Attorney General, Mark Shurtleff’s Soft Stand on Polygamy

            The other day I browsed Principle Voices’ website to see how my friends Anne Wilde and Mary Bachelor are progressing with their movement to decriminalize polygamy.  I noticed that Principle Voices hosted on September 25, 2009, a seminar of sorts entitled “Family or Felony; Polygamy and the Law” The cost to attend if registered before August 31, 2009 was $125.00 per person, thereafter the price was $150.00.  This was a first class affair held at the Cottonwood Room, Snowbird Resort.   

            The featured speakers were: Julie Balovich & Amanda Chisholm, attorneys for the YFZ polygamists; Grant W.P. Morrison, an attorney specializing in family law and polygamy; Ken D. Driggs, another attorney whose writings indicate he is a pro polygamy advocate; Kirk Torgenson, an attorney with the Utah Attorney General’s Office; Allie Darger, an apparent polygamy advocate; and no other than the Utah Attorney General himself, Mark Shurtleff.  This was obviously a pro polygamy event with the majority of speakers either advocates or defenders of the polygamist lifestyle.  The event was obviously organized for the enlightenment and comfort of pro polygamists.  And I suspect the goal was to examine alternative legal avenues that would result in the decriminalization of Mormon polygamy.  The last I heard polygamy was still against the law, so what was Utah’s leading law enforcement officer doing there?  Was he defending the bigamy statute?  Was he defending the Utah Constitution that stipulates polygamy shall be forever prohibited?  Was he defending the views of the people or expressing his own personal views?

            Shortly after Mr. Shurtleff first took office he came out strong against Mormon polygamy.  But since meeting with the ladies from Principle Voices his attitude has become more tolerant. Thus far, as Utah’s Attorney General, Mr. Shurtleff has ignored the constitutional ban on polygamy, presumably because it is not feasible to hunt down and prosecute every polygamist in the state.  He suggests that if he goes after one he is obliged to go after them all.  This in my opinion is a lame, lazy excuse.

            I have met Mr. Torgenson who I believe is a gentleman who would put the people’s interest above his own political objectives.  I do not know what his personal sentiments are towards Mormon polygamy – at least the type of polygamy practiced in the FLDS, AUB and Kingston Group.  I am also acquainted with Mr. Shurtleff.  I have heard him speak at town meetings organized specifically to address the pros and cons of polygamy.  And I have had telephone conversations with him about polygamy – and what I get from him is mixed messages about his position on polygamy. Mr. Shurtleff wants to replace Bob Bennett as a United States Senator which is not only a highly prestigious but a highly influential office.  It is therefore advisable that voters know as much about each Senatorial candidate as possible, especially regarding subjects as inflammatory as polygamy. 

             As a retired Salt Lake County deputy sheriff, I agree that wholesale prosecution is not feasible.  There are many polygamists who mind their own business, obey the law and do not use religious coercion for selfish reasons.  In these circumstances I agree prosecuting them would be a drain on state resources and cause more social harm than good. Prosecutors have discretionary powers and use them all the time.  It would be perfectly appropriate for a prosecutor to use the bigamy statute to go after a sexual predator that uses ruthless religious coercion to force young women into unwanted polygamist relationships and not prosecute the average otherwise law abiding polygamist. In this regard Mr. Shurtleff has indifferently turned down the opportunity to use the bigamy statute to prosecute James D. Harmston, a self appointed prophet, a sexual predator, and leader of the True & LivingChurch, a polygamist cult. He has stated publicly that he will not use the bigamy statute and will not prosecute a polygamist unless an underage girl is victimized and in that regard he has kept his word.   

            Mr. Shurtleff was handed the best bigamy case ever put together on a silver platter.  It was a much better case than what Juab County Attorney, David Leavitt had to convict Tom Green of bigamy.  There isn’t space to go into many details but you can read the unabridged account in Polygamy’s Rape of Rachael Strong, Protected Environment for Predators, a true story. The predator was 65 year-old James D. Harmston who threatened his young step daughter with eternal damnation and a thousand years in hell if she didn’t become his 18^th plural wife.  The young woman had been brainwashed into believing that disobedience to the prophet was tantamount to disobedience to God. The trauma she suffered was equivalent to that of a rape victim.  Rachael was an attractive young woman and the evidence that was presented to Mr. Shurtleff was clear and convincing that the prophet Harmston only wanted her for sex.  In fact he had a special house for his young wives that he used as his personal brothel.  After each sexual encounter he made them take birth control pills.  Mr. Shurtleff has stated publically that Rachael gave Harmston sex out of religious duty – which is absolutely untrue and a hurtful thing to say about Rachael. It took a lot of courage for Rachael to appeal to law enforcement for help and justice but all she got from the Utah Attorney General and San Pete County Attorney was a cold shoulder.  In her eyes she was victimized a second time by the people who were elected to protect her. The Utah Supreme Court has upheld the bigamy statute. The problems occurring in the polygamist subculture is primarily with the unscrupulous leaders of the organized groups where power and money are the driving force. The laity in these groups either lacks the power or desire to clean up the corruption endemic to the subculture.

            When it came to Warren Jeffs he talked tough because everyone else talked tough but when it comes to taking a stand on polygamy he is nothing but talk and short on action.  For instance, he was furnished by dissident members of the Kingston Group dozens of names of men and their plural wives and the consanguineous relationship to each other.  The information provided strong probable cause that incest is rampant among the Kingston oligarchy.  I have it from reliable sources that DNA search warrants were issued but never served.  Why???  According to outraged Kingston dissidents the nieces and half sisters of the Kingston ruling dynasty are indoctrinated into believing that God approves of incestuous relationships.  I devote several pages towards the problem of incest among Mormon polygamists in my soon to be published book, Mormon Polygamy, Virus of the Mind. I think Mr. Shurtleff owes the public an explanation as to why those DNA search warrants were never served.  Are the young girls born into the Kingston polygamist group expendable as Rachael Strong was expendable?  How much does politics have to do with Mr. Shurtleff’s, hard to understand, decisions?  

           Mr. Shurtleff’s office indicated to the complaining dissidents that the Attorney General was willing to go after the perpetrators.  This bolstered the dissident’s resolve who risked retribution from the Kingstons to obtain evidence that would expose what was believed to be a doctrine of incest.  According to the dissidents an AG investigator was assigned to build the case but he was suddenly pulled off the case without any explanation and the investigation aborted, leaving the dissidents high and dry. Why???

            Mr. Shurtleff is running as a Republican but his lack of action and concern for victims of polygamist coercion and crimes does not seem harmonious with Republican values.  Mr. Shurtleff’s treatment of polygamy seems more consistent with leftist liberal political values. I think the voters in the State of Utah are entitled to know if Mr. Shurtleff is a “closet liberal” running as a Republican.   If he will turn his back on victims of polygamist crimes, where else will he turn his back?  

            In the near future I will address why I think decriminalization is a bad idea.