Jana Duggar 13: I Don't Think She Will :(

[gustava]

3 hours ago, pyjamabanana said:

Was there not an episode where a small kid got their head stuck in the stair railing? Maybe something similar and they had to get fire services involved this time? I would still consider it unfortunate and not criminal, but I am no Arkansas lawyer.

Yes, and Meech found it amusing, IIRC.  One of the boys.

[Mama Mia]

I would very much appreciate it if the Duggar borg would halt their War on Christmas - I have presents to buy and crafts to do…they need to chill out. 

[Satan'sFortress]

Did not expect this story. Geez. And they are going in age order, too.  If I were JD, I think I would be very worried.

[JillRodsEyeliner]

17 minutes ago, gustava said:

Yes, and Meech found it amusing, IIRC.  One of the boys.

That one time one of the Lost Boys fell down an orchestra pit. Poor kid had tons of cameras in his face.

[Father Son Holy Goat]

At this point I want to search all the other Duggar names, anyone else?

[nausicaa]

5 hours ago, EyesOpen said:

Although she does know her address and name she got very scared and wouldn’t talk… and she peed her pants.

Aw! This is so sad and adorable all at once. 

[moreorlessnu]

24 minutes ago, Mama Mia said:

I would very much appreciate it if the Duggar borg would halt their War on Christmas - I have presents to buy and crafts to do…they need to chill out. 

...I'm afraid to put my Christmas cookies in the oven...

[ifosterkittens]

Emily D Baker briefly covered this tonight on Friday Night Live. She said she does not know the circumstances, but it could be Jana left the kid in the car while she ran into the store. Someone said they heard Jana fell asleep while watching the kid, and the kid wandered into a busy street, and Emily said that could fit as well. Emily said when more information is released she'll cover it, but it is a misdemeanor, and not what she spends time covering. She suspects because of Josh's conviction someone went looking for anyone else with the same last name. 

[HerNameIsBuffy]

Whomever selected that pic hates her.

[Sabine]

1 minute ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

Whomever selected that pic hates her.

what picture?

[HerNameIsBuffy]

Just now, Sabine said:

what picture?

In the article linked above.  

[Smee]

I'm really curious now. It's in an awkward place of being something too significant to be let off with just a warning (i.e. she was actually charged) yet minor enough that it carries a max 90 days jail time. Everything I've heard (falling asleep, losing a kid, driving without a car seat) has been pure speculation.

[browngrl]

What?! Jana is in trouble with the law? I did not see this coming. What is next? One of the unmarrieds has an unplanned pregnancy? 

[JermajestyDuggar]

The first week of Bontrager family camp in Iowa was taking place September 9th. I’m not positive if the Duggars went the first or second week of family camp. I doubt they went both weeks. Usually only the Bontragers and Wissmanns do both weeks. I say this only because Jana could have been one of the few adults home at that time of the Duggars were away at family camp on Sept 9.

[Freejin]

1 hour ago, Anne Of Gray Gables said:

She pled not guilty. Hearing is in January.

Definition from the Arkansas Code is below. 

  Hide contents

5-27-207. Endangering the welfare of a minor in the third degree.

(a) (1) A person commits the offense of endangering the welfare of a minor in the third degree if the person recklessly engages in conduct creating a substantial risk of serious harm to the physical or mental welfare of a person known by the actor to be a minor.

(2) As used in this section, "serious harm to the physical or mental welfare" means physical or mental injury that causes:

(A) Protracted disfigurement;

(B) Protracted impairment of physical or mental health; or

(C) Loss or protracted impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ.

(b) Endangering the welfare of a minor in the third degree is a Class B misdemeanor

.

Thank you for this. This description sounds way more serious than people are making it seem. Am I off base?

[Smee]

5 minutes ago, Freejin said:

Thank you for this. This description sounds way more serious than people are making it seem. Am I off base?

It does sound serious, but technically a broken finger could count as "protracted impairment of the function of any bodily member". It does sound like something bad actually HAPPENED to said child though, not just that they were found somewhere they shouldn't have been? 

[llucie]

1 minute ago, Smee said:

It does sound serious, but technically a broken finger could count as "protracted impairment of the function of any bodily member". It does sound like something bad actually HAPPENED to said child though, not just that they were found somewhere they shouldn't have been? 

Just means there was a substancial risk (like for example being on a road), there doesnt need to be an actual injury.

[Freejin]

7 minutes ago, llucie said:

Just means there was a substancial risk (like for example being on a road), there doesnt need to be an actual injury.

The description above makes it sound like there needs to be an actual injury. Not the possibility of one. 

[SamanthasMom]

Everything we know about the Duggars makes me not want to minimize this. Yes, it could be an unbuckled child or one that wandered, but many people have mentioned having these types of incidents happen with their children and they received warnings or a fine for a missing car seat. I think the apple didn’t fall far from the tree when it comes to safely caring for children.

Edited December 11, 2021 by SamanthasMom

[llucie]

Just now, Freejin said:

The description above makes it sound like there needs to be an actual injury. Not the possibility of one. 

It doesnt? it says:  conduct creating a substantial risk of serious harm. That means there was a risk of harm that could be serious, for example th risk of being run over by a car if the kid is in a road.

[older than allosaurs]

7 hours ago, FiveAcres said:

 I once found a toddler in the middle of the road in my rural neighborhood. I parked in the middle of the road and put my hazard lights on to protect me and toddler from any cars and got out of the car. (Visibility was very good there.) I decided I should call 911 to alert the sheriff that I had found a toddler and didn't know her family. About ten seconds later a hyperventilating man showed up saying "we just took our eyes off her for a moment!" Her family was visiting her grandparents.

It can happen so fast. I had to bring my then preschooler to a meeting at a community hall decades ago. I set her up with her toys, sat down, and it seemed like seconds later she had vanished  ... out the front door, down onto the street (right in front of a stop sign, thankfully) where she was standing with her arms up to stop a logging truck, reveling in her power. 

It could have been me with that court date and I would have been guilty as charged. 

 

[Freejin]

1 minute ago, llucie said:

It doesnt? it says:  conduct creating a substantial risk of serious harm. That means there was a risk of harm that could be serious, for example th risk of being run over by a car if the kid is in a road.

Yes, you’re right. I was reading it wrong. Thanks for the clarification. 

[Lista]

4 hours ago, Chickenbutt said:

I swear I remember that. I am looking around FJ on and off to see if I can find it. 

Not the only one. I remember it too. 

[Jana814]

1 hour ago, JillRodsEyeliner said:

That one time one of the Lost Boys fell down an orchestra pit. Poor kid had tons of cameras in his face.

I remember that. I felt so bad for the kid. 

[Freejin]

Is this the type of case where details will eventually be made public or is that not the case for misdemeanors?