TEXAN HERITAGE TRUST – December 2008
UNITED ORDER TRUST – October 2006
~ by FLDS TEXAS on May 8, 2009.
Posted in The Evidence
I read in the TRUST they renamed the Church!
Holy Order Of Texas
Stamp said this on May 8, 2009 at 1:41 PM
I’m a Hooter, are you a Hooter too? Lets go to Hooters Anonymous!
Stamp said this on May 8, 2009 at 3:02 PM
Tell ya what, Im praying all those ignorant people who are following the theives of FLDS will decide to LEAVE!!!!! No tithes from members, no donations of land, POOF!! NO TRUST!!!
deputydog1 said this on May 8, 2009 at 3:25 PM
I think they’ve got plenty stashed. Seems to me there is a vault in or connected to their whatchacallit temple thing as well as much in the way of still-hidden assets.
GrannyToad said this on May 8, 2009 at 3:37 PM
Seriously, can I do Seriously?
Ok Ok Ok
So NOW the FLDS are HOOTS, HQ in ElDorado TX. In “Pure Oneness”.
Geez, if I were a Cricker I would not only be feeling left out, I doubt I would be shoveling over that fat tithing check any more, especially not written out to HOOT.
So now that Warren righteously disrespected what, about 9,255 people, and his gravy train is gonna stop, how long is his squirrel stash gonna last?
Look at all the trials lined up to pay for, and that doesnt even take into account probable FEDERAL charges.
The Trust reads like a litany of CYA to cover past legal failures, why didnt they just come out and say “Thee are Thine HOOT Slaves, wee own you and your goods, Dont like it, we will help you get lost”…..
Stamp said this on May 8, 2009 at 3:50 PM
That document Officially splits the Church. This one would-be HOOTER wonders what the legal and socioeconomic ramifications will be.
Would “TRAIN WRECK” be a good lil prophetic guess?
Stamp said this on May 8, 2009 at 3:54 PM
They included no member can claim a Tort case either.
deputydog1 said this on May 8, 2009 at 4:04 PM
I suspect this document will inspire Utah / AZ litigants to enjoin YFZ in their suits, as well they should. By renaming the church and claiming a trust, they cant hide behind past sins.
They missed the switch on the train ride, heading now for that unrepaired section just up ahead..
Stamp said this on May 8, 2009 at 4:39 PM
It was noted that the Trustees arent the original owners of YFZ which presents more legal problems in this odd effort.
Stamp said this on May 8, 2009 at 4:53 PM
Well since they filed the Trust May 7,2009 anything before that date, Flds members can sue for.
deputydog1 said this on May 8, 2009 at 6:02 PM
Actuzlly it may be much farther along than that, since regardless they filed this scrap draft, there are holes in it you could drive a semi truck through.
HOOT – – – – AH BWA HAA HAA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAAAAa
Stamp said this on May 8, 2009 at 6:54 PM
If there is still a mortgage on YFZ, can the mortgage holder gift the property to a trust where the “consecration” is irreversible? Who then holds the mortgage and wouldn’t the bank have to approve the transfer and wouldn’t the new “owners” have to apply with the bank to take over the loan? What if the mortgage is not paid, how does the bank then foreclose on the property?
LadySadie said this on May 9, 2009 at 2:34 AM
Sadie, I think they paid off the property in 2006.
deputydog1 said this on May 9, 2009 at 2:59 AM
DD, I thought I read somewhere when the rescue happened that there was still a mortgage on the land.
LadySadie said this on May 9, 2009 at 3:13 AM
There is still that little issue of ownership and fraud by taking money from company A, buying real estate in the name of Joe B, and then transferring it to Church C.
The document has “Lost more lawsuits” written all over it!
Stamp said this on May 9, 2009 at 12:39 PM
There is the same problem with this as with all previous – no legal definition of who the beneficiaries are. Also the ‘as long as his needs are just’ thing allows for lots of wiggle room, and thus lots of room for suing. The scripture is just noise that has no legal meaning.
Also, there is no such thing as holding someone blameless for their actions. You can have members recognize reasonable risk and accept the starting agreements. But neglect, malice, fraud etc. would still be worthy of a law suit. Do they really think that if the trustees decided to run off with it to Tahiti, that they would be held blameless?
Betty said this on May 9, 2009 at 12:51 PM
It must be binding; it has a notary’s stamp on it. And the long D&C passages will certainly tip the scales when this is reviewed in court. I can see the Judeo-Christian version now: “Your honor, I don’t have to make payments on the farm any more. It’s a Jubilee year.”
My biggest issue is that the thing was drawn up ex post facto. The residents of Y2K have already made their complete and total contributions—their labor, the homes they abandoned in Utah, the daughters they sold into sexual slavery to get there. How can a trust be drawn up like that (after the fact) which forces the residents to sign or depart?
TxBluesMan, will you please hurry back to your blog and explain how much of this will be legal and binding in Texas?
Greetings from New York said this on May 9, 2009 at 1:47 PM
Another thing to consider is that if any of the property that was transferred to the Texas trust was moved fraudulently, for example a transfer of assets from the UEP trust without the permission of the special master, or to conceal income / assets from a prior judgment, then the Texas trust can be successfully attacked on those grounds.
TxBluesMan said this on May 9, 2009 at 1:48 PM
TxBluesMan, you mean as in:
“Short Creek has movable sprinkler system—can they bring it to R1?
“Short Creek has a calf hutch (calf shed)—can it be brought to R1- the cow is going to calf in December?”
(Page 10 of the 2006 draft document)
Greetings from New York said this on May 9, 2009 at 2:07 PM
What blows me away is BROOKE has completely missed the ball on this one! And no Willie retorts, DOES HE EVEN KNOW?
Brooke calls it “UEP 2” BBZZTTT Wrong its an entire new CHURCH HUOOT – Holy United Order Of Texas!
That is SUCH HUGE NEWS!
I wnat to see how they are going to explain this to the “FLDS FOLK” they arent included.???
This is really the richest brainfart to have floated in awhile!
Stamp said this on May 9, 2009 at 2:22 PM
Warren Jeffs told his followers, in re: the UEP trust reformation: “Do not sign your name to any document for property that has already been consecrated to God.” Guess the Wizard isn’t running Oz anymore.
The major difference between the filed trust document and the 2006 draft is that authority rests with trustees rather than the Bishop (which makes sense seeing as he’s under indictment).
Who is James Jerry Jessop? Another scion of the House of Jessop? If so, he will have learned the shell game from the master—see, yet again, Rulon’s deposition and how often Merril appeared as the president of this, that and the other thing.
Greetings from New York said this on May 9, 2009 at 2:27 PM
Stamp said this on May 9, 2009 at 3:17 PM
What I found interesting in all the reading of Warren’s dictations HE WAS SELLING SALVATION.
MEMBERSHIP WAS FOR SALE!
David Allred was bought out, that meant he bought in.
Stephen Harker was asked to buy in.
Anonymous said this on May 9, 2009 at 3:21 PM
This is about to get even more interesting. The ranch was conveyed outright to the new Trust — will post the docs this afternoon. However, the declaration of trust says that isaac jerry and keith are transferring the ranch property into the trust- which is a legal impossibility since the three musketeers didn’t own the land and can’t transfer it. Ergo – the trust wasn’t funded and it’s not a trust ..for sure it doesn’t own the ranch property.
I still don’t know how the Wayman Note and Deed of Trust figure in. Looks like they were all executed at the same time by Merril as managing member of YFZ LLC.
Potential for some very big problems for Merril and/or FLDS leadership.
FLDS TEXAS said this on May 9, 2009 at 5:14 PM
“that little issue of ownership and fraud by taking money from company A, buying real estate in the name of Joe B, and then transferring it to Church C.”
Stamp you are a hoot! If company A gives money to Joe B so he can buy real estate to transfers it to Church C, that is not fraud.
Anyway, so who owns YFZ? you guys don’t, I don’t. Please if you are trying to claim they stole the money or other such tripe, who did they steal it from. You can’t just come in and assert Joe B stole from Jim Steed when Jim steed denied such a theft took place.
duane said this on May 9, 2009 at 9:43 PM
There has not been a split, that name is being given to this trust, the church is still intact.
duane said this on May 9, 2009 at 9:46 PM
Where in the trust does it name the FLDS duane?
Nowhere. Not mentioned once not nada not never.
Where does it call it a new name HOOT (Hereinafter named “the Church)
The first paragraph! DOH!
Hence, it appears there is fraud as it exes the original bene class.
Read FLDS TEXAS post above yours, outlining how the Trust is a joke, it wont make it out of the hay barn.
Stamp said this on May 9, 2009 at 10:28 PM
read it slow and two or three times if you have to, then answer this… What is the name of the “CHURCH” that the TEXAN HERITAGE TRUEST belongs to?
“Here is some of what it says:
“Texan Heritage is to assist the living of the Holy United Order. It exists to preserve and advance the religious doctrines and goals of the United Order of Texas, a common law trust (hereinafter referred to as the “Church”), having its principal office in Eldorado, Texas. . . . The doctrines and laws of the Holy United Order are found in the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, the Pearl of Great Price, and the Holy Bible; and are the guiding tenets by which the trustees of Texan Heritage shall act.”
I realize its written poorly, but how do you deny what it says?
Where are the FLDS in this picture?
Stamp said this on May 9, 2009 at 10:39 PM
Yes, just because they give it this name doesn’t mean a split, could be for legal purposes, what about the “FLDS” in Colorado? Will that be the “United Order of Colorado”, “United order of South Dakota”, “united order of Nevada”, and so on.
Stamp, are you the Chief Propagandist of the Anti-FLDS?
Ok, about the trust, so they stole the money to build YFZ? No, it seems the anti-flds are looking for a way to take their property so you accuse them of fraud but no one in the FLDS is claiming they were defrauded, in fact they emphatically deny it. Basically you guys claiming the FLDS defrauded themselves so you can justify confiscating their assets…rather ingenious but I don’t think it will fly.
duane said this on May 9, 2009 at 10:59 PM
IRT Canada, SD, CO, I dont know that they are looking that far – at least not in this trust or Church renaming.
The Church renaming includes the name “TEXAS” which is completely odd if not out of the ordinary.
And I really dont care what kind of SHELL GAMES they play, as long as they pay their way like everyone else.
They molest, they pay for that.
They earn money, they pay taxes.
They have a commune, they pay taxes on it I dont care if part of it is exempt for Religious exemptions. (not the whole thing tho)
They steal from people, they pay back for that.
The trust is an attempt to sheild from lawsuits due to the multitude of mistakes they have made.
It surely wont be the thing that protects them in the end.
Only lawful compliance will, and that seems like it might take awhile!
Stamp said this on May 9, 2009 at 11:11 PM
Do we have access to the various UEP trusts?
Just curious how they lay out the FLDS in those docs.
Stamp said this on May 10, 2009 at 3:51 AM
Stamp, I thought those were online at the UEP site. I’ve read them before.
I think the most interesting thing is that this trust is declaring this a church of Texas only. No mention of other congregations. I wonder how they feel about that at the Crick or if they even know. Maybe it’s “wink, wink” that language is for the gentiles…maybe not.
Betty said this on May 10, 2009 at 2:34 PM
I am still trying to figure out if Warren knows. I consider this move to be a split from the Creekers, but is it a split with Warren included or not? What could he do about it from jail? Not much!
Anonymous said this on May 10, 2009 at 3:08 PM
I’m not sure of the toadly correct translation of “holy crap” from Toadlish.
GrannyToad said this on May 10, 2009 at 4:21 PM
Holy Lizard Lump batman, more road bumbs!
Stamp said this on May 10, 2009 at 7:50 PM
duane wrote “Please if you are trying to claim they stole the money or other such tripe, who did they steal it from.”
The UEP trust. Or, in other words, the people of Short Creek. Where have YOU been for the last year and a half????
Betty said this on May 11, 2009 at 3:13 PM
Betty, the people of Short Creek are not bringing forth complaints that their money was stolen, in fact they deny their money was stolen and everything that has been said coming out of FLDS short creeks indicates they support the founding of the YFZ ranch. Like I said, it is outsiders who are claiming that the FLDS stole from itself as pretxt to coniscate their property.
I don’t see any indication of a split, the flds short creekers fully suppor the flds leadership. This texas trust is for legal purposes. YFZ is another FLDS settlement, I suppose it may be the headquarters of the FLDS realm, with Short creek, Nevada, SD, Idaho, Canada and Colorado as other FLDS “cities” or “settlements” with Short Creek being the larges FLDS “city”.
For good reason, they are establishing settlements so they can live together and be better able to protect themselves. Individual flds families isolated in mainstream neighborhoods may be vulnurable to lynch mobs or others who want to commit acts of violence against them.
duaneh1 said this on May 11, 2009 at 5:22 PM
I think the Federal charges will / should deal with the theft of funds, among other things.
Stamp said this on May 11, 2009 at 5:24 PM
” Individual flds families isolated in mainstream neighborhoods may be vulnurable to lynch mobs or others who want to commit acts of violence against them.
duaneh1 said this on May 11, 2009 at 5:22 PM ”
Thats FUNNY duane!
But I suppose thats why they have those 50 cal rifles, huh? To keep away that lynch mob..?
Stamp said this on May 11, 2009 at 5:34 PM
If they embezzled from the trust, moved buildings off land owned by the trust, etc., then they stole from the people in Short Creek. If those people are too ignorant, frightened or brainwashed to complain, that does not change the facts. Also, some of them HAVE brought suits and complained in public…we call these people apostates.
And Justice is everyone’s business.
Betty said this on May 11, 2009 at 7:36 PM
Warren’s gonna be toast.
OH WAIT! He already is toast!
Stamp said this on May 11, 2009 at 8:08 PM
Betty, If those people emphatically denie any theft, the buildings were donated volunatarily and they fully supported YFZ then it is not embezzlement. The trust is a land trust, there was no hoard of millions in the bank, just ask Wisan.
Those brainwashed ignorant people showed up in force by the thousands some time ago when Wisan attempted to sell of some of their property, the judge backed down and now the issue is in stand by mode. No, there was no fraud, the allegations of fraud is a cynical attempt for the state to take their assets.
duaneh1 said this on May 12, 2009 at 1:16 AM
Every day that goes by with Wisan as Trustee is another $4,650 down the FLDS toilet.
And I thought they had a plumber or two? Willie sure can stop the bleeding!
Stamp said this on May 12, 2009 at 1:37 AM
duaneh, there were bank accounts, just under fraudulent corporations. There was LOTS of money to, only problem only ONE man had access, warren jeffs!
Buildings belonging to the Trust were dismantled, and moved to another corporation. Basically taken by Theft by Flds, moved, and set back up in another area. Hell, Flds in Short Creek knew little about what was going on with YFZ ranch! They have been left behind buddy!
deputydog1 said this on May 12, 2009 at 1:44 AM
Things that disappeared from Short Creek. How many were part of the UEP trust?
1) State-of-the-art computer controlled potato barn – just an empty shell of a building left
2) Grain elevator – it reappeared much later (dismantled and not in working order) after Bruce Wisan made a lot of threats.
3) Cozy Log Homes building was totally dismantled and moved away somewhere
4) Cows from the dairy (MANY cows left town) and I don’t think they just wandered off.
5) Power plant generator that was supposed to run the utilities in the twin towns. Generator just vanished and the power company went belly-up.
Can anyone think of other UEP trust things that went POOF in the night?
Anonymous said this on May 12, 2009 at 3:39 AM
Irrigation pivot systems disappeared and stockpiled pivot systems were found at expanding Atlanta Farms, near Pioche, NV. Cement Facility at the YFZ Ranch is believed to have come from Utah. Generator systems were sold for scrap by Short Creek staffers and generators were installed at the YFZ Ranch and were working/serviceable.
cajIM said this on May 12, 2009 at 6:49 AM
Women and children were whisked away in caravans, with Warren eyeing the cuties.
Can you say MANN ACT VIOLATIONS?
Stamp said this on May 12, 2009 at 11:17 AM
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Google+ account. ( Log Out / Change )
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.
Blog at WordPress.com.