27 Dresses - I Mean Duggar Threads (Now, with Duggar women lawsuit discussion!)

[Coconut Flan]

7 hours ago, Jinder Roles said:

As previously stated, it was probably not very ethical to release the report without their knowledge.

As Velociraptor said the police department did notify the Duggars of the FOIA request and IIRC it was about two weeks that the department worked on the redactions and getting legal clearance.  Two weeks in a small town is plenty of time to get an emergency injunction if that would have been a legal option.  My guess is that they couldn't legally block the FOIA release. 

[Cleopatra7]

To me, the only thing that was shocking about the InTouch exposé was that it took as long as it did for it to happen. People had been discussing "Alice"'s allegations for years, even if they were dismissed. Josh's crimes appear to have been an open secret in ATI circles and the NWA fundegelical scene in general. Plus, the Duggars were local celebrities before TLC arrived on the scene. JB and Michelle must have been convinced that no one would ever find out about the molestations to be gunning so hard for a reality show.

[luv2laugh]

Holy shit look at this!! Anchors are fighting to interview the 4 girls and they're looking for 10-15 million settlement $$$$!!!!

They want a Gawker takedown a la Hulk Hogan settlement style!

[VelociRapture]

@singsingsingI was the one who pointed out how much redacting would have been needed. I pointed it out because it's true - they literally would have had to black out close to everything. No, the job of the redactor isn't to satisfy the public or appease the media. I never said or implied that.

The reports appear to have been legally requested under FOIA though. If the redacting that was done meets the requirements for their state (and I don't know whether or not it does) then I don't see how they could win their lawsuit. I could see the argument made that laws should be clarified to really protect victims in that instance though and I do not necessarily think that's a bad idea (as long as it's done right and doesn't mess up anything to do with Government accountability.)

Your personal suggestion of a summary would have been far kinder and more merciful to the victims - there were still rumors bouncing around the internet about Josh harming his sisters and I think people could have still guessed that he harmed some of them based off the fact that he wouldn't have had access to many non-family females. But it would have been purely speculative and the family probably could have ignored it or denied the rumors easily (even if they were true.)

However, as you pointed out, I don't know if a summary would have been sufficient under Arkansas' FOIA Law. They may require that the actual documents be redacted and released.

Finally, I don't necessarily disagree with them filing the lawsuit in general. They have the right to file the lawsuit if they feel it's warranted.

[BackseatMom]

It's not about money? Hmm, well, it wasn't about protecting victims of sexual abuse when Boob and Mullet failed to stop the abuse the first time the heard learned about it, and failed to get any of their children meaningful help afterwards. It wasn't about the victims when they started a reality show a few years later knowing full well this whole episode was only a few inches beneath the surface. It certainly wasn't about the victims when they made their married daughters do the Kelly interview. So... When hasn't it been about the money?

[Four is Enough]

It'll fall out like this:

Attorneys: $5 mill

Jim Bob: $5 mill

Girls: $divide up the other 5 mill.. IF they get the entire settlement, which I doubt.

[2manyKidzzz]

I wonder who will get the interview. Can't wait. Will they get paid for that? Do networks pay for these things? 

[VineHeart137]

Those TLC paychecks must not be cutting it anymore.

[Gobsmacked]

I might be a bit daft,but won't this whole shennanagins bring newly "repentant" Joshly back into the headlines big style??

Not fair on Anna at all. She is trying to make her sham of a marriage work. A 5th M kid on the way, then this! 

The Duggars parents are so blinded by $$$$ that they cannot see/don't really care about Anna.  I really hope that Anna's  brother will be able to persuade her to go back to Florida and that her daft parents can start to look after her properly.

Big hopes I know, but miracles can happen sometimes.

[neurogirl]

I doubt the 4 will say things in the exclusive interview that Jessa and Jill did not already say in the first exclusive interview...JB and J'chelle are pimping out their daughters YET AGAIN for money.

[luv2laugh]

These people are greedier than the Wall Street bankers I know.  I hope they fail miserably. 

8 minutes ago, 2manyKidzzz said:

I wonder who will get the interview. Can't wait. Will they get paid for that? Do networks pay for these things? 

Please don't watch their disgusting interview. I hope they won't be paid but they probably will be $$$.

[mango_fandango]

Can I just ask a random question here: how come we get two different places mentioned when it comes to where the Duggars live? Sometimes it's Springdale and sometimes it's Tontitown. I googled and they're right next to each other.

Likewise the Gardner family (the one with the quads). Their FB page lists their location as Pleasant Grove, Utah but when they appeared on the Ellen Show Ellen said "from Orem, Utah". Pleasant Grove and Orem are close but not right next door to each other like Springdale and Tontitown are.

Dunno what to say about lawsuit. I would say it's all gone tits-up in Duggarland but it's been like that for a while.

[Carm_88]

15 million? Holy shit!  Derick and Jill could go on a praycation for a long time with a portion of that.  

[VixenToast]

Wait... wut? No sympathies from me, just thinking it's fishy they're doing this now that all the victims have been sold off as chattel married (or in Joy's case, soon-to-be). Just so much wow.

[Cleopatra7]

It seems like Jill and Jessa's past statements contradict what they're saying now. If the molestations were "mild, inappropriate touching" as they claimed in the Megyn Kelly interview, why are they now claiming they were sexual assaults. If the InTouch interview was a breach of privacy, how do they square that with being on a so-called reality show and why didn't they file this suit when Joshgate 1.0 happened? I am no degreed legal professional, but it seems like the Duggar "girls" have enough rope to hang themselves.

[HWest]

I think you are on to something Vixen Toast about the timing of the lawsuit. The Duggars needed to get the victims settled into marriages before filing the lawsuit and it needed to be done before the statute of limitations expired. Also TLC may have known the suit was coming down the Pike and timed the new season to begin when publicity was high. All a shameful money grab by the network and the parents but what else is new? The only parties who should be sued are the parents who imprisioned their children, brainwashed them and exploited them shamelessly for every dime they could collect. Others have expressed this much better than me. Sad all the way around.

[singsingsing]

33 minutes ago, VelociRapture said:

@singsingsingI was the one who pointed out how much redacting would have been needed. I pointed it out because it's true - they literally would have had to black out close to everything. No, the job of the redactor isn't to satisfy the public or appease the media. I never said or implied that.

No, and I didn't think that the person whose comment I was referencing (which turns out to be you!) was implying that at all. I was just using that vaguely remembered comment as a jumping off point for my personal stream of consciousness re: redaction.  

[eveandadam]

22 minutes ago, Cleopatra7 said:

It seems like Jill and Jessa's past statements contradict what they're saying now. If the molestations were "mild, inappropriate touching" as they claimed in the Megyn Kelly interview, why are they now claiming they were sexual assaults. If the InTouch interview was a breach of privacy, how do they square that with being on a so-called reality show and why didn't they file this suit when Joshgate 1.0 happened? I am no degreed legal professional, but it seems like the Duggar "girls" have enough rope to hang themselves.

But their whole life is a contradiction in itself.

sexual assault  - mild inappropriate touching

wanting privacy - being reality tv stars

being a woman - activily trying to get women's rights cut

saying they are modest - talking about sex/relationships all the time

.

.

.

the list is endless

[Casserole]

Jessa's gotta put in work for that bigger house, y'all. JB isn't just going to hand it to her. 

 

While I still feel for them as victims and wish they would sue their parents... I just can't get behind this lawsuit because it feels like an icky money grab with JB's paws all over it. 

[Tatar-tot]

 I am sitting here scratching my head trying to reconcile what is going on.  Previously all the family including the girls went on and on about how they are forgiven Josh and moved on.  

Filling the lawsuit tells me loud and clear no one has moved on.  The girls do not care if this may hurt Anna as everything gets dragged up again.  The girls have not forgiven Josh for the trauma he  has caused them, and, want Josh to feel the pain again as they line their pocketbooks with cash.  

Finally Jim-Bob and Michele realize that Josh is damaged goods.  They want Josh punished in every way possible.  In addition JB/M feel they have absolutely no responsibility for Josh's behavior as a teen, and continue to treat him as a someone with scarlet letter tattooed on his chest. 

If the  family had even an ounce of forgiveness in their souls this lawsuit would not be taking place.  Dragging the entire family thru this craziness once again is not worth any potential pay off.

[mpheels]

53 minutes ago, Four is Enough said:

It'll fall out like this:

Attorneys: $5 mill

Jim Bob: $5 mill

Girls: $divide up the other 5 mill.. IF they get the entire settlement, which I doubt.

I hope the attorneys working for InTouch can see through Jim Bob's motivations, and stipulate that any settlement $$ goes into trusts accessible only to the four sisters, based on JB/Michelle's failure to properly respond to the initial molestation incidents. They could even increase the amount of $$ offered - either the Duggars accept and undercut JB's cash grab, or they reject the offer and publicly expose JB's methods for controlling his adult children. 

[snickers34]

6 minutes ago, mpheels said:

I hope the attorneys working for InTouch can see through Jim Bob's motivations, and stipulate that any settlement $$ goes into trusts accessible only to the four sisters, based on JB/Michelle's failure to properly respond to the initial molestation incidents.

OMG, I would pay big money to see this. They win the lawsuit, they're all happy, then the judge stipulates that JB is the initial douchecanoe that could have prevented all of this in the first place by stopping Josh earlier and therefore can't access a dime.

[Imagine20]

These women have been robbed of their agency their entire lives because they were born female. That's why Josh got away with it. Their lives are mapped out for them. It's why they can't have most jobs outside the home or get a decent education. It's why they are joyfully available and never raise their voices. It's why they have a headship to follow. They don't even have the agency to feel any emotion besides happy. I don't think they ever had a choice in how to label what happened to them. (Inappropriate touching? Sexual assault?)

In my opinion, I don't think they had the choice on whether to file this suit or not, either. I don't think their headships had the choice, either. 

If they feel passionately about victim's rights, I wish they would use their platform to speak out against sexual assault, especially between family members and family friends. It happens so often, and they could raise awareness and do so much good, but... they won't. 

[Kittikatz]

@VelociRapture from what I recall, Joy applied to have the documents related to her statement destroyed, which is apparently something that minors can do in Arkansas. I'm not sure if that really means all copies are deleted/shredded or if it just means something more like sealing - a declaration that the document is officially deemed destroyed and can no longer be used.

@singsingsing I can see where you are coming from, but most FOI laws don't allow for the creation of new or summary documents of specific records unless the applicant has requested and it is in the interests of transparency for the public body to provide information in that format. Usually, summary information is easier to provide in the case of financials - applicant wants information showing all expenditures made for purchases by x public body in the 2016 calender year. In that case, it may be effective for both parties to just give the applicant a summary sheet by vendor rather than the actual receipts, purchase orders and invoices. If the applicant specifically requests those background documents, then they would need to be pulled and redacted as appropriate (this can take months, and could result in tens of thousands of dollars in fees to the applicant - not really aiding in the whole government transparency thing). Just thinking of that makes my eyes cross, but it happens. In the case of a request for access to victim/witnessed statements it would be almost impossible to provide a summary sheet - it's too subjective and 'soft'. It could also be seen as inappropriate, because the person creating the summary would essentially be putting words in the victim's mouths.

[HarleyQuinn]

"It's not about the money"

*asks for 15 Million*

Good lord, these people. 

Also no way they let anyone other than Fox News or maybe the Today Show interview them. They can't risk having a journalist ask tough questions.