Josh & Anna Smuggar: A Series of Unfortunate Events

[Quilt Fairy]

4 minutes ago, Tabbygirl521 said:

I’d be happy to see them hounded forever but I don’t think they’d enjoy it. 

I beg to disagree.

[Tabbygirl521]

6 hours ago, Cinnabon said:

Exactly. Where is ANYONE from Anna’s own big family?

Maybe they feel like we do about Josh, and about her failure to see reality. Although if she were my sister is show up to drag her bodily out of the courtroom and to a deprogrammer. 

[iwantcookies]

1 hour ago, BitterApple said:

Do you think Anna is medicated? 

Not unless Dereck slipped her something 😂.

Not a chance Anna would ever be allowed to see a psychiatrist or a therapist.

[Tabbygirl521]

1 hour ago, emmawoodhouse said:

I can't believe Anna sat there "stonefaced" during that testimony. Her little infant isn't much younger than the youngest victim. 

Sick. 

I’m no defending her but perhaps the onlookers were instructed by the court not to react? I’m thinking of Travis Alexander’s poor family sitting stoically as Jodi Arias blathered her disgusting lies, and crime scene photos were shown. 

[Tuxcat]

This weekend is going to seem so boring by comparison to this week. Likely the only updates will be some cryptic Quiz Mommy Amy  Duggar King tweets. 

[JustRosie]

1 hour ago, BitterApple said:

Do you think Anna is medicated? 

I think she was silently praying or meditating when the details were given. I don’t think she was listening at all. 

[Tabbygirl521]

2 minutes ago, Namaste said:

I think she was silently praying or meditating when the details were given. I don’t think she was listening at all. 

Praying her ass off. 

[Churchhoney]

5 minutes ago, Tabbygirl521 said:

Praying her ass off. 

Probably. But if there is a god of the kind she purports to believe in, I'll bet that god really likes truth, kindness and children. So Anna's prayers were probably barking up the wrong tree. 

[hathorlive]

4 hours ago, absnow54 said:

In order to install the Linux partition, you boot off of a USB that has the OS installation on it. The defense was questioning how the install got on a flash drive, and verified that the installer didn’t come from one of Josh’s devices. 

That's one way to install it.  You can use the many free installation discs that are out there, or install from a direct link from the internet or an open source site.  This is a rabbit hole the defense has created to distract the jury.  Or to quote Shakespeare, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

[Quilt Fairy]

1 hour ago, hathorlive said:

That's one way to install it.  You can use the many free installation discs that are out there, or install from a direct link from the internet or an open source site.  This is a rabbit hole the defense has created to distract the jury.  Or to quote Shakespeare, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

Not only am I getting a legal education from all of this, I feel like I'm also getting a course in advanced computer forensics.  Which, BTW, I find very interesting.  I wish a field like this existed when I went to college. 

[Cinnabon]

2 hours ago, Rootbeer said:

I think they also want to avoid having reporters ask JB about his future plans in light of his son's current situation.  It is important for JB's aspirations that the public doesn't associate him with this trial or his son's alleged crimes.

Good luck with that, Boob.

2 hours ago, Churchhoney said:

Probably. But if there is a god of the kind she purports to believe in, I'll bet that god really likes truth, kindness and children. So Anna's prayers were probably barking up the wrong tree. 

BuT sHe’S aLL aBoUt ThE cHiLdrEn!

[EVS]

1 hour ago, hathorlive said:

That's one way to install it.  You can use the many free installation discs that are out there, or install from a direct link from the internet or an open source site.  This is a rabbit hole the defense has created to distract the jury.  Or to quote Shakespeare, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

In this case, “It is a tale told by an idiot” could apply to the defense attorney, Josh, or JB. I vote for ‘all of the above’. 

Edited December 4, 2021 by EVS

[Zella]

24 minutes ago, EVS said:

In this case, “It is a tale told by an idiot” could apply to the defense attorney, Josh, or JB. I vote for ‘all of the above’. 

[emmawoodhouse]

To Gelfand: You speak an infinite deal of nothing. 😀

[RedDelicious]

4 hours ago, Enya Face said:

Batman got a big ole’ dick!

(Im so sorry, the neuropathy in my legs and feet is bad enough I took some medicine and now I’m like 🤤)

NIKE!!!! 😆

[realityfan26]

I just read on Reddit that David Waller was at the trial today. Someone said they sat right behind him. Has that been mentioned by anyone else?

I think I've gotten very confused about the Waller family. Matthew Waller is his younger brother who testified; correct?

Edited December 4, 2021 by realityfan26

[Zella]

12 minutes ago, realityfan26 said:

I just read on Reddit that David Waller was at the trial today. Someone said they sat right behind him. Has that been mentioned by anyone else?

I've not seen any media cover it like the Sun. But the DS people pointed out that in one of the pics of Justin, Hilaria, Santa, and Belt Buckle coming out of the courtroom yesterday, you can see the faintest glimpse of a hairline that seems like it could belong to the one and only TFDW. I was skeptical at first, but it really does look like his head. 

[Zella]

@realityfan26 I was afraid it would be impossible to find, but it was the first result when I googled his name in relation to the subreddit! I didn't realize it was from the full asshat thumbs up pic. 

 

Edited December 4, 2021 by Zella

[CountryGirl]

It seems we’ve reached a particularly suitable page number for this thread. 

[Tuxcat]

So lawyer question please as my Law and Order knowledge is escaping me. Generally the order is prosecution presents - defense cross -- prosecution rests - defense presents - prosecution cross - defense rests - both close. Correct?

I was reading opinion that says its risky for the prosecution to present the past molestation acts (even though allowed) because of possible grounds for appeal later.  Is there a way the prosecution  can "rest" their case let's say Monday -- and then only bring up another witness with the past evidence if they think they need to (after hearing the defense's case)?

[emmawoodhouse]

33 minutes ago, realityfan26 said:

I just read on Reddit that David Waller was at the trial today. Someone said they sat right behind him. Has that been mentioned by anyone else?

I think I've gotten very confused about the Waller family. Matthew Waller is his younger brother who testified; correct?

TFDW was seen carrying a box behind Smuganna leaving court today. 

Yes, he is Matthew Waller's older brother.

[Zella]

3 minutes ago, Tuxcat said:

I was reading opinion that says its risky for the prosecution to present the past molestation acts (even though allowed) because of possible grounds for appeal later.

Per the judge for this case, that is simply not true.

Quote

The judge acknowledged taking “a fairly deep dive” on rule 414, finding “pretty strong case law” to admit the prior acts of molestation as evidence. He noted that the 8th circuit has never reversed a case of admitting it, while one case was reversed for not admitting such evidence.

https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/judge-calls-for-evidentiary-hearing-during-josh-duggar-child-porn-pretrial-conference/

[ChiCricket]

3 minutes ago, emmawoodhouse said:

TFDW was seen carrying a box behind Smuganna leaving court today. 

Yes, he is Matthew Waller's older brother.

Here he is mud wrestling with Josh. (starting at 3:30)

 

Edited December 4, 2021 by ChiCricket

[hathorlive]

2 hours ago, Quilt Fairy said:

Not only am I getting a legal education from all of this, I feel like I'm also getting a course in advanced computer forensics.  Which, BTW, I find very interesting.  I wish a field like this existed when I went to college. 

Not to age myself, but I have a liberal arts degree.  I never took a computer class in college, though I was always great with computers.  I've been in the field so long, when I was in college there were NO Digital Forensics programs.  And the problem is that most people with a degree don't have any experience.  Today, I wouldn't get hired, even though I have every high level certification in the field.  VERY hard certifications, I might add.  I came to the field via network security/intrusion detection.  Or like I say, I'm a nosy bitch who had extensive recon and data recovery from the multitudes of losers I dated.  It's a fun field but cases like this can really drag you down.  I would say that 85% of my last job were CP cases.  Now, I have about 20%.  

Speaking of which, did JB pay for the defense to bring in the Forensics experts to testify?  Y'all are in for some great BS gaslighting from these folks.

1 hour ago, emmawoodhouse said:

To Gelfand: You speak an infinite deal of nothing. 😀

But he's getting paid by the word, so he's laughing all the way to the bank, with his thesaurus. 

Edited December 4, 2021 by hathorlive

[Gweilo]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but we don't know for sure that Anna's family aren't there, do we? 

I mean, I wouldn't be surprised if they're being total arseholes to her, but for all we know her mother could be at Anna's home looking after the children and the household. Just because we haven't seen them at court doesn't mean they're not in Arkansas and helping out in some other way.

The poor M7 children. I wish them as successful a life as they can manage to cobble together, because God knows their parents aren't going to lift a finger to help them.

[Tuxcat]

45 minutes ago, hathorlive said:

Speaking of which, did JB pay for the defense to bring in the Forensics experts to testify?  Y'all are in for some great BS gaslighting from these folks.

Yes, we just know there will be an expert to refute everything presented today. I am trying to figure out if the defense has any line of reasoning that they are building to a big reveal -- or if they truly are just throwing things out. 

So far -from what's been reported:

Waller said the password to the partition side sounded "familiar."

Email sent from Caleb Williams sent to Josh Duggar regarding eBay shipping labels March 2019 (why is this relevant?)

Rufus is an app on the Linux side which allows you to create a bootable USB drive

A bootable USB drive was plugged in on May 13

Files were opened from the thumb drive on May 13

Don’t know where this thumb drive is - it was never seized or searched

The files that were opened on the thumb drive were never opened on MacBook and iPhone

The files couldn’t have been created on the thumb drive - where were the files created?

“Is there anything in your reports about remote access?”

"Remmina is an app for the computer for remote access - and if a router would help with remote access?" -- I believe they said this app was installed on the windows side

He said that linux can be accessed remotely

Thumb drive was plugged in before the Tor browser was installed - "so if you find out who put the thumb drive in - you know who downloaded the porn"

Feds do not know from where the Linux OS or the  TOR browser came - they say probably App Store.

Router was "open" and never "investigated"

Lots of people knew his password for the partition since it was used for 5 years all over the place. 

 

Okay, where are we going? Is this an onion defense that will go somewhere after peeling all these layers?  Someone installed linux OS from the bootable drive onto the partition side and then installed TOR remotely and then "the porn." Or is this just throw spaghetti till something - anything - sticks.

Edited December 4, 2021 by Tuxcat

[crazy8s]

3 hours ago, Zella said:

I've not seen any media cover it like the Sun. But the DS people pointed out that in one of the pics of Justin, Hilaria, Santa, and Belt Buckle coming out of the courtroom yesterday, you can see the faintest glimpse of a hairline that seems like it could belong to the one and only TFDW. I was skeptical at first, but it really does look like his head. 

hahaha Belt Buckle - that's when i realized it was Robby Spivey. he is always shown wearing that giant belt buckle

[GeeGolly]

The Matthew Waller Reasonable Doubt Defense really feels like a Jessa move. She'd be walking around feeling all kinds of smart and proud that she outwitted everyone, right up until the moment she found out she didn't. Then she'd walk around for days in wonder, trying to figure out what went wrong. 

Not sure why they hired these high falutin city attorneys when Jessa could have cued up a court case on YouTube and defended Josh herself.

Edited December 4, 2021 by GeeGolly

[js9548]

Question for the attorneys/lawyers on this site:

If, in fact, any of the jurors were nodding during testimony, could the defense team get them dismissed?  I realize a juror should not show any emotion but could a juror be excused for this? 

Also if the juror was dismissed would it happen that day or right before deliberations, assuming there are alternates still available? 

Edited December 4, 2021 by js9548

[madpsych78]

4 hours ago, ChiCricket said:

Here he is mud wrestling with Josh. (starting at 3:30)

 

Same episode highlighted that Josh was borderline diabetic. 

[cocobeans]

1 hour ago, js9548 said:

Question for the attorneys/lawyers on this site:

If, in fact, any of the jurors were nodding during testimony, could the defense team get them dismissed?  I realize a juror should not show any emotion but could a juror be excused for this? 

Also if the juror was dismissed would it happen that day or right before deliberations, assuming there are alternates still available? 

Not an attorney but I do testify in court quite frequently as an ER/SANE (Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner) nurse. Jurors always show emotion and cry during my testimony.  They aren't allowed to speak out loud or ask questions, and many judges will remind them to not look away from pictures.

[iwantcookies]

2 hours ago, crazy8s said:

hahaha Belt Buckle - that's when i realized it was Robby Spivey. he is always shown wearing that giant belt buckle

He is compensating for something wink wink 😂

[js9548]

41 minutes ago, cocobeans said:

Not an attorney but I do testify in court quite frequently as an ER/SANE (Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner) nurse. Jurors always show emotion and cry during my testimony.  They aren't allowed to speak out loud or ask questions, and many judges will remind them to not look away from pictures.

Thank you, I guess I knew the answer but wanted it confirmed. I have been called for jury duty before but never made it as a final juror. I do keep up with trials that make national news but never to the extent  I am with this trial. Probably because it is the Duggars and the content of the trial. 

[Trillium]

According to Redditor who’s a local reporter who was there there, the final piece of evidence yesterday was a single document of the timeline of all the downloads and texts from Josh placing him there at the time. Similar to what another intrepid Redditor had done in their own, but the jury will officially have a very clear and easy to follow piece of evidence that makes it clear it was Josh. This is the timeline by the Redditor. The jury likely has a better on since this is based on what was reported by The Sun, so some details are missing on this one. I wonder if Anna remembered the time Josh texted her he was going to be “late” because he had “customers” which just happened to be right as the downloads were completing.  Wake the fuck up girl! 

[Churchhoney]

7 hours ago, realityfan26 said:

I just read on Reddit that David Waller was at the trial today. Someone said they sat right behind him. Has that been mentioned by anyone else?

I think I've gotten very confused about the Waller family. Matthew Waller is his younger brother who testified; correct?

Yeah, Matthew is the youngest Waller. Seems likely he would have been pretty agitated when his testimony came around and probably badly needed some support.

He seems to have had little or nothing at all to do with anything the trial's actually about. But he was all tied up in it nevertheless, with the prosecution seeking his testimony and then apparently the defense lawyers talking to him too-- and leading him into trouble on the stand, no less. That had to be confusing and anxiety-producing. And being in another IBLP honcho family, he's probably all too aware of the Duggars' "importance." 

So I hope his brother was there for him. Unlikely that anybody else in his family was around. He's not from Arkansas. HIs parents live in the upper Midwest somewhere, I think. 

Edited December 4, 2021 by Churchhoney

[Lisa418722]

14 hours ago, CouchTater said:

At least she has a husband.  Sorry, but as someone who is single and childless*, that will never get old.  😄

*Edit to add:  and doing just fine, in case anyone is worried about me.  I even happily brought in my own trash and recycling totes this evening.

I always laugh too.  I'm single and childless. I own my home (well, almost, I still owe some on the mortgage).  I take my trash out and when I stay in a hotel, I only have to handle my own suitcase, no one else's.  Yeah, being single is not the worst thing in the world.  

[merylinkid]

8 hours ago, Tuxcat said:

So lawyer question please as my Law and Order knowledge is escaping me. Generally the order is prosecution presents - defense cross -- prosecution rests - defense presents - prosecution cross - defense rests - both close. Correct?

Close but not quite.   After the Defense rests, the prosecution MAY do what is called rebuttal.   they can put on additional witnesses to rebut anything the defense raises.   The defense does not get a rebuttal after that because the defense already got to see what the prosecution was doing and act accordingly.

Typing this I realize that may be the perfect time to put on the prior acts.   The Defense is all "some other guy did it."   Okay, but WHO ELSE has a history of molestation?  Sure they others are felons, but they aren't child molesters.   The tricky part with doing this is you kinda have to present your known case IN your part of the case.   You can't hold back the good stuff for the end if you knew or SHOULD HAVE KNOWN you would need it.   Rebuttal is for "oh man they really made this argument, I need to use this evidence after all."   Since the prosecution fought really hard to get the prior acts made admissible it means they kinda know they will need to use it.   So they probably better use it in the main part (case in chief) of their case.

One other side note -- just because the Judge was VERY careful in his reasoning on why the prior acts were admissible does NOT mean it can't be appealed.  It just means the prosecution has more to point to on appeal to justify why it was admissible.   ANYTHING can be appealed.   I just did oral arguments where the other side was arguing some wording of the Order that if they just did the freaking math would make them realize that the order was correct.   There were other issues, but I think I am going to win at least THAT point.  

[quarks]

Over on the Jill thread, a couple of people noted some women sitting at the attorney tables in the courtroom and asked if the attorneys included women.

On the defense side, Travis Story appears to have at least two women on his staff, legal intern Abby Jackson and office manager Tricia Story.  Justin Gelfand's office has paralegal Amy Murray. Based on the videos of everyone coming in and out of the courtroom, I think the woman with the defense is Abby Jackson, but it could be Amy Murray after changing the color of her hair.  That said, neither office appears to update their website that frequently, so it could be someone else entirely.

On the prosecution side, Carly Marshall has been there from the start - her name is all over the various motions filed with the court. She's one of the prosecutors who has been questioning witnesses. 

Edited December 4, 2021 by quarks

[farmgal4]

13 hours ago, Churchhoney said:

Probably. But if there is a god of the kind she purports to believe in, I'll bet that god really likes truth, kindness and children. So Anna's prayers were probably barking up the wrong tree. 

I would pay big money to be able to ask her, and all the fundies, where their god was when those poor babies/children were being raped and tortured!

[Minivanessa]

As @merylinkid said, anything can be appealed, but success on appeal is another matter altogether. The "propensity evidence," aka the molestations of little girls, should be bulletproof here, assuming the prosecution does a clean presentation and the court doesn't let extraneous and unfairly prejudicial evidence creep in.

This kind of evidence gets my lawyerly spidey senses tingling, because its admission goes absolutely against one of the bedrock rules of evidence in our legal system. It's an exception to the general rule that evidence of past crimes can't be used in trial to prove the defendant's a bad person and thus more likely to be guilty of the crime charged.

I swear, I have some kind of ingrained reaction against the idea of such "prior crimes" evidence. I think other lawyers do too. Including some on YouTube. But, Federal Rule of Evidence 414 specifically carves out the exception that's being applied in this case, and the prosecution will be allowed to show that in his past Josh's behavior showed a sexual interest in prepubescent females, i.e., a propensity toward the behavior at issue in this case. 

The federal Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals (this federal trial court is in the Eighth Circuit so that court's rulings govern there) has apparently upheld the admission of Rule 414 in an overwhelming percentage of cases in which it was an issue on appeal, including holding that evidence of past "hands on" child sexual assault is admissible in a later case charging possession/viewing of CSAM. Which of course is the situation in Josh's case. 

It gets even more solid for the prosecution in Josh's case because they are dealing with acts which Josh himself admitted in various conversations, and in a lawsuit which HE and his sisters filed in the very court where he's now on trial. This isn't some second-hand vague gossipy nonsense; it's solid. But as we know, nothing is certain in this world, so I hope that a few years from now someone won't read this post and fall over laughing because I was wrong in this case. Sigh.

[DXD526]

Quote

This is the timeline by the Redditor.

That's not the official document? You mean, they don't call him "Pest" in court? 

And on a gross note, Pest downloaded CSAM on my birthday 🤢

[Churchhoney]

2 minutes ago, DXD526 said:

That's not the official document? You mean, they don't call him "Pest" in court? 

 

I wouldn't be surprised if even his defense attorneys call him "Pest" behind his back. 

[Trillium]

2 minutes ago, DXD526 said:

That's not the official document? You mean, they don't call him "Pest" in court? 

And on a gross note, Pest downloaded CSAM on my birthday 🤢

Lol, no that is not the official document. Someone cobbled it together on their own. But the prosecution did present a timeline as evidence so the jury will have a clear layout of the events. 

[ginger90]

Falling asleep last night, I thought about how Anna’s stunted growth, shall we say, has been mentioned. I believe someone said she’s like a 12 year old. I don’t recall the actual age used. Anyway, this made me think it was what Josh wanted, an adult stuck at a younger age. 
 

😔 

 

[CandyCaneTree]

2 hours ago, Lisa418722 said:

I always laugh too.  I'm single and childless. I own my home (well, almost, I still owe some on the mortgage).  I take my trash out and when I stay in a hotel, I only have to handle my own suitcase, no one else's.  Yeah, being single is not the worst thing in the world.  

My mom is single and loves her life. 

[Churchhoney]

3 minutes ago, ginger90 said:

Falling asleep last night, I thought about how Anna’s stunted growth, shall we say, has been mentioned. I believe someone said she’s like a 12 year old. I don’t recall the actual age used. Anyway, this made me think it was what Josh wanted, an adult stuck at a younger age. 
 

😔

 

Good point. I think that's pretty much what all patriarchy-loving guys want.

After all, being an adult implies not only having full reasoning powers and some understanding gleaned from experience but agency......None of these patriarchy guys -- even the ones who don't sneak around committing felonies --  want to view women as being in possession of any of those things. 

[IvySpice]

Quote

Anna’s stunted growth

Yeah, it's hard for me to see her as having any agency in her own life, however old she is and however many children she has. I can't blame her for clinging to Smuggar's hand with everything she's got. He IS everything she's got. The air she's breathed since infancy tells her she has no value except as his wife. What's she going to do? Divorce him? Live like a widow in her parents' house with seven children, as the object of pity and contempt for all who see her? Even people who believe Josh did wrong might blame Anna for not keeping him happy at home. She's a prisoner.

[MMEButterfly]

5 hours ago, cocobeans said:

Not an attorney but I do testify in court quite frequently as an ER/SANE (Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner) nurse. Jurors always show emotion and cry during my testimony.  They aren't allowed to speak out loud or ask questions, and many judges will remind them to not look away from pictures.

I hope this is sufficiently on-topic. While on a murder jury, I liked the defense attorney. I know I tended to smile while he talked (I'm a smiler anyway), but I fully voted for conviction. 

[Boston]

23 minutes ago, IvySpice said:

Yeah, it's hard for me to see her as having any agency in her own life, however old she is and however many children she has. I can't blame her for clinging to Smuggar's hand with everything she's got. He IS everything she's got. The air she's breathed since infancy tells her she has no value except as his wife. What's she going to do? Divorce him? Live like a widow in her parents' house with seven children, as the object of pity and contempt for all who see her? Even people who believe Josh did wrong might blame Anna for not keeping him happy at home. She's a prisoner.

I was thinking about Anna also.  Is everything just butterflies and roses in her version of her life?  Because alot of people will eventually break (like psychotic break).  Not wishing it for her, but she has GOT to be under tremendous stress.

[realityfan26]

11 hours ago, Gweilo said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but we don't know for sure that Anna's family aren't there, do we? 

I mean, I wouldn't be surprised if they're being total arseholes to her, but for all we know her mother could be at Anna's home looking after the children and the household. Just because we haven't seen them at court doesn't mean they're not in Arkansas and helping out in some other way.

The poor M7 children. I wish them as successful a life as they can manage to cobble together, because God knows their parents aren't going to lift a finger to help them.

The family attending this trial has been interesting.

Why is Derrick sitting with Anna?

Why are Austin and Joy going from the family section to the back of the room? Are they wrestling with supporting Anna vs wanting to punch pest's smug face?

Why are Justin and Spiveys there at all?

Is David Waller supporting his brother or brother in law? What does David think about the defense throwing his brother's name out there as a reasonable doubt?

 

 

Edited December 4, 2021 by realityfan26