FLDS Raid

[Andrewwhyte 1]

A search and seizure of property may be illegal but the protection of the children is not a criminal matter in and of itself. They still can use the evidence in a child custody hearing; the evidence is not used against anyone in particular, it is used in favour of the child's interest.

[cloudseeker2001 0]

Quote

A search and seizure of property may be illegal but the protection of the children is not a criminal matter in and of itself. They still can use the evidence in a child custody hearing; the evidence is not used against anyone in particular, it is used in favour of the child's interest.

I do not agree. And it is not ok to lie, cheat or steal.

"Some call it heavenly in it's brilliance,
others mean and rueful of the western dream"

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Which part of what I said do you not agree with?

[cloudseeker2001 0]

Quote

Which part of what I said do you not agree with?

I do not believe that evidence collected illegally will be deemed legal to use in court. Of course, this will take some form of argument no doubt.

"Some call it heavenly in it's brilliance,
others mean and rueful of the western dream"

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Well I am not a lawyer but I believe the rules of evidence only allow for the exclusion of evidence based upon the effect on the defendant or at least the subject of the hearing, and the parent is not the subject of a child custody hearing, the child is. I could be wrong.

[cloudseeker2001 0]

Quote

Well I am not a lawyer but I believe the rules of evidence only allow for the exclusion of evidence based upon the effect on the defendant or at least the subject of the hearing, and the parent is not the subject of a child custody hearing, the child is. I could be wrong.

It will be interesting to see how the State of Texas goes about the details.

"Some call it heavenly in it's brilliance,
others mean and rueful of the western dream"

[cloudseeker2001 0]

Where does the skullduggery stop? Now The Brown Shirts are going to press charges on the woman they believe to have made the call in the first place.

"Some call it heavenly in it's brilliance,
others mean and rueful of the western dream"

[jakee 1,271]

Quote

Where does the skullduggery stop? Now The Brown Shirts are going to press charges on the woman they believe to have made the call in the first place.

What? So first you were pissed off that everything originally stemmed from a false report, now you think making false reports to the police is ok?

Can't you people make up your minds?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Zipp0 1]

I wonder if the men will submit to the DNA tests or fight them. It seems that in submitting to the tests they may in fact be losing their 5th ammendment rights against self-incrimination.

--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.

[Shotgun 1]

It sounds like at least some of them are cooperating with the DNA testing. And it also sounds like they are admitting that underage girls in the sect have sex with adult men (though claiming to not have known that it was illegal):

Quote

Three male members of the sect said in an interview aired on CBS's "Early Show" Monday that they would cooperate in DNA testing if it would help them get the children back.

"Whatever we need to do to get them back in their peaceful homes," a man identified only as Rulan said.

State prosecutors have argued that the FLDS church encourages underage marriages and births, subjecting children to sexual abuse or the imminent risk of abuse. "Rulan" said sect members are reconsidering whether girls under 18 should have sex with adult men.

"Many of us perhaps were not even aware of such a law," he said. "And we do reconsider, yes. We teach our children to abide the law."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080421/ap_on_re_us/polygamist_retreat;_ylt=AiHc1RDInm49kqlxplHJuMCs0NUE

[Nightingale 0]

Quote

I wonder if the men will submit to the DNA tests or fight them. It seems that in submitting to the tests they may in fact be losing their 5th ammendment rights against self-incrimination.

They don't have to do either. The DNA tests are only mandatory for the children in custody, and optional for adults. It appears as though many adults are cooperating, though, because otherwise, the state won't know which child to return to which parent.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

I wonder if the men will submit to the DNA tests or fight them. It seems that in submitting to the tests they may in fact be losing their 5th ammendment rights against self-incrimination.

They don't have to do either. The DNA tests are only mandatory for the children in custody, and optional for adults. It appears as though many adults are cooperating, though, because otherwise, the state won't know which child to return to which parent.

with the level of inbreeding, will they know even with the DNA test results? Could be a lot of ambiguous results.

[Nightingale 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I wonder if the men will submit to the DNA tests or fight them. It seems that in submitting to the tests they may in fact be losing their 5th ammendment rights against self-incrimination.

They don't have to do either. The DNA tests are only mandatory for the children in custody, and optional for adults. It appears as though many adults are cooperating, though, because otherwise, the state won't know which child to return to which parent.

with the level of inbreeding, will they know even with the DNA test results? Could be a lot of ambiguous results.

Even with that level of inbreeding, they should be able to show paternity/maternity without too much of a problem.

[livendive 8]

Quote

The DNA tests are only mandatory for the children in custody, and optional for adults.

Just out of curiousity, do children not enjoy constitutional rights? It would seem to me that mandatory DNA testing would meet the test of a search and seizure requiring probable cause.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[Nightingale 0]

Of course they do. They are protected from search and seizure without due process. They had their day in court and got due process. Also, it's a practical matter. Since the kids won't tell them who their parents are, and the parents won't ID their kids, the state needs to know who to return the child to.

[PLFXpert 0]

Quote

Even with that level of inbreeding, they should be able to show paternity/maternity without too much of a problem....

Since the kids won't tell them who their parents are, and the parents won't ID their kids, the state needs to know who to return the child to.

Exactly.

Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

I wonder if the men will submit to the DNA tests or fight them. It seems that in submitting to the tests they may in fact be losing their 5th ammendment rights against self-incrimination.

They don't have to do either. The DNA tests are only mandatory for the children in custody, and optional for adults. It appears as though many adults are cooperating, though, because otherwise, the state won't know which child to return to which parent.

with the level of inbreeding, will they know even with the DNA test results? Could be a lot of ambiguous results.

Even with that level of inbreeding, they should be able to show paternity/maternity without too much of a problem.

http://www.springerlink.com/content/w015lg07l2595064/

Abstract Multilocus DNA fingerprinting was carried out on 65 individuals from a captive colony of guinea baboons (Papio hamadryas papio) at Brookfield Zoo, in order to determine the allocation of reproductive success among 7 active males. DNA fingerprinting was found to reveal very low levels of genetic variability in the study population, rendering discrimination of different levels of relatedness, and hence paternity, impossible. A method was therefore developed for emphasizing the region of the fingerprint pattern which revealed the greatest level of band variability, and the effect of this experimental modification on band sharing statistics was tested. Band sharing coefficients among unrelated individuals were significantly lower using the modified system, which was then applied to paternity testing in the whole population. However even when using the modified system, of the 33 offspring analyzed only 4 could be assigned solely to 1 male, 14 offspring were assigned to 1 of 2 males, 7 offspring had 3 potential fathers, and the remainder had 4 or more possible fathers. The implications of the limitations of these data for behavioural studies and genetic management of captive populations are discussed.

[cloudseeker2001 0]

Quote

Quote

Where does the skullduggery stop? Now The Brown Shirts are going to press charges on the woman they believe to have made the call in the first place.

What? So first you were pissed off that everything originally stemmed from a false report, now you think making false reports to the police is ok?

Can't you people make up your minds?

You do not find this odd? Someone makes the call, the police show up and start their games. Then they cannot find the person who makes the call at the compound, but then find out it was a black women in CO who has made something like 40 hours of calls between two different people?????????? And now they are going to arrest her? What is this some kind of win/win deal for the cops?????

Sounds fishy to me.

"Some call it heavenly in it's brilliance,
others mean and rueful of the western dream"

[Nightingale 0]

The FLDS has only existed for about 75 years, and has a membership of around 6000. That's a lot of people to get extremely inbred in less than a century.

[cloudseeker2001 0]

Quote

The FLDS has only existed for about 75 years, and has a membership of around 6000. That's a lot of people to get extremely inbred in less than a century.

Maybe more than 6000 people. I suspect many of the memebers live in the woods of Idaho, Utah, Washington, northern Cali and Oregon and are not counted.

And I think there is one in Waller! One of our skydivers landed in their yard not long ago and he has not been the same since!

"Some call it heavenly in it's brilliance,
others mean and rueful of the western dream"

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

with the level of inbreeding, will they know even with the DNA test results? Could be a lot of ambiguous results.

The paper cited was from 1992, so likely to be using RFLP and Southern blotting.

Using the standard methodology today which examines at sections of DNA (loci) that show large amount of variability across the human genome, it should not be a problem.

If there is a need to go to either additional number of short tandem repeats (STR), focusing on the sex chromosomes, that can be done. Or Amplified Fragment Length Polymorphism (AFLP)-based genetic screening as a secondary, confirming test should be do-able as well.

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

Of course they do. They are protected from search and seizure without due process. They had their day in court and got due process. Also, it's a practical matter. Since the kids won't tell them who their parents are, and the parents won't ID their kids, the state needs to know who to return the child to.

My understanding is that the DNA testing is to try to identify close(st) siblings to keep them together and as further evidence of polygamous practice and sex with minors. It’s unclear whether the children are intentionally being deceptive or genuinely don’t know who their biological mother is – “they’ve been trained to evade questions about relationships and use ‘mother’ to address all their father's wives.”

Texas Law, sponsored by Rep. Harvey Hilderbran (R-Kerrville), was changed in 2004 to make polygamy a felony (rather than a misdemeanor) and to increase the legal age of marriage for girls to 16:

“In cases where teenage girls have babies, authorities will look closely at how old they were when they conceived and at the father’s age. And because polygamous sects do not file marriage certificates of second and third wives, the law also allows prosecutors to charge people with polygamy in situations where there is an appearance of the crime, such as multiple wives living under one roof.”

“The bill’s final version also made it illegal for children to marry their stepparents. It also provided for the prosecution of parents who allowed children younger than 16 to get married.”

Other parts of the 2004 Texas law: provide for felony prosecution of parents who allow children younger than 16 to marry; allows for prosecution of people who perform wedding ceremonies for people younger than 16; prohibits people from being in a common-law marriage if they are already married; makes having sex with first cousins a second-degree felony, while other forms of incest may be considered third-degree felonies; voids marriages in which one of the parties is underage, meaning that sexual acts committed during those marriages can be considered felonies.

Taken in conjunction with documents, "Bishop's records," from the search of the FLDS compound, I suspect Texas prosecutors will be trying to show violations of those State laws.

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[livendive 8]

Quote

Of course they do. They are protected from search and seizure without due process. They had their day in court and got due process. Also, it's a practical matter. Since the kids won't tell them who their parents are, and the parents won't ID their kids, the state needs to know who to return the child to.

Hmm...I thought they needed probable cause related to a crime, not just "due process", but this is your arena, not mine.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[masterrig 1]

So no, seeing a pregnant young girl walking down the street is not probable cause to take 416 children from their families.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

with the level of inbreeding, will they know even with the DNA test results? Could be a lot of ambiguous results.

The paper cited was from 1992, so likely to be using RFLP and Southern blotting.

Using the standard methodology today which examines at sections of DNA (loci) that show large amount of variability across the human genome, it should not be a problem.

If there is a need to go to either additional number of short tandem repeats (STR), focusing on the sex chromosomes, that can be done. Or Amplified Fragment Length Polymorphism (AFLP)-based genetic screening as a secondary, confirming test should be do-able as well.

VR/Marg

well, that should cover it.

I wondered if the tests keep it too simple and only look at a few data points to determine the result.