The Glade 4.0

"Turn the lights down, the party just got wilder."
It is currently Sat Nov 23, 2024 8:05 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 7:30 pm 
Offline
adorabalicious
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:54 am
Posts: 5094
http://trueslant.com/stephenwebster/201 ... nsuitable/

Police: Teaching Kids to Mistrust Government Makes Couple ‘Unsuitable’ Parents
By STEPHEN C. WEBSTER
Williamson County Courthouse, in Georgetown, Texas
Texans, beware: If you teach your kids that the “government is out to harm them,” police in Williamson County might just deem you an “unsuitable” parent.

That startling claim, leveled by officers in Child Protective Services documents detailing an investigation into an Austin-area activist couple, should be enough to give reason for pause to any staunch conservative in the state.

The allegation was made against drug reform activist filmmakers Barry and Candi Cooper, whose home was recently raided and searched after the Williamson County Sheriff’s Department claimed Barry’s voice was heard in the background audio of an allegedly false police report.

Once in the couple’s home, officers discovered a small amount of marijuana and charged the Coopers with Class B misdemeanors, resulting in both their arrests. Each immediately bonded out of jail and paid a small fine. Days later, while Candi’s youngest son was visiting his father in east Texas, Child Protective Services contacted the Coopers, revealing that the incident could cost them not only custody of the boy, but also their freedom on felony child endangerment charges.

After CPS interviewed the couple, Travis County Deputy District Attorney Dayna Blazey pronounced both Coopers to be fit parents, whose children are healthy, happy and “well cared for.”

“[There] is nothing to indicate that the kids are at risk,” she wrote.

A message requesting the deputy DA’s comment on this story went unanswered at time of publication.

Her conclusion, which falls at the end of documents published below, is almost odd following the numerous pages of text entered by police, who seemingly describe an alternate reality.

Among their claims — that Barry and Candi regularly give illicit drugs to their children, that they allow and encourage other kids to use drugs in their home, that they’ve mentally abused their children by telling them that marijuana is good and anti-drug efforts are riddled with lies — the most extreme is that the Coopers are “unsuitable” parents because they create an environment in which the children learn their “government is out to harm them.”

The allegation is found atop page five of the CPS report.

In another completely dumbfounding, ironic entry, Sgt. Gary Haston of the Williamson County Sheriff’s Department — the officer whose testimony appears on the original search warrant affidavit — actually claims he observed the children “crying for no reason” as armed officers invaded their home. [Emphasis added.]

He also claims that Barry “hates” his father and does not believe in church, as though this information would somehow be relevant to the CPS agents.

Haston, who Cooper described as Williamson County’s “head of narcotics,” has an extensive history with drug interdiction as a police officer. He was even the 2008-2009 vice president for the Texas Narcotic Officers Association Central Region, according to a memo circulated by the association. It was his testimony that gave officers access to the Coopers’ residence and files for the alleged misdemeanor offense of filing a false police report.

A request for comment left with the Williamson County Sheriff’s Department went unanswered at time of publication.

“In my 19 years of experience with criminal defense matters, a search warrant for a misdemeanor charge is certainly unusual,” wrote Minnesota attorney Maury D. Beaulier, who had no prior knowledge of the Coopers’ case. “It indicates to me that this is a targeted investigation. It may be targeted because it is believed to be a part of a greater crime or conspiracy, or, perhaps, because there are political motivations at work.”

While searching through the Coopers’ private data, police discovered a photograph of a minor in the shower, nude from the bust up. The image was a risque self-portrait shot by one of the adolescent children, who later took sole responsibility for the photo. Both parents claimed they knew nothing about it before the issue was raised to them by authorities. Ultimately, the photo held no bearing on their case and the minor was warned to be cautious with digital imaging equipment. Because of the individual’s age, all identifying information has been removed from the documents published below.

In a court hearing Tuesday, the Coopers were unsuccessful in re-obtaining custody of Zachary, Candi’s seven-year-old who is currently under the care of his father in Upshur County, Texas. The court did not issue a ruling, as matters of geographic limitations have yet to be addressed. Barry and Candi are seeking to have the custody battle in Travis County, but it’s still a matter of dispute. Lawyers for the Coopers and Zachary Johnston’s father brokered limited visitation rights for Candi, but Barry is required to stay away from the boy for the time being.

Because of the nature of Texas’ drug laws and their status as nationally-known political activists, the Coopers are facing the very real possibility of losing Zach entirely, with future contact only allowed in the context of supervised visitation.

“I just don’t know what I’ll do if we lose Zach,” Barry said. “That would be the most horrible thing to ever happen to me in my entire life.”

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 7:39 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
Your article is laden with predjudicial language and bias, and indicates that it was drug charges, not their political leanings, that caused the removal of the children.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 7:46 pm 
Offline
adorabalicious
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:54 am
Posts: 5094
the most extreme is that the Coopers are “unsuitable” parents because they create an environment in which the children learn their “government is out to harm them.”

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 8:04 pm 
Offline
pbp Hack
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 8:45 pm
Posts: 7585
I think it's a stretch.

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 8:42 pm 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
For misdemeanor pot charges?

Ridiculous.

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 7:32 am 
Offline
Evil Bastard™
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:07 am
Posts: 7542
Location: Doomstadt, Latveria
The spin-doctoring in the original piece of yellow journalism is retarded.

_________________
Corolinth wrote:
Facism is not a school of thought, it is a racial slur.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 11:23 am 
Offline
Lean, Mean, Googling Machine
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 2903
Location: Maze of twisty little passages, all alike
It's hard to find anything on this situation that isn't published by someone with an obvious agenda. I did find this, though, which is slightly less sensationalist:

Opposing Views: "KopBusters" Barry Cooper & Wife Lose Son Over Misdemeanor Marijuana Charge

The police report itself is quite ridiculous, but this sounds like it has a lot more to do with the pot, and specifically with Cooper being a former K-9 narc officer cum high-profile pot advocate than any particular anti-government sentiments. I also more than slightly suspect that Cooper did, in fact, call in a false "suspicious package" report at a school, exactly as claimed. That doesn't justify this sort of retaliation, of course, but if he's been making knowingly false alarms to the police, his *** should be fined for it. Nor should it be any surprise if the local police have an axe to grind with him.

More interestingly, it brings up the relation between Cooper and his step-son's father:

Quote:
In the document, an affidavit in support of ex parte relief filed with a court in Upshur County, Texas, Mr. Johnston contends that because of Barry and Candi’s standing as nationally-known marijuana activists and their high (no pun intended) level of comfort with the drug, they pose a danger to Zachary. He cites articles on the duo’s exploits published by Cannabis Culture and Maxim, noting in particular that when Barry and Candi met, she was his “pot dealer.”

“This recent [arrest] crosses the line from advocacy to illicit drug abuse,” Mr. Johnston concludes. “I have tried to tolerate the Coopers and their lifestyle as long as I can. My son, Zachary, does not deserve to be raised in a household that uses illicit drugs, abuses drugs, and where they derive the majority of their income on the advocacy of how to engage in illegal conduct."


The local PD is acting stupidly, but I'm not sure that they're doing it entirely on their own initiative. This whole thing reeks of a custody battle in progress.

_________________
Sail forth! steer for the deep waters only!
Reckless, O soul, exploring, I with thee, and thou with me;
For we are bound where mariner has not yet dared to go,
And we will risk the ship, ourselves and all.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 12:59 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
Elmarnieh wrote:
the most extreme is that the Coopers are “unsuitable” parents because they create an environment in which the children learn their “government is out to harm them.”


That's listed as just one thing out of "pages and pages". Your thread title indicates that the children were removed purely for that reason. You did, after all use an '=' sign.

There is no reason to think that the children would have ben removed without the drug charges, or that they would not have been removed with only the drug charges and not the teaching about the government. It appears to be an entirely superfluous comment in the middle of the case, although still clearly irrelevant to whether they are fit parents.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 1:07 pm 
Offline
Noli me calcare
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:26 am
Posts: 4747
Diamondeye wrote:
There is no reason to think that the children...would not have been removed with only the drug charges and not the teaching about the government.


Here's a reason:

Quote:
After CPS interviewed the couple, Travis County Deputy District Attorney Dayna Blazey pronounced both Coopers to be fit parents, whose children are healthy, happy and “well cared for.”

“[There] is nothing to indicate that the kids are at risk,” she wrote.

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 1:11 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
Vindicarre wrote:
Diamondeye wrote:
There is no reason to think that the children...would not have been removed with only the drug charges and not the teaching about the government.


Here's a reason:

Quote:
After CPS interviewed the couple, Travis County Deputy District Attorney Dayna Blazey pronounced both Coopers to be fit parents, whose children are healthy, happy and “well cared for.”

“[There] is nothing to indicate that the kids are at risk,” she wrote.


How does that in any was establish that they wouldn't have been taken in the first palce if they had only been charged with drug offenses and no comment had been made about their political attitudes?

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 1:13 pm 
Offline
Noli me calcare
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:26 am
Posts: 4747
I'm sorry DE, I thought you said "there is no reason to think...", not "enough evidence to establish...".

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 2:01 pm 
Offline
adorabalicious
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:54 am
Posts: 5094
Maybe that is because he did say "there is no reason to think"?

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 8:38 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
Vindicarre wrote:
I'm sorry DE, I thought you said "there is no reason to think...", not "enough evidence to establish...".


If there's not enough evidence to establish something, then there's no reason to think it's necessarily true. There may be a reason to think it's possibly true depending on how much evidence there is. My fault for the sloppy phrasing.

However, there is in this case not even close to enough evidence to establish either that the children would have been removed without any drug charges or that the children would not have been removed only for the drug charges.

It's pretty much a classic complex cause fallacy to seize on one line in the report (which isn't even directly cited) and claim that's the reason to the exclusion of all the other causes given.

So, let's rephrase. There's no reason to think that the parents' alleged teachings about government were any more than a trivial contributor to the children's removal.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 9:02 pm 
Offline
Noli me calcare
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:26 am
Posts: 4747
Well DE, I think we agree that the tag line "Teaching kids that government lies = removing your kids" is spurious at best. I do think the quote given by the ADA is a reason the kids shouldn't have been involved in this. However, I think that the largest factor in all this is the guy going from "Top Narco Cop" to "Outspoken Pot Advocate". The "voice in the background" to get a search warrant(!) and the misdemeanor marijuana charge was just the reason they needed to "get him good". That **** doesn't happen unless there's a reason they want to get ya.

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 10:05 pm 
Offline
Grrr... Eat your oatmeal!!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 11:07 pm
Posts: 5073
Stathol wrote:
This whole thing reeks of a custody battle in progress.



This, very much so.

_________________
Darksiege
Traveller, Calé, Whisperer
Lead me not into temptation; for I know a shortcut


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Sat Apr 03, 2010 8:52 am 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
Vindicarre wrote:
Well DE, I think we agree that the tag line "Teaching kids that government lies = removing your kids" is spurious at best. I do think the quote given by the ADA is a reason the kids shouldn't have been involved in this. However, I think that the largest factor in all this is the guy going from "Top Narco Cop" to "Outspoken Pot Advocate". The "voice in the background" to get a search warrant(!) and the misdemeanor marijuana charge was just the reason they needed to "get him good". That **** doesn't happen unless there's a reason they want to get ya.


Perhaps. On the other hand, I'd point out that Children's Services (or whatever name it goes by there) =/= the police, and the two don't normally associate unless they have to. The article is so poorly written that it's a little hard to determine exactly who did what at what point.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 94 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group