After an exhaustive legal search, I found one law that might have applied-"Put murderers in prison."
@ GiantSquid: While you are under no legal obligation, you really should do
your civil duty and turn the conclusive evidence of guilt that you possess over
to the police. You probably could have prevented this tragedy if you had turned
it over earlier.
Given the evidence in this case, it is possible that the social services
intervention and news media attention was at cause for the outcome. Guilty or
not, there are very few people that have the coping skills to deal with
everything that Josh Powell was faced with. Powell's actions were not those of a
rational man, but those of someone who was beyond his wits end and under attack
by everyone around him.
In the case of Josh Powell, he furnished several clues he was up to something.
There was that calm confident demeanor he exhibited, that wasn't typical. He
donated all those personal items to Good Will; if he left his very high profile
name with the donation it is surprising that wasn't reported to authorities.
Everyone involved knew he wanted to do something to get even with the Cox
grandparents, and saing some nice things about them recently should have aroused
suspicion too.All the agencies involved, law, protective services
and possibly a church are over burdened with too many dilemmas to address, but
this guy was about as well known as a high level political candidate. One female
social worker should not have been alone in taking the children for a visit, and
it should not have been in his home. The emotional trauma this woman is
experiencing is horrific, and she has my complete sympathy; I'm not chastising
anyone specifically, but I think collectively there should have been greater
concern about what he would do.There were also those charred pieces
of wood in the desert in the vicinity of the "camp out." Considering
that cadaver dogs confirmed something human there, I'm sure many law authorities
believed that Josh Powell was an expert with accelerants. The bottom line is
probably we have just too many messed up individuals among us to keep an eye on
all of them, but I can't think of anyone that more deserved constant
surveillance, as in a detective who would have seen him buying gasoline in cans.
At this point we should all be praying for the family members of the
little boys, and all the rest who have emotional ties to any of them.
While I in no way justify the man nor his actions, its sure easy for sightseers
to pass judgment after the fact about what shoulda, woulda, coulda been done.
Josh should never have had those kids at his home.
Very well written article. The fact is, there was no legal reason for the kids
to not have a supervised visit. He had not been arrested, had no legal charges
and has the right to be presumed innocent, even if all of us think he is guilty.
I believe that protective services should have been involved in the very
beginning. Questioning the safety of a parent taking two very young toddlers
camping in the middle of winter, during a very harsh winter, without proper
equipment and without being properly prepared. That was a showing a direct
disregard towards the children's well being. Putting them in danger.
Because we live in the United States, we all have freedoms. The same rights
that give us freedom of religion, freedom to choose where to work, the right to
bear arms, and the right to vote, gave Josh Powell the right to have the
children in his home. He was not guilty of murder. Nothing had been proven. Just
because his behavior is suspicious does not exclude him from any rights he has
living in this country.We have the right to be presumed innocent until
proven guilty. As one of the police officers said yesterday, you have "one
shot to get this guy". You cannot make a case with little evidence and
hope that more comes up later that will help you convict him. There was
nothing that could have been done to prevent this. Had the visits been done in
an office, he would have killed the children there instead. He was going to act
the way that he did regardless of anything that anybody else did.
Can we please have Susan's law, to protect children from someone suspected of
killing their mother?I believe the jury is in on whether or not he
@Kathy: The children were protected from their father. They were removed from
his care, and he only had SUPERVISED visitation with them for 6 hours a week.
NOTHING would have stopped Josh Powell from killing his children.
I believe that hind sight here in this case was that more percaution should have
been taken on this case, since he judge had ordered an physcosexual exiame and a
polgragh test. I know this man was just someone of interest in the case of his
missing wife, but I believe that he was involued in his wife's dissaperance and
also her death. A sane man wouldn't of taken the life of his children if he
loved them like he claimed. I also believe he took the cowards way out, because
he knew he may be charged in his wife's death. I believe that the ppolice from
West Valley had some leads and maybe more to charge him.