Josh & Anna Smuggar: A Series of Unfortunate Events

[hathorlive]

8 minutes ago, Zella said:

My biggest problem with the defense's argument so far is that is has not been cohesive. They keep contradicting themselves.

On one hand, Josh is too stupid to use Tor because he was homeschooled. On the other hand, Josh has used Tor for years because he's dodging the paparazzi and selling the cars there. (What?) 

Then they turn around and say Tor is innocuous and being unfairly characterized as the dark web and is readily available on app stores, which kind of undermines the presentation of it as mindbogglingly complex to use. 

To me, the argument would be more effective if they'd just picked one of those--either Josh uses Tor and it's no big deal because people use Tor or he doesn't use Tor because he's dumb. Neither is a perfect argument, but you could work it and repeat it. 

 

They literally hope that juror number 1, who agrees with Mark Meadows that the Chinese used thermostats to hack election servers, will think Josh needed a secure application from the gubment.  Or that juror number 2 had a homeschooled neighbor who was dumb as a box of hair.  Or that Juror 3 thinks the dark web is something spiders get caught in.   There will be jurors who think just like you did, that it's contradictory arguments.  Better yet, the AUSA needs to do a closing argument that shows clips of Josh on TV with his high tech gadgets and computer equipment to show them that the defense is full of air. 

Its a defense that has something for every conspiracy nut you know!

[Zella]

Just now, hathorlive said:

Its a defense that has something for every conspiracy nut you know!

So, basically the Jim Jones approach. Put together it's absolute bullshit that bewilders a lot of people but individually parts of it may resonate with a select few. 

[emmawoodhouse]

I like the idea of using footage of Smuggar from 19 Kids in his computer room to convict him. I clearly remember him showing off the room and saying, "NO RUGRATS ALLOWED!" It can't be more clear that the tech room was made for the Golden Boy. 

eta It was the moving in special, not the series.

Edited December 5, 2021 by emmawoodhouse

[Jeeves]

One thing to keep in mind over the next days as this trial keeps rolling, is that trials don't typically unroll like a scripted play. Yes, the prosecution does its best to present its case in an orderly way, but all witnesses are subject to cross-exam, and the fun of that is that crazy spaghetti gets thrown at the wall which is distracting. And the prosecution may have to call witnesses out of their preferred order because of real life scheduling stuff. 

When I tried cases, I had prepared my personal checklist of the facts required to prove the case and if I was defending, the facts I would want to cite in my closing argument. As I checked those off during the trial, they never were introduced into the record in a lovely consistent order. Some were introduced in direct testimony from witnesses, and some from cross-exam. Some were not just a matter of testimony but also of items introduced as exhibits. But, by the time I stood up to make my closing argument, they were all there. 

I'm totally here for the enlightened discussions of what may be weaknesses in some of the testimony, and heaven knows what the defense will serve up when it's their turn next week. 

What will matter, and I won't be in the courtroom so I won't hear them directly, are the closing arguments of the prosecution and defense lawyers. That's where all the facts in evidence will be organized and presented to the jury. I live in hope that the prosecution will have introduced all the evidence required to prove it was Josh - and not some other dude - who possessed and viewed the CSAM in question, regardless of whatever the defense is contending. 

In the meantime it wouldn't surprise me if there's an ebb and flow of information, with some witnesses coming across well and maybe others not so much. A former mentor, may he rest in peace, was a judge with a long career. He once said to me, "I don't know how many trials I've done as a lawyer and presided over as a judge, that were covered by the press. When I would read the news stories about them I would usually wonder what the heck courtroom they were talking about because I didn't recognize much of what was in there." Not saying the reporting from this trial is that bad but it's obviously going to reflect the perspective, and limits of knowledge, of the reporters.

[Quilt Fairy]

9 minutes ago, Jeeves said:

What will matter, and I won't be in the courtroom so I won't hear them directly, are the closing arguments of the prosecution and defense lawyers. That's where all the facts in evidence will be organized and presented to the jury. I live in hope that the prosecution will have introduced all the evidence required to prove it was Josh - and not some other dude - who possessed and viewed the CSAM in question, regardless of whatever the defense is contending.

Well, all the documents and motions presented by the prosecution have been well-organized and clearly written, so hopefully that will carry over to the closing argument.  I hope all those documents weren't written by some para-legal or intern.  

[hathorlive]

38 minutes ago, Zella said:

So, basically the Jim Jones approach. Put together it's absolute bullshit that bewilders a lot of people but individually parts of it may resonate with a select few. 

Exactly.  You will always have people who get a bit of info and extrapolate it to the final conclusion.  Other's have to be led there.  Still others will say "but his family is so nice and Jesus!".  But that's where the other jurors have to get in these people to fall in line and say that the mysterious thumb drive doesn't trump 5 victims and text messages. 

And jurors are complex.  I was on a drug case jury and we had one hold out.  And the main reason was that the suspect was black and her family owned a restaurant across from the historical black college.  It's a small town, she's afraid if people find out she was on the jury, it would kill her family's income.  That's hard to overcome.  But we got her there after a few hours of talking it out.  She knew he was guilty.  I think this jury won't have much trouble knowing he's guilty. If a few are focused on remote access, that's when the jurors have to point out he was at the computer texting, what's probable: that Josh did it or some unknown suspect with no evidence did it?  

I will say I am not losing sleep over Josh being found not guilty.  I've gotten many guilty verdicts with much less evidence.

[hathorlive]

16 minutes ago, Jeeves said:

One thing to keep in mind over the next days as this trial keeps rolling, is that trials don't typically unroll like a scripted play. Yes, the prosecution does its best to present its case in an orderly way, but all witnesses are subject to cross-exam, and the fun of that is that crazy spaghetti gets thrown at the wall which is distracting. And the prosecution may have to call witnesses out of their preferred order because of real life scheduling stuff. 

When I tried cases, I had prepared my personal checklist of the facts required to prove the case and if I was defending, the facts I would want to cite in my closing argument. As I checked those off during the trial, they never were introduced into the record in a lovely consistent order. Some were introduced in direct testimony from witnesses, and some from cross-exam. Some were not just a matter of testimony but also of items introduced as exhibits. But, by the time I stood up to make my closing argument, they were all there. 

And those same limitations also affect the defense.  They have had many rulings going against them.  They have witnesses who need to fly in and fly out and they will have times that chaos is raining down.  It's normal in a trial.  I had a case where the audio visual equipment went out and the federal judge told me to speak loudly.  Well, the jury is right next to me and the judge is in a 100 year old court room with no acoustics, sitting up on a perch behind me.  You don't get to be federal judge unless you are as old as Methuselah (thrown in the for the Duggars). He was deaf and I was basically yelling out my testimony. I won the jury over though.  And it worked out.  Nothing every goes smoothly for both sides.

I think the prosecutors have done a good job. The defense is earning their money.  But in the end, you have a lot of evidence and I think it's a solid case.  If Jill comes in and says this didn't happen to victim number 1, it happened to me, it's game over.  That's just my experience. Remember, unlike most of us, the jurors live in this area.  Do they want Josh Duggar free, near their kids?

[Quilt Fairy]

I think if the molestation evidence is introduced, the jury will find him guilty of that, regardless of what the actual charges are. 

[Tabbygirl521]

5 hours ago, Churchhoney said:

Well, everything's been said but not everybody has said it, re: south and north ends.

This is from Free Jinger, May 22, 2015 -- talking about the end of 19 Kids -- and quoting Anna as saying the "south end" and "north end" part. ..... Bin and Jessa were apparently in this same episode talking to Anna.....but contemporaneous evidence says it is Anna who talked about that, unfortunately. 

Quote from free jinger poster -- 'The part that bothers me the most was Anna saying that "mama takes care of the north end, and daddy takes care of the south end." SHE KNEW. And she still gave him, most likely, unsupervised diaper changing time with Mack. I am just at a loss.'

https://www.freejinger.org/topic/23398-josh-duggar-admits-to-molestation-rumors-part-2/page/30/

 

Thank you. I was certain it was Anna and Josh and am glad to know for sure. 

[Tuxcat]

30 minutes ago, Quilt Fairy said:

I think if the molestation evidence is introduced, the jury will find him guilty of that, regardless of what the actual charges are. 

I will lose it if that information gets introduced and the defense argues it was just "hormones and curiosity." 

Thank you all for such a great discussion on the arguments presented - and to be presented. Anyone want to guess about the email regarding shipping labels from Caleb in March 2019? Ha! This is really  such a fun "whodunit" - sarcasm intended. I guess its more like a "where tf are they going with this?" fun.

 I've enjoyed reading up on computer apps and lingo I never knew existed. Slightly concerned my IP will be marked from all my searches!

Edited December 5, 2021 by Tuxcat

[Zella]

4 minutes ago, Tuxcat said:

Anyone want to guess about the email regarding shipping labels from Caleb in March 2019?

I remember that coming up and being so confused since it seemed not terribly relevant to anything happening in May. LOL

[hathorlive]

4 minutes ago, Tuxcat said:

I will lose it if that information gets introduced and the defense argues it was just "hormones and curiosity." 

Thank you all for such a great discussion on the arguments presented - and to be presented. Anyone want to guess about the email regarding shipping labels from Caleb in March 2019? Ha! This is really  such a fun "whodunit" - sarcasm intended. I guess its more like a "where tf are they going with this?" fun.

 I've enjoyed reading up on computer apps and lingo I never knew existed. Slightly concerned my IP will be marked from all my searches!

Well, I can top that email.  I got one from my boss on Friday saying that I needed to do m monthly stats and we all know what that means. Right?? Smoking gun of the century.  People get emails about work at a scary level.  Are they going to say that his ability to access the invoice system or send an email implies he had remote access?  Who knows.  

[js9548]

Please forgive me if this has already been explained but doesn't the picture of Josh's hands help the prosecution  as to when Josh was at the auto lot? Has that picture been thrown out? Does that picture identify that it was the auto lot and the time it was taken?  Wouldn't that place Josh at the scene while all this  CSAM was taking place?  Or is this picture part of the pictures of cars that Josh was taking so it is included? Wouldn't this help negate the remote access argument?

Edited December 5, 2021 by js9548

[GeeGolly]

I asked this before the trial began, and I believe someone else also asked it, but I'm unsure if its been answered. Wouldn't you be able to tell when the computer is accessed remotely for a download and when its not? Isn't there a log in history or something like that to show from where access happened? And wouldn't Josh would get an alert?

Can back to add - maybe this will come out when the defense expert witness is on the stand and cross examined?

Edited December 5, 2021 by GeeGolly

[absnow54]

10 minutes ago, GeeGolly said:

Isn't there a log in history or something like that to show from where access happened? And wouldn't Josh would get an alert?

There would be a log of someone accessing the machine. If they SSH in, though, Josh wouldn’t see it. It’s not like Windows where you get booted when someone else logs in or VNC where you can see the mouse moving and windows popping up. The remote user would be doing everything via a terminal window that’s all command prompt lines. 

Edited December 5, 2021 by absnow54

[GeeGolly]

3 minutes ago, absnow54 said:

There would be a log of someone accessing the machine. If they SSH in, though, Josh wouldn’t see it. It’s not like Windows where you get booted when someone else logs in or VNC where you can see the mouse moving and windows popping up. The remote user would be doing everything via a terminal window that’s all command prompt lines. 

Would Josh get an email alerting him to the remote access?

[floridamom]

The only one who knows if Josh is truly guilty of these charges is Josh himself. The prosecution's   job is to try the evidence, not the defendant's guilt or innocence per say. IF the evidence proves the charges, then the defendant should be found guilty. A case is only as good as the presentable evidence they have. This is what my ex-husband ( state prosecutor) has always told me. Those here on our board who are in the legal field...is this so?

[absnow54]

20 minutes ago, GeeGolly said:

Would Josh get an email alerting him to the remote access?

No. It’s extremely hard to explain why Josh logged into the Linux partition when all the car dealer stuff was on the Windows side, and stayed late to give the nefarious actor time to finish their download though. 

[Insert Username]

Wouldn’t the remote user have to know that there was a partition to access it? Also, I don’t think that there anything on the desk top that indicates a partition (like a button you push), so anyone who used the computer wouldn’t know that the partition existed unless they were told by Josh. Finally, wouldn’t a random user stealing the WiFi be using it to down load or view stuff on their own device - not to down load it onto a computer they can’t access. Unless they had the partition on their own device, wouldn’t it be impossible to down load from that?

The defense arguments make little sense.

My dad was a prosecutor for years (and did a short stint as a public defender) He said that sometimes the defense attorney’s job was not to prove his client innocent, but to make sure that the prosecution do their job properly

[Churchhoney]

11 hours ago, Zella said:

Yes and I think they're also tabloid hacks who are just focusing on sound bites and sensational details. 

 

I'm sure this is what The Sun person's editor keeps yelling at the reporter. "People read us for dirt, not technology education. Get back to agitating people about who's sitting with whom in that courtroom! A couple dozen people are actually interested in the tech shit....Screw them! Millions'll click on us to read about a family feud!"

 

[Not Buyin It]

10 hours ago, emmawoodhouse said:

I like the idea of using footage of Smuggar from 19 Kids in his computer room to convict him. I clearly remember him showing off the room and saying, "NO RUGRATS ALLOWED!" It can't be more clear that the tech room was made for the Golden Boy. 

eta It was the moving in special, not the series.

I remember that. I believe it was more of a media studio.

 

[BigBingerBro]

Pest having his own private media closet freaked me out then and now makes me want to puke thinking about what went on in there.  I wonder how much trash was downloaded in there under the guise of "joyfully producing content for Jesus"????

[GeeGolly]

[CountryGirl]

10 hours ago, Quilt Fairy said:

Well, all the documents and motions presented by the prosecution have been well-organized and clearly written, so hopefully that will carry over to the closing argument.  I hope all those documents weren't written by some para-legal or intern.  

I doubt all were but keep in mind anything that isn’t written by an attorney themselves (or a judge for opinions, memoranda et al) is heavily reviewed, scrutinized, etc. by lead counsel (or judge /clerks) before it ever sees the light of day. Interns/clerks have to learn somehow after all and as for paralegals, in terms of their research, writing, and analytical skills, there are many I would put in the same league as attorneys, those in my former practice among them. 

[Jeeves]

3 hours ago, floridamom said:

The only one who knows if Josh is truly guilty of these charges is Josh himself. The prosecution's job is to try the evidence, not the defendant's guilt or innocence per say. IF the evidence proves the charges, then the defendant should be found guilty. A case is only as good as the presentable evidence they have. This is what my ex-husband ( state prosecutor) has always told me. Those here on our board who are in the legal field...is this so?

That is absolutely true. Especially the parts I bolded above. 

2 hours ago, Insert Username said:

My dad was a prosecutor for years (and did a short stint as a public defender) He said that sometimes the defense attorney’s job was not to prove his client innocent, but to make sure that the prosecution do their job properly

That's true. I'd say some of that a bit differently though. I always saw that as not so much my job, but the result of my doing my job. My job as a defense lawyer was to get my client acquitted (or have charges dropped) if the prosecution didn't have the evidence required to prove my client guilty as charged. In the pre-trial stages this meant I'd review the prosecution's evidence for any missing links or weaknesses. That often led to resolving the case by a plea bargain. If the case went to trial, I kept track of the evidence needed to prove all the elements of the crime(s) charged, and if the prosecution's case came up short, I would move for judgement of acquittal after the prosecution rested its case. My intent wasn't to make them do their job or teach them how to do it, but that was the effect of my being a prepared and competent defense lawyer. 

1 minute ago, CountryGirl said:

I doubt all were but keep in mind anything that isn’t written by an attorney themselves (or a judge for opinions, memoranda et al) is heavily reviewed, scrutinized, etc. by lead counsel (or judge /clerks) before it ever sees the light of day. Interns/clerks have to learn somehow after all and as for paralegals, in terms of their research, writing, and analytical skills, there are many I would put in the same league as attorneys, those in my former practice among them. 

I agree as to the review that lawyers and judges give to documents drafted by paralegals, and the quality of research and writing by the best paralegals. 

[Quilt Fairy]

Please know that I didn't intend to diss interns, law clerks, or paralegals, but it was 2a.m. and I was having a hard time putting a coherent sentence together, so I left out a phrase that would have clarified that.  Sorry. 

[hathorlive]

4 hours ago, GeeGolly said:

Would Josh get an email alerting him to the remote access?

Not through SSH.  Again, both Linux and Windows have log files that event id codes that let you know whose where at what time doing what.  We aren't sure if anyone checked those log files.  I'm not happy with the prosecutions answer to this situation.

[GeeGolly]

3 minutes ago, hathorlive said:

Not through SSH.  Again, both Linux and Windows have log files that event id codes that let you know whose where at what time doing what.  We aren't sure if anyone checked those log files.  I'm not happy with the prosecutions answer to this situation.

Has anyone brought the log files up? It seems to me the prosecution would have shut down the remote access theory if they could have. 

[GeeGolly]

Oh no. It just occurred to me the defense might be looking through Duggar snark to get a read on how their defense is being perceived. How often do they get a client that has forum after forum commenting on a case. I'd hate to think we're giving them intel (had to) to strengthen their case.

 

[Zella]

I feel like it's a little late for them to start making adjustments. They can't take back what they've already said that doesn't make sense or that moment when the one federal investigator told them they were being misleading.

[Tuxcat]

This article actually is fairly good at summarizing the arguments so far. It leans a little toward the defendant side of things - in terms of poking holes - . I do like though that when the defense raised the possibility of the time stamps being incorrect, on cross- the prosecution was able to show an example of one time stamp correlating with a picture that showed the reflection of a clock on the computer screen. Time correlated within a few minutes. 

https://people.com/tv/josh-duggar-trial-defense-cross-examines-key-prosecution-witness/

[SunnyBeBe]

Totally by accident, I tuned in to this movie on Hulu this weekend called Silk Road.  It’s the true story of Ross Ulbrict who created it on the Dark Web. A former Boy Scout and scholar, he was eventually investigated by the FBI and charged with multiple federal charges.  He was offered a plea deal of 10 years, but he refused and is serving a double life sentence, plus 40 years.  I just found this ironic.  It reminded me of Josh.  Link about it and trailer below. It shows about how he desired to create a place you could buy anything, even if illegal. 
 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ross_Ulbricht

 

 

[quickjessie]

1 hour ago, SunnyBeBe said:

Totally by accident, I tuned in to this movie on Hulu this weekend called Silk Road.  It’s the true story of Ross Ulbrict who created it on the Dark Web. A former Boy Scout and scholar, he was eventually investigated by the FBI and charged with multiple federal charges.  He was offered a plea deal of 10 years, but he refused and is serving a double life sentence, plus 40 years.  I just found this ironic.  It reminded me of Josh.  Link about it and trailer below. It shows about how he desired to create a place you could buy anything, even if illegal. 
 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ross_Ulbricht

 

 

Hey, thanks for this.  I'm going to watch it today.

[hathorlive]

8 hours ago, Insert Username said:

Wouldn’t the remote user have to know that there was a partition to access it? Also, I don’t think that there anything on the desk top that indicates a partition (like a button you push), so anyone who used the computer wouldn’t know that the partition existed unless they were told by Josh. Finally, wouldn’t a random user stealing the WiFi be using it to down load or view stuff on their own device - not to down load it onto a computer they can’t access. Unless they had the partition on their own device, wouldn’t it be impossible to down load from that?

The defense arguments make little sense.

My dad was a prosecutor for years (and did a short stint as a public defender) He said that sometimes the defense attorney’s job was not to prove his client innocent, but to make sure that the prosecution do their job properly

They will say that the remote accessor knows there's a Linux partition because he, not JOsh, installed it.  There is nothing on the Windows desktop that indicates a Linux partition.  If someone was a wise Windows user, they would notice they have less disk space than normal, but there's nothing to indicate the partition.  What I don't understand is that the defense can't say Josh didn't use it because weren't there documents or reviews that were initiated from the Linux side?  It's getting confusing right now with all the details.

[Tuxcat]

1 minute ago, hathorlive said:

What I don't understand is that the defense can't say Josh didn't use it because weren't there documents or reviews that were initiated from the Linux side?  It's getting confusing right now with all the details.

The only document that supports their argument to Josh himself using the partition side with the Linux OS is a bill of sale  loaded onto that side in June (a month after the CSAM). That bill of sale says the salesperson is Joshua. They also argue that the password to the partition side is Intell1988 which is his password. Of course the defense argues that everyone knew that was his password - so anyone framing him could have set it up that way.

Obviously the other argument is that Josh was there - tagged via gelocation and text messages when the partition was installed and when the TOR was installed the next day - not to mention when the CSAM was loaded. He was there every time so in theory he should have seen this mysterious person setting the partition up on the 11th. 

[hathorlive]

3 hours ago, Tuxcat said:

This article actually is fairly good at summarizing the arguments so far. It leans a little toward the defendant side of things - in terms of poking holes - . I do like though that when the defense raised the possibility of the time stamps being incorrect, on cross- the prosecution was able to show an example of one time stamp correlating with a picture that showed the reflection of a clock on the computer screen. Time correlated within a few minutes. 

https://people.com/tv/josh-duggar-trial-defense-cross-examines-key-prosecution-witness/

But you establish timestamps when you take the hard drive out of the machine and image it.  Once it's out, you boot the computer and note the time and date that is in the BIOS.  That should be done at the onset to show the system time and date.  Other things, like web files, may have time stamps from the server they reside on, so conversions are needed.  But again, these are best practices that we should do every case.

 

On the issue of remote access.  The prosecution should immediately fix the weakness of their experts by demanding the defense witness present proof.  "Oh it was probably done via remote access".  Then they should immediately counter, do you have log files to prove this? Can you show me Linux OS settings that allow for remote access? Can you show me user movements across the system?  Questions like this force the defense to prove remote access, not just throw it out as an affirmative defense.

7 hours ago, Not Buyin It said:

I remember that. I believe it was more of a media studio.

 

It's still kind of hard to say he's computer illiterate when he has all that electronic equipment around.

[Zella]

IIRC the prosecution has already stated the partition needs an ass in seat in front of the screen to boot it. 

[hathorlive]

2 minutes ago, Zella said:

IIRC the prosecution has already stated the partition needs an ass in seat in front of the screen to boot it. 

There are ways to set up a dual boot system, which is what this computer became after Linux partition was installed.  On my macbook, when I power it on, I hit the option key and let's me pick what OS it boots to.  If I don't push the button, it goes to the Mac partition automatically.  On my windows systems that were dual booted with Linux, it was the same thing.  So to get to the Linux OS, you have to have the butt in seat, unless he left the computer running all night, on the Linux partition.  

BTW, I love how they make the car shack sound like Google.  Like there are hundreds of employees coming and going.  We know that it was mostly just Josh, and probably only between the hours of noon and time for porn o'clock.  Duggar time and all.

[Tuxcat]

10 minutes ago, hathorlive said:

But you establish timestamps when you take the hard drive out of the machine and image it.  Once it's out, you boot the computer and note the time and date that is in the BIOS. 

I believe the timestamps they were referring to as being suspect were the ones from the old iPhone back up they found on the MacBook. I don't think they were refuting the timestamps on the HP.

Edited December 5, 2021 by Tuxcat

[Picture It. Sicily]

On 12/4/2021 at 2:41 PM, CalicoKitty said:

No, I remember that, too.

 

If it makes you feel any better, I don't believe for a second that Josh has ever lifted a finger to help Anna with any aspect of child care.

[3 is enough]

4 minutes ago, Picture It. Sicily said:

If it makes you feel any better, I don't believe for a second that Josh has ever lifted a finger to help Anna with any aspect of child care.

Totally agree.

[Jeanne222]

I just don’t understand Anna at all. A lot of what we are hearing at trial Anna has known for a long time.   How can she hold his hand and support such a monster. 

Stand by your man is one thing but supporting a man so into CP with seven little children of her own is quite another. 

Do you think the jury is understanding all this computer talk???

[mittsigirl]

19 hours ago, hathorlive said:

They do have a lot of resources, but each of us have our own specialty.  Some are great at working servers, others specialize in cell phones or Macs.  There's a lot of stuff to know! The weird thing about this guy is that he's a 19 year experienced MANAGER.  My managers don't do active forensics anymore. I don't know if they had the top guy do the work because of his experience testifying and working cases or what.  

I really wish that it was you in that court room, and not anybody else. You have taught all of us so much and have lots of experience. Plus-you are a woman, and I know you are smarter than most men, because women think with both sides of their brain, and men with just one side at a time. Don't kill me everyone, that's just a fact.

 

[mittsigirl]

19 hours ago, hathorlive said:

They literally hope that juror number 1, who agrees with Mark Meadows that the Chinese used thermostats to hack election servers, will think Josh needed a secure application from the gubment.  Or that juror number 2 had a homeschooled neighbor who was dumb as a box of hair.  Or that Juror 3 thinks the dark web is something spiders get caught in.   There will be jurors who think just like you did, that it's contradictory arguments.  Better yet, the AUSA needs to do a closing argument that shows clips of Josh on TV with his high tech gadgets and computer equipment to show them that the defense is full of air. 

Its a defense that has something for every conspiracy nut you know!

Can the prosecution ever fix anything in closing arguments, or is it too late to bring up anything that the defense would consider new evidence? Are cases ever won by the prosecution with their closing arguments?

[Quilt Fairy]

The rationale for the remote access defense confounds me.  I mean, I understand they are trying to convince the jury that it was anyone but Josh, but what would someone doing this remotely gain?  They'd go to that effort to put CSAM on Josh Duggar's computer?  Really?  I guess I'm glad they struck the potential juror who said he didn't trust the government. 

[Cinnabon]

1 hour ago, hathorlive said:

There are ways to set up a dual boot system, which is what this computer became after Linux partition was installed.  On my macbook, when I power it on, I hit the option key and let's me pick what OS it boots to.  If I don't push the button, it goes to the Mac partition automatically.  On my windows systems that were dual booted with Linux, it was the same thing.  So to get to the Linux OS, you have to have the butt in seat, unless he left the computer running all night, on the Linux partition.  

BTW, I love how they make the car shack sound like Google.  Like there are hundreds of employees coming and going.  We know that it was mostly just Josh, and probably only between the hours of noon and time for porn o'clock.  Duggar time and all.

They really should show a picture of the tiny roadside carlot shack to the jury, so they can see it for themselves.

[kaleidoscope]

Did Josh have to pay to download the pictures?  If so, is there a money trail?

[SunnyBeBe]

Does anyone know if Grandma Duggar had any affiliation with Josh’s business?

[mittsigirl]

18 minutes ago, Quilt Fairy said:

The rationale for the remote access defense confounds me.  I mean, I understand they are trying to convince the jury that it was anyone but Josh, but what would someone doing this remotely gain?  They'd go to that effort to put CSAM on Josh Duggar's computer?  Really?  I guess I'm glad they struck the potential juror who said he didn't trust the government. 

I agree with you, plus there is his sick past that will be brought up, it's not like he never showed any interest in his sickness before! I could see the case being iffy if he had never been in trouble with this before, but he has been! I don't see how anyone on that jury could say he wasn't guilty and that somebody just set him up. But that's just the way my mind would work if I was a jury member.

 

[Nysha]

2 hours ago, Jeanne222 said:

I just don’t understand Anna at all. A lot of what we are hearing at trial Anna has known for a long time.   How can she hold his hand and support such a monster. 

Stand by your man is one thing but supporting a man so into CP with seven little children of her own is quite another. 

Anna has no qualms about having seven little children, and more if possible, with Sex Pervert because she truly does not believe he downloaded the CSAM, or watched it, or has any interest in children in that way. She thinks this is a witch trial to persecute the Pervert and his godly family.