Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

Josh & Anna Smuggar: A Series of Unfortunate Events

maraleia

By maraleia
in Counting On

Recommended Posts

Zella

Zella

(edited)
4 minutes ago, farmgal4 said:

I’m not sure how I missed hearing about it, but can you please summarize, in a sentence or two, what the Anna/Austin feud is about?

There is no confirmed feud. I can't remember if it was WOACB or Pickles reported after the trial that Austin and Anna had a very heated argument about Josh because Anna is still clinging to the theory that he is innocent and, per this rumor, Austin was sick of her shit. I could see it happening, but I also think it is entirely just some weird wish fulfilment reporting too.  

Edited by Zella
  • Useful 2
  • Love 9
  • Replies 39.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • GeeGolly

    1526

  • Churchhoney

    1075

  • JoanArc

    1061

  • Sew Sumi

    1049

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

hoosier80
hoosier80

New show title: 10 to 20 Years and Counting 

MargeGunderson
MargeGunderson

Someone on Reddit just described Josh’s face as a glistening glazed ham. I am considering divorcing my husband and marrying that poster. 

doodlebug
doodlebug

Well, for many of us, it's the difference between 'imperfect' and 'non-PC' and being a criminal.  Josh is a child molester and his parents actively intervened in his situation to avoid him being punis

Posted Images

libgirl2

libgirl2

6 minutes ago, Zella said:

There is no confirmed feud. I can't remember if it was WOACB or Pickles reported after the trial that Austin and Anna had a very heated argument about Josh because Anna is still clinging to the theory that he is innocent and, per this rumor, Austin was sick of her shit. I could see it happening, but I also think it is entirely just some weird wish fulfilment reporting too.  

Austin more than likely believes what Josh did. What his feelings on it and forgiveness are one thing, but I get a feeling he doesn't think it is a lie. 

  • Love 6
galaxygirl76

galaxygirl76

12 minutes ago, Zella said:

There is no confirmed feud. I can't remember if it was WOACB or Pickles reported after the trial that Austin and Anna had a very heated argument about Josh because Anna is still clinging to the theory that he is innocent and, per this rumor, Austin was sick of her shit. I could see it happening, but I also think it is entirely just some weird wish fulfilment reporting too.  

Wasn't there something about Carlin and her husband too.

  • Useful 1
  • Love 2
Zella

Zella

41 minutes ago, libgirl2 said:

Austin more than likely believes what Josh did. What his feelings on it and forgiveness are one thing, but I get a feeling he doesn't think it is a lie. 

Oh I don't doubt that. What I am less sure is true is whether or not Anna and Austin had a screaming match with each other.

36 minutes ago, galaxygirl76 said:

Wasn't there something about Carlin and her husband too.

I've seen speculation about that--that Anna was blaming Carlin, of all people, for Josh's arrest--but I don't know if it was part of the original rumor or is part of a subsequent one. 

  • Useful 2
Zella

Zella

(edited)

I just went snooping--I cannot find anything about the feud via Google, and I lost brain cells trying to look through both Pickles and WOACB. On the Joy and Austin thread, though, the idea of a feud between Anna and Austin is mentioned in relation to Joy and Austin not being with the Duggars for Thanksgiving, but those were the only details given. This was as of December 12. I think additional details about Carlin and/or the fact it involved a screaming match were after the fact. 

Edited by Zella
  • Useful 3
Liddy52

Liddy52

(edited)

I seem to remember that there was something about Anna saying that Carlin's husband (Evan???) had been at the car lot around the time the CP was downloaded. And someone (Anna??) suggested that maybe that showed that there were other people that could have been responsible or something like that. WOACB or someone speculated that perhaps Anna was suggesting it could have been Carlin's husband. I think the whole story was a bunch of conjecture which may or may not have happened. (Anna accusing Carlin's husband and Austin and Joy being upset) .And I  may be completely remembering the discussion incorrectly.  

Edited by Liddy52
  • Useful 2
Zella

Zella

43 minutes ago, ginger90 said:

Many assumptions are made regarding who has and hasn’t been at holiday gatherings. 

Agreed! A lot of families smaller than the Duggars don't have everyone present just because of the logistics of families needing to balance celebrating with both sides of the family. If someone never shows back up at holiday get-togethers, that is interesting. But if they don't show up for one holiday, it doesn't really mean anything. 

39 minutes ago, Liddy52 said:

I seem to remember that there was something about Anna saying that Carlin's husband (Evan???) had been at the car lot around the time the CP was downloaded. And someone (Anna??) suggested that maybe that showed that there were other people that could have been responsible or something like that. WOACB or someone speculated that perhaps Anna was suggesting it could have been Carlin's husband. I think the whole story was a bunch of conjecture which may or may not have happened. (Anna accusing Carlin's husband and Austin and Joy being upset) .And I  may be completely remembering the discussion incorrectly.  

Yes that did come up, but it's a more recent addition to the story than what was first claimed back in December. I was just interested in establishing what the initial rumor was because I've found they tend to morph substantially. 

  • Love 6
Zella

Zella

(edited)
4 minutes ago, Rootbeer said:

I think the speculation about Austin and Anna being on the outs was also fueled by the fact that he was virtually the only member of the family who sat in the back of the courtroom, far away from Anna, every day he attended the trial.  I'm pretty sure that everyone else, even Derick, either sat near Anna or was seen speaking to her during breaks and such.

His seating was a weird progression, though, if I remember correctly. He started out sitting in the back and then actually sat with Derick and Anna at one point before sitting in the back again with Joy, so I'm not entirely sure that indicates a feud conclusively either. 

Edited by Zella
  • Love 10
MargeGunderson

MargeGunderson

Didn’t it come out at the trial that Josh’s abuse of his sisters, including Joy, was more serious and happened over a longer period of time than had previously been known? I could see that creating new wounds for Austin and Joy, and leading to discord between them and Anna (and other Duggars).

  • Love 16
mimionthebeach

mimionthebeach

On 2/4/2022 at 9:21 AM, madpsych78 said:

I've read and heard that even Boob and Michelle - privately - believe that Josh is guilty. It is only Anna who firmly believes he is innocent. And I believe that the Austin/Anna feud is real, and that Austin and Joy didn't attend the Xmas party because of Anna, and maybe Boob (I don't think there are any issues with Michelle and believe Austin and Joy are on good terms with her).

 

 

I have no doubt that a soon as he heard what Josh was being arrested for,  he knew Josh had done it. That inconvenient fact would not stand in the way of Jim Bob moving heaven and earth to get him off. I think he has explained it very carefully, slowly and in small words, to Michelle that this time Josh did a Really Bad Thing. I don't think he shared all the vile details because she's not going to be able to process that. 

  • Useful 3
Zella

Zella

(edited)
44 minutes ago, MargeGunderson said:

Didn’t it come out at the trial that Josh’s abuse of his sisters, including Joy, was more serious and happened over a longer period of time than had previously been known? I could see that creating new wounds for Austin and Joy, and leading to discord between them and Anna (and other Duggars).

Yes it was in Bobye's testimony about how it started earlier than had been previously reported and included even more serious assaults than had previously been released. 

Edited by Zella
  • Useful 2
  • Love 6
Zella

Zella

10 minutes ago, Rabbittron said:

Is there a copy of Bobyes transcript online that I can read. 

Not that I'm aware of, but this article is a pretty comprehensive summary of what she testified in the pretrial hearing, which as far as I know is pretty much what she said at trial:

https://people.com/tv/josh-duggar-family-friend-emotional-testimony-court-hearing/

  • Useful 3
SusanM

SusanM

59 minutes ago, Zella said:

Yes it was in Bobye's testimony about how it started earlier than had been previously reported and included even more serious assaults than had previously been released. 

Was it ever discussed in regards to how much of this information TLC was privy to at the time the original show was airing?  I get why, among other reasons of course, the Duggars wanted this hidden, but were they able to hide it from the producers of the show?

  • Love 9
Zella

Zella

15 minutes ago, SusannahM said:

Was it ever discussed in regards to how much of this information TLC was privy to at the time the original show was airing?  I get why, among other reasons of course, the Duggars wanted this hidden, but were they able to hide it from the producers of the show?

I have no clue, nor am I sure TLC cared. I consider them pretty complicit in continuing to foist the family on everyone. But even back in 2015, the family's official version of events didn't match the police report. Bobye's testimony is closer to what is in the police report, but if she is telling the truth--and I think she is--they lied to the police too. 

  • Useful 4
  • Love 9
auntieminem

auntieminem

17 hours ago, Zella said:

I just went snooping--I cannot find anything about the feud via Google, and I lost brain cells trying to look through both Pickles and WOACB. On the Joy and Austin thread, though, the idea of a feud between Anna and Austin is mentioned in relation to Joy and Austin not being with the Duggars for Thanksgiving, but those were the only details given. This was as of December 12. I think additional details about Carlin and/or the fact it involved a screaming match were after the fact. 

On WOACB's YouTube https://www.youtube.com/c/WithoutACrystalBall/videos  There were a couple videos dealing with Austin and Anna, that last a couple of weeks ago which included the Carlin thing (I think).  There was one during the trial that talked about Joy and Austin being upset over being lied to about what Josh did to the sisters. There might be another but those were the obvious ones about Austin and Anna.  She has all these sources close to the family which I suspect are all in her own mind. I confess I look at her FB page occasionally and even though I know better every now and then I look at a video. It is like reading tabloid titles while in line at the grocery store. There might be some speck of truth to some of her stuff but seems like it is covered up with wild fantasy.  

  • Useful 3
  • Love 1
Zella

Zella

Just now, auntieminem said:

On WOACB's YouTube https://www.youtube.com/c/WithoutACrystalBall/videos  There were a couple videos dealing with Austin and Anna, that last a couple of weeks ago which included the Carlin thing (I think).  There was one during the trial that talked about Joy and Austin being upset over being lied to about what Josh did to the sisters. There might be another but those were the obvious ones about Austin and Anna.  She has all these sources close to the family which I suspect are all in her own mind. I confess I look at her FB page occasionally and even though I know better every now and then I look at a video. It is like reading tabloid titles while in line at the grocery store. There might be some speck of truth to some of her stuff but seems like it is covered up with wild fantasy.  

Thank you--I bet that's where it came from. I was pretty sure it was either her or Pickles. 

  • Useful 2
  • Love 1
lascuba

lascuba

1 hour ago, SusannahM said:

Was it ever discussed in regards to how much of this information TLC was privy to at the time the original show was airing?  I get why, among other reasons of course, the Duggars wanted this hidden, but were they able to hide it from the producers of the show?

It was never discussed. My personal theory based on pure cynicism is that TLC knew. Maybe not all the details, but they were there when Josh was being punished the first time; they were there for "sin in the camp;" they were there for the fallout when Oprah's people contacted authorities. I find it impossible to believe that TLC didn't know something--if nothing else, they would have had serious questions for JB after Oprah cancelled their appearance at the last second. But it wouldn't surprise me if they knew before that.

  • Love 15
quarks

quarks

1 hour ago, Rabbittron said:

Is there a copy of Bobyes transcript online that I can read. 

The official trial transcripts haven't been released by the court yet.  

I don't know why, but my guess is:

1. The court needs someone to go through the transcripts and black out some specific information regarding the CSAM and possibly other testimony.

2. Everything in the federal court system, including the release of court transcripts, is still struggling with significant Covid-related delays. 

So they might not be released for another few days/weeks/months. 

  • Useful 3
GeeGolly

GeeGolly

Not that I give a shit about TLC, but is there a network out there, besides maybe PBS, that is innocent of exploitation for the gain of viewership? 

Dr Phil, Maury, the Kardashians, the Bates, Tucker Carlson, Dr Oz and many more shows air on different networks. Some networks are worse than others, but all seem willing to lower their standards for the all mighty dollar.

What TLC heard or knew about Josh back then may have been presented as gossip or as a family matter that had been taken care of. Anyway no matter what they knew, they're not complicit in the Felon's crimes. The only thing TLC did is help JB get rich.

  • Love 10
Zella

Zella

(edited)
21 minutes ago, GeeGolly said:

Anyway no matter what they knew, they're not complicit in the Felon's crimes. The only thing TLC did is help JB get rich.

Oh I don't think they are complicit in his crimes. But they are complicit in continuing to give these people a platform, long after they knew they were toxic, and soft-pedaling the worst aspects of their lives to make them appear more wholesome than they were. I see them as the ultimate enablers. And I don't think they were willing to cancel the show until they knew Josh was going to court, which I find . . . interesting. 

Edited by Zella
  • Love 22
lascuba

lascuba

36 minutes ago, Zella said:

Oh I don't think they are complicit in his crimes. But they are complicit in continuing to give these people a platform, long after they knew they were toxic, and soft-pedaling the worst aspects of their lives to make them appear more wholesome than they were. I see them as the ultimate enablers. And I don't think they were willing to cancel the show until they knew Josh was going to court, which I find . . . interesting. 

Another reason I think TLC knew a good bit of what was going on with Josh...they didn't cancel the show after the molestation story broke. The FR-fucking-C of all organizations fired Josh, but TLC, who canceled Honey Boo Boo after the mother started dating her daughter's abuser, went ahead and aired a 19K marathon when the article came out. I know I'm slipping into conspiracy theory territory with this, but I think they knew JB would scream from the rooftops that TLC knew all if they canceled. 

 

  • Useful 3
  • Love 9
Absolom

Absolom

(edited)

Sadly all the mess with the older Anderson sons is rather old news.  It was quite sordid. 

Although what Josh did as a thirty year old is more horrifying.  I can see TLC waiting to see if the government filed charges before proceeding.  After all an investigation is just that and may not yield evidence.  They acted when Josh was arrested and I can see waiting for that especially if Jim Bob was not forthcoming about the investigation.

Edited by Absolom
  • Love 6
Zella

Zella

(edited)
44 minutes ago, Absolom said:

I can see TLC waiting to see if the government filed charges before proceeding.  After all an investigation is just that and may not yield evidence.  They acted when Josh was arrested and I can see waiting for that especially if Jim Bob was not forthcoming about the investigation.

They actually waited well past the charges being filed. Josh was arrested in late April 2021 and charged in early May 2021. The show wasn't cancelled until late June 2021, nearly 2 months after charges were filed. That's why I think something else caused them to cancel, and I suspect that's when they learned Josh intended to go to court rather than pleading guilty. 

Edited by Zella
  • Useful 4
  • Love 9
Scarlett45

Scarlett45

Several posts have been removed-

It is not appropriate to use comments made on social media, by individuals not the Duggars and have never been on the show, as a jumping off point to discuss fundamentalism or its followers at large. People are allowed to have whatever opinion they like about the Duggars, they have not decided to come to our site to discuss their opinions, as such it does not belong in the thread.

The focus of this thread is Josh, Anna and their family- if appropriate you can always take your discussion to Sweet Fellowship, the religion thread, or Small Talk (so long as it does not violate forum guidelines).

Further off -topic posts will result in warnings. Please PM @deaja or myself if you have questions.

  • Love 2
Rabbittron

Rabbittron

On 2/6/2022 at 12:12 PM, quarks said:

The official trial transcripts haven't been released by the court yet.  

I don't know why, but my guess is:

1. The court needs someone to go through the transcripts and black out some specific information regarding the CSAM and possibly other testimony.

2. Everything in the federal court system, including the release of court transcripts, is still struggling with significant Covid-related delays. 

So they might not be released for another few days/weeks/months. 

Thanks 

ChiCricket

ChiCricket

(edited)
7 hours ago, quarks said:

If anyone is interested, a Reddit user has put up the transcripts of Josh's September hearing:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/0atpgy1z44hm8xa/9-27-21 Transcript of Motions Hearing.pdf?dl=0

Warning: this is a long document, and some of the material is pretty disturbing. 

 

OMGosh, I don't know how lawyers can do this day after day. I started reading this transcript, and within minutes my eyes were crossing at all the legal jargon.

I learned how  to speed-read in 4th grade, but even skipping chunks, this took quite a while to read (I would stop and fully read the sections that caught my eye.) 

The main thing I want to comment on is:

(BTW, IANAL, or even close to it, this was just what *I* took from the transcript) 

1. the defense tried so hard to imply that Josh wasn't allowed to contact his lawyer and/or leave at any time. Not true at all. (IMO) 

2. they also tried really hard to implicate other people, one of whom was not knowledgeable at all about computers. He said he only had Facebook for about 15 minutes before he got into an argument with an online stranger, and had to go across the street to ask his neighbor to delete Facebook from his phone for him.

3. the amount of pages in that transcript that had to do with just the scar on Josh's hand was mind-boggling, but I slogged through just to see what the outcome would be. This was where I *think* they were trying to say the government should have had a warrant(?) to take pictures of Josh's hands. The defense lost this appeal, I think. (I'm sure I'm not using the proper lawyer-y words here.) 

Seriously, I don't know how lawyers do this... and I was interested in this case.

I can't even imagine doing this all the time. Wow

Kudos to the hard-working lawyers that helped convict Josh. 

Ps. forgot to mention that the other employees thought they were under constant video surveillance when they were in Josh's office. Only Josh knew they weren't actually recording anything. 

Edited by ChiCricket
  • Useful 14
  • Love 1
  • Popular Post
merylinkid

merylinkid

  • Popular Post
5 hours ago, ChiCricket said:

forgot to mention that the other employees thought they were under constant video surveillance when they were in Josh's office. Only Josh knew they weren't actually recording anything. 

Sooooo other employees who believe they are constantly being watched just HAPPEN to do all the stuff Josh claims ONE OF THEM did rather than him?    His defense gets dumber and dumber.   I think "the router did it" is more plausible.

  • LOL 29
  • Love 1
Ohiopirate02

Ohiopirate02

13 hours ago, JoanArc said:

I feel like he’s the spy cam type.

Josh definitely is the spy cam type and not just the pervy stuff.  Josh is the type to revel in watching people he knew unguarded just to humiliate them.  He would lord it over his brothers and his coworkers--Caleb picks his nose when he things people aren't looking or Josiah went into the office to pick out a wedgie.  Harmless stuff people do when they think no one is looking would be fodder for Josh.

  • Love 12
emmawoodhouse

emmawoodhouse

(edited)
9 minutes ago, floridamom said:

Evidently, Anna is not some poor, broke ill-equipped wife. I understand she pocketed a lot of cash from selling their home; along with many LLCs in her name stocked with cash. Boob made sure whatever went down with Josh, Anna would not be hurting for funds. Time will tell.

I think the money paid for his defense. They got about $400k for a house that may not even be finished.

Edited by emmawoodhouse
  • Useful 4
  • Love 2
Churchhoney

Churchhoney

(edited)
22 minutes ago, winsomeone said:

When is Josh to be sentenced? I thought the end of January, but must have been wrong.

I think the estimate I heard at the trial's end in mid-December  was that it would be about four months before the sentencing.....

There's a lot of paperwork and deliberation that goes into sentencing decisions -- more back and forth between the sides....convicted people themselves have an opportunity to submit stuff....plus the immense Covid court backup is still around and farily intense, I'd guess.. 

 

Edited by Churchhoney
  • Useful 5
  • Love 2
Minivanessa

Minivanessa

56 minutes ago, Churchhoney said:

I think the estimate I heard at the trial's end in mid-December  was that it would be about four months before the sentencing.....

There's a lot of paperwork and deliberation that goes into sentencing decisions -- more back and forth between the sides....convicted people themselves have an opportunity to submit stuff....plus the immense Covid court backup is still around and farily intense, I'd guess.. 

I just looked at the case docket on Court Listener. There's no entry yet that sets the date for the sentencing hearing. 

We've noted here in our discussions that on January 19 the defense filed a post-trial Motion for Judgment of Acquittal or, in the Alternative, Motion for New Trial, a routine type of motion which is necessary to preserve the defendant's appeal rights. The prosecution's response to that is due to be filed today. 

  • Useful 8
  • Love 4
quarks

quarks

(edited)

Link to the government response to the motion for judgment of acquittal or new trial. I haven't read it yet, but I'm assuming that the usual cautions that this is about Josh Duggar and may therefore be enraging/disturbing/sickening still apply:

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/59871253/134/united-states-v-duggar/

Edited by quarks
  • Useful 2
  • Love 6
  • Popular Post
Scout Finch

Scout Finch

  • Popular Post
(edited)
13 hours ago, quarks said:

Link to the government response to the motion for judgment of acquittal or new trial. I haven't read it yet, but I'm assuming that the usual cautions that this is about Josh Duggar and may therefore be enraging/disturbing/sickening still apply:

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/59871253/134/united-states-v-duggar/

"The defendant, for his part, claimed that someone else did it but his attempts to scapegoat others collapsed under the mildest scrutiny."

FYI, there's no details about what was in the videos or photos, just that the materials found were CSA so it shouldn't be as triggering. The prosecution masterfully takes apart every one of the reasons for the appeal!

 

Edited by Scout Finch
  • Useful 7
  • LOL 6
  • Love 14
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...