Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
maraleia

Josh & Anna Smuggar: A Series of Unfortunate Events

Recommended Posts

I never understood until seeing the picture today what the physical set up of the car lot was.  It's gotten me thinking about a possible avenue the prosecution could choose to go down to demonstrate how Josh orchestrated his crimes -- and how it will apply pressure and make public interest go through the roof.

If that property changed hands through the typical Duggar three-card Monty style of transferring ownership it may well have been controlled by JB or an entity for which JB is listed as the official officer prior to being either transferred to Josh to operate his business, or ostensibly leased to Josh to operate the business.   This opens up the potential that JB could be called as a witness to testify how it was that Josh's car lot happened to operate from that location.

Why is that important?  Seeing the premises and realizing the building is the size of an old Fotomat location struck me -- for the most part that building would be only be selected if the business was intended to run most of the time as a one-man operation.   Sure theoretically there are times two people might be there working, but overall it would be a one-man operation because you also need to allow for space for customers to come inside and complete transactions.   Yeah, okay, still why is that important?   Josh isn't guaranteed, required or even likely to testify, but JB can be called and the prosecution can probe how it is the business came to locate there.   If he testifies Josh selected the location the prosecution is likely to raise that issue in closing as potential planning on Josh's part to set up the means to conduct his crimes unobserved.   No matter how the location was chosen, I have no doubt that Josh came to appreciate the location's unexpected benefits of giving him the ability to work alone in a place where it was very easy for him to be very aware of anyone approaching and observing what he was up to.  It's a remote possibility, but the potential is there.

I'm also wondering if any other family members will be on the prosecution's witness list and if Josh and Anna's home was raided along with the car lot?   I keep thinking back to the family asserting in no uncertain terms that the TTH was not raided, contrary to rumors.   

  • Like 4
  • Useful 10

Share this post


Link to post

1 hour ago, Zella said:

They were "living" in a small house in Springdale that wasn't JB owned. I can't remember all the details, but I think someone who pops up a fair amount in their real estate dealings owned the house. I don't know if it would still be available because I think there was some talk about it being advertised as for rent or even being sold. I don't have time to check, but @crazy8s might remember or be able to check. 

If I remember correctly it was the JB realtor friend Tom Joseph who owned it

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, crazy8s said:

If I remember correctly it was the JB realtor friend Tom Joseph who owned it

Thanks! That's who I thought but I was hesitant to say without looking. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Oldernowiser said:

Except I would assume officially he won’t have internet access. Nothing to do but watch regular cable and listen to the cicadas…if he’s wearing a monitoring device they’ll know if he even walks down to the mailbox. 

Unfortunately no on the ankle monitor. Sure they can find out if they go look but usually they only do that after there is a suspected issue with someone wearing one. Contrary to popular belief, they crossing a threshold out of the area they are restricted to doesn’t set off alarms and deploy a gaggle of well armed men to grab his delinquent butt and put it back in the clink. It’s actually kind of scary how much they are relied upon and yet don’t work in the way that is expected. 

  • Like 2
  • Useful 3
  • Surprise 1
  • Sad 4

Share this post


Link to post

Here

 Is the link to the podcast by that person who did the AMA and grew up around Josh. It is very raw and emotional. Two hours long, Probably a lot of good information. Hopefully someone will listen and do a recap for us.

  • Like 8
  • Useful 3

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, Zella said:

Thanks! That's who I thought but I was hesitant to say without looking. 

He and his wife "sold" it to an llc in 2019 - Tom Joseph is the organizer/incorporator listed on the llc

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

1 minute ago, crazy8s said:

He and his wife "sold" it to an llc in 2019 - Tom Joseph is the organizer/incorporator listed on the llc

A Jim Bob Special! LOL

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, Tikichick said:

I'm also wondering if any other family members will be on the prosecution's witness list and if Josh and Anna's home was raided along with the car lot?   I keep thinking back to the family asserting in no uncertain terms that the TTH was not raided, contrary to rumors.

The picture of Josh's almost secluded tiny computer laden carlot  shack is interesting. It certainly seems like the perfect setup should someone want to do what Josh...does. It will be interesting to see how the prosecution uses this visual. I think its probable that JB or the other brothers are called (or were called as part of the grand jury proceedings). 

IIRC the Duggars said their home was not raided. And we don't know if that's true or not. It could be that Josh's warehouse was raided. It could be that only the carlot was raided. The only confirmation that was provided by Homeland Security was that they were on the premises of the carlot. 

It seems that the defense might also argue something about that public Homeland Security public statement. They make reference to it in the bond hearing documents. 

Edited by Tuxcat
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
34 minutes ago, 3 is enough said:

The thing that bothers me most is the hypocrisy.  Josh is a POS who molested his sisters, cheated on his wife, and got off looking at images of little children being abused.  But as long as he repents and says he has sinned all is forgiven.  

Meanwhile, they condemn LGBT people for just existing the way God made them. 

Somewhere Jesus is weeping.

Agree with your sentiment, but I hope that Jesus is fucking pissed.

  • Like 13

Share this post


Link to post

I just watched a show(real event)of a teacher who used his kids for a child porn ring. He was brutal to them with texting them the most horrendous things. These kids were 14 at the time. When a parent came to the school to call him out and talk to the principal, the principal wouldn't see her and the school board did nothing.

He was finally arrested for 19 felonies of CP. He was sentenced to 18 months and was set free for time served. He moved to another city and started again, but a child went to police and he was caught before he could do damage to several children. He served 4 years and was out last year.

I can only hope that Josh will get no bond and have a hefty sentence, but after watching this show, my hopes aren't high that this will be the case.

Edited by Madtown
  • Like 1
  • Sad 19

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Tuxcat said:

And could Josh be on the Duggar property and housed in a trailer so long as he doesn't have unsupervised access to kids?

The only problem with that is, Josh would do anything he wanted if unsupervised on the Duggar property and they'd let him.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Tuxcat said:

The picture of Josh's almost secluded tiny computer laden carlot  shack is interesting. It certainly seems like the perfect setup should someone want to do what Josh...does. It will be interesting to see how the prosecution uses this visual. I think its probable that JB or the other brothers are called (or were called as part of the grand jury proceedings). 

IIRC the Duggars said their home was not raided. And we don't know if that's true or not. It could be that Josh's warehouse was raided. It could be that only the carlot was raided. The only confirmation that was provided by Homeland Security was that they were on the premises of the carlot. 

It seems that the defense might also argue something about that public Homeland Security public statement. They make reference to it in the bond hearing documents. 

Do you know the significance of this?   I don't put it past the defense to attempt to claim some nonsense such as the raid being nothing but the feds harassing a family with a certain profile, looking to make a public splash, etc., but IMO that's unlikely to be persuasive with the Judge and I don't see it crossing any lines as far as anything they should not have commented on publicly.

While ordinarily I don't feel the Duggars define facts and the truth the same way I do, I think in this instance the stakes were too high for them to risk publicly lying that their home wasn't raided, knowing the government could eventually release the information that it was after all.   They did not however say anything about Josh and Anna's home, which I'm unclear if that was the warehouse at that time or if they were living in another property and then moved to the warehouse after the raid?   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

1 minute ago, Madtown said:

I just watched a show(real event)of a teacher who used his kids for a child porn ring. He was brutal to them with texting them the most horrendous things. These kids were 14 at the time. When a parent came to the school to call him out and talk to the principal, the principal wouldn't see her and the school board did nothing.

He was finally arrested for 19 felonies of CP. He was sentenced to 18 months and was set free for time served. He moved to another city and started again, but a child went to police and he was caught before he could do damage to several children. He served 4 years and is was out last year.

I can only hope that Josh will get no bond and have a hefty sentence, but after watching this show, my hopes aren't high that this will be the case.

That is just horrendous. Vigilante justice is very wrong but it’s things like this that  cause it to happen. I am hopeful that since this is federal it will be harsher. He’s  been charged with at least one count of receipt which under federal guidelines has a mandatory minimum of 5 years. The possession count doesn’t have a mandatory minimum but does have a 10 year max. The feds also have conditions where the sentence can be increased. He meets that too because of the ‘under the age of 12’ part.  That said, I doubt he’ll get the 20 years the articles talk about. 

  • Like 4
  • Useful 2

Share this post


Link to post
50 minutes ago, Tuxcat said:

Assuming the warrant specified the search and seizure of electronic equipment on the property, how likely could the defendant argue that the phone was in fact not part of that order? 

Assuming they didn't perform an illegal search, and Josh did in fact pull the phone from his pocket, I assume that means its fair game as others have said.

But is there any chance the defense argues it's not?

I wouldn't be surprised at the defense quibbling with any and everything in a full court press to quash any scrap of evidence possible.  IDK at the federal level, but as a general rule of thumb most defense attorneys here abide by an informal custom not to argue flat-out ridiculous nonsense to the judge.   They save pulling out all the stops, baffle them with as much BS as possible, seemingly no limits to the illogical nonsense when it comes to arguing to the jury.  They only need to baffle one juror to prevent a guilty verdict.   If you posit ridiculous on their face arguments to the judge and you lose the judge still controls the sentencing, and they tend to offer their critique on the preposterous arguments when they are pronouncing sentence.   

Just because the defense argues a point doesn't mean that even they have a reasonable expectation they will win the argument.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

At what point would they have known the nature of the charges against him?  When the feds served the warrant, would they have known what they were looking for?  Or did they find out later during the grand jury?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, Tikichick said:

Do you know the significance of this?   I don't put it past the defense to attempt to claim some nonsense such as the raid being nothing but the feds harassing a family with a certain profile, looking to make a public splash, etc., but IMO that's unlikely to be persuasive with the Judge and I don't see it crossing any lines as far as anything they should not have commented on publicly.

While ordinarily I don't feel the Duggars define facts and the truth the same way I do, I think in this instance the stakes were too high for them to risk publicly lying that their home wasn't raided, knowing the government could eventually release the information that it was after all.   They did not however say anything about Josh and Anna's home, which I'm unclear if that was the warehouse at that time or if they were living in another property and then moved to the warehouse after the raid?   

Agree. I don't believe the government's public statement will amount to much at all, though it is fairly unusual to make such a statement I believe? I do see the defense throwing in the angles you mention just for more smokescreen effect. 

I believe Josh sold his home summer 2019. So he would have been on the duggar property at the time of the raid. I'm inclined to believe that they only searched the carlot. However if that's the case, I'm unclear as to why. If Josh is suspected of accessing CP, why would the government not want to search any accessible device?

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

2 hours ago, BitterApple said:

I can't remember if it was the L.A. visit or what, but an observer saw them out and about and said Josh did nothing to help with his kids. I think being holed up on some remote property is a dream come true for him. No wife, no kids, and I'm sure Boob will send Jana over to cook, clean and shop. So Josh gets to continue his legacy of being a lazy, useless slug and the rest of the family pays the price.

I think it was some tabloid. Anna took out the stroller and unfolded it while Volderjosh stood there. She also placed the kids in the stroller. So taking care of his pregnant wife is BS.

I’ve read Anna carried/handled the luggage on their honeymoon. Is that true?

  • Like 7
  • Useful 1
  • Sad 3

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, Tuxcat said:

If Josh is suspected of accessing CP, why would the government not want to search any accessible device?

I'm guessing they tracked the CP images to the IP address of the desktop computer at the car lot. His iPhone is probably the only other device that is exclusively his. Not sure they'd have probable cause to search any other device at the Duggar compound.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, SMama said:

I think it was some tabloid. Anna took out the stroller and unfolded it while Volderjosh stood there. She also placed the kids in the stroller. So taking care of his pregnant wife is BS.

I’ve read Anna carried/handled the luggage on their honeymoon. Is that true?

Yes, that was shown on the show.  Josh came strolling into the hotel, free as a bird while Anna, his personal sherpa, struggled carrying the bags.

There was also a scene on the show where, while sitting in an easy chair, Josh snapped his fingers at one of his sisters and ordered her to bring him a coke.  She did as she was told.

  • Like 5
  • Surprise 4
  • Sad 12

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Tuxcat said:

I guess its possible that the family might secure a "counselor" or "elder" to live with Josh while out on bond, off the property, (in one of their rentals). Perhaps they simultaneously  appease members of the "church" community by stating that Josh will be undergoing intensive "training" during his bond release time. In that way, no phones or computers will also be part of his "treatment."  

I think this might be the solution. Anna has six kids at home. JB and Michelle have multiple kids at home, including one over whom they have guardianship but who is not technically their son. All but two of the married couples have kids. Justin is out because he’s out of state (and still a teenager, which is not great optics for being able to “control” Josh). Jed! has a political career to think of, and I’m sure JB doesn’t want the attack ads next election cycle to portray Jed! as roomies with the pedophile. Jana is a single adult, but it would be a dreadful “look” to foist Josh off on the one grown sister he DIDN’T molest... and I’m sure JB is aware of Jana’s popularity as far as the show goes. There’s Jeremiah, but do you really trust the Sinner Twin with this job? 
 

JB needs to find a middle aged or elderly pillar of the community type who owes him a favor (or wants an in with JB at any cost) rather than looking to immediate family. I suspect he has a list. 

  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Panopticon said:

JB needs to find a middle aged or elderly pillar of the community type who owes him a favor (or wants an in with JB at any cost) rather than looking to immediate family. I suspect he has a list. 

That's what concerns me.  The last guy who counseled Josh ended up in prison for CP.  I'm not really impressed with JBoob's counselors. 

  • Like 23
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, Panopticon said:

I think this might be the solution. Anna has six kids at home. JB and Michelle have multiple kids at home, including one over whom they have guardianship but who is not technically their son. All but two of the married couples have kids. Justin is out because he’s out of state (and still a teenager, which is not great optics for being able to “control” Josh). Jed! has a political career to think of, and I’m sure JB doesn’t want the attack ads next election cycle to portray Jed! as roomies with the pedophile. Jana is a single adult, but it would be a dreadful “look” to foist Josh off on the one grown sister he DIDN’T molest... and I’m sure JB is aware of Jana’s popularity as far as the show goes. There’s Jeremiah, but do you really trust the Sinner Twin with this job? 
 

JB needs to find a middle aged or elderly pillar of the community type who owes him a favor (or wants an in with JB at any cost) rather than looking to immediate family. I suspect he has a list. 

and i'm sure they are all PILLARS of the community.. NOT.. look at all these Fundies who play with children.  I would not trust ONE of them.  JMO

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post

11 minutes ago, 3girlsforus said:

That is just horrendous. Vigilante justice is very wrong but it’s things like this that  cause it to happen. I am hopeful that since this is federal it will be harsher. He’s  been charged with at least one count of receipt which under federal guidelines has a mandatory minimum of 5 years. The possession count doesn’t have a mandatory minimum but does have a 10 year max. The feds also have conditions where the sentence can be increased. He meets that too because of the ‘under the age of 12’ part.  That said, I doubt he’ll get the 20 years the articles talk about. 

First time I've heard the mandatory minimum mentioned.   That means that charge is definitely the defense's primary target to somehow dismiss.

Do you know if federal sentencing requires concurrent or consecutive sentencing, or if it is decided at sentencing how it will run?  

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, 3girlsforus said:

That is just horrendous. Vigilante justice is very wrong but it’s things like this that  cause it to happen. I am hopeful that since this is federal it will be harsher. He’s  been charged with at least one count of receipt which under federal guidelines has a mandatory minimum of 5 years. The possession count doesn’t have a mandatory minimum but does have a 10 year max. The feds also have conditions where the sentence can be increased. He meets that too because of the ‘under the age of 12’ part.  That said, I doubt he’ll get the 20 years the articles talk about. 

The other day I read through and posted here a very long list of Western District of Arkansas press releases, describing cases from the same initiative Josh is charged under -- the current link to my search on the DOJ site is below.

It appears to show a range of sentences between about 5 and 9 years for people charged with the two specific crimes that he's charged with. Longer sentences seem mostly reserved for people who created or distributed the material or had the material but also enticed or transported a child or something like that in addition. There may be exceptions to that but I didn't see any. 

https://search.justice.gov/search?query=project+safe+childhood&op=Search&affiliate=justice-usao-arw

Edited by Churchhoney
  • Like 3
  • Useful 3

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, Tikichick said:

First time I've heard the mandatory minimum mentioned.   That means that charge is definitely the defense's primary target to somehow dismiss.

Do you know if federal sentencing requires concurrent or consecutive sentencing, or if it is decided at sentencing how it will run?  

I don’t know about concurrent vs consecutive. To be clear I got the federal sentencing guidelines from internet research but it seemed consistent from several places. But I don’t have any first hand knowledge since I too have a law degree from Hudson university although I have advanced studies in Dateline and the ID channel. LOL

Jared the Subway got 15.5 years but I don’t know how the time was spread out. He pled guilty rather than a trial. It just said ‘sex crimes and child porn’. His case isn’t an exact parallel even though it’s federal because some of his charges were physical sexual contact with minors/children. But one thing I found interesting was that there was a plea but it didn’t include sentencing amount in the agreement. There was a sentencing hearing. The defense asked for 5 years, the prosecution asked for 12 1/2 but the judge gave him 15 1/2. I thought that was really interesting that he got more than even the prosecutor asked for. 

  • Like 7
  • Useful 3

Share this post


Link to post
42 minutes ago, SMama said:

I’ve read Anna carried/handled the luggage on their honeymoon. Is that true?

She carried her own suitcase.  We all commented on what a dick he was at the time. Little did we know...

  • Like 5
  • Sad 5

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, 3 is enough said:

You have to wonder if that Hutchens creep actually introduced Josh to CP instead of "setting him straight".  The fact that he himself was arrested a few years later for CP certainly suggests that that was the case.

You just can't make this stuff up.  What a shit show.

Even if he only reinforced the idea that boys will be boys, it's in their nature, can't be helped, that's problematic for someone at an impressionable age and should have been receiving intensive professional treatment and oversight.

That's on JB and M for not protecting Josh's victims, further abusing some of them even, and for creating ample opportunity for the problem to be ongoing and eventually envelop other victims and bring stress and trauma to the rest of their family as well.  Sure, as a member of the human race I'm completely comfortable with the possibility that it may well be JB providing a list of candidates for potential supervision of his predator son out on bail.    

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
28 minutes ago, Tikichick said:

First time I've heard the mandatory minimum mentioned.   That means that charge is definitely the defense's primary target to somehow dismiss.

Do you know if federal sentencing requires concurrent or consecutive sentencing, or if it is decided at sentencing how it will run?  

Former federal court law clerk here - judge gets to decide if a sentence is concurrent or consecutive. I've almost never seen consecutive sentences though - 95%+ of the time it's concurrent with credit given for time served (i.e. if Josh were to not make bond today and sit in prison for say 6 months until he pleads and is sentenced, he gets credit for that 6 mos served). 

I think he's never getting the 20 year maximum here -- there's too many arguments re first time offenders, not luring any of the children "just" looking at pics etc. I think if he gets 5-7 years here that's a "win" for society in that he does pay SOME price. From the perspective of his family though, his oldest kid would be what 16-18 by then and the newest baby would be 5-7 - wow that's still a lot of years ahead with kids in his life. If he somehow gets less than 5 years, that's a win for his legal team.

Edited by cereality
  • Like 9
  • Useful 5

Share this post


Link to post

I read the Google reviews at the car lot. Most are quite humorous and it seems like a horrible place. David Waller bought his minivan there!

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, 3 is enough said:

So how long does a bail hearing last?

 

I know right?

  • Laugh 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, 3 is enough said:

So how long does a bail hearing last?

 

In this case I'd say 30 min-1 hr minimum. It's interesting bc both sides have argument -- is he or is he not a flight risk; does it matter that his wife is pregnant; what living arrangements work or not etc. Sometimes they take 10 min but I don't see that happening here.

  • Like 4
  • Useful 7

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, 3 is enough said:

She carried her own suitcase.  We all commented on what a dick he was at the time. Little did we know...

I’m betting that Anna’s wedding night was horrible.

  • Like 3
  • Sad 14

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, cereality said:

Former federal court law clerk here - judge gets to decide if a sentence is concurrent or consecutive. I've almost never seen consecutive sentences though - 95%+ of the time it's concurrent with credit given for time served (i.e. if Josh were to not make bond today and sit in prison for say 6 months until he pleads and is sentenced, he gets credit for that 6 mos served). 

I think he's never getting the 20 year maximum here -- there's too many arguments re first time offenders, not luring any of the children "just" looking at pics etc. I think if he gets 5-7 years here that's a "win" for society in that he does pay SOME price. From the perspective of his family though, his oldest kid would be what 16-18 by then and the newest baby would be 5-7 - wow that's still a lot of years ahead with kids in his life. If he somehow gets less than 5 years, that's a win for his legal team.

Very similar to how the sentencing operates at the state level here, including your estimate of sentence.

Judging by the way CPS operates here and knowing that states do have some autonomy regarding how they handle those matters but do actually operate under an umbrella of federal guidelines I don't think it's likely Josh will reside with his minor children again if convicted.   CPS involvement would effectively operate like a routine body cavity search on Josh and Anna's home again and again until they were able to either convince Anna to separate from Josh or they will keep probing regularly until they come up with enough to take before the court and obtain an order to remove the children from the home.   

If I'm not mistaken Josh will wind up on Central Registry if convicted of this, along with needing to register as a sexual offender.       

  • Like 4
  • Useful 5

Share this post


Link to post

1 minute ago, farmgal4 said:

I’m betting that Anna’s wedding night was horrible.

I believe that goes without saying.  I hope somewhere in the last decade Anna learned about lube.  

  • Like 5
  • Laugh 4
  • Surprise 1

Share this post


Link to post
39 minutes ago, Boston said:

and i'm sure they are all PILLARS of the community.. NOT.. look at all these Fundies who play with children.  I would not trust ONE of them.  JMO

Well yes, I meant pillar of the community in a Duggar sort of way. I was trying to get into JB’s head (always dangerous), not expressing a personal opinion that Josh belongs anywhere but prison. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, farmgal4 said:

I’m betting that Anna’s wedding night was horrible.

I doubt it got better. Ever.

  • Like 2
  • Laugh 1
  • Surprise 1
  • Sad 9

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Tikichick said:

Very similar to how the sentencing operates at the state level here, including your estimate of sentence.

Judging by the way CPS operates here and knowing that states do have some autonomy regarding how they handle those matters but do actually operate under an umbrella of federal guidelines I don't think it's likely Josh will reside with his minor children again if convicted.   CPS involvement would effectively operate like a routine body cavity search on Josh and Anna's home again and again until they were able to either convince Anna to separate from Josh or they will keep probing regularly until they come up with enough to take before the court and obtain an order to remove the children from the home.   

If I'm not mistaken Josh will wind up on Central Registry if convicted of this, along with needing to register as a sexual offender.       

Right totally forgot about the fact that he'll have to register on the child sex offender registry. So yeah he may never end up residing with his kids -- luckily for his kids. IDK Anna and this family seem so messed up that can't you see her moving her kids into the TTH to be "raised by" their "loving" grandma and grandpa -- who BTW did such an excellent job with Josh -- so that she can live with him post prison?? In reality it'd be her oldest daughter (and any Duggar daughters that don't marry) raising the 6 younger siblings. That way it keeps Josh as a part of the family by having Anna still with him and as for the kids hey they're being raised by family, what's better than that?!

  • Like 3
  • Sad 3

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, cereality said:

Right totally forgot about the fact that he'll have to register on the child sex offender registry. So yeah he may never end up residing with his kids -- luckily for his kids. IDK Anna and this family seem so messed up that can't you see her moving her kids into the TTH to be "raised by" their "loving" grandma and grandpa -- who BTW did such an excellent job with Josh -- so that she can live with him post prison?? In reality it'd be her oldest daughter (and any Duggar daughters that don't marry) raising the 6 younger siblings. That way it keeps Josh as a part of the family by having Anna still with him and as for the kids hey they're being raised by family, what's better than that?!

If Anna were to agree to an arrangement like that, then she’s every bit as f’ed up as her perv husband.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, cereality said:

Former federal court law clerk here - judge gets to decide if a sentence is concurrent or consecutive. I've almost never seen consecutive sentences though - 95%+ of the time it's concurrent with credit given for time served (i.e. if Josh were to not make bond today and sit in prison for say 6 months until he pleads and is sentenced, he gets credit for that 6 mos served). 

I think he's never getting the 20 year maximum here -- there's too many arguments re first time offenders, not luring any of the children "just" looking at pics etc. I think if he gets 5-7 years here that's a "win" for society in that he does pay SOME price. From the perspective of his family though, his oldest kid would be what 16-18 by then and the newest baby would be 5-7 - wow that's still a lot of years ahead with kids in his life. If he somehow gets less than 5 years, that's a win for his legal team.

Exactly!  If I read one more youtube pontificator say he's up for 40 years, I'm going to scream.  I've never seen a concurrent sentence in federal court. I think we'll be lucky if he gets 10 years, but it's rare that federal court gives 5 years for these cases.  In my experience, that is.  

  • Like 13
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post

Just now, iwantcookies said:

I doubt it got better. Ever.

Since this broke last week I've thought about this and considered that it's very likely this aspect of her marriage has been quite difficult to handle.    The rest of it certainly isn't a bowl of cherries by any means, but I suspect this may have been very dark and disturbing to contend with.    

  • Like 2
  • Sad 11

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, farmgal4 said:

I’m betting that Anna’s wedding night was horrible.

Ugh.  I just had a flashback to Sansa Stark's wedding night, for any fellow Game of Thrones fans.  It wasn't pretty.

  • Surprise 2
  • Sad 9

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, GeeGolly said:

To be fair the Nakatsus and Spiveys have nothing to do with this.

I certainly hope neither family is concerned about this anymore than other Duggar friends would be. Their daughters didn't marry Josh. This has nothing to do with them or their families.

They have nothing to do with the crime, but their children married into a family that meets constantly at the TTH for holidays, family game night, and birthdays. Josh has been included in these activities and has had contact with all his nieces and nephews. JB has known this is coming for the last year and a half and I doubt he told the new in-laws. Josh's behavior and the Duggars refusal to protect their children is something they should be rightfully concerned about.

  • Like 12
  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, iwantcookies said:

I doubt it got better. Ever.

Considering that if Josh is looking at CP, he's probably not very turned on by a woman. 

  • Sad 9

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, hathorlive said:

Exactly!  If I read one more youtube pontificator say he's up for 40 years, I'm going to scream.  I've never seen a concurrent sentence in federal court. I think we'll be lucky if he gets 10 years, but it's rare that federal court gives 5 years for these cases.  In my experience, that is.  

IMO the best you can hope for if convicted on both charges and they run concurrently is that the one charge has a mandatory minimum and the second charge might possibly provide a slight enhancement of the total time served, meaning that he could serve a bit more time than he would if he were only convicted of a single charge.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, hathorlive said:

Considering that if Josh is looking at CP, he's probably not very turned on by a woman. 

He was going to strip clubs and banging hookers, too.  I think he’s more the type that will have sex with anything. He’s just not into that particular woman (Anna).  I doubt he ever really loved Anna. Or if he did, it was more in passing. 

  • Like 7
  • Sad 6

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, CouchTater said:

Ugh.  I just had a flashback to Sansa Stark's wedding night, for any fellow Game of Thrones fans.  It wasn't pretty.

That’s exactly what I was referring to when I said that Anna’s wedding night was horrible.

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, Tikichick said:

IMO the best you can hope for if convicted on both charges and they run concurrently is that the one charge has a mandatory minimum and the second charge might possibly provide a slight enhancement of the total time served, meaning that he could serve a bit more time than he would if he were only convicted of a single charge.   

I never understand the sentencing.   State court handed out 5 years regardless of the case.  In Federal court, I've seen a few images get 7 years and terabytes of images get 10 years.   And I've never had a case where I testified apply enhancement penalties of images that fit the description. I had one case where I told the judge during sentencing that I had a folder of videos for him to watch, as they were the worst I'd ever seen.  He literally said "yes, yes, it's all horrible". .No, it's all bad.  Horrible is a different class of pervert.

  • Like 2
  • Sad 6

Share this post


Link to post
Scarlett45

Guidelines for the thread:

Charges have been made public that specifically name possession of Child Sexual Abuse Material, discussion of charges are allowed. However, discussion of victims, or possible victims (and their identities) related to these charges are NOT ALLOWED
We are not here to provide content for ghoulish rubbernecking- there is no need to discuss the graphic details related to these charges, the moderators are not going to police posts for graphic content- posts will be removed and violators will be warned. Do not attempt to circumvent this guideline with spoiler tags.

You MAY discuss the 2015 scandals, and any statement a NOW ADULT victim has made public as previously instructed, but speculation on unnamed victims or minor victims is NOT allowed. 

Jokes, asides, memes etc regarding the sexual assault of anyone, INCLUDING Josh Duggar are not allowed.

As of May 10, 2021: Please respect the privacy of the Reber family, discussion of their social media postings, public statements to the press/court testimony are acceptable. Discussion of their activities on their property, their schedule, where/how they run their errands not acceptable. Again, discussion of social media/court statements/public statements to the press- FINE, "So and So saw the Rebers standing in their yard/grocery shopping/getting gas"- NOT fine. 

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Customize font-size