Josh & Anna Smuggar: A Series of Unfortunate Events

[emmawoodhouse]

1 minute ago, mynextmistake said:

Sounds like Josh has this case in the bag. The judge is probably a closet fundie. 

The judge said it was basically a tossup. She's giving Smuggar the benefit of the doubt, but he's on a VERY SHORT LEASH.

[Gigi43]

5 minutes ago, Boston said:

I am always on here.. but who are the REAVERS??  i've been out of the loop for the last few hours.. Thank you

 

They testified to be Josh's guardians should he be released, which he is. The wife admitted she did not know the charges til the hearing and that her husband made the decision and supports his decisions, and admitted she's not very comfortable with being alone with Josh after hearing everything but swore she would call law enforcement before her husband/JB if she catches Josh in violation. She also mentioned thinking they had to give Josh and Anna 'ministry.' They've known the family but about 6 yrs, likely cult members because who else would JB ask? Basically she is just obeying her husband and the court seems to think that's good enough.

[Minivanessa]

1 hour ago, Boston said:

I am always on here.. but who are the REAVERS??  i've been out of the loop for the last few hours.. Thank you

LaCount Reaver Reber is a guy JB knows from church I think. Reaver Reber works full time at the VA and does prison ministry on the side but hasn't been active with that since the pandemic locked down the jails. His wife Maria is a housewife. Their adult daughter (who I think lives elsewhere) sometimes gives piano lessons to children at the Reaver Reber home. The Reavers Rebers have a "mother in law" apartment in their home where Josh will stay, I don't know much about it except it has its own door to the outside. They also have six firearms in the house that aren't in a gun safe, just a bedroom closet. I'm not sure how well the Reavers Rebers know the Duggar family. Mrs. Reaver Reber testified that her husband decided to "help" Josh by giving him a place to stay and she "supports" that decision.  

ETA: The judge asked Mrs. Reaver Reber some rather savvy questions as @Gigi43 indicated. Including, if you know Josh has violated any of the release terms, you WILL call the federal probation office first? Not JB Duggar, or the church elders, or your husband? You will tell them AFTER you notify the probation office, right? 

Edited May 6, 2021 by Jeeves
I've learned the name is "Reber"

[MrsClaus]

1 minute ago, catlover79 said:

😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡

 

Send them to the Reavers

[Churchhoney]

7 minutes ago, Boston said:

I am always on here.. but who are the REAVERS??  i've been out of the loop for the last few hours.. Thank you

They seem to be "church people" who kinda sorta know JB and M, except kinda sorta not. I guess they seem like upright, church-going people, the guy works at the VA, etc.....So after calling 52,000 other people, JB must have gotten Mr. Reaver to agree to this. .... Mr. Reaver, like Mr. Keller, used to do prison ministry before COVID.....So I guess this is part of his ministry. 

If the judge followed these idiot people the way we do, she might be more skeptical of anything that's part of anyone's ministry who has anything to do with the Gothard and/or Duggar enterprise...But she clearly doesn't. 

I'm hoping it's all a trick and someone who knows the score has set up a situation where Josh will be babysat by the Reavers from Firefly. Who are cannibal pirates. 

Edited May 5, 2021 by Churchhoney

[Annb67]

What the actual Fuck is this? The hell? So YOUR DAUGHTER AND WIFE don’t want this perv in your house, but to hell with them. Bring him in. Cook his meals. Bullshit! Fuck the Reavers and the Duggar’s. I would cook him something...

Edited May 5, 2021 by Annb67

[Oldernowiser]

Free Mrs. Deaver!

[Arkay]

15 minutes ago, 3 is enough said:

He has unlimited access to the kids as long as Anna is there?  Are you kidding me?  

I have no words.

The thread is moving too quickly for me, so this has probably already been asked and answered: this unlimited access to his kids while Anna is present——does that take place at the Reavers’ home only? It can’t possibly be at his house as long as Anna is there, right? 
What would happen when Anna needs the bathroom, or to escort a toddler to the bathroom? 
Someone with better eyes than mine, pls inform me. 

[Madtown]

Now I'm picturing Anna posting a family picture after Josh is out and saying "God is great"🤮

[WinnieWinkle]

10 minutes ago, beckie said:

I'll bet they wake up one day and Josh,  who "is not a flight risk " has taken off, with or without  Anna and the kids.

Does anyone know what happens to the Reavers if Josh actually does make a break for it?  Are they on the hook for anything?

[Nysha]

2 minutes ago, WinnieWinkle said:

Does anyone know what happens to the Reavers if Josh actually does make a break for it?  Are they on the hook for anything?

As long as they notify his probation office/police they're in the clear. If they don't or for some reason cover for him, I'm sure they can be charged with aiding and abetting. 

[BitterApple]

I'm really scratching my head on the Reavers being deemed suitable guardians. I felt like Mrs. Reaver was practically BEGGING the judge to say "Hell No!" with all the red flags she was dropping during her testimony. 

Minors in the home, weapons in the home, room with outside access, wife admitting she's not comfortable alone, wife admitting she's only doing this out of deference to her husband, adult daughter not comfortable with set-up, etc. Seriously, who in their right mind adds up those factors and thinks, "Yep, Mrs. Reaver has the right constitution to deal with a pedophile." What the actual fuck is going on here?

[emmawoodhouse]

5 minutes ago, Arkay said:

The thread is moving too quickly for me, so this has probably already been asked and answered: this unlimited access to his kids while Anna is present——does that take place at the Reavers’ home only? It can’t possibly be at his house as long as Anna is there, right? 
What would happen when Anna needs the bathroom, or to escort a toddler to the bathroom? 
Someone with better eyes than mine, pls inform me. 

He's not allowed at the TTH or the guesthouse.

[PJ123]

7 minutes ago, BitterApple said:

Wouldn't surprise me. I think Josh will either run or off himself before it's all said and done. No way do I think this ends with him in prison.

Hmmmm...I think he is still believing the horsepoop JB has told him since day one that one day he (Josh) will be the head of household.  JB and ME-shelle are certainly continuing to act like that is the case.  This is just a temporary thing to Josh (hence the smirking and other reactions).  He thinks wont be found guilty (or just have probation) and it will go away. No big deal.  Ugh.

[Nysha]

Nothing was said about how much is bail is. Is that a separate ruling or has it been waived?

[Patricia07]

11 minutes ago, mynextmistake said:

Sounds like Josh has this case in the bag. The judge is probably a closet fundie. 
 

Someone should start a petition to recall them, like they did that judge in California who gave the guy who raped a girl 2 years because he was afraid a longer sentence would affect the rapist’s life. I’d sign.

I’m not surprised he got out on bail, I pretty much accepted that would happen. But allowing him access to the kids when only their brainwashed zombie mother is around does surprise, and horrify me. Plus it seems like the judge bent over backwards to minimize Josh’s prior conduct. And it’s *really* interesting that the judge kept calling him “Josh.” An uninvolved professional would have used Mr. Duggar or called him the defendant. Things that make you go hmm...

 

Maybe that's why Josh was reportedly smirking and laughing. 

[WinnieWinkle]

Was Michelle part of the Zoom call or present in the courtroom if that was allowed?  I am just trying to wrap my head around how a mother would react hearing what her son has been accused of doing.  I know this woman is something else, but how could any mother not be horrified right now?

[Gigi43]

The best thing that could happen to those kids is Josh fleeing, because there's no way he'd want them with him on the run.

 

There are so many shifty things about this, Anna being allowed a suitable supervisor, he can have access to his own kids but no others and the unwilling guardian wife, I'm starting to think his smug ass will skate once again.

[quarks]

20 minutes ago, emmawoodhouse said:

They claimed under oath that Boob isn't paying them anything.

He should, though.

At the very least, Josh/JB should be paying whatever the market rent for a studio apartment in the area is, plus a portion of the utility bills. 

And that's the very least.

[GeeGolly]

This is so fucked up. I'm speechless.

[ElsieEm]

Not surprised he's been granted pre-trial release sadly, it's what I expected.

Feel terrible for Mrs. Reaver though. Talk about a raw deal. No end of sht these fundie women have to put up with apparently. Friendship with JB is the gift that keeps on giving 🤢

And Anna will be supervising his visits with his kids? Oy. Hopefully she finds it a lot of work to schlep everyone over there very often and does short visits like, once a week at most. Especially when she has her new baby. 

[Jeanne222]

14 minutes ago, mynextmistake said:

Sounds like Josh has this case in the bag. The judge is probably a closet fundie. 
 

Someone should start a petition to recall them, like they did that judge in California who gave the guy who raped a girl 2 years because he was afraid a longer sentence would affect the rapist’s life. I’d sign.

I’m not surprised he got out on bail, I pretty much accepted that would happen. But allowing him access to the kids when only their brainwashed zombie mother is around does surprise, and horrify me. Plus it seems like the judge bent over backwards to minimize Josh’s prior conduct. And it’s *really* interesting that the judge kept calling him “Josh.” You’d think an uninvolved professional would have used Mr. Duggar or called him the defendant. Things that make you go hmm...

 

You are writing exactly what I'm thinking!  For the air tight case the feds seem to have on Josh and his CP Josh seems to be skating along.

Who is this judge?  Is she a church member?

If Josh is not permitted back at his Guest House home he shares with Anna then where are these family get togethers going to take place?

Josh is free to go to work....aaa a Josh doesn't work!

Is all of this the work of this high priced attorney JB hired?

[JoanArc]

2 minutes ago, GeeGolly said:

This is so fucked up. I'm speechless.

I don’t think I’ve ever known a group of people that can take insanity to the next level like the Duggars. It’s all.they.do.

 I’m really scared to think about what is next.  At this point They’ll actively encourage people to produce CSA. With full biblical justification, of course. 

[Pingaponga]

What are the odds that Anna won't be taking the kids to visit Josh on a regular basis? She may be equally appalled by what he has done, now that more details have been made public.

[mittsigirl]

3 hours ago, hathorlive said:

It indicates he really is a pedophile.  I just hope he's stopped abusing his relatives and switched to online porn. I'm afraid of what the answer is.

Sadly, I think we probably know what that answer is. He is a very sick human being and will never be able to be any different. He will never get the sentence he so deserves, but even though you say that these children are likely adults now, their sentences will be forever. Heartbreaking. I knew I shouldn't read the details, I knew what it would do to me, but I stupidly read them anyway. He deserves to rot in prison for the rest of his life, but of course he won't. 

[GeeGolly]

Someone needs to put flyers up around NWA warning the community about Josh.

Shit like this makes one wonder who their neighbors are or are harboring.

And Josh is allowed to 'work'. Basically going back to the scene of the latest crime?

[Lurk]

54 minutes ago, MMEButterfly said:

I understand the judge allowing Josh to go to church, but I'm imagining all the little girls who will be there. I wouldn't be comfortable there with my granddaughters. 

Isn't TTH their "c h u r c h"?

*using the word church loosely

[Minivanessa]

3 hours ago, Churchhoney said:

If the judge followed these idiot people the way we do, she might be more skeptical of anything that's part of anyone's ministry who has anything to do with the Gothard and/or Duggar enterprise...But she clearly doesn't. 

I don't think the judge is all that clueless. She specifically asked Mrs. Reaver Reber about what she'd do if she knew Josh had violated one of the conditions of his release - who would she call first? The judge got across the message that Mrs. Reaver Reber would have to call the federal probation office FIRST to notify them. Not JB Duggar, not the church elders, not Mr. Reaver Reber. She could tell those people later. 

I could be wrong but I think that at this hearing the prosecution had the burden of persuading the judge that Josh shouldn't be released. LATER EDIT: i think this case was one with a presumption against pretrial release, so I suppose one of the "special cases" I mention in the following sentences.

 Generally even in federal criminal cases, American law is that people pending trial (not yet convicted of a crime) should be eligible for release, except in special situations. (In most state court systems, for instance, being charged with a capital offense which is usually first degree murder is the main situation rendering someone not eligible for bail.)

In this case the prosecution didn't quite convince the judge that even with that long list of conditions, it would be unacceptable for Josh to be released pending trial. As disgusting as the charges are, and it appears there's a strong probable cause case for the charges, those charges don't mean that Josh is ineligible for pre-trial release as a matter of law. L\ Later edit: I don't understand what the judge meant if she said the prosecution "didn't meet its burden." Unless she meant that the defense had shown a prima facie case in favor of release and the prosecution didn't successfully rebut that case.

The judge had to weigh the evidence against factors that I'm sure are laid out in a list, and the prosecution came up short in keeping Josh from factors added up to pretrial release with a shitload of conditions. The judge is probably not enthused about the Reavers Rebers - but they got up and testified under oath and answered the questions, and said they would call the federal probation office if Josh breaks the rules. I don't think they were discredited on cross-exam. 

ETA: There are NO minors living in the Reaver Reber home. Mrs. ReReaver Reberaver testified that if Josh is released to live there, her daughter will not give piano lessons at the house but will find somewhere else to do that.

EDITED much later: I've learned that this actually was a case where the presumption was against pretrial release, in which case it would seem the defense actually had the burden of persuasion, so the "prosecution didn't meet its burden" comment quoted doesn't make sense. Maybe it related to a specific issue and not the overall burden of persuasion. I have inserted edits above to try to correct the worst stuff.

Edited May 6, 2021 by Jeeves
Grammar, clarity, all those goals I often miss . . .AND later I learned it's "Reber" not "Reaver."

[theironwoman]

I wish I hadn't read the recaps. I know it's more complicated than this but the thought I keep coming back to is how this "godly" Quiverfull lifestyle has resulted in a grown man who has this sick and deranged view of children and women. I feel like throwing up.

[Churchhoney]

4 minutes ago, Jeanne222 said:

 

Josh is free to go to work....aaa a Josh doesn't work!

 

He can get education, too....oh, wait. He's a Duggar. 

[Trillium]

4 minutes ago, Pingaponga said:

What are the odds that Anna won't be taking the kids to visit Josh on a regular basis? She may be equally appalled by what he has done, now that more details have been made public.

Zero. She’s probably planning on what matchy outfits the M’s will wear to greet him tomorrow when he’s released. 

[Arkay]

2 minutes ago, Churchhoney said:

He can get education, too....oh, wait. He's a Duggar. 

I’ll bet he enrolls in a community college now. Just to escape more frequently.

What a burden he is on everyone in his orbit. 

[Spazamanaz]

Just now, Oldernowiser said:

It is my most fervent hope that the adult children and their spouses confront JB and Michelle and say, “That’s it. This is a bridge too damned far and if you put up that bond money, you’ll never see any of us again AND we’ll be shopping the tell-all to the highest bidder by Friday. We’re done.”

Now that's a Duggar book I would buy! 

[IndianPaintbrush]

 

2 minutes ago, Jeeves said:

But generally I believe that it's not usual for a court to deny bail completely to a defendant with ties to the community and no prior convictions, whose facing charges short of capital crimes.

Agree with this. More importantly, people should not look at his bond release as predictive of the ultimate outcome. There was a much lesser burden of proof. Remember, the feds' conviction rate is over 90%.

[Tuxcat]

1 minute ago, Jeeves said:

I don't think the judge is all that clueless. She specifically asked Mrs. Reaver about what she'd do if she knew Josh had violated one of the conditions of his release - who would she call first? The judge got across the message that Mrs. Reaver would have to call the federal probation office FIRST to notify them. Not JB Duggar, not the church elders, not Mr. Reaver. She could tell those people later. 

I could be wrong but I think that at this hearing the prosecution had the burden of persuading the judge that Josh shouldn't be released. Generally even in federal criminal cases, American law is that people pending trial (not yet convicted of a crime) should be eligible for release, except in special situations. (In most state court systems, for instance, being charged with a capital offense which is usually first degree murder is the main situation rendering someone not eligible for bail.)

In this case the prosecution didn't quite convince the judge that even with that long list of conditions, it would be unacceptable for Josh to be released pending trial. As disgusting as the charges are, and it appears there's a strong probable cause case for the charges, those charges don't mean that Josh is not ineligible for pre-trial release as a matter of law. The judge had to weigh the evidence against factors that I'm sure are laid out in a list, and the prosecution came up short in keeping Josh from pretrial release. She's probably not enthused about the Reavers but they got up and testified under oath and answered the questions, and said they would call the federal probation office if Josh breaks the rules. I suspect the prosecution came close to carrying the burden of persuasion, but this isn't horse shoes, and they lose.

Someone more familiar with the federal system will address this, I hope. But generally I believe that it's not usual for a court to deny bail completely to a defendant with ties to the community and no prior convictions, whose facing charges short of capital crimes.

Someone yesterday or the day before indicated that for cases involving child exploitation, the situation is reversed from most court cases. The default is to detain and the burden is on the defense to prove that he's not a threat. So I am unsure if that was correct information now. If it was, the judge seems to have made a questionable decision.  Though there is one very important piece of evidence for the defense. If the govt. thought Josh was a threat, they would have and should have removed him in 2019. They did not.

Secondly the judge is correct in saying he cannot see minors except his children. However she should have mandated limited visitation with a specified third party in a limited location. Instead, it seems rather open ended so long as Anna is present and they aren't at the TTH.

[mynextmistake]

2 minutes ago, Jeeves said:

I don't think the judge is all that clueless. She specifically asked Mrs. Reaver about what she'd do if she knew Josh had violated one of the conditions of his release - who would she call first? The judge got across the message that Mrs. Reaver would have to call the federal probation office FIRST to notify them. Not JB Duggar, not the church elders, not Mr. Reaver. She could tell those people later. 

I could be wrong but I think that at this hearing the prosecution had the burden of persuading the judge that Josh shouldn't be released. Generally even in federal criminal cases, American law is that people pending trial (not yet convicted of a crime) should be eligible for release, except in special situations. (In most state court systems, for instance, being charged with a capital offense which is usually first degree murder is the main situation rendering someone not eligible for bail.)

In this case the prosecution didn't quite convince the judge that even with that long list of conditions, it would be unacceptable for Josh to be released pending trial. As disgusting as the charges are, and it appears there's a strong probable cause case for the charges, those charges don't mean that Josh is not ineligible for pre-trial release as a matter of law. The judge had to weigh the evidence against factors that I'm sure are laid out in a list, and the prosecution came up short in keeping Josh from pretrial release. She's probably not enthused about the Reavers but they got up and testified under oath and answered the questions, and said they would call the federal probation office if Josh breaks the rules. I suspect the prosecution came close to carrying the burden of persuasion, but this isn't horse shoes, and they lose.

Someone more familiar with the federal system will address this, I hope. But generally I believe that it's not usual for a court to deny bail completely to a defendant with ties to the community and no prior convictions, whose facing charges short of capital crimes.

I know you’re right. I’m just MAD. This is CRAZY. And you know Mrs. Reamer is lying through her brainwashed fundie teeth. she’ll call her husband before she calls anybody else and they’ll try to sweep whatever Josh does under the rug.

sometimes it is hard to stay objective when you’re smacked in the face with how little girls and women mean in our society. And not just in fundie circles. Everywhere. This is not OK.

I hope in touch or some other publication parks a car in front of the reamers house 24/7 until trial and take photos of everything Josh does. And they have someone follow him so they can see where he’s going. Because it ain’t to work. I hope the amount of public shame that is heaped on Anna is significant enough that she decides it would be better for the kids to just stay home until daddy goes to trial. I hope Jill told her siblings exactly what was said at this hearing, so that nobody can delude themselves any longer into thinking it is safe for Josh to be around their kids. And I hope smirky-ass Josh tries to violate his conditions, just once and ends up back in the slammer.

[iwantcookies]

Huh Josh might get 0 jail time

 

[Tabbygirl521]

52 minutes ago, Lady Whistleup said:

Probably to back-date some cold cases. It's very typical upon arrests for sexual crimes that the criminal has to give a DNA sample. The Central Park jogger case got solved this way.

That’s what I was afraid of...that they suspect crimes against persons and not “just” viewing images. This is just so awful. 

[mittsigirl]

3 hours ago, hathorlive said:

I told the AUSA in my last big CP case that I wouldn't be happy with anything less than 20 years.  She told me before the sentencing that I was delusional.  I got …maybe 13? For hundreds of thousands of graphic videos.  It's nearly disheartening.

I hate to keep bothering you, but why are the sentences so low, when they affect these children for the rest of their lives? Shouldn't this crime be right up there with murder? It seems to me that these perverts are so protected in the courts, when they should have much worse sentences given to them! Just why?? Young children, toddlers and babies! They should have to rot in jail!

[Annb67]

What was his bail amount?

[Minivanessa]

2 hours ago, Tuxcat said:

Someone yesterday or the day before indicated that for cases involving child exploitation, the situation is reversed from most court cases. The default is to detain and the burden is on the defense to prove that he's not a threat. So I am unsure if that was correct information now. If it was, the judge seems to have made a questionable decision.  Though there is one very important piece of evidence for the defense. If the govt. thought Josh was a threat, they would have and should have removed him in 2019. They did not.

LATER EDIT: I was wrong in my original response, and apparently this was one of those cases. 

Edited May 6, 2021 by Jeeves

[catlover79]

5 minutes ago, mynextmistake said:

I hope in touch or some other publication parks a car in front of the reamers house 24/7 until trial and take photos of everything Josh does. And they have someone follow him so they can see where he’s going.

This is where TMZ comes in handy!! They have eyes and ears everywhere.

Edited May 6, 2021 by catlover79

[emmawoodhouse]

1 minute ago, Annb67 said:

What was his bail amount?

There was no bail. Hexaaz released with a laundry list of conditions.

[BitterApple]

1 minute ago, mynextmistake said:

I know you’re right. I’m just MAD. This is CRAZY. And you know Mrs. Reamer is lying through her brainwashed fundie teeth. she’ll call her husband before she calls anybody else and they’ll try to sweep whatever Josh does under the rug.

I agree. I honestly think we're more educated on how these people operate than the courts. There's no way in hell Mrs. Reaver or Anna would report violations. Let's say Michelle stops by to visit her Golden Boy and she happens to have Josie in tow. Does anyone really think the Reavers will tell her she can't come in or call law enforcement? No freaking way. All information will end at Boob's doorstep.

[doodlebug]

1 minute ago, Tabbygirl521 said:

That’s what I was afraid of...that they suspect crimes against persons and not “just” viewing images. This is just so awful. 

I don't think that the DNA requirement means that Josh is a current suspect in a specific crime.  I think it is that the judge knows, as do we, that someone who views images of children being abused is a high risk to abuse kids himself.  She just wanted to make it clear to Josh that his profile will be run against any current and future cases of child molestation; so there will be no escaping consequences should his DNA be linked to any case, now or in the future.

I believe this is pretty routine for this sort of criminal charge.

Of course, knowing Josh' past history, there has to be some concern that there are other instances of criminal behavior out there.  I certainly don't think he went 20 years without trying to assault other children after his initial victims.

[Lady Whistleup]

Unfortunately, this country's court system protects the wealthy and white. Josh is exhibit A.

[mynextmistake]

Does anyone know how much federal judges earn? 

[Oldernowiser]

There’s no way Josh stays off the internet until July. None.

[Churchhoney]

15 minutes ago, iwantcookies said:

Huh Josh might get 0 jail time

 

I don't think it's time to despair.

The initiative that picked him up has sent a lot of guys to prison for the same crimes Josh is charged with. This is a different phase of the process that has its own ways of operating. Similar things may well have happened at those guys' bond hearings, too. But they convicted them or got guilty pleas in the end. 

I do think Josh'll have to be convicted. But that rests on different facts than the nature of the pretrial release does. 

He's still on the hook. 

[WinnieWinkle]

9 minutes ago, Churchhoney said:

He's still on the hook. 

And given that this is Josh Duggar we're talking about there is no way he's not going to screw this up for himself.  The Reavers are where he is staying but there is no way he isn't going to be watched and not just by the Feds.

Edited May 6, 2021 by WinnieWinkle