Josh Duggar Admits Molestation of 5 Juveniles - Part 6

[ApologistsBeDamned]

I dont have access to my lexis account from home but I promise I will post the statute of limitations information that would have applied in 2004/2005 tomorrow.

I can say now that the statute of limitations would have run after one year on any misdemeanors, even today.

It is not:

5-14-110. Sexual indecency with a child. - Josh was under 18

5-14-125. Sexual assault in the second degree. - Josh was under 18

5-26-202. Incest - Josh was under 16

Likely charge is:

5-14-126. Sexual assault in the third degree

I'm quite sure that this was the law in 2004 but I will confirm it tomorrow

5-1-109

And I'll just leave this here for those "elders"

Thank you.

Interesting. I do think we should try the angle of why the church elders did not notify. Get that church in trouble even if there can be no prosecution now.

[ApologistsBeDamned]

Apologist: I edited my post above. The law professor is basing analysis on the current code, which is tougher than 2002. And yes, the act is what starts a criminal SOL, not the impact on the victim. That is why civil code is more flexible.

I agree civil suit is far easier after the fact.

I still think that any good lawyer could have ran with the charges in 2006 because they were minors. But if we are assuming Josh was turned into DHS CPS thenI have to beleive some lawyer decided it wasn't worth prosecuting.

Otherwise Hignite was overstepping as he isn't qualified to interpret laws.

[justoneoftwo]

I agree civil suit is far easier after the fact.

I still think that any good lawyer could have ran with the charges in 2006 because they were minors. But if we are assuming Josh was turned into DHS CPS thenI have to beleive some lawyer decided it wasn't worth prosecuting.

Otherwise Hignite was overstepping as he isn't qualified to interpret laws.

He would hardly be the first officer to do that, or to have his information just be wrong.

[Snarkle Motion]

I dont have access to my lexis account from home but I promise I will post the statute of limitations information that would have applied in 2004/2005 tomorrow.

I can say now that the statute of limitations would have run after one year on any misdemeanors, even today.

It is not:

5-14-110. Sexual indecency with a child. - Josh was under 18

5-14-125. Sexual assault in the second degree. - Josh was under 18

5-26-202. Incest - Josh was under 16

Likely charge is:

5-14-126. Sexual assault in the third degree

I'm quite sure that this was the law in 2004 but I will confirm it tomorrow

5-1-109

[Buzzard]

The statute of limitation AT THE TIME OF THE CRIME is what matters. Subsequent legal changes are not retroactive.

[Snarkle Motion]

The statute of limitation AT THE TIME OF THE CRIME is what matters. Subsequent legal changes are not retroactive.

Sorry, not a lawyer. So does that mean when a crime occurs or when a crime is reported?

[Buzzard]

Sorry, not a lawyer. So does that mean when a crime occurs or when a crime is reported?

At the time of the crime. The same goes for the penalty. If you do something in year x and the penalty is a $500 fine and 1 year in custody and in year Y its changed to public flogging and you are indicted in year Z the penalty is a $500 fine and 1 year in custody.

[DuggarCurls]

... one person connected to the show's production says bluntly that the reality is simple: "The show's over." The official word is that no decision has been made.

... the show is not currently in production, this takes away some of the urgency from TLC's internal deliberations. "Cancelling" the show would really mean "deciding not to resume production as planned." And that decision doesn't have to be made immediately.

Eventually, it probably will be. Many viewers will never look at Josh Duggar or his parents the same way again.

The person connected to the production, who spoke on condition of anonymity, acknowledged as much.

The fate of the show is being orchestrated at the highest levels of the company. The executives involved are feeling the pressure from the press and from social media campaigns against the reality show.

TLC has to wonder whether some fans of "19 Kids" will reject the channel's other reality shows if TLC appears to mistreat the family.

Maybe that's why the channel is "butting out," in the words of one executive, while the Duggar family deals with the scandal.

That may or may not be literally true, but it's what TLC wants observers to think. Pulling "19 Kids" from the schedule, but not canceling it, was the closest thing to "butting out" that TLC could publicly do.

Announcing something more -- for instance, that production won't be resuming as planned -- risks the appearance that the entire Duggar family, including the molestation victims, are being punished.

Conversely, announcing a spin-off anytime soon risks the appearance of exploitation and further reactions from advertisers.

.. two sources with knowledge of the channel's plans said Thursday that no announcements about the franchise are imminent.

http://www.abc-7.com/story/29183643/why ... omplicated

[Snarkle Motion]

Basically what I was trying to say is that no report was made, no charges filed, etc. But the law changed to allow individuals to report prior sex offenses until they were 28, correct? So pretending that nothing was ever done (since that's essentially the result) then under the law the person can be prosecuted now for offenses against a minor since the victims are under 28. These would be new charges occurring now within the law so it has nothing to do with statute of limitation? Again, sorry not a lawyer, I'm asking for patience.

[ApologistsBeDamned]

He would hardly be the first officer to do that, or to have his information just be wrong.

Oh don't I know it. Cops have been on my shit list for over a decade. Most of FOIA requests involve hunting down police corruption.

[Buzzard]

... one person connected to the show's production says bluntly that the reality is simple: "The show's over." The official word is that no decision has been made.

... the show is not currently in production, this takes away some of the urgency from TLC's internal deliberations. "Cancelling" the show would really mean "deciding not to resume production as planned." And that decision doesn't have to be made immediately.

Eventually, it probably will be. Many viewers will never look at Josh Duggar or his parents the same way again.

The person connected to the production, who spoke on condition of anonymity, acknowledged as much.

The fate of the show is being orchestrated at the highest levels of the company. The executives involved are feeling the pressure from the press and from social media campaigns against the reality show.

TLC has to wonder whether some fans of "19 Kids" will reject the channel's other reality shows if TLC appears to mistreat the family.

Maybe that's why the channel is "butting out," in the words of one executive, while the Duggar family deals with the scandal.

http://www.abc-7.com/story/29183643/why ... omplicated

Boob will force a decision. He is hell bent on selling Josiah's courtship and Jessa's baby - Anna's birth story may be too much right now. If TLC isnt going to film it, he's going to look for someone else to sell that to. They can film things for themselves for a while, and may even self produce some videos for their "fans," but they cant do that till TLC cuts them loose.

[gustava]

I don't want this matter drawn out legally. It would hurt the sisters even more.

[Snarkle Motion]

At the time of the crime. The same goes for the penalty. If you do something in year x and the penalty is a $500 fine and 1 year in custody and in year Y its changed to public flogging and you are indicted in year Z the penalty is a $500 fine and 1 year in custody.

I guess I'm still confused. If the new 2013 ruling extends the time of reporting until the victim is 28 then this would not apply to minors who were under 28 but had been abused when a different law is in place even if its newly reported?

[Buzzard]

I don't want this matter drawn out legally. It would hurt the sisters even more.

I have no doubt that the statute has run.

[Buzzard]

I guess I'm still confused. If the new 2013 ruling extends the time of reporting until the victim is 28 then this would not apply to minors who were under 28 but had been abused when a different law is in place even if its newly reported?

Unless the statute says that its retroactive, no. You can only be punished based upon what was the law at the time.

[ApologistsBeDamned]

I don't want this matter drawn out legally. It would hurt the sisters even more.

At this point the issue has advanced beyond the victims into possible church, police and or prosecutorial misconduct.

The victims wouldn't reallly even play into it beyond it was initially the crime agaisnt them that started the entire legal fiasco.

But if the police or.church elders did wrong then they should be prosecuted. Or at the very least investigated.

[ThatsMyTaquito]

I'd buy this based on the cover!

Whats up with Josh's right eye, though? They certainly picked a jacked up pic to photoshop in there!

[attachment=0]in touch cover.jpg[/attachment]

Any one else notice it says, "Josh's victims tell their stories"?

[apandaaries]

Boob will force a decision. He is hell bent on selling Josiah's courtship and Jessa's baby - Anna's birth story may be too much right now. If TLC isnt going to film it, he's going to look for someone else to sell that to. They can film things for themselves for a while, and may even self produce some videos for their "fans," but they cant do that till TLC cuts them loose.

There's always Duggar Studios!

I would not be surprised if JB had the Howlers start filming and editing (lord knows they have enough A/V equipment). JB is brazen enough to try to sell footage to CBN or some similar venue.

[SassyPants]

Boob will force a decision. He is hell bent on selling Josiah's courtship and Jessa's baby - Anna's birth story may be too much right now. If TLC isnt going to film it, he's going to look for someone else to sell that to. They can film things for themselves for a while, and may even self produce some videos for their "fans," but they cant do that till TLC cuts them loose.

And this is an example of why this just pisses so many people off. I think most of us understand that bad things can happen even in the best of homes, but like the Christian broadcaster said on that telecast that was linked here, you have to incorporate that experience into your life, learn from it, ask questions as to why and then make a viable plan for going forward. The Duggars did not do that. They apparently never questioned if perhaps their behaviors at home might have influenced Josh. They seemingly dealt with the problem via a convenient method for them-they did not alter their behaviors and they certainly did not make a viable plan. When you have this kind of history in your immediate family and home, you do not sell your family and home to TV as morally superior, because it will come out.

The Duggar family needs to find another method of support.

[Snarkle Motion]

Unless the statute says that its retroactive, no. You can only be punished based upon what was the law at the time.

Thank you! That makes sense.

[justoneoftwo]

At this point the issue has advanced beyond the victims into possible church, police and or prosecutorial misconduct.

The victims wouldn't reallly even play into it beyond it was initially the crime agaisnt them that started the entire legal fiasco.

But if the police or.church elders did wrong then they should be prosecuted. Or at the very least investigated.

Yes, this is exactly why victims don't get to "press charges." The harms go beyond these girls.

[calimojo]

Didn't see this listed in the search results. Salon article written by a woman who grew up in ATI. She discusses what life is like for a regular person in the movement. Quite interesting. Hopefully more people read this and more media picks it up.

http://www.salon.com/2015/05/28/i_could ... _shock_me/

This is a great article, and it sheds some light on just how deeply brainwashed the Duggar girls might be.

In case you missed this article in the flurry of posts, take time to read it now.

[SassyPants]

This is a great article, and it sheds some light on just how deeply brainwashed the Duggar girls might be.

In case you missed this article in the flurry of posts, take time to read it now.

Earlier today, I was talking about this article on another forum. Having no idea what a reference to 9th grade meant (it made me think of how Jill was not embarrassed to be shown with 13yo James working on his multiplication tables...she would have no idea that Xs tables are usually taught in 3rd grade). IMO, these girls believe what they are told to believe and do not question. They'd have a tough time jumping into our world. Maybe in terms of the current debacle, they are better off? IDK, will they eventually become overwhelmed and angry? They need real counseling,

[bella8050]

From the article: "I hope this latest religion and sex scandal teaches that religious extremism isn’t entertainment. It is abuse."

...which is why I hope and pray that 19KAC is gone for good.

Hey there TLC! Word is getting around about the Duggars. Why, right this very minute, my husband is watching that spoof Duggar video on Funny or Die. My husband! Who has never had any interest in the Duggars! And I don't know how he heard about that video. Wasn't me who told him. People are shocked. Repulsed. Disgusted. Saddened. TLC, we're WAITING. Do you or do not intend to keep 19KAC? People are joking that TLC stands for Touching Little Children. Keep the show, and that will be your legacy.

What's it gonna be, TLC?

It's getting pretty ridiculous. If they do continue on or do a spin-off series, they deserve that legacy and all the backlash they receive for it. They already deserve that and more IMO.

[ThatsMyTaquito]

Also:

Not sure if it was discussed and I missed it Im try to keep up but everything is moving really fast.

So the first time she mentions him is the 5th victim. So the second time is that a potential 6th or something else?