Megyn Kelly and Fox News Speculation: Where the Talking Hits the Road

[dillpickles]

The Official Duggar Drink game

Fill a 16 ounce cup with your frosty beverage and the shot glass with hard liquor, and let the games begin.

The rules are simple. Every time the Duggars use one of the following words, you have to drink:

Jesus – God – Christ – pray – forgive – sin – soul – heart – lust – mistake – love – heal

If they use any of the following phrases, you have to do a shot:

Only a child – just 14 years old – asked for forgiveness – sought God’s love – a long time ago – private family matter

If Megyn Kelley says “heartbreaking,” the first person to finish their drink gets to make a new rule.

The first person to pass out gets “I love the Duggars” written on their forehead with a Sharpie.

The last person to vomit, considering the interview is undoubtedly intended to show support for a confessed child molester, wins.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/05/31/the-duggar-drinking-game-official-rules-and-regulations/

I'll replace liqour with whipped cream and pickle juice, in honour of Mechelle and her favorite things~.

(she's the one that started the pickle thing right?)

[BitterApple]

Lucky Megyn, she will be served some American cheese slices on a paper plate that Josie licked.

As if! This is Fox News we're talking about! Michelle will surely command Jana to bust out the generic Triscuits and Aldi brand Cheez-in-a-can that's reserved only for the highest of company!

Edited June 2, 2015 by BitterApple

[galax-arena]

I'll replace liqour with whipped cream and pickle juice,

Wow, what did your taste buds ever do to you? :(

 

Here's one to add to the drinking game: Chug the whole bottle if Jim Bob or Michelle ever do not use wishy-washy euphemisms and instead actually use the words "incest," "abuse," or "molestation." 

 

Bella suggested eating cookies instead as a substitute. But I feel like by the end of the interview, a lot of us might welcome the unconscious bliss that being blackout drunk will bring. Then again, I suppose if we eat enough cookies we could go into a sugar coma instead. 

[Cherrio]

As if! This is Fox News we're talking about! Michelle will surely command Jana to bust out the generic Triscuits and Aldi brand Cheez-in-a-can that's reserved only for the highest of company!

You only forgot one thing, Josie licked it.

[Churchhoney]

To be fair, releasing that poorly redacted report was reprehensible. Sexual assault and abuse victims should get to control how, when, and if they tell their own stories.

(Fully aware this is not why JB, M, and TLC are upset about it, however.)

It's also a dirty tactic for them to feature that in their promotions, to me. Because, as you say, it's undeniable that it's a bad thing for the girls to lose control of their own stories. However, when they deliberately get people to focus on that harm, it's obviously for the purpose of diverting attention from the huge harms without which that one would never even have existed. And the diversion will probably work for many people. Attempts to divert attention from the crap that Josh, JB and M perpetrated on those girls are infuriating -- and make the network a coconspirator with the Duggar Three, in my opinion. Yuch yuch yuch.

[mbutterfly]

I'm not watching. IT will make me too angry. How, for example, does Megyn Kelly know the victims did not want the police report revealed? Has she interviewed them? Does she in fact know who they are? Or has some spokesman on behalf of either the Duggars or TLC made that global statement? Each little piece of the story that is blurred out in advance by representatives of some of the parties involved, makes it a non-story. 

[Lemons]

Megyn just teased the Duggar interview on Bill O'Reilly..  She said she is flying in on Wednesday morning to interview the parents.  She said she was going to ask them about what they did and didn't do, etc. but what bothered me was that she said that she was also going to pursue the angle of the story about the a police chief who released the information that should never have been made public (paraphrasing).  She said that the victims never wanted any of this out there.  

Oh no.  More deflection off of the perpetrator.    Let's focus on the police chief who responded to a request under the Freedom of Information Act!  Great!

[Sew Sumi]

Megyn just teased the Duggar interview on Bill O'Reilly..  She said she is flying in on Wednesday morning to interview the parents.  She said she was going to ask them about what they did and didn't do, etc. but what bothered me was that she said that she was also going to pursue the angle of the story about the a police chief who released the information that should never have been made public (paraphrasing).  She said that the victims never wanted any of this out there.  

Oh, so we're going to get a deflect job? It's not for the Duggars to explain why the Springdale PD's redaction was so shoddy. it IS the fault of the Duggars not to have marched to the police dept. in 2007 after the investigation had been completed and get the report destroyed. They left a ticking time bomb in place, and that is ALL on JB and Mechelle. But I doubt Megyn will ask why they were so negligent? Easier to blame the police. *eyeroll*

[sometimesy]

Their  'boy' had a 'glitch' during his 'young' season of life.

[sometimesy]

On the O'Reilly show today, Megyn called what Josh did "child molestation. She also had positive things to say about Caitlyn Jenner.

 

On the other hand, she seems to be focusing her ire on the police who allowed the report to be publicized against the will of the victims who did not want this publicized. Hmmm. I see the TLC angle...

umm, so drawing attention to it on a national news network will help the victims keep their privacy how? Wow viewers will have to be sheep to believe the Duggars are doing the interview because of their victims feelings.

[Jordan Baker]

I actually watched part of Megyn Kelly's own show tonight. There was a brief bit with a reporter and then she talked to Fox's media analyst, Howie Kurtz. All hope I had for the interview went out the window.

 

As was mentioned earlier, she seems mostly upset that the police report was made available. Then she and Howie talked about those evil media outlets that are trying to link this to Republican candidates. (I actually think this is a very small percentage of the news coverage, but it allows Fox to portray Republicans and the Duggar as victims.)  She actually shouted "BILL CLINTON WAS ACCUSED OF RAPE" and . . . I can't even remember the rest of her sentence because I was just sort of dumbstruck.

 

There was also some footage of Nicole Wallace saying how Megyn would be tough and fair, and Megyn said yes, she's tough, but this won't be a cross-examination. It'll be an interview. There was more said, but I'm not sure I was hearing it all because I really was fuming.

 

So, yeah, we'll be getting an interview. Great, just great.

[galax-arena]

Then she and Howie talked about those evil media outlets that are trying to link this to Republican candidates.

Ooh, I can't wait for her to mention Lena Dunham in the context of evil liberal hypocrisy. 

[Georgia]

I'm hoping some of y'all will throw up some bullet points or some kind of recap (or point me to it). I'm not in a place where I can stomach watching it at all, but I'm morbidly curious about what these people have to say.

[brandyelf]

I just watched the little blurb on the Kelly File Facebook page and that was enough for me. Child molestation is not political, but she's going to make it that way.

[Hpmec]

OK, so the emphasis is going to be on the fact that the report was made public in the first place. How dare the police respond to a Freedom of Information Act request that revealed a horrific secret the Duggars had buried. Now I get it. Boob and J'Chelle's panties are in a wad not because their son is a child molester, not because their daughters were violated, but because the secret got out and now their gravy train is stuck in its tracks. And Megyn Kelly will help them play up that angle -- they are the victims here. Boo Hoo. The public will continue to be outraged -- but not for the reasons the Duggars are hoping.

[Potato511]

OK, is there *any* chance that the announcement the Duggars make at the close of the interview will be that THEY are halting production of the show to focus on their family at this difficult time? What do you think?

[Wellfleet]

OK, is there *any* chance that the announcement the Duggars make at the close of the interview will be that THEY are halting production of the show to focus on their family at this difficult time? What do you think?

 

For me, no - no chance at all. I believe Boob would do anything to keep the show going. And to prove it, he's doing this interview...

Edited June 2, 2015 by Wellfleet

[Potato511]

For me, no - no chance at all. I believe Boob would do anything to keep the show going. And to prove it, he's doing this interview...

I guess what I'm wondering about is the possibility that TLC has actually decided to cancel the show, but is giving the Duggars a way to have it appear to have been their decision (to the possible benefit of both parties)... 

[Wellfleet]

I guess what I'm wondering about is the possibility that TLC has actually decided to cancel the show, but is giving the Duggars a way to have it appear to have been their decision (to the possible benefit of both parties)... 

 

I understand why Boob would like this idea, but I'm not sure how it would benefit TLC. It seems like it would be much better for them, from a PR standpoint, to be shown taking a strong stand and cancelling. As it is, if they don't cancel, I have no idea how they're going to justify sticking with 19 Kids when they cancelled HBB with - literally - hours of the news about Mama June's boyfriend.

[Potato511]

I understand why Boob would like this idea, but I'm not sure how it would benefit TLC. It seems like it would be much better for them, from a PR standpoint, to be shown taking a strong stand and cancelling. As it is, if they don't cancel, I have no idea how they're going to justify sticking with 19 Kids when they cancelled HBB with - literally - hours of the news about Mama June's boyfriend.

Right, I see that. On the other hand, TLC has already NOT cancelled 19KAC within hours, nor within days, nor within (quite nearly) weeks, of this scandal.

 

In the HBB case, it was a surprise to them (i.e., it was new information that MJ had taken up with the perp). This scandal is over information that they quite possibly had the entire time they have been filming with the Duggars. They may indeed wish to cancel while remaining in decent graces with the family (and then TLC never has to say never).

 

Anyway, I enjoy the musing. It just seems so impossible the show can come back from this.

[rulesoftravel]

 

Taken from the media thread: 

I know that the bit of hope I have for it is because of something I saw on The Daily Show. Jon Stewart showed a clip of Megyn smiling as she jerked over a politician (Jeb Bush I think) and then puts up a photoshopped picture of himself and Megyn skipping thru a field and is all "Oh Megyn... you and I, what we could have been together.... if we weren't completely opposed" or something like that. If Stewart is giving her props.... then she might come thru on this. I really don't see her as ok with the Duggars

I saw that little bit-that was not props;that seemed like vintage Stewart sarcasm.     "If I didn't disagree with you on everything" didn't sound like approval to me.   But I'm totally biased against her, so maybe my interpretation, my husband's interpretation and all our friends' interpretation of that little snippet is wrong.   I think Stewart was basically saying that even a stopped clock is right twice a day.   I think that's generous when applied to Ms Kelly, but whatever.

Edited June 2, 2015 by rulesoftravel

[mbutterfly]

I don't get the Republican strategy here. Wouldn't it be better to present "this is a family on reality tv who -- like half of America -- are Republicans. Our hopes and prayers are with them."

End of story. Nothing to see here. 

[becca3891]

EVERYBODY!!!! Turn your face toward New York, squinch your eyes shut and channel Megyn Kelly. Put all the things you want answered on that little telekinetic thread and zap her. Maybe she won't be ABLE to soft-ball with us overriding her thoughts with our questions. Wouldn't it just be AMAZING if JB got mad enough to get up and leave the cameras? Be SUCH a telling moment...

The trouble is, even if he does get mad and storm off, we'll never see it because it's taped. Once he regained his cool, he'd go back and demand a retake just like I'm sure they do all the time on TLC. 

 

Do you think the Duggars want the interview or do TLC want the interview? I'm assuming that could change the direction of the questions.

Definitely agree that TLC told them they had to do this interview to gauge public reaction. Also, LOL about Megyn possibly wearing something defrauding. I noticed Erica Hill's skirt was below the knee and she had a high neckline, and wondered if the Duggars required that because it was in their own home. Obviously they couldn't make that kind of demand when they've gone on shows like Good Morning America but they'll be on their own turf. I wonder if it's true what I've read online, that Boob won't speak directly to female servers in restaurants. If so, I wonder how he's okay with women in the media.

[Churchhoney]

But they are political people, aren't they?  Wasn't he a politician at one point?  And he ran for US Senate and made his intolerant views public.  And she lent her "personality" to rant against transgender people by phone.  And Josh is behind the scenes politically.  So she shouldn't go any softer on them than any other political personality.

 

They won't be talking about politics, though. Most interviewers will go softer on a politician too, if the questions are personal things rather than about political ideas and actions, as far as I can tell. Even if those actions have a bearing on the politics (as they do here, obviously), there's still usually some inhibition about really bringing the hammers and the skewers out. It's one thing to be ultra-aggressive with a politician about political graft but another to be ultra-aggressive about misdeeds that happened within the family, outside the public realm. Reporters are people, not machines, and things like empathy, a sense of privacy and manners we've learned since we were kids tend to kick in and soften the approach. It may be just a minor softening, but it's usually there, I think.

[mynextmistake]

Megyn just teased the Duggar interview on Bill O'Reilly..  She said she is flying in on Wednesday morning to interview the parents.  She said she was going to ask them about what they did and didn't do, etc. but what bothered me was that she said that she was also going to pursue the angle of the story about the a police chief who released the information that should never have been made public (paraphrasing).  She said that the victims never wanted any of this out there.

I don't think that's an invalid angle for her to pursue. If Arkansas law provides for the privacy of underage victims of crime, then this report should not have been released without much more extensive redacting. I think it's reasonable for the survivors to be upset if they truly didn't want this information out in public and now it's out there anyway.

That said, I really hope that isn't the main focus of her interview. Jim Bob and Michelle do need to be called onto the carpet.

[GEML]

It's my understanding that the report shouldn't have been released. FOIA or not, if it was a misdemeanor to release it, it was illegal to release it. Just because you are a politician, a reality TV personality or an annoying holier-than-thou know-it-all patriarch doesn't mean you aren't covered by the law.

[CoolMom]

Oh no.  More deflection off of the perpetrator.    Let's focus on the police chief who responded to a request under the Freedom of Information Act!  Great!

 

Is it covered under the FOIA?  Because it's my understanding that minor records are sealed.  I am NOT defending Josh at all but this is an issue that the records of that not only should have been sealed but should have already been destroyed.  If I am wrong, ok but if not then those documents should have remained sealed because as noted above just because they are on TV and many people don't like them and their brand of "religion" (my Conservative Christian self included) doesn't mean they don't share the same rights as I do.

 

In Arkansas, most juvenile records are automatically sealed. The primary exception is for delinquency adjudications in which the juvenile could have been tried as an adult. In such cases, the records remain available for law enforcement purposes for ten years after the final delinquency adjudication or adult criminal conviction. (Arkansas Statutes § 9-27-309.)

[starfire]

If JimBob and Michelle do have young kids in the room where the interview is taking place, using them as some sort of protection against hard-hitting questions, hopefully any Duggar supporters will finally recognize what poor judgment the Duggars have and how inappropriate that is.

 

I think it is bad enough they are holding an interview about Josh's child molestation in a home with so many little kids too young to be advised of the true reality (and who are used to being on TV and will want to know what is going on). I wouldn't want to travel right now if I was JimBob and Michelle, and would be hiding out at home as well, but I think their decision to host such an interview at their home shows that the protection of their kids is not their first priority and that they are thoughtless, selfish, inappropriate parents.

Edited June 2, 2015 by starfire

[GEML]

Of course, they have an entire studio set up in the building near the road. Where they filmed Jessa and Ben's "marriage counseling." Saying the interview will be "at their home" isn't the same as it would be if it were at yours or mine.

[starfire]

Of course, they have an entire studio set up in the building near the road. Where they filmed Jessa and Ben's "marriage counseling." Saying the interview will be "at their home" isn't the same as it would be if it were at yours or mine.

I hope that is the case as I don't think the little ones should be present (and especially not used as a reason to avoid intense questioning).

[Julia]

By all accounts, Arkansas is currently working really hard at reforming their system for dealing with children in the criminal justice system as adults, after the Supreme Court turned thumbs down on them imprisoning the fourteen year old accomplice of a murderer for life. The current system, where children younger than Josh are routinely tried as adults was gifted to them, ironically enough, by the Arkansas state government class of 1999, although apparently there were those legislators who thought they didn't go far enough.

 

By one of those coincidences life abounds in, 1999 was tough law and order candidate Jim Bob's first year serving in the state House.  

 

As someone who believes in redemption, I'm pleased to hear that moving forward the rights of juveniles will be better protected.

Edited June 2, 2015 by Julia

[Seashell Lover]

Is it covered under the FOIA?  Because it's my understanding that minor records are sealed.  I am NOT defending Josh at all but this is an issue that the records of that not only should have been sealed but should have already been destroyed.  If I am wrong, ok but if not then those documents should have remained sealed because as noted above just because they are on TV and many people don't like them and their brand of "religion" (my Conservative Christian self included) doesn't mean they don't share the same rights as I do.

 

In Arkansas, most juvenile records are automatically sealed. The primary exception is for delinquency adjudications in which the juvenile could have been tried as an adult. In such cases, the records remain available for law enforcement purposes for ten years after the final delinquency adjudication or adult criminal conviction. (Arkansas Statutes § 9-27-309.)

Why would this report be sealed as it is just a report and not a conviction or a juvenile record as Smuggar never went to trial for this?

[CoolMom]

Why would this report be sealed as it is just a report and not a conviction or a juvenile record as Smuggar never went to trial for this?

 

Because I was thinking anything dealing with a minor would be covered under the law.  Good grief we cannot even get names of children who bully our kids in school and we can get a POLICE REPORT on a minor (again not specific to Josh) just thinking it is a bit crazy. We had an experience with trying to get a police report on an incident that involved my minor child (nothing criminal, I will stay OT) but my sister could not get even a redacted one.  I had to go to the police station and prove with an official birth certificate that I was her mother to get the report because it involved a minor child. 

[Panders]

Frankly, you can't undo what has been done. The report is out there and the Duggar's should have to answer to it. They can speak to how much it was a violation of their privacy and the victim's, which is fine, but I really hope the most important part isn't overlooked here. He molested at least 5 young women, and for the past 10+ years the family has acted like nothing like this has ever happened to them, while spewing their hate against other "sinners".  It just makes me sick and I won't be watching the interview or ever tune into Fox News for any kind of reporting of facts. 

[BitterApple]

My mother is a loyal Fox News watcher and a fan of Megyn Kelly and when I told her about the Duggar interview on Wednesday she was furious. She thinks the Duggars are Fundie Kardashians with floor length skirts and Bibles and that Megyn has sold herself out to tabloid journalism. And this is coming from a woman who is as far right as you can get without falling off the edge of the Earth. It will be interesting to see how Megyn's fan base reacts to this.

[Soup333]

As was mentioned earlier, she seems mostly upset that the police report was made available. Then she and Howie talked about those evil media outlets that are trying to link this to Republican candidates. (I actually think this is a very small percentage of the news coverage, but it allows Fox to portray Republicans and the Duggar as victims.)  She actually shouted "BILL CLINTON WAS ACCUSED OF RAPE" and . . . I can't even remember the rest of her sentence because I was just sort of dumbstruck.

 

That was the exact moment I stopped watching. 

 

I'm hoping some of y'all will throw up some bullet points or some kind of recap (or point me to it). I'm not in a place where I can stomach watching it at all, but I'm morbidly curious about what these people have to say.

 

I can't either. I'll have to come here to see the interview discussed. There is no way in hell I could stomach watching her turn Josh, the child molester, into a victim. 

 

Is that what they're telling the older girls who were his victims? That It was wrong of them to release the police report and this is just a liberal media attack on family values? This was all a liberal conspiracy to get our show off the air? 

[GEML]

Anyone who is old enough to have lived through the Clinton years knows that privacy laws are broken all the time in Arkansas. That doesn't mean we shouldn't call people out for breaking them.

[Foghorn Leghorn]

I am in Canada and Bell is our provider.  Can anyone tell me what channel, what time and the name of the show?  I can't seem to find it to set my dvr.  Thx.  

Edited June 2, 2015 by Foghorn Leghorn

[Lemur]

Anyone who is old enough to have lived through the Clinton years knows that privacy laws are broken all the time in Arkansas. That doesn't mean we shouldn't call people out for breaking them.

 

Except that in this case, they weren't.  We don't *know* who the victims are.  We can suppose both logically and wildly, but the report was redacted and we have can narrow four of them down, but since they are never directly named, we simply don't know.  The fact that none of the victims petitioned to have the report destroyed until the story went public indicates that either these people aren't that savvy on how the FOIA works or were too proud-stupid to think anyone would ever drop the dime on them to the media.  (Or ... it indicates that there is a cabal within the victims to bring the family down from the inside, but that is most likely my over-heated imagination at work.)  The fact of the matter that is if Josh's parents had reported him to the proper authorities in the proper manner, Josh may have ended up listed on a sex offender list that all and sundry would have access to without a FOIA petition and the report would have been destroyed to shield the victim in due course without any of this happening.  But, as we all know, the Duggars would have never gotten their television show if that course of events had unfolded.

 

 

ETA:  Softened up speculative language.  Arkansas does list juveniles on their registered sex offender list, and a hearing is held to determine if they should be listed as such, as per Arkansas Code Annotated §12-12-901 -- 12-12-920.

Edited June 2, 2015 by Lemur

[Bella]

Would a juvenile go on the sex offender registry?

[Lemur]

Would a juvenile go on the sex offender registry?

 

40 states add juvenile sex offenders to a registry.  20 make them public.

 

Arkansas is among those 20, from what I've read on WestLaw.  It's at the discretion of the prosecutor though. 

[BoogieBurns]

So our choices are alcohol poisoning or obesity and increased risk of type 2 diabetes. Are you sure that isn't just letting the Duggars win?

 

How about we do pushups and crunches instead? Turn the drinking game into a workout game? We may need those endorphins running to make it through the hour.

[Lemur]

 

How about we do pushups and crunches instead? Turn the drinking game into a workout game? We may need those endorphins running to make it through the hour.

 

I think we should all err on the side of caution and turn it into an endurance contest.  Prizes for those who make it through without changing the channel, vomiting or yelling at the television screen.

[ChiCricket]

40 states add juvenile sex offenders to a registry. 20 make them public.

I felt conflicted hearing this..not from a religious standpoint of redemption (I'm agnostic), but from the conviction that most people deserve a second chance (after serving whatever punishment for whatever they did, however.)

Then I remembered reading that sex offenders re-offend all the time (even after therapy).

So I guess being on a sex-registry is a necessary evil, even for minors.

Because how can we warn and protect children from the boogeyman, if we don't even know who the boogeyman IS?

Edited June 2, 2015 by ChiCricket

[DamWrite]

It's been reported that MK will not be asking tough questions.  http://www.rawstory.com/2015/06/safety-zone-foxs-megyn-kelly-says-she-wont-ask-the-duggars-any-tough-questions/#.VW26OE8n5Ww.facebook Looks like she'll be lobbing softballs, so let the drinking/eating/exercise games begin.  

[SoSueMe]

It's been reported that MK will not be asking tough questions.  http://www.rawstory.com/2015/06/safety-zone-foxs-megyn-kelly-says-she-wont-ask-the-duggars-any-tough-questions/#.VW26OE8n5Ww.facebook Looks like she'll be lobbing softballs, so let the drinking/eating/exercise games begin.

Yeah looks that way.

I am loving some of the comments here:

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/megyn-kelly-previews-duggar-interview-not-going-to-be-a-cross-examination/

[Lemons]

Is it covered under the FOIA?  Because it's my understanding that minor records are sealed.  I am NOT defending Josh at all but this is an issue that the records of that not only should have been sealed but should have already been destroyed.  If I am wrong, ok but if not then those documents should have remained sealed because as noted above just because they are on TV and many people don't like them and their brand of "religion" (my Conservative Christian self included) doesn't mean they don't share the same rights as I do.

 

In Arkansas, most juvenile records are automatically sealed. The primary exception is for delinquency adjudications in which the juvenile could have been tried as an adult. In such cases, the records remain available for law enforcement purposes for ten years after the final delinquency adjudication or adult criminal conviction. (Arkansas Statutes § 9-27-309.)

 

It wasn't a "juvenile record," it was a police report.  There is that court case involving Creepy with a docket number that is still sealed.  I think juvenile police reports are typically made public as long as the names are redacted. 

[sometimesy]

y

I don't think that's an invalid angle for her to pursue. If Arkansas law provides for the privacy of underage victims of crime, then this report should not have been released without much more extensive redacting. I think it's reasonable for the survivors to be upset if they truly didn't want this information out in public and now it's out there anyway.

That said, I really hope that isn't the main focus of her interview. Jim Bob and Michelle do need to be called onto the carpet.

JB seems like the type to sue' the people responsible for the release of the document and yet he is bringing more attention to it with his national broadcast interview. He isn't the type to appreciate his entire family personal business to be broadcast (pfft) and he needs to protect his daughters (pfft). Not only does he deflect the issue from his little boys glitch, but he starts to build sympathy for his lawsuit. That is what this is starting to look like.

Edited June 2, 2015 by sometimesy

[NEGirl]

Josh did not have a juvenile record- his parents made sure of that.

I believe Juvenile records are sealed in all 50 states.  From what I have read the police report was obtained via The Freedom of Information Act. His case appealing the decision of AR.CPS is sealed becasue he was still a juvenile and the victims were juveniles.

[Lemur]

It wasn't a "juvenile record," it was a police report.  There is that court case involving Creepy with a docket number that is still sealed.  I think juvenile police reports are typically made public as long as the names are redacted. 

 

Exactly.  For all intents and purposes, Josh has a perfectly clean criminal record, juvenile or otherwise.  He has never been convicted of a crime.  He does, however, have police and court records.  The police report, which was redacted to shield the victims, was released.  The sealed court record has not been unsealed and made public even though apparently the local reporter has a copy of it.  

Edited June 2, 2015 by Lemur