LE are local, rural sheriffs, not the federal government. These are good ol' boys from the same state. Probably attend similar churches. They didn't storm the house because the family are "preppers" or religious. Let's not get hysterical here.
And once they remove the kids, local LE has no say as to what happens next with regard to custody of the kids. Different agencies.
I agree that for now, it is unlikely there will be charges. This is not a criminal case at present. It is a juvenile dependency case. Many CPS removal cases do not parallel criminal charges.
If DHS (DCFS) didn't support the removal, they have a funny way of showing it.
Here's the process in Arkansas for removal.
1. Determine if it is a priority I or II case, which depends on the severity of the maltreatment alleged. If it is a priority
I case, a special child abuse unit of the State police investigates. If it is a priority II case, DCFS investigates.
2. In priority I cases, if the police determine that the abuse is severe and the children should be removed, then DHHS, the Department of Health and Human Services, must do a health and safety assessment to determine if the child can safely remain in the home. If the child is determined to be at risk of severe maltreatment, the
agency shall take a 72 hour hold on the child
as a prerequisite to the filing of a petition in juvenile court pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 12-12-516.
This protective custody can also be taken by law enforcement, a juvenile division of circuit court judge in a juvenile proceeding, a hospital administrator or treating physician
but if this protective custody is initiated, DHHS shall
be notified immediately so that the proper procedure for attaining emergency custody can be
initiated timely (Ark. Code Ann. §12-12-516(c)). (That means DHHS must still conduct its investigation).
In priority II cases, DCFS determines whether the child can remian safely in the home. If it determines that the child cannot safely remain in the home, the 72 hour procedure is also followed. \
3. If DCFS believes it needs to continue to hold the child for more than 72 hours, DCFS must seek a court order, known as an ex parte emergency order (Ark. Code Ann. §9-27-314). An attorney ad litem shall be appointed when
the petition or emergency ex parte order is filed to represent the child’s best interest.
Parent counsel may also be appointed and indigency determined at the probable cause hearing.
Within five business days the court must conduct a probable cause hearing (Ark. Code Ann. § 9-27-315) to determine if probable cause existed to protect the juvenile when DCFS removed the child; if it continues to exist; and if removal from the home is in the child’s best interest and is necessary to protect the child. If probable cause is found, the court will schedule a trial, known as the adjudication, to determine if the child is abused, neglected, or dependent (Ark. Code Ann. §9-27-303).
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...=4SsSptO5Xs5YwmWiZzHAiA&bvm=bv.84349003,d.cGU
So, in this case, DCFS (DHS), not LE, is the one who had to authorize the 72 hour hold/removal pending an ex parte, emergency order, which was clearly granted by the court as the kids have remained in custody longer than 72 hours. And both DCFS and the court system have determined that a probable cause hearing is warranted.
Once the kids were removed by LE, it was out of their hands. DHS (DCFS) are the ones who have kept the kids from returning home. So it looks like they agreed with LE.