Deseret News | Reader comments: Defense in FLDS rape case casts wide net

Reader comments
Defense in FLDS rape case casts wide net

Standard FLDS tactics | 6:26 a.m. Oct. 13, 2008

Admit nothing, deny everything, make counteraccusations. And run up the financial burden of prosecuting the case. None of which has anything to do with the guilt or innocence of the accused.

This 19 year-old adult took a 14-year old wife. That's rape. Even if she never protested, which is consistent with the way she was trained to act by the extremely corrupt society she lived in.

It's unfortunate that our system gives the defense the tools to make this prosecution so drawn out and so very expensive, chasing down all these red herrings. But it has become absolutely necessary to show these corrupt child abusers we mean business.

At least we can take comfort that once we've made the investment in nailing this jello to the wall, future prosecutions will proceed more smoothly.

And let's hope there will be many, many future prosecutions.

zxcvbnm | 8:53 a.m. Oct. 13, 2008

Looks like the flds is learning how to fight.
Look for supression of evidence, unproven allegations, the manipulation of witnesses by the state..........what fun.
It is laughable to claim that a state with a multi billion dollar budget is being bled by a defendant with a working mans income. Even the flds millions is no match for the State budget,
Here we go again........is there physical evidence of a sex act?

Gal50 | 9:45 a.m. Oct. 13, 2008

It appears that Bradshaw does not typically handle rape cases as many of the victims have trouble reporting these incidents on a timely basis. I was violently molested by a stranger in a hotel elevator when I was 16. It wasn't until I was between 40 and 50 did I realize that I should file charges. At the time, I just wanted to forget about the incident. Now, I realize I have the responsibility to report it in case it can prevent someone else from experiencing the same trauma. So, that one to three years passed before Elisa Wall filed charges is not excessive at all considering that she was raised in a society that brainwashes its children. There are reports on the Internet that former FLDS require ten years of therapy before feeling normal.

That two years passed does not change the nature of the crime.

Where the unfairness lies in the criminal justice system is that criminals are held entirely liable for their crimes even when they were raised in emotionally impoverished environments that did not allow them to develop normally. This young man thought it was normal for old men to have sex with girls.

Comments continue below

To zxcvbnm | 8:53 | 10:29 a.m. Oct. 13, 2008

Thanks for making my case for me.

Who cares if there's physical evidence of sex? There is a detailed eyewitness account that's never even been denied by the rapist. That's would be plenty enough for anyone but an FLDS operative.

And to suggest the entire state budget should be dedicated to this prosecution merely illustrates the FLDS tactic -- admit nothing, deny everything, make counteraccusations. And bleed the state budget with irrelevant and dilatory discovery requests.

What fun, indeed.

John Pack Lambert | 12:00 p.m. Oct. 13, 2008

To Gal50,
I am very sad to hear you were so violated. I wish such things did not happen.
In the same vein I wish your theory that the lawyers actions indicate that he is unaware of rape cases was acurate.
To began with, the state really only needs to prove that Steeds had sex with Wall. If it can prove that, he is guilty of statutory rape.
Secondly, I think these tactics indicate Bradshaw is used to rape cases. He knows that it is a traumatizing experience, and that society is not open enough on the issue. He also knows that to continue getting his clients aquitted he needs to keep it that way.
Thus he goes on the offensive, and tries to discredit that statements and motives of his opponants.
Contrary to some people, I do not think the prosecutor erred in the Duke Rape Case. I think there was actual rape, however I think it is also at times hard to recall specific events when they are so tramatic you really just want to forget them. With defense attorneys who will pounce on minor inconsistancies things are bad.

John Pack Lambert | 12:06 p.m. Oct. 13, 2008

Just to reiterate what I said before, rape defense attorneys are the sleeziest lawyers around.
Instead of focusing on the cases at hand, they expend large amounts of time and energy trying to demean the victims. This is partly why rape is under-reported, it is a horrible enough experience, but to then have lawyers try their best to drag up as much demeaning, degrading material as they can, makes things worse.
The lawyers spend their energy trying to prove that the victims were women of loose morals. This is a method of character assasination that is not allowed in other cases.
Murder trials do not normally devolve into the lawyers claiming that the dead had done things that invited a murder. Whatever else happened in the OJ trial, no one ever claimed that the actions of the victims in some way insighted OJ to murder.
This is an even odder exception, because in a murder trial the victim can not speak in their defense.
Rape defense attorneys are a sleezy lot who constantly try to make a crime of violence and domineering about passion.
While there are people falsely accused, I think most false acusations are against victims.

zxcvbnm | 2:01 p.m. Oct. 13, 2008

The man entered a plea of not guilty.
The state has to provide EVIDENCE of his ALLEGED crime.
The man has a right to defend himself.....or is this Texas.
Now we have generalizations anout the unethical practices of rape lawyers........as if more generalizations about lawers were not enough.
Let these people defend themselves without the classification of every action as some type of plot.
Where is the evidence? One persons word against another isn't enough.

Gordo | 5:39 p.m. Oct. 13, 2008

SFT above is not correct. The crime for which Warren Jeffs was convicted was NOT statutory rape, but rape. Elissa Wall's age at the time of the rape was never considered at the trial. Therefore the state will have to prove rape in the charge against Allen Steed irrespective of the victim's age. That may prove more difficult than statutory rape, and an acquittal of Steed would leave the convictions against Jeffs on shakey ground. After all, how can you maintain a conviction against a person of accomplice to rape if the actual rapist is acquitted?

John Pack Lambert | 9:03 p.m. Oct. 13, 2008

The state can push statutory rape charges against Steed and they should do so.
However, I do see why they would want to push rape chargs against Steed. Gal50's analogy was clearly to a rape incident. Many things that are prosecuted as statutory rape are full force rapes involving the males using violence.
Up until about 30 years ago if not less, rape laws basically were interpreted if not in fact requiring the use of force not just of beating the girl with a fist, but of totally overwhelming her. Justice Blackmun actually in a case where the man had beat the girl with his fist multiple times that he would not consider it rape if it were not for the fact that she was under the legal age of consent and he was above that age.
It is a legal establishment that would acquit men who beat women with their fist to get them to consent to sex of rape charges that makes me say that rape defense lawyers are a sleesy lot.

Interloper | 11:43 p.m. Oct. 13, 2008

Statutory rape is a form of rape, so arguing that the charging of Allen Steed is flawed is pointless. Steed could not have legally had sex with Wall because she was below the age of consent. Furthermore, even if Steed had not admitted to raping her during Warren Jeffs' trial, there is plenty evidence of his sex with the Wall. She had several miscarriages right up until she left him. The crime was one that was ongoing for years.

As others have said, Steed's attorney is attempting to bury the prosecution in a mountain of discovery, nearly all of it unnecessary. All that is really needed to try the case is Steed's testimony from the Jeffs' trial, Wall's medical records and whatever defense Steed intends to offer. More would be surplus.

Gordo | 6:47 a.m. Oct. 14, 2008

Interloper is missing the point. Statutory rape does not require that it be established that the sex was non-consensual AT THE TIME IT OCCURRED. The fact that a non-consensual rape had occurred was central to the case against Warren Jeffs. If Elissa Wall refuses to testify against Allen Steed for rape, which she has implied she would not, then statutory rape is probably the best that the state can obtain against Allen Steed, and that's not the crime Warren Jeffs was convicted of being accomplice to. Warren Jeffs conviction as accomplice to rape resulted in a far greater sentence than even the people who have been convicted of statutory rape have received so far in connection with the FLDS. But don't take my word for it, read Steven Singular's, "When Men Become Gods". He explains it fully in his book.

reeeaaaalllly | 8:37 a.m. Oct. 14, 2008

If any one living the flds life read Steven Singulars book. They would put it down after the first paragraph. It is chucked full of lies....

Deb Lee | 9:30 a.m. Oct. 14, 2008

I agree with Mr. Bradshaw.

If a person is going to be tried for a crime, he and his attorney should be entitled to see any evidence collected by the state. There are too many cases in which innocent people were sent to prison because the state did not provide to the defense all the information they acquired during an investigation.

To Deb Lee | 9:30 | 10:36 a.m. Oct. 14, 2008

No one's arguing an accused has no right to engage in whatever oppressive discovery the court will let him get away with.

The point is this -- when evidence against an accused is overwhelming, as in this case, the accused typically offers to plead guilty in the hope of obtaining leniency in return for the act of saving the government substantial resources in the preparation and prosecution of the case, as well as showing the first steps towards responsibility and rehabilitation

I'll bet once Mr. Steed is convicted, as he surely will be, he also pleads for a lenient sentence. He should not get it. He still sees himself as the victim in this case, showing he has not abandoned the cynical FLDS juxtaposition of good and evil.

Red | 12:18 p.m. Oct. 14, 2008

"... 'work projects' ..."

You probably mean "work product."

(see dictionary dot com)

Pliggy | 1:19 p.m. Oct. 14, 2008

Utah LAW
"With respect to the crime of rape, a 14-year old is capable of consenting to sexual intercourse"
-From the Jury instructions in the Warren Jeffs trial

To Pliggy | 1:19 | 2:19 p.m. Oct. 14, 2008

Maybe you missed the change to Utah law (U.C. 76-5-401) at least 10 years ago, but a 14-year-old actually cannot consent to sex with an adult. If she does have sex with an adult, it's a third degree felony unless:

"the defendant establishes by a preponderance of the evidence the mitigating factor that the defendant is less than four years older than the minor at the time the sexual activity occurred, in which case it is a class B misdemeanor."

So, contrary to your assertion, sex by a 19-year-old with a 14-year-old is a felony. Has been for quite awhile.

Even in Southern Utah.

Interloper | 4:15 p.m. Oct. 14, 2008

As I said before, Allen Steed could not have legally have had sex with Ms. Wall because she was underage. (Someone has cited the statute above.)

Warren Jeffs was convicted of 'rape as an accomplice." The statute he was convicted under does not exclude any form of rape, including statutory, as being the crime the defendant acted as accomplice to. So, it is certainly possible to try Steed for statutory rape, despite the verdict in the Jeffs' case. (Furthermore, I suspect stare decisis could be controlling.)

John Pack Lambert | 7:22 p.m. Oct. 14, 2008

I am not 100% sure that rape as an accomplice requres an ability to convict the main people involved of rape.
If someone encoraged two ten year olds to have sex with eachother, at least I think this might be the case, they could be prosecuted for promoting indecency in minors.
So what I am thinking is in some cases your actions are criminal because they encorage sexual activity that is not just harmful for one but harmful for both people involved.
I might totally not understand the nature of these laws. If someone who is an expert on rape as an accomplice law in Utah could comment it would be helpful.

realitycheck | 3:50 p.m. Oct. 15, 2008

the rape is the adults telling these kids what to do, when their own moral judgement is so messed up.

Still confused how the FLDS can act like they are all religious and holy, then force people to marry someone they certainly don't love. I guess they believe God thrives on pain and dispair. (I always thought He promoted love, but obviously the FLDS missed that chapter. Which is suprising since they spend 24/7 analyzing their religious books.)

Jen | 6:24 a.m. Nov. 13, 2008

Must read: "Stolen Innocence" by Elisa Wall...incredible!

Judy | 5:06 p.m. Jan. 10, 2009

Duhhhhh!! A reality check is in order here. The fact that this was a 14 year old child, who apparently went to extraordinary lengths within her limited FLDS boundaries to prevent this "placement" marriage, to her first cousin no less, and then forced to go thru with it anyway is beyond normal comprehension. Furthermore, FLDS's teaching of female children to not have conversation, friendships, dating, etc with boys, and in all ways consider them "poisonous snakes" would hardly prepare one's psyche for the reality of sex or marriage even at a legal age. What is it about the fact that a 19 yr old male cannot understand the word "NO" at every step of his sexual attempts - is this not proof enough that this was not a consensual act? Is not 4 pregnancies proof enough that a sexual act was committed over and over? In cult comparisons, it was probably more painless for the followers of Jim Jones to 'drink the coolaid' and put them out of their misery than to live life in an FLDS environment. Read 'Stolen Innocence' for your reality check, and think about whether you would want this type of life experience for your child?

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.