Josh & Anna Smuggar: A Series of Unfortunate Events

[Quilt Fairy]

19 minutes ago, Cinnabon said:

 Not only is MOTY Michelle not there to support her beloved son,  but none of Anna’s huge family is there to support her, either.

I think the "guy who looks like Santa" sitting close to her is supposed to be her Uncle Eric. 

[CherryMalotte]

I'd still like to verbally slap the silly off of Justin.  It's a case over child porn, not a traffic ticket.

[Quilt Fairy]

2 minutes ago, quarks said:

This is the second time Matthew Waller has testified for this case. He was at the hearing back in September, where he was ordered to produce his employment records. Waller also talked to federal agents and prosecutors more than once, and the defense named him when mentioning other people with access to the car lot - insinuating that Matthew Waller could and should have been a major suspect.

I was very confused by what was reported of his testimony.  He was a prosecution witness but he admitted he was prepped by the defense?  

[Lukeysboat]

My (adult) daughter was distraught and just blurted out to me what I’m assuming is the shocking information from the Sun about one of the children. If you haven’t read it, please don’t. My stomach hurts and I honestly feel like I could throw up. What a sick bastard he is. 

[hathorlive]

3 hours ago, Lindsay Loo Hoo said:

James Fottrell testified that someone accessed the computer with the partition on June 22, 2019, the same date as the previous documents mentioned before.

He says the user deleted them, but he found them through his software.

So when you "delete" things from your computer, they aren't deleted. All it does is change the Master File Table entry for that file to where it's noted as being available to overwrite.  That was great in the says before huge hard drives. The bigger the drive, the longer it takes to physically overwrite these files.  Our software goes through the tables, and the sectors and pulls the files out and notes they were deleted.  But they are usually still intact.  Josh didn't know you delete, then wipe the file.

[Cinnabon]

6 minutes ago, Lukeysboat said:

My (adult) daughter was distraught and just blurted out to me what I’m assuming is the shocking information from the Sun about one of the children. If you haven’t read it, please don’t. My stomach hurts and I honestly feel like I could throw up. What a sick bastard he is. 

It’s definitely upsetting and people should be warned. Some of us just had to know the full story though. Don’t read it if you don’t think you can handle it.  I think family members like Jessa, who apparently thinks child porn is no different than adult porn, should be made to hear all of the details. And of course, Anna.

Edited December 3, 2021 by Cinnabon

[Zella]

1 minute ago, Cinnabon said:

And of course, Anna.

I was wondering if Anna was in the courtroom this time around. I didn't see any of the updates about her being absent. 

[CouchTater]

16 minutes ago, CherryMalotte said:

I'd still like to verbally slap the silly off of Justin.  It's a case over child porn, not a traffic ticket.

Earlier today, in this thread, I essentially said that speculating and projecting our feelings on to the siblings was getting out of hand, in my opinion.  So, here I go being guilty of that:  my first thought when I saw Justin's terrible thumbs-up picture is that some reporter called out "Hey Justin!  How's it going?" or something to that effect, and his reaction was dripping in sarcasm.  I can't imagine any other reason for his silly grin and thumbs up.  Of course, that's me reaching and jumping to hopeful conclusions.  And I have no excuse for his hanger-on mother-in-law Hilaria's creepy smile in the same photo.

What a mess.  I hope this is all over soon.  

[quarks]

11 minutes ago, Quilt Fairy said:

I was very confused by what was reported of his testimony.  He was a prosecution witness but he admitted he was prepped by the defense?  

I thought the reporting was pretty confusing. From what I understood of it - and watch the transcripts prove that I got this completely wrong - he seems to have told the prosecution one story, agreed to testify for the prosecution, then spoke to defense lawyers, and then, at trial told a different story, one somewhat more helpful to Josh. The prosecution then made a big thing of pointing out that Matthew Waller is connected to the Duggars and then changed his testimony after speaking to Josh's defense attorneys.

(And this sort of, wait, what happened is almost certainly exactly why Austin is at court, since this is a lot more important to him than to me!)

[hathorlive]

13 minutes ago, Cinnabon said:

It’s definitely upsetting and people should be warned. Some of us just had to know the full story though. Don’t read it if you don’t think you can handle it.  I think family members like Jessa, who apparently thinks child porn is no different than adult porn, should be made to hear all of the details. And of course, Anna.

I think most of America should understand that there are seriously vile, evil, horrible people in the world.  I do think every Duggar should be forced to watch the videos by Child services, so they understand what they are letting their kids around.  I told you all that when the jury saw the images and vids, it would be a gamer changer.

[Cinnabon]

9 minutes ago, hathorlive said:

I think most of America should understand that there are seriously vile, evil, horrible people in the world.  I do think every Duggar should be forced to watch the videos by Child services, so they understand what they are letting their kids around.  I told you all that when the jury saw the images and vids, it would be a gamer changer.

I just read the description in The Sun of the CP, and as disturbing as it is, they left a lot of the sickening details out, believe it or not.

[lilwhitelion]

6 hours ago, Cinnabon said:

Like the “difference “ between words like “vaccinated “ and “inoculated?” 🤣 look that one up if you don’t get the reference.

Actually, I think he used the word "immunized", implying he was vaccinated.

[Quilt Fairy]

26 minutes ago, Cinnabon said:

I just read the description in The Sun of the CP, and as disturbing as it is, they left a lot of the sickening details out, believe it or not.

I wonder if they've sanitized it a bit in the 4 hours since I've read it, because it was pretty detailed, and I thought they were giving the actual descriptions from the DOJ guy's testimony.

[Tuxcat]

Questions: Josh installed the Linux partition on May 11 and used the TOR browser "on that side" (fyi I get that its not an actual side), and downloaded adult material along with CSAM on the 14th and 15th of May. They have time stamped evidence that puts Josh at the car lot/computer at the time of the downloads and they testified today that there is no way to remotely download material onto the Linux partition - you have to manually start that part. Furthermore they say someone tried to delete material on Jun 22...

My question relates to Josh's actions on all the other days between May 11 and Jun 22. One would think that if he installed the partition in order to avoid Covenant Eyes, and he used the TOR browser to access "dark web" material, then why did he stop? He went to alot of trouble to just stop? The feds say they don't have evidence of him actually opening and viewing the CSAM - which doesnt make him less guilty or sick of course -- but I keep wondering what Josh was doing on all those other days. Was he accessing the dark web on other days too? Or did he just download material these two days. One would think that someone who went to that extent of installing the partition and then using the TOR browser -- would keep going back for more and more to fulfill their "desires." ? It just seems weird that nothing else occurred past the 15th until the time of the attempted deletion.

Edited December 3, 2021 by Tuxcat

[Quilt Fairy]

I'm a little concerned with how this trial has ended up being structured.  If the prosecution finishes tomorrow, isn't there the possibility that the jury will forget stuff over the weekend and thus the defense will make more of an impression on them next week than it otherwise would?  Somebody talk me down off the ledge. 

[Zella]

2 minutes ago, Quilt Fairy said:

I'm a little concerned with how this trial has ended up being structured.  If the prosecution finishes tomorrow, isn't there the possibility that the jury will forget stuff over the weekend and thus the defense will make more of an impression on them next week than it otherwise would?  Somebody talk me down off the ledge. 

The prosecution will still cross-examine defense witnesses and there are also closing arguments. So, it's not just like the defense gets to take over completely once it's their turn. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

With the specific evidence the jury viewed, I doubt they'll be able to forget any detail of it for a long time.     My worry is that one person can deadlock a jury, and who knows who is connected with fundies, or will discount the evidence to cause a mistrial.  

I wonder if Josh has access to other computers, besides the one at the car lot?    

Edited December 3, 2021 by CrazyInAlabama

[3 is enough]

1 hour ago, CherryMalotte said:

I'd still like to verbally slap the silly off of Justin.  It's a case over child porn, not a traffic ticket.

He is 19, and even though he is married he is extremely immature.  He was trained to smile for the cameras from an early age.  I think when he heard his name called he instinctually gave a big smile and a thumbs up. 
Honestly I have to wonder how much the younger kids even know about the case.  They have probably been told that it’s all a plot by heathens who are targeting their righteous family.  Josh’s transgressions started around the time Justin was born so he doesn’t remember and I doubt it has been discussed since then.

[Cinnabon]

Were masks required in the courtroom? I guess Justin and the Spiveys whipped theirs off as soon as they stepped out of there. They should have worn them coming out of the building, like Josh and Anna finally learned. That way their smug grins would have been hidden.

 

[Quilt Fairy]

24 minutes ago, Cinnabon said:

Were masks required in the courtroom?

Yes.  The only exceptions are people actively speaking, like lawyers and witnesses. 

[cereality]

Maybe it's just me or that I've seen these types of trials but I'm not at all shocked at what Josh was looking at. What did people think it was?? If anyone wants to read it, I think the Sun just has 1 sentence about it in the timeline but there is a separate article that comes up if you google.

What I am surprised by (but shouldn't be) is the continuous exchanging of pleasantries with this monster. Ok Derick is sitting behind him and is also a lawyer who will at some point in his career appear in this court - he acted professional yesterday and shook his hand and smiled at dumbass Josh and his "nice to meet you." And ok maybe brother Justin feels the need to go up there and say hi. But really Claire and Justin's MIL need to chit chat with him?? Like if you're so worried about being rude - exchange hellos with Anna and assume you've now spoken to the couple and be done with it. But people here are right Justin, Claire, and hanger oner MIL 100% believe this is their fam being prosecuted by the liberals blah blah so Josh hasn't done anything REALLY wrong. And they were too coward to stick around to find out what it was really about - bc it'd blow their head in the sand theory. Justin/Claire/MIL showed up when they were talking technical stuff like partitions and Tor, likely did not even grasp 1% of it, and left with their theory in tact - oh please this is just a "computer crime" NBD, they're just harassing my bro -- hence the huge thumbs up on the way out the door.

Austin and Joy and Derick OTOH get it - though that could just be bc of their wives' experience and also bc Derick didn't grow up as sheltered as fundies and has gone to law school so it isn't shocking to him that in fact yes these crimes occur A LOT and no it isn't just gov't entrapment.

[coconspirator]

1 hour ago, hathorlive said:

I think most of America should understand that there are seriously vile, evil, horrible people in the world.  I do think every Duggar should be forced to watch the videos by Child services, so they understand what they are letting their kids around.  I told you all that when the jury saw the images and vids, it would be a gamer changer.

You may not have an answer but I have to ask, especially after some of the details that came out Thursday. Was anyone involved in the creation of that file ever caught and held accountable? I’d like to at least know the people who harmed the infant, and the couple who videotaped their abuse of the 7-8 year old (well and all of the perps really), were caught and prosecuted. 

[MsJamieDornan]

31 minutes ago, coconspirator said:

Was anyone involved in the creation of that file ever caught and held accountable?

Thank you !!! I have been wondering that !  They need to punish all the slimy, disgusting people that watch it but also shoot the people that make the garbage!

[emmawoodhouse]

Anna was reportedly in the courtroom and may have seen some of the CSAM thumbnails, according to The Ashley:

"The Ashley can also confirm that some of the disturbing images were visible to Anna and Derick and others in the courtroom. Although the CSA images were only supposed to be shown to the jury, judge and attorneys (with the TV screens to the general public turned off during those times), the prosecutor left his computer screen on for a short time, showing several storyboards of the CSA images and videos in question. Anna, who was seated right behind where the prosecutor’s screen had a view of the images. (The prosecutor eventually turned off his computer, but not before some of the child p0rnography file storyboards were visible to those in the first rows.)

While Joy and Austin looked sad and disturbed by the descriptions, and several of the jurors looked away or wiped tears from their eyes, Anna remained stonefaced, even as the graphic descriptions were read and the CSA images were briefly visible to her. (The Ashley is choosing not to describe the files in question; however nearly all of them had disturbing file names indicating things like the age of the girls in the files, etc.,…”

Edited December 3, 2021 by emmawoodhouse

[Cinnabon]

1 hour ago, coconspirator said:

You may not have an answer but I have to ask, especially after some of the details that came out Thursday. Was anyone involved in the creation of that file ever caught and held accountable? I’d like to at least know the people who harmed the infant, and the couple who videotaped their abuse of the 7-8 year old (well and all of the perps really), were caught and prosecuted. 

Yes, one of the most heinous of them is now serving a life sentence in the Philippines.

[emmawoodhouse]

9 minutes ago, Cinnabon said:

Yes, one of the most heinous of them is now serving a life sentence in the Philippines.

I read that some in the Philippines wanted to reinstate the death penalty, just for him.

[MsJamieDornan]

35 minutes ago, emmawoodhouse said:

Anna was reported in the courtroom and may have seen some of the CSAM thumbnails, according to The Ashley:

Did any others see the photos or did they just hear the description?

Family members?

[emmawoodhouse]

3 minutes ago, MsJamieDornan said:

Did any others see the photos or did they just hear the description?

Family members?

Justin's brigade appears to have left for good at lunchtime. Given David Waller was with them, I would guess they were there to support Matthew Waller, who pissed off the prosecution he was supposed to be helping.

[Cinnabon]

According to a Redditor, Claire Spivey’s grandfather was on the board of the camp that teen Josh went to for “rehab” after his molestations were made public. 

7 minutes ago, emmawoodhouse said:

Justin's brigade appears to have left for good at lunchtime. Given David Waller was with them, I would guess they were there to support Matthew Waller, who pissed off the prosecution he was supposed to be helping.

So Matthew Waller now sides with Josh?

[GeeGolly]

I think hearing about the details could go either way for those who do support Josh. I'm guessing a few of them, including Anna, will double down and feel Josh is definitely innocent because he would never be interested in, or want to see such images.

Also if Derick is there strictly for Jill and her possible testimony or because he's a new lawyer observing a case, the jury is not going to know this. There's a reason why defendants are told to dress in certain ways and have family present in the courtroom - because optics matter. I'm thinking as a lawyer Derick should know this.

Jurors are told only to consider facts, but their minds take in the whole courtroom scene. As far as they know Derick, Jill's husband, Josh's BIL, or the man in the suit, comes in everyday to support Josh.

[MsJamieDornan]

Quote

 As far as they know Derick, Jill's husband, Josh's BIL, or the man in the suit, comes in everyday to support Josh.

I'm personally confused as to who is attending the trial and why ? 

Edited December 3, 2021 by MsJamieDornan

[GeeGolly]

12 minutes ago, MsJamieDornan said:

I'm personally confused as to who is attending the trial and why ? 

I'm confused on the why as well.

Derick, Austin, Joy, Justin, Claire, and Claire's mom and brother have all attended the trial so far. And possibly Anna's uncle.

[MsJamieDornan]

1 minute ago, GeeGolly said:

Derick, Austin, Joy, Justin, Claire, and Claire's mom and brother have all attended the trial so far. And possibly Anna's uncle.

Okay, thanks.         I feel a long post coming on. I better rest.

[ChiCricket]

6 hours ago, quarks said:

Two local reporters seem to be doing a pretty decent job covering this on Twitter:

C. C. McCandless (@cccmccandless on Twitter)

Anna Darling (@AnnaDarlingTV on Twitter)

Thing is, unlike the Sun, they are following the rules, so they only update during breaks and lunch.

Thanks for this! I went and checked them both out. Good stuff.

 Btw, I think you added an extra c in his name (at the beginning.)☺️

(in case others want to find him on Twitter too.) 

It's :   @ccmccandless

[tnvolgrl]

Hearing some of the details about the videos on his computer makes me so sick. How Anna can hold his hand & support him is beyond me.  I want to smack her just as much as I want to beat the snot out of him.  I will be 50 next year & I know I can take that smug POS. I can't imagine knowing what was downloaded & still supporting that trash. Has Anna ever thought about her children? Most child abusers don't just stop. JMO

I hope Jill does testify but mostly I want her & the other girls to be ok. Jill is the only one (that we are aware of) that has sought therapy with the help & support to Derek who has stood by her. I think Austin is truly beginning to see the damage that was done to Joy. I am not sure he grasped it completely before.  He should be raging & perhaps he is. Jerm I can't figure out if he cares or not & Ben doesn't have deep thoughts IMO. 

 

[Tuxcat]

4 hours ago, GeeGolly said:

Jurors are told only to consider facts, but their minds take in the whole courtroom scene. As far as they know Derick, Jill's husband, Josh's BIL, or the man in the suit, comes in everyday to support Josh.

Agreed. I am hoping that maybe he's making all sorts of faces and rolling his eyes when the defense talks. But I think his choice of seating - if indeed he is "against" Josh is odd. Maybe he thinks he's being intimidating toward Josh but to the jury, as you said, he is "supportive suit man."

Also maybe Justin was smiley and thumbs up because Matthew Waller made the prosecution mad.

Edited December 3, 2021 by Tuxcat

[merylinkid]

I think we are reading too much into where everyone is sitting and who they talk to.   Remember, they are talking to Josh during the breaks, away from the eyes of the jury.   So they aren't seeing the chitchat.   They may not even know WHO these people are who are sitting behind Josh.   Just some folks in nice clothes.   Could be family.   Could be interested members of the public.   Whatever.   

Yes juries are wild cards and can be unpredictable.   But in general they are made up of people who take their civic duty seriously.   They are not likely to let  him off just because they saw his wife sitting behind him every day.

Remember their theories are SOME OTHER GUY and JOSH IS STUPID.   See above about juries taking their duty seriously.   They want more than some vague, well SOMEONE else knew the password.

I think the prosecution made a mistake by making a big deal about Matthew Waller not telling them he knew the password.   He was asked by the Feds at the time whether he knew it, he said he didn't.   yeah if you asked me if I knew someone else's password to something I would probably say no too, because I might not the password to THAT one thing.   But if you TOLD me later "Was this the password?"   I would say 'Yeah it sounds familiar" because it sounds like one of the passwords that person would use.   Although NOT NECESSARILY would I associate it with this one account.   So kinda two different things here:  1) do you know the password to this specific account?  No.   2) Have you heard of this password being used?   Yes.   But they aren't talking about the same thing.

Prosecution should have let this go.   By making a big deal out of it they actually made it seem more important than it was.  

But the actual things he had on his computer?   Yeah the password kerfluffle is going to get lost in what was actually password protected.

[Snow Fairy]

I was thinking, I feel so sorry for M7. Those kids, if they ever find out what their dad did, what he watched, that will be a huge shock.

And I know they are sheltered now, but I truly hope that at least one says goodbye to this extra fundy lifestyle, somewhere in the future. 

[Tuxcat]

13 minutes ago, merylinkid said:

Prosecution should have let this go.   By making a big deal out of it they actually made it seem more important than it was.  

I thought this too initially. However,  I had second thoughts. Waller is related to Josh. Waller said he was employed until the end of April yet the secret password "rang a bell" - even though that wasn't installed until May 11. And it wasn't until the defense told him, possibly before the trial,  "Intell1988." He admitted to this. That it was the defenses information, not a memory.  It's important to cast doubt on that since it affects the timeline of the prosecutions case and of course Waller is also incriminating himself by saying he knew that password. If the prosecution said nothing, the jury could focus in on this discrepancy as enough doubt. The prosecution had to make him look shady in order to cast this discrepancy aside.

[GeeGolly]

5 hours ago, emmawoodhouse said:

Justin's brigade appears to have left for good at lunchtime. Given David Waller was with them, I would guess they were there to support Matthew Waller, who pissed off the prosecution he was supposed to be helping.

David was there? Attending the trial?

[Ohiopirate02]

8 hours ago, Tuxcat said:

Questions: Josh installed the Linux partition on May 11 and used the TOR browser "on that side" (fyi I get that its not an actual side), and downloaded adult material along with CSAM on the 14th and 15th of May. They have time stamped evidence that puts Josh at the car lot/computer at the time of the downloads and they testified today that there is no way to remotely download material onto the Linux partition - you have to manually start that part. Furthermore they say someone tried to delete material on Jun 22...

My question relates to Josh's actions on all the other days between May 11 and Jun 22. One would think that if he installed the partition in order to avoid Covenant Eyes, and he used the TOR browser to access "dark web" material, then why did he stop? He went to alot of trouble to just stop? The feds say they don't have evidence of him actually opening and viewing the CSAM - which doesnt make him less guilty or sick of course -- but I keep wondering what Josh was doing on all those other days. Was he accessing the dark web on other days too? Or did he just download material these two days. One would think that someone who went to that extent of installing the partition and then using the TOR browser -- would keep going back for more and more to fulfill their "desires." ? It just seems weird that nothing else occurred past the 15th until the time of the attempted deletion.

Josh did more on his computer than what is being talked about at the trial.  The prosecution is only looking at two specific incidences where illegal stuff happened and they can prove Josh was at the car lot.  From what has been previously reported, there was more CSAM on his computer, but those files do not have enough evidence to support Josh being the one who downloaded them.  There are two things necessary to bring charges--possession of the materials and proof the defendant was at the location of the download at the time of it downloading.  The last thing the prosecution wants to do is included other charges where they cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Josh was at the car lot when the downloads happened.  

[Snow Fairy]

And I don't know how they can say they are all godly and have their faith. 

God and Jesus always want to protect children. Always. Whatever Gothard or anyone else says

[SnapHappy]

By the way,

Derrick is not a lawyer.  He did graduate from law school, but is not a lawyer.  He has a degree in Jurisprudence, but is not a lawyer. 

I would like for ONE practicing lawyer on this board to correct me and say "You are absolutely wrong, Derrick Dillard IS currently a lawyer".  

 

Edited December 3, 2021 by SnapHappy

[tnvolgrl]

So I am apparently computer stupid....what the heck is a partition?

[quarks]

6 hours ago, Cinnabon said:

According to a Redditor, Claire Spivey’s grandfather was on the board of the camp that teen Josh went to for “rehab” after his molestations were made public. 

So Matthew Waller now sides with Josh?

Sides may be a strong word. The prosecution says he has changed his testimony; the current testimony is more favorable to Josh, and accused the defense of prepping Waller for trial.

BUT

Matthew Waller was one of the four names the defense listed in their most recent "look at all the people who had access to the car lot computer!" and were willing to name as potential suspects in this case.  So I think there's a non-zero chance that the defense attorneys told him hey, you open the door to some reasonable doubt here; we won't accuse you of possibly downloading CSA material.

6 hours ago, GeeGolly said:

Also if Derick is there strictly for Jill and her possible testimony or because he's a new lawyer observing a case, the jury is not going to know this. There's a reason why defendants are told to dress in certain ways and have family present in the courtroom - because optics matter. I'm thinking as a lawyer Derick should know this.

Jurors are told only to consider facts, but their minds take in the whole courtroom scene. As far as they know Derick, Jill's husband, Josh's BIL, or the man in the suit, comes in everyday to support Josh.

During the jury selection process most of them said that they weren't that familiar with the Duggars. They probably don't know who Derrick is.

If they do, which guess is more likely: Derrick showed up to support the man who molested his wife, or that Derrick showed up to watch justice served to the man who molested his wife?

42 minutes ago, GeeGolly said:

David was there? Attending the trial?

Seemingly just for Matthew Waller's testimony.

9 minutes ago, SnapHappy said:

By the way,

Derrick is not a lawyer.  He did graduate from law school, but is not a lawyer.  He has a degree in Jurisprudence, but is not a lawyer. 

I would like for ONE practicing lawyer on this board to correct me and say "You are absolutely wrong, Derrick Dillard IS currently a lawyer".  

 

Practicing attorneys/lawyers on this board clarified this back when it became apparent that Derrick had not passed the law exam. Derrick holds a JD degree and is a lawyer. He is not, however, an attorney, and won't be one until he passes the bar exam.

[MMEButterfly]

10 hours ago, Lukeysboat said:

My (adult) daughter was distraught and just blurted out to me what I’m assuming is the shocking information from the Sun about one of the children. If you haven’t read it, please don’t. My stomach hurts and I honestly feel like I could throw up. What a sick bastard he is. 

Someone way above wrote that Josh may have struggled with his "desires" from a young age. It made some sense to me. Who gets off on seeing a baby tortured? I can't imagine, but my mind does go to a young child living in a tiny house filled with crying babies with a mother breaking under the strain. I'm not defending Josh. He is now an adult and needed to deal with it. But, still, I am curious about how he got there.

[CandyCaneTree]

10 minutes ago, tnvolgrl said:

So I am apparently computer stupid....what the heck is a partition?

A partition turns one computer into 2 separate computers in one.

[Rootbeer]

6 minutes ago, tnvolgrl said:

So I am apparently computer stupid....what the heck is a partition?

I'm computer stupid, too, but, from our experts here:  There are ways to take a single computer and actually divide it into two separate devices so that one side doesn't know what the other is doing.  

In Josh' case, he downloaded something called a Linux partition onto his regular computer which had a program called Covenant Eyes which would report to Anna anytime he visited an inappropriate website or such.  The Linux partition was not 'visible' to the part of the computer where Covenant Eyes was; so, when Josh opened the Linux part of his computer and downloaded CSAM, Covenant Eyes didn't detect it and report to Anna.

Someone here suggested looking at this as being like rowhouses.  They share walls, but each has a separate entrance and is completely contained within its walls.  So, you can enter your townhouse through your own door, but your neighbor in the next unit doesn't see you and doesn't know you're there.

Everything I know about partitions, I learned from this thread, feel free to correct me.  Thanks to all the brilliant folks here who have so kindly educated all of us about this stuff.

[CherryMalotte]

10 hours ago, CouchTater said:

  I can't imagine any other reason for his silly grin and thumbs up.  Of course, that's me reaching and jumping to hopeful conclusions.  And I have no excuse for his hanger-on mother-in-law Hilaria's creepy smile in the same photo.

I know.  It has been way apparent to all of us that for the most part the Duggar offspring don't appreciate/understand/know how to act in normal (or not normal) situations.  He's immature for sure.  It's a shame they don't have any awareness.  But, they marry like to like, so there's another generation of idiot kids.  

You'd think this trial would be a wake up call to all of them, but then with his reactions probably not.  

[Twopper]

11 minutes ago, quarks said:

Practicing attorneys/lawyers on this board clarified this back when it became apparent that Derrick had not passed the law exam. Derrick holds a JD degree and is a lawyer. He is not, however, an attorney, and won't be one until he passes the bar exam.

Wouldn't he have taken the bar exam over the summer?   I think it took about 4-6 weeks before I got my bar exam results back, but that was in prehistoric times.