LL legal crew, was there enough evidence for a warrant v.texas polygamy?

[A_C_E]

Originally Posted by Phantom

It's hard to say. An anonymous tip and nothing more is not enough for a warrant.

An anonymous tip plus just a little bit more is going to be enough for the warrant. If they have the anonymous tip and can trace the call back to the compound, that's probably enough.

It's absolutely enough.

[A_C_E]

Originally Posted by thewise1

Can you link me to what evidence they had by any chance? I haven't seen the list or followed it very closely. If it was just one anonymous phone call, that doesn't sit well with me... but if it was just one anonymous phone call that led to cops cruising by and seeing a wedding with a little kid... obviously that becomes different.

It gives me heart to see you asking this, though. Seriously - my day just got a lot better.

It gives you heart to see a possible scenario where people guilty of beating and molesting children get set free on a technicality?

[Thorgrim]

Note, 6speed is calling us OTers, not LLers...and he runs this forum

[A_C_E]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Note, 6speed is calling us OTers, not LLers...and he runs this forum

I just realized that.

I'm so used to seeing "OT ____ crew" that it didn't even give me a second of pause

[thewise1]

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

Well thats my point, the media is hanging these people prior to the trial (not uncommon for the media) but the only real evidence I've heard is an anonymous tip, which sounds pretty to me.

The media loves to hang a religious group before the trial especially in situations like this - it's dramatic TV and it's great for ratings.

I'm no mormon, but the normal LDS folks I've met are probably better people than myself I had a tough time taking this one at face value (though I realize this is not the same sect) but in time the evidence will shake itself out I guess.

[6SpeedTA95]

Originally Posted by A_C_E

It gives you heart to see a possible scenario where people guilty of beating and molesting children get set free on a technicality?

It's called following the constitution. I dont want pedophiles to go free, but I sure as hell dont want to piss on the constitution to get them thrown in jail.

[thewise1]

Originally Posted by A_C_E

It gives you heart to see a possible scenario where people guilty of beating and molesting children get set free on a technicality?

I guess this just goes to show Ivy League educations aren't infallible

[thewise1]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Note, 6speed is calling us OTers, not LLers...and he runs this forum

I didn't even notice I guess OT really was a way of life for a long time

[Thorgrim]

Is it just me or does this thread seem like a re-run of yesterday but with different characters playing different roles?

[6SpeedTA95]

Originally Posted by thewise1

I didn't even notice I guess OT really was a way of life for a long time

Yeah it was, but a buddy of mine at work is on OT and while I was typing the thread up he told me to post it on OT as well so I got OT in the title somehow

[6SpeedTA95]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Is it just me or does this thread seem like a re-run of yesterday but with different characters?

Yesterday was about the death penalty.

This is about the legality and warrant requirements for the case. I was hoping people taht are more knowledgeable on thsi subject could chime in because we had a pretty heated debate at work this morning and yet none of us can find any hard evidence that points to a warrant being justifiable...other than this so called tip.

[7960]

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

Yesterday was about the death penalty.

This is about the legality and warrant requirements for the case. I was hoping people taht are more knowledgeable on thsi subject could chime in because we had a pretty heated debate at work this morning and yet none of us can find any hard evidence that points to a warrant being justifiable...other than this so called tip.

One of the arrest warrants.

[A_C_E]

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

It's called following the constitution. I dont want pedophiles to go free, but I sure as hell dont want to piss on the constitution to get them thrown in jail.

There's no Constitutional consensus on when a warrant is required, what justifies a warrant, and what searches are "reasonable." Most scholarship says that the Framers wouldn't have said warrants are necessary as long as the searches are reasonable, but that's neither here nor there.

The Constitution is not an appropriate guide here.

[A_C_E]

Originally Posted by 7960

One of the arrest warrants.

Says there that a number of Family Services counselors had direct contact with residents of the compound, who provided firsthand knowledge and testimony of illegal activities ongoing there with underage women.

That's more than enough for a warrant.

[7960]

the warrant was issued (one of them, anyway) for two things

1) child abuse, and
2) polygamy

The call was evidence of child abuse. There's also officer testimony that the officer spoke with children under 17 years old who had children 2 and 3 years old. The girls interviewed told the officer their ages and the ages of their babies. Simple math tells us the rest.

The polygamy part also came from interviews with the girls.

It wasn't just the single phone call.

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by A_C_E

Says there that a number of Family Services counselors had direct contact with residents of the compound, who provided firsthand knowledge and testimony of illegal activities ongoing there with underage women.

That's more than enough for a warrant.

He's right, but, ace, the constitution is only not an issue because it has already been ruled upon...not because the issue itself is non-constitutional, or because it was obvious to the framers, etc

[motivez]

Originally Posted by 7960

the warrant was issued (one of them, anyway) for two things

1) child abuse, and
2) polygamy

The call was evidence of child abuse. There's also officer testimony that the officer spoke with children under 17 years old who had children 2 and 3 years old. The girls interviewed told the officer their ages and the ages of their babies. Simple math tells us the rest.

The polygamy part also came from interviews with the girls.

It wasn't just the single phone call.

I don't think polygamy should be evidence enough for anything on its own though, whatever relationship dynamic consenting adults want to have with each other should be their own decision and there shouldn't be any laws against it

When children are involved though, it's a different story..

[7960]

Originally Posted by motivez

I don't think polygamy should be evidence enough for anything on its own though, whatever relationship dynamic consenting adults want to have with each other should be their own decision and there shouldn't be any laws against it

You thinking there should not be laws against it doesn't mean cops should ignore it.

[motivez]

Why should cops investigate the relationship dynamics of consenting adults?

I mean, if me and two other women () wanted to enter a consenting relationship, what business is it of theirs that there's three of us instead of two?