Current Events

TOPICS:

7/19/08

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11

 ... 434

Next

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

5 | 6 | 7

Next

IDGAS

IDGAS

Jackson Heights, NY
March 2004

MAY 28, 2008 10:50 AM

Via the Huffington Post and first published in Deseret News, Dallas News, and The Smoking Gun photographs showing Warren Jeffs holding and kissing two different young girls. Mister "I will stick my tongue down the throat of a 12 year old girl" Jeffs is/was the leader of the YFZ Ranch.

Child Protective Services can keep in its care an infant born to a polygamist sect member this month...

Last week, the agency released several photographs, including one showing sect leader Warren Jeffs holding a 12-year-old girl he purportedly married in July 2006 and kissing her on the lips.

[sect attorney Rod] Mr. Parker said the infant's parents, Louisa Bradshaw Jessop and Dan Jessop, decided not to keep fighting for the child's release, because a Texas Supreme Court decision affecting all 450 or so sect children removed by CPS from the sect's West Texas ranch is expected shortly.

On Tuesday, the Jessops signed an agreement with state lawyers, saying that the 12-year-old girl shown with Mr. Jeffs lived in the same building with the couple at the sect's Yearning for Zion ranch in Eldorado.

When shown the photo of his sister with Mr. Jeffs, Dan Jessop said, "There's everything wrong with that." Later, though, when asked if the photo showed sexual abuse, he said, "I do not consider a girl kissing a man sexual abuse." (emphasis mine May 27, 2008 link)



Photographs

Rusty_metal_ass

Rusty_metal_ass

I'm lost
October 2006

MAY 28, 2008 11:00 AM

IDGAS said:
Via the Huffington Post and first published in Deseret News, Dallas News, and The Smoking Gun photographs showing Warren Jeffs holding and kissing two different young girls. Mister "I will stick my tongue down the throat of a 12 year old girl" Jeffs is/was the leader of the YFZ Ranch.

Child Protective Services can keep in its care an infant born to a polygamist sect member this month...

Last week, the agency released several photographs, including one showing sect leader Warren Jeffs holding a 12-year-old girl he purportedly married in July 2006 and kissing her on the lips.

[sect attorney Rod] Mr. Parker said the infant's parents, Louisa Bradshaw Jessop and Dan Jessop, decided not to keep fighting for the child's release, because a Texas Supreme Court decision affecting all 450 or so sect children removed by CPS from the sect's West Texas ranch is expected shortly.

On Tuesday, the Jessops signed an agreement with state lawyers, saying that the 12-year-old girl shown with Mr. Jeffs lived in the same building with the couple at the sect's Yearning for Zion ranch in Eldorado.

When shown the photo of his sister with Mr. Jeffs, Dan Jessop said, "There's everything wrong with that." Later, though, when asked if the photo showed sexual abuse, he said, "I do not consider a girl kissing a man sexual abuse." (emphasis mine May 27, 2008 link)



Photographs



Gross. That first one says One year anniversary. Was she twelve when those pics were taken? That would make her 11 when they got married.

Having an 11 year old daughter, I think I'm gonna puke.

As far as I'm concerned, everyone over 18 at that ranch is guilty of the same charges as Jeffs. Every single one of them knew what was going on. It's not like they kept their perversions secret from each other. That's why it was necessary to vacate the entire compound. They are all criminals. I'm sorry, but your religious freedom does not cover child rape.

IDGAS

IDGAS

Jackson Heights, NY
March 2004

MAY 28, 2008 12:19 PM

Shiny_Metal_Ass said: I'm sorry, but your religious freedom does not cover child rape.



But, but, but it's freedom of religion man, why do you hate God so much?????

SPOILERS! (Click to view)
For the few who cannot not recognize it this is satire. It is not a serious comment.

ckdexterhaven

ckdexterhaven

Redding, CA
December 2005

MAY 28, 2008 01:03 PM

abbazappa said:

LSlice said:

Thistle said:

abbazappa said:

They would have been more successful if they had CPS go and inspect the compound and issue warrants and take the children out in case by case issue rather then throwing the baby out with the bath water.



I'm curious as to what you think is the "baby" in this scenario.



I would guess he means, a successful prosecution of those who were actually comitting crimes, as oppossed to having the whole case thrown out for for fourth amendment violations.


That and also instead of figuring out who did what and getting your story straight before going into the compound gun ho to take all of the people that looked young (as mentioned a few lines back some of the "girls" are not even teenagers any more).

It would have been nice if they decided to actually take into account the mental damage they would cause the kids, the violation of the fourth amendment, and to look into the facts and figure out the truth before going in..


4th amendment? Bah! Who needs it?

Toku666

Toku666

Columbus, OH
May 2004

MAY 28, 2008 01:44 PM

ckdexterhaven said:
4th amendment? Bah! Who needs it?



Clearly not the USA. Wait, who else would use it?

There needs to be some big, huge national roundtable about this kind of horsecrap. A new generation of Schoolhouse Rock with somebody sufficiently gnarly telling young'uns "YOUR GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT WATERBOARD PEOPLE" might make for a nice start.


abbazappa

abbazappa

Los Osos, CA
June 2006

MAY 28, 2008 03:45 PM

ckdexterhaven said:

abbazappa said:

LSlice said:

Thistle said:

abbazappa said:

They would have been more successful if they had CPS go and inspect the compound and issue warrants and take the children out in case by case issue rather then throwing the baby out with the bath water.



I'm curious as to what you think is the "baby" in this scenario.



I would guess he means, a successful prosecution of those who were actually comitting crimes, as oppossed to having the whole case thrown out for for fourth amendment violations.


That and also instead of figuring out who did what and getting your story straight before going into the compound gun ho to take all of the people that looked young (as mentioned a few lines back some of the "girls" are not even teenagers any more).

It would have been nice if they decided to actually take into account the mental damage they would cause the kids, the violation of the fourth amendment, and to look into the facts and figure out the truth before going in..


4th amendment? Bah! Who needs it?


Well we already lost the notion "innocent until proven guilty" so I guess getting rid of the 4th amendment was bound to happen.

SPOILERS! (Click to view)

And no I do not support child abuse and if they are guilty they should be punished, I just happen to support the rule of law.

velvet_petal

velvet_petal

I'm lost
November 2006

MAY 28, 2008 05:19 PM

It's playing out the way one would've expected from the outset. Even if there were a favorable ruling for the State it'd be fought and overturned. This is as it should be. I've no doubt about that. I mean, you've got to start somewhere. As a baseline, as the bare minimum of minimum standards, certain laws and actions should be Constitutional or we've got nuthin'.

At the same time, I'm equally concerned with human rights and in particular children's rights. There's a worldwide problem with human trafficking, more often than not, the trafficking of women and minors. It's a concern I feel I'll turn my attention to more fully in some concrete way in the years to come.....but I digress. Even here, children are essentially treated as chattel with little, if any legal voice, the poor little bastards.

The sort of discussion I'd be interested in seeing or having on the FLDS subject is more of a "think tank" type of discussion of how to effectively tackle the problem. It is a problem. We know something has occurred with at least a few of the influential elders at the helm. It's a vague and distressing feeling, but not enough to make a case on. These leaders have been very shrewd in their strategies to subvert police investigations, shrewd in leading their little lambs astray.

For me the more interesting discussion would be to try and puzzle out a strategy or avenue for making a solid case against individual cultic abusers, which would hold constitutional water. It's not like I've got answers, but it might be an interesting project to put our minds to if anyone is interested. It might be fun to scheme.....or maybe not. I know we're all busy and this may not be very realistic or the right venue.

There are a lot of things floating around in my head at the moment, so pardon me while I put them out there. Things which fall on both sides of the argument. Some are more obvious some less so. It's all sort of free-from and hasn't taken shape yet, plus I am not in a place where I can cruise the net and research right now.

SPOILERS! (Click to view)

-No one here in this thread is a proponent for child abuse or child rape. Arguments such as these only serve to distract.

-Arguing the validity of a religion or calling for the quashing of one, is hardly likely to get you anywhere much less win cases.

-The freedom of religion is not unrestricted. One can still prosecute for practices which break laws i.e. human sacrifices will never be allowed no matter how much you believe in what you're doing....heh. The same goes for meditating with your bong. The State/City and can regulate other practices or enforce zoning regs i.e. regulating how one goes about bloodletting animals to be consumed, where, etc. The State has to prove its case, of course.

-Pursuing members based on welfare fraud/abuse schemes were used effectively in some small way previously.

-Other groups have been looking at broadening the scope of laws related to the interstate transportation of minors across borders for sexual purposes.

-Polygamy, while illegal is not an effective angle to pursue. Prosecutions generally involve cases of bigamy where one party files because they've been defrauded and ripped off in some way. By the nature of things any additional marriages are null and void. Unless one of the parties files to assert some right or files a complaint that they've been harmed, the state doesn't try to get involved in such matters. It doesn't seem likely FLDS members will make such complaints nor provide the necessary proof. It's also one of those things which people steer clear of because polygamy, polygyny, polyandry exists in a number of countries and some religions and is recognized by many outside of the USA.

-Not sure what kind of tax break and tax incentives groups like this get. If tax dollars are given for the schooling of children who don't get schooled in the mandatory subjects for the mandatory amount of time daily, that might be another angle. I'm all for tracing where our tax money goes and nailing people for tax fraud.

-IRS fraud? Good enough to nail Capone and many others. Any avenues there?



Like most of us here, I've not done and in depth comparative analysis of all religions and am not all knowing. Hell, I'm not even religious, but I do believe wholeheartedly in your right to practice yours. I don't want to engage in activities which are tantamount to the persecution of any group for their beliefs. I am however for out scheming schemers and trying to beat them at their own game. I'm interested in trying to figure out what the next step is.


motorfirebox

motorfirebox

Pittsburgh, PA
March 2004

MAY 28, 2008 06:37 PM

one consequence of freedom is the existence of those who will abuse it. groups like the FLDS are, and will remain, a facet of our society so long as our society retains any reasonable level of freedom. the simple fact is that if people choose to hole themselves up together and not talk to outsiders, they can do pretty much anything they want to each other and nobody is likely to find out. we, as a society, value our individual privacy, and it is that individual privacy which allows groups like the FLDS to flourish. it seems to me that any steps we take towards preventing such reclusive subgroups from forming are, by necessity, steps towards stripping away our ability to remain private citizens.

velvet_petal

velvet_petal

I'm lost
November 2006

MAY 28, 2008 07:11 PM

motorfirebox said:
one consequence of freedom is the existence of those who will abuse it. groups like the FLDS are, and will remain, a facet of our society so long as our society retains any reasonable level of freedom. the simple fact is that if people choose to hole themselves up together and not talk to outsiders, they can do pretty much anything they want to each other and nobody is likely to find out. we, as a society, value our individual privacy, and it is that individual privacy which allows groups like the FLDS to flourish. it seems to me that any steps we take towards preventing such reclusive subgroups from forming are, by necessity, steps towards stripping away our ability to remain private citizens.



Yeah, I see your point. I find myself conflicted. Definitely worth giving some more serious thought.

Shalome

Shalome

MODERATOR

Los Angeles, CA

MAY 28, 2008 08:21 PM

motorfirebox said:
one consequence of freedom is the existence of those who will abuse it. groups like the FLDS are, and will remain, a facet of our society so long as our society retains any reasonable level of freedom. the simple fact is that if people choose to hole themselves up together and not talk to outsiders, they can do pretty much anything they want to each other and nobody is likely to find out. we, as a society, value our individual privacy, and it is that individual privacy which allows groups like the FLDS to flourish. it seems to me that any steps we take towards preventing such reclusive subgroups from forming are, by necessity, steps towards stripping away our ability to remain private citizens.



By that argument, that guy who kept his daughter locked up in the basement for 20 years and forced her to have six kids was just "remaining a private citizen" and practicing his right to "individual privacy."

Forcing young teenage girls to marry men they don't love and bear their children under threat of eternal damnation and being thrown of the community penniless and homeless, where they've been told that they'll be forced to become prostitutes if they leave the community, should not be accepted in a free society.

Individual freedom does not mean "the right to do anything you damn well please without regard to the rights of others and without consequence." That's not a free society, that's the most hellacious form of anarchy imaginable.

Shalome

Shalome

MODERATOR

Los Angeles, CA

MAY 28, 2008 08:29 PM

Here, check out FLDS sect leader Warren Jeffs practicing his individual right to privacy and personal freedom by kissing his newest "wife" back in 2005.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/05/28/jeffs.kissing/index.html

zoom image

One set of pictures is labeled "first anniversary -- January 26, 2005."



One of the girls shown in the photos ... birth date was given as July 1994, meaning she is 13.



Jeffs, 52, is in a Utah prison, serving two consecutive terms of five years to life after a conviction on two charges of being an accomplice to rape in connection with a marriage he performed in 2001. He also faces trial in Arizona on eight charges, including sexual conduct with a minor, incest and conspiracy.

IDGAS

IDGAS

Jackson Heights, NY
March 2004

MAY 28, 2008 08:34 PM

Shalome said:
Here, check out FLDS sect leader Warren Jeffs practicing his individual right to privacy and personal freedom by kissing his newest "wife" back in 2005.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/05/28/jeffs.kissing/index.html

zoom image

One set of pictures is labeled "first anniversary -- January 26, 2005."



One of the girls shown in the photos ... birth date was given as July 1994, meaning she is 13.



Jeffs, 52, is in a Utah prison, serving two consecutive terms of five years to life after a conviction on two charges of being an accomplice to rape in connection with a marriage he performed in 2001. He also faces trial in Arizona on eight charges, including sexual conduct with a minor, incest and conspiracy.



At least I used a spoiler.

motorfirebox

motorfirebox

Pittsburgh, PA
March 2004

MAY 28, 2008 10:23 PM

Shalome said:

motorfirebox said:
one consequence of freedom is the existence of those who will abuse it. groups like the FLDS are, and will remain, a facet of our society so long as our society retains any reasonable level of freedom. the simple fact is that if people choose to hole themselves up together and not talk to outsiders, they can do pretty much anything they want to each other and nobody is likely to find out. we, as a society, value our individual privacy, and it is that individual privacy which allows groups like the FLDS to flourish. it seems to me that any steps we take towards preventing such reclusive subgroups from forming are, by necessity, steps towards stripping away our ability to remain private citizens.



By that argument, that guy who kept his daughter locked up in the basement for 20 years and forced her to have six kids was just "remaining a private citizen" and practicing his right to "individual privacy."


no. by my argument, that man abused his right to individual privacy. in the US and most of the first world, we are largely free from surveillance and monitoring. that freedom can be exploited, but i don't believe that means that freedom should be taken away.

Shalome said:
Forcing young teenage girls to marry men they don't love and bear their children under threat of eternal damnation and being thrown of the community penniless and homeless, where they've been told that they'll be forced to become prostitutes if they leave the community, should not be accepted in a free society.

Individual freedom does not mean "the right to do anything you damn well please without regard to the rights of others and without consequence." That's not a free society, that's the most hellacious form of anarchy imaginable.


correct--individual freedom does not convey the right to do terrible things to people without consequence. it merely conveys the ability to do terrible things to people, frequently without consequence if one is careful.

the same laws that protect you from having your house searched without due cause, from having your phones tapped just because the gubmint feels like it, from being detained indefinitely without charge--these laws also protect groups like the FLDS. it is very, very difficult to reduce the amount of protection that groups like the FLDS derive from these laws without also reducing the amount of protection that everyone else derives from these laws.

the things such groups can do to people are terrible. and velvet_petal makes a very good point--this issue of privacy versus protection extends beyond insular cults, and into such areas as human trafficking and every other criminal endeavor. but we need to always keep in mind the price of protecting ourselves from such abuses, and balance it against the benefit.

LSlice

LSlice

Montclair, NJ
December 2007

MAY 28, 2008 11:09 PM

Speaking of the Fourth Amendment:




The Supreme Court offered unanimous support for police Wednesday by allowing drug evidence gathered after an arrest that violated state law to be used at trial, an important search-and-seizure case turning on the constitutional limits of "probable cause."



http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/04/23/scotus.searches/

Rusty_metal_ass

Rusty_metal_ass

I'm lost
October 2006

MAY 29, 2008 03:29 AM

LSlice said:
Speaking of the Fourth Amendment:




The Supreme Court offered unanimous support for police Wednesday by allowing drug evidence gathered after an arrest that violated state law to be used at trial, an important search-and-seizure case turning on the constitutional limits of "probable cause."



http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/04/23/scotus.searches/



And this has what to do with child rape?

Oh yeah.....gubbment baaaaaad....

Priapos

Priapos

Water Valley, TX
October 2005

MAY 29, 2008 05:01 AM

Shiny_Metal_Ass said:
Oh yeah.....gubbment baaaaaad....



Bring it

abbazappa

abbazappa

Los Osos, CA
June 2006

MAY 29, 2008 05:16 AM

Shiny_Metal_Ass said:

LSlice said:
Speaking of the Fourth Amendment:




The Supreme Court offered unanimous support for police Wednesday by allowing drug evidence gathered after an arrest that violated state law to be used at trial, an important search-and-seizure case turning on the constitutional limits of "probable cause."



http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/04/23/scotus.searches/



And this has what to do with child rape?

Oh yeah.....gubbment baaaaaad....


Or maybe that we have been talking about the 4th amendment and how the government raid on the compound was a violation against it, but never mind that go on trolling and continually stating "gubbment baaaaad".

Rusty_metal_ass

Rusty_metal_ass

I'm lost
October 2006

MAY 29, 2008 05:20 AM

abbazappa said:

Shiny_Metal_Ass said:

LSlice said:
Speaking of the Fourth Amendment:




The Supreme Court offered unanimous support for police Wednesday by allowing drug evidence gathered after an arrest that violated state law to be used at trial, an important search-and-seizure case turning on the constitutional limits of "probable cause."



http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/04/23/scotus.searches/



And this has what to do with child rape?

Oh yeah.....gubbment baaaaaad....


Or maybe that we have been talking about the 4th amendment and how the government raid on the compound was a violation against it, but never mind that go on trolling and continually stating "gubbment baaaaad".



Sometimes the image in the mirror isn't too pretty. Sorry you can't handle that.

ckdexterhaven

ckdexterhaven

Redding, CA
December 2005

MAY 29, 2008 05:57 PM

LSlice said:
Speaking of the Fourth Amendment:




The Supreme Court offered unanimous support for police Wednesday by allowing drug evidence gathered after an arrest that violated state law to be used at trial, an important search-and-seizure case turning on the constitutional limits of "probable cause."



http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/04/23/scotus.searches/


It's all good. I trust the government and law enforcement officials not to abuse their power.

Rusty_metal_ass

Rusty_metal_ass

I'm lost
October 2006

MAY 29, 2008 06:19 PM

Priapos said:

Shiny_Metal_Ass said:
Oh yeah.....gubbment baaaaaad....



Bring it



I did. Where u at?

SPOILERS! (Click to view)

That 's what I thought.

LostLucy

LostLucy

USA
December 2006

MAY 29, 2008 06:24 PM

It is extremely complicated, and terrbily sad for the mothers, who it appears may be complicit, or may be in the dark. Or denial.

In an ideal situation the mothers would have had supervised visits off-site with their children.

Rusty_metal_ass

Rusty_metal_ass

I'm lost
October 2006

JUL 24, 2008 02:19 PM

Rusty_metal_ass

Rusty_metal_ass

I'm lost
October 2006

JUL 28, 2008 03:26 PM

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

5 | 6 | 7

Next