Now we are getting an entirely different story from the one that was first published. It seems that the parents have changed their story to make it seem like there is evidence that Bell took the children from the house.

No one mentioned this alleged "dream" prior to this testimony and now the prosecutor attempts to enter into evidence "purported facts" which haven't been substantiated by any other evidence. If I was the defense I would ask that the testimony be dismissed unless a prior written, signed and dated statement can be presented that verifies it.

"Kraft repeatedly tried to ask questions about what happened after Latu found the children in Bell's home, which has received widespread media attention. County prosecutor Angela Micklos, however, constantly objected."

This has bearing on the issue since it calls the mothers testimony into question. She claims X but then she sends people to break into someone's house and beat them nearly to death.

I think that has a lot of bearing on whether it was a "mother's instinct" or the lies of a guilty person who was drunk and unable to care for her children.

I think the full facts will come out though!

So, when will the DA file charges against the vigilantes?

This story is great story to help pass Prop 8 in California. The reason.... The continual media coverage of I'm gay therefore I can do whatever I want...

The only story that matters is the one that is presented in court. The "dream" was always part of the case and the defense always knew about it. The court system worked exactly the way it was supposed to. If, as Mr. Kraft had suggested, that this was a misunderstanding, why did he not put on one witness of his own on to show that the children wandered over to Mr. Bell's house. Mr. Bell tells investigators that he took the children over to his house and that he knew he shouldn't have because it was not his place. I am sure the D.A. will welcome a full trial because the "full facts" will come through. This was a pre lim which puts forth basic facts. If this was such a weak case the pre lim would have been an ideal setting to have Mr. Bell put on his evidence to have the case thrown out, but yet he did not put on ANY evidence. Better yet why didn't Mr. Bell himself speak. I know he doesn't have to but it cast doubt on his story.

Perhaps the prosecutor knows things that we do not. But I hope that if it becomes clear to the prosecutor that the case should be dismissed--and/or that charges should be filed against the vigilantes who tried to kill these men--that she will do the right thing.

Of course, I'm not holding my breath.

Prove that the adult kids who entered the home into Bells house weren't invited in, and prove which ones beat the crap out of him. I think Bell invited them in. There is nothing wrong with what they did in this situation. Any normal human being would have done the same. Bell is obviously guilty. It's black and white. No grey area in this case. Bell should be dead.

The five vigilantes need to be prosecuted. This is no longer the wild West. We have procedure for handling crimes and beating people up is not one of them.

I think the door being kicked in is evidence enough to show they weren't "invited" in. Of course, that wasn't documented because the drunk and high thugs were never even looked at as perpetrators. No one can bring back that little girl that died under the nose of the So. Salt Lake Police, but they shouldn't make the next person that comes along pay for their incompetence and let the loosers who are the real perpetrators in this instance get away with attempted murder.