I figured not in reality, but the wording used was "does not exist" and I was thinking creatively. To think that because the ball was dropped when it was initially reported, it can't be prosecuted sometime in the future is awful.

I can't find it either and I keep looking. Subsection (h) says "If the period prescribed in subsection (b) of this section has expired, a prosecution may nevertheless be commenced for a violation of the following offenses if, when the alleged violation occurred, the offense was committed against a minor, the violation has not previously been reported to a law enforcement agency or prosecuting attorney, and the period prescribed in subsection (b) of this section has not expired since the victim has reached eighteen (18) years of age:" But I can't find anywhere that says what applies if it has been reported. And I'm interested in what, if any, effect the report being expunged may have.

Um, that was rude. You read the thread. There's an unstated winking going on in my post (hence the asterisks around really and quotes around doesn't exist). As in, if the police are saying they can't comment because no report exists (because it was expunged), and the law expert says that the statute of limitations has only run out now because a report was made, if the report "doesn't exist" now, perhaps the statute of limitations based on that report having been made also does not exist, therefore the broader no limit on sexual assault on minors would be in effect.

At any rate, it appears that the criminal statute of limitations on second degree sexual assault, which is what they were investigating, had NOT actually run out like they said it had when the police report was made.

From the MSNBC article I posted:"Marci A. Hamilton is a professor at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law who maintains a site on statutes of limitation for child sex abuse, and wrote a book, Justice Denied, on the topic. She points out that though the civil statute for child sexual abuse in Arkansas has a three year limit, the criminal statute had a much longer time frame. As she reads Arkansas law, “If it is reported when [the victim] is a minor, then they have seven years from the date of the abuse,†Hamilton says. By her reading, that means the clock ran out on the Duggar allegations in 2013. “When it expires,†Hamilton says of the statute of limitations, “it’s over.†" But I wonder what effect this has on that: "“As a public information officer, I cannot speak about that police report because it does not exist as far as we are concerned,†said Scott Lewis of the Springdale Police Department. That’s because the police report first posted by In Touch Weekly and obtained under a Freedom of Information Act has been expunged due to a judge’s May 21 order. " If he can't comment because it "doesn't exist," then was it *really* reported?

MSNBC reported that there was no three year statute of limitations on the case: http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/why-the-duggar-abuse-investigation-end

That appears to be the old law actually. I found this from 2013 indicating that there is now NO SoL: http://m.dailykos.com/story/2013/02/22/1189159/-Tree-Climbers-Arkansas-Lifts-Statute-of-Limitations-on-Sex-Crimes-Involving-Minors

Hmmm. This site http://victimsofcrime.org/docs/DNA%20Resource%20Center/sol-for-sexual-assault-check-chart---final---copy.pdf?sfvrsn=2 says for sexual offenses against a minor in Arkansas, SoL is before victim turns 28. It's 6 years for rape and 3 for sexual assault.

What I read in her posts is that this woman was upset by Michelle's robocall calling transgendered people child molesters because she knew that Josh was one. She and her wife then protested in front of the Duggars home and posted pictures. She was then contacted by In Touch and told them about it and that led to the FOIA request.

I realize that. But they did actually black out the genders and gender pronouns. But what actually happened involved certain genitalia so it was obvious.

Read on the other two links I added.

Tandra's instagram: https://instagram.com/p/3MeEIQAjLi/ "happy_lil_tantan Truth is out, I have no problem owning it up too! The American public had a right to know, whom they were following in all the discriminatory campaigns! #EQUALITY #LGBT #PRIDE #TLC #NoMoreDuggarHypocrisy #loveislove #timeforchange #JoshDuggar" And https://instagram.com/p/3FP5P5AjGq/ And https://instagram.com/p/296u2vAjGn/

Ages and genders were not released.

Walgreens has pulled their ads. In an article on that, I found this interesting: http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/tv/2015/05/27/walgreens-pulls-ads-from-duggar-show/28011407/ "Wednesday, InTouch was back with another story, this time reporting that, even after the Springdale, Ark., police closed their investigation of Josh without bringing charges in 2006, he and his family were investigated by the state Department of Human Services for possible child abuse. Citing an unnamed source familiar with the investigation, the magazine reported the results of the inquiry are sealed and that Josh Duggar filed suit against the department after that, but that case is sealed, too. Amy Webb, spokeswoman for the Arkansas DHS in Little Rock, confirmed that all child-abuse investigations in the state are confidential; she can't even confirm there wasan investigation, she said. ... If investigators issue a "true finding," the offender's name goes on a state "child-maltreatment registry," which is confidential but can be checked by employers, nursing homes, day care centers, and the like. It is not open to the media or the general public, she said. People who are listed on the registry can appeal that finding to a court, she added."

Agree. We drive SC to ME and do 77 to 81 for the mountain drive. That puts you close to Charlottesville also. Then pick up 84 near Scranton and then I'd go 91 in Hartford to get to VT. If you want to see NYC and DC, I'd do 95 going south. You'll pay a lot less in tolls going south.

LOL, she's a lesbian! Some sort of poetic justice in that. http://www.sheknows.com/living/articles/1077251/lesbian-newlyweds-kiss-in-front-of-duggar-family-home-in-protest

Link?

I realize that my post was after yours and I didn't quote, but it was NOT directed at you. I agree with your posts 😉

What on earth does Israel have to do with the OP, or are you just trying to get the thread shut down? OP, I know how you feel. I feel very impotent over here in my middle class American life.

They got rid of them a few years ago. They only want you buying from them.

This whole thing bothers me so much. I mean, the facts of the case itself, but also the mental gymnastics required by supposedly normal people to defend this guy. All because he's Christian and his family has been held up as a model of virtue. I don't get involved in Facebook drama ever, but I did today when a friend of a friend said "who even knows, it could have been consensual?"

I read that the victim that requested destruction is still a minor, so that pretty much only leaves one person.

I used the IG for my first child. Second time through, I used just the schedule the first year and for next year I won't be using it at all. I completely rearranged everything because I really don't like the way they schedule things.

And this timeline mentions the rumors from 2007 about him doing something on the campaign trail: http://defamer.gawker.com/the-web-has-known-about-josh-duggar-for-years-when-did-1706258269

This is the article that mentions the case file seen in 2007: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2015/05/21/josh-duggar-apologizes-resigns-from-family-research-council-amid-molestation-allegations/