Josh Duggar, Admitted Child Molester - Part 9

[JenniferJuniper]

Mentally ill people are allowed to file lawsuits just like everyone else.

But it's irresponsible for OK and Radar to treat this like it's a real story. It isn't.

[0KidsAndHappy]

I don't doubt he has done this more than we've been told, but this man sounds like he is trying to steal away some of Jonathan Lee Riches' (the original prison bae :lol: ) fame. I'm honestly surprised he hasn't sued Jim Bob and Michelle for stealing his 19 children.

[halcionne]

I don't doubt he has done this more than we've been told, but this man sounds like he is trying to steal away some of Jonathan Lee Riches' (the original prison bae :lol: ) fame. I'm honestly surprised he hasn't sued Jim Bob and Michelle for stealing his 19 children.

To each their own. :? I'd never heard of this guy so I looked him up and he doesn't float my boat.

[ILoveJellybeans]

More victims??? I hope not, but I think it is possible. He seemed to take any chance he could get, and it isn't outside of the realm of possibility that in that time period, Josh found the opportunity to molest sleeping girls more times than he confessed to.

I think this guy's insane ramblings are bullshit though. Why are they treating it as if it is news. Its obviously false.

[apandaaries]

For the record, that's not *the* pedophile cop, and he made a lot of ridiculous accusations, my favorite being that Josh threw Baby Jessica down the well. :lol:

Link above ultimately leads to this story: http://radaronline.com/celebrity-news/j ... e-victims/

Josh has been FAR busier than even the craziest FJ speculations could have imagined!

It's rather shameful they're treating this as though it's news, but anything for click-bait, I suppose.

[goldfishgoddess]

Meh. :whistle:

[princessmahina]

This kind of thing is what is going to start earning the Duggars sympathy. I know OK is just a business and trying to cash in on the Duggar scandal, but they need to cut the crap. Unless magazines actually have new, real information, I think they should leave the family alone. Parading them constantly is going to give them a platform to claim persecution and try to rebuild their fan base.

[Eleemosynary]

For the record, that's not *the* pedophile cop, andhe made a lot of ridiculous accusations, my favorite being that Josh threw Baby Jessica down the well. :lol:

Link above ultimately leads to this story: http://radaronline.com/celebrity-news/j ... e-victims/

I thought you were joking. Then I read the article. Wow. Next he'll be, to quote Dr. Evil, "accusing chestnuts if being lazy." :wtf:

[Emelsu]

I don't doubt that Josh has more victims. I wouldn't be shocked at all if that was found out. But obviously this guy has some mental issues. Josh is already getting sympathy, the people from my parents church that I'm friends with on facebook keep posting their support for him because he's "being attacked". This is just helping fuel their sympathy and support for Josh. I hope a real story comes out soon with proof like In Touch claimed they would have.

[DGayle]

For the record, that's not *the* pedophile cop, and he made a lot of ridiculous accusations, my favorite being that Josh threw Baby Jessica down the well. :lol:

Link above ultimately leads to this story: http://radaronline.com/celebrity-news/j ... e-victims/

I wonder how he threw Jessica down that well before he was even conceived! Time travel. It exists!

[DGayle]

For the record, that's not *the* pedophile cop, and he made a lot of ridiculous accusations, my favorite being that Josh threw Baby Jessica down the well. :lol:

Link above ultimately leads to this story: http://radaronline.com/celebrity-news/j ... e-victims/

I wonder how he threw Jessica down that well before he was even conceived! Time travel. It exists!

[DGayle]

Mentally ill people are allowed to file lawsuits just like everyone else.

If it becomes habitual, though, they should be required to have an attorney willing to back the case to help weed out the cases like this that are so meritless that they're guaranteed lost from the start, while costing a lot of taxpayer money.

[JenniferJuniper]

If it becomes habitual, though, they should be required to have an attorney willing to back the case to help weed out the cases like this that are so meritless that they're guaranteed lost from the start, while costing a lot of taxpayer money.

Not sure that would be constitutional.

[DGayle]

Not sure that would be constitutional.

It's ENTIRELY constitutional to require a vexatious litigant to have to have a backing attorney or permission from a judge. It's hard as fuck to get declared a vexatious litigant, and it takes filing a LOT of bogus lawsuits. Riches was declared vexatious, but he got off easy--he's simply no longer allowed to file fee waivers. If you abuse a legal right at the expense of others, you can absolutely lose it.

[Rachel333]

“Josh Duggar works under direct orders from Warren Jeffs,†Uber asserts, before rambling, “Josh Duggar molested the Slenderman girls in Wisconsin … Josh Duggar threw Baby Jessica in my well. Josh Duggar hurt Chandra Levy. Josh Duggar was pen pals with Elizabeth Smart. … Josh Duggar knows what happened to Jon Benet Ramsey.â€

Sounds like Josh has been getting around! Pretty impressive of him to throw Baby Jessica in this guy's well since he wasn't even born when the event happened. And what's so evil about being pen pals with Elizabeth Smart? :lol:

[HarleyQuinn]

This bullshit is going to make people take pity on the Duggars. I never thought I'd say this, but OK and Radar should let In Touch stick to the reporting on the Duggars.

[iheartchacos]

This bullshit is going to make people take pity on the Duggars. I never thought I'd say this, but OK and Radar should let In Touch stick to the reporting on the Duggars.

This is how I feel. they don't need anymore leghumpers.

[skulduggery]

Here are some articles that question whether Judge Zimmerman may be overstepping her authority in ordering the destruction of Josh's police record and denying FOIA requests about the Duggar family.

Links not broken because they are news sites:

http://www.inquisitr.com/2171661/new-pr ... struction/

Now the Springdale Police Department is under fire again for responding to a request under FOIA law — it seems that Judge Zimmerman issued additional orders, forbidding the department to release anything pertaining to the Duggar family. Unfortunately, that additional order somehow didn’t make it to the police, who say they only became aware of the additional orders after releasing the Duggar 911 call.

http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2015/jun/ ... kansas-nwa

The Northwest Arkansas Democrat-Gazette sought to intervene on Friday as well.

"We're very mindful of the need to protect the identities of children who become involved in the juvenile court system. But the public also must have the ability to evaluate the performance of its government at all levels through the inspection of public records," said Rusty Turner, editor of the newspaper.

"When a juvenile court attempts to extend its veil of secrecy to other sectors of the government, the citizens' ability to evaluate how it operates is compromised. We want the opportunity to make that argument to the court."

So, what part of Freedom of Information is this judge not willing to respect? Where in the FOIA does it state that a judge can deny the release of public records based on her own personal discretion? Doesn't that go against everything the Freedom of Information Act stands for in the first place?

And why are the Duggars so special and exempt from the laws of the land that apparently apply to everyone else but them? Rhetorical question: would it have anything to do with the fact that they're white, rich, Christian, and television celebrities that they can pretty much do whatever they want without close examination or criticism? And that no matter how horribly they behave, they can assume the status of victims while targets of their hateful speech go unnoticed and unempathized with.

The fact that this judge can reframe the entire situation about this being about the Duggar's privacy is so gross. There's just no other word for it. As far as I'm concerned, she's a complicit party in this entire fiasco.

[skulduggery]

I read about his lawsuit on another site, and the things he is claiming are absurd. No self respecting magazine or tabloid should reprint his allegations without also acknowledging how ridiculous they are.

So far I have been impressed with how In Touch Weekly has been reporting about the Duggars. Hopefully they don't give any credibility to this story without showing there's substantial proof to back it up.

[halcionne]

I'm beginning to agree with your assessment of Judge Zimmerman. I was uncomfortable with her telling the sheriff's department that her order covered their report. And she (I think it was her? could be someone else except she initialed it, if I'm looking at it right) is the one who added unnecessary information imo to the order to expunge.

[NoneandDoneinCali]

Earlier at the store, I saw that JB and Of JB were on the cover of In Touch again. I felt bad looking at it without buying it lol. But it said something about them hiring a lawyer for something.

[RosyDaisy]

FYI: Barnes and Noble is offering a $5.00 gift card for purchasing annual subscriptions to select magazines. Ok, Us Weekly and a few others are on that list. If you don't have a Nook, you can download the Nook app.

Edited because didn't read the thread.

[karen77]

Bill Maher has some commentary!

http://www.real-time-with-bill-maher-bl ... nt-have-to

[amster]

Josh is back on Instagram. He posted a happy birthday message to Michael https://instagram.com/p/3-UCZzOWEu/

[hennypenny]

Here are some articles that question whether Judge Zimmerman may be overstepping her authority in ordering the destruction of Josh's police record and denying FOIA requests about the Duggar family.

Links not broken because they are news sites:

http://www.inquisitr.com/2171661/new-pr ... struction/

http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2015/jun/ ... kansas-nwa

So, what part of Freedom of Information is this judge not willing to respect? Where in the FOIA does it state that a judge can deny the release of public records based on her own personal discretion? Doesn't that go against everything the Freedom of Information Act stands for in the first place?

And why are the Duggars so special and exempt from the laws of the land that apparently apply to everyone else but them? Rhetorical question: would it have anything to do with the fact that they're white, rich, Christian, and television celebrities that they can pretty much do whatever they want without close examination or criticism? And that no matter how horribly they behave, they can assume the status of victims while targets of their hateful speech go unnoticed and unempathized with.

The fact that this judge can reframe the entire situation about this being about the Duggar's privacy is so gross. There's just no other word for it. As far as I'm concerned, she's a complicit party in this entire fiasco.

Wasn't that judge the one that presided over the juvenile cps case. She was the juvenile judge at the time. Maybe she's got something to hide. Idk.

I really do hate all of these cousin humpers covering up all of the scandal. It's all very unseemly.