Josh & Anna Smuggar: A Series of Unfortunate Events

[RazzleberryPie]

Wow. That was…comprehensive.

Wow. It was. I can honestly say my heathern non-fundie mind had never heard of about half of those things before that site.  To each their own as long as they're consenting, but y'all some freaks up in Fundieville. If Jana has seen things like that website, and thinks all of this is normal, regular, typical behavior endorsed by like-minded believers, no wonder she's avoided marriage. Hard to believe that someone like Michelle, who couldn't comprehend that feet or shoes could be considered sexy/attractive could fathom some of the categories on that page.

 

ETA: Just to clarify - when I said some of those things weren't 'normal', I didn't necessarily mean they were immoral, sinful, shameful, wrong, etc. Consenting adults can consent to whatever without my approval or permission, of course. What I did mean by 'normal' is typical, run of the mill, mainstream, etc. If someone who is not allowed to be alone with a man or express any affection prior to marriage, like Jana, kissing or regular missionary sex could be very overwhelming, let alone more adventurous things or fetishes. 

Edited January 31, 2016 by RazzleberryPie

[Marigold]

I was raised Fund. Baptist and was a Fund Baptist as a married woman. i gotta say, sex was also talked about in a positive way. Like, it's a good thing, it's fun. Husbands should please the wife. The wife should please the husband. Most/all things were allowed between a husband and wife. Dressing nicely for bed was always encouraged. Good sex was a priority.

I have a very open attitude about sex with my husband. I never knew anything different.

I might have a long list of things about Fund Baptists that I disagree with but sex is not one of them. At least not the churches that I attended.

[GeeGolly]

Are most religions all up in folk's sex lives? 

[Love2dance]

Sounds like the fundies are having way more fun than we thought.

[queenanne]

I think to some extent, clearly there's an age gap in the sexual frankness and permissiveness department.  For example, I can see Grandma Duggar being and lecturing sexual conservatism to her DIL, because whether or not someone who came of age in the 50s swung from the chandelier, you most emphatically wouldn't have spent any time telling anyone else you swung from the chandelier.  You also would have genteelly averted your eyes and pretended that such sites never existed, simply because sex was considered a private matter that wasn't discussed publicly.

[Churchhoney]

Are most religions all up in folk's sex lives? 

 

My theory is that insecure, control-freak men founded and run most religions. So...yeah.

Sounds like the fundies are having way more fun than we thought.

 

Well, they are if the men involved are actually listening to the women and the women are telling them the truth. Given what we see of a lot of these hangin-around-tv couples, though, I kind of doubt that that's happening for most.

Edited February 1, 2016 by Churchhoney

[BitterApple]

Josh is out of Jesus Jail soon, right? I don't understand how the show will go on with such a big elephant in the room. Even if Josh isn't featured, the entire viewing audience knows his pudgy mug is lurking around off camera. I still can't believe Anna is determined to make a go of her dumpster fire of a marriage. I have a feeling Boob would be more than happy to send Josh off on a one-way ticket to Siberia and it's Michelle who wants him back in the fold.

[kokapetl]

If Jill is back in town, I wonder where Josh plans to live. The guest "house" shed?

[BitterApple]

If Jill is back in town, I wonder where Josh plans to live. The guest "house" shed?

I can see Anna being pissed if Jill gets the pool house. She's got four kids and lives in the girls dorm, while Jill has one kid and gets a 4,000 sq. ft. McMansion on a couple of acres. I can't wait until the Duggars drop the nicey-nice facade and the claws start coming out.

[Missy Vixen]

I can see Anna being pissed if Jill gets the pool house. She's got four kids and lives in the girls dorm, while Jill has one kid and gets a 4,000 sq. ft. McMansion on a couple of acres. I can't wait until the Duggars drop the nicey-nice facade and the claws start coming out.

I think the claws have already come out. And I think there is not much hope of being able to contain what's really happening in that household (namely the TTH) much longer; the tabloids will have a field day.

 

Jim Boob's "empire" depends on keeping Joshley Madison under his thumb 24 hours a day. Anna will be in the girls' dorm indefinitely; her will's broken. She's not leaving.

[Marigold]

I think the claws have already come out. And I think there is not much hope of being able to contain what's really happening in that household (namely the TTH) much longer; the tabloids will have a field day.

 

Jim Boob's "empire" depends on keeping Joshley Madison under his thumb 24 hours a day. Anna will be in the girls' dorm indefinitely; her will's broken. She's not leaving.

Agree!

Jim Bob will do whatever he has to, to get Perv Josh under control. Anna's brain is toast so she is easy to control.

There is a lotta money at stake. Jim Bob will glue Josh's pants on if he has to...give him a chaperone 24/7. Anything. I bet that Jim Bob is cooking up all sorts of retaliation....

[Celia Rubenstein]

The porno chick wants to drop her lawsuit but Josh is saying not so fast ....

 

http://www.tmz.com/2016/02/01/josh-duggar-porn-star-lawsuit/

 

Josh's lawyers say they'll only agree if Dillon drops her case forever and retracts her allegations on her social media accounts. He also wants her to foot his legal bills.  

She's refusing Josh's offer, and adds in the docs he might think twice before digging his heels in, because of his admission he's been treated for sex addiction.

[queenanne]

OK, that's a point for LAWYR, because if reported in truth, that would seem to indicate Dillon's lawyers now don't think she can win a "he said, she said", regardless of the sex addiction, and is just hoping that waving the latter around in the air threateningly scares Josh.

Edited February 2, 2016 by queenanne

[GeeGolly]

The porno chick wants to drop her lawsuit but Josh is saying not so fast ....

 

http://www.tmz.com/2016/02/01/josh-duggar-porn-star-lawsuit/

Maybe this accounts for the radio silence. If this is true and the lawsuit is dropped, the Duggars will want all eyes & ears on this.

[kokapetl]

MOTION to Withdraw Complaint Without Prejudice filed by ASHLEY STAMM-NORTHUP.Certificate of Service.(FRUMER, MARC)

[Arwen Evenstar]

WOT!!!!!!!!

I can't believe that slimy eel of a Smuggar wriggled off the hook again!

That said, no matter how slimy someone is, they don't deserve to be falsely accused of something.

Maybe Daddy Boob paid her off to make her go away and slapped her with a gag order? That would be true to form that he shouldn't have to be held accountable because he's a Speshul Snowflake.

Edited February 2, 2016 by Arwen Evenstar

[riverblue22]

I bet she was paid off.

[Tabbygirl521]

I really wanted details on all Josh's alibi evidence. I was coming around to thinking Danica might be lying or exaggerating. Now I guess we will never know for sure.

[kokapetl]

I don't think Josh would pay Ms Dillon to withdraw her claim without prejudice, she would retain the option to pursue her claim and he doesn't want that.

[Sew Sumi]

Yeah, he wants her to deny claims on social media, among other things. She isn't having that.

[JoanArc]

IF she does have photos - there could've been a payoff to keep them from going public.

[kokapetl]

A settlement would have had Ms Dillon withdraw her claim with prejudice. Josh would be insane to allow her to flake on this current lawsuit and let her make more claims. He wants/needs/deserves to have a definitive resolution.

[Fuzzysox]

How many more days til fake rehab is over?

[Marigold]

A settlement would have had Ms Dillon withdraw her claim with prejudice. Josh would be insane to allow her to flake on this current lawsuit and let her make more claims. He wants/needs/deserves to have a definitive resolution.

so what do you think happened?

I'm not a legal person...I'm depending on you guys to explain what really happened.

did josh pay her off finally?

[kokapetl]

I'm not a lawyer.

I don't think Josh or JimBob has paid Ms Dillon anything, or even offered her anything.

Edited February 2, 2016 by Kokapetl

[truthtalk2014]

My thought is that Danica saw this as way to get her name in the spotlight.  I am in no way protecting Joshie.  She got a magazine cover and everyone knows her name now.  More money for her- no matter how you slice it.  

 

Honestly, it sounds like they were hoping for an easy payout from Josh and JB.  When Josh's attorney asked for the proof in the pudding, they were obviously unwilling to provide. AND, I think Josh must have had some proof that he was not at the scene of the crime at the time she said.  If she had proof, she would not be asking to drop this.  I think she is finally realizing that she can be liable for his legal fees.  

 

If this woman has lied (and it is sounding more and more like that every day) then I hope it comes back to bite her on the ass  - not because of Josh- but because of Anna and the M's.   This will be around forever. Josh is a big enough pig without any false stories in the media.

[Sew Sumi]

Discovery gas begun, and Danica's request may come from not supplying enough information that her lawyer could actually subpoena (ie. Josh's computers (work and home) in addition to phone/text/social media posts. Maybe Josh friended anyone who requested (hell, he friended me). but Danica was a FB friend. I bet some PMs were exchanged and that Anna was shut out of all of his SM accounts, unlike her sister Priscilla.

[kokapetl]

Radar Online's latest SHOCKING COURT DOCUMENT!

Edited February 2, 2016 by Kokapetl

[Marigold]

I don't understand this 'with prejudice" and "without prejudice". But it sounds like Danica doesn't have clear evidence.

[kokapetl]

"With prejudice" would prevent Ms Dillon from pursuing the issue any further. "Without prejudice" would allow it, as far as I can tell.

[Marigny]

Yes, I recommend the post "What's OK, what's not" if you want to cut to the chase. Then the boards for men discussing how to get what they are entitled to.

I stopped at "Adult Nursing." Some things I just cannot do. 

[Tabbygirl521]

My thought is that Danica saw this as way to get her name in the spotlight. I am in no way protecting Joshie. She got a magazine cover and everyone knows her name now. More money for her- no matter how you slice it.

Honestly, it sounds like they were hoping for an easy payout from Josh and JB. When Josh's attorney asked for the proof in the pudding, they were obviously unwilling to provide. AND, I think Josh must have had some proof that he was not at the scene of the crime at the time she said. If she had proof, she would not be asking to drop this. I think she is finally realizing that she can be liable for his legal fees.

If this woman has lied (and it is sounding more and more like that every day) then I hope it comes back to bite her on the ass - not because of Josh- but because of Anna and the M's. This will be around forever. Josh is a big enough pig without any false stories in the media.

I am tending now to think she is lying. But if Jish had proof he wasn't with her, why is he in Jesus Jail? Porn, maybe. Or he really did manage to connect with someone via Ashley Madison or otherwise. It is none of my business but I still wanna know.

[louannems]

I stopped at "Adult Nursing." Some things I just cannot do.

I went to that marriage bed site. I cannot find "what's OK, what's not OK"

[NewDigs]

Adult. Nursing.

I backed out of that site just in the nick of time.

Now it would seem that fundies are overly preoccupied with sex!

Wonder what bible verses they find that give the godly ok to adult nursing. And almost everything else on that site.

Now I kinda' feel bad for married fundie wimmens.

I went to that marriage bed site. I cannot find "what's OK, what's not OK"

Whatever a man wants?

[Celia Rubenstein]

I believe Dillon wants to drop her case because she can't produce any evidence of damages.  There is no point in going any further.  Josh clearly isn't willing to pay her to go away, she has got all the publicity out of it she can get, and she won't win in court without showing how she was harmed.  So she wants to cut and run.  Sorry, Danica.  That's not how this works.  That's not how any of this works.

 

I totally believe that Dillon should have to pay Smuggar's legal fees.  Why should Josh (or anyone else) have to fork over money to some LAWYR to defend complete nonsense?  And this case was complete nonsense, imo.  Dillon's whole case is based upon how harmed she was by Josh.   But her inability to produce such basic things like psychiatrist bills and reports and contracts from the performances she had to cancel because she was too traumatized to work suggest to me that her entire cause of action was a sham. That stuff is not hard to produce.  And just when it is required she produce such things, she suddenly wants to drop her case.  I don't think it's a coincidence.  It's because that stuff doesn't exist.

 

I really think Danica Dillon is nothing more than a scheming little hustler who thought she could shake down that pasty, busted can of biscuits and his slack-jawed daddy for hush money and maybe score herself some publicity.  Well, she got the attention, I guess.  No money from the Duggars, though.  I just hope that she is forced to use whatever money she did manage to make from her efforts to pay Josh's attorney fees and it doesn't go into her pocket.  She doesn't deserve to make a dime for what she's done. 

Edited February 2, 2016 by Celia Rubenstein

[queenanne]

Just curious; any lawyers want to weigh in on how usual that is as a fibbing type of claim?  "Your Honor, Plaintiff/Defendant has not enough to pay ME, their own counsel, let alone the opposing side."  I wonder because if the lawyer then gets money from their client, wouldn't they be perjurers if the court finds out?

Edited February 2, 2016 by queenanne

[GeeGolly]

Just curious; any lawyers want to weigh in on how usual that is as a fibbing type of claim?  "Your Honor, Plaintiff/Defendant has not enough to pay ME, their own counsel, let alone the opposing side."  I wonder because if the lawyer then gets money from their client, wouldn't they be perjurers if the court finds out?

Some lawyers take on cases pro bono, for various reasons. And I believe in some civil suits the lawyer agrees that if they win, they take a certain percentage and if they lose the client owes them nothing.

[duggarshow]

My thought is that Danica saw this as way to get her name in the spotlight. 

 

If this woman has lied (and it is sounding more and more like that every day) then I hope it comes back to bite her on the ass  - not because of Josh- but because of Anna and the M's.   This will be around forever. Josh is a big enough pig without any false stories in the media.

 

I totally agree!

[Churchhoney]

I believe Dillon wants to drop her case because she can't produce any evidence of damages. 

 

...But her inability to produce such basic things like psychiatrist bills and reports and contracts from the performances she had to cancel because she was too traumatized to work suggest to me that her entire cause of action was a sham. That stuff is not hard to produce.  And just when it is required she produce such things, she suddenly wants to drop her case.  I don't think it's a coincidence.  It's because that stuff doesn't exist.

 

 

 

It's clear that she actually got additional useful exposure and advertising for her career from the whole incident -- which I've always thought is what she wanted in the first place -- and she probably got even actual cash from some of the opportunities that came her way because of it. So she wasn't too traumatized to quickly use the whole thing as a marketing opportunity, which probably harms your claims of having had your career damaged.

 

Edited February 3, 2016 by Churchhoney

[Tunia]

I went to that marriage bed site. I cannot find "what's OK, what's not OK"

 Use this link http://site.themarriagebed.com/front-page to go to TMB first page and then scroll down about half way.  On the left of the page, you'll see a list of topics, and "What's OK, not OK" link will be there in the "Popular" section.

Edited February 3, 2016 by Tunia

[GeeGolly]

 Use this link http://site.themarriagebed.com/front-page to go to TMB first page and then scroll down about half way.  On the left of the page, you'll see a list of topics, and "What's OK, not OK" link will be there in the "Popular" section.

And then brace yourself for an interestingly odd twist on what they believe to be okay in the marriage bed, which from what I understand is just about anything.

[BitterApple]

Agree with the above comments. As much as I can't stand Smuggar, I have no respect for people who waste the court's time with frivolous lawsuits. Danica figured Boob would pay off to make her go away. Danica figured wrong. If it turns out her claims were fabricated, then she should pay Smuggs' attorney fees.

[riverblue22]

So she can't prove her claims that she was harmed by Josh Duggar.  So what do you think?  Did they have sex (and maybe she exaggerated his aggressivesness) or did she make the entire thing up?

 

BTW Celia, "busted can of biscuits" is the PERFECT description of our Smugs!

[Sew Sumi]

Maybe she can prove that they had sex, but can't prove damages? That would be the only reason I can see for her asking to be able to refile.

[Saylii]

If she could proved they met or had sex, I would think Danica would have provided those dates.

I really think she and Josh were having explicit FB convos, maybe even ones where they were role playing that he was in PA and going to come to her house to rough her up, and she thought that'd be enough to squeeze some money and publicity out of Daddy dearest. Otherwise why would she run so quickly after seeing his proof laid out?

[Sew Sumi]

She did provide dates in March and April. Obviously, she wasn't too traumatized after the first encounter if she could go back to strip in a second club in PA. But she could still try and prove harm from the second encounter? Just thinking why a lawyer would take a case like this without any sort of proof.

I already mentioned subpoenaing all of his devices and social media, including deleted conversations. However, she brought the case after he went to Jesus Jail, so whatever communications they had are likely still easily accessed.

If she wanted her 15 minutes, she could have just contacted a tabloid and gotten a sweet payday. I have to question why this route if there's no case (although the judge denied LAWYR's motion to dismiss).

Help me, guys!

[Saylii]

I've only skimmed the linked articles, but didn't Josh have proof he wasn't in PA those days? Uber receipts, plane tickets, and eyewitness alibis?

As for the lawsuit, $500,000 from JB is way more then she'd get from a tabloid. That kind of story would top out at less then $100,000 especially since he was already disgraced. No one is gonna to make a movie about a porn star having sex with a reality star. No publisher is going to give her a book deal. Not enough people care about his sexual exploits after he's been accused of molestation and caught on Ashley Madison. Now if she could have slipped in earlier with irrefutable proof there might be a bigger payday.

Edited February 3, 2016 by Saylii

[Sew Sumi]

Just playing Devils Advocate here. The LAWYR made claims. No one knows what's true, since that would all be part of discovery. Lawyers bluff all the time. And of course LAWYR is going to proclaim innocence.

I think the actual truth is somewhere in between. IOW, I think lying is happening on both sides.

[DropTheSoap]

Lawyer knowingly filing a false lawsuit would potentially be subject to court sanctions. Not saying that it doesn't happen, just saying it's not always without repercussions.

 

The request to dismiss without prejudice means she's open to refile the case at another time. If it's dismissed with prejudice, that's the final determination.

 

My guess is that she's out of money, or if the attorney is working on contingency, he's reached the limit of what he'll extend on the case. The motion to withdraw mentions that she doesn't have the money to comply with the discovery requests.

 

They also have the motion for removal to federal courts. My guess is that she (or her lawyer) is concerned about the fact that the motion could be grants. My guess is that it all would involve more cost and probably less friendly courts.

 

Not taking sides; that's just my read on the motion filed.

[Micks Picks]

Yes, her lawyer is out of money and his client is out of any evidence.  The plaintiff has a much higher earning potential than Josh.  He isn't going to pay her half a million or anything close to it.  And he is not paying her lawyer for her either.  She can make more in a week than he'll make a year.   His goose is already cooked.