Reply #9: The judges as "accessories before and after the fact" [View All]

[autorank]

That is the precise wording - which I missed - but will use in a response at a few other forums where
the snarks have shown up - you know, the "skeptics" who say they have to be returned because nothing
was proven.

Of course, the purpose of child protective legislation and functions is to secure the child's safety
given a reasonable suspicion that abuse is taking place. It's a cult. The cult leader engages is
convicted of sexual abuse and child rape. And the child protective workers found evidence on site
of broader implementation of the "Jeffs paradigm" for child rearing. Any child subject to that,
the underage girls, plus any child exposed to that environment, is at risk. Yet that wasn't enough
for the "accessories before and after the fact."

Thank you for the elegant phrasing!