Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

boston bean

(36,221 posts)
Sat May 23, 2015, 04:43 PM May 2015

I think it's disgraceful that the victim Duggar siblings have been named.

I think that is quite unfortunate.

Victims that didn't ask to be identified.....

No one has a right to do that, except the victims themselves.

I understand some may still be under the age of 18, and they do need a voice, but it's not something the public needs to know. Usually courts leave this information confidential.



9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

historylovr

(1,557 posts)
1. Have they been publicly named?
Sat May 23, 2015, 05:08 PM
May 2015

I know that some have been guessing, based on the time line and the sisters' ages and the relationship of the other girl.

 

riderinthestorm

(23,272 posts)
2. AFAIK, no ones naming them. It's just obvious from the police report
Sat May 23, 2015, 05:12 PM
May 2015

their ages are given and their parents are listed as Michelle and Jim Bob...

Pretty easy to work it out.



 

libdem4life

(13,877 posts)
3. They are Reality Stars. Publicity is their claim to fame and when in the Public Eye, things are
Sat May 23, 2015, 05:40 PM
May 2015

different. What really sucks is that they had no choice but to be paraded out and literally flaunted by their parents, and endless photo opps...all the while bearing the family secrets in their psyches, minds and bodies.

Knowing the names is publicity and doing the math. All names were redacted from the Court records, best I know.

boston bean

(36,221 posts)
5. They were minors when it occcured every bit of identifying information
Sat May 23, 2015, 05:47 PM
May 2015

should have been scrubbed.

This is just disgusting. Victimizing the victims all over again and they gave NO ONE permission to touch them or tell their story to anyone.

 

libdem4life

(13,877 posts)
9. Absolutely true. But there were public records and they were redacted. Oprah did the right thing.
Sat May 23, 2015, 06:12 PM
May 2015

Apparently there were friends who knew. But I'm going to have to weigh in on the side of the adults...from beginning to end...that must be first held responsible. A sexual survivor is victimized every day of his/her life. it is in the DNA, it is in the lack of boundaries, ad nauseum. Some things must come out in the light to be cleaned up. And the Cult of Secrecy and Entitlement at home, yet forced into the public to play a fake role for Fame and Money and God that was embedded in this entire family morass, obviously required public exposure.

I'm going to guess that these girls, whether now or later, will be glad to be rid of the forced double life lie they have always lived. Living a lie is a life-damning experience. And without the public, nothing...absolutely nothing...would have been done. She'd have kept popping out progeny as long as she could to bring in the money and the fame and fortune.

 

reddread

(6,896 posts)
4. the beast of public appetites for licentious stimulation surpasses dignity before it ties its shoes
Sat May 23, 2015, 05:45 PM
May 2015

salacious titillation beats reasoned discussion, not to mention human rights, every time.

 

bravenak

(34,648 posts)
6. I don't think they were named. They were just the only female Duggars born at the time.
Sat May 23, 2015, 06:03 PM
May 2015

Makes it obvious who the victims might be.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»I think it's disgraceful ...