Josh & Anna Smuggar: A Series of Unfortunate Events

[lascuba]

2 minutes ago, crazy8s said:

Also it is possible Jill wants the entire story, not filtered through jb. Since she is on the witness list, she is unable to be in the courtroom for the entire trial.

on whether derick writes things in the notebook or not - what courtroom people are watching him every moment??

There appears to be at least one person from reddit there...they're the most likely one to observe the family members as or more closely that the proceedings.

[hathorlive]

Can someone please stab me in the ear for listening to WOACB?  Hey KJ, I have a psychology degree, too.  I've spent 17 years doing this job.  I just happen to be really wicked good at doing computer stuff. I have all sorts of certifications that have tortured forensic knowledge into me. One of them, the CFCE, was a two week class, followed by 4 months of case work, practical's and questions that took me months to answer.   There were NO degrees in Computer Forensic until recently.  So, most of the senior analysts in this country don't have forensics degrees.  And the certs you are making fun of are harder than hell to get.  

Yes, Michelle Bush is a lightweight.  She doesn't have the degree and she's too young to have the experience. Yet here I am, an expert witness in federal court. Fottrell, the DOJ head guy, doesn't list what his degree is in, but it's not forensics.  So please don't dis most of us to make your point that Michelle is a neophyte.  

23 minutes ago, lascuba said:

Oh, same here (minus the knowledge part, because almost everything I know about criminal trials, I learned from John Grisham novels).

Wait, he's not an expert?  Is law and order not perfectly accurate either? My world is shaken. 

God, I'm exhausted. I can't even imagine how Joy feels.

[mittsigirl]

3 minutes ago, hathorlive said:

Can someone please stab me in the ear for listening to WOACB?  Hey KJ, I have a psychology degree, too.  I've spent 17 years doing this job.  I just happen to be really wicked good at doing computer stuff. I have all sorts of certifications that have tortured forensic knowledge into me. One of them, the CFCE, was a two week class, followed by 4 months of case work, practical's and questions that took me months to answer.   There were NO degrees in Computer Forensic until recently.  So, most of the senior analysts in this country don't have forensics degrees.  And the certs you are making fun of are harder than hell to get.  

Yes, Michelle Bush is a lightweight.  She doesn't have the degree and she's too young to have the experience. Yet here I am, an expert witness in federal court. Fottrell, the DOJ head guy, doesn't list what his degree is in, but it's not forensics.  So please don't dis most of us to make your point that Michelle is a neophyte.  

I just want to hug you for this!!

[SJC]

5 minutes ago, hathorlive said:

Is law and order not perfectly accurate either?

Oh no...you mean it isn't ?!? 😉

[absnow54]

Apparently the defense already rested their case!

[Future Cat Lady]

42 minutes ago, ElsieEm said:

My (perhaps generous) reading on Derick is that he's there because he really does want the truth. He's the one least likely to buy JB's and Josh's bullshit. He'll want to make up his own mind based on evidence. 

Plus, he's obviously interested in the law, and observing a trial is probably engaging enough on it's own for him. But I think at the end of the day, he does just want to have an informed opinion on Josh and his guilt.

I understand his interest in the law. However, I'm not sure about wanting to know the truth. With the Duggars and their adjacents, I'm always supsicious.

Edited December 7, 2021 by Future Cat Lady

[hathorlive]

2 minutes ago, absnow54 said:

Apparently the defense already rested their case!

But has the router consented to this????

[StaceyNotStacie]

2 hours ago, Rootbeer said:

As far as Derick sitting with Anna, he has been wearing a suit and taking notes the whole time.  I doubt he is recognizable to anyone on the jury.  If anything, they probably figure he's one of the junior defense lawyers sitting next to Anna and keeping track of stuff for the defense.  Most family members of defendants don't wear suits to court.

Makes me wonder if he’s taking notes for a book or if he and Jill plan on their own lawsuit in the future. 

[SJC]

Just now, hathorlive said:

But has the router consented to this????

Bahahaha ! 😂 

[momma2seven]

I almost wish we could slow down the commenting...having his (hopefully) guilty verdict plastered all down page 666 of this thread would be amusing.

[libgirl2]

6 minutes ago, absnow54 said:

Apparently the defense already rested their case!

How many witnesses did they call? One? 

[quarks]

 

5 minutes ago, absnow54 said:

Apparently the defense already rested their case!

Ok, not to complain here exactly, but does this mean we just went through the entire freaking trial without hearing word ONE from ANY OF THE OWNERS OF THE CELL PHONES?

 

[merylinkid]

I do not blame Derek being there.   One of the best things I ever did as a new attorney and I do with any baby attorneys I am mentoring is take a day to go court watch.   You can learn a lot -- including what NOT to do.   I've always said the Rules of Evidence make so much ore sense when you see them in action instead of read them in a book.   If he has the time, let him watch.   He's not doing anything wrong.

Pre-Covid we always got lookie loos in court.   People, who aren't even lawyers, have no legal background, who just like to come to court to watch.    WHY I have no clue.   I'm THERE actually doing something and I find it boring as hell most of the time.  But if someone wants to spend all day in court watching, let them.  

[libgirl2]

1 minute ago, merylinkid said:

I do not blame Derek being there.   One of the best things I ever did as a new attorney and I do with any baby attorneys I am mentoring is take a day to go court watch.   You can learn a lot -- including what NOT to do.   I've always said the Rules of Evidence make so much ore sense when you see them in action instead of read them in a book.   If he has the time, let him watch.   He's not doing anything wrong.

Pre-Covid we always got lookie loos in court.   People, who aren't even lawyers, have no legal background, who just like to come to court to watch.    WHY I have no clue.   I'm THERE actually doing something and I find it boring as hell most of the time.  But if someone wants to spend all day in court watching, let them.  

One of my mom's proudest days was sitting in on a pre-hearing for Drew Peterson. She used to live in Bolingbrook and then lived just a town over. She was an avid follower of the case. I remember her telling me she silently said Spanish jinxes or hexes at his head. He did end up getting convicted so it must have worked :) 

[MargeGunderson]

10 minutes ago, hathorlive said:

But has the router consented to this????

JB does not allow it!

[absnow54]

Okay, based on the defense only having 1 witness, and that witness was an expert with less than 10 years of experience, do we still think Jim Bob shelled out $500k for this? It really feels like Jim Bob low balled the lawyers on everything, and this is what it got him. 

[merylinkid]

Wow.   I figured the Defense would throw a few witnesses to confuse about who was running in and out of the car lot shack like it was grand central station.   Or put the Router on testify about all the people accessing it remotely (wow that sounds dirty when I type it).   

But the Defense doesn't have to prove he didn't do it.   They just have to create reasonable doubt.   Not sure their 'expert" did that.

I'm guessing this late in the day, they will take care of housekeeping matters, IF the Prosecution doesn't do rebuttal.   If they do, that will start today.   But I'm guess they won't.   The closing arguments tomorrow morning.   It could go to the jury by lunch time.

[libgirl2]

6 minutes ago, absnow54 said:

Okay, based on the defense only having 1 witness, and that witness was an expert with less than 10 years of experience, do we still think Jim Bob shelled out $500k for this? It really feels like Jim Bob low balled the lawyers on everything, and this is what it got him. 

He told them to make it fast so it would be cheaper! And I am joking! 

Edited December 7, 2021 by libgirl2

[MargeGunderson]

1 hour ago, absnow54 said:

Okay, based on the defense only having 1 witness, and that witness was an expert with less than 10 years of experience, do we still think Jim Bob shelled out $500k for this? It really feels like Jim Bob low balled the lawyers on everything, and this is what it got him. 

My feeling is that the defense’s entire strategy is to introduce reasonable doubt. It’s the only route they have. Unfortunately for Josh, reasonable is the operative word. If the jurors have to do some serious mental gymnastics to come up with “doubt,” it’s not reasonable.

Edited December 7, 2021 by MargeGunderson

[MMEButterfly]

52 minutes ago, lascuba said:

Based on things he's said even before going to law school, he strikes me as the type that's more interested in the procedures and technicalities rather than the outcomes or any actual truths.

I don't think that is unusual--the procedures and technicalities are part of the draw to studying law. 

[Nysha]

4 minutes ago, merylinkid said:

Wow.   I figured the Defense would throw a few witnesses to confuse about who was running in and out of the car lot shack like it was grand central station.   Or put the Router on testify about all the people accessing it remotely (wow that sounds dirty when I type it).   

Given how easily the prosecution was able to rip the defense's expert testimony apart, there is no way in hell any of the Duggars would have lasted being cross examined.

JB definitely got what he paid for.

[absnow54]

The Sun stream is up again. Apparently they called 2 witnesses, but I haven't found who the second witness was. 

[emmawoodhouse]

4 minutes ago, absnow54 said:

The Sun stream is up again. Apparently they called 2 witnesses, but I haven't found who the second witness was. 

I assume Fortrell is the first.

[MrsKravitz]

4 minutes ago, absnow54 said:

The Sun stream is up again. Apparently they called 2 witnesses, but I haven't found who the second witness was. 

Per CC McCandless: Daniel Wilcox, a former HSI and Rogers PD officer involved in the search warrant execution and an undercover investigation at Duggar's car lot.

I don’t remember hearing anything at all about him. 

[Lindsay Loo Hoo]

Anna Duggar has been sitting in the first row during the trial, according to the Sun reporter, and Derick Dillard has regularly been sitting by her.

During a small break on Tuesday, Jim Bob Duggar went to the first row to hug her and talk to her.

The Sun reporter noted that Jim Bob passed Derick and said “hello," and that Derick said hi back, but suggested the interaction seemed awkward.

After that interaction, Jim Bob remained in the first row. Derick moved to sit with other family members in another row.

[absnow54]

Looks like Fortrell has been recalled by the prosecution, so we'll clarify everything Bush muddled up.

Also, the Sun is reporting that Jim Bob pulled a power move and sat in the first row with Anna. Derrick had been sitting in the front row, and moved to another row after this. 

[libgirl2]

I'm getting ads for attorneys. 

[RedDelicious]

3 hours ago, GeeGolly said:

Looks like Laura is with them too.

Is that Jinger's $300 blazer from Rodeo Drive?? 😆

[SMama]

19 minutes ago, absnow54 said:

Looks like Fortrell has been recalled by the prosecution, so we'll clarify everything Bush muddled up.

Also, the Sun is reporting that Jim Bob pulled a power move and sat in the first row with Anna. Derrick had been sitting in the front row, and moved to another row after this. 

So JB is only there to be portrayed by The Sun as a caring FIL. What a douche canoe. JB’s first born penis is his clone.

ETA: Do we still think Derick is at the trial at JB’s direction and is Volderjosh’s cheerleader?

My autocorrect fills in Volderjosh after the first letter. This gives me inexplicable joy. 

Edited December 7, 2021 by SMama

[EVS]

If it hasn’t already been posted, here is the link to today’s McCandless coverage. it is far better than the Sun’s, imo. 
 

https://www.nwahomepage.com/josh-duggar-trial/josh-duggar-trial-day-5-prosecution-hammers-credibility-of-defense-expert-witness-in-cross-examination/

some highlights:

Michelle Bush admits this might be her first federal case. 
 

There were dark websites bookmarked. 
 

The prosecution asked Bush if she requested the router and she said no.
 

“I’m not going out to try to find additional evidence,” she said.”

Edited December 7, 2021 by EVS
Added quote and clarified witness name

[SMama]

17 minutes ago, libgirl2 said:

I'm getting ads for attorneys. 

You are lucky given the obvious alternative. 

[quarks]

Sorry. I just need to circle back to this:

August, 2021:

Me: But what federal agents did with the cell phones doesn't seem very relevant?

Defense: Trust us! The cell phones are VERY relevant!

Government: They are not relevant.

Defense: They are!

Court: No, they are not. This is a waste of everyone's time.

September, 2021:

Me: I still don't think the cell phones are very relevant.

Defense: THEY ARE SO RELEVANT

Government: Allow us to point out that the owner of one cell phone was shopping at Walmart at the time, and yes, we have proof; the owner of another cell phone didn't start working at the car lot until after the crime, and the only reason we've had problems pinning this down is because your client keeps questionable records; and the owner of the third cell phone was in jail at the time of the crime, which you really should have known about BECAUSE HE WAS YOUR CLIENT.

Defense: Relevant!

Court: No.

October, 2021:

Me: I think the defense should stop talking about the cell phones.

Defense: BUT THEY ARE RELEVANT. 

Government: While we're on the topic of relevance, the router?

Court: The cell phones are not relevant.

November, 2021:

Me: Well, at least the chatter about the cell phones should be over --

Defense: CELL PHONES! RELEVANT! WILL PROVE REASONABLE DOUBT

Government: You have got to be kidding me.

Court: This is irrelevant.

November 30, 2021:

Me: Ok, let's hear about whether the testimony about prior molestations should be admitted, since that seems interesting and relevant--

Defense: CELL PHONES!

Court: No. 

Actual trial, December 1, 2021 and onwards:

Defense: Cell phones? What cell phones. Owners? What owners. But let's chat about this router!

[Jeanne222]

So did the defense create reasonable doubt?  

In my humble opinion Michelle Bush talked of many things that I didn't understand.  The Prosecutors pretty much unraveled most of her testimony and her being an expert witness kind of went out the courtroom window.

Guilty as charged.

[SunnyBeBe]

49 minutes ago, libgirl2 said:

He told them to make it fast so it would be cheaper! And I am joking! 

We used to have a seasoned district court judge who often joked with the attorneys, that the attorney with the most boxes (they contained exhibit notebooks, case law, motions, reference books, etc,) would win the trial.  Lol. He didn’t mean it. He was kinda making fun of how much stuff we carried into the courtroom.  

[quarks]

.....ok, it seems that the defense did mention the cell phones today. Michelle Bush said she couldn't analyze them because they weren't seized by authorities.

Which, ok, but given the defense argument of "someone else could have done this!" shouldn't they have at least tried to have someone explain why William Mize and Randall Barry's phones were seized?

 

[CandyCaneTree]

29 minutes ago, libgirl2 said:

I'm getting ads for attorneys. 

I'm getting ads for Bones coffee. 

[SusanM]

27 minutes ago, SMama said:

So JB is only there to be portrayed by The Sun as a caring FIL.

I think he also picked today to show up because he was sure that the star defense witness was going to wow them with her brilliant takedown of the satanic forces that have conspired against Smuggar.  So, how'd that work out again JB?

[Jynnan tonnix]

1 hour ago, momma2seven said:

I almost wish we could slow down the commenting...having his (hopefully) guilty verdict plastered all down page 666 of this thread would be amusing.

I really wish it would slow down! I have not read more than half a dozen posts a day on this thread in weeks, because, as interested as I am in how it will play out at the end, I have pretty much zero interest in all the minutiae leading up to it. I guess I'm just weird that way...it's the same with movies which feature battle scenes. I lose complete interest in the goings on, and just want to fast-forward to find out who won. Plus, it really WOULD be great to wrap it up on page 666. 😁

[Panopticon]

1 hour ago, MargeGunderson said:

JB does not allow it!

Snarkers, are you going to allow for that???

[GeeGolly]

I present to you, Ms Michele Bush.

[SnapHappy]

2 hours ago, crazy8s said:

Also it is possible Jill wants the entire story, not filtered through jb. Since she is on the witness list, she is unable to be in the courtroom for the entire trial.

She has no contact with her father, he's not going to "filter" anything. 

And she lived the only story she's involved in.  She knows what happened, she doesn't need her husband, who wasn't even there, to tell her.   The porn is a separate situation altogether.  He's there for himself, for some inexplicable reason.  If not, he'd be with his wife. 

 

[Jordan Baker]

1 hour ago, MargeGunderson said:

My feeling is that the defense’s entire strategy is to introduce reasonable doubt. It’s the only router they have. 

FIFY.

[Ijustwantsomechips]

On 12/7/2021 at 3:18 PM, absnow54 said:

Okay, based on the defense only having 1 witness, and that witness was an expert with less than 10 years of experience, do we still think Jim Bob shelled out $500k for this? It really feels like Jim Bob low balled the lawyers on everything, and this is what it got him. 

Yeah, it’s sounding more and more like a Dollar Tree defense.

Edited December 9, 2021 by Ijustwantsomechips

[RedDelicious]

4 hours ago, GeeGolly said:

Looks like Laura is with them too.

I would also like to state for the record that Jim Bob has not now nor has he ever learned the rule of always/never (two-button suit) or always/sometimes/never (three-button suit). He will be that f*cking tool who buttons all the buttons on his suit jacket in perpetuity. 

[Trillium]

Oh, the truth did come out, JB. I also love their graphics team blurred out Meech so they could put the quote in. 😂

[MargeGunderson]

Oh, JB, you would not be thanking me if you knew what my prayers for your family are.

ETA - first post on page 666! I could not be any prouder. 

Edited December 7, 2021 by MargeGunderson

[irisheyes]

I wonder if Derrick is also there as bar exam review. Maybe criminal law was a weak area, and he figured watching a trial in action could help. 🤷‍♀️
 

My lawyer experience also comes from Grisham novels and Law & Order, so I could be totally off base. 

[emmawoodhouse]

Rebuttal has rested. Looks like closing arguments tomorrow at 9.

[beckie]

JB just wants THEIR truth to come out

 Even though their truth is lies, deflection, and lessening the event as "something that happens in alot of families."

[ScorpioSoul]

Wow can't believe we could possibly have a verdict by end of business tomorrow. Fingers crossed for guilty. He did it. It was not someone else at the car lot or someone framing him.