The cop was a child pornographer? I hadn't heard that. Where did you get that from?
It WAS reported in the past. That's what you're not getting.
They were told it would not be. They expected privacy because they were told it would be private.
So, 4 people, in your opinion, say it is not a big deal.
No, the reason people can figure it out is that a report that was promised to the victims to remain private was not kept private. A lot of things about them remain private, just like every other famous person, but this was not kept in confidence as promised to the victims. That some sleazebag company chose to take what should, to any reasonable person, be private information and made it public is why we know if it. It's very much like those starlets who took nude photos and then someone hacked their private accounts to make those pictures public. No one would know about them if they weren't starlets, and the hack was a known fault in the system, so it's really their own faults, right? NOT
I was unaware of this, that is true. I don't see how it negates the fact that the Duggars went to the police three years before the police report was made, but you don't really worry about the core issues, you like to obfuscate the real issues with side ones like these. It fits your MO.
you want to show where they were promised this document would not be a public record? or maybe show how that promise was conveyed?
The duggars hand chose that cop based on the reccomendation of a friend. That cop didn't do anything about it and later turned out to be a child porn lover. Yeah, i'd say that factors in. I would also say that it is mighty suspicious that they just happened to choose a perv to "confess to" and that they didn't take Josh back to the police after his second and third 'confession".
This is just getting more entertaining for me.
Releasing the information is horrific sleazebag stuff. Whether the family is known to twenty million people because they are on TV or twenty people because everybody knows somebody, it was private, intimate information that benefits no one to be released but unquestionably harms at least the victims. Whether it was legal to release and publish (which is highly suspect) or not, it was sleazy to do.
How does it factor in that a police officer who was not charged at that point and was recommended to the family was who they went to? How does that change that you believe they should have gone to the police and they did?
Fish in a barrel.
Once again, doing YOUR homework, and now with your own words; that you seem to have no memory writing. You should get that fixed:
Of course you're going to deny that this is what you're saying; but I think most of us are pretty clear about your view of the Duggars.
We get that think this was a serious crime. We get that you would had your child (if you had one; which it's obvious you don't) you'd have your own child thrown in prison and put your own son on (in your own words) "a sex offenders list". We get that you would have your own 14 year old son "prosecuted and ostracized".
See, most of us who are REALLY parents have a more rational way dealing with family problems; and that is to discipline, counsel, punish, and (when necessary, get our children help. You're the type that feels you have some right to inject yourself into the business of other peoples' families. You think you have some sort of ownership over peoples' lives. Most of us just want to get through our family issues, and YES, cover up our dirty laundry because, quite frankly.............. IT'S NONE OF YOUR DAMN BUSINESS. The Duggars dealt with it in their own way. How they dealt with it worked for them. The kids went on with NORMAL lives with their own families and don't need people like you coming along and trying to dictate to them how they should deal with their own problems.
You try to portray yourself as some conservative libertarian, when it's blatantly clear that you're nothing but a progressive, get-government-involved-in-everything, activist, busybody.
Let me guess, his arguments are straw man arguments and you're getting bored with this, amiright?
Oh I know… everyone is wrong even when everyone is telling you you’re wrong. Someone help me... there is a psychological term for this.
I think you’ve made your point clear. Let us know when you have a 14 year and he does something really stupid. I want to go visit him in jail hear what he has to say about DADDY putting him there because he got curious about girls and went a little too far.
Everyone huh? By my count most have no opinion or are staying out of it and there are 4 or 5 on each side. But you can count that as 'everyone' if you want
You have made your point clear too. You would hide your son's criminal activity even when he repeats it numerous times and violates 5 different grls and you would teach him to not take personal responsibility for his actions.
Releasing the information is horrific sleazebag stuff. Whether the family is known to twenty million people because they are on TV or twenty people because everybody knows somebody, it was private, intimate information that benefits no one to be released but unquestionably harms at least the victims. Whether it was legal to release and publish (which is highly suspect) or not, it was sleazy to do.
How does it factor in that a police officer who was not charged at that point and was recommended to the family was who they went to? How does that change that you believe they should have gone to the police and they did?
I read your posts on the matter and you are such a liar! YOU said this was just playing doctor.(Post 126) YOU said this was a "kid feeling up another kid".(Posts 167 and 175) Are you that afraid of being wrong that you have to lie abou things?
