Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search
Log-in Changes With Upcoming Upgrade

Josh and Anna

Dr Spengler

By Dr Spengler
in Counting On

Guest

💚Green-Light! Exemplary Community Engagement💚 

Congratulations! Starting on page 2, this thread’s discussion reflects our core values of diversity, respect, and constructive engagement. Your kind and considerate contributions turned this topic Green.  

Here’s to continuing this success:

- Recognition: A big thank you to all contributors for navigating a difficult topic in a healthy, and respectful way.

- Inspiration: Let’s keep this momentum going! Continue to engage with empathy, listen actively, and recognize diverse perspectives.

- Grow Together: Encourage each other to have respectful conversations about difficult topics and to keep humor smart for maintaining a Green Light status.

 

Your collaborative efforts are what make our community thrive.

  • Reply
  • Start Topic

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 325
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Zella
Zella

I just saw a news notification that the Supreme Court denied Josh's request to hear his appeal.

Zella
Zella

Yes I actually do have sympathies for families who find themselves in this situation. It would be heartbreaking as a parent to discover one of your kids is preying on your other children (I say that n

Notabug
Notabug

The thing is, when he was out on bail, the judge did allow his children to visit when accompanied by Anna.  Even though he lived elsewhere, there was no mention of anyone else being present to monitor

Posted Images

quarks

quarks

4 hours ago, merylinkid said:

If SCOTUS denies cert (doesn't take the case) that's pretty much the end of the line.    There won't be any more legal bills.    Since he already filed for cert (request for the Supremes to take the case) there should be only minimal or even no legal bills until such time as the Supremes make a decision to take the case or not.   If they don't (which is more than likely) then that's it.   No more bills.   So that drain was ending soon already.   

 

 

Probably, assuming:

1. Josh manages to keep out of additional legal trouble while in prison. He apparently committed at least one infraction already, and I wouldn't rule out the possibility of another one, potentially leading to new charges.

2. Josh doesn't file any additional/collateral petitions.

My understanding - which might be very wrong - is that if the Supremes don't take his case, he might still be able to file a claim alleging prosecutorial misconduct and/or ineffective defense counsel.

I don't think there's evidence of either one. But given that Josh already decided not to spare his family and everyone else the costs of a trial, and then decided not to spare his family the costs of an appeal, I wouldn't put it past him to try this technique if he legally can, even without that evidence.

  • Like 2
  • Useful 7
crazy8s

crazy8s

Agree

I think they all still live on the TTH property same a Joe and Kendra, Jer and Hannah.

Elijah though, claimed he had moved out and his truck was stolen from his new home a year or so ago and he has not updated to any other address in Arkansas.

Anna is still registered with the warehome address. Maybe she lives there still, but I don't think so.

Jessa and Ben are still registered at the old mold house address.

Joshiah and Lauren are listed in Rogers even though they supposedly built that big house adjacent to JB property near that schoolroom church shown on the show.

Maybe AR records are slow, but Jer and Jed's have changed several times over the past few years, so they do get changed.

  • Like 2
  • Mind Blown 1
  • Useful 4
Zella

Zella

(edited)
3 hours ago, crazy8s said:

Agree

I think they all still live on the TTH property same a Joe and Kendra, Jer and Hannah.

Elijah though, claimed he had moved out and his truck was stolen from his new home a year or so ago and he has not updated to any other address in Arkansas.

Anna is still registered with the warehome address. Maybe she lives there still, but I don't think so.

Jessa and Ben are still registered at the old mold house address.

Joshiah and Lauren are listed in Rogers even though they supposedly built that big house adjacent to JB property near that schoolroom church shown on the show.

Maybe AR records are slow, but Jer and Jed's have changed several times over the past few years, so they do get changed.

Which site are you using? The secretary of state site is very accurate in reflecting voter information on file with the county clerk's office. 

Edited by Zella
  • Like 1
GeeGolly

GeeGolly

Josh has been in prison for 663 days and should be released in 3,120 days. Had he not been caught with a phone he release date would have been in 3069 days. 

In 8+ years his kids will be 21, 19, 17, 15, 13, 11 and 9. Josh and Anna will be 43.

I wonder if Josh has the cognitive ability to realize how much society will change in that time and more importantly, how much Anna and the kids will.

  • Like 19
  • Sad 2
  • Useful 4
Zella

Zella

9 hours ago, GeeGolly said:

Josh has been in prison for 663 days and should be released in 3,120 days. Had he not been caught with a phone he release date would have been in 3069 days. 

In 8+ years his kids will be 21, 19, 17, 15, 13, 11 and 9. Josh and Anna will be 43.

I wonder if Josh has the cognitive ability to realize how much society will change in that time and more importantly, how much Anna and the kids will.

I suspect he does, but I also am not sure he really cares, which is probably the same difference. 

  • Like 21
  • Sad 3
CalicoKitty

CalicoKitty

In this culture, the eldest son is "in charge" of siblings and has special treatment.  JB used to take Josh to the (was it the state senate??) when he was very young, and he received a lot of attention.  He received "special treatment" from his parents when he messed up (badly).  Being in prison is the first time in his life that he is not in charge, and is not getting special treatment.  I don't think the ability to care about others was instilled in him growing up.  It will be interesting to see how he handles life when his sentence is up.

  • Like 12
  • Useful 4
GeeGolly

GeeGolly

Nature vs nurture. I feel pretty strongly that Josh would have been a troubled guy no matter the environment in which he was raised. However for a family whose motto is J.O.Y., they should have an asterisk on the O, as it hard to care about "others" if you're taught to fear most of them. Not only fear them but also pity them.

I think this holds true for Josh and the rest of the siblings, so for sure this type of nurturing negatively impacted who Josh already was.

 

  • Like 10
  • Useful 1
Salacious Kitty

Salacious Kitty

10 hours ago, GeeGolly said:

Nature vs nurture. I feel pretty strongly that Josh would have been a troubled guy no matter the environment in which he was raised. However for a family whose motto is J.O.Y., they should have an asterisk on the O, as it hard to care about "others" if you're taught to fear most of them. Not only fear them but also pity them.

I think this holds true for Josh and the rest of the siblings, so for sure this type of nurturing negatively impacted who Josh already was.

 

He probably thought of the J as JOSH first. Seriously. 

  • Like 14
Not Buyin It

Not Buyin It

On 3/4/2024 at 12:59 PM, GeeGolly said:

I spent a couple years working exclusively with 'after incarceration' folks. Assisting with everything from getting a ride from the jail or prison, pocket money, renewing IDs, social services, clothing and obtaining housing and jobs. None of it is easy. A lot of discrimination, but also some great places and landlords who go out of their way to be supportive. But IMO, some felons should have limited ability to work, live and move about the community - Josh included.

The judge made it sound like Josh had sizable savings, whether any of that will be left in 8ish years, who knows. IMO, any support he gets from JB has less to do with JB's age and more to do with how much money JB has left.

But no doubt, unlike many of my former clients, Josh will always have a place to lay his head and food to eat, even if it feels totally unfair.

Why is it unfair? Why should a felony charge mean a life of guaranteed poverty? Yeah, Duggar did some Sh!tAzz things. But I can't help but notice that, while certain politicians, sports figures and Hollywood darlings have done same/worse, Duggar is held in greater contempt and hatred. And the only apparent difference is the Duggars' Christian faith (flawed as their practice might be). It makes me wonder.

  • Like 3
  • Popular Post
GeeGolly

GeeGolly

  • Popular Post
1 minute ago, Not Buyin It said:

Why is it unfair? Why should a felony charge mean a life of guaranteed poverty? Yeah, Duggar did some Sh!tAzz things. But I can't help but notice that, while certain politicians, sports figures and Hollywood darlings have done same/worse, Duggar is held in greater contempt and hatred. And the only apparent difference is the Duggars' Christian faith (flawed as their practice might be). It makes me wonder.

I feel its unfair because most of the clients I supported had very hard times getting back on their feet, and Josh, while certainly hated by many, won't have to worry about food and shelter when he's released.

Poverty greatly contributes to recidivism, yet there's not much help for released convicts. Josh will never be broke.

  • Like 30
  • Applause 3
  • Love 1
  • Popular Post
quarks

quarks

  • Popular Post
19 hours ago, Not Buyin It said:

Why is it unfair? Why should a felony charge mean a life of guaranteed poverty? Yeah, Duggar did some Sh!tAzz things. But I can't help but notice that, while certain politicians, sports figures and Hollywood darlings have done same/worse, Duggar is held in greater contempt and hatred. And the only apparent difference is the Duggars' Christian faith (flawed as their practice might be). It makes me wonder.

Well, to start with, I would agree that a felony conviction (as opposed to charge) shouldn't mean a life of guaranteed poverty.

But I would also completely agree with Geegolly that for the majority of convicts a felony conviction does often lead directly to poverty, for a variety of reasons. And I would add that we have multiple reports of various people - usually but not exclusively men - who were convicted in their late teens/early 20s of statutory rape with teenagers, and who struggled to find any sort of housing after release because of the housing restrictions placed on sex offenders, or who suddenly found themselves forced to move because a school board decided to build an elementary school nearby. That in turn can cause additional financial stress. 

I suspect, by the way, that Josh is going to face similar issues - yes, he has a large family, but also yes, all else aside, that family is presumably currently supporting his wife and kids and may have helped cover his legal bills. And notably, even though this is a family that previously made a point of making nice Christian visits to prisons, as far as we know, only one of Josh's siblings has bothered to visit him in prison. That doesn't rule out other visits that went unnoticed by the press, of course, but I think it's probably fair to say that they aren't visiting him often. So I don't know how much financial help Josh will be getting once he's released. That's where Geegolly and I do disagree, at least a little bit.

But moving on to your other contention - that Josh is getting much more vitriol than certain other celebrities/politicians who have done the same/worse, well, I won't go into the politicians because of forum rules. But on the non-politicians,  I don't think this applies to, say, Jeffrey Epstein. Or Mark Saling - sure, some expressed disbelief or "wait and see" after his arrest on charges of possession of child pornography, but after he was officially charged, his film contract was immediately terminated, and he was shunned everywhere in Hollywood. Saling eventually took a plea deal, but committed suicide before his official sentencing date.

And just this past week, Sean Combs/Diddy has been the subject of intense vitriol and hatred - and in all fairness to him, he hasn't even been charged with these particular allegations.

So that's three men, just off the top of my head, who have absolutely been getting more/worse vitriol than Josh Duggar - in large part, of course, because all of them were/are considerably better known than Josh Duggar, and/or were a lot wealthier than Josh Duggar, but still. And none of them are/were particularly known for their Christianity. 

And I could add various examples of Hollywood celebrities who have been shunned/fired/harassed/etc for far less than what Josh Duggar was convicted of doing. I mean, Kelly Marie Tran was harassed pretty much right off the internet largely for the crime of appearing in a Star Wars movie. She's back, after a lot of therapy, but almost exclusively in voice roles, and continuing to avoid many public appearances.

So....is Josh probably facing potentially severe financial issues and certainly currently facing internet vitriol? Yep - just like multiple other convicts and celebrities. Is he getting treated differently because of his family's Christian faith? I'd argue no. 

  • Like 18
  • Applause 9
crazy8s

crazy8s

22 hours ago, Not Buyin It said:

Why is it unfair? Why should a felony charge mean a life of guaranteed poverty? Yeah, Duggar did some Sh!tAzz things. But I can't help but notice that, while certain politicians, sports figures and Hollywood darlings have done same/worse, Duggar is held in greater contempt and hatred. And the only apparent difference is the Duggars' Christian faith (flawed as their practice might be). It makes me wonder.

I can see your point. But I would say held in greater contempt than the others mentioned holds true here, only because Josh Duggar is the topic here. We talk about the Duggars and are limited by the politics policy and general rule of not bringing up side topics and people not seen on the show.

I don't see Josh getting more hateful or ongoing media coverage in the real world. I can say neither my mom or my daughter have ever seen the show. They know he was tried and convicted and if asked today they would have zero sympathy for him because of the crime he was convicted of committing. Other than that, it is forgotten to both of them just as it is for the vast majority of people.

 

  • Like 12
  • Applause 2
andromeda331

andromeda331

On 3/29/2024 at 6:35 PM, GeeGolly said:

I feel its unfair because most of the clients I supported had very hard times getting back on their feet, and Josh, while certainly hated by many, won't have to worry about food and shelter when he's released.

Poverty greatly contributes to recidivism, yet there's not much help for released convicts. Josh will never be broke.

No, he won't. He'll be back home with his parents who don't care and have never held him accountable for anything including abusing his sisters and another woman in the past or for what he was convict for and a wife who still refuses to believe Josh did anything wrong. Their not exactly going to watch or monitor him to make sure he doesn't mess up again. Josh certainly isn't. There's nothing to prevent Josh from recidivism.   

  • Like 11
  • Sad 2
GeeGolly

GeeGolly

(edited)
4 hours ago, Salacious Kitty said:

Doesn't part of the probation stipulate that he can't be around minors unsupervised for 20 years? How will that work with his own minor children? His many nieces and nephews visiting the Big House?

I think Josh will return to the warehouse, not the Big House. But do we know what qualifies as supervision? During the court case he was allowed to be around his own children as long as Anna was there. 

Anyway, IMO, once Josh gains access to a phone or computer it'll just be a matter of time before he gets caught and ends up violating the terms of his release.

Edited by GeeGolly
  • Like 13
  • Sad 1
  • Useful 1
GeeGolly

GeeGolly

"Note that prisoners are limited in the number of visitors they can see within a month. However, inmates in the federal prison system get at least four hours of jail visitation each month and multiple people in a group (such as family members) can visit an inmate together." 

Because its Easter I wondered about visitation for Josh. Holiday visiting hours are 8:30 - 3. If Josh has already had 4 hours of visitation this month, does that mean he needs special permission to have visits today?

  • Useful 4
  • Popular Post
satrunrose

satrunrose

  • Popular Post

I'm not sure I agree that Josh is being treated unduly harshly. As a counter example, everything I've heard about Subway Jared lately has been in terms of true crime "Jared from Subway, why it was so much worse than you thought" and not "Jared from Subway: Bygones" 

That being said, I do think the Duggars specific brand of Christianity has affected the reaction here and elsewhere. The Duggars (and sweet friends, admittedly others are worse) have called out about 40% of the North American population for (checks notes) wearing pants, let alone how they've treated birth control debates and LGBTQ+ folks. All the while, they knew that their son had committed (and it turned out was committing) acts that are considered heinous pretty much everywhere on the moral spectrum. I maybe an agnostic/Mainline Protestant, but I know my Bible well enough to know that the New Testament comes down very hard on hypocrites. That's one of the main reasons I snark on the Duggars (well, that and the fact that they aren't content to just keep their hyper-religious bubble to themselves). 

  • Like 22
  • Applause 11
  • Love 1
all fall down

all fall down

13 hours ago, GeeGolly said:

I think Josh will return to the warehouse, not the Big House. But do we know what qualifies as supervision? During the court case he was allowed to be around his own children as long as Anna was there. 

Anyway, IMO, once Josh gains access to a phone or computer it'll just be a matter of time before he gets caught and ends up violating the terms of his release.

Per the release order (bolding mine).

Quote

The defendant shall have no unsupervised contact with minors, which shall include his own children. Contact with his
children must be supervised by his wife, his parents, or another individual approved by the U.S. Probation Office. If
there is a concern about the potential for inadvertent contact with a minor at a particular place, function, or event, then
the defendant shall get approval from the U.S. Probation Office before attending any such place, function, or event.

This is less restrictive than when he was on trial as then the only minors he could be around supervisoed were his own children. This does not limit supervised contact to only his children. I wouldn't want him anywhere near my (imaginary) kids, even supervised, but I'm also not related to him. Theoretically, he could be a family celebration around his nieces & nephews so long as he's always supervised. All his siblings will be adults by the time he is out. 

Assuming he gets released on his current release date (Oct 2032), he will still have 4 minor children. 

*

Also, wherever he chooses to live has to be approved by the probation officer. So he'll only be permitted to go to the warehouse if that's approved. 

Quote

You must live at a place approved by the probation officer. If you plan to change where you live or anything about your living
arrangements (such as the people you live with), you must notify the probation officer at least IO days before the change. If
notifying the probation officer in advance is not possible due to unanticipated circumstances, you must notify the probation officer
within 72 hours of becoming aware ofa change or expected change.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Useful 7
emma675

emma675

The majority of his siblings will more than likely have underage children when Josh is released from prison. Knowing what he's done to his own sisters when they were young, I wonder how many of them would be willing to have Josh around their kids even if he's being "supervised" by Anna or another adult? I'm using supervised in quotation marks because I have serious doubts about the quality of supervision Anna or his parents would provide given that they insist he's innocent. I would not want Josh in the same room as any kids, ever, even with multiple adults around. Why take the chance?

  • Like 9
  • Applause 5
  • Love 3
quarks

quarks

Well, and there's also the question of how many of his siblings will be willing to be around Josh, period - and to a certain extent, how many of his siblings Josh will want to see.

After all, many of his adult siblings didn't bother to go to his trial; none of them wrote the judge to ask for leniency; and at least five of them wrote public statements agreeing with the verdict. And apparently only one sibling has bothered to go visit him in jail, even though he's only a few hours away. 

Not exactly an indication of warm family dynamics here.

  • Like 17
GeeGolly

GeeGolly

1 hour ago, Salacious Kitty said:

I feel for any of the siblings who chose to live on the Back 40 yet don't want anything to with their oldest brother. It will be nearly impossible to avoid him around the property. 

Who is there? Joe, Jer and Josiah? They all have young kids, who will likely range in age from newborn to teenager, in 8 years.

  • Like 5
Guest

💚Green-Light! Exemplary Community Engagement💚 

Congratulations! Starting on page 2, this thread’s discussion reflects our core values of diversity, respect, and constructive engagement. Your kind and considerate contributions turned this topic Green.  

Here’s to continuing this success:

- Recognition: A big thank you to all contributors for navigating a difficult topic in a healthy, and respectful way.

- Inspiration: Let’s keep this momentum going! Continue to engage with empathy, listen actively, and recognize diverse perspectives.

- Grow Together: Encourage each other to have respectful conversations about difficult topics and to keep humor smart for maintaining a Green Light status.

 

Your collaborative efforts are what make our community thrive.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...