I have read numerous posts from people who are appalled at the way the investigation is being conducted. While I agree not enough information has yet been released, having a legal background, I have a little bit different perspective on what I see happening.
The 911 call gave authorities cause to enter the compound without a warrant under what the law allows as “exigent circumstances,” which is to ascertain the safety and welfare of a possible victim of a crime. During the search for the victim, if evidence of other criminal activity is found, the police have a duty to act.
For example, if a woman reports that she is being beaten, and the police arrive only to be met at the door by a man who denies the claim, the police have the right to enter the residence despite his protests, to ascertain if there are any victims of abuse. During the warrantless search for a possible victim, if evidence is uncovered relating to another crime (i.e. drugs) in plain view, the officers may seize the evidence and make the appropriate arrest. In a warrantless search however, the law does not admit evidence that for example, might be found concealed in a dresser drawer while officers were tasked with locating a person.
It’s important to understand how investigations relate to search and seizure laws. Having said that, my understanding is that the Texas authorities actually went to a judge and obtained a warrant to enter the compound and search for the girl that placed the call. This was an additional (but possibly unnecessary) protective step presumably due to the sensitive nature of entering the large, closed compound. It is also probable that authorities were able to ascertain with the caller that there was no immediate threat of danger prior to being able to obtain a warrant. Judges can and do issue emergency protective orders based on affidavits, 24/7. Still, the scope of the search at that time would have been narrow.
On the first day, during the search for the victim, 18 girls were removed into state custody and placed into foster care. The legal action that authorities took regarding these 18 was different than was taken with the other children who were removed the same day. Other children were removed and detained during the investigation to determine their welfare. Because of how this case is unfolding, it stands to reason that during the investigation to locate the 16 yr old caller, these 18 girls were probably pregnant minors (or teen mothers) who were suspected or determined to be victims of adult sexual abuse. Armed with information from the initial investigation, the judge has been issuing warrants further increasing the search radius to locate more victims and evidence, and expanding the search to include records of marriages and births. Warrants are definitely specific in nature, but a judge may expand the scope depending on what information the investigation reveals.
Removing abused or neglected children to ensure their safety and welfare happens in homes all over the country. Once an allegation of abuse or neglect has been received, the state has a duty to investigate. If the possibility exists that the allegation may be true, then the state is liable for leaving a child in their current circumstance until it is determined that the environment is safe. This holds true with siblings of victims, who have not been victimized themselves, but might be at risk. Unfortunately, due to the sheer numbers of children, this is a large task that has appalled many people.
Additionally, not all those taken from the compound are considered at risk. Allowing the adult women (presumably mothers) to voluntarily leave the compound and go with the children is very unusual. This is normally not allowed when the state removes children from homes, and speaks to the fact that authorities are at least attempting to accommodate the children’s transition with some degree of sensitivity.
The investigation is a large undertaking, but the fact that 18 girls were removed and placed into legal custody the first day, makes me think that we might see arrest warrants forthcoming at least regarding these cases. It also explains why as the investigation continues and new information is uncovered, the judge is further expanding the scope of the warrant. While it may be true that authorities have not yet located the girl who placed the original call, it’s no doubt a moot legal point now. The way this case is unfolding, it sure makes it look like when officers entered the compound the first day, they discovered evidence leading them to believe there was abuse involving those 18 girls.
Just my take on what appears to be happening in Texas. It will be interesting to see what evidence if any, does eventually come to light. I really can’t see the judge expanding the scope of the warrant if there was absolutely no evidence from the initial investigation. Such an act would have serious consequences for not only the judge, but the state of Texas.
.
. 
) but an interesting thing was a couple of states required parental consent only if both the bride and groom were under a certain age - presumably that means if one of them is older parental consent wasn't needed?
