This certainly seems to be the case when it comes to allegations against Catholic priests.
But, no I don’t believe this is a typical assumption. If anything, I think folks on this forum generally take pains to presume innocence.
I suspect the use of the term “compound” (how scary is THAT word? ) is being used to emotionally justify the raid based on the allegation - an unproven
allegation to boot.
Let us see, a young girl calls the authorities, complains that she is pregnant, and was forced to get married and that she needs help.
I am pretty sure the standard protocol in reported cases of child abuse is to remove the children from the environment while the investigation proceeds.
I am sure it is quite painful for all those involved, but this also seems the prudent course of action to me.
Unfortunately, the truly innocent accused are never afforded any real protection or recourse. By the time the truth comes out their lives and reputation have usually been destroyed and no one is nearly as interested in publicizing the fact that they were found innocent.
I don’t think responses to unproven accusations are quite the same thing as proven instances of current & ongoing abuse.
Agreed, unfortunately in current American culture we seem to be more interested in the severity of the accusation than the facts of the criminal case.
In this case, I trust that our legal system demanded evidence of “probable cause” before the “raid”, especially because of the potential for “religious persecution” accusations.
Isn’t that possible in the case of these accusations against the folks at El Dorado? They’re FLDS, so they’re wrong about God, & about polygamy, etc., but those things don’t prove guilt.
Is it possible that some religious bias led authorities to act? Sure.
Do I believe that is “why” they acted in the actual case? No.
In general, the religious views of those accused should have absolutely nothing to do with the actions that authorities take.
Should professed religious beliefs about polygamy and the age of consent play a role in deciding to take action in a case like this one? I don’t know. Maybe? Though it is a “religious belief”, isn’t it also circumstantial evidence of a sort that needs to be taken into consideration when considering the girls allegations?