Comments on: BARBIE TELLS THE LAWYERS THAT JANET COULDN’T BE MARRIED TO RAYMOND BECAUSE SHE WAS ALREADY MARRIED.

By: Cupcake

Cupcake — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 21:17:23 +0000

Pins:

Sorry about the mix-up. As the KS like to point out, I can’t spell well.

By: kent

kent — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 14:32:16 +0000

The “doubleex” post is a bit dated. We should watch to see if anything newer comes out from her.

I’ve read about every article I can find to follow this trial, and all leave me wondering HOW they qualified Musser as an expert to tell the jury what the dictations of the “FLDS Prophet” were taken for. It’s not like she was the secretary for all priesthood meetings, so what makes her the “expert”?

Another thought on those dictations; I’m not reading of any that go into such detail on the daily or weekly activities of all ranch residents where it would show something like Warren telling so many men to work the next month on a project away from the ranch and assigning some to stay home and make babies.

Musser told the court;

“He is to teach and govern the people and record it all, because in their culture, he has to answer to God,” she said. “Every area of our life was governed by the dictates of the prophet.”

If this alleged “accomplice to rape” keeps such meticulous records of all activities of those following him, where is the evidence that Raymond created the baby in Texas?

Another note on that specific quote of Musser; It looks like she is telling the court that ALL Warren recorded in his dictations are absolutely church records. All was an “…answer to God”, not some record kept just for the sake of future reference here on Earth.

By: Alinusara10

Alinusara10 — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 13:26:47 +0000

Whoops my mistake, it was Raymond not Janet. Delete if you wish. Not enough coffee yet to wake up.

By: Alinusara10

Alinusara10 — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 13:25:31 +0000

John “Jack” Samson, a University of Texas law professor who specializes in family law, testified Wednesday that because Jessop was legally married to another woman in Utah in 1994, the alleged victim could not have been his spouse in 2004.
===================================
This is significant up to the level of Lawrence vs. Texas. Can a person be guilty of sexual assault if they have consensual sex with a married man or woman?

By: Julie

Julie — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 13:24:14 +0000

Cupcake misspelled it. The correct link:

http://www.doublex.com/blog/xxfactor/polygamists-trial

Hanna Rosin: The prosecution was using these photos to build their case but the impression they leave is exactly the opposite: Here was a woman, beaming and carefree, until a man from the state showed up at her front door, with a medical instrument. Visually, they confirm what Willie Jessop, the spokesman for the sect, keeps repeating. “There is no victim here. The state is trying to create one.”

By: pins

pins — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 06:04:25 +0000

Cupcake, link didn’t work!

By: Cupcake

Cupcake — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 05:06:54 +0000

Here is an interesting article written by a person who is actually attending the trial. Enjoy!

http://www.doubleex.com/blog/xxfactor/polygamists-trial

By: kent

kent — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 02:39:25 +0000

Thanks Ron!

Rule 803, (11) Records of Religious Organizations. Statements of births, marriages, divorces, deaths, legitimacy, ancestry, relationship by blood or marriage, or other similar facts of personal or family history, contained in a regularly kept record of a religious organization. and any dictations of a Mormon leader IF walther shows any interest in them.

That should cover it!

By: WC

WC — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 00:51:44 +0000

That’s a huge problem with the law and penal codes- they apply to everyone. Mozart wrote a concert at age 8, people used to ruteinly marry at 14 and stay married for decades-obviously some people aren’t children till they’re 17-yet the law dictates they are, which is a load of garbage. Same problem when Hilderbran tried to blanket the state with his homeschooling laws, but that didn’t fly cause it stepped on too many Baptist’s toes.

By: Bill

Bill — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 00:44:59 +0000

Well,

Lets keep an eye on his blog and see what good old
Two Dogs Screwing does.