Would you expect anything different from those sort of people?
Would you expect anything different from those sort of people?
Thanks for that link."We have to distinguish between sexualized behavior that might be pretty normal — experimenting, touching each other — versus molesting, subjecting another child to harm," she said. She recalled investigations of children as young as 7, and the arrest of an 8-year-old.
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-01-07/child-sex-abuse/52431616/1
Milkweed said:It is good for society to realize that the majority of these kids are not sexual psycopaths and most are unlikely to re-offend. While I feel disgust with the Duggarts lifestyle in general, it appears the methods they chose to educate Josh worked. He stopped feeling up his sisters. And that is the desired outcome after all isnt it?
Yes, he’s a violent offender, a serial rapist, toss him under the jail and throw away the key. Just describing his offenses makes one shudder. He touched his clothed sisters and a friend on possibly ten occasions, and likely touched some skin on two of them. Except for one, these were girls he had been innocently touching countless times for their entire lives, but on these select occasions he had evil in his mind, evil mind you, and his hands violated sacred territory. The sacred nature of this territory is such that if violated to any degree without permission, extreme physical and emotional damage will occur to the host body. Such horrendous violation makes all other forms of violation pale by comparison.So let me get this straight:
Beause a study says a vast majority of young abusers are less prone to recidivism, we should ignore Josh Duggar's recidivism that is already on record?
Advocates tend to exaggerate a situation for their own purposes and there is the whole inherent bias thing we all face. I dont like the Duggarts lifestyle but am aware of my own bias. You dont like the Duggarts lifestyle either but have your own reasons for ignoring your own bias' in this matter.So let me get this straight:
Beause a study says a vast majority of young abusers are less prone to recidivism, we should ignore Josh Duggar's recidivism that is already on record?
According to the police report, Josh molested several of his sisters and one other girl. This wasn't a one off. He offended over the course of a year. He was allowed to molest for what? Two lots of sexual molestation. He was punished after the second lot of molestation. He then went on to molest his 5 year old sister and possibly more, since the parents advised there were other instances where molested in that timeframe, but failed to advise how many or who. It was then that it finally dawned on them that they had to protect their daughters and they sent him away to a so called treatment center that wasn't a treatment center and they continued to lie about it. His pattern of abuse fits every definition of recidivism. Why? Because he continued to molest children after he was punished and knew it was wrong. Experts agree, this was not a mistake.Advocates tend to exaggerate a situation for their own purposes and there is the whole inherent bias thing we all face. I dont like the Duggarts lifestyle but am aware of my own bias. You dont like the Duggarts lifestyle either but have your own reasons for ignoring your own bias' in this matter.
Josh doesnt qualify under the term recidivism. I have seen no evidence that after Josh was shipped away for 'counseling' there were further incidents so his 'treatment' worked. Come up with something new and I will reconsider. But until then you should take heed to the words of professionals:
..."Now that the data has shown most of those assumptions were wrong, it's difficult to undo those messages that people in the advocacy and treatment fields were putting out a generation ago."...
Your beliefs are behind the curve.
You are still trying to excuse and normalise sexual molestation of children?Yes, he’s a violent offender, a serial rapist, toss him under the jail and throw away the key. Just describing his offenses makes one shudder. He touched his clothed sisters and a friend on possibly ten occasions, and likely touched some skin on two of them. Except for one, these were girls he had been innocently touching countless times for their entire lives, but on these select occasions he had evil in his mind, evil mind you, and his hands violated sacred territory. The sacred nature of this territory is such that if violated to any degree without permission, extreme physical and emotional damage will occur to the host body. Such horrendous violation makes all other forms of violation pale by comparison.
I’m in total agreement; this was an example of recidivism in the extreme, he must have been corrected many times throughout his childhood for inappropriate touching, yet he ignored his correction and continued these endeavors to satisfy his evil impulses. Josh likely molested every one in the house as they slept, including the family pets. Moving from one room to the next for hours every night, for at least a year, and possibly from the time he first learned to crawl as an infant. And then he compounded the offense by only confessing to a relatively few instances, thereby depriving his victims of rightful ownership of additional grief and suffering. His behavior was truly monstrous.According to the police report, Josh molested several of his sisters and one other girl. This wasn't a one off. He offended over the course of a year. He was allowed to molest for what? Two lots of sexual molestation. He was punished after the second lot of molestation. He then went on to molest his 5 year old sister and possibly more, since the parents advised there were other instances where molested in that timeframe, but failed to advise how many or who. It was then that it finally dawned on them that they had to protect their daughters and they sent him away to a so called treatment center that wasn't a treatment center and they continued to lie about it. His pattern of abuse fits every definition of recidivism. Why? Because he continued to molest children after he was punished and knew it was wrong. Experts agree, this was not a mistake.
Are you suggesting that his parents and Josh exaggerated the abuse he perpetrated? .
No, of course not, you’ve converted me; I’m in complete support of your missionary crusade. I now realize that the labia and areola are sacred epidermal structures, and to violate their sanctity in any way is an act of unparalleled desecration.You are still trying to excuse and normalise sexual molestation of children?
According to the police report, Josh molested several of his sisters and one other girl. This wasn't a one off. He offended over the course of a year. He was allowed to molest for what? Two lots of sexual molestation. He was punished after the second lot of molestation. He then went on to molest his 5 year old sister and possibly more, since the parents advised there were other instances where molested in that timeframe, but failed to advise how many or who. It was then that it finally dawned on them that they had to protect their daughters and they sent him away to a so called treatment center that wasn't a treatment center and they continued to lie about it. His pattern of abuse fits every definition of recidivism. Why? Because he continued to molest children after he was punished and knew it was wrong. Experts agree, this was not a mistake.
"Now that the data has shown most of those assumptions were wrong, it's difficult to undo those messages that people in the advocacy and treatment fields were putting out a generation ago."...
Are you suggesting that his parents and Josh exaggerated the abuse he perpetrated?
I’m in total agreement; this was an example of recidivism in the extreme, he must have been corrected many times throughout his childhood for inappropriate touching, yet he ignored his correction and continued these endeavors to satisfy his evil impulses. Josh likely molested every one in the house as they slept, including the family pets. Moving from one room to the next for hours every night, for at least a year, and possibly from the time he first learned to crawl as an infant. And then he compounded the offense by only confessing to a relatively few instances, thereby depriving his victims of rightful ownership of additional grief and suffering. His behavior was truly monstrous.
I read the report. I have prosecuted sexual molesters for doing less.Hes smarter than you. He wont come out and say "Its abuse. Its sexual Assault. Its developmental Trama blah blah blah. But hes probably read the papers and knows full well...
I did read the report. Multiple times. And what you just posted is clear evidence recidivism. If you don't know what that word means, look it up.Part one is a teen not listening to his parents.
Part two is a teen being sanctioned for actions. Now he took it serious. He beeleeves.
It is clear you did not read the police report.Nope. I am sure you are exaggerating the seriousness of the former situation.
So your child molests your other child and your sole concern is to protect the molester and not the molested?But I will tell you for sure. On a first incident (and that is defined as when I become aware as a parent) and reading what Josh allegedly did, there is no way I am going to bring my kid to the cops. I am going to try to handle it at home. I have my kids future to be aware of, knowing full well extremists such as yourself exist and want to make sure the rest of my kids life is spent paying a debt to you. Because this is about you and not the sisters of Josh.
The police report is not really the problem. The names of the victims were redacted. Had this gone to trial, what we heard or found out in the last few weeks would have been even more detailed. The identity of the victims were released by the victims themselves. It was Fox News, who violated the girls by taking cameras into their parents households and then questioning them and allowing them to out themselves as his victims. I don't blame those girls. I blame their parents for what they allowed to happen and continued to happen.Your not horrified that a police report that should have never been made public is out there. Your not horrified that the sisters have lost their privacy. Your not questioning why the media violated the rights of these girls. Nope. Your lovin it because you dont agree (nor do I) with the Duggarts lifestyle.
The girls are the victims. They were molested. I think it is great that they are able to get past it as they have done. I don't think it is great that they were left with no choice but to forgive, when they were told by their patriarchal father to forgive. Nor do I think it is great that the media and some in this thread, seem to think that Josh is the only victim in all of this.And the simple fact is you cant stand that these girls didnt become victims and went on with their lives without your idea of proper treatment. They succeeded without you!! Dammit. Lets ruin the stuff they had going on because thats what happened isnt it? Now all of them are paying the price.
I read the report. I have prosecuted sexual molesters for doing less.
Or do you live in a household that is like the Duggars, who forced Josh's victims, who even admitted they were afraid, to sit and talk to him and forgive him and left them with no other choice but to forgive him?
The police report is not really the problem. The names of the victims were redacted. Had this gone to trial, what we heard or found out in the last few weeks would have been even more detailed. The identity of the victims were released by the victims themselves. It was Fox News, who violated the girls by taking cameras into their parents households and then questioning them and allowing them to out themselves as his victims. I don't blame those girls. I blame their parents for what they allowed to happen and continued to happen.
On May 21, 2015, the magazine controversially released a police investigation of Josh Duggar from the 19 Kids and Counting reality TV show, from an investigation carried out in 2006, when Josh was 18 years of age, about events occurring in 2002, when Josh was 14 and still a minor, when he was accused of molestation. In spite of no charges being laid, In Touch Magazine implied that Josh Duggar was a rapist, paedophile and child molester, and that his family were paedophile enablers. They published the full contents of the police report, which were not redacted sufficiently to protect the identities of the victims, in spite of a judgement by Judge Stacey Zimmerman on May 21, 2015, which ordered for all copies of the police report to be destroyed.
According the website, as of 2010, In Touch Weekly sells for $2.99 on newsstands, $.50 cents less than competitors US Weekly and Star Magazine. Subscribers pay $1.49 per issue.
Of Course they Are investigating... now.... suddenly.... LOL Does Josh still live there or is it grandstanding?As it stands, the DHS are currently investigating the family and the police had to be called because they were refusing to cooperate or allow to check that a child in that house was safe.
And what stuff did they have going? You mean the TV show and media appearances and political lobbying where they said LGBT were child molesters and should be denied more rights? Yes, how horrible that they are now prevented from doing that [insert giant eye-roll here]..
My job was actually about prosecuting people for breaking the law. You see, it is illegal to sexually molest and abuse children. If that makes me an extremist, then I will happily own up to being an extremist who does not diminish, minimise, normalise the abuse and assault and sexual molestation of children and sexual assault.I am sure you have. Your an extremist. And your job depends on someone elses mistakes.
I am trying to figure out how you have come to the conclusion that they cost me money..Of course you hate the duggarts. They cost you money. If everyone handled it without the cops/dhs how many jobs would be lost.... See, it is all about you.
From Fox: The two women said that they didn’t even know what had happened until Josh confessed to their parents, who then approached each child individually and shared it with them. The two women agreed that they were “shocked” to learn of Josh’s actions, but Jill added that their experience was “very mild compared to what happens to some young women.”
Jill said she felt angry at first. But then, she said her parents explained what happened, and Josh came to each victim to ask for forgiveness.
“I had to make that choice to forgive him, you know. And it wasn’t something that somebody forced like, ‘Oh you need to do this.’ It’s like, you have to make that decision for yourself,” Jill said.
Wanna watch the real interview:
http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/06/...t-know-about-molestation-until-josh-confessed
And you have a reading and comprehension problem.More lies. Origin of story: Not Fox news.
http://www.intouchweekly.com/posts/...leged-sex-offenses-for-more-than-a-year-58906
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Touch_Weekly
The police report is not really the problem. The names of the victims were redacted. Had this gone to trial, what we heard or found out in the last few weeks would have been even more detailed. The identity of the victims were released by the victims themselves. It was Fox News, who violated the girls by taking cameras into their parents households and then questioning them and allowing them to out themselves as his victims. I don't blame those girls. I blame their parents for what they allowed to happen and continued to happen.
Hmm?Of Course they Are investigating... now.... suddenly.... LOL Does Josh still live there or is it grandstanding?
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...als-denied-access-child-molestation/71053510/
This doesn't even make sense.Eye-roll all you want... Your exactly the same with regards to heterosexuality of very young teen boys.
And yet, you would not protect your children from a child molester. Says it all about you, doesn't it? Do you think it is in your children's best interest to remain in the same house as a molester?I would protect my 14 year old kid from the likes of you absolutely. Your motive isnt in the kids best interest.
I am sure you have. Your an extremist. And your job depends on someone elses mistakes. Of course you hate the duggarts. They cost you money. If everyone handled it without the cops/dhs how many jobs would be lost.... See, it is all about you.
Not mocking sexual assault at all, only your analysis and interpretation of it.What kind of person mocks or makes a mockery of sexual assault and the molestation of children?
Please, seek help.
My job was actually about prosecuting people for breaking the law. You see, it is illegal to sexually molest and abuse children. If that makes me an extremist, then I will happily own up to being an extremist who does not diminish, minimise, normalise the abuse and assault and sexual molestation of children and sexual assault.
No one knew exactly who the victims were, until they outed themselves in the Kelly interview on Fox.
Had you read and paid attention to what I said, you would have seen that it corresponded with what you just linked and quoted from wiki.
And yet, you would not protect your children from a child molester. Says it all about you, doesn't it? Do you think it is in your children's best interest to remain in the same house as a molester?
truncated said:I am sure you have. Your an extremist. And your job depends on someone elses mistakes. Of course you hate the duggarts. They cost you money. If everyone handled it without the cops/dhs how many jobs would be lost.... See, it is all about you.
I would protect my 14 year old kid from the likes of you absolutely. Your motive isnt in the kids best interest.
"Now that the data has shown most of those assumptions were wrong, it's difficult to undo those messages that people in the advocacy and treatment fields were putting out a generation ago."...
Actually, and this may come as a surprise to one such as yourself, it's about preventing this from happening to other innocent children.You claim its your job. Its about your income.
Your wrong. Josh was just a kid with limited resources in dealing with his emerging sexuality. Family took natural and Very Normal steps in correcting the situation. 15 years later we have no further indication Josh is a habitual sexual predator. And he doesnt have to register for the rest of his life as a predator. He grew up to lead a relatively normal life in-spite of what you think of kids like him.
I am curious how any data could show it to be wrong... after all, a repeated and traceable pattern of behavior is, to most rational people, provides a reasonable basis on which to determine likely future behaviors..."Now that the data has shown most of those assumptions were wrong, it's difficult to undo those messages that people in the advocacy and treatment fields were putting out a generation ago."...
It would not be in the childs best interest, nor the families best interest to have him labeled a sex offender. Potentially for the rest of his life. Stop wondering about why so many do not seek help from the 'professionals'; the answer is directly in your extremism.
Milkweed said:The Duggarts were right in keeping DHS/Police out of their family. Oh Wait. They did go to a cop right after Josh got back from 'treatment'. Did they know he had child porn on his computer? Nope. No one did.
Your wrong. Josh was just a kid with limited resources in dealing with his emerging sexuality. Family took natural and Very Normal steps in correcting the situation. 15 years later we have no further indication Josh is a habitual sexual predator. And he doesnt have to register for the rest of his life as a predator. He grew up to lead a relatively normal life in-spite of what you think of kids like him.
But thats because you are behind the curve:
"Now that the data has shown most of those assumptions were wrong, it's difficult to undo those messages that people in the advocacy and treatment fields were putting out a generation ago."...
Did they go to a family friend who happened to be a cop? Did they ask him to break the law by not reporting the incident? Did he break the law by not reporting the incident?
Yes.
Recidivism is one of the most fundamental concepts in criminal justice. It refers to a person's relapse into criminal behavior, often after the person receives sanctions or undergoes intervention for a previous crime.Jun 17, 2014Except for the fact that he has show recidivistic behavior, which you try to deny↑ as an article of faith.
We have recidivistic molestation and a conspiracy involving a police officer to keep it off the record.
And here you are trying to normalize this sort of criminality.
The only thing I don't get is what stake anyone thinks they have in empowering sexual abuse. Maybe you can shed some light on why you hope to empower sexual abuse of children.
Emily Horowitz, a sociology professor at St. Francis College in Brooklyn, said the Duggars' decision to keep law enforcement out of it at first is understandable — even defensible.
"I don't condone this behavior, but I spoke to so many families that did the 'right thing' and the reaction was so excessive and Draconian that it destroyed the lives of their children," said Horowitz, author of the new book "Protecting Our Kids: How Sex Offender Laws Are Failing."
Horowitz said that juvenile offenders are the most treatable group of sex abusers, but law enforcement is more focused on punishment, including criminal prosecution with possible jail terms and lifetime listing on a sex-offender registry.
She said Justice Department data shows that one-third of sex offenses involving children also involve underage perpetrators. The most common age, she said, is 14 — the age Josh Duggar was.
"I'm pro-punishment," Horowitz said. "I'm just not pro-Draconian, permanent punishment."