Josh Duggar Admits Molestation of 5 Juveniles - Part 6

[DuggarsTheEndIsNear]

Also, people are weird about the rules they make for themselves about right and wrong. I haven't read the details about his crimes, but it could be that he sees his watching and distributing child porn to be a much lesser crime that molesting children. I've known of abusers who draw a line at abusing family members. Everyone else is fair game, but tell them someone abused their child/sister/niece, and they're completely appalled.

True. And, from what I've read, the charges he pleaded no contest to were about possessing, viewing, or distributing the porn. He could viewed what he did as different because he was just watching, not actually touching the kids. He may very well be appalled by the ones who supplied him the porn, even if he watched it, for the same reason.

[Hera]

I won't be thrilled if Jessa or Jill get their own shows either.

Both of these women have chosen to continue to live this lifestyle when at any given time in the last 2-4 years they could have escaped if they truly didn't believe all the crap their parents taught them.

Neither deserve a public forum to spread their nonsense.

Now if TLC offered one of the kids who truly wants out a sort of Breaking Duggar show then okay but for now I am not convinced any of the kids above Joy are worthy of ever having a public forum.

My opinion of course.

I agree with this. I feel bad for what Jill and Jessa have gone through, and I hope they are able to get whatever help they want and/or need. However, that doesn't change the fact that Jessa, at least, has seized upon her "celebrity" to spew hatred and ignorance. I cannot support the promulgation of her views, regardless of her background. And, sadly, unless there is a real "Breaking Duggar" situation, all of the other "kids" (and kids) likely share the same horrible views. This platform needs to go away.

[Snarkle Motion]

There comes a time where we have to balance society's need vs. our desire for information. It is in the best interest of our children that juvenile records are sealed. Does it defeat FOIA? Yup, and that should stay. Would it be awesome if we could know EVERYTHING about this case? Yup, but things dont work like that. The bottom line is that the statute of limitations has run. Us finding out the truth wont change that.

The Duggars are done. They've been exposed as the hateful lying hypocrites that they are. Nothing that is in those files will change that. We would LIKE to know what else is out there because WE are curious. It doesnt help the victims, it doesnt change what happened, and it cant make things better.

We snark on things that we see, hear, or know. Guessing about what may have happened based on our imaginations doesnt really add anything, there's plenty out there for us to discuss so lets stick with that. We can scour the internet, rewatch episodes, look for writings, whatever, but lets keep the discussion in reality.

I agree that there needs to be a balance but my concern is that when other children are potentially at risk I'd rather err on the side of protecting them. Not at the expense of outing personal information about the victims but yes absolutely I will risk hurting Josh and JB's reputation if children are still being hurt or not getting the therapy they need. Yes, speculating on a random internet board probably does nothing. But its a place where ideas are exchanged and potentially brainstorming useful areas to direct action. However I've also seen people say "Media please investigate this or report this" so I think there is some use to that.

I wish I could agree that the Duggars are done. But from what I've read it seems like they are trying for a spin-off show. I worry that they are trying to weather this storm and sweeping any further misdeeds under the rug.

Also, really this was less about the "rules" per se and more about people's general tone toward new members and commenting in general. We may have people with new information about the Duggars or Gothard who come to this forum for the first time and feel too afraid to comment or speak out because honestly the tone has been pretty hostile.

[theinvisiblegirl]

"We are sorry that we have given you information to use against us."

Sorry to bring something back that was said on the second or third page; I checked all the other pages before commenting. I think if people from FRC did reach out to GLAAD, it was probably to apologize for when Josh said that LGBT people were more likely to harm children.

[SassyPants]

Does the Gothard/ATI crowd believe in the all-seeing God? And God knows your heart and all of that? I just can't fathom how JB can justify/sanctify his lying. The omniscient God would not approve. I mean, clearly, God isn't very happy with them right now.

I'm really not sure that Jill and Jessa's lives are all that interesting. Not interesting enough for a TV show. And what, as more kids get married they add them in to the show? I don't like that idea. I also don't like the idea of exploiting MORE children from this family. These people have been reduced to circus performers. Give the kids trusts and call it quits. Leave them alone.

Perversion, twisting, convoluting is a huge problem with these pseudo-religions. They believe and follow whatever suits their agenda, the flavor of the day and what ever justifies their current actions.

JB has probably been lying for the last 49 years, 11 months. He certainly has been for the last 13 years.

Does the religion of the holy living room believe in judgement day? If so, JB and M should be quaking in their thrift store shoes.

[SheWhoIsObeyed]

Didn't see this posted elsewhere. RawStory has it.

Trooper friend says Jim Bob lied. The trooper says he would have reported it had he known it was more than one girl and more than one time.

The plot thickens

rawstory.com/2015/05/ex-state-trooper-jim-bob-duggar-lied-and-told-me-his-son-had-molested-only-one-girl/

[ApologistsBeDamned]

Even in prison kiddie molesters get treated very badly by fellow inmates.

Kiddie porn veiwers do as well but it is possible that Hutchens is trying to control the story before be is labeled a kiddie molester on top of kiddie porn purveyor on cell block c.

[lookinggoodforjesus]

Viewing child porn is punishable with a 56 year long sentence, but touching your four year old sister's vagina has no punishment at all?

[SassyPants]

Viewing child porn is punishable with a 56 year long sentence, but touching your four year old sister's vagina has no punishment at all?

I think there should not be a SOL for such behaviors.

[theinvisiblegirl]

http://www.tmz.com/2015/05/27/19-kids-a ... lestation/

More and more advertisers are pulling the plug on advertising during the show.

In addition to General Mills and Wallgreens:

Jimmy Dean, Pure Leaf Iced Tea, Ace Hardware, David's Bridal, ConAgra Foods, Party City and Behr have all just announced they've removed their ad campaigns from the show and CVS, H&R Block, Ricola and Keurig all say they have no plans of advertising with the show if it's reinstated.

I'm sure there are even more advertisers that have yet to make a decision, but I'm sure this is setting a precedence. If TLC is dumb enough to bring back 19KAC, who's going to advertise during it? Hobby Lobby is the only one that comes to mind.

I saw the posts above about a possible spin-off. I wonder how any of those companies would feel about it. Would they advertise during a spin-off?

[ApologistsBeDamned]

Sorry to bring something back that was said on the second or third page; I checked all the other pages before commenting. I think if people from FRC did reach out to GLAAD, it was probably to apologize for when Josh said that LGBT people were more likely to harm children.

They are trying to desperately distance themselves from this story but we all know they knew everything josh Duggar was saying and hired him because he was a Duggar. So while they didn't know he did this as a teen they did know the stupid crap that he spouted and paid him to continue spouting it.

[VelociRapture]

I don't like the idea of a spinoff much. Not because I think it would be boring - nothing could be as boring as the endless recap episodes of 19KAC - but because I feel like these people have had enough of their lives broadcast for public consumption.

Jill and Jessa were just kids when their parents got the show. At that point, they didn't have a choice in whether or not they wanted to be on the show - their parents signed the contract and that was that. Its possible that they love being on camera and decided to stay on the show after marriage. . . but its also possible that they only did it for the money. The married daughters aren't old enough to decide for themselves what they want. I doubt a show featuring them would be a huge success though because I don't think they'd be comfortable saying anything negative about their beliefs or family - considering everything the public has just learned, it would be odd to watch them pretend everything is perfect and normal.

Some of the younger kids have lived their entire lives on camera. I feel quite strongly that they should be left alone. Let them release all the youtube videos and selfies they want. . . but I think TLC needs to back off of them. They deserve privacy.

As for the unmarried adults, I doubt any of them would be picked for a spinoff because (in my opinion) none of them are likely to break away. If they continue living in their parents' house then there really wouldn't be any way for TLC to film while keeping the rest of the family out. Not to mention, some of them might be more than willing to hand their money over to dear old dad.

[twinmama]

This is what gets to me. The kid was so indoctrinated that he told on himself. JimBob and Michelle Duggars are villains and terrible people. I hate what they - and IBLP - have done to these children

I don't think that is a sad indictment of their lifestyle though. Is it better to molest people and NOT tell?? At least he had a chance at help by telling. Sadly, his parents didn't seem to give it to him regardless.

[DuggarsTheEndIsNear]

JB may have told him it only happened once initially but I have a hard time believing that he didn't know there was more than one instance until a few days ago but I could be totally off point. From the article outlining his sentencing it states he was initially arrested in 2005 and was given parole and had a suspended sentence agreement. He was arrested again in 2007 for violating his parole and that led to his going to jail.

I'm not in law enforcement but wouldn't the detectives, who conducted the interviews with the family, have also interviewed Hutchins in 2006 based on the fact that JB told them he had spoken to him? Surely those detectives would have informed Hutchins that there was more than one instance. Then again since he was on parole for kiddie porn they may not have told him anything.

Anyone with legal knowledge know how that would have worked?

Okay. First, why would they talk to him about it? If they hadn't done their homework to know that he only knew about one instance, then why would they have told him there were more?

Also, he had 3 years to report after the first instance. The investigation took place 3 years after the last. His reporting any time since 2006 would have been useless.

[halcionne]

Daily Mail is trying to make more stories out of this..

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... veals.html

Didn't break the link because it's DM (hope that's okay, I always screw these up)

I'm not giving this one a click because it looks like nonsense, just based on the title. I've been googling "duggars" periodically all week, and popular stories float to the top of the news result. I love it when relevant, correct articles turn up there.

[Nowyn]

Viewing child porn is punishable with a 56 year long sentence, but touching your four year old sister's vagina has no punishment at all?

Sometimes the law is asinine. IMO there shouldn't be a statute of limitations when it comes to sex crimes especially when children are involved.

[quiversR4hunting]

1) Was there a "heads up" for Josh and Anna, and thus their families?

I think they were given a short heads up 24-48 hour heads up.

2) Did TLC know?

I wouldn’t be surprised if someONE at TLC knew or they knew enough to stop digging to claim plausible deniability. I don’t think Jim (boom), camera guy, etc knew.

3) Did the Kellers and Anna really know what Josh had done, when Pa Keller hand-picked him for Anna?

I don’t think the Kellers knew the whole truth and nothing but the truth. I bet they were given a glossed over view and led to believe Josh played kissy face or first base with his first girlfriend.

4) Are the Kellers and/or the Seewalds truly supportive?

I think the Kellers are supporting Anna. Or at least I hope that is what is happening. I hope Anna gets counselling! Seewalds, well I see where Ben gets shooting off his mouth from! I think Seewlads were blindsided and trying to save face by letting Ben live over there and marry one of the daughters.

5) Will the "show go on" in some form or another?

I think it will quit right now. I think if any of the kids want to do a tell-all they will do a special. If a kid does a real tell-all (not like what was on the other week), I would watch every last minute of it. The only way a spin off would work is if the children were out of the house and truly on their own. I wouldn't trust that JB and J'M weren't in the background being the puppeteers of the kids on a spin-off.

#3 made me think of the Duggar girls and the strict courting rules made up by each couple. :roll: Do you think the strict courting rules started because of Josh? (sorry if someone mentioned it in threads 3-4-I missed most of those threads) If a sibling of mine made it more difficult for me to date or meet someone, I would be ticked. However, the courting rules could have came out just because of ATI.

[twinmama]

Jezebel already has some info about this:

http://jezebel.com/court-records-reveal ... 1707192733

HOLY SHIT. I can't believe someone would put all that in their public profile. What the hell. Not that I think people into child pornography are intelligent, but jesus this guy was asking to get found out (thankfully, I guess??).

[Librul]

RE: a spin off featuring "the girls".

Jana, Jill, Jessa, Jinger and JoyAnna are cute, some are even absolutely beautiful, but I agree with the previous poster who said they are both boring and unintelligent. They cannot string together an engaging or interesting sentence, let alone fill a series. They are still ATI. They are still narrow minded fundamentalists. They are still the same people they were last month. This revelation doesn't change the previous 20+ years of programmed responses and substandard education. The show has allowed them to have the added veneer of princess entitlement overlaid onto a SOTDRT education at it's sketchiest. What would we watch? Jill changing diapers and blanket training the nation of Israel? Jessa giving herself a manicure and sharing her deep thoughts on theology and atheists? Jana looking both ethereal and overworked? Joy demonstrating timeless artery-destroying recipes from the Duggar files, served up on paper plates?

[ApologistsBeDamned]

Viewing child porn is punishable with a 56 year long sentence, but touching your four year old sister's vagina has no punishment at all?

The difference that screams outs to me is that Hutchens was caught by the feds and nt local good ole boy sooper cops.

[twinmama]

Supposedly.

If this happens, I just hope it's something the women genuinely want; and Boob and J'chelle aren't getting any of the money from it.

IMO, if this happens it won't last long. 19 kids was popular because they HAD 19 KIDS. Newlyweds with one baby a piece? Everyone does that, who cares? Unfortunately it takes 9 months to produce a new cast member, so they'd have entire seasons of nothing happening but gestation.

Though I do like the Brady Brides feel to it, lol.

[DuggarsTheEndIsNear]

I'll watch a spin off if it's of the girls getting the hell out of that cult and trying to navigate life without ATI rules.

ETA: I'll also watch it if it focuses around the boys or involves the boys leaving the cult. It could be called "19 kids and leaving."

[quiversR4hunting]

http://www.tmz.com/2015/05/27/19-kids-and-counting-advertisers-tlc-josh-duggar-molestation/

More and more advertisers are pulling the plug on advertising during the show.

In addition to General Mills and Wallgreens:

I'm sure there are even more advertisers that have yet to make a decision, but I'm sure this is setting a precedence. If TLC is dumb enough to bring back 19KAC, who's going to advertise during it? Hobby Lobby is the only one that comes to mind.

I saw the posts above about a possible spin-off. I wonder how any of those companies would feel about it. Would they advertise during a spin-off?

I wonder if Hobby Lobby was a sponsor if they would pull their advertising dollars. The connection from Hobby Lobby to the Duggars is pretty clear, I wish more people would see how much Hobby Lobby is forking money into Gothard/ATI/ALERT, etc.

[meep]

1) Was there a "heads up" for Josh and Anna, and thus their families?

I think they knew 24 hours in advance so they were allowed to lose their shit over this being made public and then be able to be spotted out in public afterwards (they were) seeming all calm. I really don't think they had a heads up more than that, otherwise I feel there would have been MUCH more damage control.

2) Did TLC know?

I think they knew the Duggars were very shady and they had quite a few skeletons in their closet. I don't think they knew any details.

3) Did the Kellers and Anna really know what Josh had done, when Pa Keller hand-picked him for Anna?

I think they knew 100%. In that culture, when you repent for your sins and ask forgiveness, it's suppose to be like it never happened. I'm sure it bothered them to some degree but if they ever showed that outwardly, it would reflect bad on THEM as being bad Christians not being able to forgive. I honestly don't think they though of it as a big deal but kept the secret going because they knew the "secular world" wouldn't understand.

4) Are the Kellers and/or the Seewalds truly supportive?

I think the Kellers are still very supportive of Josh and the marriage as a whole. I don't know much about the Seewalds but from their post, I'm guessing they are.

5) Will the "show go on" in some form or another?

TLC is for sure scrambling right now to salvage what they can, but with so many sponsors dropping, I don't think it's very realistic. If they do get a show off the ground, even if it left out BoobChelle and Josh, I have a feeling they would just get more backlash about it.

[VelociRapture]

I agree that there needs to be a balance but my concern is that when other children are potentially at risk I'd rather err on the side of protecting them. Not at the expense of outing personal information about the victims but yes absolutely I will risk hurting Josh and JB's reputation if children are still being hurt or not getting the therapy they need. Yes, speculating on a random internet board probably does nothing. But its a place where ideas are exchanged and potentially brainstorming useful areas to direct action. However I've also seen people say "Media please investigate this or report this" so I think there is some use to that.

I wish I could agree that the Duggars are done. But from what I've read it seems like they are trying for a spin-off show. I worry that they are trying to weather this storm and sweeping any further misdeeds under the rug.

Also, really this was less about the "rules" per se and more about people's general tone toward new members and commenting in general. We may have people with new information about the Duggars or Gothard who come to this forum for the first time and feel too afraid to comment or speak out because honestly the tone has been pretty hostile.

I understand your point. I would hate to learn that other children had been harmed in anyway. However, at the moment we have no evidence or information suggesting that is the case. No one has come forward here or elsewhere claiming to have knowledge or evidence of additional abuse. If someone were to come onto FJ and claim that I assume they would be subjected to a good deal of skepticism and questioning - not out of anger or a desire to be rude, but because we want to be sure that we have accurate information. Not only would it cause trouble for people that didn't actually do what they are accused of doing, it would also have a negative impact on the children they are accused of harming.

The tone you have seen directed at some posters was born out of frustration at the way the thread was moving. People were posting wild speculation about all sorts of topics. It got to the point where the overall conversation was being dragged down by people arguing about really stupid stuff. Normally, this website isn't like that.