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

[MyBelle]

I doubt any charges will be filed. They charged the house because the teens told LE that they were survivalists and dad was a preacher so maybe LE was expecting another Ruby Ridge and Waco. Snipers in the ditches and another SWAT team 2 miles down the road. Now they have to explain so much fire power and they're stuck with egg on their faces IMO. And look at the picture of mom and dad's visit with the children. Do the children look like they're fearful or were ever abused? Not to me.

A couple of the news articles note that DHS didn't support the Sheriff's actions, which seems to be an incredible over-reach of authority.

JMO

 

[tlcya]

ALL your thoughts are much appreciated on this one friends. I must admit to being confused. At first outraged, and then as more and more came out which seemed to indicate more than just vitamin or water purifying chemical I climbed right up here :fence:

I don't know what I think about this one so I am glad to have gotten the varied opinions of all of you folks.

Much food for thought.

Think I will sit right up :fence: til we have more and better info on what specifically the sheriff think poses a danger and how LE came to be involved.

 

[BeginnersLuck]

Initial article was one sided. I think there will be more that comes out.

I've never seen anything good come from such extremism.

 

[SStarr33]

I agree, a few things in the article don't sit right with me... There is more to this story. The cops saw a few things they could not ignore ... It isn't easy to remove kids without very good reason. Especially 7 of them IMO. It's hard enough to get them to remove kids who are obviously in neglectful homes. Just read a couple cases here and that is plain to see. I'm almost dreading what we may learn. There are also 2 grown children moved out. Bet they have some idea what life is like in that home.



Also wanted to add - teenagers are a bit old for "spanking". And blaming the kids, the government,etc. just gives me pause.

Not me.

 

[SStarr33]

Just a bit of info.....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_Mineral_Supplement

The sheriff said this has nothing to do with MMS--I posted the link above.

 

[gitana1]

I doubt any charges will be filed. They charged the house because the teens told LE that they were survivalists and dad was a preacher so maybe LE was expecting another Ruby Ridge and Waco. Snipers in the ditches and another SWAT team 2 miles down the road. Now they have to explain so much fire power and they're stuck with egg on their faces IMO. And look at the picture of mom and dad's visit with the children. Do the children look like they're fearful or were ever abused? Not to me.

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.

As to the kids looking happy, there is a reason in my child custody cases why child custody evaluators don't want photos to look at. Smiling faces do not always tell the real story. Many dead, murdered and abused kids we discuss on here are clear examples of that.

A couple of the news articles note that DHS didn't support the Sheriff's actions, which seems to be an incredible over-reach of authority.

JMO

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.

 

[MyBelle]

Initial article was one sided. I think there will be more that comes out.

I've never seen anything good come from such extremism.

Extremism on who's part? I think subjecting children to a SWAT team is a tad extreme.

JMO

 

[RaeL]

Report about it from local news:

http://hotspringsdaily.com/2015/01/7-children-taken-from-parents-during-search-for-noxious-chemical/

I will just say, they searched the home for hours. If they didn't find anything to warrant charges, we will find out tomorrow.

Stanley opened his door Monday afternoon to find a warrant waiting for him and his home surrounded by State and Garland County agents. “It said we’re here to search your house,” Stanley explained. Hal and his wife Michelle were kept outside for hours while officers searched the home with their seven children inside.

I am curious why there were so many officers and weapons to search the house.

 

[gitana1]

I will just say, they searched the home for hours. If they didn't find anything to warrant charges, we will find out tomorrow.

I am curious why there were so many officers and weapons to search the house.

A site I found indicates the probable cause hearing started yesterday at 1:30 p.m. and would be continued until this morning at 9:00 a.m. If so, I wonder what the outcome was? I imagine if the kids were returned to their family,
they would have screamed that form the rooftops: http://medicalkidnap.com/2015/01/18...use-father-had-unapproved-mineral-supplement/

I don't know why they had so many police either. That is very frightening for children. Probably because the authorities knew that the family is very anti-government and armed to the teeth? Maybe threats were made?

 

[Elley Mae]

Hope this is OK to post.

http://www.christianpost.com/news/7...ce-say-it-was-for-alleged-child-abuse-132902/

Arkansas Online reports that the Garland County Sheriff's Department issued a statement indicating that the warrant, search and removal of children was all part of a child abuse investigation.

snip
"There have been a number of reports in various media outlets the decision was made to remove the minor children from the residence based on one contributing factor of chemical known as 'MMS' or 'Miracle Mineral Supplement,' this is absolutely false," the department's statement reads. "[T]here was a number of different factors and investigators felt they had no choice but to intervene in the best interest of the minor children."

 

[gitana1]

Probable Cause Hearing:

The Judge is tasked with determining one of three options: there was probable cause to take the children at the time and still is; there was probable cause at the time but not anymore and the children can go back home; or, there was never probable cause to take the children.


Outcome:

After hearing arguments in a probable cause case of the Department of Human Services vs. Hal and Michelle Stanley, a Garland County judge has found probable cause for DHS to keep custody of the Stanley's seven children.


http://www.arkansasmatters.com/story/d/story/update-garland-co-children-to-remain-in-dhs-custod/13202/HM_6yEtGhUutVMD_Pwu3cg

 

[Elley Mae]

Today Byrum Hurst Jr., the family’s attorney is trying to show there was no emergency and no reason to remove these children.

According to a motion he filed today an affidavit previously filed by authorities didn’t set out any facts of abuse to the children and only said the juveniles’ health and safety are in danger due to the “allegations” involving abuse.

He says a child is not abused by “allegations” and points out that the children were examined on scene by a physician and pronounced fit and healthy.

http://hotspringsdaily.com/2015/01/...ounty-court-to-reunite-parents-with-children/

 

[MyBelle]

I will just say, they searched the home for hours. If they didn't find anything to warrant charges, we will find out tomorrow.



I am curious why there were so many officers and weapons to search the house.

A 5-hour search and forcing small children into a medical exam in an ambulance is so far over the top it is ridiculous. Add a SWAT team to the mix and those kids must have been terrified.

Seems to be politically motivated because Dad is a Tea Party activist rather than having anything to do with the best interest or safety or health of the children.

Rather than admit they screwed up, I'm betting this will be dragged out in the courts for months.

JMO

 

[gitana1]

Today Byrum Hurst Jr., the family’s attorney is trying to show there was no emergency and no reason to remove these children.

According to a motion he filed today an affidavit previously filed by authorities didn’t set out any facts of abuse to the children and only said the juveniles’ health and safety are in danger due to the “allegations” involving abuse.

He says a child is not abused by “allegations” and points out that the children were examined on scene by a physician and pronounced fit and healthy.

http://hotspringsdaily.com/2015/01/...ounty-court-to-reunite-parents-with-children/

Well, the court did not agree. The court found probable cause to keep the kids in custody. Another hearing will be held within 30 days.

 

[MyBelle]

Today Byrum Hurst Jr., the family’s attorney is trying to show there was no emergency and no reason to remove these children.

According to a motion he filed today an affidavit previously filed by authorities didn’t set out any facts of abuse to the children and only said the juveniles’ health and safety are in danger due to the “allegations” involving abuse.

He says a child is not abused by “allegations” and points out that the children were examined on scene by a physician and pronounced fit and healthy.

http://hotspringsdaily.com/2015/01/...ounty-court-to-reunite-parents-with-children/

Thanks. The 16-yr-old who made the allegations needs the evaluation. This sounds like the exact opposite of the Pelletier case, where the teen accused the hospital of abuse and wished to return to her parents but the parents dragged it out.

JMO

 

[gitana1]

A 5-hour search and forcing small children into a medical exam in an ambulance is so far over the top it is ridiculous. Add a SWAT team to the mix and those kids must have been terrified.

Seems to be politically motivated because Dad is a Tea Party activist rather than having anything to do with the best interest or safety or health of the children.

Rather than admit they screwed up, I'm betting this will be dragged out in the courts for months.

JMO

Why would local sheriffs, local DHS and the local court in rural Arkansas, all be in a conspiracy against a father because he is a Tea Party activist?

86% of people in Arkansas are Christian. It is an overwhelmingly conservative state. There is a relatively large number of tea party members in the Stanley home town of Hot Springs. http://www.irehr.org/issue-areas/te...alysis/527-status-of-tea-party-by-the-numbers

Are we to believe that the local sheriffs, the investigators from DHS and the judge in the case are all liberals who have conspired to take down this particular tea partier in their state?

That doesn't sound too logical to me.

BTW, according to their facebook page, the next hearing is 2-12-15.

 

[RaeL]

Probable Cause Hearing:

The Judge is tasked with determining one of three options: there was probable cause to take the children at the time and still is; there was probable cause at the time but not anymore and the children can go back home; or, there was never probable cause to take the children.


Outcome:

After hearing arguments in a probable cause case of the Department of Human Services vs. Hal and Michelle Stanley, a Garland County judge has found probable cause for DHS to keep custody of the Stanley's seven children.


http://www.arkansasmatters.com/story/d/story/update-garland-co-children-to-remain-in-dhs-custod/13202/HM_6yEtGhUutVMD_Pwu3cg

Thanks Gitana for finding the updated info. I didn't even check the dates on the article. So, no info was shared on evidence?

 

[SStarr33]

Why would local sheriffs, local DHS and the local court in rural Arkansas, all be in a conspiracy against a father because he is a Tea Party activist?

86% of people in Arkansas are Christian. It is an overwhelmingly conservative state. There is a relatively large number of tea party members in the Stanley home town of Hot Springs. http://www.irehr.org/issue-areas/te...alysis/527-status-of-tea-party-by-the-numbers

Are we to believe that the local sheriffs, the investigators from DHS and the judge in the case are all liberals who have conspired to take down this particular tea partier in their state?

That doesn't sound too logical to me.

BTW, according to their facebook page, the next hearing is 2-12-15.

As the children were removed from the home Hal and his wife Michelle say they emotionally asked who made the decision.

Hal said, "And finally a young man from the Sheriff's department raised his hand, 'I did it and I'm proud of the decision'."

http://www.arkansasmatters.com/stor...ng-search-for-mi/18793/P9S1iYaoUEuIXypDAa_3kQ

 

[SStarr33]

BTW, the judge imposed a gag order. If I was their mother, I would not comply.

 

[gitana1]

As the children were removed from the home Hal and his wife Michelle say they emotionally asked who made the decision.

Hal said, "And finally a young man from the Sheriff's department raised his hand, 'I did it and I'm proud of the decision'."

http://www.arkansasmatters.com/stor...ng-search-for-mi/18793/P9S1iYaoUEuIXypDAa_3kQ

Yeah, that's what the parents said. That's their story But their story has changed several times. And this story doesn't make sense.

Again:

1. LE found reason to swarm their house and serve a search warrant.
2. After that, LE found reason to remove the children from the home.
3. DCFS found reason to apply ex parte for a 72 hour removal.
4. The court granted an order for a 72 hour removal and a probable cause hearing was set.
5. At the probable cause hearing, the court found cause to keep the children in custody pending a further hearing date.

But you think a young LE officer is the cause of all this? That some young man had the power to remove all of the children, over objections of multiple LE officials at the house? It was one young man who got to make such an important decision?

And then did he also somehow have the power to influence DHS and the judge, and overcome the defense mounted by the family through their attorney?