That's a good question. Since the matter never reached a court, what authority does the/any judge have to order the records destroyed? The judge refuses to say why the order was issued.
From what I understand, in most places (because both victims & abuser were under 18), nothing could be released-regardless of how old abuser was when the police were notified.
"In most places" might be correct. But public records laws differ from state-to-state. In Arkansas, apparently these particular records can be released because Josh was an adult when his perversion came to light.
Laws can differ, of course, but most state laws regarding juvenile cases are pretty strict.
Indeed. Juvenile court cases. This matter never went to court so controlling law is whatever laws apply to the release of police records. Names & pronouns were redacted, as is required under Arkansas law.
Are you suggesting that the cops involved are brain dead stupid? Do you know any of them that are unaware of the state's interest in protecting the futures of juvenile offenders?
Over the years, i've known lots of cops, and I assure you they are very cognizant of the law regarding juvenile cases. It is axiomatic, and common practice that details of juvenile cases are *NEVER* released.
The judge refuses to say why the order was issued.
I don't see where a juvenile court judge is under any obligation to explain his orders. In fact, I can't see how they can do their job if they needlessly spill details of cases to parties that have no need to know.
The judge IS the court. There is no legal distinction.
You are wrong. It was reported when he was a minor, it didn’t “come to light” only when he turned 18.