all fall down

I went back and watched it again, and I think you might be right. Poor Olivia.

She was in the video with the little girlies walking into the mill, but not in the pictures. Weird.

He's served 7 months now. He was found guilty on Dec 9, 2021 so that's when his sentence started. Doesn't seem like that long ago. Because I like to keep track...

A ride was given but Jill made it clear she was not happy to have been asked. I thought I had a screen shot of it, but can't seem to find it. If I do, I'll come back and post it.

It was from a blind item submitted to Deuxmoi. I saw the originial post on Deuxmoi. But anyone can submit things there and they are not vetted, just posted as is, so there is no way to check if it's legitimate. I thought about posting it here, but decided against it since it can't be verified, and I personally doubted it. I took it to be rumor/speculation or just wishful thinking. If it happens, we'll know about it then.

It's been nearly 5 years since she had Sam. We know she's changed in that time in terms of learning boundries with her family and getting some kind of counseling, and she seems to have matured a bit. Hopefully she won't feel as overwhelmed this time. Also she won't have a toddler like she did when Sam was newborn. Sam and Israel are old enough now to do some things on their own, and also old enough to help a little bit. So I hope she does better with this baby, but time will tell.

Didn't Amy confirm that JL had some time in jail for fraud? I think I'm remembering that correctly.

There aren't too many details, but they are listed on page 6 of the Judgment: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.arwd.62817/gov.uscourts.arwd.62817.162.0_1.pdf As noted, the $5000 is for the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act.

Nice article! He knows who Lord Daniel is, so I'd say this reporter is well versed in fundie snark. 😁

The lump sum of $50,100 is due immediately, but looks like there are also payment options. Page 7 of the below document https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.arwd.62817/gov.uscourts.arwd.62817.162.0.pdf Per page 6 of this judgment, $35,100 is his assessment, $10,000 is a fine, and $5,000 goes to the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act.

I found the text of the Alice letters a while ago online so I saved them. Text posted under the spoiler due to length. It's wild that this info has all been around since 2007, nearly a decade before it all came out publically. Like a lot of us here, I definitely remember hearing the rumors, so when it all came out I was not surprised. I bolded the part where Alice claims to know the person who called Oprah. I agree Deana and Amy had to know something, they must have at least heard the rumors. I can believe that they didn't know the specifics of the "touching" because that didn't really come out until the police report. Either they got their information from JB who we know downplayed it, or they were willingly ignorant, but they had to know something was going on.

Yes, you are correct. It was in Kayleigh Holt Tull's deposition in the Duggar sister lawsuit (link below). Kayleigh wrote a letter that she put into a book, then loaned the book to a friend. She named the friend who she loaned the book to, and the person who called the hotline. Not sure if either of those people, or Kayleigh herself, was Alice though, but it could have been. "Alice" said in her letters that she knew the person who contacted Oprah. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.arwd.51417/gov.uscourts.arwd.51417.139.13_1.pdf The stuff about the Oprah show and the letter in the book starts on page 36 and goes to page 40.

Here's the order with his conditions https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/59871253/158/united-states-v-duggar/

I believe the 12.5 years includes the nearly 6 months he's already served. So it's closer to 12 years from now.

Also from The Sun: Judge recommends sex offender treatment The judge will recommend sex offender treatment for Josh Duggar, but Josh doesn't have to do it. Judge Brooks wants Josh to go to the prison in Seagoville because it has a good sex offender program, but that determination depends on bed space. No reaction from Anna Duggar Josh Duggar's wife, Anna Duggar, had no reaction when the sentence was determined, The Sun's court reporter noted. His father, Jim Bob Duggar, also did not visibly react.

From The Sun JUST NOW Two prison options Josh Duggar will either go to Seagoville, Texas to serve his sentence, or to a prison in Texarkana, Arkansas, according to The Sun's court reporter at the sentencing. JUST NOW No reaction from Josh Duggar Josh Duggar had "no reaction" when the sentence was handed down, according to The Sun reporter at the hearing on Wednesday.

"Anna was seen making a hand gesture towards him." I'm sure she was just waving, but I just want to imagine her giving him the finger!

I wondered that myself. I found a tweet from Giancarlo where he pronounces it es-POS-ito, so I guess that's it. I've been wrong all these years!

To be fair the robo calls are not linked at all to his present day troubles, only the FOIA request and release of the police report. They weren't looking for Josh, just anyone who happened to be downloading CSAM and happened to catch him. The only thing connected is that the prior molestation information could affect his sentencing. You could argue that the interest in the current case is releated to the prior scandals. Even if we had no knowledge of the molestations, I still think it would have been a big deal to have the son of this 'famous for being the best Christian family' to be caught using Ashley Madison and downloading CSAM. The Duggars were already thought of as hypocrites by many even before we knew of the molestations, but it's a bigger deal because of knowledge of his prior acts.

It seems like IG posts are new/real time and youtube is a weekly summary of whatever happened in the prior week or so, up to when they post it. Jill R does that too. Once a month or so she'll create a youtube video of all her facebook and instagram posts since the last time she did a youtube video smooshed together.

Looks like it. Here is the defense's reposnpse, entered yesterday I have not read it yet, off to do that now. It's 12 pages. Read it - basically argues that he deleted the files right away and may not have even opened some of them, and that the government over-described the images/videos to get an emotional reaction. Their counter-arguments seem a bit weak to me. I found the Government's arguments more effective. But of course I'm not a lawyer, that's just my lay-person opinion. I know the Government's job is to go for the maximum sentence, and the defense's job is the opposite, but I still thought the government did a better job in laying out their case. FYI - all the documents that are publicly available and free can be found on this link. I bookmarked it a while back. It's sorted by descending so the newest ones are at the top. Other items that are under seal or not freely available, the website will direct you to PACER to purchase. As a side note, anyone from the public can sign up for a PACER account, you do not have to be a lawyer or associated with one. The account is free, but documents cost per page.

Jill once posted a video of her shaking up her pink drink in a different but also long pink container with a much more uh, natural, looking lid, and I had to take a screenshot. Remember, this was from a video, where she was SHAKING it back and forth. She removed the video not long after. I could not get the image out of my head.

I think it was along the lines of "Josh is so polite, Josh is so considerate, and loving and kind, etc, etc, etc" and the judge could see through that and think "he wasn't very considerate to his family when choosing to commit these crimes", and the letters were all quite over the top when seen together. I had to watch the video in chunks because it kept buffering on my end. The whole video was over 3 hours long even though the Josh part was only part of that. The video was loading slower that my internet wanted to play it, so i kept having to pause and wait for it to catch up, so I might be slightly mis-remembering her exact words, but that was the gist of her opinion.

She couldn't even get through the first sentence! And when she got to Michelle's signature, I thought she was done for. But it was nice to hear her analysis of both memos and her opinion that these overly flowery letters could backfire on them.

Question for @hathorlive is there a reason that during the prosecution's discussion of a pattern of behavior, that they couldn't bring up the Ashley Madison stuff and his admissions of (legal) pornography viewing/addiction? Was it because that stuff wasn't part of the trial? I would think if any person is able to write a letter on behalf of FF about things not specificall related to the trial, that the government could use his own words to show the opposite. Just curious.