Josh & Anna Smuggar: A Series of Unfortunate Events

[Zella]

It's interesting to me that whoever caught Josh looking at porn basically shielded him. Seems like they never reported him to Holt until the "sin in the camp" internal investigation was launched. 

[hathorlive]

51 minutes ago, Zella said:

It's interesting to me that whoever caught Josh looking at porn basically shielded him. Seems like they never reported him to Holt until the "sin in the camp" internal investigation was launched. 

Or worse, that a grown man blames a kid looking at porn for losing an election.  I'm shocked at how superstitious these Christians are.  I'm surprised they don't have a Ouija board out to predict who will sin next.

[Zella]

5 minutes ago, hathorlive said:

Or worse, that a grown man blames a kid looking at porn for losing an election.  I'm shocked at how superstitious these Christians are.  I'm surprised they don't have a Ouija board out to predict who will sin next.

I suspect Holt's campaign staff knew he was a psycho and, without any additional information on Josh, just assumed he was a normal kid doing normal things and were trying to spare him the inevitable explosion.  

Honestly, if I had been the one who caught him and knew nothing at all else about him, we probably would have had a chat about professional expectations, but I don't know that I would have told on him either. 

I've never really heard gossip locally about the Holts. I know some folks who have met him once when he was campaigning--and similar to the people I know who have met the Duggars at campaign events--they said he and his family seemed nice enough. But I feel like that's sort of inevitable at a campaign event where you are trying to convince people to vote for you. 

Edited May 10, 2021 by Zella

[Tabbygirl521]

5 minutes ago, hathorlive said:

Or worse, that a grown man blames a kid looking at porn for losing an election.  I'm shocked at how superstitious these Christians are.  I'm surprised they don't have a Ouija board out to predict who will sin next.

And why did God punish someone else for Josh’s sin? It is so very perplexing. 

[Zella]

2 minutes ago, Tabbygirl521 said:

And why did God punish someone else for Josh’s sin? It is so very perplexing. 

LOL That is a good point. I suspect in the same way that Josh was the golden boy for the Duggars and their prince that was promised, Holt probably had near messianic views of himself.

I must admit that is something I never thought too much about until reading that AMA with Josh's childhood friend. I know from being around fundies that they can have a high opinion about themselves and their families and their place in the world, but it had never really clicked for me how extreme that can be. 

Edited May 10, 2021 by Zella

[lascuba]

 

 

1 hour ago, Tikichick said:

My guess is a public self admission of previous predatory behavior on family members who were minors combined with verified possession of csa and seeking it out on several occasions would also factor in to what DCF can bring before the court in a petition for removal or a requirement for no contact with Josh and the children.    The fact that the admission stretches back to his teen years and his current activities are in the neighborhood of 20 years later is demonstrative of grave likelihood of risk to the children -- particularly if he's in a position where he truly is unable to access an online outlet.

Honestly, it wouldn't surprise me if that weren't a factor at all. Josh was a minor at the time. By the time police investigated and the family were put in front of a judge, Josh apparently wasn't deemed a danger anymore. It seems obvious to you and me and maybe even individual social workers that the two thing are related, but legally, I'm guessing most family court judges aren't going to countenance removal without evidence that Josh abused a child.

The Duggars' fame and money is also a significant factor, I think. Not they're getting preferential treatment, per se, but there's a spotlight there and they have the means to be lawyered up. DCF is going to tread very, very carefully. They're not going to make a move because Josh is a creep who might abuse his children in the future--they have to have evidence that abuse has already happened.

[Tikichick]

3 minutes ago, lascuba said:

 

 

Honestly, it wouldn't surprise me if that weren't a factor at all. Josh was a minor at the time. By the time police investigated and the family were put in front of a judge, Josh apparently wasn't deemed a danger anymore. It seems obvious to you and me and maybe even individual social workers that the two thing are related, but legally, I'm guessing most family court judges aren't going to countenance removal without evidence that Josh abused a child.

The Duggars' fame and money is also a significant factor, I think. Not they're getting preferential treatment, per se, but there's a spotlight there and they have the means to be lawyered up. DCF is going to tread very, very carefully. They're not going to make a move because Josh is a creep who might abuse his children in the future--they have to have evidence that abuse has already happened.

Yes, child protective authorities are going to proceed very carefully because they are aware they may only get one bite at the apple or be accused of harassment, malicious prosecution, etc.    But the risk factor assessment will be an important component the family judge has to consider if a petition is brought.   

He may have been a minor and was not prosecuted, but the resistance to treatment of those issues is well known.  The fact that he never faced punishment, never received treatment, has publicly admitted to the conduct and nearly two decades later has been viewing explicit child sexually abusive material does offer substantiation for the claim that his being in the presence of minors can be considered to present a grave level of threat.

[hathorlive]

16 minutes ago, Tabbygirl521 said:

And why did God punish someone else for Josh’s sin? It is so very perplexing. 

I have to wonder how god has all this time to punish people for other people's "sins" when he's busy blessing pro athletes with wins and singers for their country music awards.

[MargeGunderson]

5 minutes ago, hathorlive said:

I have to wonder how god has all this time to punish people for other people's "sins" when he's busy blessing pro athletes with wins and singers for their country music awards.

God multitasks like a boss.

[Future Cat Lady]

58 minutes ago, hathorlive said:

Or worse, that a grown man blames a kid looking at porn for losing an election.  I'm shocked at how superstitious these Christians are.  I'm surprised they don't have a Ouija board out to predict who will sin next.

To me, these types of Christians never take responsibility for anything. Specially if you’re a man.

[MargeGunderson]

White Christian males are at the top of the entitled asshole pyramid. 

[3girlsforus]

I have come to the conclusion that one thing the law gets wrong is it's view of child porn vs the physical act of child sexual abuse. They are treated as different things. Let's just set aside the stuff from when he was a minor. That's legally complicated in and of itself because he was a minor and he was never charged. Even if this was his first arrest with no minor past history, if Josh was arrested for the physical act of abusing a child there would be no question about access to children, even his own. However, since he "only" looked at pictures of someone else doing the abusing, the onus was on the prosecution to prove he would take the step to physical abuse of a child, specifically his children. Because they would have to prove that, a parent's right to see their child (which I also think is something the law sometimes values more than they should) became the driving force. After all, he is forbidden to be around children other than his own. 

I know our judicial system is very hesitant to say 'well you did X so Y could happen down the road', but I think in terms of child sexual abuse, whether you are looking at it or doing it something needs to change in the law that doesn't make one worse than the other in terms of being considered a danger to children. I also think the view needs to change in terms of penalty. "Just" possessing pornography needs to be treated the same as if they touched the child themselves. We've heard lots of posts here of people getting pretty light sentences for this horrific behavior. Jared, the Subway guy, got 15 years but he did physically abuse a child (or many multiple ones) and my impression from the articles I read about it led me to believe it was the physical abuse that made the penalty as high, not the pornography. 

Ok - done ranting now....

[Tikichick]

29 minutes ago, MargeGunderson said:

White Christian males are at the top of the entitled asshole pyramid. 

Within a limited view, maybe.   There's a lot of competition for the top of that pyramid among misogynists and zealots of many stripes, some not even involving a faith-based belief system.

I wouldn't want to be a female pursuing an education in Afghanistan, especially right now.  Not sure how much I'd want to wander around India just going about my day as a lone female either. 

Edited May 10, 2021 by Tikichick

[Natalie68]

21 hours ago, Black Knight said:

Granted it's different circumstances, but when a friend of mine was getting a divorce and her husband was only allowed "supervised" visitation, I learned that at least there, it does not mean any random adult in the circle of family and friends who is willing, available, and acceptable to both sides. Supervision is handled by a trained professional, who is expensive, requiring a retainer and billing hundreds of dollars an hour per visit. I would be surprised if a mandate for supervised visitation handed down by a criminal court is more relaxed, given it's criminal court.

I have a friend that does this for a living.

[Tikichick]

Supervision of child visitation in a divorce action has to be paid for if there are no neutral parties among family members or close friends that both parties agree to and the Court will approve because there is no case worker on the case.  In certain circumstances the Court may require it be held in a therapeutic setting if there is a particular issue causing problems between a parent and child(ren).   That's obviously paid for also. 

Supervision of child visitation in a protective matter can be by a family member if the Court approves, by a case worker from family or human services at their agency offices, or sometimes the Court can order it to be in a therapeutic setting where a mental health provider is designated by the Court to work on issues that are barriers to reunifying the children with the parent(s). 

[Tabbygirl521]

2 hours ago, Zella said:

LOL That is a good point. I suspect in the same way that Josh was the golden boy for the Duggars and their prince that was promised, Holt probably had near messianic views of himself.

I must admit that is something I never thought too much about until reading that AMA with Josh's childhood friend. I know from being around fundies that they can have a high opinion about themselves and their families and their place in the world, but it had never really clicked for me how extreme that can be. 

It occurred to me later that it might be another manipulation tool. A person might be willing to “sin” for their own gratification but maybe it would give them pause to think others might suffer for it? Whatever, this cult is loony. 

[Cinnabon]

4 hours ago, JoanArc said:

 Very telling that he was digging that pond for looking at porn instead of Molesting his sisters. 

Really can’t wrap my head around going to a church for you loudly proclaim your sins and have a group punish you for them. Isn’t that what God is for? Aren’t you doing his job for him at that point?

Regarding the porn only - imagine being that shocked and upset that a 16-17 year old teen boy had been curious enough to look at porn on a computer? Almost all teen boys do this, probably at an earlier age these days. I don’t necessarily think that’s a great thing (mostly because porn is usually completely unrealistic), but that’s the reality. I was the type of kid/teen who was always MORE interested in anything I was prohibited from watching /doing (within limits). My parents were strict about what I could watch on tv, so guess what I watched as soon as they were out or otherwise occupied? By punishing Josh so much for simply being naturally curious about women and porn as a teen boy seems ludicrous and probably added to his dysfunction.

Edited May 10, 2021 by Cinnabon

[mittsigirl]

3 hours ago, hathorlive said:

Or worse, that a grown man blames a kid looking at porn for losing an election.  I'm shocked at how superstitious these Christians are.  I'm surprised they don't have a Ouija board out to predict who will sin next.

I don't consider them to be true Christians-at all. More of a cult than anything Christian-like.

[RedDelicious]

48 minutes ago, mittsigirl said:

I don't consider them to be true Christians-at all. More of a cult than anything Christian-like.

It's so true. And these fundie people like Josh think they can do whatever they want because "only God can judge them". I've been on the receiving end of words like that and it is INFURIATING.

[luvmylabs]

Any word on whether Anna and kids visited him?  I would think TMZ or some other media would be parked nearby.  Or is the view of the house not accessible from the road?

[sue450]

don't  forget  when josh was before the elders in the church..the way they got him to confess was they threatened to shave an innocent  girls  head  (gothard says all females MUST have long hair.), so to do this to  a female in this cult would be devastating.

[emmawoodhouse]

Has it been confirmed that visitation has to be supervised by a 3rd party? I don't recall anyone who was on the zoom call reporting this. And can Anna visit alone to service her pig of a husband? Is that allowed?

[Zella]

I don't recall any restrictions on adults visiting or being around Josh, just minors, so if Anna wanted to go on her lonesome, I don't think anything would forbid it. 

[cereality]

23 minutes ago, emmawoodhouse said:

Has it been confirmed that visitation has to be supervised by a 3rd party? I don't recall anyone who was on the zoom call reporting this. And can Anna visit alone to service her pig of a husband? Is that allowed?

Visitation only has to be surpervised by Anna. Haven’t seen the courts order so I’m unclear whether the kids could visit w a 3rd party like Jana without Anna. My gut is that the Probation Officer would need to approve that. He can have adult visitors certainly his wife so yes she can visit him to “satisfy” him all she wants. 

[emmawoodhouse]

Just now, Zella said:

I don't recall any restrictions on adults visiting or being around Josh, just minors, so if Anna wanted to go on her lonesome, I don't think anything would forbid it. 

Yeah, that was my understanding. It's just disgusting to think about.

 

 

 

 

[3 is enough]

3 hours ago, RedDelicious said:

It's so true. And these fundie people like Josh think they can do whatever they want because "only God can judge them". I've been on the receiving end of words like that and it is INFURIATING.

And yet THEY can and do judge people who don't share their beliefs.  Infuriating indeed.

[RedDelicious]

I’m picturing StinkBus2, dilapidated to the degree of the Walking Dead RV, rolling up with freshly tinted windows and TT casserole. Or maybe JB will loan Anna the (frigging) Slingshot he drove in the birthday parade. But probably not. Ugh.

[farmgal4]

3 minutes ago, RedDelicious said:

I’m picturing StinkBus2, dilapidated to the degree of the Walking Dead RV, rolling up with freshly tinted windows and TT casserole. Or maybe JB will loan Anna the (frigging) Slingshot he drove in the birthday parade. But probably not. Ugh.

I don’t know whether to laugh or cry!

[farmgal4]

22 minutes ago, emmawoodhouse said:

Yeah, that was my understanding. It's just disgusting to think about.

 

 

 

 

She may be staying with him every night and/or day.  It wouldn’t surprise me at all.

[farmgal4]

53 minutes ago, sue450 said:

don't  forget  when josh was before the elders in the church..the way they got him to confess was they threatened to shave an innocent  girls  head  (gothard says all females MUST have long hair.), so to do this to  a female in this cult would be devastating.

You must be kidding me!  These people are twisted, evil POS.

[RedDelicious]

15 minutes ago, farmgal4 said:

I don’t know whether to laugh or cry!

I know, me too! 🤭

[Westiepeach]

38 minutes ago, cereality said:

He can have adult visitors certainly his wife so yes she can visit him to “satisfy” him all she wants. 

Ewww.

[Readalot]

Anna is really fucked up if she still has sex with him. Either way, intentional or pressured. Will she finally make a stand?

[emmawoodhouse]

1 minute ago, Readalot said:

Will she finally make a stand?

In a word? 

No.

[Zella]

I think Anna is probably way past the point of no return here. I mean, she continued to sleep with him even after all the other shit that would have put someone else off. 

Edited May 11, 2021 by Zella

[emmawoodhouse]

4 minutes ago, Zella said:

I think Anna is probably way past the point of no return here. I mean, she continued to sleep with him even after all the other shit that would have put someone else off. 

Her entire sense of worth is in her fecundity and desirability. 

[merylinkid]

Plus what is she going to do?   She has no education and 6 (7) kids?   How is she going to support that many kids by herself? She has a free house right now and her kids' needs are met.     If she toes the party line and stands by her man, the idiot and his even more idiotic wife will continue to support her and the kids.   Heck they might even convince TLC to give her her own show about coping as a single parent after Idiot Jr is sent to real people prison.

[Scarlett45]

Mod Annoucement:

An addition was made to the guidelines by @deaja yesterday. The Mod Announcement on the thread homepage has been amended, as has the red box above the reply box here, but I wanted to make sure everyone was aware. 

 

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. 

[Future Cat Lady]

I don’t think Anna has much of a choice about having sex with Josh or not. The women in this cult are taught that they can’t say no and that marital rape doesn’t exist. Also, they probably think that having sex with his wife will control Josh’s urges. 

Edited May 11, 2021 by Future Cat Lady

[Tikichick]

47 minutes ago, Future Cat Lady said:

I don’t think Anna has much of a choice about having sex with Josh or not. The women in this cult are taught that they can’t say no and that marital rape doesn’t exist. Also, they probably think that having sex with his wife will control Josh’s urges. 

Um ...  

If true, it seems the word think doesn't mean what they believe it does. 

[3girlsforus]

57 minutes ago, Future Cat Lady said:

I don’t think Anna has much of a choice about having sex with Josh or not. The women in this cult are taught that they can’t say no and that marital rape doesn’t exist. Also, they probably think that having sex with his wife will control Josh’s urges. 

 

7 minutes ago, Tikichick said:

Um ...  

If true, it seems the word think doesn't mean what they believe it does. 

I'm actually a little worried about this. He's a guy with sick urges who is now being monitored. Even if he can set up some way to get to these nasty things again, it will take a little time. I can't imagine he's someone who can go without for very long.  From what I read his imagines weren't just young, but also violent. I hope he doesn't find the need to be violent with her. 

[Future Cat Lady]

16 minutes ago, 3girlsforus said:

 

I'm actually a little worried about this. He's a guy with sick urges who is now being monitored. Even if he can set up some way to get to these nasty things again, it will take a little time. I can't imagine he's someone who can go without for very long.  From what I read his imagines weren't just young, but also violent. I hope he doesn't find the need to be violent with her. 

I agree with you. That’s why I have some sympathy for Anna. I don’t think her private life with him is all that good. 

[lascuba]

2 hours ago, merylinkid said:

Plus what is she going to do?   She has no education and 6 (7) kids?   How is she going to support that many kids by herself? She has a free house right now and her kids' needs are met.     If she toes the party line and stands by her man, the idiot and his even more idiotic wife will continue to support her and the kids.   Heck they might even convince TLC to give her her own show about coping as a single parent after Idiot Jr is sent to real people prison.

I was going to say that that wouldn't happen only because Anna would refuse to acknowledge the severity of Josh's actions (remember "Josh's teenaged....wrong choices"?), in addition to her being unwilling to consider herself a single mother because of course she'll be waiting for Josh to get out and make more babies with her. But then I remembered that this is TLC, and they won't care.

[Hpmec]

Anna has been raised to believe it's her mission in life to satisfy her man and pop out as many babies as she can during her fertile years. She has never shown any inclination to do otherwise. She has wealthy in-laws who will continue to house and feed her and her offspring no matter what. There's no way she'll flee or seek a divorce. She's in it for the long haul. If and when Josh winds up behind bars, she'll wait for him, and the minute he's set loose, she'll be ready for another pregnancy. As far as the charges go, she probably doesn't want to know the grim details. Satan is messing with her husband, and prayer is the answer. 

[crazy8s]

2 hours ago, lascuba said:

I was going to say that that wouldn't happen only because Anna would refuse to acknowledge the severity of Josh's actions (remember "Josh's teenaged....wrong choices"?), in addition to her being unwilling to consider herself a single mother because of course she'll be waiting for Josh to get out and make more babies with her. But then I remembered that this is TLC, and they won't care.

Life after Lock Up a Duggar very special episode

Edited May 11, 2021 by crazy8s

[hathorlive]

Put a fork in him, he's done!

Okay, so it took me a few days to catch up, but I read an account that someone attending the bond hearing typed up.  And I have to say that Josh is screwed.  I have NEVER, EVER in 17 years of doing this been able to put a suspect behind the keyboard like they have in this case.  Josh's geolocation activity with his phone will do him in.  I've never had this kind of collaboration of activity and still gotten mostly guilty verdicts in federal court.    The text messages saying he'd be late, while downloading CP is golden.  As is the picture of the wreck outside the porn shack taken while he's downloading porn.  It's golden.  I don't see how they can lose this case.  It will be very hard for Josh to say that another person came in the tiny shack, sat at his computer and downloaded CP while Josh was in the same place at the same time.

Edited May 11, 2021 by hathorlive

[Zella]

1 minute ago, hathorlive said:

Put a fork in him, he's done!

Okay, so it took me a few days to catch up, but I read an account that someone attending the bond hearing typed up.  And I have to say that Josh is screwed.  I have NEVER, EVER in 17 years of doing this been able to put a suspect behind the keyboard like they have in this case.  Josh's geolocation activity with his phone will do him in.  I've never had this kind of collaboration of activity and still gotten mostly guilty verdicts in federal court.    The text messages saying he'd be late, while downloading CP is golden.  As is the picture of the wreck outside the porn shack taken while he's downloading porn.  It's golden.  I don't see how they can lose this case.  It will be very hard for Josh to say that another person came in the tiny shack, sat at his computer and downloaded CP while Josh was in the same place at the same time.

I was looking forward to hearing your take on the details! They are rather damning. 

[3girlsforus]

2 minutes ago, hathorlive said:

Put a fork in him, he's done!

Okay, so it took me a few days to catch up, but I read an account that someone attending the bond hearing typed up.  And I have to say that Josh is screwed.  I have NEVER, EVER in 17 years of doing this been able to put a suspect behind the keyboard like they have in this case.  Josh's geolocation activity with his phone will do him in.  I've never had this kind of collaboration of activity and still gotten mostly guilty verdicts in federal court.    The text messages saying he'd been late, while downloading CP is golden.  As is the picture of the wreck outside the porn shack taken while he's downloading porn.  It's golden.  I don't see how they can lose this case.  It will be very hard for Josh to say that another person came in the tiny shack, sat at his computer and downloaded CP while Josh was in the same place at the same time.

This is the best news I've heard all day. I watched two episodes of Dateline last night while folding laundry that I just picked at random and both ended in inexplicable not guilty verdicts and it got me thinking that I really hope they have Josh dead to rights because juries are stupid. It sounds like they do and I'm so very glad. Now I really hope they just plea it out because his siblings don't deserve a long, drawn-out trial. I assume at least some of the family might have to testify too. I hope he does the right think and spares them that. 

[hathorlive]

Just now, Zella said:

I was looking forward to hearing your take on the details! They are rather damning. 

I have a feeling that's why they specifically charged two counts on those days.  Why bother with any other images when you have put him behind the computer, downloading horrific images and videos?  I've never personally had a case this strong.  I give the forensic analysts props for timelining activity on the phone and the computer and matching it up. It doesn't take a lot for a jury to convict in these cases.  It's so offensive that most juries don't want to dive too deep into it.  But that said, I hope they put the nail in the coffin and play the video.  The jury needs to understand he wasn't downloading pictures of kids in a bath tub. And then they need to ask themselves, do I want this pervert in my neighborhood or in jail.

 

[GeeGolly]

6 minutes ago, hathorlive said:

Put a fork in him, he's done!

Okay, so it took me a few days to catch up, but I read an account that someone attending the bond hearing typed up.  And I have to say that Josh is screwed.  I have NEVER, EVER in 17 years of doing this been able to put a suspect behind the keyboard like they have in this case.  Josh's geolocation activity with his phone will do him in.  I've never had this kind of collaboration of activity and still gotten mostly guilty verdicts in federal court.    The text messages saying he'd be late, while downloading CP is golden.  As is the picture of the wreck outside the porn shack taken while he's downloading porn.  It's golden.  I don't see how they can lose this case.  It will be very hard for Josh to say that another person came in the tiny shack, sat at his computer and downloaded CP while Josh was in the same place at the same time.

I'm not sure I'm understanding this...

Josh took a picture of a car accident, texted Anna and downloaded the CP, all basically within minutes of each other?