Originally Posted by The Joker
Right. Until Batman Begins when they did start daring to touch them. Unless you missed Rachel and Finch going after Falcone and having him indited after Batman gave them all the dirt on him.
It's not hard to put two and two together here.
That was a continuity goof. After all it wouldn't take 4 years to rebuild Wayne Manor. It certainly wouldn't take Joker 4 years of being a bank robber before he eventually made his big move.
Choose your interpretation. If you insist on interpreting the "year ago" line that way ... it seems at least as likely that the "year ago" throwaway line is a continuity goof. If you're going to just ignore an annoying detail ... why not ignore that one?
A three-year gap makes more sense in the timeline. It coincides with the kids ages. It coincides with the 5-years of using the Begins suit (as referenced in one of the movie tie-in manuals). And, it makes Wayne's Batman service-time work better for the overall story (five-years before the 'retirement' + plus a year during the Bane incident). Makes far more sense in continuity than the whole first two movies happening within a year ... at which point Wayne retires at 31, and has already acquired a chronic injury. Makes no sense at all.