Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21816
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Mon May 25, 2015 5:19 am

Quoting seb146 (Reply 49):
Good. Redact victim's names. Please. That should be done always.

That's why they're being destroyed. I've read the report. All the redacts appear to be where names should go.

In the end, the REAL issue here is that we, the sexual minorities of America, are getting really tired of being called pedophiles when the religious wackjobs doing the name-calling are the real pedophiles. It's basically like our "blood libel."
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
opethfan
Posts: 940
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:35 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Mon May 25, 2015 5:47 am

Quoting seb146 (Reply 49):
Yes, I have seen 10 and 11 year old boys with the beginnings of mustaches.

I had just started grade 6 (around 10 or 11) when I started feeling the urge to push against the bottom of my desk, voice started breaking, etc etc etc. It was incredibly lonely, especially since I was also moving internationally a few times during that period. But I certainly never molested or attacked anyone. I was probably a bratty preteen / teenager to girls, but who wasn't at that age?

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 50):
In the end, the REAL issue here is that we, the sexual minorities of America, are getting really tired of being called pedophiles when the religious wackjobs doing the name-calling are the real pedophiles. It's basically like our "blood libel."

Hopefully the only good thing that will come from these cases is that it's another notch in the counter-argument. The sky isn't falling in Canada and Spain and France and Ireland and Spain and so on. Instead it's the priests, the Duggars, the Republican politicians, the TV celebrities, etc. who are the real scumbags, and they're hypocrites as well.
 
Mir
Posts: 19491
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Mon May 25, 2015 6:56 am

Quoting seb146 (Reply 38):
also, I have heard the judge destroyed the records.

A judge appointed by the Duggars' pal Mike Huckabee, who has been very vocal in defending them. Read into that what you like.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 18071
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Mon May 25, 2015 7:22 am

Quoting Mir (Reply 52):
A judge appointed by the Duggars' pal Mike Huckabee, who has been very vocal in defending them. Read into that what you like.

Life is so much easier when the religion you've made up endlessly forgives you for your vile transgressions but never those of your enemies; why not extend that to the justice system? It's what Jesus would do; you are sure of it! Hallelujah Amen.
I don't take responsibility at all
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21816
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Mon May 25, 2015 6:01 pm

Quoting Mir (Reply 52):
A judge appointed by the Duggars' pal Mike Huckabee, who has been very vocal in defending them. Read into that what you like.

It's a red herring. The victims wanted the records destroyed. They have been destroyed. The actual police report with the redactions is now in the public domain.

This is like Republicans shouting BENGHAZI!!! There is nothing to see here. Mere association with Gov. Huckabee does not make it a conspiracy.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
Mir
Posts: 19491
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Mon May 25, 2015 9:37 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 54):
The victims wanted the records destroyed.

Do we have evidence of that?

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21816
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Mon May 25, 2015 11:23 pm

Quoting Mir (Reply 55):
Do we have evidence of that?

-Mir

I'd heard it reported but now I can't find it. So I'll retract what I said above about the reasons for it.

That said, the important information is already out in the open. Destroying the records does not erase our memories.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 22329
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Mon May 25, 2015 11:47 pm

Quoting Mir (Reply 52):
A judge appointed by the Duggars' pal Mike Huckabee, who has been very vocal in defending them. Read into that what you like.

Huckabee is very vocal in defending Josh Duggar, which is sad. But, there is probably no connection and just a series of coincidences that Huckabee appointed the same judge that destroyed the records.
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
D L X
Posts: 12671
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Wed May 27, 2015 8:31 pm

Quoting mham001 (Reply 44):
he was 14, 15 and maybe 16 at the time. He wasn't much more than a child (legally) himself. This is unlikely to qualify as pedophilia.

But it can still qualify as rape.

Note that word in the police report: FORCIBLE.

I am beyond blown away that there were no arrests in these cases.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 46):
And ultimately it's come down to this. Their biggest sin is hypocrisy.

I can't agree. Their biggest sin is rape, and covering up rape.

[Edited 2015-05-27 13:31:57]
 
User avatar
OA412
Moderator
Posts: 4781
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2000 6:22 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Wed May 27, 2015 9:45 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 6):

        

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 32):

Yup. When I was in law enforcement, that's how we dealt with it. Wash. Rinse. Repeat. It's how you deal with really horrific things, you just can't dwell on them as cold as that may sound.

Quoting LAX772LR (Reply 24):
It's often said that male homophobia is often just the expression of fear that a gay male may regard and treat "you" the same way that you think of/treat women.

I have to believe that there's truth to that.

I think it's absolutely true. Straight men have no problem ogleing at and objectifying women. They realize that gay men are likely doing the same thing to them, and I think a lot of it comes down to understanding what women feel like, not liking it at all, and knowing you've made a lot of women really uncomfortable. People really don't want to accept that consequence of their behavior.

As an aside, it's often been my experience that the biggest homophones and the ones most concerned about gay men "checking them out," are also some of the most unattractive straight men I've ever encountered.

Quoting Mir (Reply 37):
If he hadn't gone on to work for an organization that tries to make the claim that gay people present a danger to children because of pedophilia while presenting itself as having a squeaky clean image, I'd be inclined to agree. But you don't get to do what he did, even if he was 14, and then put down entire groups of people for being potential pedophiles.

Exactly!
Hughes Airwest - Top Banana In The West
 
DDR
Posts: 1724
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 11:09 pm

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Thu May 28, 2015 12:46 am

Quoting seb146 (Reply 57):

Really? It's all a coincidence? LMAO. No way is it a coincidence. I can't believe you are that naive. I mean seriously. That is the saddest thing I have read in a long time.

The U.S. really is doomed if people buy this line of crap.
 
D L X
Posts: 12671
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Thu May 28, 2015 1:00 am

Quoting DDR (Reply 60):
No way is it a coincidence.

Why not?

Not everything is a conspiracy.
 
User avatar
WarRI1
Posts: 13938
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:51 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Thu May 28, 2015 1:01 am

Quoting DDR (Reply 60):
Really? It's all a coincidence? LMAO. No way is it a coincidence. I can't believe you are that naive. I mean seriously. That is the saddest thing I have read in a long time.

The U.S. really is doomed if people buy this line of crap.

Of course I am not sure, but he may have said that in jest. It would be puzzling if it was not. I do not believe in co- incidence in politics.

[Edited 2015-05-27 18:05:10]
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
 
mham001
Posts: 5745
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 4:52 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Thu May 28, 2015 1:29 am

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 48):
There are multiple definitions of pedophilia.

No there isn't. 16 is widely considered by the medical profession and law enforcement as the age where pedophilia begins. Many 15 year olds have facial hair too, so what? 13 defines the change from child to adolescent. Diddle a 12 year old and it is pedophilia, but only if you are 16+, diddle a 13 year old and it is child molestation. This is a big distinction often lost in the internet wars and it's not going to change now because it's a Christian you would like to hang. This falls under the medical classification of child molestation by a curious teenager sexually exploring.

Quoting D L X (Reply 58):
But it can still qualify as rape.

No it would not, unless you have evidence of some penetration. Without that, it does not meet the FBI guidelines for rape and is considered molestation.
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21816
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Thu May 28, 2015 3:15 am

Quoting mham001 (Reply 63):
No there isn't. 16 is widely considered by the medical profession and law enforcement as the age where pedophilia begins

There is also paraphilia NOS, child-directed and a few other things that most people would consider that fall under the umbrella.

Quoting D L X (Reply 58):
I can't agree. Their biggest sin is rape, and covering up rape.

No, THEY did not commit rape. Josh Duggar did (or something very much like rape, anyway). That's his crime and his "atonement" and "price paid" was...remodeling a bathroom.

The Duggars cannot possibly have seen it coming. No parent sees it coming. But their response was most certainly their fault. They did not get formal counseling for him, or (I'd bet a body part) any of the victims. They got "religious" counseling, which is worthless. The place where Josh was sent for "Christian Counseling" teaches that even small children can bring molestation on themselves by immodesty. Now, I'm terribly sorry but in my work I see naked kids all day and I never have felt even the tiniest tingle in my nether bits over it. The thought makes me ill.

AND THEN they started opposing MY rights and MY marriage because I'm a danger to children. That was their crime.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
D L X
Posts: 12671
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Thu May 28, 2015 3:53 am

Quoting mham001 (Reply 63):
Quoting D L X (Reply 58):
But it can still qualify as rape.

No it would not, unless you have evidence of some penetration. Without that, it does not meet the FBI guidelines for rape and is considered molestation.

The FBI has nothing to do with this. This happened in Arkansas, where rape is so defined:


Arkansas Code 5-14-103. Rape:
(A) A person commits rape if he engages in sexual intercourse or deviate sexual activity with another
person:
  1. By forcible compulsion; or
  2. Who is incapable of consent because he is physically helpless, mentally defective or mentally incapacitated; or
  3. Who is less than fourteen (14) years of age; or
  4. Who is less than eighteen (18) years of age, and the actor:
    • (a) The victim’s guardian;
    • (b) Uncle, aunt, grandparent or step-grandparent, grandparent by adoption;
    • (c) Brother, sister or the whole or half-blood or by adoption;
    • (d) Nephew, niece or first cousin.
    • (e) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under this subdivision (D) that the actor was not more than three (3) years older than the victim.

(B) It is not a defense to prosecution under (3) or (4) of this section that the victim consented to the conduct.
(C) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under (3) of this section that the actor was not more than three (3) years older than the victim.
(D) Rape is a Class Y felony.
***


The police report uses the language "forcible." The victims were younger than 14. Some of the victims were his sisters.

Looks like rape to me.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 64):
AND THEN they started opposing MY rights and MY marriage because I'm a danger to children. That was their crime.

Still can't agree. Yes they are a-holes, and they were a-holes to you. I get that, but that's not a crime. It's just despicable. Conspiring to cover up multiple rapes and provide shelter for a serial rapist however...

but this part:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 64):
The Duggars cannot possibly have seen it coming. No parent sees it coming. But their response was most certainly their fault. They did not get formal counseling for him, or (I'd bet a body part) any of the victims. They got "religious" counseling, which is worthless. The place where Josh was sent for "Christian Counseling" teaches that even small children can bring molestation on themselves by immodesty. Now, I'm terribly sorry but in my work I see naked kids all day and I never have felt even the tiniest tingle in my nether bits over it. The thought makes me ill.

I fully agree. I lump that with covering up rape.

[Edited 2015-05-27 20:54:23]
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21816
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Thu May 28, 2015 5:10 am

Quoting D L X (Reply 65):
I get that, but that's not a crime.

Not in the legal sense, no. But in a moral sense, yes.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
ha763
Posts: 3201
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2003 5:36 pm

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Thu May 28, 2015 10:06 am

Quoting D L X (Reply 65):
The police report uses the language "forcible." The victims were younger than 14. Some of the victims were his sisters.

Looks like rape to me.

It's not rape since it doesn't meet the Arkansas definition of rape. For it to be rape, there has to be penetration of the mouth, vagina, or anus. There is no need to define sexual intercourse, but this is the Arkansas definition of "Deviate sexual activity."

12-18-103. Definitions.

(8) "Deviate sexual activity" means any act of sexual gratification involving:

(A) Penetration, however slight, of the anus or mouth of one person by the penis of another person; or

(B) Penetration, however slight, of the labia majora or anus of one person by any body member or foreign instrument manipulated by another person;

There was no allegation of penetration, just touching. The police report also says forcible fondling. I would say one of the reasons the report used "forcible" because several of the allegations happened while the victims were sleeping. According to the report, what Josh Dugger did was this:

(19) (A) (i) "Sexual contact" means any act of sexual gratification involving:

(a) The touching, directly or through clothing, of the sex organs, buttocks, or anus of a person or the breast of a female;

It still is considered sexual abuse under Arkansas laws.
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 12856
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Thu May 28, 2015 10:28 am

I wonder how they will deal with one of there kids if they're gay, there's bound to be at least one out of 19 kids. That'll be an episode to watch.
 
D L X
Posts: 12671
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Thu May 28, 2015 11:58 am

Quoting ha763 (Reply 67):
It's not rape since it doesn't meet the Arkansas definition of rape. For it to be rape, there has to be penetration of the mouth, vagina, or anus. There is no need to define sexual intercourse, but this is the Arkansas definition of "Deviate sexual activity."

I think the police report supports the possibility of fitting 8b. It's certainly indictable.
 
luckyone
Topic Author
Posts: 3026
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:50 pm

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Thu May 28, 2015 2:23 pm

Quoting D L X (Reply 61):
Why not?

Not everything is a conspiracy.

It's not a conspiracy, it's wide open for the world to see. The Duggars are politically connected to Mike Huckabee, who uses them for his own political purposes. Mike Huckabee appointed the judge who expunged Josh Duggar's record. It's not a big leap.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 64):
AND THEN they started opposing MY rights and MY marriage because I'm a danger to children. That was their crime.

Agreed. The issue is the Duggars and their duplicitous political endeavors, with Josh making the claim of "epitome of conservative family values." I think a lot of people are perfectly happy to leave people like the Duggars and the Phil Robertsons be in their kooky deluded worlds. There aren't a ton of Duggar families out there, but there are quite a few, and I can't help but believe that most of them don't want the camera anywhere near them-- most normal people don't. They like the attention and intended on using it for their own agendas, which go way beyond faith. That's when the problem starts. Jim Bob Billy Bob Joe apparently ran for the US Senate in 2002, and one of his planks was that rape and incest should be tried as capital crimes. He wasn't very quick to offer his own son up, though.

[Edited 2015-05-28 07:30:03]
 
blueflyer
Posts: 4352
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 4:17 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Thu May 28, 2015 5:51 pm

Quoting DDR (Reply 60):
Really? It's all a coincidence? LMAO. No way is it a coincidence.

Mike Huckabee was governor for over ten years. That's enough time for a judge that he appointed to be sitting on a case involving one of the governor's friends without any machination.
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 12856
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Thu May 28, 2015 6:41 pm

the older daughters are all quite bangable.

 
User avatar
DIRECTFLT
Posts: 2260
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 3:00 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Mon Jun 01, 2015 11:28 pm

It's an Arkansas story ... I'd leave it at that...

Heck, taken --as a whole--, Josh Duggar is no better, or worse, than Wild "Bill".
Smoothest Ride so far ~ AA A300B4-600R ~~ Favorite Aviation Author ~ Robert J. Serling
 
User avatar
akiss20
Posts: 948
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 9:50 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Tue Jun 02, 2015 12:21 am

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 72):
the older daughters are all quite bangable.

Always can rely on KiwiRob to class up a thread...  
Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are
 
User avatar
WarRI1
Posts: 13938
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:51 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Tue Jun 02, 2015 1:43 am

Quoting DIRECTFLT (Reply 73):
Heck, taken --as a whole--, Josh Duggar is no better, or worse, than Wild "Bill".

Might I ask, Wild Bill who? I just know you are not referring to Bill Clinton.

[Edited 2015-06-01 19:09:02]
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21816
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Tue Jun 02, 2015 2:52 am

Quoting DIRECTFLT (Reply 73):
Heck, taken --as a whole--, Josh Duggar is no better, or worse, than Wild "Bill".

Yes, because Bill Clinton diddled his 5yo sister.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
Mir
Posts: 19491
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Tue Jun 02, 2015 3:02 am

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 76):
Yes, because Bill Clinton diddled his 5yo sister.

And then went on to preach hateful lies about a certain group of people. Yeah, totally analogous.  

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
User avatar
WarRI1
Posts: 13938
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:51 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Tue Jun 02, 2015 3:04 am

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 76):
Yes, because Bill Clinton diddled his 5yo sister.

I had never heard that, some documentation please.
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21816
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Tue Jun 02, 2015 3:05 am

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 78):
I had never heard that, some documentation please.


You missed my sarcasm.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
User avatar
WarRI1
Posts: 13938
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:51 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Tue Jun 02, 2015 3:13 am

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 79):

You missed my sarcasm.

Sorry about that, I sure did. It sure threw me for a loop. I feel better now. I sure cannot equate womanizing with child abuse as someone did earlier if I an correct about the Wild Bill comparison.

[Edited 2015-06-01 20:16:17]
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
 
DLFREEBIRD
Posts: 1460
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2015 6:07 pm

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Thu Jun 04, 2015 4:34 am

well the Duggars were interviewed by Fox News, a lot of what was said here turns out not to be true.

you all may want to watch it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=J0zFOoPdkqw
 
luckyone
Topic Author
Posts: 3026
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:50 pm

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Thu Jun 04, 2015 11:24 am

Quoting DLFREEBIRD (Reply 81):
well the Duggars were interviewed by Fox News, a lot of what was said here turns out not to be true.

The Duggars are in full-on damage control because they see a major source of income about to be gone. None of what they said changes the fact that their son molested their daughters on multiple times (which they still managed to minimize while discussing their feelings of failure), and they all got away with it. That said son then turned around and labeled groups of people as child molesters and actively sought to limit their rights and privileges. They also minimized the fact that the police report stated that at one point one of their daughters went to them and told them what was happening. They dodged the hypocrisy charges and pulled a Hillary Clinton "vast conspiracy." They spent a fair amount of time blaming other people with agenda--never mind that they have their own political agenda. What bugs me, though I was expecting it, was that the issue of their deluded sense of reality contributing to a pubescent kid's bad behavior was never addressed. They blame the media, though they certainly didn't mind taking the money and the praise. That is the risk you take when you sell yourself--eventually the novelty wears off.

As for the Duggar daughters defending their brother, I can understand it from a personal level (who would want the world to know about that..) and the fact that the two older girls (Jill and Jessa) feature prominently in the latest series of episodes and likely have a lot to lose financially should the show go off the air. They have no other skills.

[Edited 2015-06-04 04:37:20]
 
jpetekyxmd80
Posts: 4316
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2003 3:16 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Thu Jun 04, 2015 11:48 am

They are pathetic as well as that PR softball game masquerading for a real interview.
The Best Care in the Air, 1984-2009
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 18071
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Thu Jun 04, 2015 12:53 pm

Quoting luckyone (Reply 82):
likely have a lot to lose financially should the show go off the air. They have no other skills.

Well there's an opening at the Family Research Council!  
I don't take responsibility at all
 
DLFREEBIRD
Posts: 1460
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2015 6:07 pm

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Thu Jun 04, 2015 12:55 pm

I agree the Fox interview was nauseating. I thought they were manipulative, and purposely minimizing Josh's behavior.

All i'm saying, is that a lot of assumptions were made, that turned out not to be true. The girls apparently did get professional counseling as well as Josh. They did remove Josh from the home for a time.

Which is contrary to what people were saying on this board. I don't want to hear gossip. If you don't know, then you really shouldn't be making educated guesses.

what i think is ironic is how the Duggars are thinking of suing the state for not sealing the records, you can't make this stuff up.
 
D L X
Posts: 12671
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Thu Jun 04, 2015 1:12 pm

Quoting DLFREEBIRD (Reply 81):
a lot of what was said here turns out not to be true.

such as?
 
DLFREEBIRD
Posts: 1460
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2015 6:07 pm

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Thu Jun 04, 2015 1:33 pm

besides what i already mentioned. the show hasn't been cancelled. apparently it's on temporary hiatus. http://variety.com/2015/tv/news/19-k...covery-tlc-josh-duggar-1201506363/
 
luckyone
Topic Author
Posts: 3026
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:50 pm

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Thu Jun 04, 2015 1:51 pm

Quoting DLFREEBIRD (Reply 85):
They did remove Josh from the home for a time.

That was already known. And was discussed above as the kid was sent away to "counseling" which later turned out to be "home remodeling manual labor."

Quoting DLFREEBIRD (Reply 87):
besides what i already mentioned. the show hasn't been cancelled. apparently it's on temporary hiatus.

With most of its advertisers bailing.
 
flymia
Posts: 7126
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 6:33 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Thu Jun 04, 2015 2:03 pm

All this hoopla about the parents not turning him into the authorities is ridiculous. Lets talk real here, how many parents are going to take their own son to the police, "here you go, lock him up." They did not make great choices, but they did what they thought was best.

Anyway, forget about Josh, he obviously did some horrible things, but those records are also sealed for the protection of the victims. I feel bad for the sisters that now have to deal with this all over again.
"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
 
DLFREEBIRD
Posts: 1460
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2015 6:07 pm

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Thu Jun 04, 2015 2:17 pm

Apparently they don't want to lose their cash cow. I don't get TLC myself.

they have a show called my husband's not gay. that follows men in the Mormon church who are attracted to men but who cultivate relationships with women.

[Edited 2015-06-04 07:18:07]
 
D L X
Posts: 12671
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Thu Jun 04, 2015 2:36 pm

Quoting flymia (Reply 89):
Anyway, forget about Josh, he obviously did some horrible things, but those records are also sealed for the protection of the victims.

Police reports are public documents. That's why they were recoverable with a FOIA request.

Quoting DLFREEBIRD (Reply 85):
All i'm saying, is that a lot of assumptions were made, that turned out not to be true.

The big picture items remain fully intact.

- Josh Duggar molested his sisters (possibly even satisfying the requirements for rape in Arkansas).
- Jim Bob Duggar sent Josh to "counseling" which consisted of helping a guy fix a house, instead of calling the law.
- The Duggars did not report the crimes until much later, when the statute of limitations blocked further criminal punishment
- Despite these facts, TLC initiated a television series starring this family.

Really damning stuff.
 
mham001
Posts: 5745
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 4:52 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Thu Jun 04, 2015 2:36 pm

Quoting luckyone (Reply 82):
As for the Duggar daughters defending their brother, I can understand it from a personal level (who would want the world to know about that..)

Believe it, there is a lot going on that you never heard about. it is quite possible they were willing participants. Were you ever molested? And then there is the money...

Quoting D L X (Reply 86):
such as?

Just about everything this guy has said and/or implied in this thread. Nothing like an obsessive hatred of Christians to warp a mind.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 76):
Yes, because Bill Clinton diddled his 5yo sister.
 
D L X
Posts: 12671
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Thu Jun 04, 2015 2:38 pm

Quoting mham001 (Reply 92):
Nothing like an obsessive hatred of Christians to warp a mind.

I'm Christian.

Who's warped?

Quoting mham001 (Reply 92):
it is quite possible they were willing participants.

Sick man.

Minors cannot consent. It is still molestation.
 
mham001
Posts: 5745
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 4:52 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Thu Jun 04, 2015 3:01 pm

Quoting D L X (Reply 91):
- Josh Duggar molested his sisters (possibly even satisfying the requirements for rape in Arkansas).

And you are another one who has spread plenty of untruths here. We've been over this already, without penetration, there is no "rape". You have been shown the law, yet you keep making this claim with no indication anywhere that there was rape. I don't even know these people, never seen them but people like you only make them more sympathetic.

Quoting D L X (Reply 93):
Sick man.

Minors cannot consent. It is still molestation.

That is not the point. Have you ever been molested? I have and feelings later can be mixed. What is your experience with child molestation? Please, tell us. Give us all some of your vast knowledge on the subject as well as their family dealings.

I believe there is also more playing around between siblings than we know about, I have seen some myself.
 
D L X
Posts: 12671
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Thu Jun 04, 2015 3:29 pm

Quoting mham001 (Reply 94):
And you are another one who has spread plenty of untruths here.

False. Everything I said here is either cut and paste from statute, or my opinion on how to apply it.

Quoting mham001 (Reply 94):
You have been shown the law

Actually, I showed *you* the law. You on the other hand, thought that the FBI was somehow involved.

Quoting mham001 (Reply 94):
yet you keep making this claim with no indication anywhere that there was rape.

The police report says "FORCIBLE" many times, including on the first page. The statute says penetration, "however slight" and does not limit said penetration to a male's penis. It also does not limit it to being under a victim's clothes. I'm showing you the roadmap, but you refuse to examine the possibility.

Quoting mham001 (Reply 94):
That is not the point.

So then you agree with what I said?

Quoting mham001 (Reply 94):
Have you ever been molested? I have and feelings later can be mixed. What is your experience with child molestation? Please, tell us. Give us all some of your vast knowledge on the subject as well as their family dealings.

Thankfully, I have not, nor have I pretended to know what's likely going through their minds. I hope you and they both get the help you need.
 
User avatar
OA412
Moderator
Posts: 4781
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2000 6:22 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Thu Jun 04, 2015 3:44 pm

Quoting DLFREEBIRD (Reply 81):
well the Duggars were interviewed by Fox News, a lot of what was said here turns out not to be true.

If it was on Fox News, it must be true...

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 76):
Quoting DIRECTFLT (Reply 73):
Heck, taken --as a whole--, Josh Duggar is no better, or worse, than Wild "Bill".

Yes, because Bill Clinton diddled his 5yo sister.

Dontcha know, he and Jane Fonda spelled the downfall of America. 
Quoting D L X (Reply 93):
Quoting mham001 (Reply 92):
it is quite possible they were willing participants.

Sick man.

Minors cannot consent. It is still molestation.

  

Quoting mham001 (Reply 94):
That is not the point.

Sure it is, minors can't consent. The law is quite clear on that. Even if they claimed to be "willing participants," the law says otherwise. And before you ask, no I have thankfully not been molested. I know several people who have been, and I can't begin to imagine the pain and confusion they've been through. What makes it such a heinous crime, particularly when it involves teenagers, is the confusion you noted.
Hughes Airwest - Top Banana In The West
 
luckyone
Topic Author
Posts: 3026
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:50 pm

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Thu Jun 04, 2015 10:13 pm

Quoting flymia (Reply 89):
Anyway, forget about Josh, he obviously did some horrible things, but those records are also sealed for the protection of the victims.

According to the laws of the State of Arkansas, in this case the release was legal as the offender had reached majority and the names of the then-minors had been redacted. Interestingly, the City of Springdale alerted the Duggars that they were releasing the records, which they were not obliged to do.
 
flymia
Posts: 7126
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 6:33 am

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Fri Jun 05, 2015 2:21 am

Quoting luckyone (Reply 97):
According to the laws of the State of Arkansas, in this case the release was legal as the offender had reached majority and the names of the then-minors had been redacted.
Quoting D L X (Reply 91):
Police reports are public documents. That's why they were recoverable with a FOIA request.

I had no idea he was 18 when the report was filed. Anyway, while true, the victims still should had been better protected. And it seems now that the records were destroyed as order by a judge in Arkansas by the request of one of the victims. http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/...ity-defends-release-record-n370171

After taking a quick look at the record I a do think these records should had been sealed and/or destroyed. One of the lines clearly states the age of one of the victims at the time and that it was his sister. It is clear that the victims were sisters as well. Again, I feel bad for the victims that had this report come out where it is obvious who the victims were. Its not like the typical reports which I have read countless times when working for state and government agencies where you have absolutely no idea who the child victims are, even when you are working for the government. The victims were not protected here.
"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
 
luckyone
Topic Author
Posts: 3026
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:50 pm

RE: Josh Duggar: Child Molestor

Fri Jun 05, 2015 2:36 am

Quoting flymia (Reply 98):
After taking a quick look at the record I a do think these records should had been sealed and/or destroyed. One of the lines clearly states the age of one of the victims at the time and that it was his sister. It is clear that the victims were sisters as well. Again, I feel bad for the victims that had this report come out where it is obvious who the victims were. Its not like the typical reports which I have read countless times when working for state and government agencies where you have absolutely no idea who the child victims are, even when you are working for the government. The victims were not protected here.

(You're making me sort of defend the government of Arkansas, well done sir). It is not the state's responsibility or concern that Jim Billy Bob Dave and Michelle Duggar chose to make a spectacle out of themselves or exploit their children for their own financial gain--if it was the state would've been concerned that the Duggars were exploiting their children for their own financial gain long before this issue came to the surface, and would have a statute of limitations that didn't expire after three years. I don't think the state should make special exceptions because a walking clown car wants to put itself on display then suddenly whine when the honeymoon is over. The Duggars clearly didn't mind two of the victims trotting out on national television and identifying themselves, but they're VICTIMS!--incidentally it's the two daughters that feature prominently on their show recently, who likely have their own financial incentives to try to jump back into the airplane. Granted I'm not, but if I were in their position and something like this happened I would've said "No comment. Leave my children alone." But I wouldn't have exploited my children that way. I also probably wouldn't have made it a political crusade to impose my cultish beliefs on others and restrict their rights.

Incidentally...Michelle Duggar's hair....all I could think was "yeah but Dolly Parton takes her hair off at night."

[Edited 2015-06-04 19:40:00]

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: scbriml and 59 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos