Josh & Anna Smuggar: A Series of Unfortunate Events

[barbedwire]

Good points!  I wonder if she also saw the BS of JimBoob and MeeShell saying that they put "safeguards in place" but yet we know he still was able to roam at night.  I have said it before, he should have been sleeping in a sleeping bag on the floor of their room.  But nooooooooooooooooooooo, that would prevent further baby making.

[Calamity Jane]

Here's a link to the code. Based on that and the police report, I still think this person has their work cut out for them. I'm not a lawyer, so there's a fair chance I'm wrong on this.

Doesn't statute of limitations apply only to criminal action?  This is a civil lawsuit -- I'm not a lawyer, either, but do statutes of limitation apply also to those?  I don't think they do, with the caveat again that I'm not an expert in the field.  Also, the burden of proof in civil cases is much lower than in criminal court, which is how OJ got nailed for that big judgment in the death of Nicole, even though he was acquitted in criminal court.  It may be difficult, but I don't think the lack of a criminal conviction is fatal. 

I agree that it's more likely about something other than the financial compensation, I'm just saying that even if she were being solely motivated by money, it wouldn't change how I feel (which is that she deserves each and every last cent she can wring out of them).

Whatever the motivation, civil suits are about money.  That's all you can sue for. 

[kokapetl]

Doesn't statute of limitations apply only to criminal action? This is a civil lawsuit -- I'm not a lawyer, either, but do statutes of limitation apply also to those? I don't think they do, with the caveat again that I'm not an expert in the field. Also, the burden of proof in civil cases is much lower than in criminal court, which is how OJ got nailed for that big judgment in the death of Nicole, even though he was acquitted in criminal court. It may be difficult, but I don't think the lack of a criminal conviction is fatal.

Whatever the motivation, civil suits are about money. That's all you can sue for.

What I linked is the statute that sets time limits on civil actions based on sexual abuse. I think.

[Lemur]

Whatever the motivation, civil suits are about money.  That's all you can sue for. 

 

Not necessarily.  Not to wander too far off-topic, but civil suits are very commonly used by victims of sexual assault/abuse/molestation to get some form of justice after the criminal statutes of limitation have expired due to the fact that so many people are abused as children and had no recourse (for whatever reason) at the time and continue not to have it for a decade or more after the fact.  It's why states such as California have no statute for such cases. Ultimately, if the complainant wins they do get a monetary award, but that doesn't necessarily mean they keep it.  It's not uncommon for them to donate their award.

Edited July 2, 2015 by Lemur

[GEML]

It may come down to money, but it might not be "about" money. The settlement itself can involve almost anything. Including details saying that the Duggars do not speak for her and they will pay more money if they say publicly that they do, such as Jessa came very close to saying in the Fox interview.

[Calamity Jane]

Not necessarily.  Not to wander too far off-topic, but civil suits are very commonly used by victims of sexual assault/abuse/molestation to get some form of justice after the statutes of limitation have expired due to the fact that so many people are abused as children and had no recourse (for whatever reason) at the time and continue not to have it for a decade or more after the fact.  It's why states such as California have no statute for such cases. Ultimately, if the complainant wins they do get a monetary award, but that doesn't necessarily mean they keep it.  It's not uncommon for them to donate their award.

I understand that, I'm just saying when you bring a civil suit, you are suing for money because there's nothing else you can sue for.  So the victims may want other things (institutional changes, better policies, etc.),  but the only thing they can do is make the behavior prohibitively expensive.  Sometimes this makes people look "greedy," but that's because they have no other recourse.  This is often misunderstood and misinterpreted, from what I read.

It may come down to money, but it might not be "about" money. The settlement itself can involve almost anything. Including details saying that the Duggars do not speak for her and they will pay more money if they say publicly that they do, such as Jessa came very close to saying in the Fox interview.

Yes, but you can't bring a suit just to do that.  People get upset sometimes that victims seem to "only want money," but that's the only thing can do in a civil suit.  Other things may get put in, but they can't of themselves be the lawsuit. 

[Oldernowiser]

Again, I don't want to speculate too much, but this woman could well have been under enormous pressure as a young teen in a fundie community to accept the Duggarization of her molestation when, in fact, it was traumatic for her.

Now having the Duggar girls out there sweeping away her molestation with a wave of a manicured hand so that the money train will roll on, she might well be thoroughly pissed and justifiably so.

I hope she gets a ton of money and uses it to go to college and grad school and ends up with a career and a life that isn't just measured by pregnancies.

[Julia]

If the victim can't take away sanctimony, I can't imagine anything that would punish the Duggars, parents and eldest son, more than losing money. It's what they care about.

 

I think, too, it's important to remember that before this came out, the Duggar family was being protected by local authorities and apparently using their position to punish people who pissed them off (remember the renters who were threatened with eviction from someone else's property if they didn't put up a Duggar sign during an election?). This woman, whoever she is, was essentially prevented from getting justice while justice was still available. Let her have some money instead.

 

Besides, it's not as if Josh or his parents have honor or reputation to lose.

Edited July 2, 2015 by Julia

[GEML]

I don't know how much this person would have been "punished" by local authorities. It's pretty clear they have some local enemies, and she could have gone to the media at any time. The newspaper reporter clearly says this was a known but unable to be verified story. She could have verified it, or essentially asked for some sort of "settlement" in exchange for her silence if she only wanted money.

Which is why I think it's more internal. I think people close to her are close to the Duggars, but she herself is not. And why it's not just about the money.

[Sew Sumi]

It may come down to money, but it might not be "about" money. The settlement itself can involve almost anything. Including details saying that the Duggars do not speak for her and they will pay more money if they say publicly that they do, such as Jessa came very close to saying in the Fox interview.

Jessa didn't just "come close" to speaking for the 5th victim. She flat out said the person was "fine" with all of this. Just because she may have been (likely) forced to forgive Josh at church, it doesn't mean that she ever really forgave or forgot what he did. Even if she managed to push it to the back of her mind, I don't know how the events of the past 6 weeks couldn't have triggered her. 

Edited July 2, 2015 by Sew Sumi

[JoanArc]

Jessa didn't just "come close" to speaking for the 5th victim. She flat out said the person was "fine" with all of this. Just because she may have been (likely) forced to forgive Josh at church, it doesn't mean that she ever really forgave or forgot what he did. Even if she managed to push it to the back of her mind, I don't know how the events of the past 6 weeks couldn't have triggered her. 

Exactly! Jessa was spewing so many lies in rapid fire during the interview she let this go. She really should've only spoken for herself.

[GEML]

I didn't see the interview, so I can't speak definitively about it. So I appreciate others' knowledge.

[MrsMommy]

I don't think the 5th victim wants her name out there or else I'd think she would have already said something. My cousin who is 10 now accused my husband of touching her over the clothes and our lawyer and their lawyer said that if Mt husband requested it then my cousin would have to testify which puts the identity out there. I assume that Josh would request the victim to testify as well.

Btw my cousin came out and told the victims advocate that her grandma (my aunt) made her say my husband touched her that why I'd divorce him and get half his money. My aunt doesn't like me being married to him bc he is 30 years older than I am, and for some reason my aunt thinks we are rich when we arent. Smh

[barbedwire]

MrsMommy - that must have been awful to go through.

 

I too didn't see the interview.  I agree that Jessa should NOT have spoken for anyone else.

[Sew Sumi]

I didn't see the interview, so I can't speak definitively about it. So I appreciate others' knowledge.

No problem! Jessa definitely crossed the line w/r/t who she spoke for. She actually cut off Jill and said, "I can speak for them. They're all fine with it." 

 

A 10 year old victim is much different than one who is now in her mid-20's (if it's who I think it is, she's now 27). If she's willing to go this far, I'm pretty sure she's aware of the risks involved. 

Edited July 2, 2015 by Sew Sumi

[neece26]

 

I find it distasteful to sue for money when the family didn't bother to press criminal charges a decade ago. So it was no big deal when it happened, but now that the Duggars are worth millions and there's gold to dig, she's coming out of the woodwork.

 

Well the flip side of this argument is many people find it distasteful that the Duggars pimped themselves out for those millions pretending to be this wholesome Christian family when they knew they had a creepy hidden secret.  

[NikSac]

EDITED to add: I've realized that it's possible that IF JB had homeowner's insurance back then, the liability coverage might extend to Josh's molestation of a child. OTOH given JB's tight-fisted methods toward his family at that time (spending $200K in a failed political race while shoehorning his family into a much too small house), who knows if he carried homeowner's liability insurance? (Generally mortgage companies require the property to be insured, and most homeowner policies also include liability coverage, but I assume you could go cheap and minimize or exclude the liability coverage.)

 

That's assuming they had a mortgage. If not, I don't think he had to have homeowner's insurance at all. (I'm not 100% sure on that, but I think that's the case)

[Cherrio]

''If the victim can't take away sanctimony, I can't imagine anything that would punish the Duggars, parents and eldest son, more than losing money. It's what they care about.''

 

Yes !      That is their religion. Money.   So, this statement should be repeated often.

[GEML]

And I'd add that keeping her name out of it may, again, have been more a kindness to her family than because she herself is afraid of the scrutiny. As someone who left the community but has family in it (who would pay a price if I were to - purely hypothetically- raise a stink about something in my childhood) I can understand her possible reluctance on their behalf as easily as I can see her as a victim who doesn't want to relive it, or doesn't want the media coverage.

The first would actually give me the most pause. But that's me.

[3 is enough]

Maybe the victim did not have a say in what actions were taken regarding her molestation all those years ago.  Maybe she does not subscribe to the same beliefs anymore, and has decided that it is time for her to get some sort of closure.  Given that a lot of church members knew the story back then she may be concerned that her identity will be revealed with or without her consent, so she has chosen to take control of the situation.

 

And yes, maybe she just wants Josh, Jim Bob and Michelle to face some sort of consequences.  Hitting them were it hurts seems to be an obvious choice.

Edited July 2, 2015 by 3 is enough

[GeeGolly]

No matter what her circumstances are, Survivor #5 is very brave to even consider filing a law suit. It is hard for survivors under the best of circumstances, and without the eyes of many watching. I hope if she does file, they settle of out court for her sake.

[SoSueMe]

How did they explain to the babysitter that the girls' bedroom door was to remain locked???

I don't remember hearing how that worked. Did the girls lock themselves in or was the door locked from outside?

[Fosca]

It's possible that the 5th victim didn't sue before because 1. When she was underage her parents/church wouldn't let her, and 2. By the time she was old enough and/or secure enough to sue, she didn't think anyone would believe her--without the police report (which she probably thought didn't exist or had been destroyed) would anyone have believed her?

[kokapetl]

It's possible that the 5th victim didn't sue before because 1. When she was underage her parents/church wouldn't let her, and 2. By the time she was old enough and/or secure enough to sue, she didn't think anyone would believe her--without the police report (which she probably thought didn't exist or had been destroyed) would anyone have believed her?

The Babysitter was an adult at the time of her police interview in 2006, and she only discovered she had been assaulted when the contrite Duggars told her in 2002/2003.

[NikSac]

How did they explain to the babysitter that the girls' bedroom door was to remain locked???

 

I thought they incorporated the locking bedroom door in the TTH but the molestations happened in the previous house?  If that's the case, there was no locked bedroom door when the babysitter molestation happened.

[zenme]

So the babysitter was also unaware someone had been fondling her while she slept?  Was this what the Duggars say happened, or is it the actual truth?  I dunno.  I still find it very hard to believe that not one of the girls (except for the girl in his lap), felt Josh's hands. 

[HundFan]

Dear Santa (I know I'm early, but I've been good and this is really important),

Please let the rumored lawsuit by Josh Duggar's fifth victim proceed. Please let the Duggars' hubris lead them to "buy used and save the difference" when lawyering up, and give them inept counsel who secretly abhor them and bungle their defense (though not to the extent an appeal or mistrial could occur). Please give the victim a crack shot feminist legal team that wears pants and graduated from the Ivy League. Please make some of these women lesbians who just married their wives in Arkansas. Please make sure the Duggars know this.

 

During depositions and testimony, please let the victim's lawyers use big words and withering questions to scare the shit out of Josh and his molester-enabling parents. Please give Josh, MEchelle and Boob overactive bladders, cotton mouth and flop sweat during questioning - and please let the court reporter so note in the legal record. Please keep Josh on his stress-relieving junk food diet and make his "court clothes" waistband so tight it pinches whenever he sits. Finally, please give Josh's fifth victim a sympathetic judge and anything and everything that eases her gelatinous molester-caused pain even a tiny bit, including but not limited to the following: (1) a huge cash settlement from the Duggars, (2) public Duggar admissions of guilt, and (3) personal apologies from each of the three Duggars, prepared in isolation without PR team input in the presence of a court-appointed proctor who will also supervise the hand delivery of said apologies to Josh's fifth victim.  

Hoping For The Best Since I've Been Good,

Not A Duggar Fan

PS: I know I'm asking a lot, but I promise I won't bother you again 'til next year. I'm thinking maybe then you could free one of the J-slaves? Just tossing out the idea. Thanks again!

 

ETA: "Gelatinous molester" came from another poster. Sorry I can't recall who said it - but I loved it so I told whomever it was that term should be his name of record henceforth.

Edited July 4, 2015 by HundFan

[kokapetl]

So the babysitter was also unaware someone had been fondling her while she slept? Was this what the Duggars say happened, or is it the actual truth? I dunno. I still find it very hard to believe that not one of the girls (except for the girl in his lap), felt Josh's hands.

In her 2006 police interview, the non Duggar victim said although she remembered spending the night at the Duggars, she did not remember any assault.

[Flowers]

In her 2006 police interview, the non Duggar victim said although she remembered spending the night at the Duggars, she did not remember any assault.

Maybe all the media buzz, seeing certain pics of him or the home or the family, or something else, has triggered her memory.

I hope for the same things as in the Dear Santa post above.

[zenme]

In her 2006 police interview, the non Duggar victim said although she remembered spending the night at the Duggars, she did not remember any assault.

 

Wow.  Well, all I can say is that Josh missed his calling.  For all his stealth he could have been a ninja, or with hands like that he could have been a surgeon.

[kokapetl]

Wow. Well, all I can say is that Josh missed his calling. For all his stealth he could have been a ninja, or with hands like that he could have been a surgeon.

Not that I think Jessa knew what the word meant, Josh actually was sly.

How about Josh Duggar, Cat Burglar? No not lithe enough.

Edited July 2, 2015 by Kokapetl

[Dianaofthehunt]

HundFan, your list is mine; exactly!

[What In The]

About the victim suing Josh, when mommy superior Kourtney Kardashian had some pics stolen from her of a sexual experience with her High School bf, they were able to press charges because she was a minor at the time of the incident. Not sure if she can but if she can sue Josh on the same premis then good for her. I want Justice for her more than for the Kardashian hoe bags.

[Sew Sumi]

Maybe all the media buzz, seeing certain pics of him or the home or the family, or something else, has triggered her memory.

I hope for the same things as in the Dear Santa post above.

She may well still have been under the jurisdiction of her fundie parents, and been coached as to what to say. Just a thought. 

 

Josh Duggar, fox in the henhouse. 

[What In The]

ETA, Kourt sued as an adult years later.

[zenme]

Josh Duggar, fox in the henhouse.

 

Is that the new thread title?

[Cherrio]

So the babysitter was also unaware someone had been fondling her while she slept?  Was this what the Duggars say happened, or is it the actual truth?  I dunno.  I still find it very hard to believe that not one of the girls (except for the girl in his lap), felt Josh's hands. 

 

       Are children being drugged?  The Druggars?     I don't believe a word of what they say.

[Joe Jitsu913]

That's assuming they had a mortgage. If not, I don't think he had to have homeowner's insurance at all. (I'm not 100% sure on that, but I think that's the case)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the Duggars rented that house? If so, they wouldn't have homeowners insurance.

If they owned the house without a mortgage, they are not required to have homeowners insurance. Although it's a wise investment, we all know Jim Bob is cheap and he wouldn't have ponied up the cash.

[NikSac]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the Duggars rented that house? If so, they wouldn't have homeowners insurance.

If they owned the house without a mortgage, they are not required to have homeowners insurance. Although it's a wise investment, we all know Jim Bob is cheap and he wouldn't have ponied up the cash.

 

Good question, I don't know on that house whether it was a rental, owned, or mortgaged. Hopefully someone who knows more Duggar real-estate history can help.

[Sew Sumi]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the Duggars rented that house? If so, they wouldn't have homeowners insurance.

If they owned the house without a mortgage, they are not required to have homeowners insurance. Although it's a wise investment, we all know Jim Bob is cheap and he wouldn't have ponied up the cash.

The abuse all occurred at the Johnson Rd. house, which they moved out of into the "rent house." So yes, they owned it. Whether they owned it in the clear is anyone's best guess, but I think they must have. They did Sammons' debt seminar not long after they met Dr. Wheat (the ":Pill causes miscarriage" and fundie sex book author). So, they've "purposed" to be debt-free since the early/mid-90's. I remember Jinger saying she was born in that house, so that was 12/93. Hard to say if they still carried a mortgage as late as 2002/3. I would wager that they didn't. Who knows what kind of insurance they had on that house, if any at all?

Edited July 3, 2015 by Sew Sumi

[Vermicious Knid]

Please give the victim a crack shot feminist legal team that wears pants and graduated from the Ivy League.

 

 

Please be Gloria Allred :)

[Fuzzysox]

Please be Gloria Allred :)

I think your probably right she loves cases that allow her to famewhore the situation but I haven't seen her around in awhile, is she still taking cases?

[mbutterfly]

The Babysitter was an adult at the time of her police interview in 2006, and she only discovered she had been assaulted when the contrite Duggars told her in 2002/2003.

How do we know when she knew she had been assaulted? I didn't think she had spoken. 

Added to say: I am not trusting what she said in what seems to have been a pretty controlled interview. Honestly I don't believe it is possible she didn't know it or slept through it. 

Edited July 3, 2015 by mbutterfly

[NikSac]

Thought this might be a good refresher: http://imgur.com/a/zqPMi#30

 

This is the police report page related to the babysitter. The interview was in 2006, and on this page the person says it happened when she was asleep. She knew about it because her parents got a call 3.5-4 years ago from JB and Michelle telling her parents what had happened (which would put her assault at around 2002-2003). She was on the asleep on the living room couch and remembers spending the night there, but not the assault.

 

I swore there was something about a blanket too, but I'm not finding it again (and it's a lot of pages to dig through), so hopefully that answers the main questions.

[Morgalisa]

Fuzzy, Gloria Allred is representing several of the Cosby accusers.

[Loves2Dance]

Thought this might be a good refresher: http://imgur.com/a/zqPMi#30

 

This is the police report page related to the babysitter. The interview was in 2006, and on this page the person says it happened when she was asleep. She knew about it because her parents got a call 3.5-4 years ago from JB and Michelle telling her parents what had happened (which would put her assault at around 2002-2003). She was on the asleep on the living room couch and remembers spending the night there, but not the assault.

 

I swore there was something about a blanket too, but I'm not finding it again (and it's a lot of pages to dig through), so hopefully that answers the main questions.

 

 

Pretty sure it was Jill who remembers Josh trying to steal her blanket one night. And it partially woke her up. 

[purplemonkey]

Re: insurance, as a wealthy person, JB probably has umbrella liability insurance. Not sure if that would help Josh at all. I am not a lawyer.

[SmallTownMom]

Our local paper has an interesting story this morning.  Seems a 27-year-old young man made some "mistakes".  He broke into 2 Amish houses and fondled girls in their sleep.  For this he will serve 4-8 years in jail, have no contact with the victims or their families, and must register as a sex offender under Megan's law.

 

Sounds a little harsh compared to someone who gets a stern lecture, does some construction work as counseling, and is allowed to live with his victims.

[ariel]

Please be Gloria Allred :)

Or her daughter Attorney Lisa Bloom.

[TomServo]

I swore there was something about a blanket too, but I'm not finding it again (and it's a lot of pages to dig through), so hopefully that answers the main questions.

 

I believe that part is near the beginning and is part of Jim Bob and Michelle's initial interview and was not about the babysitter.  They told the police that one of the girls kinda sorta remembered halfway waking up one time when Josh took her blanket off, but that she didn't remember if anything else happened.