Reader comments
Ex-husband of accuser testifies

If Jeffs is an accomplice isn't Steed the offender? Where's his charge? Beyond a reasonable doubt...sure doesn't sound like it. Creepy Jeffs walks

Jeff's "trained" this guy into what to say, same as those women who "testifed" a few days ago. This whole trial is a sham!! Jeff has so much control over these people, they will say anything and lie on the stand !! Just another CULT !!

I agree that if Jeffs is the accomplice, Steed's the offender. But if you believe the girl's story that she was forced into the marriage and coerced to have sex, then it's quite possible Steed was just as forced and brainwashed. He's a victim too of this twisted arrangement.

I agree with El Mano. To be an accomplice, there needs to be an offender? Where is Steeds charge? We all see this as what it is, A witchhunt after Jeffs. If you are going to go after polygamy, then charge them with polygamy. If you are going to charge them with bigamy, you better charge everyone who is cheating on their wives. Instead, this is a politcal witchhunt to try to repair the image of Utah and its polygamist past by Mark Shurtleff picking and choosing his court battles. All marriage counselors better be prepared to be dragged into court when they counsel a couple who is having troubles and the wife decides to sue her husband for rape. After all the counselor said to try to work things out so thereby they are an accomplice to rape.

It seems the crux of the case should be that Jeffs was using a position of power and influence to set up an arrangement whereby a 14 year old girl under that influence (who was too young even to make a contract to buy a bicycle) would have sex with an adult. If sex occurred under this arrangement, whether consensual or not, the result would be statutory rape, and Jeffs would be an accomplice to it.

We wouldn't permit this if a teacher of a junior high school girl made arrangements for her to have sex with an adult--even if because of the teacher's influence she was willing to do it.

If it boils down to consent or not, which I think should not be the issue, the state is going to have a very hard time proving that the sex was not consensual.

I am curious what criminal law experts think out there.

I agree with dcs...we don't have to make it so complicated. Of course it's wrong for spouses to do some of the things they do, but that's not what this issue is about.
It is wrong to force people to marry through any means and regardless of age. But it's especially wrong to force teenagers! We don't permit this with any other person in authority and we shouldn't permit under the disguise of "religion" either!
It's true that the ex-husband in this case was a vicim too. The defense just tries to make the issue about the character of the girl rather than the real issue.

I am quite sure that there is proof of more than one charge here; I agree that because she was fourteen, even if she gave consent, it is still rape; she, like most girls that age, was too young to know better; it's slavery, you know, how the polygamists hiding out there force girls to marry at 12-14; they're taking advantage of the girls' ignorance!

And not only that, but I am quite sure that the minimum age to marry is 16, which is yet another charge.

Also, unless I am much mistaken, polygamy is illegal.

What about those charges? Jeffs is guilty of all of them!

I believe polygamy isn't illegal in Utah, but may be unlawful. (For the difference between illegal & unlawful, see a law dictionary). What is illegal is "unlawful cohabitation" which is defined as cohabiting with someone you are not legally married to. You can see the problem with this and why they do not prosecute too much on this law. They would have to arrest ever boyfriend and girlfriend living together before marriage.

This case will never hold up, they will never get a conviction, this is so contrived. I'm not a supporter of Jeffs, but this case will never hold water.

Is it against the law to have sex with a 14 year old girl, in or out of marriage? If not, then the state has wasted time and money on this case. If this case is really against plural marriage, then say so, and go after that, but this pretense about rape in marriage is pretty dumb. Rape within marriage is extremely difficult to prove.

If you want to go after the flds church, then seize their assets, disenfranchise the church, charge them with theft, tax evasion, or other crimes, but forget the polygamy thing. If the supreme court defends and protects the right of gays and lesbians to have sex, and an array of other bizarre sex acts, then prosecuting against polygamy will never fly.

Most states have, or had, laws against adultery; anybody seen any adultery prosecutions lately?

The law in Utah with regard to the age of consent is confusing at best. Teenagers 14-15 years of age can have consensual sex with each other, 16-17 as well. It seems inconsistant.

Also, I believe the age at which someone can be married in Utah is 14 with parental consent.

Here is the crux of the case. The marriage that was "performed" was not a legally recognized marriage as far as I know. Now you have a 14 year old and a 19 year old having sexual relations (consensual or not). Pretty obvious statutory rape case.

The husband may still be charged. He was read his rights before he began his testimony, and was told that whatever he said could lead to charges.

We all know that they are after Jeffs, and that is why the husband will probably not be charged with anything.

Having once been a teenage girl who lived in a home with an abusive step father I read somethings into this story. Did the girl say the "NO" or "stop"? The point is could she have. No she couldn't! She had no where to turn. No one to turn to. You have older people controlling your life. You have no say. You feel you have no voice.

Even grown women have a problem with standing up for themselves under the best of circumstances. So how could this girl say "No" and have it mean anything!

As for the 19 year old young man. He is a product of his society. He was doing as he was told. He was their puppet. He was doing what he was told that God wanted of him. He didn't want to disappoint God. It seems as if in his mind things were supposed to be different and He was trying to do as he was told God expected. So, is he guilty? Has he been brain washed? If he wanted things to be different did he have a voice? If he said "No" would he have been heard? I don't think so

Think for yourself, question authority!, that guy could have thought about it logically and decided it wasn't ok, I think he should be charged too.

Just a reminder to those who keep looking for other things Jeffs is "Guilty" of... He is on trial for "Rape", not for being offensive to us, being a monster, the leader of a terrible cult, etc. He may be guilty of all the above but he's only on trial for "Rape".

The jury may decide Jeffs is guilty of Rape as well, but we need to leave that to the jury for now and quit trying to see how many other things he should be put away for. We can't find him guilty of Rape just because we don't like other things about him, his religion or his life-style.

These are official charges, this is a legal proceeding. So we need to leave this to the legal system and "Judge not that ye be not judged".

Remember... many people think the LDS church is just as much a controling cult as the FLDS church. Do we want President Hinkley put in jail because some feel he is a cult leader?

Suggestion... The way to do away with a corrupt leader is to quit following him. Not bring him before a court. That may make him a martyr.

It is soooo amazing to me how much media attention this trial is getting! So what if Jeff's arranged the marriage? That is what the polygamy culture does! I really think that if anyone should be charged, it should be the girl's parents. That is child abuse. For anyone to say that it was kept a secret, and the girl had nobody to tell..........I would bet that most people knew. In that culture, girls marry at 13 -14 years old all the time, so why would anyone living in that community be surprised? Or anyone else for that matter? I think the girl / woman has figured out a way to make lots of money.

I can't believe that someone could actually believe that the "culture" that allows 13-14 year olds to marry would only think that the parents are guilty. That part you are right about. Any adult in that "culture" that condones any part of that life style,(brainwashing children and forcing them to marry against their will, even forcing out the young boys so the dirty old men can have the sweet young girls) should be tried and convicted of child abuse. This is the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, we do not tolerate treating our children like that. In this country we do have freedom of religion but not at the expense of our children.

I think it is legal. Unfortunately, it is immoral and I encourage the state to continue to disrupt this polygamous society. This is not the way polygamy was intended to be procticed when it was practiced by the saints. So I hope that the efforts continue and that the disruption continues, until this exploitation of young girls ends. A side note: It makes good sense to allow 14 year olds to marry, if they are marrying someone close to their own age. So let's make it illegal to allow a 14 year old to marry anyone 10 years older than her and allow an exception to 15 years with a judges permission.

No, polygamy is not legal in Utah. That was a condition of statehood. Furthermore, the Supreme Court has specifically ruled that polygamy is not covered under "religious freedom," as the state (meaning society, not the specific state of Utah) has a larger interest in promoting monogamy as part of a stable society. So polygamy is not legal in any state, period.

THIS IS A PRIME EXAMPLE OF WHERE PEOPLE NO MATTER BELIEVE THAT MAN IS GOD AND THEY ARE NOT PEOPLE NEED TO START USING THERE OWN BRAINS AND STOP LETTING MAN CONTROL WHAT THEY DO AND I BLAME A GREAT DEAL OF THIS ON THE PARENTS OF THESE TWO KIDS THEY NEED TO BE IN COURT

If consenting adults want to be in a polygamous arrangement, that is their right. The goverment is not right to dictate families arrange themselves. Forced marriages and child abuse are a seperate issue.