Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
maraleia

Josh & Anna Smuggar: A Series of Unfortunate Events

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, hathorlive said:

From the lawfirm of Bled 'Em and Pled Em.   I'm sure they'll get 100,000 from JB before they suggest doing just that.

In this particular case, I'm not entirely unhappy about that. 

  • Like 4
  • Laugh 15

Share this post


Link to post

10 minutes ago, louannems said:

I cannot stand Josh but is it possible he didn't actually know what was in those files when he downloaded them?  For instance, could he have been hoping to see two teens making out and watched the video later, horrified by what he was seeing instead!

Shame on me for trying to think better for Josh.

Let's see if they reveal his search history in trial.  Trust me, there are terms only pedophiles know.  As I've said in court before, you shouldn't be shocked when you get naked pictures of little boys when you search for naked little boy pics.

  • Like 13
  • Useful 3
  • Sad 5

Share this post


Link to post

I give no credibility to that rumor about another Duggar being investigated by Homeland Security. 

I do believe Josh was capable of partitioning the hard drive on his computer to create a Linux partition for his nasty activities. The former fundie (who has identified himself only as Justin), who knew the Duggars in his teen years and considered Josh a friend, has a new upload today. In it he discusses how tech savvy Josh was as a teen including the very issue of Linux. He also talks about other things. He's emerged from the fundie world with strong opinions against it and against how TLC is helping the Duggars lie to the world destructively. 

  • Like 14
  • Useful 3

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, NotthebadVictoria said:

The speculation that there is another arrest coming and that he was trying to implicate someone else is where I think it’s possible. Purely speculation on my part, but at this point anything is possible. 

truly anything is possible  but I believe speculation was a Brother in Law or something, there are options Nathan, David, Daniel Keller? John Schrader? TFDW? (david waller)

Edited by crazy8s
  • Useful 5
  • Surprise 1

Share this post


Link to post

So, if Josh  is convicted of both charges, what is the minimum sentence he will receive? Thx. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Tikichick said:

IDK about there, but here counsel tables have a front panel down to the floor specifically so jurors or potential jurors will be unaware if a defendant is in fact in leg irons.   They must be dressed in street clothes and not jail uniforms by law, cannot have their hands shackled in view of jurors and only come and go from the courtroom when the jury is not present to observe, but they can and do sit at counsel table throughout trial in leg irons in many cases.   

My husband was once in a courtroom as a prospective juror when the judge specifically told members of the jury pool to pay no attention to the fact that the defendant was chained to the table.It was a murder case and the defendant, according to my husband, looked menacing. I don't see how a jury could be expected to be unbiased when it was clear the defendant was a potential danger to them. 

  • Surprise 7

Share this post


Link to post

4 minutes ago, louannems said:

I cannot stand Josh but is it possible he didn't actually know what was in those files when he downloaded them?  For instance, could he have been hoping to see two teens making out and watched the video later, horrified by what he was seeing instead!

Shame on me for trying to think better for Josh.

Some of the file names are really bad. Just having to go on the dark web implies Josh knew the content was out-of-bounds and likely illegal.

The law firm I used to work for defended a guy charged with possession of CP. He claimed he didn't actually have an attraction to children. He said he got a rush from looking at shocking images, and his viewing habits spiraled out of control because he was always in search of more shocking content. I could see Josh using this argument, although his history with minors is a huge strike against that.

  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, IndianPaintbrush said:

The law firm I used to work for defended a guy charged with possession of CP. He claimed he didn't actually have an attraction to children. He said he got a rush from looking at shocking images, and his viewing habits spiraled out of control because he was always in search of more shocking content. I could see Josh using this argument, although his history with minors is a huge strike against that.

That's kind of like robbing a bank and saying you didn't want to steal the money, you just wanted to hold the cash because it was a rush.  He can try to say anything he wants but most juries have no use for anything a suspect says once they hear the facts of the case.  There is no explanation for this.  I had a guy once say he was downloading the images so they could be taken off the net.  Because downloading means they are gone because they are now on your computer.

  • Like 14
  • Useful 1
  • Laugh 7

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, libgirl2 said:

I agree. And what are those kids with families to support (and future families to support) going to do when the money runs out and JB isn't in control anymore? 

I guess then it'll become clear to the kids raised by JB and M whether their fantastic parents actually have been the greatest kid raisers and educators ever in world history, as they claim. Or not. 

I'm sure JB has argued that plenty of other people should pull themselves up by their own bootstraps. So now it'll be time for his offspring to do exactly that. I'm sure he prepared them for it perfectly, since that's what they all say. 

Show us what you got, Duggarlings. 

  • Like 24

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, Namaste said:

So, if Josh  is convicted of both charges, what is the minimum sentence he will receive? Thx. 

HE has two counts, worth 20 years each.  That means if convicted, based on most experience, he'll get between  7 and 10 years.  If we are lucky.

  • Useful 16
  • Sad 4

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, hathorlive said:

That's kind of like robbing a bank and saying you didn't want to steal the money, you just wanted to hold the cash because it was a rush.  He can try to say anything he wants but most juries have no use for anything a suspect says once they hear the facts of the case.  There is no explanation for this. 

I completely agree. I'm simply talking about the issue of whether Josh is an active threat to children, which I really don't know, but better safe than sorry. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, hathorlive said:

HE has two counts, worth 20 years each.  That means if convicted, based on most experience, he'll get between  7 and 10 years.  If we are lucky.

That's IT???   Even with having him dead to rights?   Hell he'll be out in time to make more spawn with Anna.  

  • Like 5
  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post

20 minutes ago, Hpmec said:

My husband was once in a courtroom as a prospective juror when the judge specifically told members of the jury pool to pay no attention to the fact that the defendant was chained to the table.It was a murder case and the defendant, according to my husband, looked menacing. I don't see how a jury could be expected to be unbiased when it was clear the defendant was a potential danger to them. 

There are the outlier cases where things like that happen, but unless there is very good reason it's avoided.   The judge made the statement he did because he was making a record that they were taking every possible measure to preserve the defendant's right to be seen as innocent until proven guilty.  

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, hathorlive said:

That means if convicted, based on most experience, he'll get between  7 and 10 years.

Would that include factoring in sentencing enhancements? I found an online calculator that dealt with that, but I got too grossed out reading the factors to actually use it. 

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Tikichick said:

The attorney can tell a client to plead all he wants, but in the end the client has to decide to go through with it.   Predator types are a different species than other criminals.   They like to always be in control and are always sure they know best.   They only concede when they are completely convinced there is absolutely no other way out, and then they just want to concede, be done with it -- and then promptly flip into the mode where they demand an appeal and no one can convince them they won't get one and win it.    Josh ain't known as Smuggar for no reason.

Complicating the matter in this case is you also have JB's unshakable belief that he also can control everyone and everything.   I would give a lot to observe how his nature and his desire to save his brand are gumming up the works, or if he has accepted reality and is in fact urging his firstborn to take his medicine. 

I think Michelle will be a major stumbling block to a guilty plea. Jim Bob might see the wisdom of urging Josh to face reality and accept a plea deal, but I doubt if she ever will. Josh is clearly her favorite child, perhaps the only one she truly loves, and she must be hysterical with fear at the thought of what would happen to him in prison. She's probably leading the "It wasn't that bad, he was just curious, Satan tempted him, we're being persecuted" brigade and deluding herself that he could be acquitted at trial. And, of course, an acquittal would not only save Josh, but also what's left of their tattered reputation and possibly their TLC contract.

I also think that Michelle's opinions carry great weight behind closed doors. She has the baby-voiced, head-bobbing Gothard wife act down pat, but in private I think that Jim Bob is very dependent on her guidance and support and may even be a little afraid of her.

Edited by Albanyguy
  • Like 7
  • Useful 5
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
20 minutes ago, Churchhoney said:

I guess then it'll become clear to the kids raised by JB and M whether their fantastic parents actually have been the greatest kid raisers and educators ever in world history, as they claim. Or not. 

I'm sure JB has argued that plenty of other people should pull themselves up by their own bootstraps. So now it'll be time for his offspring to do exactly that. I'm sure he prepared them for it perfectly, since that's what they all say. 

Show us what you got, Duggarlings. 

I absolutely don't disagree with your summation of their parenting and JB's pronouncements of how others need to work harder in order to match what he claims his family is.   

Then I recognize what the actual parenting and preparation of the kids actually was, along with the fact they may have a very distorted viewpoint of how they stack up in the real world.   I don't see them having much of anything to show us, and I can't really hold them much more than 20-percent at fault, if that.   I shudder to think of what the last years of being a minor now looks like for the ones under 18 with their family no doubt imploding around them.   Any way you slice it, JB & M are bound to be complete wrecks for the foreseeable future and much of the normal routine of their home and interactions with their married siblings is probably upturned.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post

Do we know for sure which Duggars "worked" with Josh at his car lot? I've heard speculation but wondering if we actually know who frequented the area.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, Tuxcat said:

Do we know for sure which Duggars "worked" with Josh at his car lot? I've heard speculation but wondering if we actually know who frequented the area.

The rumors are that Josiah worked there, but he could have easily always been at Champion (Jed's lot).

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

8 minutes ago, Albanyguy said:

I think Michelle will be a major stumbling block to a guilty plea. Jim Bob might see the wisdom of urging Josh to face reality and accept a plea deal, but I doubt if she ever will. Josh is clearly her favorite child, perhaps the only one she truly loves, and she must be hysterical with fear at the thought of him what would happen to him in prison. She's probably leading the "It wasn't that bad, he didn't mean it, Satan tempted him, we're being persecuted" brigade and deluding herself that he could be acquitted at trial. And, of course, an acquittal would not only save Josh, but also what's left of their tattered reputation and possibly their TLC contract.

I also think that Michelle's opinions carry great weight behind closed doors. She has the baby-voiced, head-bobbing Gothard wife act down pat, but in private I think that Jim Bob is very dependent on her guidance and support and may even be a little afraid of her.

I can't imagine any mom not being hysterical with fear at the thought of her child facing incarceration.   I'd have a hard time just with the idea when, where and how I could see and be with my child wasn't up to myself and my child.   I can't imagine what it must be for a parent to look at the entire concept of incarceration.  That's in the normal range of parenting attitudes in my opinion.

Frankly I have no idea how to even begin to sort out where Michelle might land on anything to do with this, or much of anything to do with any of her children for that matter.   I have no idea whether it's her personality, if she is in fact medicated as is often speculated, if she is just burnt out, or if she's just a complete phony and all we see is a facade.   I have no earthly idea who she is or how she might feel or respond about anything.   She strikes me as empty vessel, nothing more.   Honestly Jessa gives me much of the same vibe.       

  • Like 20

Share this post


Link to post

Michelle definitely has power in the Duggar family.

I agree that Josh has been a favored child, but I don't think Michelle is a big defender of wrong doings, despite her Kelly interview. From reading the police report from the molestations, she was very honest and straight forward with the police. And I believe Michelle believed they punished Josh harshly and then watched out for the girls. She's a mom and she sent her teen away for 6 months.

Also, when asked some question on the show about her married kids, she rolled her eyes and said, "leave and cleave baby".

I think she'll want Josh punished if she can bring herself to believe he's guilty. If the lawyers recommend a guilty plea, I think she'll be all for it.

And even JB, if he can also bring himself to believe Josh is guilty, I think he'll be so over Josh, he'll want him gone for a few years. I think JB will have a harder time getting there because he is so concerned about his own reputation and probably the money making show too.

  • Like 6
  • Useful 6

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, louannems said:

I cannot stand Josh but is it possible he didn't actually know what was in those files when he downloaded them?  For instance, could he have been hoping to see two teens making out and watched the video later, horrified by what he was seeing instead!

Shame on me for trying to think better for Josh.

No.  This wasn't a wrong turn because the streetlights were out.

  • Like 11
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post

Josh better freeze his sperm so Anna can keep having his babies. 

Edited by iwantcookies
  • Sad 3

Share this post


Link to post

I wonder if any of the Duggars *truly* believe that Josh was set up, or whether that’s just what they need to tell themselves to sleep at night. The fact is that this behavior didn’t come from left field — it’s not like Joe (no shade on Joe, I just chose him at random) was caught with CSA images on his computer and everyone was like “wow, I never saw that coming.” Josh has a history of molesting underage girls. It is not in any way unbelievable that he would be caught with these images. It’s not even that surprising.

So for all their talk of Satan and Jesus and forgiveness and repentance, does anyone think JB or MIchelle truly believe that prayer was enough to fix Josh? They both seem worldly enough that they would realize that’s not how this works. So do most of the older kids and their spouses. They (especially JB and MIchelle) might be claiming they think he was set up to save face, but I very much doubt any of them believe it. Anna might have actually talked herself into believing he was set up, because believing the reality would make it necessary for her to acknowledge that her husband is a monster and that she’s a shitty mother, but she’s the only one I think might truly believe Josh is being framed.

  • Like 19

Share this post


Link to post

4 hours ago, 3girlsforus said:

Yea I know you are right but it still sucks for his sisters. I am also horrified that he will get to sit in the trial and see that video again. I don't know that he's ashamed enough to balance the fact that it will turn him on. That just makes me want to vomit. All of this makes me want to vomit. Ugh - now I'm getting angry. 

If it’s the video/s I’ve read about , they will not be showing them to the jury or anyone else. Just reading about the content should be enough for anyone to convict.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, merylinkid said:

That's IT???   Even with having him dead to rights?   Hell he'll be out in time to make more spawn with Anna.  

I go back to the case where I was bookmarking images of kids under 8 and had over 5 TB of images.  I had the most horrific videos I've ever seen and chats where the suspect tells another downloader to find crackheads with kids because they are to strung out to notice what you are doing to their kids.  And he got 10 years plus another three for the chats I added to the case for that purpose.  Terabytes of the worst videos I've ever seen and he barely got 13 years.  We consider it lucky if a suspect gets 7 years and are thrilled with 10 years.  Anything over that is amazing.  I've had one case get 30 years but he was abusing kids and producing CP.  So, don't get your hopes up that he'll get a huge sentence.  The only way he gets over 10 years is if the sentencing takes into consider what he did to his sisters, whether that's allowed to be considered or not.  If you are horrified and disgusted, please contact your politicians and demand better sentences. 

31 minutes ago, Cinnabon said:

If it’s the video/s I’ve read about , they will not be showing them to the jury or anyone else. Just reading about the content should be enough for anyone to convict.

They do show them in court.  I don't know if the prosecutors will have the balls to show the video, but why would you convict someone on something you didn't watch and deem bad or illegal?  I can show you known images in NCMEC where the girls look 20 and are only 15.  That's still CP, even though most people would not know it's a child.  Wouldn't you want to judge for yourself that Josh viewed this, knowing it was a child and not caring?  It should always be shown in court or it's convicting someone on here say, in my humble and not important opinion.

Edited by hathorlive
  • Like 13
  • Useful 1
  • Sad 5

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Zella said:

Would that include factoring in sentencing enhancements? I found an online calculator that dealt with that, but I got too grossed out reading the factors to actually use it. 

So here's what the last case that had ALL the enhancers got from the judge.  We pointed out he had all of them (I won't mention them because you all don't need that in your head) and the judge said "well, the enhancers are up for debate and we don't want to use them because they may not be around for long".  I've never had a case where the sentence was increased due to enhancers.  And it's infuriating to me.  Again, this is a crime where 85% of the defendants are white.  

  • Like 1
  • Useful 11
  • Sad 5

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, hathorlive said:

So here's what the last case that had ALL the enhancers got from the judge.  We pointed out he had all of them (I won't mention them because you all don't need that in your head) and the judge said "well, the enhancers are up for debate and we don't want to use them because they may not be around for long".  I've never had a case where the sentence was increased due to enhancers.  And it's infuriating to me.  Again, this is a crime where 85% of the defendants are white.  

Oh that is frustrating. Thank you for responding! 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, hathorlive said:

I go back to the case where I was bookmarking images of kids under 8 and had over 5 TB of images.  I had the most horrific videos I've ever seen and chats where the suspect tells another downloader to find crackheads with kids because they are to strung out to notice what you are doing to their kids.  And he got 10 years plus another three for the chats I added to the case for that purpose.  Terabytes of the worst videos I've ever seen and he barely got 13 years.  We consider it lucky if a suspect gets 7 years and are thrilled with 10 years.  Anything over that is amazing.  I've had one case get 30 years but he was abusing kids and producing CP.  So, don't get your hopes up that he'll get a huge sentence.  The only way he gets over 10 years is if the sentencing takes into consider what he did to his sisters, whether that's allowed to be considered or not.  If you are horrified and disgusted, please contact your politicians and demand better sentences. 

They do show them in court.  I don't know if the prosecutors will have the balls to show the video, but why would you convict someone on something you didn't watch and deem bad or illegal?  I can show you known images in NCMEC where the girls look 20 and are only 15.  That's still CP, even though most people would know it's a child.  Wouldn't you want to judge for yourself that Josh viewed this, knowing it was a child and not caring?  It should always be shown in court or it's convicting someone on here say, in my humble and not important opinion.

I cannot wrap my brain around how hard it's got to be to seat a jury who's aware they're going to have to view this stuff.    They've got to probe that possibility to assess if people can handle it.   If you release someone who says, there's no way I can do that and remain objective 80-percent of the pool is going to say the same, if only to get out of serving.   If you put on someone who can't watch it when the time comes, it jeopardizes the trial.

  • Like 5
  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post
18 minutes ago, Zella said:

Oh that is frustrating. Thank you for responding! 

Again, this is based only on my experience and that of my coworkers.  I'm sure some judges throw the book at the enhancements.  I'm just saying it's never worked out that way for me.

  • Like 2
  • Useful 3
  • Sad 4

Share this post


Link to post

Anna is already 33, so a 5-7 year sentence could at least spell an end to the baby train. Her mom only had nine kids, and she herself doesn’t seem to be super fertile like Kendra. With the exception of M1 and M2, who were only 20 months apart, she’s had a kid every two years, which is pretty normal spacing even for non-fundie couples (they just generally stop after 2 or 3). If Josh isn’t out until she’s 39 or 40, there would probably only be one other kid at the most.

  • Like 13

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, mynextmistake said:

Anna is already 33, so a 5-7 year sentence could at least spell an end to the baby train. Her mom only had nine kids, and she herself doesn’t seem to be super fertile like Kendra. With the exception of M1 and M2, who were only 20 months apart, she’s had a kid every two years, which is pretty normal spacing even for non-fundie couples (they just generally stop after 2 or 3). If Josh isn’t out until she’s 39 or 40, there would probably only be one other kid at the most.

At least there's that as a sliver of a silver lining, I suppose. 

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, hathorlive said:

HE has two counts, worth 20 years each.  That means if convicted, based on most experience, he'll get between  7 and 10 years.  If we are lucky.

Thank you for responding. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, hathorlive said:

I go back to the case where I was bookmarking images of kids under 8 and had over 5 TB of images.  I had the most horrific videos I've ever seen and chats where the suspect tells another downloader to find crackheads with kids because they are to strung out to notice what you are doing to their kids.  And he got 10 years plus another three for the chats I added to the case for that purpose.  Terabytes of the worst videos I've ever seen and he barely got 13 years.  We consider it lucky if a suspect gets 7 years and are thrilled with 10 years.  Anything over that is amazing.  I've had one case get 30 years but he was abusing kids and producing CP.  So, don't get your hopes up that he'll get a huge sentence.  The only way he gets over 10 years is if the sentencing takes into consider what he did to his sisters, whether that's allowed to be considered or not.  If you are horrified and disgusted, please contact your politicians and demand better sentences. 

They do show them in court.  I don't know if the prosecutors will have the balls to show the video, but why would you convict someone on something you didn't watch and deem bad or illegal?  I can show you known images in NCMEC where the girls look 20 and are only 15.  That's still CP, even though most people would not know it's a child.  Wouldn't you want to judge for yourself that Josh viewed this, knowing it was a child and not caring?  It should always be shown in court or it's convicting someone on here say, in my humble and not important opinion.

From my understanding, what he watched included the Scully videos? I can’t imagine those being played in court.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, hathorlive said:

From the lawfirm of Bled 'Em and Pled Em.   I'm sure they'll get 100,000 from JB before they suggest doing just that.

I am hoping that the law firm takes JB for 3x that much!

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, hathorlive said:

They do show them in court.  I don't know if the prosecutors will have the balls to show the video, but why would you convict someone on something you didn't watch and deem bad or illegal?  I can show you known images in NCMEC where the girls look 20 and are only 15.  That's still CP, even though most people would not know it's a child.  Wouldn't you want to judge for yourself that Josh viewed this, knowing it was a child and not caring?  It should always be shown in court or it's convicting someone on here say, in my humble and not important opinion.

As much I would hate having to see the images/videos, I agree that if I was on the jury I would want to see it. Well I wouldn't want to but I think it would be necessary.

  • Like 14

Share this post


Link to post

36 minutes ago, mynextmistake said:

Anna is already 33, so a 5-7 year sentence could at least spell an end to the baby train. Her mom only had nine kids, and she herself doesn’t seem to be super fertile like Kendra. With the exception of M1 and M2, who were only 20 months apart, she’s had a kid every two years, which is pretty normal spacing even for non-fundie couples (they just generally stop after 2 or 3). If Josh isn’t out until she’s 39 or 40, there would probably only be one other kid at the most.

No conjugal visits?

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, mittsigirl said:

I am hoping that the law firm takes JB for 3x that much!

The good news is that Boob has to pay both Travis Story AND the fancy St. Louis lawyer. 😂

  • Laugh 11

Share this post


Link to post

And all the St Louis lawyer's experts, probably an associate or three, a paralegal, and a secretary plus the partridge in the pear tree.  :)  

  • Like 5
  • Laugh 12

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, LilJen said:

No conjugal visits?

Not in Federal prison. Of course, nothing is stopping him now as he awaits trial (or an 11th hour plea).

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, emmawoodhouse said:

The good news is that Boob has to pay both Travis Story AND the fancy St. Louis lawyer. 😂

Good, because JB is the type of man who is hurt the most if you take away his money!

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, hathorlive said:

The joke we had in my lab was we would quit if we ever had to explain epochal time in court.  It's something that they always put on certification tests, but you NEVER see in real life.  And there I was, in front of a giant screen walking the jury through where the value was found and converted and blah blah.  I almost laughed at one point, it was so silly.  Noted you are on my list of future jurors!

I just googled it and tried to understand it as much as I could, sure is different than anything I have ever read about. It sure must be the most precise measure of time for a court case like this one. Gee HATHORLIVE, I knew you were very smart before, but now you are way up there in my mind! Sure appreciate the way you explain things so well, that even a layperson can understand-thank-you:)

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post

5 hours ago, Namaste said:

So, if Josh  is convicted of both charges, what is the minimum sentence he will receive? Thx. 

Nowhere NEAR long enough!

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Tigregirl said:

Admin - if this is not allowed, please delete.

I saw this post from May 10 on Duggars W/O pity.  Taking it with a grain of salt but things could get even more f’ed up:

“Another Duggar is being investigated by Homeland Security and there is going to be another arrest. Anna is moving off the property into a home some one close to her and Josh owns. There is a huge divide of the Duggar's that still believe Josh was set up. Stay tuned...

Neighbor”

 

Please let it be JB on an obstruction of justice or destruction of evidence charge. 

Pleaseeee (fingers crossed)...

  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Hpmec said:

My husband was once in a courtroom as a prospective juror when the judge specifically told members of the jury pool to pay no attention to the fact that the defendant was chained to the table.It was a murder case and the defendant, according to my husband, looked menacing. I don't see how a jury could be expected to be unbiased when it was clear the defendant was a potential danger to them. 

Wow! I am pretty sure that I would have peed my pants if I had to be in a jury with someone so dangerous! In the last 25 years, I have been called for jury duty 6 times, but because I am on a high dose morphine, I was excused each time. I live in a small city so that's why I was called so many times.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I’m surprised that, IF Anna has been to visit Josh, we haven’t heard any paparazzi reports. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, hathorlive said:

That's kind of like robbing a bank and saying you didn't want to steal the money, you just wanted to hold the cash because it was a rush.  He can try to say anything he wants but most juries have no use for anything a suspect says once they hear the facts of the case.  There is no explanation for this.  I had a guy once say he was downloading the images so they could be taken off the net.  Because downloading means they are gone because they are now on your computer.

What an idiot! I bet that you have all kinds of stories you could tell that include dummies like him! You just have to have some that are funny and make you laugh to balance out all of the terrible things that you see:(

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

For some reason, Josiah keeps coming to my mind here. The show did depict him as probably the only sibling who demonstrated any sort of looking-up-to-Josh behavior (especially when he first started courting Marjorie). And, he hasn't been on social media for six months. I really feel like he is such a wild card that it could have nothing to do with Josh, or absolutely everything to do with Josh (re: the supposed rumor about some other Duggars being implicated).

Edited by madpsych78
  • Like 5
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Churchhoney said:

Totally agree. That's why it makes me so angry I could rip somebody's head off. 

Jim Bob and Meeechelle have ruined those kids' lives and they're well on the way to ruining a lot of their "grandbabies'" lives, too. And yet we still hear "Oh, but Jim Bob loves eeez kidddzz!!!" No, he doesn't. He feels some fuzzy feelings in his crotch and belly and maybe a wee bit in his brain when he sees his little loin fruit walking around and producing more little descendants-of-Jim-Bob sperm to bring him glory with Jesus. But he's spent every day of his adult life doing stuff that ruins their lives.  And yet they've been on tv for over a decade, held up as role models, which has not just convinced strangers that they're role models but has convinced their own kids. 

And yet none of his kids are likely to realize this until they're forced to. 

So if this forces them to, it won't be pretty but it's the only thing that's likely to move most of them in the direction of the truth, as far as I can tell.

And that will be sad and difficult. 

BUT -- and this is a big "but" as far as I'm concerned, they will be far from the only people who have had to create their own lives nearly from scratch when they never knew they'd have to and who are often just as ill-prepared as the Duggars through no fault of their own - people grow up in terrible poverty, they grow up and become orphaned at just the wrong moment, they become estranged from their families through no fault of their own, they have parents with undiagnosed mental illness, etc. People get deprived in all kinds of ways and have to make it as adults on their own. And an amazing number ultimately manage to scramble and do it. With no more resources handed to them that the Duggarlings have. 

The Duggarlings won't have been well prepared. But they'll be just as prepared as a lot of other people are.

Up to now, in my opinion, they've been a super-self-satisfied and smug-as-hell bunch, based on their parents' estimation of themselves and the fact that many of the older kids, especially, believe themselves to be important "celebs."

So while I do have a lot of sympathy for them, I also think there's no reason that it won't ultimately improve their lives if they have to get off that high horse and struggle down on the ground the way many many other people have to do. There are a lot of them. They can help each other if they're willing. 

They may now have to go through some stuff that lots and lots of other people also go through. And the fact that they'll be going through it from a lifelong position of imagining that they're above it -- because of what they've heard from Mama and Daddy -- doesn't mean to me that they deserve any special help or consideration we don't give to every other young person who has to struggle without much help to make a life. 

 

AMEN. Very well said CHURCHHONEY!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

If there is another charge coming and it’s related to this - and not financial crime - I wonder if we’ll see an obstruction of justice charge against someone who helped Josh maybe destroying evidence after the 2019 raid (or more likely if they got wind of a raid hours before it happens which isn’t unheard of in a small town if you see authorities moving around that you’ve never seen). In that event it’s more likely to be one of the brothers than JB bc how much does JB know about technology? IDK what brothers hang with Josh. The show and social media have painted a picture of Josh being totally removed from the siblings’ lives but reality is we don’t know who hangs out with who. While I think the older brothers (JD, Joe) are thoroughly disgusted with Josh bc they understand what he did to their sisters, the cheating on Anna etc. The middle brothers were toddlers with he did stuff to the sisters and like preteens when he cheated on Anna. While some of them may have vague notions that he’s messed up, you know the sister stuff was never discussed with them when they were old enough to understand (or it was vague platitudes re messing up when he was a young teen and he’s sought the lords forgiveness) and the cheating on Anna - eh the devil led him astray when he left his mommy and daddy for the big city life. I could see one of those brothers helping in some way that’s obstruction.

In any event this isn’t going to trial unless it’s JB&M or Josh overruling the lawyers’ advice. It’s federal court folks, verdicts must be unanimous. A jury with 12 members will necessarily have some women and some moms — I don’t see that demographic being like CP eh but the hash values on the images don’t match so maybe there’s spoliation of evidence blah blah. Some # of jurors vote guilty on CP bc it’s so visceral. All you need is 1 juror voting guilty and there goes Josh’s acquittal - then you’re looking at a mistrial and retrial or a plea deal after day after day of making headlines for the trial (granted the plea deal on the back end may not be bad bc USAO showed they couldn’t get a conviction but given that he’s on supervised release until trial lord knows what new evidence he gives them if he scores a phone/internet in the next 2-3 mos).

 

  • Useful 7

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