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

6SpeedTA95 · 04-16-2008, 10:41 AM

Guys was there enough evidence for a warrant in this case? If yes, why? If no why?

if I get links to evidence I will post them here

kinggovernor · 04-16-2008, 10:50 AM

they received a complaint about an underage girls being beaten and sexually molested, of course they had to act.

Phantom · 04-16-2008, 10:53 AM

The bar for a warrant is very low.

If they have the complaint of abuse made by a caller from the compound, there's easily enough evidence to take out a warrant.

WickedLou9 · 04-16-2008, 10:55 AM

I'm not a lawyer but I know that when there are allegations of abuse of children, the burden of proof is very low. They tend to act first by taking the kids away and then sort things out. If it's all on the up and up, they give the kids back. There is too much at stake to do it any other way.

6SpeedTA95 · 04-16-2008, 10:56 AM

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

they received a complaint about an underage girls being beaten and sexually molested, of course they had to act.

Oh I agree they had to act, but the articles I've read said they had ONE anomous call?

kinggovernor · 04-16-2008, 10:57 AM

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

Oh I agree they had to act, but the articles I've read said they had ONE anomous call?

I tried to find the affidavits filed for the search warrant, but I couldn't find them. They would explain the reasons for why they applied for a warrant

Thorgrim · 04-16-2008, 10:57 AM

Originally Posted by Phantom

The bar for a warrant is very low.

If they have the complaint of abuse made by a caller from the compound, there's easily enough evidence to take out a warrant.

I concur, especially in that state

All you'd have to show is the dumbest cop in the world was acting in good faith, and the judge wasn't grossly violating his duty to the court

Needless to say i don't even think those questions would be asked, but if they were, they'd pass the very low bar

BTW the bar is so low, and it's so easy for the government to search your homes, because of conservative rulings made my Republican SCOTUS judges

Thorgrim · 04-16-2008, 10:59 AM

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

Oh I agree they had to act, but the articles I've read said they had ONE anomous call?

check out illinois v. gates (should be on wikipedia)

Thorgrim · 04-16-2008, 11:01 AM

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

I'm not a lawyer but I know that when there are allegations of abuse of children, the burden of proof is very low. They tend to act first by taking the kids away and then sort things out. If it's all on the up and up, they give the kids back. There is too much at stake to do it any other way.

federal law sets the minimum, and I don't think there is any lesser requirement if the situation may involve child abuse...it's just like any case involving drugs, etc

6SpeedTA95 · 04-16-2008, 11:49 AM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

federal law sets the minimum, and I don't think there is any lesser requirement if the situation may involve child abuse...it's just like any case involving drugs, etc

So you think it was justified based on the evidence? Or have you not seen much evidence, just speculating?

Reason I ask is I got into it with a buddy at work, I dont think they had enough evidence for the warrant. While I think these guys need to be brought to justice for child abuse they need to do it within the bounds of the constitution.

7960 · 04-16-2008, 11:55 AM

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

Guys was there enough evidence for a warrant in this case? If yes, why? If no why?

yes.

there was the phone complaint and the prior acts by members of the group.

6SpeedTA95 · 04-16-2008, 12:00 PM

Originally Posted by 7960

yes.

there was the phone complaint and the prior acts by members of the group.

What are these prior acts and complaints though? I haven't seen any of the filings and they haven't been made public. How do we know the sherrif (who claims this) isn't just covering his rear end?

Phantom · 04-16-2008, 12:02 PM

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

So you think it was justified based on the evidence? Or have you not seen much evidence, just speculating?

Reason I ask is I got into it with a buddy at work, I dont think they had enough evidence for the warrant. While I think these guys need to be brought to justice for child abuse they need to do it within the bounds of the constitution.

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.

thewise1 · 04-16-2008, 12:03 PM

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.

6SpeedTA95 · 04-16-2008, 12:09 PM

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.

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.

Thorgrim · 04-16-2008, 12:11 PM

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.

Phantom says it perfectly...

6Speed I understand exactly where you are coming from...and 40 years or so ago you may have been correct...but understand the Supreme Court has ruled on dozens of cases...always lowering the requirement for a warrant because the GOP's concerns about "high crime and liberal judges"

So, everything points to that you were wrong in the argument

7960 · 04-16-2008, 12:11 PM

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

What are these prior acts and complaints though? I haven't seen any of the filings and they haven't been made public.

jeffs (former leader)
bateman (that made me laugh)
jessop (avoided prison though a plea bargain, but had to register as a sex offender)
kelly fischer

(Arizona polygamist sentenced to jail time, registered as sex offender)

there are more.

How do we know the sherrif (who claims this) isn't just covering his rear end?

Huh?

Thorgrim · 04-16-2008, 12:13 PM

wise/6 again:

anonymous tip plus some sort of minor "police instict" has been ruled by the Supreme Court of this nation (the conservative majority) to be enough for a justifiable warrant

Phantom · 04-16-2008, 12:15 PM

Originally Posted by 7960

bateman (that made me laugh)

7960 · 04-16-2008, 12:15 PM

one search and arrest warrant

I'm sure there are more

Texas Sect's Sick "Temple" - April 10, 2008