[posted by Justin Levine]

This post is by guest blogger Justin Levine, and not by Patterico.

Due to the nature of my job, I get bombarded by various phone call inquiries and e-mails from PR firms trying to pitch guests for the show. I just got a notable pitch request that came across my in-box that I felt I had to share with you dear readers. I am omitting the name, phone number and e-mail of the contact person in order to protect the guilty (and to ensure that PR people can still feel comfortable pitching me submissions in the future - no matter what their perspective might be).

Text of e-mail [all links contained therein were provided in the original message that was sent to me]:

Subject: Story Idea Federal Judge Thinks Porn is Funny

Good Morning,

I was writing to let you know of an immediate media guest availability. Michael Leahy is an author and leading vocal critic of the porn industry and its effect on our country. Last week, a federal appellate judge was found to have uploaded explicit content on his website. He reportedly considers the content to be “funny.” A Nashville based action group is calling for Alex Kozinski’s resignation or impeachment. Michael Leahy weighs in on the controversy.

If you would like more information (more…)

Posted by WLS:

I’ve watched with dismay as Dan Abrams has lowered himself into the sewer over at MSNBC by going completely in the tank for Obama, and turning the network into a full-time operative of the DNC.  But Abrams is clearly one of the principal players behind that move, as it began after he gave up his prior show a couple years ago to be program director for the network.  I never imagined he was anything but a New York liberal, but in his prior incarnation when his show focused mainly on legal affairs, I found him to be a fair and insightful inquisitor of his guests and their viewpoints.

Abrams new show is only marginally less partisan than Dolpermann’s, but last night he reached a new low for himself.

At about the halfway mark the show he did a segment on the new video that emerged yesterday of the South Side Catholic Priest Michael Pfleger and his ridiculous “sermon” last Sunday at Obama’s church in Chicago.  Pfleger is a long-time ally retired Rev. Wright, and has appeared with and spoken glowingly of Louis Farrakhan.

(more…)

[Guest post by DRJ]

What makes a good mother?

There are probably as many ideas of what makes a good mother as there are mothers. Patrice Buzzanell, a communications and gender professor (an interesting combination) at Purdue University compared working and stay-at-home moms and found they have different ideas of what makes a good mother. Specifically, while stay-at-home mothers emphasize their ability to nurture their children, working women are more likely to describe themselves as nurturers who have successful careers:

“Even if they don’t say it explicitly, [working mothers] are implying ‘Look at me, I am doing this so much better because I have the best of both worlds.”

Buzzanell was surprised that the women in the study rarely mentioned fathers in decision-making about childcare issues, something that would not surprise most of today’s fathers.

Whatever kind of mother you have, you are or you want to be, best wishes and Happy Mother’s Day!

– DRJ

Posted by WLS: 

Now that there is a presumptive Dimocrit nominee for the general election, I’m going to start a recurring series of postings commenting on non-answers given by Obama to direct questions posed to him by the media and others. 

The problem I expect to see develop in the very near term is the dramatic curtailment of Obama’s availability to answer questions in a format that provides for any level of candidness.  He is clearly an effective speaker when working with a teleprompter and a script, but his impromptu responses to media questions are largely void of substance.  When they do have substance they often amount to a dodge of the issue, but sometimes they contain some nugget of information about the stealth candidate that is illuminating with respect to his real beliefs.  As these more revealing comments appear I’m going to highlight them, and the implications of those comments in future policy issues.

Yesterday Obama appeared on Wolf Blitzer’s show on CNN.  As an initial entry in this series, I present the following “answer” on a simple question about whether he might advocate an increase in the capital gains tax rate:

[Blitzer]   Because they’re arguing already that you want to increase capital gains taxes, for example, on investments, and stocks, and things like that.

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: A lot of middle-class people have those kinds of accounts. If they’re…

OBAMA: If they have, — Wolf, if they have a 401(k), then they are going to see those taxes deferred, and they’re going to pay ordinary income when they finally cash out. So, that’s a phony argument. And this is something that you have seen the Republicans consistently do, is they try to make this broad- based argument about, he’s going to raise your taxes as a cover for them eliminating taxes for people like myself and you, who can afford to pay a little bit more…

Now this was a pretty straight-forward question — whether he’s suspectible to GOP claims that he will raise the capital gains tax rate, and what that means for middle class Americans.   

Rather than address the question — by saying, for example, that the capital gains tax rate it too low and should be raised, or that  it is fine where it is and will be left alone — he answers with a complete obfuscation. 

401(k) plans have nothing to do with capital gains taxes.  Contributions to 401(k) plans are made with pre-tax earnings, and the withdrawals upon eligibility are taken as ordinary income and taxed accordingly at the tax rate applicable to the retiree — including that part of the plan’s funds the constitute appreciation/ capital gains.    

Wolf Blitzer is too much of an idiot to follow-up by pointing out that Obama hadn’t answered the question, and the issue of raising the capital gains tax rate extends far beyond simply raising taxes on the “rich”.  

To suggest that American households only own stocks in their 401(k) plan — and to ignore completely the issue of capital gains taxes on investment accounts, college savings accounts, on the sale of homes, farms, or other real property –  reflects either ignorance of basic tax issues, or an unwillingness by Obama to state his positions honestly.

Frankly, I think its more of the former than the latter. 

Obama would be only the most recent example in my life of a Harvard Law School egghead who lacked a basic comprehension of day-to-day issues facing ordinary Americans.  Some of the dumbest people I’ve ever met — including some of the worst lawyers I’ve ever encountered — were graduates of elite East Coast academic institutions.   

[Guest post by DRJ]

A group of native Hawaiians has taken over the Iolani Palace museum in Honolulu in order to peacefully protest Hawaiian statehood and support Hawaiian sovereignty.

Is there any group of people left in America that doesn’t feel oppressed?

– DRJ

Posted by WLS:

Yesterday I remember reading one commentator’s recollection of the event that included a list of numerous well-known attendees — a crowd handpicked to be supportive of Rev. Wright’s anticipated rehabilitation tour. 

The only two I remember as I write this were Cornell West and Clarence Page. 

Juxtapose the crowd’s cheering of Rev. Wright’s commentary while it was happening in real time, with Obama’s claim today that he was “outraged” by what he saw when he watched television clips of the Rev’s performance on TV last night.

I can’t seem to find the commentator that I read yesterday who listed the attendees.  So, a little assignment for those who visit here — let’s identify as many of the Rev’s NPC cheerleaders as we can.   It might lead to some serious navel-gazing if we can put a few of them on the spot over their conduct.

[Guest post by DRJ]

Like the Elian Gonzalez and the Terri Shiavo cases, people are polarizing over an emotional story in the news - in this case, the FLDS child custody case. It seems to me there are three main viewpoints:

1. Some people approve of the State’s action because they believe the State has an interest in protecting girls in polygamous sects from underage sex.

2. Others need more evidence that underage FLDS girls were having sex with older men and getting pregnant. They don’t believe the CPS allegations and/or they don’t agree children should be taken away from their parents without clear proof.

3. Others aren’t concerned about underage sex or pregnancy because they are already pervasive in society. These persons require more evidence of neglect or abuse than underage sex or pregnancy to justify removing children from their homes.

People in the second and third groups are overlapping for now but their divisions will become more clear if the State comes forward with clear proof of its allegations. From what I’ve read about the Texas system, the State will present its evidence at the adversarial hearings on or before June 5 so we should learn more then.

Which group or groups do you fit in, and have I left someone’s views out?

– DRJ

[Guest post by DRJ]

This post deals with the first day of testimony in the FLDS temporary child custody hearing. It is based on the live-blog posted by the following reporters with the San Angelo Standard Times:

“Standard-Times reporter Matt Phinney updates the FLDS child custody proceedings in the 51st District Court from the remote location at the City Auditorium, while reporter Sandy Rojas reports from outside the courthouse, and reporter Trish Choate is reporting at large. Jayna Boyle is reporting from Schleicher County.”

The reporters have done an excellent job but there are limitations to what they can do. For instance, this is obviously not based on an official transcript, it has interruptions when a reporter has to leave the area (so parts of the hearing may have been missed), and I don’t believe the reporters are attorneys so his/her summary may not grasp all the legal issues.

Absent an official transcript, the best source is to click the link and read the entire summary for yourself. However, because the website is undoubtedly getting a lot of hits and has been difficult to load and/or was down some of the time, I’ll include the highlights after the fold.

I won’t make any comments below the fold in this post so everything you see past “More” will be from the San Angelo Standard Times’ blog.

Also note that the children have apparently been divided into three or more color-coded groups and the attorneys are also grouped based on those groups. I’m not sure but I think the three groups are young children, teens, and pregnant minors.

(more…)

[Guest post by DRJ]

… and they’re off to a rocky start due to a “flurry of objections” from attorneys for the children, parents and the FLDS sect. Most parties want separate hearings for each child, something I think they should have.

The San Angelo Standard Times has reporters live-blogging the event. It’s difficult for the reporters to get a handle on the legal issues but it’s such an unusual proceeding that it’s hard for everyone. However, the reporters are doing a good job reporting on the burgeoning service industry of food carts (chili pie!) and other vendors in the area, as well as conveying the controlled chaos and carnival atmosphere that seems to have taken hold.

I’m reluctant to tell people how to run their business, especially judges, but I’m surprised this judge hasn’t requested assistance from other district judges. After all, they’ve brought in scores of volunteer attorneys, clerks, law enforcement, CPS agents, consultants, and more. They need judges to provide individual hearings. It seems so obvious that I must be missing something.

In any event, I have gainful employment matters to work on this afternoon so I’ll leave you with this open thread.

In addition to the San Angelo Standard Times’ link, other good resources to check for updates are the Deseret News, the Salt Lake Tribune, and the Houston Chronicle. (The Chronicle’s reporters usually do a good job understanding legal issues.) Not to mention the big cable outlets that are apparently out in force.

NOTE: There’s an excellent article in the Houston Chronicle on Schleicher County Sheriff David Doran’s role in this case.

– DRJ

[Guest post by DRJ]

The case involving the children taken from Warren Jeffs’ Eldorado, Texas, compound has been described as the largest child custody case in the past 50 years. The San Angelo Standard Times reports that the Judge presiding in the case met today with about 4 dozen attorneys to prepare for Thursday’s preliminary hearing.

The presiding judge in the case is Judge Barbara Walther. Judge Walther is a Texas district judge of the 51st judicial district which includes Tom Green, Coke, Irion, Sterling and Schleicher Counties. San Angelo is the county seat of Tom Green County. Eldorado is the county seat of Schleicher County. I suspect Judge Walther travels to the various counties on a rotating basis to hear cases.

This case has been set in San Angelo where the children and their mothers are being housed. Tom Green County has a larger courthouse and more personnel than Schleicher County. In addition, San Angelo has a small commercial airport and is more accessible by road than Eldorado. San Angelo also has more lodging and restaurants so it can better support the influx of people that will be involved in the hearings.

The court clerks and the Texas Supreme Court are working on arrangements for the thousands of pages of documents expected to be filed:

“The Tom Green County and Schleicher County district clerks have formed an agreement to allow paperwork to be filed in either court and transferred, while the Texas Supreme Court is meeting in emergency session to consider a request from Walther to allow electronic filing in her court, in the hope that such a move could mitigate the tens of thousands of pages of paperwork expected in the massive case.”

The Standard Times also reported that Judge Walther has appointed two San Angelo attorneys to coordinate the attorneys who will be representing the 416 children who are in temporary state custody. According to the Houston Chronicle, they may be coordinating over 350 attorneys:

“Texas bar officials say more than 350 attorneys from across the state have volunteered to represent the children for free. Child welfare laws require each child in state custody to have an attorney.

“The size, the scope of this effort is unprecedented,” attorney Guy Choate said. “It’s terribly important to the State Bar of Texas that everyone have access to justice.”

As Judge Walther noted, if every party is given 5 minutes to speak, the hearing will last a minimum of 70 hours. The attorney coordinators will probably work to identify children with similar interests, combine them in groups, and designate a spokesperson to speak for them. The key will be getting enough information from the children and their mothers that children with similar interests can be identified and grouped.

Finally, state officials confiscated about 50 cell phones from the children and/or their mothers pursuant to the Judge’s order. I’m interested if the cell phone that was used to call the Newbridge shelter was among those confiscated.

UPDATE: Fox News reports that the children have been moved to a larger facility, the San Angelo civic center, and the mothers were returned to the Yearning for Zion compound.

ABC reports that mothers with children under 4 were allowed to stay with their children, and the other mothers were told to return to the compound.

This makes sense if the State plans to argue that the mothers were complicit in the older children’s abuse. It doesn’t make sense to argue the parents are abusers while allowing the children to remain in their care.

– DRJ

[Guest post by DRJ]

Friday, Texas state Judge Barbara Walther ordered that all children will remain in San Angelo until Thursday’s custody hearing. The hearing is expected to last 14 days. Only the mothers who left with their children will be permitted to visit them. The State of Texas is currently providing for 555 people in shelters, including 139 women.

The court also released an 80-page search warrant that provides insight into their lives:

“Items removed from the ranch include boxes of photo albums, family trees, multiple laptop computers, shredder contents, cell phones and digital electronic equipment.

Many of the inventory items refer to the name of the girl who called in the original complaint, including 18 receipts from Shannon Medical Center laboratory.

However, the inventory notes that several girls with the same name lived at the compound and the receipts pertain to a number of people, not just one.

Also on the list are items indicating the children on the ranch went through some home schooling: four textbook exercises, one teacher notebook, 19 report cards with names and a mobile video of both floors at the schoolhouse.

The officials also seized an item described as a video of the birthing room.

More items included photographs, multiple journals as well as father-child identifying information and what are described in the inventory as “pedigree documents.”

Officials worry that the Texas FDLS case will be hard to prosecute because the Texas members were selected based on their obedience and are unlikely to cooperate with officials:

“Polygamist sect members who were moved to a Texas compound from their longtime homes along the Utah-Arizona line were hand-picked for their fierce loyalty to leader Warren Jeffs, and that allegiance may be a stumbling block for law enforcement, authorities say.

Jeffs, the imprisoned leader of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, transferred people to Eldorado, Texas, to escape growing government scrutiny on the sect’s base in Colorado City, Ariz., and Hildale, Utah, Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard said.

“This was Warren Jeff’s all-star cast,” said Goddard, who has been investigating the sect since 2004. “They had the strongest sense of obedience.”

As a result, their extreme devotion could make it hard on Texas authorities as they push for prosecutions, said Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff.

“All these girls are taught from the cradle not to trust anybody from the outside,” Shurtleff said. “Especially the government. We’re the beast. We’re the devil.”

There are also more details about the raid led by Texas Ranger Capt. Barry Caver: “When officials asked to enter the massive temple, for example, about 57 men who live on the ranch formed a line around the huge white building to offer, for the most part, superficial resistance.”

Approximately sixty people (men and elderly women) remain at the compound and have resumed their normal lives. There was also more on the original call for help:

“Also Thursday, officials from NewBridge Family Shelter in San Angelo and the National Domestic Violence Hotline said their agencies will work with similar domestic abuse groups in Utah to get training to help victims from plural families such as those from the YFZ Ranch.

Tammy Harris, NewBridge executive director, said her agency contacted CPS once it took calls from a girl at the FLDS compound and determined she is 16. On a separate day, NewBridge contacted law enforcement.

Phone operators are not allowed to get help for a caller unless the caller asks for assistance, said Sheryl Cates, chief executive officer of the National Domestic Violence Hotline and the leader of the Texas Council on Family Violence.

“When we go to the phones, we have to believe that call,” Cates said in response to a question about the authenticity of the FLDS calls. “Our job is to assess that situation.”

NewBridge does not record phone conversations, but phone operators take notes, Harris said.”

Apparently Child Protective Services were contacted after the first call, but it sounds like Texas law enforcement agencies weren’t called until after the girl’s second phone call. If so, the search warrant and investigation were mobilized in less than one day. I imagine law enforcement had plans in place to respond to this but that’s still impressive.

Related posts here, here, here, and here.

UPDATE 1 - The parents have been served notice by publication in the Eldorado Success newspaper. The children’s names are listed in the notice. Their last names (where known) are mostly Jeffs, Jessop, Steed, and Barlow.

UPDATE 2: Saturday, Texas law enforcement talked with Dale Barlow in Utah.

– DRJ

[Guest post by DRJ]

I read three interesting articles today about the Jeffs’ compound. First, the Eldorado, Texas, Sheriff has been working with a confidential informant for 4 years to gain information about the compound:

“A Texas sheriff says he has been working with a confidential informant for four years to get information about life inside a polygamist compound.

The sheriff declined to say whether the informant was in Texas or other sect compounds in Utah or Arizona. But he says it wasn’t until authorities searched the Texas compound that he learned about the beds allegedly used by men for sex with underage girls they had married. The beds were found on the top floor of the temple.

Despite having the informant for four years, state authorities are defending their decision to leave the sect alone during that time. They say the group still has civil rights that are going to be respected.”

Second, according to court affidavits, “one girl, younger than 16, has four children and says she is pregnant again.”

Third, there is this transcript of an interview with Texas officials regarding the physical and legal status of the women and children:

“Here are some questions put Thursday to Marleigh Meisner, spokeswoman for the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, the agency now caring for the women and children, and John J. Sampson, a University of Texas law professor who teaches the Children Right’s Clinic, which provides legal representation for abused and neglected children in Travis County.

Q: What’s the next legal step?

MM: April 17, a full adversarial hearing, 10 a.m., in the Tom Green County Courthouse. At that point we will make a recommendation to a judge. There will be attorneys appointed or even perhaps have already have been appointed to represent the children.

Q: For each child individually or as a group?

MM: Normally, it’s each child individually but the judge is making a decision how she’s going to do that.

JS: You have X number of mothers and Y children and Z number of fathers, presumed fathers, alleged fathers, unknown fathers. All of the fathers are entitled to service. All mothers are entitled to service. All children are entitled to representation.

Q. Sounds like a crowded courtroom.

JS: It would actually be more or less a crowded stadium. I’ve never seen a case tried in a stadium but this might be a first.

Q: What if the judge decides not to grant custody?

MM: This is all to do with temporary custody. If the judge decided the children needed to be returned, then the children will be returned. It’s ultimately always the judge’s decision.

JS: They’ve already made something of a case to the judge when they convinced the judge we need an order not to investigate but to take possession of the children. This kind of gets into speculation because since this is unprecedented… Since there’s smoke here, we suspect fire. And so the court is almost always going to say: ‘Yes I realize the statute says the parent should walk out with the child unless it would be dangerous. I’ve already had a preliminary determination that there’s a danger to the child and we’ve had a hearing there’s a danger to the child, and I find there’s a continuing danger to the child so naturally the state is going to be continued in the foreseaable future.’

Q. How long is that?

JS: “Foreseeable future” is supposed to be one year. You can get an extension for six months, then the case needs to be decided. Each case is an individual case, however many children there are. I read in the paper there’s a whole lot of problems in identification. That does not help the parents get the children back when the children are not identified.

Q: Is it possible the 139 women could be separated from their kids?

MM: That’s a decision that’s to be made later and it’s a decision that’s not been made yet.

JS: The reluctance of a parent to cooperate doesn’t facilitate the parents’ situation. The only time a parent has a chance of prevailing is when they make a case. Now they have a presumption when they make a case that parents have a right to have and raise children, but that presumption is subject to trumping if there is a serious danger to the physical or emotional well-being of the child.

Q: If the judge says the state can’t continue temporary custody, will the women be free to go?

MM: They’ve been free to go always. They came because they asked to come. They’ve stayed with us but are free at any time to leave. They are here on their own choice.

Q: Have any departed?

MM: To my knowledge, none have left.

Q: Where would they go?

MM: I have no idea.”

There’s more to the interview at the second link.

It sounds to me like the authorities have been watchful of the polygamist compound, while respecting their rights. Obviously it’s a shame that the children there have suffered but the authorities had to have probable cause before they could proceed. And as Professor Sampson notes, this is going to be an unprecedented stadium-size legal case.

NOTE: I edited the title to add the word “Texas” since there are also Jeffs’ compounds in other states.

Related posts here, here, here, and here.

– DRJ