Everything Josh Duggar, Child Molester - Part 7

[formergothardite]

CRYING of laughter at this, VelociRapture.

Spoiler alert: Just wait til you get to the parts where the fancy store clerk made her drive around crying with her daughters, and of course most recently, when she called the police because of a transgendered individual.

Just wait till she gets to the garbage can ice cream.... :? I still can't believe Jill R. posted that on the blog.

[Ali]

nst, you gotta head over to the Jill Rodrigues thread! The crazy cannot be explained second hand.

My house is never going to get clean now.

[HermioneSparrow]

CRYING of laughter at this, VelociRapture.

Spoiler alert: Just wait til you get to the parts where the fancy store clerk made her drive around crying with her daughters, and of course most recently, when she called the police because of a transgendered individual.

You also need to watch their videos in the youtube channel, specially the one forcing her kids to say how awesome is to be a Rodrigues child. :?

[warriorblade8857]

Just wait till she gets to the garbage can ice cream.... :? I still can't believe Jill R. posted that on the blog.

IMO, the worst was when she turned up her nose at that poor gullible old lady's house.

[FundieFarmer]

You also need to watch their videos in the youtube channel, specially the one forcing her kids to say how awesome is to be a Rodrigues child. :?

YES. Where Nurie lists what they get for their birthdays???

VelociRapture, I actually am waiting with baited breath for your opinions of this crazy train!

[Nic]

I expect this to happen too. I've already seen comments on news stories that accuse writers of only reporting about this because Josh believes in Jesus. Not because the Duggars are extreme in their beliefs and have been given a platform to potentially force them on everyone else, but because Josh is a Christian. Need I remind them that the Family Research Council exists solely to prevent the progress of LGBTQA rights, and other social progress in the name of "religious freedom"? Who is persecuting who, exactly? This is why people are talking about hypocrisy, but they will hear none of it.

Incidentally, I just found a link from raw story talking about how other conservative Christian families have been given a pass by Arkansas Department of Health Services:

rawstory.com/2015/05/not-just-the-duggars-arkansas-dhs-keeps-giving-christian-conservatives-a-pass-on-child-abuse/

If Christian conservatives are getting a pass for abuse of children, then Josh Duggar's case is one of many in which conservative Christians are viewed as inherently good.

This also makes me ask, if Josh Duggar sued DHS, and if DHS tends to favor conservative Christians, exactly how bad was it in their house?

Thanks for the story. And you know you're screwed if 20/20 is looking into you.

And related to there's some hinky stuff happening Dr. Phil and I have something in common (FINALLY!) he's saying there's more going on than we know about-- hence his way of butting into it for attention is offering to give a lie detector test to JB and Josh. Like that'll happen. But I'm thinking at least he's someone that has a conservative-ish audience maybe... oh who knows who watches him.

I wonder also if say you're conservative and you are in the anti-Josh camp, however, you are more anti-liberal biased media and liberals in general, are you more inclined to let the Duggars slide. Kind of like jury nullification?

[OkToBeTakei]

I just can't with all the poor me I'm a poor picked on poster .... You guys should have met Valsa!!! This is a snark site, not somewhere to have your hand held and your brow mopped, nobody is picking on you as a person, you are an anonymous stranger , it is your words that are being commented on. Might be worth remembering that.

It's not a fit for everyone, certainly not if you are sensitive to criticism. Also this forum is much bigger than the Duggar threads and I do think it is very condescending to try and inform, comment or criticise when your only posts span one topic.

Back to Duggargate, can't quote parts of posts as on phone.

Back a page or 2 or 3 I think it was Sassypants who mentioned the two women from the Duggar blog. I brought it up in the other thread about the advertising. I always wondered how 'insider' they were. I kind of looked on them as harmless super fans. Obviously snark worthy for that but relatively harmless. I now wonder how much of Duggar life they subscribe to, beliefs, religion etc. this trying to keep the show on at all costs, seems a bit more...... Less harmless?

Yeah I know, crap grammar :)

[Milly-Molly-Mandy]

This site is primarly geared toward people who are opinionated, sarcastic and thick skinned. It might take some people a while to learn to roll with the punches.

Just ignore anyone who offends you. They are only a screen name on a snark forum.

Yeah I've been on FJ for years but the way some older members are acting with all our new members is ridiculous in my view. Expecting them to know all the rules and how to search etc and acting as if they are so much better than the new members...a bit mean.

Welcome new members, so glad to have you! Several years ago FJ was a much meaner & less fun place than it is now so I love newbies :)

[princessmahina]

I just can't with all the poor me I'm a poor picked on poster .... You guys should have met Valsa!!! This is a snark site, not somewhere to have your hand held and your brow mopped, nobody is picking on you as a person, you are an anonymous stranger , it is your words that are being commented on. Might be worth remembering that.

It's not a fit for everyone, certainly not if you are sensitive to criticism. Also this forum is much bigger than the Duggar threads and I do think it is very condescending to try and inform, comment or criticise when your only posts span one topic.

Back to Duggargate, can't quote parts of posts as on phone.

Back a page or 2 or 3 I think it was Sassypants who mentioned the two women from the Duggar blog. I brought it up in the other thread about the advertising. I always wondered how 'insider' they were. I kind of looked on them as harmless super fans. Obviously snark worthy for that but relatively harmless. I now wonder how much of Duggar life they subscribe to, beliefs, religion etc. this trying to keep the show on at all costs, seems a bit more...... Less harmless?

Yeah I know, crap grammar :)

They always seemed a little creepy to me. I remember watching the video where the girl (Ellie?) was in the girls' room when Jessa did the hair tutorial. They seemed beyond irritated with her. I got the vibe that she bugged them a good bit.

[Buzzard]

I guess my original point was that if no police report exists and these crimes can be prosecuted until the minors are 28 then can't these still be prosecuted? What in the current law is stopping them from launching an investigation? Not a lawyer, sorry if I'm being dense in not understanding this. Is it that there may have been prosecution that has been sealed that was what Josh appealed? Because otherwise my thought is that a judge outright states no police report was made and the crimes don't violate SOL so you'd think his confession would be enough to at least start an investigation and potentially prosecute?

And sorry for my tone earlier. All I want is for people to be nicer to new people!!! I don't like being a jerk.

Most of the legal questions have been answered already so I won't rehash.

The judge can't make something "never exist." She ordered the physical report destroyed. That doesn't change the fact that a case number exists having been assigned to it, there exist records that are not subject to foia, and the memories of those involved.

Josh's actions, as released, do not fit any statute that qualify for the tolling of the statute of limitations in 2003.

Asleep does not qualify for the statute you cited, that's generally reserved for drugged or physically unable to move (coma, knocked out etc)

EVEN IF he did qualify for tolling he would be prosecuted AS A JUVENILE. Josh is not going to jail under the known allegations or any allegation made today short of rape.

I think I got everything. :wink-kitty:

[skulduggery]

Thanks for the story. And you know you're screwed if 20/20 is looking into you.

And related to there's some hinky stuff happening Dr. Phil and I have something in common (FINALLY!) he's saying there's more going on than we know about-- hence his way of butting into it for attention is offering to give a lie detector test to JB and Josh. Like that'll happen. But I'm thinking at least he's someone that has a conservative-ish audience maybe... oh who knows who watches him.

I wonder also if say you're conservative and you are in the anti-Josh camp, however, you are more anti-liberal biased media and liberals in general, are you more inclined to let the Duggars slide. Kind of like jury nullification?

Your welcome, anytime.

I vote that Dr. Phil is just butting into it for attention. But if he convinces Boobchelle and Josh to do lie detector tests, I will have a level of respect for him I never thought possible.

lol@jury nullification. That sounds about right!!!

[Nic]

Back to Duggargate, can't quote parts of posts as on phone.

Back a page or 2 or 3 I think it was Sassypants who mentioned the two women from the Duggar blog. I brought it up in the other thread about the advertising. I always wondered how 'insider' they were. I kind of looked on them as harmless super fans. Obviously snark worthy for that but relatively harmless. I now wonder how much of Duggar life they subscribe to, beliefs, religion etc. this trying to keep the show on at all costs, seems a bit more...... Less harmless?

Yeah I know, crap grammar :)

No they are more than superfans. I don't think they are best buddies, but they are friends and have "fellowshipped" with the Duggars. I think they were the ones filming when they did they hair tutorials. And they are an aggregate for pro-Duggar info, but I think they also get a few pics that's just theirs... or they snag them off the Duggar FB who knows.

They were invited to the weddings, but let's just say I'm not sure if they were to the TTH after party.

[mamallama]

I'm pretty sure this wasn't posted I searched and everything.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nat ... ders_N.htm

Interesting points under today's laws Josh would definitely have to register as a sex offender and that early sex education is a key to prevention. Duggar fail!

[DuggarCurls]

I also found:

At the 3:31 mark, a waitress at the restaurant that the Duggars were eating at said that they came last week with a family of 8 (the Holts) - starts at 3:40

Jim Holt explaining how he met JB starts at the 3:59 mark. (they met in 7th grade, both wanted to grow up and sell bibles and encyclopedias together in Kansas)

The Holts and Duggars are the "core" to the "homegrown church" every Sunday in the Duggar living room - starts at the 5:40 mark.

[bBvideo 560,340:3barwgxy]

[/bBvideo]

[nelliebelle1197]

Most of the legal questions have been answered already so I won't rehash.

The judge can't make something "never exist." She ordered the physical report destroyed. That doesn't change the fact that a case number exists having been assigned to it, there exist records that are not subject to foia, and the memories of those involved.

Josh's actions, as released, do not fit any statute that qualify for the tolling of the statute of limitations in 2003.

Asleep does not qualify for the statute you cited, that's generally reserved for drugged or physically unable to move (coma, knocked out etc)

EVEN IF he did qualify for tolling he would be prosecuted AS A JUVENILE. Josh is not going to jail under the known allegations or any allegation made today short of rape.

I think I got everything. :wink-kitty:

I am so glad you came back. I was about to dig through the bar directory to try to find you.

[Fascinated]

You also need to watch their videos in the youtube channel, specially the one forcing her kids to say how awesome is to be a Rodrigues child. :?

The video of Jill 'interviewing' her kids in the RV is truly one of the most upsetting things I've ever seen.

[Buzzard]

I'm pretty sure this wasn't posted I searched and everything.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nat ... ders_N.htm

Interesting points under today's laws Josh would definitely have to register as a sex offender and that early sex education is a key to prevention. Duggar fail!

Intervention is key, but I don't think Arkansas adopted a juvenile registry.

[Four is Enough]

I guess I went too fast on scrolling through the snarking on the snarkers, so... wait! Dr. Phil? I guess I should have expected him to jump in on this... he can't resist a good controversy, and this is so meaty!

[Snarkle Motion]

Most of the legal questions have been answered already so I won't rehash.

The judge can't make something "never exist." She ordered the physical report destroyed. That doesn't change the fact that a case number exists having been assigned to it, there exist records that are not subject to foia, and the memories of those involved.

Josh's actions, as released, do not fit any statute that qualify for the tolling of the statute of limitations in 2003.

Asleep does not qualify for the statute you cited, that's generally reserved for drugged or physically unable to move (coma, knocked out etc)

EVEN IF he did qualify for tolling he would be prosecuted AS A JUVENILE. Josh is not going to jail under the known allegations or any allegation made today short of rape.

I think I got everything. :wink-kitty:

Thank you for your explanation. While I understand that the report actually existed I guess from a legal perspective someone couldn't someone argue there is no police report and nothing preventing them from proceeding with prosecution? I'm fine with him being tried as a juvenile. I understand that they wouldn't be able to use the previous report findings too. My hope is that if any legal action can be brought forth the potential to call whitnesses may allow them to uncover other current abuse that otherwise may never be brought to light. The idea that he may continuing to abuse children scares me and I guess any sort of action that could get the ball rolling, even if it was somewhat dubiously claiming that no prior report had been made because it can no longer be located, could be worth it in the long run.

[OkToBeTakei]

They always seemed a little creepy to me. I remember watching the video where the girl (Ellie?) was in the girls' room when Jessa did the hair tutorial. They seemed beyond irritated with her. I got the vibe that she bugged them a good bit.

They seem to invest so much time on that site. That level of fan is always a bit creepy in my view.

It will be interesting to watch their reaction on the blog as I strongly suspect the show will be gone soon. The material will dry up, they like the Bates as well ...... Maybe their loyalty will shift.

[snickers1]

This thread just started! I was directed here from another thread. I couldn't find the thread where the Jim Holt comments were initially coming from. I just keep getting lost in all these threads and can't find what I'm looking for. After 25 minutes of searching I thought I'd ask. You people are really mean

I agree these people are really mean. I posted yesterday about the 5th victim I did'nt want her name only thought why her parent's did'nt report or were they also part of the church. Got blasted for "wanting to know who the 5th victim was". I won't post again.

[OodOnTheLoo]

New Duggar stories from Gawker!

http://defamer.gawker.com/jim-bobs-punishment-for-masturbators-crazy-duggar-tale-1707675683

(future sorry if this was already posted)

Literal tears. Cameras were there? I'll say it again, I hope the gosselin and Duggar kids sue the pants of TLC.

[SassyPants]

Literal tears. Cameras were there? I'll say it again, I hope the gosselin and Duggar kids sue the pants of TLC.

ME TOO!

[justbecause]

[Buzzard]

Thank you for your explanation. While I understand that the report actually existed I guess from a legal perspective someone couldn't someone argue there is no police report and nothing preventing them from proceeding with prosecution? I'm fine with him being tried as a juvenile. I understand that they wouldn't be able to use the previous report findings too. My hope is that if any legal action can be brought forth the potential to call whitnesses may allow them to uncover other current abuse that otherwise may never be brought to light. The idea that he may continuing to abuse children scares me and I guess any sort of action that could get the ball rolling, even if it was somewhat dubiously claiming that no prior report had been made because it can no longer be located, could be worth it in the long run.

The 5 known victims reported to the police. Their case is done. The only chance for prosecution is:

1) new victim who has never before made allegations AND the allegations are for crimes that would toll the statute AT THE TIME OF COMMISSION

Or

2) allegation from known victims that took place after the released investigation that were not reported to police and qualify to toll the statute at the time of the offense

Even if these things happen we are unlikely to ever know because he would be prosecuted in juvenile court for crimes that far in the past.

Edited to clarify- allegations from known victims would have to be new crimes