lafcolleen

will Anna say, "its all lies. your father is innocent - except for the bit about sexually abusing girls. that bit is totally true" ? but dont worry, it was Satan that made it happen? Satan in the form of your aunts your totally normal, god-fearing aunts with their cute infants and (outwardly) happy marriages are tools of Satan bringing down god-fearing, bibically approved lifestyle living men. ?? yesh. that is totally a mindf***.

Those poor M kids. How do you explain something like this to M-oldest? and part of the trial testimony is his sexual abuse of girls her age. That poor kid is going to be so messed in the head with this -

I don't know who coined it but Nurthling is the funniest name I have ever seen on this thread. Better than Rodriguii, better than NotNurie(s); better than Timbits; better than Rodlets. NURTHLING!

New Thread title? no one remembers the names of all these kids, except Jana. (WE only remember Jana and only Jana knows the names of these sibs). "The lonely Js Club: Who The Fuck Cares?"

Were there any details about why she was having a crisis? It'd be interesting to know if she felt he wasn't "the one" or whether she was overwhelmed by some other aspect of the relationship. They've got some pretty screwy messages about relationships and marriage. I thought there seemed to be a lot of attraction between them when they married. I wonder if Jinger had trouble handling it? I could see Jer being super intense and that being frightening to Jinger. I'm not saying that Jer was putting pressure on her to act but there probably wasn't much room for her to sort of gently explore what she was comfortable with or verbalize what she needed. And if she wasn't equipped to figure out what was going on with her own feelings and get reassurance from.ANYBODY, breaking things off might have been the only thing she could think of.

Oh, I wish I could use our PACER account to see this! But we are not supposed to for non work stuff. I do civil, not criminal stuff. so grain of salt, everyone. 2 thoughts. * don't read too much into the no bail. he hasn't yet appeared before the federal (magistrate) judge. That's when it will be set. * I haven't seen any references to a sealed indictment that could possibly be about him, but maybe there is one? I can't tell if he was arrested or given an opportunity to turn himself in. anyone know what happened?

Malachi?

I doubt he is just doing "grunt" work. I work for a legal aid program (in a different state) and regularly see 3Ls doing pretty substantive work. these legal clinics have two goals: 1) to provide low cost / free work for undeserved communities and 2) provide real experience so you graduate with practical skills. I did clinic and learned interviewing skills, motion writing and negotiations. I didn't get to argue / try anything but that was a function of the type of case I was working on. I've seen clinic students doing DV hearings, evictions, delinquency, and consumer stuff. we have student interns at my office and just in the past year I have had multiple students do contested hearings with me - opening, closing arguments and presenting witnesses. so he will almost certainly have a chance to have a small client caseload. 3-5 and be expected to be the main contact for the client, develop the facts of the case and do meaningful research and handle part of a case in court. he'll be expected to find his feet in court handling routine motions or calls and deal directly with opposing counsel/party in navigating court and drafting court orders. a good clinic program will give plenty of support but also really have options for the student to be the front of the case.

perhaps she started to say the word penis not person before she caught herself.

He isn't honest at all. Stupid tiny phone keyboard.

I disagree with Jessica's comment that Margaret liked Tony because he was honest. I was struck by that comment because Jessica recognized his interactions as negging. He isn't honest abegging. And he was negging her. I disliked Tony a lot. (But Goode is excellent in the role). His flirting with her is everything I hate in a come on. *his questions were mocking and borderline cruel (if you thought someone was still in love with an ex, why would you disparage the ex? He is not her get a grip friend); *his questions weren't about getting a honest reaction from her - they were loaded with judgment so that she would perform to get his approval; *his whole "I know you better than you know yourself" is classic gaslighting; *he was very self protective of himself and yet thought nothing of demanding that she be emotionally vulnerable; *he seems like the type that will be a verbally vicious fight and use any vulnerability against you. For all those reasons, I really really hate the character. I find him distinctly unchanging. Billy was just an idiot. Tony is mean.

The filing is a Motion to Dismiss. For such a motion, you don't have disputed facts (there are some exceptions but they don't appear to apply here - I haven't read the pleadings myself). In a motion to dismiss, you take the position that - taking the complaint as truly setting forth the relevant facts, the plaintiff still has no legally enforceable right or claim. So I don't think this means anything yet. We'll see what else comes out.

I think you have nailed it. I'm going to assume that this is not a 100% cold blooded money grab. In other words, something happened that made her mad enough / hurt enough to take legal action. But there are plenty of cases where there is a valid claim, but the money you can recover isn't enough for it to be worth a lawyer's time. $500,000 is a lot of money. I see three possibilities: 1) whatever happened was serious enough to actually result in real costs to her. (Medical bills, lost wages, adverse impact on her ability to work etc) and her lawyer accordingly has strong negotiating leverage; 2) she's got no where near that level of damages and the someone has really unrealistic expectations about monwy damages; or 3) the damages claimed were designed to be high enough to avoid a quick settlement. In other words, plaintiff wants the case to stay alive because she is after something else. Obviously there are other possibilities, but these seem most likely to me. #3 is the most interesting to me. To really let my imigination run wild, what could she get other than money? (Settlements can contain any exchange that is otherwise legal - it doesn't have to be cold hard cash). I don't think Josh has much that would interest her. So what else? The goal could be to force him to participate in discovery (like a deposition) about his various activities. She could just be interested in humiliating him. But to really, really get into wild speculation - perhaps she was encouraged to file the suit by a tabloid interested in getting dirt directly from Josh?

In regard to the Josh Duggar v. AK depth of Human Services: The lawsuit could be Josh's attempt to vacate any DHS finding against him. I don't practice in AK, but in my state when there are allegations of abuse and neglect, the authorities have 3 different remedies to pursue. 1. Criminal charges which wouldn't apply in this case. 2. A juvenile court case - which only happens when the state takes custody of the children. 3. "Indicating" a person for abuse and neglect - this is a civil remedy and puts the individual into a confidential data base administered by child protection staff. Any person working with children has to pass this background check - schools, preschools, peds units in hospitals, scouts etc. Even school volunteers have to pass it. If AR is like my state, such a database is not publicly accessible, so a reporter wouldn't find it. again, assuming AR is like my state, if you are indicated, you have the right to appeal the finding and can have a non jury civil hearing. The court re cords are sealed (Here the records are either sealed or filed under initials. This is done to protection the identity of the children). So my guess I'd the some state action was taken against Josh and he appealed it. based on thsee facts, in my state a likely outcome would have been thst Josh would have been indicated for sexual molestation and Jim Bob and Michelle would have been indicated for allowing a known sex offender to have access (after finding out it happened and failing to take reasonable steps to prevent it from happening again).

I binged watched most of the episodes. I want to like Jenny, but she did one thing that pissed me off so much it is coloring everything about Jenny for me. In the episode with Nora (the mother of 8 kids who is pregnant again), Jenny realizes that Nora has been trying to cause/induce a miscarriage. Jenny attempts to engage with Nora, but Nora refuses to talk about it. The Nora's husband comes in and Jenny in the SNOTTiEST tone sells Nora out. Jenny then flounces out of the room having dropped the bomb and leaves Nora to face the consequences alone. Now, as it happens, Nora's husband does know what is going on, but I HATE JENNY FOR THIS!! How does Jenny know that she wasn't leaving Nora alone with a man that would be furious about finding out she was trying to lose the baby? How does Jenny know that NORA'S HUSBAND isn't coercing her? How can she be so convinced that Nora is safe when she leaves? At that moment, I HATE HER and I HATE HER and I HATE HER. She puts on her smug & virtuous face, her patient doesn't fall on her neck thanking her for her patronage, so she pulls a nasty trick and sashays away. Maybe Nora would forgive her but I won't.