Josh & Anna Smuggar: A Series of Unfortunate Events

[floridamom]

I'm so happy that the judge is a woman.

[GeeGolly]

Jeremiah could live with Josh in a rental house or one of the ones they already own.

I suppose they are arguing he is safe around his kids because they're portraying Josh as innocent.

[iwantcookies]

Bond might be $1 million.

Will Jim Bob pay? Or will Josh cool his heels in jail until the trial?

Joshgate 2021 the year crap hit the fan... again 

[Albanyguy]

8 hours ago, Tuxcat said:

I can't even imagine what they are telling those kids.

I imagine it's been some variation on "Daddy had to go out of town to take care of some business for Lolli and Pop". The kids would buy this because they've been raised to know that when Pop says "Jump!", Daddy says "How high, Sir?". And as long as Anna doesn't break down in front of them or some other adult doesn't let something slip, they've probably settled down happily enough. 

I don't mean to imply that this whole mess won't be traumatic for them, but for now they'll be sheltered from the worst of it because they already live in a protective bubble. No newspaper headlines or TV news reports will reach them. No other kids will taunt them on the school bus or playground.

Once Josh is released on bond, the kids will probably be taken to see him at least once for appearance's sake and again they'll be fed the "Daddy's working and can't come home right now" line.

Eventually, the kids will have to be told that Daddy isn't coming back for a very long time, but I doubt if JB, Michelle or Anna are thinking that far ahead. They're probably still clinging to the deluded hope that Josh will be acquitted or, at worst, let off with a slap on the wrist.

And once the dust settles, I doubt if the kids will really miss Josh all that much on a day-to-day level. I've always thought that he was a distant, uninvolved father. The kids' memories of Josh will probably be of them tiptoeing around, trying not to disturb him as he sits in his easy chair and Mommy waits on him hand and foot.

 

 

 

[Churchhoney]

14 hours ago, mynextmistake said:

I expect the defense will put forth either Jana (with JB proposing a new address she can live at with Josh during the pendency of the case) 

In my dreams, this proposal has been made to Jana and proven to be the last straw for her, and she has now flown the coop. In real life, she'll probably be babysitting him at the toxic-pool house. 

On the bright side, maybe she can push him in.

Edited May 5, 2021 by Churchhoney

[galaxygirl76]

So is Jana going to have to babysit Josh or the M kids with Anna staying with Josh because I'm sure Boob is going to make it Jana's burden. 

Edited May 5, 2021 by galaxygirl76

[GeeGolly]

I know a mom whose husband was in jail for nearly two years. She brought her two young daughters to see their dad at "college"* during that time.  Years later, when the youngest one was in her late teens, she overheard her older sister mentioning "that time when dad was in jail" to their mom. Needless to say, she had a glaringly bright lightbulb moment.

Like @Albanyguy said, if Anna isn't freaking out too much the kids will adjust to their new normal, without much bother as to what the adults around them are doing.

*It was minimum security in a country setting, but yes it did have barbed wire and guards and such. Young kids just tend to believe what they're told and go with the flow.

[jacourt]

But if it is Jana she has been raised to be subserviant to men.  If Josh tried something would she be able to stop him?  Would she be able to repoer it or just cover it up?  

[Churchhoney]

8 hours ago, Tuxcat said:

"Our Field Trip to Josh Duggar's Cara Lot"- wow - whole different perspective to see this now.

 

At an early age, his parents instilled in him the principles you need to be a used-car salesman. 

Seems about right. 

[GeeGolly]

13 minutes ago, jacourt said:

But if it is Jana she has been raised to be subserviant to men.  If Josh tried something would she be able to stop him?  Would she be able to repoer it or just cover it up?  

I don't think it will be Jana.

I wish I could know how JB & M are looking at this. They certainly can't trust Josh and it'll be their money they're risking. So I would think the Josh minder would likely be a brother or a male 'friend'. Maybe Travis Story? Does he have kids?

[Insert Username]

12 hours ago, Tuxcat said:

Right, but can the prosecution at any time use the past molestation behavior to further argue that Josh is a potential threat to children?

I am guessing that information is not usable since he was a minor.

But it is relevant since his ridiculous lawyers seem to be arguing that "all Josh did was look at CP images- he certainly didn't come into contact with a child..." (which by the way I am shocked his lawyers would argue in this manner but the previous post suggests thats the way they are going for the bond hearing at least)

Unfortunately, not only was he a minor, but he was never even arrested, let alone tried and convicted, for what he did in his teens. Ditto the Ashley Madison thing - it's skeevy but it was not illegal.

If anything good comes of this, maybe the Feds were able to trace where these images came from and maybe take down a whole ring of these scumbags.

[Churchhoney]

Maybe Kory Nakatsu can take him. He lives in Arkansas now. Has a big house. 

Really wondering what's going on in his head and the Spiveys' heads as it occurs to them that they talked to JB many times over the past two years about their kids' marriages.... and that he probably knew about this for most of that time -- but said nothing......

Even though in Nakatsu's case, vetting the would-be groom and his entire situation is supposed to be part of the "biblical betrothal" thing. Nakatsu seems to want his daughters in a biblical betrothal situation so they'll be safe -- and so their reputations will be safe, as Jed!'s vows so memorably stated. And Hilary seems to praise JB for raising super-responsible super-competent children -- and obviously would want that for her daughter's sake. 

Of course, I guess it's always possible that JB totally fessed up to these people about what might be coming down the pike before he helped arranged quickie weddings. Only not, it seems to me. 

And yet here they all are -- part of the tight-knit, super-faithful, super-conscience-driven Gothard empire. 

I'd be surprised if they aren't all experiencing some serious mental turmoil with a bit of rage thrown in at the moment. 

Or maybe they just believe JB's protestations that he didn't know a thing or that Josh is being railroaded because of his faith. 

{not implying anything about other Duggarlings being similar to Josh in any way -- but these connections in this cult are all about whole families linking together....And I'd think they'd expect a certain amount of honesty in that process when it comes to things as substantial as this ... )

Edited May 5, 2021 by Churchhoney

[Minivanessa]

11 minutes ago, GeeGolly said:

I don't think it will be Jana.

I wish I could know how JB & M are looking at this. They certainly can't trust Josh and it'll be their money they're risking. So I would think the Josh minder would likely be a brother or a male 'friend'. Maybe Travis Story? Does he have kids?

I also don't think it would be Jana. She's his younger sister, and lives in a home with several minor children. I wonder if JB has found some fundie buddy, maybe a married guy whose kids are grown, with no local young grandchildren, who will give Josh a home pending resolution of the case. I assume it would have to be a real Kool-Aid drinker type, whose wife won't fuss when told "Honey, get the guest room ready. Josh Duggar is moving in with us while he's out on bond pending trial in his federal criminal case. I signed paperwork with the court about it."

I wonder if the feds caught Josh because they traced the images to him during an ongoing investigation which has now resulted in charges against others as well as Josh. I think the pandemic caused some delay between the raid and the indictment, but even without the pandemic the feds may not have been at the end of a bigger investigation when they served the warrant on Josh in late 2019. I assume those facts will eventually be revealed. 

[EtheltoTillie]

On 5/2/2021 at 2:21 PM, doodlebug said:

The guilty pay their legal bills just as easily as the innocent.  I expect that this guy, who handles federal cases, is used to having sleazy clients.  If the Duggars had the assets to pay his retainer, that is all he needed to know.  While the rest of us find Josh repugnant, the sort of people this guy represents would be glad to have a lawyer who worked with a semi-high profile client like Josh.  A case like this, with the media covering, would be good for the bottom line.

The thing about criminal defense is that the lawyer gets paid win or lose. It’s not on contingency. You have to get paid the huge retainer up front so loser doesn’t skip out on the bill. 

[Future Cat Lady]

11 minutes ago, Churchhoney said:

Maybe Kory Nakatsu can take him. He lives in Arkansas now. Has a big house. 

Really wondering what's going on in his head and the Spiveys' heads as it occurs to them that they talked to JB many times over the past two years about their kids' marriages.... and that he probably knew about this for most of that time -- but said nothing......

Even though in Nakatsu's case, vetting the would-be groom and his entire situation is supposed to be part of the "biblical betrothal" thing. Nakatsu seems to want his daughters in a biblical betrothal situation so they'll be safe -- and so their reputations will be safe, as Jed!'s vows so memorably stated. And Hilary seems to praise JB for raising super-responsible super-competent children -- and obviously would want that for her daughter's sake. 

Of course, I guess it's always possible that JB totally fessed up to these people about what might be coming down the pike before he helped arranged quickie weddings. Only not, it seems to me. 

And yet here they all are -- part of the tight-knit, super-faithful, super-conscience-driven Gothard empire. 

I'd be surprised if they aren't all experiencing some serious mental turmoil with a bit of rage thrown in at the moment. 

Or maybe they just believe JB's protestations that he didn't know a thing. 

If they’re Gothard followers, they may not think it’s a big deal. It may be just another sin to them.

Edited May 5, 2021 by Future Cat Lady

[Churchhoney]

2 minutes ago, Future Cat Lady said:

If they’re Gothard follower, they may not think it’s a big deal. It may be just another sin to them.

Yeah. Perfectly possible. 

[Tikichick]

13 hours ago, Tuxcat said:

I am guessing the prosecution cannot reference Josh's pattern of behavior at the bond hearing (or at all going forward)?

Prior bad acts and criminal record is absolutely permitted at bond hearings.   The prohibition comes in when the matter goes before the finder of fact, a judge or a jury, for a decision regarding the actual allegations.

I'm unclear whether the molestations can legally be considered a factor since there was no conviction.   

10 hours ago, Tuxcat said:

So they plan to argue (later) that his constitutional rights were violated at the time of the search?

They weren't questioning him, so they weren't forcing him to talk to them without legal counsel.   They were there on a court authorized warrant, which apparently covered his phone among other things.   They were under no obligation to let him use the phone and had every right to take custody of it.

10 hours ago, cereality said:

Likely yes. I’m not a constitutional lawyer at all but this sounds like a set up for - this search wasn’t conducted properly (either the IPhone or the computer or both) so any evidence coming from these search is inadmissible. That sounds like an argument Jim Bob came up with. Reality is if they had a warrant, they had already gone to court to show probable cause of a crime — the search was fine. What Josh could have done is denied consent to search until they showed him or his atty probable cause - they would have cooled their jets long enough to send the warrant to the atty who’d then tell him he must cooperate - but he didn’t know to do that.

 

It would definitely be expected that they push back against the search warrant in any way possible during pretrial motions in order to quash any and all evidence possible.   That has zero to do with JB's legal mind.   If the actual attorneys neglect to take every run at the warrant and the raid it opens the door for an ineffective assistance of counsel claim in a bid for appeal.   

A search warrant authorized by the court is a court order.   There is no such thing as holding off execution for a suspect's attorney to be satisfied there is probable cause.   The judge who authorized the warrant found probable cause in the warrant request already.  Interfering with the execution of an authorized warrant can relate in other charges, same with any other court order.   A defense attorney's time to attack the warrant is in the pretrial phase -- and then potentially again in the appellate phase via claims that the court made some error in not quashing the warrant and evidence resulting from it during the pretrial motions.  

Edited May 5, 2021 by Tikichick

[Crochetlady]

So the bail hearing is at 1:30 central time today, correct? 

[ginger90]

5 minutes ago, Crochetlady said:

So the bail hearing is at 1:30 central time today, correct? 

Yes it is.

[GeeGolly]

To be fair the Nakatsus and Spiveys have nothing to do with this.

I certainly hope neither family is concerned about this anymore than other Duggar friends would be. Their daughters didn't marry Josh. This has nothing to do with them or their families.

[Crochetlady]

1 minute ago, GeeGolly said:

To be fair the Nakatsus and Spiveys have nothing to do with this.

I certainly hope neither family is concerned about this anymore than other Duggar friends would be. Their daughters didn't marry Josh. This has nothing to do with them or their families.

No it doesn't, but the ugly stain of this could still reach them. Guilt by association. Their child married into the family of a child molester. That type of thing. 

[3girlsforus]

10 hours ago, cereality said:

Likely yes. I’m not a constitutional lawyer at all but this sounds like a set up for - this search wasn’t conducted properly (either the IPhone or the computer or both) so any evidence coming from these search is inadmissible. That sounds like an argument Jim Bob came up with. Reality is if they had a warrant, they had already gone to court to show probable cause of a crime — the search was fine. What Josh could have done is denied consent to search until they showed him or his atty probable cause - they would have cooled their jets long enough to send the warrant to the atty who’d then tell him he must cooperate - but he didn’t know to do that.

 

They absolutely will challenge the search warrant. It would be a natural thing to do for any lawyer. In fact if it was JB’s idea instead of his lawyer, they need new lawyers. Challenging the search warrant doesn’t even mean his lawyers think the search was bad. They are just going to try to assert it was or some part of it or one piece of information etc. anything to reduce the amount of evidence allowed at trial. You never know what argument might work. I saw an episode of Dateline (or other similar show) where a lawyer got a bunch of electronic info from the suspect’s phone thrown out because the lawyer successfully argued that the investigators should have gotten a new search warrant each time they searched for something on his phone even though it was in police custody the whole time. As a layperson that seems asinine to me, but defense lawyers know it’s not about logic, it’s making interpretation of the letter of the law fit what you want. 

[Churchhoney]

7 minutes ago, GeeGolly said:

To be fair the Nakatsus and Spiveys have nothing to do with this.

I certainly hope neither family is concerned about this anymore than other Duggar friends would be. Their daughters didn't marry Josh. This has nothing to do with them or their families.

You're absolutely right. 

Never meant to imply that.

But if I were in their position, and I thought what a lot of us think, which is that JB likely had a very good idea that this would go down, I'd  be upset with him -- fairly or unfairly -- for not telling me that the DHS raid might have some consequences and that we should be prepared for that .... 

Of course, maybe he did tell them something like that. But in the interest of finding out more about what JB's really like, I'd love to know what he did or didn't say. (not that I ever will...) 

 

Edited May 5, 2021 by Churchhoney

[Tikichick]

10 hours ago, emmawoodhouse said:

Here's the "car lot." Not much room for Smuggar and the "sleazy ex-con" to fit in there. And would you trust a sleazy ex con with your computer? Yeah, didn't think so...

 

You've blown my mind with this photo showing what the car lot actually looked like.   Now I've got some new thoughts about this whole thing and some questions.

[Tabbygirl521]

34 minutes ago, Crochetlady said:

No it doesn't, but the ugly stain of this could still reach them. Guilt by association. Their child married into the family of a child molester. That type of thing. 

Plus Josh is the uncle of their future grandkids. Eternal vigilance...

[Tabbygirl521]

28 minutes ago, Tikichick said:

You've blown my mind with this photo showing what the car lot actually looked like.   Now I've got some new thoughts about this whole thing and some questions.

Wait, I seriously thought that was a joke. That was real? A car lot that looks like a kid’s lemonade stand?

[Tikichick]

Does anybody know the ownership history of the car lot property, as far as any family members having ownership of it at any point other than Josh? 

[Boston]

11 hours ago, galaxygirl76 said:

 Joy. Was. Five.

Truth.  Poor Joy is probably on a road trip to Mexico with Austin and the kids, crying all the way.  Shameful, that s.o.b.

[3 is enough]

You have to wonder if that Hutchens creep actually introduced Josh to CP instead of "setting him straight".  The fact that he himself was arrested a few years later for CP certainly suggests that that was the case.

You just can't make this stuff up.  What a shit show.

[dariafan]

13 hours ago, Westiepeach said:

Other side of the coin here, so to speak. I have always been in charge of the family finances. Husband gives me his paycheck every week. Actually, in our entire soon-to-be 34 years of marriage, he has never signed a paycheck. I sign his name and my name underneath. The last checks he ever signed were our wedding money checks. BUT... I always show him our checking/savings account balances. No hidden money, no off shore accounts. I do, however, have my scratch-off lottery winnings hidden away in the cookie jar... but he knows about that. 🤷🏼‍♀️ That system works for us. 

Oh! And if we need extra money... we get it from the cookie jar!

But you share the information.  I doubt Josh tells Anna anything cause she is the little woman and shouldn’t concern herself with such things.     ( and I hope it’s an awesome cookie jar!)

[WinnieWinkle]

1 minute ago, 3 is enough said:

You have to wonder if that Hutchens creep actually introduced Josh to CP instead of "setting him straight".  The fact that he himself was arrested a few years later for CP certainly suggests that that was the case.

 

Normal parents would definitely be wondering this and be furious at the possibility that the man they trusted made a bad situation hugely worse - of course Josh does not have normal parents.

[dariafan]

And getting you phone taken away is why I can never get locked up.  I have a FarmVille farm that needs tending.   And my Disney emoji blitz isn’t going to play itself!
on topic:     Smugger wasted his life and had destroyed a lot of his family.  And he does not care.   That’s the sad part.  He doesn’t care. 

[cereality]

2 hours ago, Churchhoney said:

Maybe Kory Nakatsu can take him. He lives in Arkansas now. Has a big house. 

Really wondering what's going on in his head and the Spiveys' heads as it occurs to them that they talked to JB many times over the past two years about their kids' marriages.... and that he probably knew about this for most of that time -- but said nothing......

Even though in Nakatsu's case, vetting the would-be groom and his entire situation is supposed to be part of the "biblical betrothal" thing. Nakatsu seems to want his daughters in a biblical betrothal situation so they'll be safe -- and so their reputations will be safe, as Jed!'s vows so memorably stated. And Hilary seems to praise JB for raising super-responsible super-competent children -- and obviously would want that for her daughter's sake. 

Of course, I guess it's always possible that JB totally fessed up to these people about what might be coming down the pike before he helped arranged quickie weddings. Only not, it seems to me. 

And yet here they all are -- part of the tight-knit, super-faithful, super-conscience-driven Gothard empire. 

I'd be surprised if they aren't all experiencing some serious mental turmoil with a bit of rage thrown in at the moment. 

Or maybe they just believe JB's protestations that he didn't know a thing or that Josh is being railroaded because of his faith. 

{not implying anything about other Duggarlings being similar to Josh in any way -- but these connections in this cult are all about whole families linking together....And I'd think they'd expect a certain amount of honesty in that process when it comes to things as substantial as this ... )

I saw a clip from I guess the episode that was put together in 2015 where they asked Anna what if anything she knew about Josh and his sisters and why did she marry him if she knew. She goes on about how when she and her parents visited the Duggars, Josh sat down with her parents and "shared his heart" and the mistakes he had made blah blah. Of course neither Josh nor JB said -- so here's the deal Josh touched x # of sisters over a y month span. You know it was fundie bullshit of "when I was young, I made mistakes, I had thoughts, but I've since grown as a man and repented and become even more Godly." You know she 100% believed it. You know her moron parents took mistakes to mean -- oh he jerked off once, what young man hasn't done that; look what a Godly man to even tell us and to repent so hard for so many years.

So with Jed and Justin's wives families, I'm sure Jed and Justin said nothing bc this isn't their issue. But I imagine JB in some roundabout way talked about raising sons and how along the way some of them have made mistakes and society has jumped so hard about those mistakes and keeps pestering them (that damn DOJ and their pestering LOL), but all have repented so hard; it doesn't matter what society thinks of us just God, and look at the beautiful families they have now within the Duggar empire, your daughters could have that too if they marry Jed and Justin.

So in JB's mind -- yes I told Jed and Justin's wives families that mistakes had been made (and maybe that the gov't is pestering us), I didn't hide the ball, they wanted to marry in regardless. And in the father in laws minds it's WAIT THAT is what he meant regarding mistakes made?? I figured he and his sons were undergoing a tax audit or something!?

[BitterApple]

2 minutes ago, dariafan said:

   Smugger wasted his life and had destroyed a lot of his family.  And he does not care.   That’s the sad part.  He doesn’t care. 

I can't remember if it was the L.A. visit or what, but an observer saw them out and about and said Josh did nothing to help with his kids. I think being holed up on some remote property is a dream come true for him. No wife, no kids, and I'm sure Boob will send Jana over to cook, clean and shop. So Josh gets to continue his legacy of being a lazy, useless slug and the rest of the family pays the price.

[Oldernowiser]

1 minute ago, BitterApple said:

I can't remember if it was the L.A. visit or what, but an observer saw them out and about and said Josh did nothing to help with his kids. I think being holed up on some remote property is a dream come true for him. No wife, no kids, and I'm sure Boob will send Jana over to cook, clean and shop. So Josh gets to continue his legacy of being a lazy, useless slug and the rest of the family pays the price.

Except I would assume officially he won’t have internet access. Nothing to do but watch regular cable and listen to the cicadas…if he’s wearing a monitoring device they’ll know if he even walks down to the mailbox. 

[cereality]

1 minute ago, Oldernowiser said:

Except I would assume officially he won’t have internet access. Nothing to do but watch regular cable and listen to the cicadas…if he’s wearing a monitoring device they’ll know if he even walks down to the mailbox. 

In the 80s-90s there used to be all these ads on TV in the middle of the day re correspondence courses that you could basically do on paper -- like they'd send you books, you'd do your work on paper and mail it back. Pre internet. How great if any of those still exist and Josh can take a course on book keeping or whatever.

LOL. Not that he'd do anything useful. He has an addiction. JB should just get him hooked on video games. I know guys his age who can play video games 12 hrs a day, eat and sleep and the day is done. Just reward him and his behavior with an xbox, he'll be fine.

[MargeGunderson]

4 hours ago, Tikichick said:

Prior bad acts and criminal record is absolutely permitted at bond hearings.   The prohibition comes in when the matter goes before the finder of fact, a judge or a jury, for a decision regarding the actual allegations.

I'm unclear whether the molestations can legally be considered a factor since there was no conviction.   

They weren't questioning him, so they weren't forcing him to talk to them without legal counsel.   They were there on a court authorized warrant, which apparently covered his phone among other things.   They were under no obligation to let him use the phone and had every right to take custody of it.

It would definitely be expected that they push back against the search warrant in any way possible during pretrial motions in order to quash any and all evidence possible.   That has zero to do with JB's legal mind.   If the actual attorneys neglect to take every run at the warrant and the raid it opens the door for an ineffective assistance of counsel claim in a bid for appeal.   

A search warrant authorized by the court is a court order.   There is no such thing as holding off execution for a suspect's attorney to be satisfied there is probable cause.   The judge who authorized the warrant found probable cause in the warrant request already.  Interfering with the execution of an authorized warrant can relate in other charges, same with any other court order.   A defense attorney's time to attack the warrant is in the pretrial phase -- and then potentially again in the appellate phase via claims that the court made some error in not quashing the warrant and evidence resulting from it during the pretrial motions.  

Agree with all. I don’t think there is any constitutional right to contact your lawyer unless you are arrested. Since it was only a search warrant, and he wasn’t arrested at the time of the search, I’m not sure he has a valid argument. (Please note my law degree is from Hudson University, which you may have heard of on Law & Order)

Edited May 5, 2021 by MargeGunderson
Clarity

[IndianPaintbrush]

I don't think he has a valid argument either - he wasn't being arrested, and it's not like the agents denied him the right to call his lawyer. He just had to do it from a different phone. However, as others have pointed out, his lawyers have to try everything - I won't be surprised if they move to dismiss even if it's based on a really shoddy argument.

[Rabbittron]

7 minutes ago, cereality said:

In the 80s-90s there used to be all these ads on TV in the middle of the day re correspondence courses that you could basically do on paper -- like they'd send you books, you'd do your work on paper and mail it back. Pre internet. How great if any of those still exist and Josh can take a course on book keeping or whatever.

LOL. Not that he'd do anything useful. He has an addiction. JB should just get him hooked on video games. I know guys his age who can play video games 12 hrs a day, eat and sleep and the day is done. Just reward him and his behavior with an xbox, he'll be fine.

He can't go play video games because all of the gaming systems are internet capable. 

[cereality]

1 hour ago, Tikichick said:

 

A search warrant authorized by the court is a court order.   There is no such thing as holding off execution for a suspect's attorney to be satisfied there is probable cause.   The judge who authorized the warrant found probable cause in the warrant request already.  Interfering with the execution of an authorized warrant can relate in other charges, same with any other court order.   A defense attorney's time to attack the warrant is in the pretrial phase -- and then potentially again in the appellate phase via claims that the court made some error in not quashing the warrant and evidence resulting from it during the pretrial motions.  

You can absolutely ask for probable cause if someone comes to execute a search. Often in practice they don't necessarily hand you the warrant, they just say they're the feds here to execute a search and people consent. But if you ask for the warrant, they must provide it. And yes I've litigated for 15 years I know that by the time there's a warrant, there's probable cause already and you don't have to satisfy anyone's attorney BUT IRL at least in my (east coast) federal district, let's be honest -- often a white male defendant CAN say, I want to call my lawyer about this and yes the FBI will cool their heels for 5 min and 100% of the attorneys you'll call will say -- the FBI is at your door with a warrant, they get to search, step aside.

3 minutes ago, IndianPaintbrush said:

I don't think he has a valid argument either - he wasn't being arrested, and it's not like the agents denied him the right to call his lawyer. He just had to do it from a different phone. However, as others have pointed out, his lawyers have to try everything - I won't be surprised if they move to dismiss even if it's based on a really shoddy argument.

Yep 100% there will be a motion to dismiss as a matter of law. It's not about winning the motion or not but if you don't make the motion, it suggests you have no confidence in your own case. It won't be about the facts of what Josh did but more than the government can't prove every element of the crime so he can't be convicted anyway so let's just dismiss it.

[Oldernowiser]

Does anyone know what the percentage of the bail money that JB will have to actually shell out to get his Best Boy out of jail pending trial? It seems like I remember it being less than the actual amount the bond is set for? But maybe that’s for lesser crimes in lesser courts?

[Tuxcat]

9 minutes ago, cereality said:

You can absolutely ask for probable cause if someone comes to execute a search. Often in practice they don't necessarily hand you the warrant, they just say they're the feds here to execute a search and people consent. But if you ask for the warrant, they must provide it. And yes I've litigated for 15 years I know that by the time there's a warrant, there's probable cause already and you don't have to satisfy anyone's attorney BUT IRL at least in my (east coast) federal district, let's be honest -- often a white male defendant CAN say, I want to call my lawyer about this and yes the FBI will cool their heels for 5 min and 100% of the attorneys you'll call will say -- the FBI is at your door with a warrant, they get to search, step aside.

Yep 100% there will be a motion to dismiss as a matter of law. It's not about winning the motion or not but if you don't make the motion, it suggests you have no confidence in your own case. It won't be about the facts of what Josh did but more than the government can't prove every element of the crime so he can't be convicted anyway so let's just dismiss it.

By this point in the proceedings (bond hearing), have Josh's lawyers seen the prosecution's evidence? I don't know the law at all, but there is something about discovery et cetera? At what point do the defendants lawyers fully understand what they are up against?

[Whyyouneedaname]

5 minutes ago, Oldernowiser said:

Does anyone know what the percentage of the bail money that JB will have to actually shell out to get his Best Boy out of jail pending trial? It seems like I remember it being less than the actual amount the bond is set for? But maybe that’s for lesser crimes in lesser courts?

I was always under the impression it was 10% of the actual bail. 

edit to add: does anyone know the time of the bond hearing today?

Edited May 5, 2021 by Whyyouneedaname
ask a ?

[PrincessPurrsALot]

So I know I used part of this Bible verse as a joke, but it has been ruminating with me.

Quote

And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and. cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee. that one of thy members should perish, and not. that thy whole body should be cast into hell. - Matthew 5:30

Josh offends me. He offends us all; that is, all decent members of society (even if we're not what the Duggars would think of as decent).  It is profitable to JB to cast Josh away.  So do it.  Shun him.  Let him rot in jail until trial (if given an option).  Stop providing the best possible counsel. It really is time for the Duggars to stop defending Josh and for him to feel the full consequences of his abhorrent actions. 

On a completely separate note, would anyone roll up to that car lot and think, "yeah, this looks legit; I want to buy a car from this greasy, sweaty guy at his hut in a field." 

[cereality]

1 minute ago, Tuxcat said:

By this point in the proceedings (bond hearing), have Josh's lawyers seen the prosecution's evidence? I don't know the law at all, but there is something about discovery et cetera? At what point do the defendants lawyers fully understand what they are up against?

This is the very first step right after Josh was publicly advised of the charges last week. The case is ongoing but no meaningful discovery yet. I haven't seen a scheduling order yet -- that'll tell the lawyers the dates by which they need to exchange documents; take depositions if any including tech/forensic experts etc. So no his lawyers at this point realistically don't fully know what they're up against -- they mostly know what Josh is telling them (they do have access to their client but right now have been focused on getting him out of prison first).

[Oldernowiser]

1 minute ago, PrincessPurrsALot said:

It is profitable to JB to cast Josh away.

That’s kind of where I was heading with wondering how much liability JB takes on if he bails Josh out. I would imagine the thought of handing Josh a bunch of cash and a beater car and telling him to head to Mexico and stay there has crossed JB’s mind more than once.

The hitch in that plan is Anna and the grandchildren. She isn’t going to give up on Joshie, ever, and it’s not the kids’ fault that their daddy is a giant ass and that they have too many siblings to feed. 

[cereality]

Any idea where Josh is living once bond is posted? It won't be with Anna since the judge has already said that if there is bond, one of the conditions is no minor children in the home. I mean I guess he could live with Anna if she gives away her children but even still I don't think any court would trust an arrangement where the kids are easily accessible to Josh at the TTH. I imagine all of the married kids in Arkansas have told JB HELL NO; the married kids outside Arkansas aren't an option because the court isn't going to let him live out of state. 

Didn't Jer have an apartment with Jed at one point; it was kind of for show but they did seem to have some living set up there to be able to say of course Jed the politician has his own place in the right district. I guess Josh could live there with Jer? Though Jer is probably trying to get himself married off by tomorrow so he too can have the ability to say no like his siblings with spouses.

I would hope that for something so heinous ALL the kids are given the opportunity to tell JB no I can't/won't do this. I mean probably not but for something like this it is NO siblings responsibility to take one for the team.

Though I'm unclear on why he has to live with someone. I wonder if that'll be a release condition from the court. It isn't any other person's obligation to watch you. Throw an ankle monitor on him so the Probation Office (I know he isn't on probation but that's usually the office in federal court that monitors supervised release of all types) can keep tabs on him and throw him in some unused warehouse and that's that.

[Tikichick]

29 minutes ago, MargeGunderson said:

I don’t think there is any constitutional right to contact your lawyer unless you are arrested. Since it was only a search warrant, and he wasn’t arrested at the time of the search, I’m not sure he has a valid argument. (Please note my law degree is from Hudson University, which you may have heard of on Law & Order)

???  I didn't say he had a constitutional right to contact his lawyer.   I said they weren't questioning him, weren't forcing him to talk to them.   If they're not detaining him they're not required to provide him means to contact his lawyer.  (Please note this is from a layperson's working familiarity of the protections afforded under cases such as Miranda v. Arizona.)    

[Zella]

1 minute ago, cereality said:

Didn't Jer have an apartment with Jed at one point; it was kind of for show but they did seem to have some living set up there to be able to say of course Jed the politician has his own place in the right district.

They were "living" in a small house in Springdale that wasn't JB owned. I can't remember all the details, but I think someone who pops up a fair amount in their real estate dealings owned the house. I don't know if it would still be available because I think there was some talk about it being advertised as for rent or even being sold. I don't have time to check, but @crazy8s might remember or be able to check. 

[dariafan]

37 minutes ago, MargeGunderson said:

I don’t think there is any constitutional right to contact your lawyer unless you are arrested. Since it was only a search warrant, and he wasn’t arrested at the time of the search, I’m not sure he has a valid argument. (Please note my law degree is from Hudson University, which you may have heard of on Law & Order)

And castle !   I follow them on Twitter. I don’t think even Joshy could get into Hudson 🤣🤣😂😂🤣