Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
maraleia

Josh & Anna Smuggar: A Series of Unfortunate Events

Recommended Posts


1 hour ago, xtwheeler said:

 

Try to imagine saying, under penalty of perjury, "nah, I'm not bothered by looking a CSA videos, even the ones the arresting officer said were in the top 5 of worst he's ever seen." 

Jurors do not get a choice about which cases they serve. It is going to be presumed the photos will gross everyone out, but he's entitled to a jury of his peers. During voir dire most jurors would say they find it sickening and can't stand to see this material. The judge will then inquire with the jurors if, even given being a victim of SA they think they could judge on the evidence. The lawyers will also have asked about personal experience with that in an initial questionnaire. Judges bend over backwards to elicit a "yeah I could be fair" from jurors. I don't think that in 20+ years of litigation that attempt to get bounced ever work (as a for cause dismissal, not one of the lawyers' preemptory exclusions). The lawyers will bounce someone with a personal history if they can, but you only get so many preemptory challenges. 

Think about what the jurors had to see in the OJ Simpson trial, or Casey Anthony, or Scott Peterson. They're horrific images. But you don't get to say "I'm disturbed by images of decapitated homicide victims, or decomposing bodies of children" because of course everyone is. The evaluation is only "can you be fair in deciding guilt" not whether or not you share the same revulsion at such this, as 99.99% of all humans do. 

In these cases judges are extra motivated not to let people off of jury duty because they think the topic is gross--if they did, they'd never seat a jury. Also, you be surprised at how reluctant people are to say "no, I can't be fair" because we all like to think we could fair. It's a weird aspect of trial science. People have a weird ego thing that makes them reluctant to do that. Even if you say you can't be fair, usually the judge will want to know your personal reason for saying that, and guiding potential jurors into saying, "yeah, my experience sucked, but I guess I can be fair."

Imagine if we let all jurors who have been raped or sexually assaulted or molested, or know someone who has off any cases on those topics. You've just eliminated the 1/3 women who have been raped, plus the 10% of people who have been molested in childhood. Now imagine excluding everyone who has a personal connection to anyone who has suffered that. Now you've eliminated virtually 100% of your jury pool. 

TL;DR: Jurors do not get excused for feeling "oh, that's icky." Being excused for cause (like "I can't be fair") is exceedingly rare in my experience. 

I was chosen for a jury about 2 years ago. It was a child rape case. I didn’t expect to be chosen, because I have experience working as a rape crisis counselor, amongst many other similar jobs. But I was still chosen, and despite thinking I would almost always believe the victim, in this case the prosecution simply did not make their case. Our verdict was unanimously for the defense. Being on a jury is a big responsibility, and most of us can handle it and be impartial when the time comes.

  • Like 22
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
23 hours ago, mittsigirl said:

When you see that there are 19 kids in this family, and if you look up and find the percentages of any of them being LGBTQ, really heavy in to porn, etc., then I just have to think that there are more secrets with the kids than just with Josh being so extremely sick. Though he may be the sickest, I think that there must be a few more that have much different thoughts than their parents want them to have. I just can't see having 19 kids and they all turn out to be the way their parents want them to be. Just my opinion.

I have always thought this and I agree

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, hathorlive said:

I'm amazed at how many people try to get out of jury duty.  You don't get to complain about the verdict in the OJ case if you've worked hard to not serve. It's a huge responsibility and an honor that any defendant can be heard and given equal time in our system of justice.  

I'm always surprised how often some people are called. I've only been called once and I had to decline. I had a 4 week old nursing baby at home which was an exemption listed on the sheet. But since my youngest is now 18 that tells you how long it's been.  But then hear people talking about how they've been called yet again (and are trying to get out of it).  I certainly would go if called again. To be honest I would probably whine about it a little just because I don't like my routine disrupted. I'm a little set in my ways LOL. But I do believe it's really a critical function so I'd do it.           

  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, 3girlsforus said:

I'm always surprised how often some people are called. I've only been called once and I had to decline. I had a 4 week old nursing baby at home which was an exemption listed on the sheet. But since my youngest is now 18 that tells you how long it's been.  But then hear people talking about how they've been called yet again (and are trying to get out of it).  I certainly would go if called again. To be honest I would probably whine about it a little just because I don't like my routine disrupted. I'm a little set in my ways LOL. But I do believe it's really a critical function so I'd do it.           

I literally get called every 4 months.  Sometimes the date comes and goes, with no jury being called to the court house.  Other times I get there and they ask for a bench trial.  And sometimes, they hear what I do for a living and bounce me.   I can count on going to the court house at least twice a year.  And I live in a huge city.

Josh will have a hard time finding a sympathetic jury.  He has been too prominent for his skeevy ways.

  • Like 6
  • Useful 1
  • Surprise 3

Share this post


Link to post

13 minutes ago, 3girlsforus said:

I'm always surprised how often some people are called. I've only been called once and I had to decline. I had a 4 week old nursing baby at home which was an exemption listed on the sheet. But since my youngest is now 18 that tells you how long it's been.  But then hear people talking about how they've been called yet again (and are trying to get out of it).  I certainly would go if called again. To be honest I would probably whine about it a little just because I don't like my routine disrupted. I'm a little set in my ways LOL. But I do believe it's really a critical function so I'd do it.           

I have a feeling everybody is about to be talking a lot about receiving a jury summons as courts reopen and attempt to begin holding jury trials again.  The backlog is unbelievable. 

  • Like 7
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post

It's probably going to be a challenge to find a sympathetic jury for Josh. I'm not sure if this is a problem everywhere, but several years ago in Georgia, they had a huge problem with less 50% of the people showing up for jury duty. The newspaper did multiple articles on it, and it came out that many notices were sent to people who had moved or had died. Of course, many said they never got the notice. Judges starting making an effort to settle the cases. It might be worse now after covid.

  • Like 2
  • Useful 3

Share this post


Link to post

I found that video of the Duggar sister eating the banana on FB. It's not inherently "wrong" in and of itself, but it is creepy in light of who made the video. If it had been anyone else who posted it, it would have not been a big deal. But Josh knows way more about the world and the flesh than most fundies and I wouldn't be surprised if he was aware of the double entendre. 

Honestly, the Ashley Madison scandal is the tamest part of all of Josh's shenagians. Yes, he lied and cheated on Anna, but it was also still legal - with consenting adults who were on the site. Part of me wonders if he was trying to address his addiction to CSAI by channeling it towards adults?

 

 

  • Like 7
  • Useful 3

Share this post


Link to post
56 minutes ago, 3girlsforus said:

I'm always surprised how often some people are called. I've only been called once and I had to decline. I had a 4 week old nursing baby at home which was an exemption listed on the sheet. But since my youngest is now 18 that tells you how long it's been.  But then hear people talking about how they've been called yet again (and are trying to get out of it).  I certainly would go if called again. To be honest I would probably whine about it a little just because I don't like my routine disrupted. I'm a little set in my ways LOL. But I do believe it's really a critical function so I'd do it.           

I was called up when I was not only 9 months pregnant with my son but I didn't even live in the county that called me. My son is not 27 and has jury duty next Monday. He has been called up twice! 

  • Like 2
  • Laugh 4

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, madpsych78 said:

Honestly, the Ashley Madison scandal is the tamest part of all of Josh's shenagians. Yes, he lied and cheated on Anna, but it was also still legal - with consenting adults who were on the site. Part of me wonders if he was trying to address his addiction to CSAI by channeling it towards adults?

 

 

 Don’t forget he basically raped a woman. I think it is more about power and control with him, but he is still a pedophile, too.

 The part of Danica Dillon’s account where his eyes went black was telling...

  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, madpsych78 said:

 

Honestly, the Ashley Madison scandal is the tamest part of all of Josh's shenagians. Yes, he lied and cheated on Anna, but it was also still legal - with consenting adults who were on the site. Part of me wonders if he was trying to address his addiction to CSAI by channeling it towards adults?

 

 

Or he is just a perv who was hoping to enact some sick fantasies with these women? 

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post

55 minutes ago, hathorlive said:

I literally get called every 4 months.  Sometimes the date comes and goes, with no jury being called to the court house.  Other times I get there and they ask for a bench trial.  And sometimes, they hear what I do for a living and bounce me.   I can count on going to the court house at least twice a year.  And I live in a huge city.

Josh will have a hard time finding a sympathetic jury.  He has been too prominent for his skeevy ways.

Does a bench trial happen often? I have never thought that was a very common thing but then again I don't have any legitimate reason for that opinion.  In relation to finding a jury for Josh, would there be any plus for him to choose a bench trial? I know you said he's screwed no matter what but would a bench trial be any better for him? This is assuming he doesn't plea.

  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
39 minutes ago, madpsych78 said:

Honestly, the Ashley Madison scandal is the tamest part of all of Josh's shenagians. Yes, he lied and cheated on Anna, but it was also still legal - with consenting adults who were on the site. Part of me wonders if he was trying to address his addiction to CSAI by channeling it towards adults?

And yet that is the thing that really bothered his parents and brothers the most.  Talk about a screwed up sense of right and wrong...  I will never understand these people.

Edited by 3 is enough
  • Like 19

Share this post


Link to post
On 5/11/2021 at 1:57 PM, 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. 

does anyone remember when jim bob ran for political office he said that pedophiles should get the death penalty...wonder how he feels about that now..........one other thing when the agents showed up they didn't say WHY they were there...so josh asks why are you here did someone download child porn??????  yes josh really said this to the agents 

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
On 5/11/2021 at 2:26 PM, 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.

duggar family friend caleb worked with him....he got arrested for getting a girl pregnant and at the same time they were looking for calebs brother to arrest for doing "something" to some sort of abuse to children

edited to add the girl was under age and the parents filed a  restraining order against him

 

 

 

Edited by sue450 · Reason: spelling and added a sentence
  • Useful 2
  • Surprise 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 5/12/2021 at 4:47 PM, emmawoodhouse said:

Jill's statistic was 2/3 of families. Straight outta Gothard.

exactly this what jill said..now think about the fact that NONE of the local fundy dads would let josh  marry their daughters. duggars got anna from FLORIDA....this is the tip of the iceberg.

    does anyone remember the mini  golf episode...jim bob up against michelles back side trying to help her golf and they start dry humping in front of their kids and THEN  said as they are doing this laughing ha ha you can't do this.....

   remember they follow bill gothard..the word "abuse" does not exist  it is not a big deal in their cult...BUT if you are abused you are to thank the one who did it to you because it made you spiritually stronger

    also PTSD, stress, trauma, depression,  shyness   do not exist, if you suffer from these you are not trusting of god.

    the outside world is evil...if you are a woman and you want to get a job or go to school you will be under Satans influence something terrible will happen (you will be raped or  your child will be murdered).

    women must have sex when ever and how often the husband wants it because the men have no control over themselves....IF the man strays it is the womans  or even the female childrens fault.

    if you leave you will be shunned by family and friends

    now think about this ...Michelle had a somewhat normal; life out in the world  before she married jim bob (the super religion started a couple of years into their marriage)..she went to school was on the   gymnastics team, dated a bunch of guys, wore a bikini when she would mow the front lawn.....so when michelle speaks of how evil and bad the outside world is  it will be that much more believable to anna, and the duggars will do everything and anything to keep her from leaving the bubble

 

 

Edited by sue450 · Reason: spelling and added a sentence
  • Like 1
  • Sad 9

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, 3girlsforus said:

Does a bench trial happen often? I have never thought that was a very common thing but then again I don't have any legitimate reason for that opinion.  In relation to finding a jury for Josh, would there be any plus for him to choose a bench trial? I know you said he's screwed no matter what but would a bench trial be any better for him? This is assuming he doesn't plea.

Bench trials can be advantageous in high-profile cases where the jury pool might be tainted or biased. Judges are usually less emotional when making decisions. But there's a trade-off: you might end up with a hardcore judge who is less sympathetic than a jury. Sometimes it's easier to plant reasonable doubt when you have 12 people as opposed to 1. It really depends on the case, the judge and the potential jury pool.

Edited by IndianPaintbrush
  • Useful 5

Share this post


Link to post

16 minutes ago, IndianPaintbrush said:

Sometimes it's easier to plant reasonable doubt when you have 12 people as opposed to 1. It really depends on the case, the judge and the potential jury pool.

So far, I've heard at least a dozen people online saying "All Josh needs is one Fundie on the jury and he'll walk". And it's useless to point out how unlikely it is that such a thing will happen. People will believe what they want to believe, especially when their only knowledge of jury trials comes from soap operas and old Matlock episodes.

  • Like 13

Share this post


Link to post

Friendly reminder that the discussion of judicial process, criminal procedure & child visitation NOT related to the Duggar family is off topic and belongs in Small Talk. 
 

Further off topic posts will be removed and warnings will be issued. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
32 minutes ago, Albanyguy said:

So far, I've heard at least a dozen people online saying "All Josh needs is one Fundie on the jury and he'll walk". And it's useless to point out how unlikely it is that such a thing will happen. People will believe what they want to believe, especially when their only knowledge of jury trials comes from soap operas and old Matlock episodes.

If Josh does beat the rap, it will be because of a technicality not because one juror is a fundie.  I know when I was on a jury, we took our instructions seriously.  I assume the same in Josh's case.  There is little room for emotion when you hold a person's life in your hands and are given instructions from a judge.  And I dont think I'm an anomaly in the 21st century.   The jurors will take the case seriously and decide if the prosecution met the burden of proof.

  • Like 17

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Tikichick said:

Do you think the visits were a good thing for the kids, in their best interest?    Courts here do not think so, so that is why they bar them when the court has authority.

Obviously a parent who has complete custody and their child is not under the jurisdiction of the court in any way can choose to take their child for visits if they wish, but when the courts have power it's a no go.

I’m taking the answer to Small Talk. That is a great question.

Share this post


Link to post

On Reddit someone posted the side of Josh and Anna’s warehouse, it has at least four windows. 

9745C14C-B119-40A8-92E1-9A3C3F2D7A6A.thumb.jpeg.1af387bd50cd3322207b47b112865060.jpeg
 

 

Edited by FizzyPuff
  • Like 2
  • Useful 5
  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post

Oh, and look - a nice loading dock deck with chairs to lounge on and enjoy the views. 

Although TBH if those windows are in bedrooms, it's less scary to think of the family living in that building.

  • Like 9
  • Laugh 1

Share this post


Link to post

4 hours ago, IndianPaintbrush said:

Bench trials can be advantageous in high-profile cases where the jury pool might be tainted or biased. Judges are usually less emotional when making decisions. But there's a trade-off: you might end up with a hardcore judge who is less sympathetic than a jury. Sometimes it's easier to plant reasonable doubt when you have 12 people as opposed to 1. It really depends on the case, the judge and the potential jury pool.

In my practice I've only conducted... I think 1 bench trial (in 24 years). Jurors are just easier to sway, and as you say, judges are less emotional. There are a few categories of cases where you're not entitled to a jury--in equitable cases (asking for the right to do something or not, like Dec relief actions). The number of jurors varies on civil cases, and jurors also don't have to reach a unanimous verdict, unlike criminal cases. 

I wish people were enthusiastic about jury duty! I would LOVE to serve, but they can't get me out of the box fast enough. I don't subscribe to the "but first, let's bounce all the lawyers" philosophy. 

If the judge determines that Smuggar can't get a fair trial, they could move it to a jurisdiction where he is less well known (they did this in the Scott Peterson case and I want to say the trial of the cops who assaulted Rodney King). It is fascinating to me that you can be a sentient human and not have formed an opinion about cases like that before being impaneled. 

Is Josh/JB a big enough deal in NWA that everybody has heard of them/can't be partial? I don't really have a sense of how well-known they are in real life, as opposed to all of us who know their intimate details! At least we know Derrick won't represent him! 

Given Josh's case is set for July, do you think he'll waive his right to a speedy trial? If he does he'll definitely get violated between now and trial! 

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
19 minutes ago, xtwheeler said:

Is Josh/JB a big enough deal in NWA that everybody has heard of them/can't be partial?

In my personal experience of living here, people usually know who the Duggars are but don't really know a lot about them or have a strong opinion on them. Your average snarker on here knows way more about the Duggars than your average Arkansan and also, in my opinion, way overestimates the family's local popularity.

Usually, when their name has come up in conversations, it's "the people with all the kids," and sometimes also "the people with all the kids whose son molested his sisters."* But the actual NWA Metro area also has a lot of people who are not local and have moved here from other areas. My guess is they would be even less likely to be aware of the Duggars.

I'm sure a jury would have to eliminate some people for knowing the Duggars, but I really don't think it's going to be impossible to seat a jury for him. The NWA Metro area has 1/2 a million people in it, and I'd venture to say most of them don't particularly know or care about the Duggars beyond "the people with all the kids."

*Every now and then, I've heard someone drop a personal anecdote of meeting them or knowing them or someone connected to them, but it's really not as common as you'd assume. 

Edited by Zella
  • Like 14
  • Useful 9

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, madpsych78 said:

I found that video of the Duggar sister eating the banana on FB. It's not inherently "wrong" in and of itself, but it is creepy in light of who made the video. If it had been anyone else who posted it, it would have not been a big deal. But Josh knows way more about the world and the flesh than most fundies and I wouldn't be surprised if he was aware of the double entendre. 

TLC filmed a similar video of the four oldest Duggar girls eating huge dill pickles and the show's producers know damn well what that looked like.

  • Like 13
  • Laugh 2
  • Surprise 1
  • Sad 6

Share this post


Link to post
21 minutes ago, Nysha said:

TLC filmed a similar video of the four oldest Duggar girls eating huge dill pickles and the show's producers know damn well what that looked like.

Are you referring to this picture? It's not from TLC, but it was widely circulated. It came from a Journey to the Heart. 

b7c905560034753acd2b33047c3ac87d.jpg

Edited by emmawoodhouse
  • Like 11
  • Useful 1
  • Surprise 2

Share this post


Link to post

That's the one. For some reason I thought it was a filmed piece. It's still kind of icky.

  • Like 4
  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post

8 hours ago, libgirl2 said:

I was called up when I was not only 9 months pregnant with my son but I didn't even live in the county that called me. My son is not 27 and has jury duty next Monday. He has been called up twice! 

In the county I used to live in in California, a bench warrant was issued if you didn't show up for Jury duty.  I was called for Jury Duty, and all the prospective jurors had to wait in the jury room because the Judge was using the courtroom to address all the people they had arrested for Jury Duty no-show.  You are given a chance to defer your service to a time that is better for you.  You just have to return the summons and tell them what date you want to be called.  Really no excuses for not showing up.  "I never received the summons" doesn't fly.

  • Like 5
  • Useful 4
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post

There's an interesting recap of someone's encounter with the Duggar kids a few years back here. Some tidbits: Josh was an ignorant, cocky ass, and Joseph could barely write his own name.

  • Like 8
  • Useful 5
  • Sad 11

Share this post


Link to post

So, pretty much everybody has known that Josh has issues, major issues, is a creep, acts strangely around young girls. Yet they closed their eyes to it.

Great job, Meeeeechelle and Jim Blob! You must be so proud

  • Like 14
  • Sad 7

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, graefin said:

There's an interesting recap of someone's encounter with the Duggar kids a few years back here. Some tidbits: Josh was an ignorant, cocky ass, and Joseph could barely write his own name.

I wonder how JD got out of this?

And I wonder whose idea this was if JB (at least) was not there. All of the older girls attended, so no sister-moms at home. If it wasn't JB's idea, then it may have been Josh's.  

 

  • Like 1
  • Surprise 1

Share this post


Link to post

14 hours ago, graefin said:

There's an interesting recap of someone's encounter with the Duggar kids a few years back here. Some tidbits: Josh was an ignorant, cocky ass, and Joseph could barely write his own name.

That "signature" is so sad. Poor kid probably has a learning disability which will never be diagnosed or get any help. 

Topic? I wonder if they will cop a plea deal for Josh or let it go to trial. 

  • Like 8
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
27 minutes ago, Crochetlady said:

That "signature" is so sad. Poor kid probably has a learning disability which will never be diagnosed or get any help. 

Topic? I wonder if they will cop a plea deal for Josh or let it go to trial. 

It almost looks like he wrote "Josepp." That last letter doesn't look like an "H" at all. I've known some guys with atrocious handwriting, but that looked like the work of a small child just learning to write. He most definitely has an undiagnosed learning disability. Even Joy did better.

  • Like 5
  • Sad 4

Share this post


Link to post
17 minutes ago, BitterApple said:

 Even Joy did better.

well she had less letters to print

  • Laugh 18

Share this post


Link to post
24 minutes ago, BitterApple said:

It almost looks like he wrote "Josepp." That last letter doesn't look like an "H" at all. I've known some guys with atrocious handwriting, but that looked like the work of a small child just learning to write. He most definitely has an undiagnosed learning disability. Even Joy did better.

There are other pictures of his signature which is much clearer, which he wrote quickly. I think it was just a one off situation, maybe a broken pen or something.

 That’s said not disputing that he is undereducated and kept willfully dumb. 

  • Like 12
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
19 hours ago, Nysha said:

That's the one. For some reason I thought it was a filmed piece. It's still kind of icky.

There was a filmed piece of Josh and Anna sharing a pickle I’m sure that was on 19 kids and counting. 

  • Like 1
  • Surprise 3

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, FizzyPuff said:

There was a filmed piece of Josh and Anna sharing a pickle I’m sure that was on 19 kids and counting. 

Gross. And combined with Smuggar declaring Anna a "champion swallower" when prenatal vitamins made her gag, pretty sick of him.

  • Like 3
  • Surprise 2
  • Sad 10

Share this post


Link to post

On 5/14/2021 at 9:52 AM, lilwhitelion said:

The guy who posted on Reddit that ran in the same circles as the Duggars had something interesting to say about Anna's behavior after Josh got out of Jesus jail.  He said that he was at Fort Rock Family Camp the same time that the Duggars were there, including Josh and Anna.  Josh was jovial and joking.  The guy posting said he went fishing early one morning at the pond.  Anna was there, walking around and around the pond, sobbing.  I think he said she circled the pond about fifteen times, crying the whole time.  I don't know how she can keep sweet for the sake of her children.  It must be exhausting.

Well when you remove the crazy Gothard stuff, and the rest of her in-laws and families religious teachings, examples and rules, Anna is just as human at the rest of us are. She must be very close to breaking down, and once she has that baby and her hormones are going crazy, I hope she has somebody close to her to understand how she is feeling and just be there to listen while she cries and vents and not start judging her. I really hope she does.

  • Like 14
  • Sad 9

Share this post


Link to post

I finally got around to listening to the podcast by the guy who grew up around the Duggars and was friends with Josh. I'm on the 3rd episode and couple of things:

1. He confirms that Josh has known for years that he could use linux to bypass filters.

2. He's been using Covenant Eyes for a very long time--Anna was pregnant with Mackynzie when the friend went to Josh for help because he'd been struggling with porn and Josh was known for having "overcome" his "addiction." So when Ashley Madison came out, the "porn addiction" excuse had been a known issue that they were already taking measures to deal with. Measures that didn't work but they apparently kept using.

  • Like 3
  • Useful 11

Share this post


Link to post

After hearing Justin's story, it's apparent that Smuggar has partitioned his computers for years. Easy enough not to surf porn while on the IPhone. And I think he continued to seek adult porn even while indulging in the viewing of CSA. All on the Linux side of his trusty laptop or work desktop.

  • Like 6
  • Useful 8

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, emmawoodhouse said:

After hearing Justin's story, it's apparent that Smuggar has partitioned his computers for years. Easy enough not to surf porn while on the IPhone. And I think he continued to seek adult porn even while indulging in the viewing of CSA. All on the Linux side of his trusty laptop or work desktop.

I'm really curious about the porn stuff surrounding Ashley Madison. When the story broke, Josh's first statement referenced porn addiction. I had assumed that was his excuse for it all, and that's when the monitoring started. But apparently she (thought she) had always been monitoring his internet use. So, did she and everyone else believe that porn was the gateway to AM? Did she think that Covenant Eyes somehow missed something, or did she or anyone else realize Josh was using linux to bypass it? Either way, why continue using Covenant Eyes? Or is it that they knew the filter wasn't the problem because they "knew" all along that "porn addiction" was Josh's attempt to excuse himself and garner some sympathy?

None of this is to blame Anna for any of this..she's a terrible human being but she's not responsible for Josh's actions. But I do take issue with her hypocrisy and arrogance in constantly telling the world how wonderful her husband.

  • Like 8
  • Useful 3

Share this post


Link to post

I think that Anna was clueless regarding the Linux partitioning. She believed that Covenant Eyes was doing its job. I think she was blindsided.... again.

  • Like 23
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post

I don't think logical problem-solving is a strong skillset for any of these people.

My guess is that in their social circle, porn is the most socially acceptable thing to blame--it certainly seems like that is what people in their church believed happened instead of the actual molestations--and it's become almost an instinctive reaction with them, especially when it comes to Josh. It was porn! All porn's fault! Not Josh's fault, never.

You can even see it in Jessa's response to his arrest. I do think she was likely the only one who wrote her statement, and it was the only one that I recall that repeated the family's obvious beliefs on porn--it's all equally bad and to blame. 

In any event, they don't parse through how to avoid repeating the problem in any way that is reasonable or measured, and they also don't force Josh to be responsible for his own choices, so you get the default of them blaming porn but them also rather ineptly trying to keep him away from it. 

My guess is also that Josh probably wanted to protect some of the slyer ways he got around their methods, so the only way they found out that he was partioning the hard drive is literally because it came out in court. It wouldn't surprise me if he admitted to using other devices she didn't have access to (like a burner phone or a a work computer) to look at porn during the Ashley Madison fallout, so that way, Covenant Eyes' effectiveness was never in question. 

  • Like 16

Share this post


Link to post

There was an early episode of ___ & Counting when Josh was engaged to Anna and set out to drive from his home to Anna's home with Jana, Jill, Jessa and Jinger along, for wedding prep help.  (Those poor girls out on the road with Josh alone.)  During their travel to FL, the show shows some of the Duggar girls eating pickles in the car.  It is a different time than the picture that was shown above.  

I believe Josh and the Duggar girls stayed a week (Josh stayed in the little camper outside of Anna's parents home) and helped make the bridesmaid dresses and other stuff.  On the last evening they were there, Anna said she had wanted to take them all out to dinner but then she felt ill and so Josh and his sisters went and ate at an Italian place without her.  I've always wondered if she learned some news that day regarding Josh and just needed time to process. 

  • Like 3
  • Useful 5
  • Sad 1

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