FLDS retorts: Raid violated the sect's rights

[High Plains]

Source: Salt Lake Tribune

SAN ANGELO, Texas - For the first time, the FLDS have responded to the state raid on the YFZ Ranch that began last Thursday and just now is nearing completion. In five filings released Monday, Isaac Jeffs and Merrill Jessop said the sect's constitutional rights were violated in a massive search that was overly broad and vague in its focus.



The men say it is "impossible" that the sealed affidavit that triggered the investigation at the ranch listed sufficient evidence to search "each and every residence, structure, school, vehicle, place of business, temple or other facility." The filing describes the ranch as an "unincorporated city or neighborhood of 300 to 400 residents" that includes single and multiple family homes, a doctor's office, a cheese manufacturing plant, a cement plant and other buildings spread over 1,691 acres.

The men also point out that the arrest and search warrants targeting Dale Barlow are moot since he has been located in Colorado City, Ariz.

The motions, which were filed Saturday at 11 a.m., also objected to law officers entering the temple located on the ranch.
FLDS members "consider it a desecration of one of their holiest sites for a non-member to enter their temple," it said. "Such a desecration would be irreparable."




Read more: http://www.sltrib.com/ci_8847459

---

The article also notes that a SWAT team entered the temple.

The Salt Lake Tribune web site has lots of related articles.

[Shakespeare]

1. Child rape.

You do know, I assume, that when a search warrant is executed, if things/situations encountered by the police upon entry warrant further search, that is 100% legal probable cause.

[High Plains]

2. I've been wondering about the legality of all this myself.

One complaint triggers the seizure of every kid in this community?

The community surrounded by cops, the men virtually held prisoner?

Polygamy and child brides aren't my thing, but compliance with the Constitution is. Or do we get to cut corners with unpopular groups?

[pnwmom]

20. One complaint apparently led to their immediately finding 18 other children

who were abused -- those 18 were immediately put into foster care. Those children probably made numerous other assertions, probably identifiying other abused children by name.

But there was also the problem of identifying who is who among the children on the ranch. They are giving different names and ages to different investigators. From what I've read, the reason they were taken from the ranch is that the CPS people hoped that they'd be able to conduct more useful interviews in a neutral setting. At least figure out who is who!

And then there's the problem that they still haven't found the girl who originally called them. They don't want to stop till they've found her.

I don't know that everything they've done in pursuing this case is legal. But I'm willing to suspend judgment until we know more. Protecting children is paramount.

[JerseygirlCT]

37. They've been watching and studying what goes on in those compounds

for a very long time now. The complaint may have given them cause to go in, but once there, the abuse was apparently pretty obvious.

[Demeter]

51. Why Not? They Do It in Michigan

Try being a parent of a disabled child--and staying out of jail. See West Bloomfield, Michigan, case:

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080316/COL04/803160557/1009/NEWS07

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080317/COL04/803170336/1009/NEWS07

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080323/COL04/803230562/1009/NEWS07

[Winterblues]

65. There are no longer any corners to cut

What ever "Unitary Executive" says is the way it is..And quit throwing that "goddamn piece of paper" in people's faces......

[kestrel91316]

79. The men weren't held prisoner, I'm sure. They WERE kept from

interfering with the search and investigation.

Why are you STILL supporting this culture of ritual child rape??

[High Plains]

3. The Texas prosecutor's response to the complaint seems strange:

From the Tribune article in the OP:

"Allison Palmer, assistant district attorney for the 51st District, filed a response that said neither men has standing or a legal right to participate in the matter or an expectation of privacy on the ranch. She also said arguments to suppress evidence seized are premature."

As the Tribune noted:

"Merrill Jessop oversees the ranch and its residents. Isaac Jeffs is the brother of Warren S. Jeffs, who led the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints until he was convicted last year of two counts of being an accomplice to rape."

If these guys don't have the standing or legal right to complain, who does?

And why should they have no expectation of privacy on their private property?

[Lance_Boyle]

4. because there was probable cause - and a warrant issued - to search?

If you and I can be searched based on probable cause sufficient to convince a judge to issue a warrant, so can a child rape cult. They're not more protected because of their beliefs.

[High Plains]

6. The warrant was for one guy--who isn't there--and the alleged complainant.

Who apparently isn't there, either, if she exists at all.

The guy they are after, Dale Barlow, is in Colorado City, Arizona, and says he doesn't even know his accuser.

[Lance_Boyle]

7. in the process of finding out he wasn't there, they saw criminal activity

or evidence of it.

[High Plains]

17. Did they? Can you show me where somebody says that?

[jayfish]

31. Doesn't Really Matter Anyway.

If the search is deemed illegal then of the the evidence obtained from the search is inadmissible in a criminal court.

Jay

[customerserviceguy]

71. Frankly, I don't care terribly much

if the Texas taxpayers avoid spending millions of dollars to put a few dozen dirty old men in prison for a couple of years, because the warrant was faulty, but I'm damn glad these kids are being given a chance to see a different life than the one their parents' cult had doomed them to.

It's called breaking the cycle, and its the only way that child abuse stops.

[LanternWaste]

80. "re at imminent risk of harm, children we believe have been abused or neglected"

http://www.rickross.com/reference/polygamy/polygamy797.html

"In my opinion, this is the largest endeavor we've ever been involved with in the state of Texas," said Child Protective Services spokeswoman Marleigh Meisner. "This is not about numbers. This is about children who are at imminent risk of harm, children we believe have been abused or neglected."

[Shakespeare]

8. See my post #1.

They are absolutely in the clear with probably cause. Now I have a question for YOU: why are you so vigoriously defending a child rape cult?

[AngryAmish]

11. Because if we don't defend the Consitution for unpopular folks...

it won't mean a thing for us.

By what I read these people are terrible. But they do get the benefit of due process just like us.

[Shakespeare]

12. Who says they're not getting due process?

The police executed a legal search warrant, and had probable cause to evacuate FOUR HUNDRED AND ONE children. I get the feeling some folks here on DU don't fully understand what "due process" really is.

This "oh, we should just leave them be" business is nauseating. They are a known child rape cult. You bet your ass the cops should go in there and put a stop to it.

They'll get their due process, which looks at this point as if it'll culminate in a criminal trial.

[AngryAmish]

15. The owners of the property say so

We do not know what is in the sealed search warrant. It is probably a good thing they are taking the kids away. But search warrants can be overbroad and, yes, a violation of due process.

[Shakespeare]

24. Oh, well, of COURSE we should believe that.

Have you READ anything about this cult? Seriously?

Ongoing reports about the raid have said that they immediately found several young girls (well under the legal age) who were pregnant. There's your probable cause, unless you want to make excuses for that, too.

[High Plains]

19. Or maybe this will turn out to be a fiasco like the 1953 mass kidnapping.

[Shakespeare]

25. Or perhaps you missed the part about 133 women leaving voluntarily.

But go ahead and keep attempting to defend the cult.

[yardwork]

64. The 1953 "mass kidnapping" that freed hundreds of other child brides?

You seem to be intent on defending a group of older men's right to rape and impregnate children.

Will you be defending the North American Man-Boy Love Association next?

[LanternWaste]

66. What leads you to believe that?

What leads you to believe that? :shrug:

[LanternWaste]

81. It won't.

It won't.

[slampoet]

13. Even a werewolf deserves a fair shake in the US justice system.

That is just how it is.


If you don't like it there are plenty of other countries to live in.

[Shakespeare]

14. "Getting a fair shake" does not mean you leave them be when they're breaking the law.

There is not one iota of evidence to suggest the police have been out of line in any way on this case.

[slampoet]

57. So you live in the same apartment building as the werewolf and you are the same religion.

Your name isn't on the warrant.

Should they be able to search your apartment?

[Shakespeare]

59. If they have probable cause, yes, they can search my apartment.

Your analogy isn't accurate, however. Everyone on this compound is interconnected--quite different from an apartment building full of unconnected people who are strangers to each other.

But don't let something such as simple logic slow you in your rush to defend these people.

[slampoet]

60. You are confusing a warrant and probable cause.

In doing so you made my point.

[Shakespeare]

62. No, I'm not. The search warrant allows them entry.

If they see something once inside, or if someone on the scene does or says something that requires investigation beyond the parameters of the warrant, they have probable cause to expand the search.

This overlaps a bit with what I do for a living, so I assure you I'm quite clear on the difference.

[Marrah_G]

74. This is not like an apartment

These people were living in large dormitories and sharing communal buildings. This was like one large apartment.

[dmallind]

86. If they find blood trails leading to my door

And hear howls then yes they should. If I just had a nosebleed and am howling in pain from it I will not likely be prosecuted.

What they found was a communal living situation with numerous obviously molested underage kids. How do you suggest they discover the guilty party?

[JerseygirlCT]

38. And I assume they will have that benefit and their day in court

Where I sincerely hope they are found guilty and sent away for the rest of their days.

[Marrah_G]

72. They are getting the same due process that I would

If someone got a phone call that I gave my daughter to my husband/boyfriend to impregante you can be damn sure they would come and remove all the children from my home.

How do you leave children in a place, with people who may or may not be their parents, where the entire adult community facilitates and witnesses the "spiritual marriage" of a 13 to a 50 year old? This is a case where there is not just one abuser, there is an entire network of abusers and those who support and protect those abusers.

There are many different accusation against these people and the only way to investigate is to remove those children. Otherwise the children would disappear during the investigation.

Also there are a half dozen women who chose to leave the cult. I am sure they will have some interesting stories to tell.

[High Plains]

18. See my post #2. I support the Constitution.

And I have real questions about the legality of what's going on.

And I don't think it's helpful to refer to the FLDS as a "child rape cult." Can we use less inflammatory, emotion-laden words?

As far as I know, they practice arranged marriages and some of them have involved underage teenagers.

"Child rape cult" conjures up images of pedophiliac orgies with six-year-olds. Is that what you're alleging?

[Shakespeare]

26. I, too, support the constitution.

There has been NO evidence WHATSOEVER that the cult leaders' rights have been violated. NONE.

"Child rape cult" means forced sex (and in this case, impregnation, too) of any underage child. There's nothing inflammatory about that, unless you think it's just fine and dandy that men are raping unwilling 13 and 14 year olds.

I can't believe anybody on this site is defending such insanity.

[sudopod]

44. Let's not call OJ a murderer

Can we use less inflammatory, emotion-laden words?

Actually, I think the charge involves pedophilic orgies with 15 year olds.

[Megahurtz]

49. Fuck the Constitution

for these people when they are forcing underage girls to fuck old men and have babies, or forcing them to fuck anyone for that matter!
Their rights are gone and rightfully so! :grr:

For their efforts they will have their own "marriages" arranged for them in the slammer :sarcasm: pun so gleefully intended.

[gator_in_Ontario]

70. couldn't have said it better

Child abuse trumps all.

[juno jones]

56. Read the thread "breaking the baby"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3127917

Read 'Under the Banner of Heaven' and then see if you can defend this 'religion'.

I believe in freedom of conscience. Gods know I'm a bit of a novel freak myself, but when money and power are involved, religion risks becoming a cult. And to involve underage children in such psychopathy is just fucking wrong.

Over a hundred women left voluntarily. Surely many of those 400 children belong to those mothers. I doubt Texas is breaking up TOO many families. My guess is many of these women were looking for ways to escape.

That's the key: escape. Most of us can choose which faith, denomination, etc we practice. We enter these things voluntarily if sometimes unwisely. These women and children in question are imprisoned and tortured according to a religion they can't escape. They were born into it and some even here would see that they have no choice because it would be somehow dissing the 'religious freedom' of their tormentors to say otherwise. Seems to me these souls should be free to choose their own religion- or lack of it- as well.

[janx]

83. I'm reading Under the Banner of Heaven now...

and I cannot believe that this has continued for so long. It's mind boggling.

[Preston120]

29. I thought that a person was innocent until proven guilty.

And while we are at it, doesn't the constitution's 1st amendment give everyone the right to worship their "God" as they see fit, not to mention the 4th amendment right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects.

[Shakespeare]

30. 4th amendment protects from UNREASONABLE search and seizure.

This was not unreasonable. The police have a legitimate warrant with probable cause.

Worshipping your "god" as you see fit does NOT protect one from the legal repercussions of raping a child.

And no one has suggested they are not entitled to a fair trial.

You wanna try and twist things a little more to defend these monsters?

[AlbertCat]

32. right to worship their "God" as they see fit,

Not if it breaks the law.

Let's see. I believe God wants me to sacrifice virgins by slitting their throats. Since I sincerely believe God wants me to do this , it's OK.

Is that what you think "freedom of religion" means?????

Stop being so dense!

If the legal age for marriage is 16 and there is a pregnant 14 year old in front of you you may bet your ass a crime has been committed.

Jeesh! One bogus complaint by the "victim" (Whahhhhhh.... they went in our temple!") and people fall for it.... only because religion always gets special "victim" sympathy it doesn't deserve and the GOP has since the 1990s been telling you "The Feds are out to get you! LOOK OUT! BLACK HELICOPTERS!!!!

[Dorian Gray]

39. No, it doesn't

It doesn't allow for breaking the law in order to worship their God.

And Pedophilia and Statutory Rape are illegal. And the FLDS has been flaunting this for years and years.

Kudos to the Law Enforcement officials who have gotten those children and women away from that horrific life.

[LanternWaste]

82. Who has been pronounced guilty by a court of law? nt

Who has been pronounced guilty by a court of law?

[LeftyMom]

23. The warrant was also for evidence of that underage marriage.

So they had to look at the temple, in residences, etc, to look for pictures and other documentation of that and possibly other underage marriages that might establish a pattern of ongoing violations of Texas law, which does not permit marriage under the age of 16, even with parental consent.

[Megahurtz]

48. Privacy is thrown out the window

when a 16 year old girl reports she is being sexually abused and most likely reports of many others being sexually abused as well. That's the law.

[High Plains]

5. "Advocates say Texas raid may terrorize those who need help"

http://www.sltrib.com/ci_8819796

From the article:

The seizure of 52 girls from an FLDS ranch in Texas Friday evoked memories of a controversial 1953 raid on the sect - and sparked fears that efforts to help abused members will be dealt a blow.

In July 1953, Arizona authorities descended on the twin towns of Hildale, Utah, and Colorado City, Ariz. - the traditional home base of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. But the effort was later seen as a debacle and within two years, the nearly 400 men, women and children initially taken into custody were all back in their homes.

Flora Jessop, a former FLDS member who has been instrumental in highlighting abuses in the sect, called the Texas raid a "colossal mistake."

"Anyone who would have needed help is now terrorized back into the hole," she said. "Things were starting to open up in the community and calls were starting to come from people who wanted out." In the wake of the 1953 raid, "it's cemented in these people's minds and hearts that the government is bad and is going to take us from our families," she said.

Mary Batchelor, a founder of Principle Voices, an advocacy group for women living in polygamy, questioned what imminent danger existed to support removing dozens of children. "I would like to know what all of a sudden provoked this overwhelming response," Batchelor said. "I'm concerned about these people and about law enforcement overreaching."

***

Other advocates cited in the article disagreed.

[Shakespeare]

9. Not likely. 133 women voluntarily left the compound while the search was going on.

They had been kept there against their will, and the raid on the compound gave them their first opportunity for escape; doesn't look as though they're going to be heading back to that nightmare of a compound any time soon.

[High Plains]

16. Funny, articles I saw said the women left to be with their children.

Not that they were taking advantage of the opportunity to flee.

[Shakespeare]

27. Then your reading is incomplete. n/t

[pnwmom]

21. Not necessarily. They might have gone along merely to protect their children;

their husbands even might have told them to go -- to keep reminding the children not to talk.

From what I've read, the authorities are disappointed with the lack of information they've been getting so far. The women, by and large, aren't talking.

[musette_sf]

52. here's some terror for you:

these sh!tbags are waterboarding INFANTS:

“The method he would use with infants was a form of water torture,” Jessop said of her former husband. “He would spank the baby until it was screaming out of control, and then he would hold the baby faceup under a tap of running water so it couldn’t breathe. He would do this repeatedly. Sometimes, it would go on for an hour, until the baby was so exhausted it couldn’t cry anymore. This method he called ‘breaking them.’”

To a child, the abuse becomes normal, she said, and resistance becomes unthinkable to most. “With this level of mind control, it’s something you’re born into and it’s generational. The babies born into this, they don’t stand a chance from the beginning,” she said.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24009286/

[ima_sinnic]

67. what a f**king monster! and there are people here defending these shitbags?!

lock them up and throw away the key.

[darue]

69. these leaders need to be de-balled de-tongued and imprisoned for life

and the rest need to be broken up so this evil crap can't start again. There is no "right" to run a god damn brain-washing control cult.

[damntexdem]

10. Violated their rights to rape and exploit children?

Were it simply a matter of consenting adults' embracing of polygamy, I would say to leave them alone. But these folks are predators who exploit the vulnerable.

[Warpy]

22. Tough shit. They violated laws and common decency

in their treatment of women and children, especially girl children. I want them sued by former members into total poverty. I want them harassed and hounded. I want those poor, beaten women to rise up against their tormentors.

I don't want much, do I?

There's nothing holy about a pedophile ring, no matter how many gods it hides behind.

[mbperrin]

28. Thank you.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

[DCKit]

35. Yeah, and Saddam was going to attack us any minute with multiple types of WMD.

The excuse for the raid on the Davidians was also an unnamed source citing child abuse and we all know how well that worked out. The second I saw Janet Reno's sour puss on TV announcing their excuse for the invasion, I knew it was illegal and based on a lie. This group has been vilified in an ongoing campaign by the government and the MSM, and the MSM is no longer in the business of informing the people or questioning the motives of government.

The argument is not about defending alleged child rapists, it's about Constitutional rights. Has a single crime, of any magnitude, ever, warranted the search and seizure of an entire community? You may as well shut down and search Manhattan because someone reported an attack in Central Park - then the other boroughs when the initial search turns up empty. Is that a system any of us wants to live under?

The point is NOT about how evil the cult is, it's about the rule of law and how we've not only gone over the line, but obliterated any trace of it. I detest everything this cult stands for, but unless every one of us is willing to defend their legal and Constitutional rights, we are simply lining up to be next.

The state of Texas has the resources, power and standing to expose and dismantle this cult legally, yet they chose to borrow the script from Waco and do this the cheap and easy way, not the right way. Anyone who doesn't think this was the implementation of a much larger agenda hasn't been paying attention.

[Shakespeare]

41. This is so utterly UNLIKE Waco, it's silly you'd even suggest it.

Everything the police have done has been legal (no indication otherwise), absolutely free of any violence whatsoever, and apparently they're also bending over backwards to be diplomatic with those inside the compound (that's the chief reason the execution of the warrant is taking so long).

If anything, this shows how much they HAVE learned from the Waco incident.

[Warpy]

46. The main problem I've read all along for the people in the

larger community is the skewing of local votes by a concentration of so many fundy robots within it. I'm sure the local authorities were hoping some excuse would drop into their laps to investigate, prosecute, and generally destroy the cult--or encourage it to move elsewhere. The cult doesn't have many friends in the area.

They've already tried to use the EPA because the cult failed to do an air quality study before it opened either its cement plant or its quarry. The cult used its ability to fund lawyers and its considerable political clout in Washington to make that problem go away.

The allegation of abuse, something that seems like a slam dunk if Carolyn Jessop has been truthful, was just what they've been waiting for. It was their entry into legal proceedings which will likely last for many years and deplete the rumored $400 million dollar treasure chest the old pedophiles have amassed from welfare and from robbing paychecks earned by their "wives."

As for the women and children you are so alarmed about, they have hardly been "stolen." They are being questioned about just what goes on in that cult, and that's appropriate given the charge. They needed to be separated from the old males who regard them as property for this to happen.

People are brought in for questioning all the time and it sounds like every effort is being made to be as gentle as possible with these women and their children.

[Ellen Forradalom]

53. And boy children too.

To eliminate competition for girls' affection, many adolescent boys have been excommunicated and expelled from the community to fend for themselves. That is every bit as criminal as the forced marriages of girls.

[Warpy]

55. You're right about the "lost boys"

It's an evil system set up for the sexual indulgence of a bunch of evil old men. It abuses women and children.

The fact that they're trying to hide behind the cross is obscene.

[leftynyc]

61. Well said. Thanks for the sanity.

I'm hoping the same as you. These cretins need to be put out of business.

[pleah]

33. This is so wrong in so many ways.

They snatched over 400 children. These children involved will probably have lasting effects from this.

[Shakespeare]

34. Brainwashing. Rape. Forced pregnancy.

I think there are other things those children have been through that should evoke MUCH more concern.

[JerseygirlCT]

40. Exactly.

These children are literally abused from birth. The male children tossed when they reach puberty, the females raped and imprisoned for life.

[blondeatlast]

42. How many young males have the cult members abandoned?

I refer you to the readings of Jon Krakauer, Florence Jessup, and Jana Bommersbach....

[JerseygirlCT]

36. There is no constitutional right to abuse and imprison women and children

You can't dress that sickness up as your religion and claim "rights".

[Freddie Stubbs]

43. "desecration would be irreparable"

So, I guess that they will never use that temple again. Will they demolish it, or will they just get over it?

[Xithras]

45. They're right, and these guys will walk as a result.

If each of these structures were private residences, they needed distinct warrants to search each home AND sufficient supporting evidence for each to justify that warrant in the first place. Legally, the residents of these homes do NOT lose their constitutional privacy rights simply because they don't own the dirt underneath them. I'd bet good money that this warrant will eventually be found to be overly broad, and ANY evidence collected during the raid will be supressed during trial.

You may not like this, but look at it from a different perspective. What if you lived in a large apartment building and your landlord was being investigated by the police. Should the police be able to simply pull a blanket warrant for the entire building and search YOUR apartment? Of course not.

The mere presence of these people on a property where a crime may have occurred will not be enough to legally support this warrant. These rapists are going to walk away scott free because of sloppy policework and a judge who wasn't paying attention.

[Shakespeare]

50. You have no way of knowing that.

Until any of us sees the exact paramaters of the warrant, it's nothing but speculation to say that rights were violated. What HAS been said--by both sides--is that the warrant was broadly written and wide-reaching in scope (so it sounds like law enforcement was careful to do things correctly).

There's also the issue of probable cause, which will go a long way in protecting the prosecution in this (scores of underage girls in various stages of pregnancy, for starters).

[mainegreen]

76. Isn't it -one- property? I doubt anyone has leases or other such agreements.

In such a case, wouldn't one warrant do?

[LanternWaste]

84. One property. One lease. LLC ownership.

One property. One lease. LLC ownership. Each "private" residence is owned by the LLC (limited liability corporation), hence-- one warrant would most likely allow searching each & every building in the compound.

The residents of the homes are not the owners-- they are living quarters assigned by the church hierarchy.

[Megahurtz]

47. The right to

rape children? I think NOT you perverted fuckwads! :mad:

[nookiemonster]

58. Absoutely!!

These fuckers should burn, and I would be more than happy to see that happen.

No apologies.

[mitchum]

54. Even if they weren't raping children (which they were), I still have little patience with religous..

lunatics and their rights.
If anyone has a problem with that, you can call me a constitution mocking cretin or whatever. I honestly don't care.
Religion is a poison concocted of fear and ambition.

[David__77]

63. This appears illegal.

How could there possibly be a blanket order to raid all these private residences? It is indeed akin to a large apartment complex. The authorities are relying on public opinion in order to subvert due process, but we should ask if such a precedent is something in our interest?

[Shakespeare]

68. The court will decide that today.

There's a hearing on a motion to quash. However, it is probably completely legal. These weren't so much "private residences" as they were big communal living quarters (80 people--mostly women--to a structure, from what I've read). If authorities went in and saw a bunch of pregnant underage girls, then they absolutely had probable cause to expand the search, if the warrant wasn't already written broadly enough.

[Marrah_G]

73. It is a large complex with dormitory living, it was not like an apartment complex

After finding absolute evidence of child abuse, supported and encouraged by the entire adult community, they obtained warrants to both seize the children and to search the grounds for further evidence.

[DogPoundPup]

75. Does anyone call this "in our interest"? (see pic)

THE TEXAS RAID IS REALLY A TRAVESTY!

Are The Amish Next?

[LanternWaste]

85. See post #84 nt

See post #84 nt

[marshall]

77. At least their compound wasn't burned to the ground...

Hey, look on the bright side.

[mitchum]

78. But I'm sure that they will say that child rape is protected by the 11 and a half amendment

[cstanleytech]

87. Who owns the property?

Is it under one person and or corporation or was it divided up and everyone owned their own own and piece of property like in a real town and or city?