MyFox
 

Corrina_Sullivan's Blog

by Corrina_Sullivan from Lake Mary, FL

Last Post 1 day, 9 hours Ago


Polygamist Sect Update
May 30, 2008 | 4:33 PM
Category: News
Report This Post

SAN ANGELO, Texas (AP) -- Texas authorities and a polygamist sect  have reached a tentative agreement to begin returning children taken by the state starting Monday. A draft agreement released in court by Texas Child Protective Services attorney Gary Banks on Friday says the parents can get their children back after showing identifications and pledging to take parenting classes and remain in Texas. The agreement was reached with the 38 mothers of the 124 children who filed the complaint that prompted the Texas Supreme Court to rule Thursday that the state overstepped its authority in taking more than 400 children. But the deal would affect nearly all the children since they were removed under identical circumstances.

Think this is a mistake?

Have a nice weekend,
Corrina
13 Comments |  Add a Comment

Member Comments Total Comments: 13
Page 1 of 1
rexsmom read my blog view my photos
May 30, 2008 | 6:17 PM

No, I think it's the right thing to do. I think those parents should sue the snot out of the government agency. I hope they bankrupt the state of Texas for that move.
Vancouver read my blog
May 30, 2008 | 6:21 PM

DAMN!!! NOW YOU CAN MOLEST CHILDREN AND GET AWAY WITH IT!!! WHATS NEXT GETTING AWAY WITH MURDER!!! YOU SICK SON OF A B*TCH!!! THOSE PEOLE SHOULD BE SHOT FOR THIS!!! THE SUPREME COURT SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF THEMSELVES FOR ALLOWING THE CHILDREN TO GO BACK TO THAT KIND OF ENVIROMENT!!! CHILD SERVICES OVER STEPPED THE LINE. WONDER HOW MANY OF THOSE JUDGES AGREE WITH THIS KIND OF BEHAVIOR!!!
Vancouver read my blog
May 31, 2008 | 12:16 AM

Meant to say those sick...
PegasusWing read my blog view my photos
May 31, 2008 | 8:10 AM

Evidently it costs texas too much money to have 400 kids in foster care. They are damaged already, so texas decided to just write them off. Everyone always figured that texas was filled with primatives and now we know it for sure. (no capital letter for that state)
PegasusWing read my blog view my photos
May 31, 2008 | 8:11 AM

Children belong first on the list when "Protecting the Innocent."
texas fails miserably.
ADeltonian read my blog view my photos
May 31, 2008 | 9:33 AM

Sounds to me like their excuse backfired against them once again. Dididnt they learn a thing from the Waco blunder?
Gammies61 read my blog view my photos
May 31, 2008 | 1:24 PM

This is a bad call. Maybe some of the families weren't abusing their children...YET. Any female under the age of 12 is safe? Hardly. Wonder how many of those children were Warrens? Did you hear he said he wasn't the prophet? Did you hear him tell his brother how he had lied to all of them? I don't think the people of Texas know what the hell they are doing. Stupid people!
80sMetalHead read my blog view my photos
May 31, 2008 | 9:22 PM

Pegasus is right. They've written those kids off bc they just figured out the cost of keeping them all in foster csre.
Meb452m read my blog
May 31, 2008 | 10:49 PM

The courts ruling is in the right direction, there was no reason to round up 400 kids. There was grounds to find the young girl that suppossedly made the call and go from there. I'd question the Parenting classes as well, if the parents did no wrong then why is the state making conditions ?
didaskalos read my blog
Jun 1, 2008 | 6:16 PM

If the basis for taking the children in the first place was molestation of minor females supported by the evidence of multiple under age "marriages" and subsequent pregnacies, then it is irresponsible to reinstate children into the original context without evidence that either nulifies the origial evidence present or evidence that the orignial context has change and is a safe environment for the children.
didaskalos read my blog
Jun 1, 2008 | 6:18 PM

For any grammar and spelling nazis ... opps, I left off the "ed" in "presented" and "changed" in the last sentence.
Meb452m read my blog
Jun 4, 2008 | 10:56 PM

This may be a little of topic, but this blog does bring a question or two to mind. If minors are involved in illegal marriages because of age, is that solely because of the written law ? The reason for this is simple, in Washongton D.C. the legal age of consent is 16. Does this mean that they are not still minors because of a written law ? Is this for the gratification of a certain type of politician and their peers ? By the Texas courts original decision, it is legal to round up everyone and without due process suspend their rights ? If that's the case then there is enough documented political coruption to round up every Senator and Representative in every state and jail them all, afterwards their innocense or guilt can be determined.
Vancouver read my blog
Jun 4, 2008 | 11:43 PM

Meb452m,
Good questions. I am sure that after this debacle the laws will be rewritten much clearer. To prevent this from hapening again I can only hope that, if they rewrite the laws that it is stated in the new version that what child services did was correct and should not have been over turned by the courts.
Page 1 of 1


Write your comment below:




Corrina_Sullivan

Corrina Sullivan joined FOX 35 as primary anchor in January of 2007. Corrina co-anchors FOX 35 News at 6 & 10. Not an anchor glued to the desk, she enjoys working in the field providing dynamic, in-depth reports. Corrina hails from Baltimore, Maryland. It was there she quickly acquired a love for the water and boating. She and her husband met and married in St. Louis, but now consider Orlando home and look forward to making an impact on the community together.

Member Since: 2/19/2007


 

View All Photos


RSS: XMLWhat is RSS?