Josh & Anna Smuggar: A Series of Unfortunate Events

[Tikichick]

3 minutes ago, Absolom said:

To me it would be worse if he were producing the material rather than collecting and viewing.  Josh could have turned into a serial rapist/murderer and that would have been worse.  

I think Josh was a bad seed and I can see it both ways.  His upbringing may have kept him somewhat in check or his parents over sexualization of life could have spurred him on.  I don't expect to get an answer from them.

It shouldn't be forgotten that many predators escalate over time because their drive requires ever increasing "thrills" for satisfaction.   Not uncommon for looks to eventually tempt to touches, etc.   All the monsters should be regarded as scary.

[floridamom]

I'm concerned about the well-being of M7. The stress that Anna has been under and is still under while having this child can't be very good for this baby. I hope all goes well for her birth.

[Scarlett45]

On 8/11/2021 at 6:53 PM, hathorlive said:

That's what really blows me away.  He was smart enough to realize that Christian eyes are watching you (or whatever the hell that program is called) is Windows based and can't see Linux partitions.  He's smart enough to dual boot a computer and create a Linux partition on it.  But he literally forgets to stop the ultimate authority (law enforcement) from seeing the bad stuff.  He stopped Jesus from detecting his illicit surfing but not the cops. Go figure. Maybe he should have gone to a tech college so he could actually learn something.

I honestly believe that Josh didnt think law enforcement would be looking at him/care what he was doing. If my theory holds, Josh was interested in protecting his activities from his FAMILY, namely Anna and JB- not law enforcement. He likely never thought there would be legal repercussions from his activity. 

 

On 8/11/2021 at 1:57 PM, merylinkid said:

Yep I've said this before and I'll say it again -- we are putting more thought into this case than the prosecution is right now.   For us this is a BIG DEAL.   For the prosecution, its a Wednesday.   Josh is one person participating in downloading (some really sick) child porn.   he's not creating it (as far we know), he is not part of some higher up in a distribution ring.   he's the equivalent of busting a john when you are trying to prostitution.   He is literally not a priority.    They got to busting him when they could and now the case is going through the normal channels.   The investigators are on to the next case.   The prosecutors are working the case that goes to trial next week, not next year.  Josh is just a small time guy from rural Arkansas* who happens to come from a big family that had its 15 minutes of fame.   He's not really important.

 

*no offense to folks from rural Arkansas.   You are not all like the Duggars.   

I agree with you.

 

On 8/12/2021 at 8:48 AM, Absolom said:

I think Josh was a bad seed and I can see it both ways.  His upbringing may have kept him somewhat in check or his parents over sexualization of life could have spurred him on.  I don't expect to get an answer from them.

I too think Josh was a bad seed. I think Josh's upbringing kept him leading a more insular life, and thus his victims were people very close to him (but that is often the case with predators). With a "mainstream upbringing" I could see Josh as the guy who sexually assaulted his dates and was on a first name basis with the person who had a stash of roofies, but may have left his sisters alone. 

You are right @Absolom- we will never know.

5 hours ago, floridamom said:

I'm concerned about the well-being of M7. The stress that Anna has been under and is still under while having this child can't be very good for this baby. I hope all goes well for her birth.

Yes. I do have concern for all of the M-kids. Especially the older ones who know something is not quite right with this entire situation although they havent been told the entire story I am sure. I also wouldnt want anything to go wrong with M-7's birth for the baby's sake. Anna has already been through this dog and pony show. Josh showed his colors 6 yrs ago when she was pregnant with Meredith.

[awaken]

11 hours ago, floridamom said:

I'm concerned about the well-being of M7. The stress that Anna has been under and is still under while having this child can't be very good for this baby. I hope all goes well for her birth.

What sad circumstances to be born into. I feel the same about sweet Meredith. Their births are inextricably entwined with their father’s terrible misdeeds. 

[Westiepeach]

I keep forgetting that Anna is pregnant with M7. Yikes. Poor baby…

[Heathen]

17 minutes ago, awaken said:

What sad circumstances to be born into. I feel the same about sweet Meredith. Their births are inextricably entwined with their father’s terrible misdeeds. 

All the kids are. For their entire lives, it'll be "son of Josh Duggar, fallen reality TV star who possessed child porn and molested his own sisters." That might as well be their names. 

In a way, it's a good thing the Ms are in a cult and will probably never go to school. 

[jcbrown]

Can someone please remind me when M7 is due?

[dargosmydaddy]

16 minutes ago, jcbrown said:

Can someone please remind me when M7 is due?

When she announced, Anna only said "fall."

[satrunrose]

On 8/11/2021 at 8:53 PM, hathorlive said:

That's what really blows me away.  He was smart enough to realize that Christian eyes are watching you (or whatever the hell that program is called) is Windows based and can't see Linux partitions.  He's smart enough to dual boot a computer and create a Linux partition on it.  But he literally forgets to stop the ultimate authority (law enforcement) from seeing the bad stuff.  He stopped Jesus from detecting his illicit surfing but not the cops. Go figure. Maybe he should have gone to a tech college so he could actually learn something.

I can see it, although it doesn't make a lick of logical sense. In all of his past misdeeds, Josh hasn't faced any consequences from law enforcement. All of the consequences (as useless or even damaging as they were) have come from his community (including the tip to In Touch, if I'm remembering correctly). Plus he had been living on the bounty of Jim Bob for years at the point he got caught. I can see why the risk of his father finding out (or of Anna finding out and telling JB) seemed way worse than the abstract threat of the law.

[MargeGunderson]

I think it was a matter of odds, too. Not every who downloads child abuse videos or pictures is caught; probably most of people who download it aren’t caught. Josh played the odds and lost. 

[jcbrown]

1 hour ago, dargosmydaddy said:

When she announced, Anna only said "fall."

Thanks. That's what I remembered, too. Wasn't sure if there was any more specific info.

[farmgal4]

11 hours ago, Scarlett45 said:

I honestly believe that Josh didnt think law enforcement would be looking at him/care what he was doing. If my theory holds, Josh was interested in protecting his activities from his FAMILY, namely Anna and JB- not law enforcement. He likely never thought there would be legal repercussions from his activity. 

 

I agree with you.

 

I too think Josh was a bad seed. I think Josh's upbringing kept him leading a more insular life, and thus his victims were people very close to him (but that is often the case with predators). With a "mainstream upbringing" I could see Josh as the guy who sexually assaulted his dates and was on a first name basis with the person who had a stash of roofies, but may have left his sisters alone. 

You are right @Absolom- we will never know.

Yes. I do have concern for all of the M-kids. Especially the older ones who know something is not quite right with this entire situation although they havent been told the entire story I am sure. I also wouldnt want anything to go wrong with M-7's birth for the baby's sake. Anna has already been through this dog and pony show. Josh showed his colors 6 yrs ago when she was pregnant with Meredith.

If Josh is sent to prison for several years, I wonder what Anna will tell the children?  I think she would want the kids to visit him while he’s there.  What a shit storm the SOB has caused.  

[emmawoodhouse]

Just heard via Emily D. Baker that Smuggar has until 10/20 to plea out. 

[BitterApple]

30 minutes ago, emmawoodhouse said:

Just heard via Emily D. Baker that Smuggar has until 10/20 to plea out. 

Did she give any insight as to whether she thinks Josh will plea? 

I know Josh doesn't give a shit about his wife or kids, but does he really want the dirty details of his crimes being splashed out in court? Even the bits released so far are sickening. 

[emmawoodhouse]

35 minutes ago, BitterApple said:

Did she give any insight as to whether she thinks Josh will plea? 

I know Josh doesn't give a shit about his wife or kids, but does he really want the dirty details of his crimes being splashed out in court? Even the bits released so far are sickening. 

No, she mostly said that the defense is still in discovery and now has a date in order to make up their minds as to plea out or proceed to trial in November. She didn't spend much time reviewing this as today's court proceeding wasn't up on PACER yet.

eta She did add in the Q&A that she thinks Smuggar has a "big uphill battle" to get off. She didn't elaborate.

Edited August 14, 2021 by emmawoodhouse

[satrunrose]

3 hours ago, farmgal4 said:

If Josh is sent to prison for several years, I wonder what Anna will tell the children?  I think she would want the kids to visit him while he’s there.  What a shit storm the SOB has caused.  

Heck, I'm dying to know what they're telling the kids now. In jail, they could (in theory) make up a story about him going on a far away mission for...uh... ten years... How do you explain "Daddy is living a few minutes away but can't come home."? Would the older kids be worldly enough to realize that such situations usually come with parents who are *horrified stage whisper* d.i.v.o.r.c.e.d (!!!)? j/k

[Nysha]

15 hours ago, Scarlett45 said:

I honestly believe that Josh didnt think law enforcement would be looking at him/care what he was doing. If my theory holds, Josh was interested in protecting his activities from his FAMILY, namely Anna and JB- not law enforcement. He likely never thought there would be legal repercussions from his activity. 

Except his first question when law enforcement showed up was "Did someone download child pornography?", so while he was most concerned about hiding it from his family, he knew there was a chance of legal repercussions.

I think Anna could easily explain to the children that "someone lied to the police that Daddy did something wrong b/c they're evil and hate Christians. Thankfully, God softened the judges heart and instead of making him stay in jail while he proves he is innocent, Daddy gets to stay with our sweet friends."

Edited August 14, 2021 by Nysha
their is not the same as they're

[emmawoodhouse]

4 minutes ago, Nysha said:

Except his first question when law enforcement showed up was "Did someone download child pornography?", so while he was most concerned about hiding it from his family, he knew there was a chance of legal repercussions.

Why would CP even come to his mind when law enforcement showed up? He could have unknowingly sold a stolen car or something. It's just such a strange thing to lead with unless it's on one's radar. Smuggar should have kept his mouth shut. 

But this is the idiot who didn't even consider getting busted by the feds. VPNs are cheap. 

[Zella]

I can't imagine a guiltier sounding first question to law enforcement. Especially since it was Homeland Security. I'd have been wondering what I had to do with terrorism, but even then, I wouldn't have dared ask it. 

[SMama]

On 8/13/2021 at 9:45 PM, Nysha said:

Except his first question when law enforcement showed up was "Did someone download child pornography?", so while he was most concerned about hiding it from his family, he knew there was a chance of legal repercussions.

I could be wrong but IIRC he asked if someone downloaded porn on his computer. I don’t think he said child.

Edited August 16, 2021 by SMama
Typo

[Cinnabon]

16 hours ago, satrunrose said:

Heck, I'm dying to know what they're telling the kids now. In jail, they could (in theory) make up a story about him going on a far away mission for...uh... ten years... How do you explain "Daddy is living a few minutes away but can't come home."? Would the older kids be worldly enough to realize that such situations usually come with parents who are *horrified stage whisper* d.i.v.o.r.c.e.d (!!!)? j/k

Would he be in a prison close to home? Sometimes that’s not the case.

[GeeGolly]

1 minute ago, Cinnabon said:

Would he be in a prison close to home? Sometimes that’s not the case.

I can see the judge recommending that because she seems to put value in Josh's kids and wife having access to him now, but I don't think the judges make the ultimate decision of where they go.

Maybe if he pleas, he could request a closer prison and that could be part of the deal.

Otherwise, their puddle jumping prop planes are going to be very busy in the next 5 - 10 years.

[satrunrose]

19 minutes ago, Cinnabon said:

Would he be in a prison close to home? Sometimes that’s not the case.

Oops! Sorry, I meant how are they explaining his current situation with the Reabers. 

[emmawoodhouse]

Smuggar made Bill Maher's snark list last night. Segment was called Books That Didn't Age Well.

 

[ginger90]

I can see Josh pleading guilty. I cannot see him entering into a plea agreement. His attorney isn’t inexperienced. But, when you consider  the family’s  input, who the heck knows.

[xwordfanatik]

2 hours ago, emmawoodhouse said:

Smuggar made Bill Maher's snark list last night. Segment was called Books That Didn't Age Well.

 

I like that show, it always makes me laugh.  

[Churchhoney]

On 8/13/2021 at 10:05 PM, emmawoodhouse said:

No, she mostly said that the defense is still in discovery and now has a date in order to make up their minds as to plea out or proceed to trial in November. She didn't spend much time reviewing this as today's court proceeding wasn't up on PACER yet.

eta She did add in the Q&A that she thinks Smuggar has a "big uphill battle" to get off. She didn't elaborate.

Maybe's she's looking at the number of convictions this particular program has gotten on these exact charges in NW Arkansas in the past couple years! ....

Looks to me like the exact people that found Josh out and are now prosecuting might be batting close to a thousand when it comes to sending similarly accused fellows up the river. And these LE and prosecutorial types have garnered a lot of experience pursuing these crimes....So, if anything, I'd think all the practice has likely improved their ability to get convictions. They oughta know the pitfalls pretty well by now. 

Edited August 15, 2021 by Churchhoney

[MargeGunderson]

I really wish that the prosecutor or judge in the case was a woman. That would just rub salt in the wound, wouldn’t it.

[JoanArc]

He recycled instagram passwords, too

Quote

The password on the computer matched the password that Duggar used on his other accounts including his bank account and family Instagram account.

They said, “That was the password that Josh Duggar had been using for years, and it goes to show that he is the person behind” the secret program.

The prosecutor told the court, “That was the password that Josh Duggar had been using for years, and it goes to show that he is the person behind the partition, behind downloading the child pornography.”

But 'Josiah did it', right? LOL. Josh is screwed.

Edited August 15, 2021 by JoanArc

[emmawoodhouse]

2 hours ago, JoanArc said:

He recycled instagram passwords, too

But 'Josiah did it', right? LOL. Josh is screwed.

Nah, it was Randy the ex-con. 🙄

[BitterApple]

17 minutes ago, emmawoodhouse said:

Nah, it was Randy the ex-con. 🙄

Ah, yes. The mysterious Randy, the George Glass of car lot employees....

[ginger90]

Interesting, long read:

 

https://www.combattingcybercrime.org/files/virtual-library/national-laws/searching-and-seizing-computers-and-obtaining-electronic-evidence-in-criminal-investigation.pdf

[emmawoodhouse]

Last ditch effort. Motion to dismiss.

The filing is at the end of the article. 

[Quilt Fairy]

1 hour ago, emmawoodhouse said:

Last ditch effort. Motion to dismiss.

The filing is at the end of the article. 

Wow.  That argument kind of almost makes sense to me.  (Although ironic to the nth degree, of course.)  What will the prosecution argue? 

[zenme]

Omg. At the bottom there was a podcast that discusses Josh’s case, including a description of one of Josh”s viewed videos, Daisy’s Destruction. The description alone is horrifying, and even though Josh did not produce that video, just his participation in purchasing that video, he should rot in jail forever. It’s that disgusting. He’s complicit in supporting that. He doesn’t belong anywhere near his children, or anyone else’s. 

[BitterApple]

Josh is undeniably a sick puppy and yet his idiot wife keeps procreating with him.

[Kellyee]

Quote

Wow.  That argument kind of almost makes sense to me.  (Although ironic to the nth degree, of course.)  What will the prosecution argue? 

Josh belongs in prison, but whether they convict him or not, his life is over. What he did is all over the Internet, and he has a publicly recognizable face. Josh is unemployable, his siblings will likely never want to be seen in public with him again, and he's broke except what small change Daddy Jim Bob decides to hand him. As bad as it was living in the Warehouse house, life will be much worse with the accusations that are stuck to him like glue now. His only employment would be one of the few manual labor jobs where they don't run a background check or ask any questions. 

 

 

[Annb67]

Unbelievable! He’s going to escape yet again. This is ridiculous! 🤬

[Minivanessa]

14 minutes ago, Annb67 said:

Unbelievable! He’s going to escape yet again. This is ridiculous! 🤬

Why do you say he's going to escape?

[quarks]

6 hours ago, Quilt Fairy said:

Wow.  That argument kind of almost makes sense to me.  (Although ironic to the nth degree, of course.)  What will the prosecution argue? 

Speaking as someone who isn't an attorney and doesn't know the specifics about the law here -

I don't see a judge buying the argument that anyone's charges should have been tossed out just because the appointment of the then-acting Secretary of Homeland Security didn't follow all of the exact steps. I mean, sure, Josh's attorneys are correct that the then-acting Secretary of Homeland Security wasn't precisely the legal acting Secretary of Homeland Security, but I don't think that's a justification for federal law enforcement officers to not enforce the law. I'm pretty sure federal prosecutors could also point to all sorts of examples where federal employees had to do their jobs regardless of the exact legal status of the head of that particular branch of government. 

They might have an argument if the federal officers in question were trying to enforce some very specific policy of that particular acting Secretary of Homeland Security, but that doesn't seem to have been the case here. As far as I can tell,  Josh wasn't arrested because law officers were running around trying to enforce specific dictates from the last administration; he was arrested because law officers believed he had violated existing law. Not to mention that although the investigation started under the previous administration, the charges were filed by the current administration.

Again, though, I'm not an attorney, so my reading of this may be completely wrong. 

 

[Churchhoney]

11 hours ago, Quilt Fairy said:

Wow.  That argument kind of almost makes sense to me.  (Although ironic to the nth degree, of course.)  What will the prosecution argue? 

I expect they'll argue that this very large set of prosecutions that include Josh's had absolutely zero to do with those particular presidential appointees and were part of a large group of  DHS programs involving CSA that were in progress and well established long before those guys were put in the department. 

There's no way you can say that every single thing DHS was involved in while those guys were on board actually related tp them, involved them, or, least of all, was initiated by or even specifically sanctioned by them.

DHS is involved in a bazillion things. Judges aren't going to issue precedents that would essentially cancel the whole work product of an entire federal department because of a couple temporary hires. 

Plus, these particular appointees were in the department to focus on things like immigrants and Arab terrorists and to steer the department away from looking at white-people terrorism, etc. In no way were they were on board to concern themselves with the kind of case that Josh's is. And I'm sure there's paperwork that demonstrates that, in numerous ways. 

This truly is spaghetti thrown at a wall. 

But it does suggest how far Jim Bob is willing to go and how much he's willing to pay to get his little ego-extension Joshua off. That's truly appalling. And I hope it appalls Josh's sibs to the point of waking them the hell up about how much they matter to their father compared to the golden boy. 

Edited August 21, 2021 by Churchhoney

[quarks]

23 minutes ago, Churchhoney said:

But it does suggest how far Jim Bob is willing to go and how much he's willing to pay to get his little ego-extension Joshua off. That's truly appalling. And I hope it appalls Josh's sibs to the point of waking them the hell up about how much they matter to their father compared to the golden boy. 

And for more proof of this, take a look at the other long, somewhat confusing motion to dismiss - the one about the evidence and whether or not federal authorities processed that evidence correctly and provided it to the defense correctly - where Josh's attorneys cheerfully admit that Witness One, who worked at the car lot "at various times," less cheerfully admitted to watching adult porn on his phone. 

A witness who could potentially be one of the Duggarlings, since some of them also worked at the cat lot "at various times," and Witness One has very little other identifying information. 

[emmawoodhouse]

34 minutes ago, quarks said:

And for more proof of this, take a look at the other long, somewhat confusing motion to dismiss - the one about the evidence and whether or not federal authorities processed that evidence correctly and provided it to the defense correctly - where Josh's attorneys cheerfully admit that Witness One, who worked at the car lot "at various times," less cheerfully admitted to watching adult porn on his phone. 

A witness who could potentially be one of the Duggarlings, since some of them also worked at the cat lot "at various times," and Witness One has very little other identifying information. 

Wouldn't the presence of Covenant Eyes preclude any Duggars from being Witness One? I just can't picture Josiah watching porn on his phone. 

[Absolom]

1 hour ago, Churchhoney said:

This truly is spaghetti thrown at a wall. 

Jim Bob has apparently hired the kind of attorney my daughter abhors.  Rather than being "gentlemanly," he's in it to wring every dime out of his clients wasting their money and opposing counsel's time on frivolous and meaningless motions that go nowhere and lack serious foundation, but make him look like he's zealously representing his clients to a certain type of client who doesn't recognize what is going on.  I could be wrong, but superficially that's how it appears.  

[hathorlive]

4 hours ago, Churchhoney said:

But it does suggest how far Jim Bob is willing to go and how much he's willing to pay to get his little ego-extension Joshua off. That's truly appalling. And I hope it appalls Josh's sibs to the point of waking them the hell up about how much they matter to their father compared to the golden boy. 

But the defense attorneys get to bill JB for every stupid motion they file.  And they are giving the Duggars hope that evidence will get tossed and their wiley defense will get Josh off. 

Next move:  The defense hires expert Tami Loehrs to testify that torrential downpour alters bits and bytes and it's not Josh who did this.  She's a nut case for sure.  

[GeeGolly]

From what I understand lawyers have a range of 'spaghetti throwing' before it gets them into trouble. In the scheme of things how close, or how far, are these motions from penalties or disbarment? 

[Churchhoney]

1 hour ago, GeeGolly said:

From what I understand lawyers have a range of 'spaghetti throwing' before it gets them into trouble. In the scheme of things how close, or how far, are these motions from penalties or disbarment? 

Unfortunately, I'll bet they're really really far from those....

On the other hand, I'm not sure I'd mind seeing JB and M lose the contents of several llcs to these legal bills.... Maybe it would alert them to some of their folly. Although probably not....

I wonder if JB's and M's whole self-concept isn't still tied to believing despite everything in the myth they built about themselves and their golden boy back when they first saw themselves flying so high.  

It's hard to believe their grandiose visions didn't collapse years ago. But given how willing they seem to be to go absolutely all out to avoid prison for their little darling, I wonder. It's like they just couldn't stand that because it really would collapse their vision of themselves once and for all.....And that's the unbearable thing...

Edited August 21, 2021 by Churchhoney

[quarks]

1 hour ago, emmawoodhouse said:

Wouldn't the presence of Covenant Eyes preclude any Duggars from being Witness One? I just can't picture Josiah watching porn on his phone. 

Assuming that Covenant Eyes was installed on that particular phone. And even then. Covenant Eyes was installed on Josh's devices, after all. 

Witness One might very well not be a Duggarling. All we know is that Witness One was a "person of interest" who worked on the car lot "at various times," watched porn on his phone, and sometimes stayed overnight on the property. I don't think that's enough to identify him as a definite Duggar.

But the motion itself is enough to say that Josh and his attorneys are absolutely willing to throw other people under the bus for the sake of Josh Duggar - and that's something that Jim Bob is paying for. 

[GeeGolly]

This is all so bizarre. I'm guessing a lot of folks watch porn, and watch it on their phone too. I wouldn't think this is something friends would talk about, or do together. It seems to me Josh asked some 'friend' to allow him to watch porn on the friend's phone to avoid getting caught. And then Josh throws the friend under the bus because he knows porn was accessed on that phone.

And... since when is watching porn anything like what Josh watched? So what if there's porn on the friend's phone. That is not illegal. 

[Quilt Fairy]

2 hours ago, Churchhoney said:

I wonder if JB's and M's whole self-concept isn't still tied to believing despite everything in the myth they built about themselves and their golden boy back when they first saw themselves flying so high.  

It's hard to believe their grandiose visions didn't collapse years ago. But given how willing they seem to be to go absolutely all out to avoid prison for their little darling, I wonder. It's like they just couldn't stand that because it really would collapse their vision of themselves once and for all.....And that's the unbearable thing...

It is interesting to speculate what would happen if JB and M do give up on Josh.  How they would ret-con his entire life, beginning from the moment of conception.  (And yes, I feel icky talking about Josh's moment of conception.)