Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

Josh & Anna Smuggar: A Series of Unfortunate Events


  • Start Topic

Recommended Posts

On 6/9/2021 at 10:06 AM, GeeGolly said:

Postponements can happen on either side, as well as with the judge, but defendants also have a right to a speedy trial. I can see Josh insisting his side not postpone, if he thinks he can get off. I doubt he's enjoying his living situation. On the other hand if Josh knows he'll be found guilty I'm sure his lawyers will use any means possible to postpone, postpone and postpone some more.

I think Josh’s residence in delusionville is gonna prevent him from thinking he could actually do time.   He probably thinks he will be handed over to his father 

  • Useful 1
  • Love 10
5 hours ago, GeeGolly said:

The charges against Josh are bad enough. The Crystal Ball chick doesn't need to add to it with more speculation. I always thought she was an obsessed attention seeking hater. Now I thinks she's scum.

All the more reason why Amy's apparent "friendship" with this woman is so ill-advised and gross.  

  • Love 10
1 minute ago, CouchTater said:

All the more reason why Amy's apparent "friendship" with this woman is so ill-advised and gross.  

I have a sneaking suspicion Amy and D.U.I. Dill are in a lot of financial trouble. I think Amy is willing to dish to any media outlet she can to get attention, money and exposure for her business.

  • Useful 7
  • Love 12
(edited)
19 minutes ago, BitterApple said:

I have a sneaking suspicion Amy and D.U.I. Dill are in a lot of financial trouble. I think Amy is willing to dish to any media outlet she can to get attention, money and exposure for her business.

Yeah I think you're probably right. Who knows how profitable her store is, but I can't help but think them launching whatever-the-hell-Wellingtons-is-trying-to-be on the cusp of a pandemic that has been absolutely brutal for the restaurant industry has probably not aided their bank accounts. 

Edited by Zella
  • Useful 1
  • Love 15
(edited)

By posting about the water park trip all WOACB doing is subjecting the girls to speculation as to whether or not Josh did something to them during the trip and they don't need that. WOACB doesn't care, though, the more speculation the more clicks she gets.  She's desperate to keep content on Josh coming and the family has been tight lipped so she's becoming even more desperate that usual.

 

I can't wait for Amy and WOACB to have an inevitable falling-out. it will be a shit show.

Edited by Gigi43
  • Useful 1
  • Love 19
Quote

Yeah I think you're probably right. Who knows how profitable her store is, but I can't help but think them launching whatever-the-hell-Wellingtons-is-trying-to-be on the cusp of a pandemic that has been absolutely brutal for the restaurant industry has probably not aided their bank accounts. 

I'm shocked they are both still in business. PPP laons, maybe?

  • Love 8
2 hours ago, JoanArc said:

Hope springs eternal.

 

I think it will be very telling if Anna skips her baby every other year schedule and goes straight to getting pregnant again before Josh goes in the big house.

I don’t think she’s quite reached the point of thinking ahead to “when Josh goes to prison”. I think she, Josh and Michelle are still clinging to the fantasy that Josh will be acquitted or, at the very worst, given a very mild slap on the wrist. Jim Bob may have a more realistic grasp of the situation but if so, he may be encouraging the others in their delusions because he’s too prideful to admit that for once Daddy can’t magically fix everything.

I agree that by the time the baby arrives, Anna will have faced the facts and will be hellbent on getting knocked up before Josh goes away.

  • Love 4
1 hour ago, Albanyguy said:

Jim Bob may have a more realistic grasp of the situation

 I don’t think so. This is the man who basically got away with everything, just like Josh did. I think Josh got his ego from the same source Jim Bob did. He’s been able to bully, bullshit, and bribe his way through life this far. That kind of thing just doesn’t start until you hit a brick wall of consequences. And not even then.

  • Useful 2
  • Love 9

Jana and JD didn't seem particularly close until after the Josh scandals broke. Growing up JD didn't seem particularly close to any of his siblings, and certainly not his sisters. He had some misogynistic views probably picked up in a cult. He seems to have grown up a lot and I think he's not the same person. 

Topic: I think the trial will start when it's scheduled. 

  • Useful 2
  • Love 7
On 6/9/2021 at 10:06 AM, GeeGolly said:

Postponements can happen on either side, as well as with the judge, but defendants also have a right to a speedy trial. I can see Josh insisting his side not postpone, if he thinks he can get off. I doubt he's enjoying his living situation. On the other hand if Josh knows he'll be found guilty I'm sure his lawyers will use any means possible to postpone, postpone and postpone some more.

Defendants have the right to a speedy trial, however even under normal conditions there are lots of valid reasons the prosecution can get a postponement granted without unreasonably treading over a defendant's rights to due process.   The parameters of what exactly a speedy trial is are definitely expanded exponentially due to Covid.   He's also not in custody, which would make his press for a speedy trial much more meaningful.

On 6/8/2021 at 7:07 PM, Hockey Addict said:

In the world they come from fertility is status it seems. She has bigger issues to focus on but I think she still believes he will come home without a doubt. Unless she was under a different name she was not at the zoom for the bond hearing correct?

Absolutely no reason she couldn't have been present on the Zoom without being onscreen, either in the same room with someone else who did visibly sit in, or sitting in without the video screen up.   

  • Useful 1
  • Love 6

Can someone tell me what our favorite felon (or alleged felon I should say) has been up to? Any court hearings since his bond hearing that made him Mrs. Reber's problem? Is trial set or any other pre trial court dates? Has Anna been visiting? Have they brought the kids?

I basically haven't seen anything since the bond hearing so I'm curious where this is at. 

  • Love 4
25 minutes ago, cereality said:

Can someone tell me what our favorite felon (or alleged felon I should say) has been up to? Any court hearings since his bond hearing that made him Mrs. Reber's problem? Is trial set or any other pre trial court dates? Has Anna been visiting? Have they brought the kids?

I basically haven't seen anything since the bond hearing so I'm curious where this is at. 

There’s this but I’m not sure what it means.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thesun.co.uk/tv/15271288/josh-duggar-child-porn-case-protect-identities-child-witnesses/amp/

 

  • Useful 2
1 minute ago, emmawoodhouse said:

It protects any minor victims/witnesses from being outed. The order further states that only Smuggar and his legal team can discuss matters. He is not to discuss the case with ANYONE, including Anna and his human ATM, Boob.

But ARE there any minor victims? I thought he was accused only of looking at images online.

  • Love 1
5 minutes ago, madpsych78 said:

Assuming that Josh did not personally know the victims, how much could he really talk about them that would run the risk of outing them? I DO get protecting any possible witnesses, however, who Josh is more likely to personally know.

We'll never know who they're protecting, other than that they are minors. For all we know, some of the older M kids may have been questioned in some capacity. I hope not, but who else is there? 

  • Love 2
(edited)

It's The Sun, so not a vanguard of journalistic integrity, but it seemed to put more emphasis on the idea of child witnesses versus victims. And the phrasing quoted referred to “avoid information that identifies or could be used to identify a child victim or witness.” 

Just based on what I have heard/read about the videos he was downloading, it's possible the victims in them have been ID'd--I am trying to avoid more info than I have to because just reading the descriptions really profoundly disturbed me--but I think considering there are so many children in his home and on the property, it very well could be they're just focusing on child witnesses who have been interviewed as part of the investigation simply because they live on the property. But that's just an armchair guess.  

My main point is I wouldn't necessarily read witness as synonymous with victim, though of course sadly that can be the case.

Edited by Zella
  • Useful 7
  • Love 4

It's also possible that a minor witness was:

1. Physically at the car lot on the day(s) in question, thus able to verify that Josh was there.

2. Physically at or somehow involved in the car/motorcycle accident that the prosecution is using to argue that Josh was at the car lot at the time in question.

I can easily see the parents of this minor witness wanting to keep this kid's name completely out of the media/sealed in court documents, and requesting that the court/attorneys do so - especially if the kid isn't a Duggar. 

  • Useful 9
  • Love 3
14 hours ago, emmawoodhouse said:

I saw the court order earlier today. The Sun is reporting it accurately. I just can't think of any other minor witnesses that would be relevant here besides his kids. 

 

I suspect there was an underage kid at the car lot, being it working, visiting, or maybe with a parent who was actually shopping at the car lot and can put him there on the day of the DLs. 

 

  • Useful 7
4 hours ago, GeeGolly said:

I think the terms victims and witnesses are 'either/or', meaning I don't think there are any witnesses. I'm guessing the order means only that select few can see the videos and the rest is legalese that is always included with these types of agreements.

This is pretty much what Emily D. Baker said. It's boilerplate language for basically any protective order.

  • Useful 3
  • Love 6
(edited)
16 hours ago, Zella said:

It's The Sun, so not a vanguard of journalistic integrity, but it seemed to put more emphasis on the idea of child witnesses versus victims. And the phrasing quoted referred to “avoid information that identifies or could be used to identify a child victim or witness.” 

Just based on what I have heard/read about the videos he was downloading, it's possible the victims in them have been ID'd--I am trying to avoid more info than I have to because just reading the descriptions really profoundly disturbed me--but I think considering there are so many children in his home and on the property, it very well could be they're just focusing on child witnesses who have been interviewed as part of the investigation simply because they live on the property. But that's just an armchair guess.  

My main point is I wouldn't necessarily read witness as synonymous with victim, though of course sadly that can be the case.

There are some known victims (through NCMEC) who show up and testify in cases where their images were downloaded.  It could refer to that.  Seeing the country that one video came from, I don't think that's the case..  There are instances where the perp has to pay the victim restitution for downloading their images.  

It's strange language.  The wording about not telling anyone in their family in a section about keeping minor's identities secret is interesting.  They went into a lot of detail about constraints of information relating to minors for there not to be victims in the case.  Of course, I have NO evidence of that.  Just saying that's super strange language.

Of course, had Jim bob done the right thing, the records regarding Josh's abuse of his sisters would have similarly been protected.  

 

Edited by hathorlive
  • Useful 10
1 hour ago, hathorlive said:

There are some known victims (through NCMEC) who show up and testify in cases where their images were downloaded.  It could refer to that.  Seeing the country that one video came from, I don't think that's the case..  There are instances where the perp has to pay the victim restitution for downloading their images.  

It's strange language.  The wording about not telling anyone in their family in a section about keeping minor's identities secret is interesting.  They went into a lot of detail about constraints of information relating to minors for there not to be victims in the case.  Of course, I have NO evidence of that.  Just saying that's super strange language.

Of course, had Jim bob done the right thing, the records regarding Josh's abuse of his sisters would have similarly been protected.  

 

Very interesting--thank you! 

  • Love 1
(edited)
45 minutes ago, madpsych78 said:

Holy crap, Michael is taking after Boob in the eyebrow department!

Second of all, it looks like he is at a golf course. There are golf bags in the back. But I'm not understanding what exactly he got to eat, it doesn't seem like much. 

They're at Top Golf. Famous for the donuts.

I forgot his birthday was today. My birthday is four days after his and four days before Anna's. 😁

Edited by emmawoodhouse
  • Useful 6
20 minutes ago, Gigi43 said:

What's with the syringes? Are they "flavor injectors " for whatever the food balls are? It looks like a Duggar attempt of a half assed pandemic themed party. 

 

But Happy Birthday to Michael. I feel really bad for the kids having to live in Josh's shit storms. 

Yes, they're jelly injectors for the donuts. 

Would they allow Smuggar to be there? 

  • Useful 2
  • Love 7
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...