Josh & Anna Smuggar: A Series of Unfortunate Events

[GeeGolly]

42 minutes ago, mittsigirl said:

Okay, this might be a very dumb question, but there has been so much to mentally process from all of the information and reading articles, and the passion and frustration involved, I may be nearing PTSD burnout and not thinking straight, so please forgive my stupidity. If his technology was taken away in May of 2019, does that mean he has not had any new technology to use since then? He hasn't been using a computer or phone since may of 2019, so hasn't looked or shared more images? I just can't see him stopping since that raid.

I think that's a great question. I'm guessing he went right out and bought a new phone and laptop. Well if JB let him. If he was still committing crimes, and if he was still be monitored by DHS, I have no idea.

And I'm with you on the information overload. In addition to all the great and varying opinions there's also graphic information, speculation presented as fact and so many unanswered questions.

Edited May 6, 2021 by GeeGolly

[lascuba]

Random question: was it pre or post-raid that Anna put "forgiving wife to Josh" in her bio? Reading all the comments on how much/little sympathy she deserves made that pop in to my head.

 

[Canadian Girl]

2 hours ago, BitterApple said:

I don't think Anna will ever leave. She has seven kids, no education and no work experience. I also think there's some part of her that likes being the martyred wife. I imagine in their twisted culture, standing by your man gets you extra brownie points.

Absolutely, she will never leave. I don't know about "liking it", that might not be the right word, but she would definitely believe that whatever challenges God puts in her path are "opportunities" to show how godly she is in overcoming them. Keeping faithful to your husband and to God are taught as the ultimate accomplishment as a woman. She would believe her eternal salvation depends on her never giving up on her marriage. 

[3girlsforus]

1 hour ago, Lady Whistleup said:

When women leave the big X factor is family support. Not just financial support (although that helps), but the abuser has usually isolated the woman (or man) to such an extent that family often needs to do things like help the abuse victim open a bank account, a credit card in her name, a burner cell phone, a lease to a car, willingness to house her pets (abusers often threaten the lives of pets), a divorce lawyer. All of those things need to be put in place before the woman can leave.

I'm not sure if the Kellers will support Anna in any of this.

Absolutely this. Not only does she not have support, she has the opposite of support. Everyone in her orbit with any power to help her will actively try to keep her abused and isolated.  

[Tikichick]

12 minutes ago, Cinnabon said:

Gothatdites see it differently, as shown in some of the literature that has been shared here. 🥲 

They straight out endorse sexually abusing a child as acceptable?

I understand Gothard was a sicko playing a long game, setting up his system by design to satisfy his desires, but do they straight up endorse the fact that the sexual abuse of children is no big deal, acceptable, whatever the term might be?

I'm still reeling with the recent information about the itinerary for Journey to the Heart being openly known to parents and ever attracting one participant.

[Cinnabon]

2 hours ago, Oldernowiser said:

The adult I feel most sorry for is that poor Mrs. Reaver/Reber. She’s stuck babysitting Josh all day while her husband goes to work or whatever he does to get his halo polished. I can see Josh getting all kinds of kicks pushing her boundaries.

I wish Mrs. R would tell her husband that he signed them up for this, he can deal with it and then she and the daughter GTFO until Josh is gone.

ETA: IOW, what @merylinkid said!

Is she allowed to leave Josh alone in the house if she goes out shopping, or to church, or anywhere else? Certainly she can’t be expected to stay at home with him 24/7?

[Nysha]

Just now, Tikichick said:

They straight out endorse sexually abusing a child as acceptable?

They don't endorse it as acceptable they believe that if the perp prays for forgiveness to the right christian god, then he will be forgiven and if god forgave who are we to question or punish him. They also believe that the child is guilty of doing something to encourage the abuse so he/she must also pray for forgiveness. The child is also told that god allowed this to happen to protect him/her against future sexual sin.

[hathorlive]

1 hour ago, BitterApple said:

The file that Josh downloaded is infamous, and law enforcement is well-versed on it. It's the worst of the worst of the worst, and if the dirty details are laid out in court, Josh is done. Unless his lawyer has some ace in the hole we don't know about, I imagine they'll reach a plea.

If the prosecutor has the nerve to show the video in court.  Some will, some won't.  

[GeeGolly]

34 minutes ago, emmawoodhouse said:

This article has more information on the Rebers. Looks like their son is friends with Jed, Jer, and Austin through those lame Freedomists. 

If these quotes are accurate, the judge has an idea about the Duggar belief system and Josh can't just come and go as he pleases - even to church and 'work'.

'Not your husband, not Jim Bob Duggar, not elders in the church,' Judge Comstock warned.

Under the release to third-party custodians, Duggar must wear an ankle monitor, have a probation officer's permission to leave the couple's home, cannot access the internet, or be inside a residency where firearms are stored.

[libgirl2]

6 minutes ago, Cinnabon said:

Is she allowed to leave Josh alone in the house if she goes out shopping, or to church, or anywhere else? Certainly she can’t be expected to stay at home with him 24/7?

Guess she will just have to have delivery! I can't imagine the daughter would be left with him. 

Edited May 6, 2021 by libgirl2

[Tikichick]

1 minute ago, mittsigirl said:

Yes, I saw the one file called Pedomom, what do you think that is all about? A woman sharing these sick files? The police told me that there are women on these sites, just not as many as there are men. There are even actual MOTHERS on them, and that is beyond stomach turning to me.

Mothers offer up their own children for solicitation.   Just no words.

[Libby]

Anna is a brainwashed member of a cult. Her mind is mush.

People in Jonestown voluntarily committed suicide per their leader's order. Manson family members committed murder at the command of their leader. FLDS members gave their 12 year old daughters in marriage to adult men because their leader told them to.

Anna will live in harmony with her child abuser husband and subject her children to him because that's what Gothard said was the right thing to do.

The only hope for Anna and her children is if the legal system puts Josh in jail. In my opinion, Anna is incapable of protecting herself or her children.

 

[mittsigirl]

7 hours ago, Madtown said:

Trying to catch up, but saw an article where a "source" said "Anna has no plans for divorce and is standing by Josh just like she always has."

Even if this isn't a true statement, I don't doubt that she would stand by him, it's what she's told to do. Talk about someone needing massive therapy.

In the heavy duty fundi religion, don't they have a pyramid that shows the placements of who is most important in a woman's life? I saw one that places God #1, then husband as #2, then last at #3 are her children. Not sure if this is what the Duggars follow or not, but husbands, for sure, are to come before her children:(

[hathorlive]

23 minutes ago, GeeGolly said:

I think that's a great question. I'm guessing he went right out and bought a new phone and laptop. Well if JB let him. If he was still committing crimes, and if he was still be monitored by DHS, I have no idea.

And I'm with you on the information overload. In addition to all the great and varying opinions there's also graphic information, speculation presented as fact and so many unanswered questions.

I wonder how many laptops the kid use for home fooling?  We took a kid's chromebook because there were pandemic relief fraud searches on it.  The mother swore that it was just for school and yet there it was.  The sad thing is that Anna doesn't stop him from looking at what Josh wants to look at.  No way she tells him what he can do.  

[Nysha]

7 minutes ago, mittsigirl said:

In the heavy duty fundi religion, don't they have a pyramid that shows the placements of who is most important in a woman's life? I saw one that places God #1, then husband as #2, then last at #3 are her children. Not sure if this is what the Duggars follow or not, but husbands, for sure, are to come before her children:(

After that is the church leaders, then like-minded politicians, the household chores, the garden, the pets, the children's education, and if she's still functional, maybe herself.

[mittsigirl]

7 hours ago, Snow Fairy said:

She is probably glad he was looking at other kids, and not doing anything to their. She is so brainwashed

Boy, if I had heard even a tiny whisper about Josh looking at CP, and doing what he did to the 5 little girls, not only would I have never been 'courted' by him, but I would have never married him, had his babies, or ever left those children alone with him, even for a few minutes! I really have to question Anna's intelligence, surly he wasn't the only fundi boy around that she could have married! But then she has stayed with him, and probably still will stay with him! Since she married him, she has had a chance to learn much more about our world and you would think she would know better by now. I just don't get her way of thinking, at all! 

 

[Zella]

For those wondering about local news coverage, I'm getting push notifications from both the local ABC and CBS channels about him being released. On my phone so hard to share, but there is video that shows a herd of reporters waiting for him and filming him while he exits the building and tries to leave. 

[crazy8s]

Josh walks out of jail. probably smirking under his mask and is shoved into the back seat a black SUv

https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/josh-duggar-released-from-jail-after-being-charged-with-possessing-child-porn/

[GeeGolly]

Just now, Zella said:

For those wondering about local news coverage, I'm getting push notifications from both the local ABC and CBS channels about him being released. On my phone so hard to share, but there is video that shows a herd of reporters waiting for him and filming him while he exits the building and tries to leave. 

Ginger just posted the video in the Media thread.

[Zella]

Just now, GeeGolly said:

Ginger just posted the video in the Media thread.

Oh good! I'm glad. I hate trying to do links on my phone. 

The Channel 5 article (CBS) makes a point of mentioning that Josh used to work for an organization that claims to support family values. 

 

[LexieLily]

Quote

• If any conditions are violated an additional prison sentence of up to 10 years may be imposed.

The saving grace I see is that Josh and the entire lot of enabler Duggars (Anna, JB, Michelle) are entirely inept and out of their comfort zone here that there is little to no way they won't screw this up for themselves and get themselves and/or Josh caught violating conditions.

Edited May 6, 2021 by LexieLily

[kaleidoscope]

Was there a bond to pay?

[Ijustwantsomechips]

1 hour ago, doodlebug said:

I've witnessed exactly one preliminary interview with a child, so limited experience here.  I was observing, not participating.  The child was about 5 and a teacher had reported unusual bruises on his legs.  He told her 'Daddy did it'.  She called DCFS.

The kid was in his own house, his parents nearby but not in his sightline and not participating.  They were there when the two interviewers came into the room and told the boy that these people were going to talk to him and he should tell the truth.

The kid was playing with his legos or similar, seated on the floor at the coffee table.  One interviewer did the vast majority of the talking, the other was just observing (I was watching remotely.)

The interviewer, a young woman was very friendly and open with the child who was a typically chatty 5 year old.  She asked him about his toys, his preschool, his friends, favorite foods, stuff like that and he happily answered.  Eventually, she got around to his relationship with his parents.  Do Mommy and Daddy ever play with you?  Do they get mad if you misbehave?  What happens then?  The kid was kind of funny, 'oh yes, they get really mad.  Daddy chased me with a sword!"  Turns out, they got a new refrigerator and Daddy cut up the box into swords and covered them with foil and they played sword fight.  When it came to the bruises on his legs, 'Daddy did it'.  How?  I was trying to ride my bike without the training wheels and Daddy let go and I fell'.  Obviously, turned out to be a whole lotta nothing, but that's all I know about kids being interviewed.  It was very relaxed and easy from what I saw.  Of course, none of us thought the kid had actually been abused or coached, so that would be a big difference;  

@doodlebug you don’t how glad I am that story had a happy ending! I couldn’t take much more today.

[doodlebug]

2 hours ago, NotthebadVictoria said:

You would be surprised at what it takes to remove kids from a home, there are plenty of people who are all races that are pure trash that get to keep their kids or get chance after chance to have them back. It is sickening what CPS will allow. 

What's really sickening is how many children are living in abusive situations.  So many that DCFS cannot possibly remove every child who needs it from his or her home.  There are not enough foster parents or group homes for the kids who absolutely must be removed.  Josh' kids aren't going anywhere unless somehow someone from DCFS can get evidence that he touched one of them.  It's a sad commentary on our society, but it is true.

I've dealt with it as a medical practitioner who delivered babies to women who were addicted or mentally ill or intellectually disabled and who were clearly not ready to parent their child.  Social services will talk to the mom and ask questions while she is still in the hospital, but, unless she currently has an open case and other kids have been removed from her already; that baby is probably going home with her.  And it will be a lucky break if someone from DCFS manages to stop by for a home visit anytime in the next 6 months unless someone files a report.

Josh' kids, like the rest of the kids in the family, live in isolation where the only people they see every day are family members.  People who have protected Josh at the expense of others including his sisters.  Even if  Josh has done something untoward and a family member knew, I don't think they'd call DCFS on him, ever.  The kids don't have school teachers and other kids' parents and the tee ball coach who they might be able to confide in or who might witness something and report it.

Edited May 6, 2021 by doodlebug

[Oldernowiser]

Does anyone think there’s a tiny possibility that Josh might actually be having an “oh, shit this is serious” moment? He’s been King Turd of Shit Mountain for so long that I have to wonder if he didn’t think his only real concern was Anna and JB and since he’d figured out a workaround for that, he was fine. Worst case scenario…more Jesus jail and a head thump from the elders. NBD.

And then the feds showed up…and shit got real. And so did jail.

 

[JoanArc]

1 minute ago, Oldernowiser said:

Does anyone think there’s a tiny possibility that Josh might actually be having an “oh, shit this is serious” moment? He’s been King Turd of Shit Mountain for so long that I have to wonder if he didn’t think his only real concern was Anna and JB and since he’d figured out a workaround for that, he was fine. Worst case scenario…more Jesus jail and a head thump from the elders. NBD.

And then the feds showed up…and shit got real. And so did jail.

 

I think it entirely depends on how he is welcomed home. Last time he had a scandal he got a free house....remodeled by his victims.  I think this time will be slightly more serious, but not much.

[Hpmec]

1 hour ago, Nysha said:

The judge didn't have a choice; she even told the prosecution that they did not make the case that Josh is a danger if he was released. He isn't being accused of actively abusing children, "just" looking at CSA images. Although he did molest his sisters, a case can be made that that was 20 years ago and he hasn't done anything to them since. 

The law is not the same as common sense. Common sense says that Josh has done a, b, c, therefore d is the logical next step. And the law says "prove it", which the prosecution did not.

Surely the judge had a choice as to what the conditions for release would be. Given the nature of the images found on Josh's computer, was it wise to allow visits with his own children with only his wife present? Normally, that would probably be ok, but Anna is in a master/slave sort of relationship with Josh as mandated by her religion. He dictates, she obeys. Who knows what kind of behavior she already tolerates. Wouldn't it have made more sense to mandate a third party be present as an observer any time he interacts with his children? Their safety ought to be paramount. 

[WinnieWinkle]

8 minutes ago, Oldernowiser said:

Does anyone think there’s a tiny possibility that Josh might actually be having an “oh, shit this is serious” moment?

I think even if he's delusional enough to believe he is the almighty Josh Duggar dammit that his fancy pants lawyer has, or shortly will, be spelling out the facts of life in the real world, as opposed to Duggar world.  He may still think he's going to get away with this - but he may finally be made to realise that it's not going to be a cakewalk.

Edited May 6, 2021 by WinnieWinkle

[crazy8s]

Just now, Hpmec said:

Surely the judge had a choice as to what the conditions for release would be. Given the nature of the images found on Josh's computer, was it wise to allow visits with his own children with only his wife present? Normally, that would probably be ok, but Anna is in a master/slave sort of relationship with Josh as mandated by her religion. He dictates, she obeys. Who knows what kind of behavior she already tolerates. Wouldn't it have made more sense to mandate a third party be present as an observer any time he interacts with his children? Their safety ought to be paramount. 

I don't think it was with only he wife present - it was only if his wife was present

[doodlebug]

6 minutes ago, Oldernowiser said:

Does anyone think there’s a tiny possibility that Josh might actually be having an “oh, shit this is serious” moment? He’s been King Turd of Shit Mountain for so long that I have to wonder if he didn’t think his only real concern was Anna and JB and since he’d figured out a workaround for that, he was fine. Worst case scenario…more Jesus jail and a head thump from the elders. NBD.

And then the feds showed up…and shit got real. And so did jail.

 

I would hope that Josh' hired gunslinger, the big shot attorney has had a 'Come to Jesus' moment with him and let him know that he is in deep sh** and better mind his P's & Q's.

I could also see Josh being dumb enough to think that authorities wouldn't be able to trace his downloads since Covenant Spy Network couldn't.  He probably figured partitioning the computer and using TOR was enough to keep them from finding him.

[3girlsforus]

I’m wondering about something in terms of the trial. Will the prosecution have to show these horrible photos and videos (or at least some of them) during trial? From my understanding they were described but not shown at the hearing. Obviously having to see that would be horrendous for the jury but I was specifically thinking about Jill and any of the other siblings who decide they want to attend the trial. Since Jill attended the hearing I mention her specifically. I can see her therapist encouraging it to face down her abuser. But what if they show this stuff during the trial? It seems like it could just be so traumatizing all over again. I’m so worried for these poor women having their trauma all over again. To be clear I have no idea if attending the trial or staying away is ‘right’ in situation like this. I’m far from qualified to make any assertion there. In fact it probably depends on the person. I’m just really worried about them and if the photos will be shown at the trial I’m extra worried for those women who choose to attend. 

[Boston]

1 hour ago, GeeGolly said:

I think that's a great question. I'm guessing he went right out and bought a new phone and laptop. Well if JB let him. If he was still committing crimes, and if he was still be monitored by DHS, I have no idea.

And I'm with you on the information overload. In addition to all the great and varying opinions there's also graphic information, speculation presented as fact and so many unanswered questions.

God help those that don't believe in God.. DIRTBAGS

[Gigi43]

52 minutes ago, Libby said:

Anna is a brainwashed member of a cult. Her mind is mush.

People in Jonestown voluntarily committed suicide per their leader's order. Manson family members committed murder at the command of their leader. FLDS members gave their 12 year old daughters in marriage to adult men because their leader told them to.

Anna will live in harmony with her child abuser husband and subject her children to him because that's what Gothard said was the right thing to do.

The only hope for Anna and her children is if the legal system puts Josh in jail. In my opinion, Anna is incapable of protecting herself or her children.

 

 

Anna has siblings who are out and tried to help her. Unlike other members she has the public telling her for years to get out and she snaps and gets smug. When they first were on the show Anna seemed to be into marrying a Duggar, not Josh himself. So I think there's room to ask if she was brainwashed completely into being into Josh or was she first young and dumb but also a social climber in their circle. She seems so smug she may not leave not because of Gothard but perhaps because she won't admit to the public she was wrong and put her pride before her kids. Anna and Josh were living in DC for a while probably experiencing the outside world more than most in Gothardville ever get to. 

 

Then of course there's Jill. Jill left. She was an outcast for it but she did it and it seems Anna would have more sibling support than Jill had. I doubt Jill wanted a relationship with Anna to begin with but I'd love to know if Anna was unkind to Josh's victim for daring to speak of her experience and put it out there she's getting actual therapy.

 

I don't have it in me to give Anna the 'it's Gothard's fault she's staying' excuse. 

 

I hope those reporters check out the Duggar home for signs of Josh.

Edited May 6, 2021 by Gigi43

[Ohiopirate02]

Just now, Hpmec said:

Surely the judge had a choice as to what the conditions for release would be. Given the nature of the images found on Josh's computer, was it wise to allow visits with his own children with only his wife present? Normally, that would probably be ok, but Anna is in a master/slave sort of relationship with Josh as mandated by her religion. He dictates, she obeys. Who knows what kind of behavior she already tolerates. Wouldn't it have made more sense to mandate a third party be present as an observer any time he interacts with his children? Their safety ought to be paramount. 

Josh is being prosecuted by the feds and not the state of Arkansas.  Federal courts run separately from state courts and have their own guidelines.  The judge followed the federal rules and regulations as it pertains to Josh being released and made her ruling.  

Josh's ability to see his children is up to the state.

[Boston]

12 minutes ago, crazy8s said:

I don't think it was with only he wife present - it was only if his wife was present

I'm sorry.. not sorry.. but here come the F WORDS.  How DARE THEY LET A FUCKIN PERV ANYWHER NEAR HIS KIDS (Anna or no Anna (i pick NO Anna cause there is nothing left in her fucking head).  I guess I just don't understand this cause i don't have a CP-FUCKIN PERV IN MY FAMILY.. ALCHOLICS, DUMBASSES, YES..  i JUST HAVE NO EMPATHY,

Edited May 6, 2021 by Boston

[JustRosie]

There is a blind on CDAN indicating that Josh is trying to cut a deal for himself by ratting out one of his brothers in law. I don’t know how to link it here. 

[mittsigirl]

Deleted my cautionary story of how it takes a village.

Edited May 6, 2021 by mittsigirl

[Mindthinkr]

3 minutes ago, Namaste said:

There is a blind on CDAN indicating that Josh is trying to cut a deal for himself by ratting out one of his brothers in law. I don’t know how to link it here. 

Anything that leads you to guess which one? 

[WinnieWinkle]

4 minutes ago, Namaste said:

There is a blind on CDAN indicating that Josh is trying to cut a deal for himself by ratting out one of his brothers in law. I don’t know how to link it here. 

If one of the BILs is involved then good.  The more rats that go down the better.  If he thinks just because he says something they will leap to believe it though he's stupider than I think he is.

[Tikichick]

8 minutes ago, 3girlsforus said:

I’m wondering about something in terms of the trial. Will the prosecution have to show these horrible photos and videos (or at least some of them) during trial? From my understanding they were described but not shown at the hearing. Obviously having to see that would be horrendous for the jury but I was specifically thinking about Jill and any of the other siblings who decide they want to attend the trial. Since Jill attended the hearing I mention her specifically. I can see her therapist encouraging it to face down her abuser. But what if they show this stuff during the trial? It seems like it could just be so traumatizing all over again. I’m so worried for these poor women having their trauma all over again. To be clear I have no idea if attending the trial or staying away is ‘right’ in situation like this. I’m far from qualified to make any assertion there. In fact it probably depends on the person. I’m just really worried about them and if the photos will be shown at the trial I’m extra worried for those women who choose to attend. 

They cannot show the images to the public because then the court is literally publishing child sexually abusive material.   I do realize how absurd that seems first hearing it.   No idea beyond that how they will go about presenting explicit evidence.

We had a murder case here with a young girl who was found mostly nude.   When it came time to present any photographs of her body there were great pains taken to make sure that only jury, judge, pros. and defense attorney and defendant could see them.   The judge actually came down off the bench into the courtroom for presentation of that evidence.

[JustRosie]

4 minutes ago, WinnieWinkle said:

If one of the BILs is involved then good.  The more rats that go down the better.  If he thinks just because he says something they will leap to believe it though he's stupider than I think he is.

I’m not sure it’s related to Josh’s trouble. Sounds like he just has a story to tell about something else?

Could be complete BS too. 

Edited May 6, 2021 by Namaste

[Oldernowiser]

So, BIL, not brothers…that’s a smaller pool. Jeremy’s probably out because of distance and I don’t think he gives smuggar the time of day….too unfashionable. Ben doesn’t seem to be the type…neither does Austin…Derrick hates Josh…

and if there are others, I’ve forgotten them completely.

1 minute ago, Namaste said:

I’m not sure it’s related to Josh’s trouble. Sounds like he just has a story to tell about something else?

That makes more sense…

[WinnieWinkle]

3 minutes ago, Namaste said:

I’m not sure it’s related to Josh’s trouble. Sounds like he just has a story to tell about something else?

Only a Duggar would think squealing on someone else would in any way mitigate being accused in a CP case.  Unless he's got someone on murder and cannibalism he's not going to lose the crown for Scummiest Duggar or Duggar-in-law.

Edited May 6, 2021 by WinnieWinkle

[hathorlive]

2 minutes ago, Tikichick said:

They cannot show the images to the public because then the court is literally publishing child sexually abusive material.   I do realize how absurd that seems first hearing it.   No idea beyond that how they will go about presenting explicit evidence.

We had a murder case here with a young girl who was found mostly nude.   When it came time to present any photographs of her body there were great pains taken to make sure that only jury, judge, pros. and defense attorney and defendant could see them.   The judge actually came down off the bench into the courtroom for presentation of that evidence.

Maybe this is regional but I've had full videos played for the jury and court room while I was on the stand.  In federal court, they printed a book of images and gave them to the jury with meta data attached.  If they want a conviction, they need to play the video.  I don't think it's publish CP is you are using it for court purposes because that logic could mean you would arrest me for viewing it during an examination.

[3girlsforus]

2 minutes ago, Tikichick said:

They cannot show the images to the public because then the court is literally publishing child sexually abusive material.   I do realize how absurd that seems first hearing it.   No idea beyond that how they will go about presenting explicit evidence.

We had a murder case here with a young girl who was found mostly nude.   When it came time to present any photographs of her body there were great pains taken to make sure that only jury, judge, pros. and defense attorney and defendant could see them.   The judge actually came down off the bench into the courtroom for presentation of that evidence.

Thanks. It makes sense and yet is very difficult because you think they would need to see what he is actually being accused of doing. It’s a horrible catch 22. I know juries have to see some awful things but I’m glad about this. Those people and anyone else who has to see it could be scarred for life. 

1 minute ago, hathorlive said:

Maybe this is regional but I've had full videos played for the jury and court room while I was on the stand.  In federal court, they printed a book of images and gave them to the jury with meta data attached.  If they want a conviction, they need to play the video.  I don't think it's publish CP is you are using it for court purposes because that logic could mean you would arrest me for viewing it during an examination.

So that would at least protect anyone attending the trial from viewing the book but they’d likely see the video? Would they give a warning to spectators about the horrors to come or would the defense call that prejudicing the jury but calling it disturbing?

[Tikichick]

1 minute ago, 3girlsforus said:

Thanks. It makes sense and yet is very difficult because you think they would need to see what he is actually being accused of doing. It’s a horrible catch 22. I know juries have to see some awful things but I’m glad about this. Those people and anyone else who has to see it could be scarred for life. 

I'm not saying the jurors can't see it.   I'm saying the public cannot -- in the case of normal times anybody observing in the courtroom in the gallery.

I have zero clue how they will go about presenting explicit material to the jury there. 

[GeeGolly]

22 minutes ago, Boston said:

God help those that don't believe in God.. DIRTBAGS

Not sure what you mean here. Plenty of great and moral folks don't believe in God. And then there's Josh, who likely does believe in God. I don't think anyone can be categorized as good or bad, by if they believe in God or not.

 

[Tikichick]

4 minutes ago, hathorlive said:

Maybe this is regional but I've had full videos played for the jury and court room while I was on the stand.  In federal court, they printed a book of images and gave them to the jury with meta data attached.  If they want a conviction, they need to play the video.  I don't think it's publish CP is you are using it for court purposes because that logic could mean you would arrest me for viewing it during an examination.

I work in a state court system, not federal.

I was referring to the public not seeing it, as in observers.    As I said in the murder case, provisions were made for judge, jury, pros, defense and deft. to see all evidence.

[Gigi43]

7 minutes ago, Oldernowiser said:

So, BIL, not brothers…that’s a smaller pool. Jeremy’s probably out because of distance and I don’t think he gives smuggar the time of day….too unfashionable. Ben doesn’t seem to be the type…neither does Austin…Derrick hates Josh…

and if there are others, I’ve forgotten them completely.

 

BIL could also mean on Anna's side. I haven't seen the article, so I don't know if they specified which side of the family and does it specify he's saying its CP or just something else? 

 

Watch Josh read the 'Derrick killed a guy in South America' story on reddit and is using that. 

 

Even if he were to strike a deal, he would still be admitting guilt and that would come with a mandatory minimum in most cases and also going on the registry. I don't think your deal is going to be that good on CP.

 

I'm skeptical of the rumor. I've said he may blackmail JB with stuff he probably has on him (financial namely) just to make sure JB doesn't cheap out on the defense but even that won't help him with the Feds directly. 

[Tikichick]

7 minutes ago, 3girlsforus said:

Thanks. It makes sense and yet is very difficult because you think they would need to see what he is actually being accused of doing. It’s a horrible catch 22. I know juries have to see some awful things but I’m glad about this. Those people and anyone else who has to see it could be scarred for life. 

Jury selection for these types of cases is challenging, and extended.   The "celebrity" factor here looms large too.