armor to get at the money flow...she gets something in return that's worth alot to her....
Rubytuesday
Just remember your "new low" is someone else's valiant fighter trying to take down the evil FLDS mafioso.
The reality lies somewhere between those polar opposites.
Regina
Just remember that no one knows really what TJ is thinking right now.
She could even be telling Mother one thing and Natalie something else.
Whether she wants to "go back" or "get away" is nothing but speculation.
From a professional standpoint, I don't think it was very prudent.-Ron
------
Prudent? She was downright injurious!
I would think that with this snag about the fiscal questions and scope of inquiry, there is a crack where ACLU could submit an amicus brief....
-----------
I too were thinking along those lines.
Rubytuesday
None of us know all the facts. We're all entitled to our opinions but unless we know all the facts they're simply speculation.
Ron in Houston said...
My understanding is that Willie and Merrill claimed Fifth Amendment privilege on the finances. I might have played the cards differently. I'd probably first instructed them not to answer since the questions weren't relevant and were overly intrusive. Only once that was overruled would I have used the Fifth Amendment.
---------
Perhaps they did, and only used the fifth amendment when Walther told them they had to answer. Malonis is the only source of this story, and she's not exactly reliable.
1st...nah...there would have been a hearing to ask Walther to compell them.....
I know it's reaching, but this could also be a way to get immunity for Willie and Merrill..
I don't see Walther compelling them without granting them immunity...
I think the easiest, and smartest, course for Walther is to shut down this whole line...for a lot of reasons....
Hey, Ron....how come you aren't telling me to take off my tinfoil hat????
lol
rericson said...
1st...nah...there would have been a hearing to ask Walther to compell them.....
---------
And that's exactly what's happening. She couldn't throw Merrill in jail over the phone, after all.
1st...yup...Monday is the hearing....I don't see Walther throwing anyone in jail...even if she compels him and he refuses...it'll get appealed, post haste....
I just don't see it....She's almost gotta stop this line.....
Regina
Actually with Merrill already under indictment, there are reasons for Walther to shut this whole thing down.
Well, tomorrow should be interesting....
Who's gonna blink, first?
Who is going to remain silent?
Who says what to the media?
Ron....my brain doesn't tend to go to the criminal aspect of this....but you're right....it's ripe for compromise...and she sure as hell doesn't want anything to compromise the INTEGRITY of the criminal prosecution, eh?
rericson said...
1st...yup...Monday is the hearing....I don't see Walther throwing anyone in jail...even if she compels him and he refuses...
---------
Seems to me that the authorities in the Tony Alamo case have modelled their actions on what Texas did. And they've even improved on them, with the Alamo judge throwing church members in jail when they refuse to do his bidding. So on Monday we'll see if Walther has maybe been watching him and learning.
Regina
Yep, those criminal trials are going to be big deals in a little county.
Besides, it takes a lot of explaining to tie the finances of the FLDS to a child abuse case.
TxBlogger,
"Excellent essay, Rebeckah. Have a read and see if anything makes a shift in your disgust of men."
Tx, let me say this in simple words since you obviously have trouble reading. The words DISGUST and DISTRUST, while looking similar, actually mean two very different things. If you don't have a dictionary you can certainly look them up online.
Also, your article is hogwash. As soon as an author uses "I've already shown that..." you know their selling something. This is one person's guess at human dynamics, and it's one that doesn't take into consideration a huge number of other factors.
Saw several comments here stating that Willie is under indictment, when did that happen and what is he under indictment for?
Deb
I think only Merrill is under indictment.
Some are just wishing, Deb.
This post has been removed by the author.
I'd probably first instructed them not to answer since the questions weren't relevant and were overly intrusive. Only once that was overruled would I have used the Fifth Amendment.-Ron
How is "not answering" vs "fifth" perceived in court? Why would the former be prefered over the latter?
My guess is perhaps CPS feels it doesn't have enough to remove the bio kids but feels she's not good enough material for the non-bio ones (CPS has lower standards to remove the non-bio ones - that is - assuming no formal adoption).
That makes no sense. As you say,
Structured Insanity !!!
Yeah, if I were TJ I'd also be highly pissed about my attorney going on the TV and talking about me. From a professional standpoint, I don't think it was very prudent.
Is that just seen as rude/ inconsiderate, or is it a violation of attorney ethics? Is it something that could be reported to the bar? What kind of action could be taken by the minor?
This has to have some payoff at the end....she's got something that is worth something to her, personally, to play it this way....she provides the chink in the armor to get at the money flow...she gets something in return that's worth alot to her..
She may be taking orders from someone else. She was "appointed" by Walther.
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2009/01/2/dl.bush.legacy.cnn
Where's CPS?! This girl is hiding something under her coat!!
put: 24/dl.bush.legacy.cnn
after the last backslash
I need pliggy or r, or Ron or etc. to teach me how to make a link. I'm not a 'computer nerd' I'm just a 'plain ol' nerd'!!
cheese
this what pliggy wrote for me. I keep it on my desktop and paste it whenever I need it
So where it says 'terramama.blogspot...." you would put your url and where it says 'regina's blog" you would put what you want to show up on your post
Substitute "<" for every place I put "(" and ">" every place I put ")"
In the following:
(a href="http://terramama.blogspot.com/")Regina's blog(/a)
This post has been removed by the author.
Cheese,
By the way, I just went back and caught up on some of the other threads...
My comment to you about knowing couples who had lived together for many years without benefit of a legal marriage was in response to your comment about them not having committed and obligated relationships...nothing about "shacking up" per se....
The FLDS are not the only people on earth who create committed relationships without the state being involved...
This post has been removed by the author.
This post has been removed by the author.
THIS GIRLS HIDING SOMETHING CALL CPS!!!
Cheese, I may be dense, but I'm missing your point with the link to D.H. Hughley's show....
I'm learning and linked to the wrong video
Click again now.
I'm just a 'regular nerd' like Ron not a 'computer nerd' like you and pliggy. LOL Ron
Okay...I thought it was a remarkably sweet story....but what point am I supposed to be getting????
By the way, it took Pliggy the better part of six months to teach me to insert links...HAHAHAHA...I am really computer challenged!!!!!
So...the sequence of events, which seem to have gotten muddled, is:
Merril was supposed to be deposed on Friday, but pleaded the 5th and Walther set a hearing for Monday to compel him to incriminate himself.
Willie is supposed to be deposed on Monday.
Flora is supposed to be deposed on Tuesday - if she can manage to leave her media circus at home this time. I wonder if the judge will cite her with contempt if she appears with cameraman/crew in tow again....?
Also...person posting about Annette and her children. My understanding, according to the iperceive blog is that 4 of Annette's biological children have been non-suited, the four adopted children and Teresa have not.
I thought it was Barbara that was going to trial for custody of Merrianne, so could someone please explain Annette's trial and 'witnesses' to me?
Thanks much!
Silver,
From what the article seems to be saying, Merrill was deposed on Friday, however, he refused to answer questions related to the finances of the FLDS and stood on the fifth. Ms. Malonis wants those questions answered, ostensibly so she will be better informed when making a motion for a trust to care for Teresa, post age 18, so she is asking for a hearing to ask Judge Walther to compel Merrill to answer. Willie will also be deposed on Monday, and Flora on Tuesday.
CPS filed for termination of Anette's parental rights, based on her failure to comply with a service plan, etc. Apparently in Texas, the parent has the right to ask that this determination be made by a jury trial, so that is what she has done. The outcome of the trial will effect all those children who are minors in her care, biological and otherwise, who have not been "non-suited", and Teresa.
Because she has asked for a jury trial she will be producing witnesses. Other parties to the action, the ad items and, counsel for CPS, have the right to depose the named witnesses prior to trial about their testimony. As far as we know, Ms. Malonis is the only party to have availed herself of this opportunity. She has also introduced a line of questioning, specifically the financial affairs of the FLDS, into her questioning. This is not an area that would have anything to do with CPS' action, so there is objection to it.
I may be the one mixing up the names. I'm known for that....sorry. But this is about Annette, wife of Warren Jeffs, mother of Teresa, who married son of Merrill Jessop.....
Barbara is wife of Merrill, mother of Merrianne....and I believe you are correct that Barbara has also asked for a jury trial...
But who knows, I could have all of this ass backwards.....
rericson said...
"Okay...I thought it was a remarkably sweet story....but what point am I supposed to be getting????"
She's obviously hiding something under her coat!!!! (Barack's oldest girl)
Cheese.......HAHAHAHA!!!!!!
secret camera!!!!!
Txblogger
Taking the fifth in a civil case allows the trier of fact to make whatever inferences they want.
Refusing to answer doesn't have the same effect.
I can't say if Malonis' conduct is an ethical violation because I don't know all the facts. Apparently her client was not pleased, which is a sign that at least the client didn't think it was helping her case.
I can't imagine why a child's ad litem would ever comment on a case. You represent the kid who is sort of in the middle. Most of the time lawyer's talk in the press it's to influence opinion about the case in order to hopefully benefit the client.
I can't see much benefit in this case. However, like I said, I don't have all the facts.
Ron:
"I can't imagine why a child's ad litem would ever comment on a case. You represent the kid who is sort of in the middle. Most of the time lawyer's talk in the press it's to influence opinion about the case in order to hopefully benefit the client.
I can't see much benefit in this case. However, like I said, I don't have all the facts."
Could all the articles, web pages & video clips saved help in determining how this client may realize any "benefit"?
;)
Is anyone else having trouble refreshing?
Good morning.
For those of you who are still questioning Malonis' motives for the depositions, well it seems that she gave the author of another blog transcripts of those depositions in which she asked questions about TJ's "hidden" child. The gentleman took the fifth at the advise of legal representation as I would hope anyone would regardless of what the answers might be given the pending trials.
It would seem that the depositions are a fishing expedition for the state and Malonis still going to great lengths to prove she is right and TJ has that child hidden somewhere. Either way, she handed the transcript out for publication which I find completely vile and reprehensible.
JJ, I can't shake off this feeling and it is a mere feeling mind you that Molonis is almost trying to portray TJ as the elusive...."Sarah".
It's a big jump to assume Malonis released the transcript. Anyone with money can order a copy. In addition parts of it may be attached to court documents that are public record.
JJ the author of the "other blog" did not say Malonis gave him the transcripts. He did not say how he got them.
Folks,
Just so you know, the person who posted hereat 3:12 today, using the name Silver, who Regina was so thoughtful as to answer to, is not me, but someone else with the same handle. (The software really should be set up to prevent those things.) I'm still reading, but am trying not to post anymore, since I kind of regretted saying what I did on those religious topics. So from here on in, the name Silver, with the first letter capitalized is someone else. (Not that it matters right, since we don't know each other?) Thanks for asking about my trees Regina, will email you personally at a later time.
So let me see if I got this straight....Silver is not silver, but silver is silver and Silver is Silver, and silver is me and Silver is someone else. But Silver is not silver.
If it served her agenda, I wouldn't put it past Malonis to portray Teresa as the fictional Sarah and if Teresa had a pet kitten, the kitten as the "hidden" baby.
What really boggles the mind is the release of information. A partial transcript with someone under indictment taking the fifth on questions that would directly affect the upcoming trial with what I would call the intent to give the impression that there is something to hide as opposed to just good legal representation from their lawyer. Full well knowing that the general public does not have the legal background to readily know the possible implications of answering questions during a deposition and presented as just bits out of context.
Malonis posted on the blog "Kurt, thank you for the opportunity to respond on your website. I have sent you some information for your review when you have some time." Why even do that?
Why not just keep things confidential and sealed in the best interests of her client? What is the need to put herself in the public arena and share matters concerning a minor with us? If her concern for our opinion oversteps what should be confidential matters and the best interests of her client, then I can't see that she is representing the best interests of her client.
Silver,
No one cares, or remembers, what one person posts about one subject on one day....*smile*
After awhile those of us who are "regulars" get a general sense of where we each stand on various aspects of things....
Unique items are far more important or poignant or demonstrative or memorable to the poster than to anyone else...
And that's not to imply that folks don't all make good and bad points and contribute.....
I'm just saying that no matter what you posted, and I certainly can't remember, your input is valuable and you shouln't "leave".
Change your name if you're uncomfortable with the apparent identity theft...I would be, and I would change....
We're much too old to hang on to unique items on a blog!!! *smile*
So, as our president would say. pick yourself up, dust yourself off, and keep blogging.......
Ron, I don't know how you feel about it, but I find her behavior reprehensible...and telling of a very emotionally needy being.....
She is stepping way, way utside the realm of acceptable behavior for anyone's counsel.....
Is it possible that "nmalonis" is not the real N. Malonis.....and is someone 'stirring'??????
Further on the where is the information coming from question, "Merril answered “quite a few” questions according to Natalie Malonis."
I would imagine he did before the questions wandered into the realm of the indictments. At which point he was probably counseled by his attorney to take the fifth. We don't know in which direction the questioning went before he began using the fifth. We have a partial picture showing the deposition in a poor light. I would imagine that was the purpose of the release.
The point is that Malonis seems to be releasing information before it becomes available to the public. It does take more than hours for depositions to be transcribed, submitted and be available for public consumption and Malonis posted Friday night. Malonis' posts to the blog started at
3:40 p.m. Friday and continued until 10:51 p.m. that night. Did she tap into the Net during a recess? Seems she spent a good part of her evening monitoring our responses. The first post to Kurts blog entry about the contents was time dated at 1:36 a.m. Monday so I will hazard a guess it was published at about that time. Last I heard you needed to wait for the courts offices to open before accessing court documents. And again, given that the case is regarding a minor, according to the information I got, you can't access the documents online. Kurt said he expects to get more of the deposition at a later date which further points to only selected partial sections being shared.
I can't imagine why our opinions should matter to her or why she feels the need to defend her actions in a public forum, but I'll take any opinions any of you have on that subject and why she would release what she did how she did.
JJ,
I know several of the attys representing different folks involved in these various actions follow the blogs, from time to time.
Several of us have had personal email contact from various attys asking questions about various things that have come up....but none of them, that I am aware of, post using their own names, or disclose their identity.....
The fact is that many ideas, good and bad, get floated by different folks on the threads....it sometimes piques the interrest,or gets the thought processes going for folks...
But if the person posting as Malonis is actually Malonis, she seems to be bordering on some serious ethical problems....
Several different things come to mind;
bi-polar disorder in a manic phase
narcissistic personality
borderline personality
Some compelling need for attention and limelight....even at one's own expense, personally and professionally, is not normal....
Kurt over at Contraries hit the nail on the head.
If TJ doesn't have another child then Merrill can just say "no." If he doesn't know if she has another child he can honestly say, "I don't know."
The fact that he claims the Fifth Amendment in response to a question about TJ having another child, means that he knows something that if revealed would put him in legal jeopardy.
Which means TJ probably has another child....
Alright Dr. Regina no diagnosing from afar....
A deposition transcript is pretty much equivalent to testimony in court, so it's fair game for anyone who wants it.
Even if Malonis released the transcript that's probably not unethical. However, even if it's ethical it still has a very unsavory smell to it.
Personally, I'd do my job and keep my pie hole closed.
Ron,
"another child"? So now we're moving on to multiple children? I don't think so.
Ron, you're not addressing that we don't have all the information on the deposition. We don't know all the questions that were asked and we don't know when he invoked the fifth. We don't know if those particular questions were the ones that caused him to invoke the fifth or were asked later in the questioning. Notice he answers the same for every question in the small bit we got to see including the question asking Teresa's age. And it seems on the advise of his attorney.
Until we have the whole picture, I don't think that a fair judgment can be made on the basis of such little, and I might add inflammatory, information supplied and selected by Malonis. Consider your own words, "even if it's ethical it still has a very unsavory smell to it."
Like a three day old corpse rotting in the street.
Come on Ron....
Just because Merril took the 5th doesn't mean crap.
He also answered the 5th regarding his own daughter having a child. This is all staging.....this is harrassment. The only thing this does is make a 72 year old man look like a piece of crap for CPS.
This is a public display of distain.
I don't give a damn about an attorney's reality......... clients have a right to their reality as well.
Molonis can go on and on and make a hidden child a reality, but that doesn't mean he\she she exists. One thing for certain, the accusation does absolutely NOTHING for the client she is supposed to be representing.
Ron,
I haven't looked at kurt's blog...
Whether something is public record or not is irrelevant....
The mere act of openly participating on these blogs smacks of impropriety....
Ron,
"another child"? - JJ
-------
Last I knew she didn't deliver any children now she stands accused of delivering more than one?
There is this little thing called "evidence" in criminal court!
Of course there is a very real possiblity that nmalonis is NOT the Malonis representing Theresa. It is quite possible that this is a troll trying to cause trouble. (It is also possible that the person posting as nmalonis IS Theresa's guardian ad litem, but I hope for her sake she isn't.) Before we jump on the "Ahh, see the evil GAL at work!" bandwagonn, remember what was said when a certain FMerril started posting stuff.
Methinks dear Natalie has spent a bit too much time with Laurie, et al....she's every bit a part of the witch hunt....
This is what scares the bejesus out of me...the total invalidation of another culture because there is an empowered faction that doesn't like or approve of that culture.....
Ron in Houston said...
The fact that he claims the Fifth Amendment in response to a question about TJ having another child, means that he knows something that if revealed would put him in legal jeopardy.
Which means TJ probably has another child....
--------
Which is exactly why you don't pick and choose where to answer. When you take the fifth for every question, the interrogator has no more than he started with. In this case Malonis only gave out a small portion of the questions and answers, probably so that she can make it look like he was hiding something about a child.
As far as I can see, TJ doesn't have "another child." She doesn't have any.
The one thing that sticks in my mind that this might be the real Malonis is a comment on an earlier thread where she told of the conversation Brooke had written about as having taken place in the hallway enroute to the ladies room....there's only a small set of people who would have known that...
I have no doubt that it was the real Malonis. No one will talk to her without a subpoena. Even her client won't talk to her, so she has to come here.
Given limited information, one can come to host of conclusions.
Show us a picture of Teresa with a baby and there are those who will insist it proves she has a child when it can be as simple as she's hold a baby brother, sister, niece or nephew.
The piece of transcript proves nothing except that questions were asked and the fifth was invoked at some point. Everything else is speculation inferred by the viewer.
A still picture of Jane Doe is circulated catching her giving another woman a kiss in the lips.
It's a still picture so was it a quick peck as some friends and family do or was it a deep smooch just caught at the beginning? How many think it's a friendly peck and how many are now claiming Jane's a lesbian.
Then you read it's Jane's sister. So now is it an innocent quick peck between affectionate and loving sisters or is Jane (Oh Horrors!) an incestuous lesbian?
The "general public" has the habit of assuming the worst in pretty much any given situation. I believe that the release of the partial transcript was designed to do just what it's doing, create speculation of the worst kind and doubt in Teresa's honesty. For as many of us who post here, how many just lurk and read? How many bother to take away any but their first impressions, how many just pass judgment on limited information and how much of this gets picked up and passed on in other venues and gets even more distorted?
Malonis has 182 days to fulfill her agenda, whatever it is, before Teresa ages out and can tell her to bugger off, if that's what Teresa wants to tell her and she's scrambling to do all she can before that happens. If I'm correct, it's un-ethical and let's up that unsavory smell to a five day old corpse rotting in the street on a hot day.
Rubytuesday
Here's why I think there could be something to the "other child" theory.
He answered some questions but didn't answer others. If the "other child" theory is simple stupidity, I'd imagine Merrill would just derisively laugh and answer the question.
Why prolong your agony about it? If it's untrue, "no" won't get you in any trouble, and same thing can be said about "I don't know."
The fact that he chose the Fifth Amendment to that particular question just smacks me as rather strange.
JJ, are you now accusing the FLDS of killing someone and leaving the corpse rot? You sure come up with some really strange ideas.
First Amendment
If she doesn't have the child, then why not just say it? It just doesn't make sense to take the Fifth to a question like that if it's untrue.
"It's a big jump to assume Malonis released the transcript. Anyone with money can order a copy. In addition parts of it may be attached to court documents that are public record."
Transcripts of depositions are public
Um, a lactating woman doesn't climb trees...
No Deb, just commenting on the level of stink.
As for your earlier question "JJ the author of the "other blog" did not say Malonis gave him the transcripts. He did not say how he got them."
On the blog Kurt says,
"Natalie Malonis is the source. I got the transcript excerpt from her. Sorry if that wasn’t clear. By the way, just to allay an conspiracy theories before they fester, yesterday, Natalie had only an uncertified, ASCII version of the transcript. She was expecting to receive a certified copy today sometime. I expect that she will provide access to the entire thing perhaps later today or tomorrow after today’s hearing. My sense is that she is willing to share anything that is not privileged or sealed by the court."
On your new comment, "JJ, are you now accusing the FLDS of killing someone and leaving the corpse rot? You sure come up with some really strange ideas."
Thank you for the perfect example of how things are taken out of context and become something they're not.
Ziggy, lactation does not affect the feet, legs or arms or in any other way physically prevent tree climbing.
This is what scares the bejesus out of me...the total invalidation of another culture because there is an empowered faction that doesn't like or approve of that culture.....
that's why there's such a thing as Suspect Classification
Does the state do a full court press on ALL custody cases like they're doing on this one? If not, why not?
kbp,
No offence, but given that the subject of the transcript is a minor, don't you think the ethical thing to do would have been to seal the transcript and not just leave it open to public scrutiny, but also not be personally releasing it to blogs?
I have no doubt that it was the real Malonis. No one will talk to her without a subpoena. Even her client won't talk to her, so she has to come here.
yeah, that's what I said. If after 10 months, she still can't figure out whether TJ is a mother, then what is she doing as her lawyer? Doesn't an attorney-client relationship presuppose a certain level of mutual trust?
It is very likely that Teresa has a child and the FLDS are keeping it hidden even from her so that this child can not be used to indict Raymond Jessop. This may be the only way Teresa will ever get her child back and the only reason she is staying within the FLDS right now is to try and find out where they have hidden her child. She may be counting on N. Malonis to help her find her child.
"If she doesn't have the child, then why not just say it? It just doesn't make sense to take the Fifth to a question like that if it's untrue."
Using that theory, Merrianne must have a baby also.
Teresa's attorney may succeed at planting ideas in the minds of jurors, creating the opportunity for Teresa to see 100+/- days in state custody and possibly many years to come for the children her mother cares for since Teresa's aunt passed away.
I think a case could be made for malicious litigation plus defamation. If TJ can prove she's been harmed throughout this year and last through Malonis' actions, whether because her friends and family start to look at her funny, whether her happiness has been impaired unnecessarily, whether she has fought depression, whether she has thought of suicide, whether she is araid to go outside because of the cameras, whether she felt forced to go public to set the record straight because of the rumors started; she might be able to make a case against Malonis when the time is right, using the totality of circumstances, i.e. the relentlessness with which Malonis cast her in a bad light on no factual basis, rhyme or reason.
FlyingFree: It is very likely that Teresa has a child and the FLDS are keeping it hidden
On what evidence do you make this claim?
JJ,
Sorry that I had somehow cut off the balance of my QUESTION!
"It's a big jump to assume Malonis released the transcript. Anyone with money can order a copy. In addition parts of it may be attached to court documents that are public record."
Transcripts of depositions are public record in Texas at this point in the process?
So ziggy, where is your medical proof that lactation women don't climb trees?
Where is your proof that it isn't?
Rubytuesday
Here's why I think there could be something to the "other child" theory.
He answered some questions but didn't answer others. If the "other child" theory is simple stupidity, I'd imagine Merrill would just derisively laugh and answer the question.
Why prolong your agony about it? If it's untrue, "no" won't get you in any trouble, and same thing can be said about "I don't know."
The fact that he chose the Fifth Amendment to that particular question just smacks me as rather strange.
-----------
I bet she is the one who called CPS. She hid her baby since she knew CPS were coming and now Molonis is going to help her get her trust fund and put all the bad men in jail.
Ron in Houston said...
First Amendment
If she doesn't have the child, then why not just say it? It just doesn't make sense to take the Fifth to a question like that if it's untrue.
---------
Doesn't matter if it's true or not, the fifth means nothing if the questioner can hone in on those questions that elicit the non answer, playing twenty questions until they have the subject nailed. Since Merril is a defendant in a criminal matter, he has the right to say nothing to any question remotely connected to it. Unless he starts answering questions, that is, and then he may find he's thrown away his fifth amendment protection. Looking at Malonis's brief excerpt at iperceive, it seems that he played it safe and didn't answer any of her questions.
He could say "I don't know" (he's a polygamist man after all, and they can't even keep up with how many kids they have sired themselves, much less their grandchildren), but then the prosecution could get Carolyn to make some claim that he did know, and bingo, perjury! And the fifth is intended to protect from possibly future perjury as well in the case where there disputing accounts. Remember, the fifth protects the innocent. As one said before, even an innocent answer can be twisted against you.
LOL!!
CHECK THIS OUT (see the video)
Jethro Barlow needs to take back his parental responsibilities! LOL Don and Martha are his children and he is good buddies with Dan Fischer and a big part of his "pity" CRUSADE.
What stupidity!!
"“We would love to see the lost boys program become obsolete as parents took back their parental responsibilities" -Dan Fischer
ROFLMAO!
http://blogs.sltrib.com/plurallife/uploaded_images/flds-grand-jury-tn-9701-745498.JPG
Seriously, Ron, take a look at this photo and see if this young woman looks as though she is a mother missing her hidden child.
http://blogs.sltrib.com/plurallife/uploaded_images/flds-grand-jury-tn-9701-745498.JPG
Seriously, Ron, take a look at this photo and see if this young woman looks as though she is a mother missing her hidden child (or should I say children)?
"Um, a lactating woman doesn't climb trees..."
Yeah, everyone knows a woman producing milk is incapable of using her arms and legs. hahahaha
It is very likely that Teresa has a child and the FLDS are keeping it hidden even from her so that this child can not be used to indict Raymond Jessop. This may be the only way Teresa will ever get her child back and the only reason she is staying within the FLDS right now is to try and find out where they have hidden her child. She may be counting on N. Malonis to help her find her child.
---------
When did they take this baby? The day of the raid? You mean to say someone got away with a child?
Oh yeah I forget about those underground tunnels.
"On what evidence do you make this claim?"
Obviously the same evidence you used to determine a lactating woman's ability to climb trees.
Ron:
"If she doesn't have the child, then why not just say it? It just doesn't make sense to take the Fifth to a question like that if it's untrue."
If Malonis knew Teresa had a baby, why hasn't the state charged Raymond for the sexual act needed to produce that baby?
Does Malonis have evidence she's withholding from the state?
"On what evidence do you make this claim?"
Obviously the same evidence you used to determine a lactating woman's ability to climb trees.
I pulled that out of thin air. Do you still stand by your statement?
Well actually, it's just that I've never seen a nursing mother vivaciously climbing trees, knowing her child is being hidden somewhere. The picture just isn't right. (nevermind the fact that giving birth usually makes a woman more plump, larger breasts, etc.; this description doesn't describe this thin spunky teenager. Compare Le Ann, for example, with Teresa...night and day, not in a bad way, but different physicals? Yes)
This post has been removed by the author.
I know exactly what you mean z. She looks as though she is a free spirit not a mother concerned about the welfare of a hidden child. But of course this might be a side show to throw people off.
Look guys
I'm not saying it's so, but the whole way Merrill answered those questions is strange.
Maybe like First Amendment says, he just decided to answer everything with the Fifth. However, if that's the case then why did he answer some and then not answer others?
Besides, where did that line of questioning come from anyway?
Are we done with the lactating Mother stuff yet?
Ron,
"I'm not saying it's so, but the whole way Merrill answered those questions is strange."
Given that we have a very small excerpt of the deposition and like I said before have no knowledge of the rest of how the deposition went, I do believe it's unfair to draw conclusions.
"Maybe like First Amendment says, he just decided to answer everything with the Fifth. However, if that's the case then why did he answer some and then not answer others?"
We still don't know when the deposition went from simple questions like name, address, age, ect... on to questions like the ones shown. Perhaps if the line of questioning had never left the stated reason for the deposition, like stuck to the financial structure of the FLDS, he never would have taken the fifth. Truth is until we see the deposition in it's entirety, we won't know when, where or why he took the fifth.
"Besides, where did that line of questioning come from anyway?"
Why, Malonis...of course.
Ron, do you have access to the entire deposition?
You can't draw clarity from confusion......
Ron:
"Look guys
I'm not saying it's so, but the whole way Merrill answered those questions is strange.
Maybe like First Amendment says, he just decided to answer everything with the Fifth. However, if that's the case then why did he answer some and then not answer others?
Besides, where did that line of questioning come from anyway?"
I had assumed he answered the initial questions and all with the fifth that followed the first time he had used it. Of course that would or could depend on what the questions were and the order they came in.
Do you know whether or not depositions are public record at this point in the process?
They are not in a few states I know of.
Confusion always sends me a red flag.
kbp
Depositions are public in that they are not secret. They're not filed in court and are kept by the attorney in their office.
The court reporter/stenographer will be happy to sell anyone a copy at, I think, $4.00 per page.
Can't someone climb a tree without it being over-analyzed?
Can't someone climb a tree without it being over-analyzed? - furnace
--------
You would be surprised how much information people can gain about you through body language.
Now a days body language specialists sit in on job interviews.
can a furnance be built without it being over analyzed?
furnace
Pliggy said...
“Jethro Barlow needs to take back his parental responsibilities! LOL Don and Martha are his children and he is good buddies with Dan Fischer and a big part of his "pity" CRUSADE.”
Doesn’t that story talk about Mark and Martha? Who is Don?
And wasn’t Jethro one of the people who had their lives and businesses destroyed by Warren Jeffs? If I recall he was one of the first people who “questioned” Warren’s authority. I wonder if he was part of the same “conspiracy” that got Louis, Dan, and Joseph Barlow excommunicated.
Poena,
I can only assume Pliggy knows every person who ever lived in FLDS. He must be a very old man, because it doesn't matter what name you bring up, or how old they are, or if Pliggy was even alive when they were excommunicated, he knows everything about everyone.
Maybe thats why his nose is so flat, from pushing it in everyones business in FLDS. LOL
Either that, or Flds members gossip alot behind other Flds backs.
They can "depose" the FLDS all they want, and it will only increase them.
INCREASE VS DECREASE
SLTRIB Plural Life-Jan.26, 2009
Part I
I am Increased! I dreamed a dream, and the Prophet sealed me with a great kiss! It took ONE DAY for God to get Israel out of Egypt, and 40-years for Israel to get Egypt out of them. There are four-years between the Prophet and me. That is significant. Four is Chesed (Mercy), for we were both born sick, and healed by the mercy of God. It took 40-YEARS for Israel to get enough wisdom and wellness to be exorcised. 40 is Mem: Fountain of Wisdom, to bind with 3 seals after 32 paths and 5 finals (3+5+32=40). The Hebrew is “Abimelek: Father of Kings. The Greek is Hagios: “Awful thing, blameless, consecrated, and pure. From this, you may begin to see the great significance of the number “four” and its variables.
It took 400 YEARS to open the seal and make the Exodus possible, that Israel might INCREASE. 400 is Tav: Seal of Okel, meal, prey, supper, battle of the Great God, to devour, as the Lord through Israel did indeed devour Egypt, and ever since they have been a loathsome nation among nations (after they had become great by the presence of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph, FOUR). Today, God promises that He will “cut His work short”, for He is accomplishing it in 200 years. America began her fall around 1976, by her approval of child-mass-murder through your criminal politicians, 200 years from her founding in 1776. The FLDS is modern Israel, which means literally: “Is Real”, those who truly fear God and keep the law, NOT MAN (wicked politicians), and their criminal corruption of the law.
The Hebrew for “Israel” is “Yisrael”: which means “He will rule as God: Gavel or Gravel (little stones), Seat of Generation or Government”. The Greek is “Nazareth (Germany abbreviated it Nazi, to devour, and perverted its meaning, and their place in history). This is the same thing for 400: Okel: To prey and devour the wicked, perverts of the law in high places, as the Lord is now doing (Rev.11:18).
It took 4,000 YEARS for Christ to come to earth, which is the opening of the ten seals (K-M): Eight Generations of 500 men = 4,000, which is Mabown: Taught, Instructed, Teacher (Christ). Ma-bown comes from Biyn, or Binah (like Bonnie), which is God. Christ indeed came from God, the cosmic Mother (“Adam instigating the Mother Earth”). So we see that Christ came from His earthly Father, our eternal Father, to shepherd His most faithful children back to Paradisical Glory, after God fell. Three Gods in one Godhead (the Trinity of Heaven, and the Trinity of Earth) equals Four Men: Enoch, Jehovah, and Michael making up the heavenly Trinity, and Michael, Jehovah, and Joseph making up the earthly Trinity, which equals four men, to rule over the four quarters of heaven and earth, that the righteous may INCREASE. Do you see the pre-eminence of “Four” in the universe, or “Fore”, the hazards of the fairways of life, that the faithful might have faith, power, and INCREASE? The article “Nice Tets” goes into this in much more detail.
God’s crown is said to be a “Lotus of a thousand crowns”, or “innumerable and endless”. The Hebrew for “Thousand” is Eleph, Aleph, or Alpha, which is beginning (Alpha and Omega). So with four gods, you have 4,000, and yet the four are one (Aleph is one). The Beginning, or the source of the stream (puberty), unfeigned, without hypocrisy, abundance of waters or powers, a projection, INCREASE, and casting together. I am cast with His Prophet, and increased. The Greek for 4,000 is Penta-Kis-Chi-Lioi (5 x 1,000) or 5 kisses (KDTYM) for a thousand saints (which is a minion or prayer-circle of 10 x 10 x 10 to infinity). These are the mathematical archtypes of nature, art, and science, created by design, the kiss of life, a kiss of great depth, being sealed by a kiss (Decad: Beyond Number). That is NOT a worldly polygamy, but rather the pure Plurality of Marriage from the source of the stream, puberty, for the bringing forth of a godly public and republic, from infinity to infinity.
Break down the word: Penta-Kis-Chi-Lioi: Five Kisses of Chi (Life Force, Living Water, or Bread of Life), from a Lion of the Lord. Do you see it? Penta (5), Kiss, Chi (Life Force), Lioi (Lion): Warrior, Champion, double-edged, Yeshen: To anoint, remain long, to be ancient, INCREASED, deluged in the Lord, a freewill offering of self. Similarly, Tetra-Kis-Chi-Lioi: Four times a thousand, Cachar or chariot of fire, merkavah, emporium, profit, to pulsate and surround with eternal treasure. Also, Chi-Lioi: Innumerable Thousands, and Rebabah: Many millions of seed. Through him, and him alone (God with us), are we increased, through God’s Priesthood lineage. No human being will ever rise to glory without his seal of approval. I am increased by him.
INCREASE VS DECREASE
SLTRIB Plural Life-Jan.26, 2009
Part II
“He INCREASETH the nations, and destroyeth them. He enlargeth the nations, and straiteneth them again (those which have not sinned unto death). He taketh away the heart of the chief of the people of the earth, and causeth them to wander in a wilderness where there is NO WAY. They grope in the dark without light, and he maketh them to stagger like a drunken man” (Job 12:23-25).
“The desire of the righteous is only good, but the expectation of the wicked is wrath: There is that scattereth, and yet INCREASETH (scattering the FLDS, and yet they increase). There is that withholdeth more than is meet (stealing the UEP), but it tendeth to poverty. The liberal soul (or liberal in soul) shall be made fat, and he that watereth (that teaching the truth) shall be watered also himself” (Proverbs 11: 23-35). I am increased by him.
“A wise man is strong (in the Lord and His law). Yea, a man of knowledge INCREASETH strength. For by wise coursel, thou shalt make thy war, and in multitude of counselors there is safety” (Proverbs 24: 5-6). America has lost every war since the institution of Roe vs Wade, the mass-murder of millions of innocent children, and their multitude of counselors have been sheer confusion and scandal and crimes against humanity to this day.
They have robbed, assaulted, and imprisoned the head of the FLDS Church, so that the saints cannot hold and behold him in person. The true saint is not subject to the laws and ordinances of corruption, but of God: “And not holding the Head, from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, INCREASETH with the increase of God”. Wherefore, if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why as though living in the world are ye subject to ordinances. Touch them not, for all are to perish with the using, after the commandments and doctrines of men” (Col.2:19-22, Matt.15:9).
“Some fell among thorns, and the thorns grew up and choked it, and it yielded no fruit. And others fell on good ground, and did yield fruit that sprang up and increased and brought forth, some thirty, some sixty, and some an hundred (children): Mark 4:7-8). These are the words of your Creator (Beriah), who loved children who married and abided by His law as He did at age 12, to be about the business of a father, or “My Father’s Business”. For He is the very Creator of life through the law of the land (Bar Mitzvah at age 12), even though the government has “given heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils…forbidding to marry”, according to the prophcy (I Timothy 4:1-3), preferring to commit mass murder of little children and to destroy the earth instead of producing an INCREASE of life. Through him, I am Increased to all eternity, and Babylon falleth.
“We give thee thanks, O Lord God Almighty, which art and wast and art to come, because thou hast taken to Thee Thy great power, and hast reigned. And the nations were angry, and Thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that Thou shouldest give reward unto Thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear Thy name, small and great (and Thy law, vs man and his corrupt law), and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth” (Rev.11:17-18).
Street
It looks like Street stopped taking his meds again. I wonder if he actually expects people to read that nonsense.
OOPS!!
Sorry DON!!
(Marks older brother)
And if you want to know who Jethro Barlow is
HERES A PICTURE
But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous [are they], selfwilled, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities.
2nd Peter 2:10
Mat 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
Mat 7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
Mat 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
Yep, Pliggy knows everybody. Not only that but he knows everything that's going on in their household. Including what goes on behind closed doors.
Pliggy is sort of a demi-prophet. He's omniscient but not omnipotent.
What I haven't figured out is if he knows so damn much, why he is stuck on the outside?
Pliggy said...
"And if you want to know who Jethro Barlow is
HERES A PICTURE"
Hahahaha! You read that websight and think your learning something? Wow, just wow.
Ron in Houston said...
"What I haven't figured out is if he knows so damn much, why he is stuck on the outside?"
Well, actually it is usually the people who know what is going on that get kicked, but luckily for him hes just making stuff up so he still "deserves" to be allowed to repent.
Awww did I hurt the poor bigots feeweengs?
The sure sign that Pliggy's been shown for the BS artist he is:
He pulls out the bigot card.
We're not bigoted, we just think you're full of crap.
Ron, I'm sure the feeling is mutual.
Poena Abstergo said...
It looks like Street stopped taking his meds again. I wonder if he actually expects people to read that nonsense.
---------
It's like Debater's all-cap blather. Noise you have to scroll through.
Brooke's latest article on Carolyn's daughter Betty.
I raised my family first in a very middle class neighborhood in NYC, then we moved to small-town, rural Pa. We moved into an old, middle-class neighborhood, not dissimilar from the type of people we left behind in NY.
I was a fairly strict parent. I had clear expectations about manners and dress and school performance and recreational activities. I had very clear ideas about what I was willing to spend my money on. I conscientiosly created a home where talk was more important than almost anything else. We talked about everything. And we especially talked about what were reasonable and fair expectations of people. From each other to politicians. That talk about fairness and respect and kindness permeated every discussion or activity for thirty years, and continues, to this day...
And I never, ever locked our doors. Not to our home or to my heart. From their earliest memories, each of my sons knows there is always, always room for one more. They know in the core of who they are as individuals that the human heart is absolutely boundless.
I would buy a new computer before I'd buy a new rug. I would buy books and plane tickets for adventures before I would buy fancy sneakers. In fact, much to my son's chagrin, I set my limit for spending on sneakers at fifty dollars, twice a year, per son. If they wanted to spend more, they had to find a way to earn the money on their own. I would buy a mattress for another person moving in before I'd take us out to dinner. A place to belong is worth far more than giving up a steak, or a fancy seafood meal.
All of this is to say I am sure that some of them, probably all of them, if they could have, would have, designed a very different childhood for themselves.
In many ways, I did not give my sons the tools to be successful in particular aspects of the larger world they were going out into. I raised them to be successful in the type of world I had chosen for us.
What I did give them was a measuring stick for judging people. Or at least I tried. I tried to give them a measuring stick for making choices. For choosing the content of their lives. And I tried to give them a way of measuring and holding themselves accountable for their own actions and choices.
And I can now honestly say, I am so, so proud of each of my sons. Even the two who are registered Republicans. *smile* My goodness, one son was in the Airforce for eight years. Another lives and likes it, in Idaho, and he loves hunting!
I think, carolyn, consciously or otherwise, did the same thing I did. She raised decent children. She raised children who think. One of the pitfalls of doing that is that sooner or later, some of them will make decisions that are very different than what we would do. I would NEVER register as a Republican! Carolyn would never return to her life in the FLDS community.
But to be truly successful as parents, we have to arrive at the point where we can look at our children's coices, some that are so different from our own, and respect them, and be proud of them for being able to make those choices. I hope Carolyn can applaud Betty for her's, and be proud of herself for raising such a beautiful young woman.
Regina:
"...I conscientiosly created a home where talk was more important than almost anything else. We talked about everything."
Our first hint was...?
;)>
kbp...
are you sensing some non-verbal communicative gesturing????
*smile*
good morning!!!
I think it's reprehensible that Carolyn threatened her own daughter, Betty, with foster care, and still calls her brainwashed, for choosing a fundamentalist lifestyle.
I'm just aghast. What kind of mother is that??? People should be sickened by this, but unfortunately, all the mainstream women in America will be on Carolyn's side, because Carolyn's account affirms their own lifestyle choices.
Does a catholic mother write a book condemning her own daughter for choosing to become a nun??
I'm just too sick for words. Carolyn is responsible for interrupting Betty's normal development and abusing her by putting her in strange, unwanted circumstances. If Betty has trouble relating to the world around her, it's Carolyn's fault.
And there she is sitting in her mansion with her millions gotten by maligning her peers and her own daughter. It's sick. The woman has no shame. Betty should sue her for character assassination.
Z-
You are one of the most un-American individuals I have encountered i a long, long time.
And clearly you are so far out of the 'mainstream' as to be virtually clueless about how anyone thinks. And you are so clearly not a parent, or certainly shouldn't be one if you are, that the best thing you can do concerning parenting is keep your mouth shut and learn a little.
Carolyn may be a lot of things. I am one of the first to criticize many of her choices. On the other hand, her daughter, who by all accounts is lovely, didn't get to be that way in a vaccumn. A big part of who she is came from her mother. Hopefully, someday, they will be able to find a way to reconcile and love one another.
Just a hint about Pliggy's know-it-all. What little he has posted about me has been far more inaccurate than when I complained about John Daughtery's inaccuracies. Hmmm..."Apostates" ain't the only ones that can't tell the truth.
Mornin,
Ron ol boy, the bigot card is right next to the "sex with 14" card.
"Sex at 14 card" Why should a married person even be eyeing down a young girl, even if there is no consummation? Why not "bless her" that she will be promised to him when she is of age and stay with her father?
Post a Comment
<< Home