Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search
Log-in Changes With Upcoming Upgrade

Josh & Anna Smuggar: A Series of Unfortunate Events

maraleia

By maraleia
in Counting On

  • Start Topic

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 39.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • GeeGolly

    1526

  • Churchhoney

    1075

  • JoanArc

    1061

  • Sew Sumi

    1049

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

hoosier80
hoosier80

New show title: 10 to 20 Years and Counting 

MargeGunderson
MargeGunderson

Someone on Reddit just described Josh’s face as a glistening glazed ham. I am considering divorcing my husband and marrying that poster. 

doodlebug
doodlebug

Well, for many of us, it's the difference between 'imperfect' and 'non-PC' and being a criminal.  Josh is a child molester and his parents actively intervened in his situation to avoid him being punis

Posted Images

andromeda331

andromeda331

19 minutes ago, Cinnabon said:

Who thinks the Rebers will have no problem breaking the rules? I’m sure their grandchild has been to visit. 
also, what kind of “counsel” could 25 (?) year old Dan Keller offer Josh or Anna????

I'm sure Josh has been breaking the rules and I really don't trust the Rebers to tell the courts. Their part of the same cult as the Duggars. 

  • Useful 1
  • Love 13
Temperance

Temperance

(edited)
1 hour ago, Cinnabon said:

Who thinks the Rebers will have no problem breaking the rules? I’m sure their grandchild has been to visit. 
also, what kind of “counsel” could 25 (?) year old Dan Keller offer Josh or Anna????

I'm not aware of any grandchildren for the Rebers. The Rebers have 2 kids, their son who got married in February and their daughter who is engaged. 

Also it was David Keller who's counseling Josh or Anna, not Daniel. Daniel is in his 30s and ex-fundie.

Edited by Temperance
  • Useful 4
  • Love 5
Albanyguy

Albanyguy

38 minutes ago, andromeda331 said:

I'm sure Josh has been breaking the rules and I really don't trust the Rebers to tell the courts. Their part of the same cult as the Duggars. 

I have no doubt that Josh is thoroughly enjoying his "vacation" at the Rebers. He doesn't have to go through the motions of working at the car lot and his children aren't constantly underfoot. He can do as he pleases, knowing that the Rebers aren't going to tattle on him. I'm sure that poor Mrs. Reber is waiting on him hand and foot, making his bed and picking his wet towels up off the bathroom floor. When Anna visits, I'm sure she comes bearing shopping bags loaded with candy bars, potato chips and ice cream. And I strongly suspect that he's managed to get his hands on Internet access. 

Of course, anyone with half a gnat's brain would be living in a state of abject terror right now, dreading the certain prospect of conviction and prison. But I think that Josh is living in a state of complete denial, convincing himself that he'll be acquitted or at least let off with a slap on the wrist.

  • Useful 4
  • Love 16
JoanArc

JoanArc

51 minutes ago, Albanyguy said:

I have no doubt that Josh is thoroughly enjoying his "vacation" at the Rebers. He doesn't have to go through the motions of working at the car lot and his children aren't constantly underfoot. He can do as he pleases, knowing that the Rebers aren't going to tattle on him. I'm sure that poor Mrs. Reber is waiting on him hand and foot, making his bed and picking his wet towels up off the bathroom floor. When Anna visits, I'm sure she comes bearing shopping bags loaded with candy bars, potato chips and ice cream. And I strongly suspect that he's managed to get his hands on Internet access. 

Of course, anyone with half a gnat's brain would be living in a state of abject terror right now, dreading the certain prospect of conviction and prison. But I think that Josh is living in a state of complete denial, convincing himself that he'll be acquitted or at least let off with a slap on the wrist.

He also doesn’t have to pretend to love Anna 24/7.  I’m sure he can take it for a few hours. It’s probably a relief to him to be left alone. I wouldn’t be surprised if she has slipped him a cell phone on the sly.

  • Love 3
JoanArc

JoanArc

32 minutes ago, DXD526 said:

As per the above article, the images Smuggs was arrested for "reportedly depicted children between 18 months and 12 years of age". 

Eighteen months?? This creep just keeps getting revealed to be more of a miscreant with each update. I hope he gets the 40-year max. Sicko. 

 Based on some of the file names that have been released to the public, at least some of these videos were of mothers, or at least women, doing the sexual abuse to children. How Anna can stick around with that knowledge I do not know.

Cinnabon

Cinnabon

1 hour ago, dargosmydaddy said:

He'll be 23 at the end of the month.

And what kind of “counsel” could a sheltered 23-year old kid offer Josh?

43 minutes ago, DXD526 said:

As per the above article, the images Smuggs was arrested for "reportedly depicted children between 18 months and 12 years of age". 

Eighteen months?? This creep just keeps getting revealed to be more of a miscreant with each update. I hope he gets the 40-year max. Sicko. 

Yes, it’s one of the worst I’ve ever heard about 🥲 he is deplorable and Anna and all of his family (the adults) should be aware of exactly what he was watching.

  • Love 4
Hpmec

Hpmec

1 hour ago, JoanArc said:

 Based on some of the file names that have been released to the public, at least some of these videos were of mothers, or at least women, doing the sexual abuse to children. How Anna can stick around with that knowledge I do not know.

I doubt Anna has any clue about what specifically Josh was looking at and I don't think she wants to know. She's floating along in the state of Denial, just figuring it ish't that bad or it's all a mistake and he'll be home as soon as he's found not guilty. I'm wondering if his attorneys will talk him into taking a plea deal rather than have all of the horrific details of his child porn viewing come out in court. He's screwed either way. 

  • Useful 2
  • Love 8
Cinnabon

Cinnabon

20 minutes ago, Hpmec said:

I doubt Anna has any clue about what specifically Josh was looking at and I don't think she wants to know. She's floating along in the state of Denial, just figuring it ish't that bad or it's all a mistake and he'll be home as soon as he's found not guilty. I'm wondering if his attorneys will talk him into taking a plea deal rather than have all of the horrific details of his child porn viewing come out in court. He's screwed either way. 

She needs to know the details so she can protect her children.

  • Love 13
emmawoodhouse

emmawoodhouse

22 minutes ago, Hpmec said:

I doubt Anna has any clue about what specifically Josh was looking at and I don't think she wants to know. She's floating along in the state of Denial, just figuring it ish't that bad or it's all a mistake and he'll be home as soon as he's found not guilty. I'm wondering if his attorneys will talk him into taking a plea deal rather than have all of the horrific details of his child porn viewing come out in court. He's screwed either way. 

But he's INNOCENT!!!!!111 Ex con employee did it! Or Josiah! 

  • Love 1
GeeGolly

GeeGolly

(edited)

Would the Rebers face any punishment from the court if it was found out they weren't reporting Josh for any misdeeds?

I'll never understand why the judge thinks its okay for Josh to be around his kids. I would have thought they would have at least ordered an evaluation to make sure they weren't harmed by Josh before that was allowed.

Edited by GeeGolly
  • Love 17
Zella

Zella

(edited)
8 hours ago, GeeGolly said:

Would the Rebers face any punishment from the court if it was found out they weren't reporting Josh for any misdeeds?

I am pretty sure they would face charges if they did that. I can't find anything definitive, but IIRC, some of our lawyers on the board were saying if they were intentionally not reporting him, they would be in trouble (as opposed to him violating rules without their knowledge). 

Edited by Zella
  • Useful 1
  • Love 7
Churchhoney

Churchhoney

14 hours ago, Cinnabon said:

Who thinks the Rebers will have no problem breaking the rules? I’m sure their grandchild has been to visit. 
also, what kind of “counsel” could 25 (?) year old Dan Keller offer Josh or Anna????

Well, they're in a church universe where teenage boys regularly preach long sermons .... all over the place......I think the idea behind that is probably that a young MAN who's right with Christ will simply have God speaking through him, whenever he turns that spigot on. And by young man, they often seem to mean a boy of 14 onward. So....David Keller qualifies as a grand old man, on that scheme. 

  • Useful 4
  • LOL 1
  • Love 4
Churchhoney

Churchhoney

12 hours ago, BigBingerBro said:

Josh Duggar Child Pornography Trial Delay Buys Star Time, But How Long Could He Go To Prison For?

This "could get 40 years" bullshit that's making the rounds makes me sick. It would take very minimal research to know that that's dead wrong, based on both the federal sentencing guidelines and pretty literally all the precedent here. And I wouldn't be surprised if these "reporters" actually know this but use the 40 years nonsense so they can get their "readers" excited now and outraged later when he gets the totally expected sentence of somewhere between 6 and 11 years. 

 

  • Love 24
merylinkid

merylinkid

10 hours ago, Cinnabon said:

She needs to know the details so she can protect her children.

She doesn't WANT to know the details.   Because then she would have to acknowledge she married a sick fuck, instead of someone who "sinned."   If she cared one whit about protecting her kids she would have taken the kids and left him after the LAST scandal.

  • Love 20
BigBingerBro

BigBingerBro

The YouTube lawyer lady Emily said that the court was very conflicted about letting him see his children, but as long as he wasn't living with them and as long as Anna was present, they didn't think he posed a threat.  Also, had they thought he posed a threat to them from the beginning, he would have been arrested the day of the raid on the car lot.   She said that the kids had not been forensically examinded, but that they probably would be.  There was some concern though that Anna may not allow it.

  • Useful 9
  • Love 1
GeeGolly

GeeGolly

33 minutes ago, BigBingerBro said:

The YouTube lawyer lady Emily said that the court was very conflicted about letting him see his children, but as long as he wasn't living with them and as long as Anna was present, they didn't think he posed a threat.  Also, had they thought he posed a threat to them from the beginning, he would have been arrested the day of the raid on the car lot.   She said that the kids had not been forensically examinded, but that they probably would be.  There was some concern though that Anna may not allow it.

That's interesting. I wonder what this Emily person thinks they based the risk, or lack thereof, on? How could they possibly know what Josh was doing in his home?

  • Love 4
BigBingerBro

BigBingerBro

1 minute ago, GeeGolly said:

That's interesting. I wonder what this Emily person thinks they based the risk, or lack thereof, on? How could they possibly know what Josh was doing in his home?

I don't know but that was the defense's big argument is that he "stayed out of trouble" since the raid, but yeah how do they know what goes on behind doors?? (not saying he did anything to anyone in his home).  Therefore, keeping him from living with his kids was the best solution I guess.

  • Useful 1
  • Love 3
BigBingerBro

BigBingerBro

17 minutes ago, ginger90 said:

I have to wonder what “from the beginning “ means here.

 

Maybe a poor choice of words.  What I meant was that if they felt he was a danger to his family or others at the time of the raid, they would have arrested him then and there.  They didn't feel he was a risk to anyone at that time.  (why, I can't say!)

  • Useful 1
  • Love 1
Zella

Zella

42 minutes ago, GeeGolly said:

That's interesting. I wonder what this Emily person thinks they based the risk, or lack thereof, on? How could they possibly know what Josh was doing in his home?

I wonder if she sat in on the Zoom hearing? The Redditor law student who did listed the judge's rather extended reasoning in which she listed a lot of concerns about releasing Josh but ultimately felt the US attorney had not met burden of proof in general for keeping him in jail. 

 

  • Useful 9
  • Love 2
galaxygirl76

galaxygirl76

14 hours ago, Cinnabon said:

And what kind of “counsel” could a sheltered 23-year old kid offer Josh?

Yes, it’s one of the worst I’ve ever heard about 🥲 he is deplorable and Anna and all of his family (the adults) should be aware of exactly what he was watching.

Like Josh is going to listen to anyone except for potentially Daddy since he's the one with the $$

3 hours ago, merylinkid said:

She doesn't WANT to know the details.   Because then she would have to acknowledge she married a sick fuck, instead of someone who "sinned."   If she cared one whit about protecting her kids she would have taken the kids and left him after the LAST scandal.

I feel Anna is gone full 'lalala can't hear you' .

  • Love 8
Cinnabon

Cinnabon

6 hours ago, Churchhoney said:

Well, they're in a church universe where teenage boys regularly preach long sermons .... all over the place......I think the idea behind that is probably that a young MAN who's right with Christ will simply have God speaking through him, whenever he turns that spigot on. And by young man, they often seem to mean a boy of 14 onward. So....David Keller qualifies as a grand old man, on that scheme. 

Well, I’m sure David turned Josh right around, then! 🤣

  • LOL 9
Scarlett45

Scarlett45

Mod Announcement:

 

Several posts have been removed that were close to the line regarding graphic details of the charges against Josh.

Reminder-

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. 

 

 

  • Love 16
BigBingerBro

BigBingerBro

5 minutes ago, sue450 said:

very ironic that when  joshs dad jim bob was running for office one of his platforms was that pedophiles  should get capitol punishment (death sentence)  

And (correct me if I'm wrong) he was running for office around the same time Josh had admitted to the inappropriate touching

  • Love 6
Bayarea4

Bayarea4

59 minutes ago, BigBingerBro said:

Anna Duggar Reportedly Would Consider Divorce From Husband Josh Amid Child Pornography Case

I can see how Jim Bob might be in favor of this (on the down low, of course). If Anna and Josh divorced, she might then become eligible for welfare, food stamps and Medicaid for herself and the children and thus would take some of the financial pressure off him.

  • Useful 3
  • Love 2
Cinnabon

Cinnabon

16 minutes ago, Bayarea4 said:

I can see how Jim Bob might be in favor of this (on the down low, of course). If Anna and Josh divorced, she might then become eligible for welfare, food stamps and Medicaid for herself and the children and thus would take some of the financial pressure off him.

She would be eligible even if they didn’t divorce, if Josh was incarcerated and not able to work.

  • Useful 7
  • Love 2
Cinnabon

Cinnabon

(edited)
23 minutes ago, Bayarea4 said:

That's good to know. I wonder if she is eligible now or whether she'd have to wait until after he is tried, convicted and sent to prison?

She might be. That all depends on how their income and taxes have been reported, etc. Are there any assets in their names?

Edited by Cinnabon
WinnieWinkle

WinnieWinkle

12 hours ago, Cinnabon said:

She would be eligible even if they didn’t divorce, if Josh was incarcerated and not able to work.

She's probably eligible now if you consider Josh hasn't worked in months - assuming he ever worked and brought in a real income of course.  I can't see the Duggars supporting the idea of her going on public assistance though - they want to give the illusion of wealth and they also want to give the illusion of being a caring family.  That wouldn't really jibe with Anna having to collect money from the government.

  • Useful 2
  • Love 6
JoanArc

JoanArc

26 minutes ago, WinnieWinkle said:

She's probably eligible now if you consider Josh hasn't worked in months - assuming he ever worked and brought in a real income of course.  I can't see the Duggars supporting the idea of her going on public assistance though - they want to give the illusion of wealth and they also want to give the illusion of being a caring family.  That wouldn't really jibe with Anna having to collect money from the government.

 Isn’t she employed by like five LLCs?  Having all those assets in her name might disqualify her from assistance. Smooth move, Jim Bob. 

  • Love 5
Absolom

Absolom

1 hour ago, JoanArc said:

Isn’t she employed by like five LLCs?  Having all those assets in her name might disqualify her from assistance. Smooth move, Jim Bob. 

That might depending on the value plus the presumed free rent and possibly groceries or clothes would be considered in-kind income and would be counted. 

  • Useful 2
  • Love 3
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...