AR - Fully-Armed Sheriffs Remove 7 Homeschool Children from 'Prepper' Family

[tlcya]

True sunflowerchick. I have been screaming for years that the child protective system is flawed and needs serious overhaul. However, much of my screaming has been in cases where CPS was involved, sometimes multiple involvements, and a child ends up dead. I am one who errs on the side of caution. Take the kids out of the environment, investigate the allegations of abuse and go from there. I agree, there does seem to be a bit of a double standard sometimes.

It is hard to find that balance when dealing with any big brother type agency. Some will scream when they act. Some will scream when they don't and others just scream regardless. No person and therefore no agency filled with persons will ever be perfect.

Still :fence: waiting to hear more facts before leaping either way. But I do not have a problem with CPS and LE investigating charges of abuse. Maybe this was all some agenda driven molehill that has been made a mountain. But maybe there is a problem in this home. I am trusting that I will have a better idea where I fall on that as we progress.

 

[gitana1]

It always amazes me how many have so much faith in "the system" (LE, Child Services, etc.) when it suits your agenda yet are the first to cry foul when the system fails. These people are human. Sometimes they get it wrong. I am not saying they did in this case. I don't have enough information to make that call. I just find the hypocrisy here sad.

I get what you're saying but isn't it a bit harsh? I mean, when I read the first news story about this case I was outraged and immediately felt there was government overreach.

Then I started reading more. And considering more. Like the statements of the family. Their changing stories. The region they're from (and thus the lower likelihood that this is political or religious persecution). The actions of the various agencies involved. The statement by police stating the removal was for various factors, not merely MMS. The blaming of the teenagers. The measured tones of the adult son who said there are serious concerns.

I can't say I have total faith in the system. I work in it and see its failures. But what I've seen in this case convinced me that a system failure was unlikely here. I changed my mind.

 

[MyBelle]

I have. That's unusual. And that case ended with CPS dismissing their case and the man getting back his visitation rights.



I'm not related to a lawyer. I am one. Lawyers take high profile cases for free for various reasons. One main one that some do is free advertising. They don't necessarily believe their client is guilty or has no claim, it's that they don't care. (Not me, BTW. I'm not into criminal defense because I would have an ethical problem with helping the guilty go free and in other cases, if I believe there is a problem with my client then I try to represent them in a manner that assists them but doesn't hurt anyone. But many attorneys I know don't care about guilt or innocence).

We have seen multiple cases right here on websleuths where either unscrupulous lawyers or those who are seriously anti-death penalty, agree to represent high profile defendants for free when it appears clear that the defendant is likely guilty.

The fact that the lawyer is a Democrat is probably not related to his representation of these parents.

It isn't known whether the attorney is providing free services. The reason he took the case is also not known. I highly doubt any attorney would take a case for free if he didn't believe his client has a good case. Being on the losing end isn't good publicity for any attorney, imo.

 

[MyBelle]

We have no idea what the pre-raid information was. If the two teens (according to the mom) were telling the authorities that their parents would take off with them in the packed van, I would imagine that the police had other information that might make them think that these were parents who might be dangerous. Whether that information was accurate or not, who knows. That said, the police need to act in a way the provides for the safety based on their best information.

Where are you getting that there was a pre-raid? I've only seen reports that there were two visits by CPS. The first was over children being barefoot in the snow and the second involved a search warrant for a poisonous substance. Where is the need to call in State Police and a SWAT Team? I'm not seeing it at this point.

JMO

It began on Jan. 12, when Stanley and his wife were on their front porch, and officers with the Garland County Sheriff’s Department and Arkansas State Police arrived, apparently ready to raid the home.

“They came out with a full SWAT team, they had snipers laying in the ditch out there,” Stanley said. “They had a SWAT team two miles down the road. People think, well the parents are giving drugs to their children, they should be put in jail.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...ts-over-the-dangerous-miracle-supplement-mms/

 

[MyBelle]

I understand, and as I said, that supervisor seemed very confrontational. But my point is, we have no info on that case, that family, etc. So maybe she was a B. And maybe dad is a and she was protecting a child from a father using the system to try to wrest custody of his tender age daughter from her mother who has a very justified reason for being the custodial parent and having an OP out against him. We cannot know from watching that video whether the supervisor is actually being a B or is restraining herself while in a room with an awful harmful parent.

You are correct. You can't tell that from a single video which is why I chose to learn more about the case. Plenty of info is online.

 

[tlcya]

You are correct. You can't tell that from a single video which is why I chose to learn more about the case. Plenty of info is online.

Thank you, I might just do that if I have a free hour that is not consumed with other cases I am already following. I hate when people use the legal system to try to wage their own personal wars against one another. Acrimonious parents who use their children and CPS as tools to right fight are ugly and it happens way too much in this country. So yeah, I may read up on that case. For now I will stick with this one and the others I am currently wrapped up in.

 

[MyBelle]

Thank you, I might just do that if I have a free hour that is not consumed with other cases I am already following. I hate when people use the legal system to try to wage their own personal wars against one another. Acrimonious parents who use their children and CPS as tools to right fight are ugly and it happens way too much in this country. So yeah, I may read up on that case. For now I will stick with this one and the others I am currently wrapped up in.

ITA with you. That is exactly what happened in that case. I think what has happened in too many of the cases we discuss here is the fact that there has been so much abuse of the CPS system by parents in custodial disputes that the agencies are not wanting to get involved at all.

JMO

 

[gitana1]

It isn't known whether the attorney is providing free services. The reason he took the case is also not known. I highly doubt any attorney would take a case for free if he didn't believe his client has a good case. Being on the losing end isn't good publicity for any attorney, imo.

I know it seems counter-intuitive but high profile criminal defense attorneys get tons of work regardless of outcomes. But I do agree that in cases like this it is more likely that a pro bono attorney would take the case because he believes in it. Or at least in certain principles. I have a unique case right now in which the main principles are ones I believe in strongly. Thus I've been working the case pro bono. But other aspects (involving child custody), I'm not committed to so much.

 

[gitana1]

Where are you getting that there was a pre-raid? I've only seen reports that there were two visits by CPS. The first was over children being barefoot in the snow and the second involved a search warrant for a poisonous substance. Where is the need to call in State Police and a SWAT Team? I'm not seeing it at this point.

JMO

It began on Jan. 12, when Stanley and his wife were on their front porch, and officers with the Garland County Sheriff’s Department and Arkansas State Police arrived, apparently ready to raid the home.

“They came out with a full SWAT team, they had snipers laying in the ditch out there,” Stanley said. “They had a SWAT team two miles down the road. People think, well the parents are giving drugs to their children, they should be put in jail.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...ts-over-the-dangerous-miracle-supplement-mms/

Photos and other statements of the parents show that it is not true that SWAT was involved or snipers.

 

[sunflowerchick]

True sunflowerchick. I have been screaming for years that the child protective system is flawed and needs serious overhaul. However, much of my screaming has been in cases where CPS was involved, sometimes multiple involvements, and a child ends up dead. I am one who errs on the side of caution. Take the kids out of the environment, investigate the allegations of abuse and go from there. I agree, there does seem to be a bit of a double standard sometimes.

It is hard to find that balance when dealing with any big brother type agency. Some will scream when they act. Some will scream when they don't and others just scream regardless. No person and therefore no agency filled with persons will ever be perfect.

Still :fence: waiting to hear more facts before leaping either way. But I do not have a problem with CPS and LE investigating charges of abuse. Maybe this was all some agenda driven molehill that has been made a mountain. But maybe there is a problem in this home. I am trusting that I will have a better idea where I fall on that as we progress.

ITA with you. I would rather see kids taken temporarily than not and end up dead. We see that far too many times here. In this case, I am still on the fence.

I just can't agree with the double standard that occurs far too often.

 

[sunflowerchick]

I get what you're saying but isn't it a bit harsh? I mean, when I read the first news story about this case I was outraged and immediately felt there was government overreach.

Then I started reading more. And considering more. Like the statements of the family. Their changing stories. The region they're from (and thus the lower likelihood that this is political or religious persecution). The actions of the various agencies involved. The statement by police stating the removal was for various factors, not merely MMS. The blaming of the teenagers. The measured tones of the adult son who said there are serious concerns.

I can't say I have total faith in the system. I work in it and see its failures. But what I've seen in this case convinced me that a system failure was unlikely here. I changed my mind.

Yes, what I said did come out a bit harsh I must admit. I am tired of the double standard and it occurs frequently on this site. In this case, I haven't made up my mind. I don't know what occurred.

 

[TrackerSam]

Still waiting to hear what the charges are. Or are they still waiting to find something to charge them with? Neither parent is under arrest.

 

[MyBelle]

Photos and other statements of the parents show that it is not true that SWAT was involved or snipers.

I'm going by the story in The Washington Post that quotes the father as saying the Arkansas State Police were present. Until I see a denial by the ASP, I will assume the father stated a true fact.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

Still waiting to hear what the charges are. Or are they still waiting to find something to charge them with? Neither parent is under arrest.

Kinda shocking to me that children can be removed from their parents for such a long period of time yet no charges are filed. Still looking for something--anything--to charge them with I guess.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

I know it seems counter-intuitive but high profile criminal defense attorneys get tons of work regardless of outcomes. But I do agree that in cases like this it is more likely that a pro bono attorney would take the case because he believes in it. Or at least in certain principles. I have a unique case right now in which the main principles are ones I believe in strongly. Thus I've been working the case pro bono. But other aspects (involving child custody), I'm not committed to so much.

The parents in this case haven't been charged with a crime and it IS only about child custody at this point.

I don't believe this high profile attorney took on the case pro bono--if he did-- for any reason other than he thinks the rights of both parents and children have been seriously violated.

 

[tlcya]

IME child abuse that results in removal of the children from the home frequently does not result in criminal charges. It takes some pretty heinous, and I do mean HEINOUS, abuse round my parts for parents to be charged. More often parents are given a reunification plan, made to get counselling, do drug screenings, take parenting classes, etc depending on the abuse alleged. This allows them to avoid criminal charges and regain eventual custody of their kids.

Reunification is CPS expressly stated goal. I won't even start ranting on that topic. Ya'll know me well enough to know that is a button pusher for me.

 

[MyBelle]

IME child abuse that results in removal of the children from the home frequently does not result in criminal charges. It takes some pretty heinous, and I do mean HEINOUS, abuse round my parts for parents to be charged. More often parents are given a reunification plan, made to get counselling, do drug screenings, take parenting classes, etc depending on the abuse alleged. This allows them to avoid criminal charges and regain eventual custody of their kids.

Reunification is CPS expressly stated goal. I won't even start ranting on that topic. Ya'll know me well enough to know that is a button pusher for me.

I know of cases where charges of neglect are dropped after the house is cleaned and is sanitary and the children are returned. I know of cases where drug charges are dropped if the parent enters a drug program. But this isn't such a case.

I don't know of any case where a child is removed from both parents and not returned to the parents for an extended period of time and yet no charges are filed against the parents.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

Agreed. Particularly if the reports included information about unsecured firearms, or irresponsible use or storage of firearms with the 7 minors present. IMO, the combination of possible parental paranoia, distrust of authorities and government, insular/ isolated lifestyle, and reports of unsafe and/ or abusive situation in the home mandates that LE arrive prepared to handle the situation safely and promptly for everyone involved. No one wants to read about another horrific Josh Powell situation, or repeat a Randy Weaver/ Ruby Ridge scenario.

No one sent the officers out there on a "whim" or a frivolous report, or because they homeschool, or have aquaponics, or are leaning one political way or another. I'm confident of that, but others commenting clearly disagree, and think there's some diabolical "conspiracy" afoot to oppress this particular family.

A gitana1 has pointed out, there was some kind of multi-layer reporting of a serious and unsafe situation involving the children, that has been vetted by a number of agencies in court. The investigation is ongoing, the children are safe, the parents are safe, and have visitation with the kids, so at this point, it needs to be worked out in the court and CPS system.

WE only know ONE side of the story-- the story told by the parents, who have their own interpretation that may or may not be truthful or valid. There is another side to this story that hasn't been told. I'm trusting the system to work. As mentioned upthread (Beginner's Luck, I think), the children can speak, and will be interviewed by child experts to find out what is going on in the home.

We know more than just one side of the story. We know a search warrant was executed looking for a poisonous substance and a dietary supplement was found that the Father admitted was his. We know the parents have not been charged with any crimes.

Arkansas does not have a law requiring locked storage of firearms. In the absence of any injury to any of the children there would be no grounds to remove them from their home if firearms were not stored away.

I'm still waiting for the probable cause to be revealed. I think it is somewhat naive to believe the "system" works perfectly. All too often, the system gets it very wrong. Mr. Stanley is a minister, he is a Tea Party activist, and the children are home schooled. He may have applied for tax exempt status. The IRS went after Tea Party members and the director was forced out. State DHS agencies are revealing themselves to be highly dysfunctional and elected officials are squarely to blame.

"I reviewed the Treasury Department watchdog's report and the misconduct that it uncovered is inexcusable," Obama said in the East Room of the White House. "Americans have a right to be angry about it, and I'm angry about it."

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/irs-head-resigns-obama-condemns-inexcusable-actions/story?id=19187388

JMO

 

[tlcya]

I know of cases where charges of neglect are dropped after the house is cleaned and is sanitary and the children are returned. I know of cases where drug charges are dropped if the parent enters a drug program. But this isn't such a case.

I don't know of any case where a child is removed from both parents and not returned to the parents for an extended period of time and yet no charges are filed against the parents.

JMO

I prefer not to elaborate further beyond saying that I was removed from my home for an extended period (6 to 8 months) as a minor and no charges were filed against either parent. Now I do not know that there was not a threat of charges. But I do know as a fact that none were ever filed and a program was begun to work toward reunification.

Know that I am not being argumentative. Just explaining why I believe as I do about this circumstance.

 

[gitana1]

I'm going by the story in The Washington Post that quotes the father as saying the Arkansas State Police were present. Until I see a denial by the ASP, I will assume the father stated a true fact.

JMO

SWAT is one division of the ASP. It is used in limited circumstances. Just because the ASP may have been there doesn't mean their SWAT division was. And why are you picking one statement of the father to believe in but not others? Because his statement about how the "raid" happened excludes the possibility that there was a SWAT raid at all.

SWAT does not knock on your door and wait patiently on your porch for you to come out while discussing with you where to talk. Sorry.