Yeah. I guess the real question is, did he want the death penalty for brothers who finger their little sisters, or for little sisters who tempt their brothers by salaciously being asleep?
And it was “a good movie” that you had to be at least 18 to see. In other news more advertisers. Warning that’s a video clip of Mama June at the end of the article, and she may actually have a point about TLC. Now that I’ve typed that I feel the urge to soak both my keypad and hands in bleach.
What I’m afraid of is what’s been discussed on Free Jinger: they’ll have specials where they make those poor girls tell the world how everything has been made okay because they’ve repented and prayed it all away. Just more being violated for them.
The local police chief had already released the report, as required by Arkansas law, with the girls’ names redacted, also as required by Arkansas law. That isn’t stopping one Arkansas state lawmaker from calling for that police chief’s head. From article at Raw Story:
Hester’s complaint is that the report identified the victims, which was illegal. In fact, according to this article, the girls’ names were redacted, but there was enough detail in the report to figure out who they were.
ETA: BTW, the judge who ordered the report destroyed wasn’t exactly appointed by Huckabee. When Huck was gov, he had appointed her to other various positions on one commission or committee or whatever.
Moving this over from the other thread, where I was starting a conversation with Aceplace about the statute of limitations. I think it really belongs here.
I thought that there are published reports that the case was outside the statute of limitations in 2006. According to this information, because the victims were under the age of 18, that is incorrect. Josh should have been prosecuted. It is unclear whether he should be prosecuted now (no statute of limitations for crimes against minors), or whether it gets dropped because he’s outside of the Juvenile court Jurisdiction. I’m not sure I follow the logic on no statute of limitations on the one hand, but not the other. It seems to me there is an implicit statement being made that these charges are so serious there’s no time limit. If you substitute in “murder”, or other crimes for which there is no time limit, how does the court handle the fact that someone was a minor at the time of the commission of the crime but is an adult when found?
If anyone knows anything about these aspects, I would like to know.
From what I read, with crimes against minors in Arkansas, the clock starts ticking on statute of limitations when the offense is reported to law enforcement. There are other limits as well, such as the crime must be prosecuted prior to the victim turning 26.
Since the Duggars reported this to the child porn guy, who was a police officer, the three year limit began than.
Should have looked it up before posting. For crimes against minors, the time limit starts when either the minor turns 18, or it is reported to law enforcement. Here is the actual verbiage of the law:
Someone actually interviewed that trooper in prison, and he claims that he was only told about one incident. I have no idea whether this would affect any charges which could be brought against any member of the family and he’d be pretty vulnerable to cross-examination, but no doubt law enforcement will be looking into it.
No good. Best case, it would have reset the clock for the other incidents to 2006 when Oprah’s people notified authorities. That still means that shipped sailed in 2009. They would have to find an incident that was never mentioned to police. It would probably need to be a brand new, never before mentioned victim to completely sever the connection to other incidents that were reported.
It’s true that the SoL is over, but if that new story is accurate, it does further go to prove just how lying, manipulative, disgusting and money hungry these people are.
The truly bizarre thing to me, is that in this family’s (and many of their supporters’) worldview, what Josh Duggar did was no worse than if he had made out with a girl his own age, or been looking at porn on the internet. Here is a twitter quote I read here:
That link goes to a blog by an ex-Quiverful woman who left that lifestyle. She has a pretty good breakdown of the mentality that sees no difference between molesting a 4 year old and having consensual sex outside of wedlock.
If there’s any good news out of all this, at least 19 (heh) sponsors so far have pulled their advertising support. That includes Ace Hardware, David’s Bridal, General Mills, Payless Shoes, CVS, Walgreens, H&R Block, Jimmy Dean, Behr, Party City, Ricola and Keurig among the biggies.
In other news more advertisers. Warning that’s a video clip of Mama June at the end of the article, and she may actually have a point about TLC. Now that I’ve typed that I feel the urge to soak both my keypad and hands in bleach.
Just more being violated for them.