Josh & Anna Smuggar: A Series of Unfortunate Events

[Insert Username]

56 minutes ago, Tikichick said:

The sentence isn't in the jury's purview and should not come into deliberations in any way.   Jury is the finder of fact and the sentencing (if any) is left up to the judge.

Depends on the state. In my state, after finding someone guilty, the jury then gets further instructions and then deliberates and recommends the sentence. From what I have been told, the judge generally follows the jury's recommendations 

[hathorlive]

3 minutes ago, starfire said:

Is Josh and Anna's house in their name or in Jimbobs? If Josh gets the potential fines of $250,000 x 2, could his house be seized and will Anna be potentially homeless with 7 kids?

I'm not saying that this NEVER happens, but in the CP trials I've been involved with, its happened ONCE.  

[crazy8s]

5 minutes ago, starfire said:

Is Josh and Anna's house in their name or in Jimbobs? If Josh gets the potential fines of $250,000 x 2, could his house be seized and will Anna be potentially homeless with 7 kids?

I believe the only thing listed in Josh's name is the RV. anything else was shifted to llcs in anna's name long ago. they don't even own a car as far as I can tell. JB of course owns the warehouse they live in that is in front of the TTH.

[Churchhoney]

13 minutes ago, starfire said:

Is Josh and Anna's house in their name or in Jimbobs? If Josh gets the potential fines of $250,000 x 2, could his house be seized and will Anna be potentially homeless with 7 kids?

I don't think they own a house any more.  They sold their house a few years ago.

For some time now they've been living in a sort of apartment in the big warehouse/garage on the land by JB and M's house. I assume the money they got for the house is stashed somewhere. And it is in Anna's name. apparently. But if there is anything in Josh's name and the government seized it (unlikely) they still wouldn't lose their current living quarters unless JB were to throw them out,. Which he won't.  So at least the kids have that much security. 

 

Edited December 8, 2021 by Churchhoney

[Jeanne222]

8 minutes ago, starfire said:

Is Josh and Anna's house in their name or in Jimbobs? If Josh gets the potential fines of $250,000 x 2, could his house be seized and will Anna be potentially homeless with 7 kids?

I think there was a lot of movement of assets a while back. I’m pretty confident the Duggers whipped the slate clean showing Joan name on anything!

Seems like Anna lives in a pole barn converted into housing for herself and kids. Courtesy of JimBob. 

He owns all of them!!!

[CountryGirl]

2 hours ago, GeeGolly said:

Jill is almost unrecognizable, but she looks great!

I love the "I'm not taking any shit!" looks on both of their faces, Jill's especially.

[GeeGolly]

11 minutes ago, CountryGirl said:

I wonder if they have frame forgiveness as I have (the first time I heard it expressed this way was on Oprah and it resonated): Forgiveness is letting go of the hope that the past would have been different.

For me, forgiveness is not at all about the other person, the one who hurt you. It's something you give yourself. The peace with never forgetting, never condoning, but accepting that it happened, it wasn't your fault, and releasing it.

Very well said. Very hard to teach. Once learned, its usually not a one shot deal. One may need to find that same peace, for the same event, more than a few times in their lifetime.

[absnow54]

Apparently the jury has already started deliberating, but The Sun updates are way behind. 

[CountryGirl]

1 hour ago, lascuba said:

When Anna and Josh Duggar walked in, they gave each other a hug, according to the Sun reporter.

Anna saw Jill (Duggar) Dillard and gave her a hug as well.

Josh, the reporter noted, went back to the gallery to give Jill a hug and to shake her husband Derrick Dillard's hand.

Justin Duggar was also seen hugging Jill, and the family members seemed "happy" to see her, with the reporter noting that everyone was complimenting her new hair.

According to the Sun reporter, Jill and Derick Dillard walked into the courtroom in the morning and sat in the first row next to Jessa (Duggar) Seewald and Jim Bob Duggar.

Jill talked to Jessa and Jim Bob, and the reporter noted it seemed serious.

Derick was seen looking straight ahead and the reporter didn't notice him speaking to anyone.

How Jill refrained from kneeing him in what little balls he has, I'll never know.

[Jeanne222]

I wonder who’s in charge of the seven little children left at home while daddy faces the music?

Michelle?  No. Jana?  No. I’ll bet the little home schooled kids. They’re getting the week off!

Then they will get days off to babysit while Anna trudges in the snow for visits to Josh!

It’s a saga that never ends!

[Cinnabon]

2 hours ago, Trillium said:

At least Meech mixed up his Grate Value Brand water flavoring for him again (aka JB emotional support kook aid per Reddit) because you know this asshole didn’t do it himself.

He’s a short man, isn’t he? 😆

[merylinkid]

6 minutes ago, Jeanne222 said:

I think there was a lot of movement of assets a while back. I’m pretty confident the Duggers whipped the slate clean showing Joan name on anything!

This is why I think they KNOW he is guilty.   Right after the raid on the car lot, everything got put in Anna's name.   Or Anna and .... wait for it ... Travis Story's name.   So that if there was a judgment against Josh, nothing could be seized.   

Besides the car lot, I hope a forensic accountant decides to look at the ALL the Duggar assets.   There's more than few shenanigans going on (and not the usual bookkeeping tricks everyone uses to avoid paying taxes in the fine old American Tradition.)

[peppergal]

1 minute ago, starfire said:

Is Josh and Anna's house in their name or in Jimbobs? If Josh gets the potential fines of $250,000 x 2, could his house be seized and will Anna be potentially homeless with 7 kids?

The warehouse living quarters building is on the same property tax record as the big house which suggest it is a single unit of ownership.  I can't imagine JB would be stupid enough to still (if he ever did) have Josh or Anna's name anywhere near whatever ownership LLC/trust/entity that owns the parcel of land/buildings that contains HIS house.  It's not like Josh has never in the past had legal difficulties that could have resulted in financial penalties, like the one where he used someone else's picture for his Ashley Madison profile.

[hathorlive]

6 minutes ago, absnow54 said:

Apparently the jury has already started deliberating, but The Sun updates are way behind. 

To  be fair, the Sun could just publish "And then the defense said some BS and the jury retired for deliberations".  And it would be true.

[Lindsay Loo Hoo]

A local reporter, Anna Darling with KNWA/Fox24 reported on Twitter that closing arguments have ended and the jury is in deliberation.

Updates from the Sun reporter will be added soon.

countdown is officially on. 

[Jeanne222]

12 minutes ago, Jeanne222 said:

I think there was a lot of movement of assets a while back. I’m pretty confident the Duggers whipped the slate clean showing Josh name on anything!

Seems like Anna lives in a pole barn converted into housing for herself and kids. Courtesy of JimBob. 

He owns all of them!!!

 

[madpsych78]

I'm on the edge of my seat!!!

[all fall down]

I'm on pins and needles waiting on this verdict. 

The reporter said the jury had the case as of about 12:15 PM local time. 

[CountryGirl]

13 minutes ago, GeeGolly said:

Very well said. Very hard to teach. Once learned, its usually not a one shot deal. One may need to find that same peace, for the same event, more than a few times in their lifetime.

Very, very true. I think what has helped me is the thought that "this person hurt me very badly and I'll be damned if I let them keep on hurting me" and trying to put it in the rearview mirror.

But sometimes, your eyes still drift there and back to those moment.

It truly is a journey. One I'm willing to make as I think I'm worth the investment. 😀

[iwantcookies]

(Singing) It’s the final countdown 

 

Lol

good song 

[Lindsay Loo Hoo]

Now this waiting is going to drive me nuts, whose with me?

[starfire]

Thanks for all the info. I haven't been following the last several years so was unaware of the house selling/asset hiding.

I wonder if Anna will bring the kids to visit their dad in prison .

 

[zoomama]

Just now, Lindsay Loo Hoo said:

Now this waiting is going to drive me nuts, whose with me?

i am totally with you! still sitting here in my pj's drinking coffee and waiting for the end result. 

[iwantcookies]

Just now, starfire said:

Thanks for all the info. I haven't been following the last several years so was unaware of the house selling/asset hiding.

I wonder if Anna will bring the kids to visit their dad in prison .

 

Definitely yes.

If I had champagne lol

[Trillium]

3 minutes ago, hathorlive said:

To  be fair, the Sun could just publish "And then the defense said some BS and the jury retired for deliberations".  And it would be true.

It would be one of their more accurate posts!

Just now, starfire said:

Thanks for all the info. I haven't been following the last several years so was unaware of the house selling/asset hiding.

I wonder if Anna will bring the kids to visit their dad in prison .

 

I really wonder what they have told the kids. I can’t imagine it’s anywhere close to the truth. Or what they will tell them if he goes to prison.  

[RedDelicious]

Just now, Lindsay Loo Hoo said:

Now this waiting is going to drive me nuts, whose with me?

This is one of those times I really wish cigarettes didn't kill you, because I'd have a full ashtray on my desk.

(I don't smoke!)

[Lindsay Loo Hoo]

Well, I'm parked here with my snacks until court ends for the day. Hoping the verdict comes down today because I may suffer stroke if I wait any longer

[Jeanne222]

2 minutes ago, starfire said:

Thanks for all the info. I haven't been following the last several years so was unaware of the house selling/asset hiding.

I wonder if Anna will bring the kids to visit their dad in prison .

 

If she can…she will. 

I’m convinced Anna is brain dead and will do anything and everything for Josh!

[madpsych78]

The defense supposedly made an hour-long closing argument as well - I wonder what they could BS for 1 hour? It doesn't seem like they hardly had any witnesses...

[Lindsay Loo Hoo]

Just now, madpsych78 said:

The defense supposedly made an hour-long closing argument as well - I wonder what they could BS for 1 hour? It doesn't seem like they hardly had any witnesses...

He has no education so couldnt have pulled this off, the reflection doesnt have a face clear....blah blah blah blah blahhhhhhhhhhhh

[mythoughtis]

In some ways I wish everything was in Anna’s name.  That was she could leave if she ever got a brain.
 

However I am sure it’s actually under the control of JB.   

[Lindsay Loo Hoo]

JUST NOW

Defense closing argument

Before the jury went into deliberation, the defense team presented its closing arguments.

Justin Gelfand noted that the defendant has no burden of proving anything and that the prosecution had to dispel reasonable doubt - that every doubt had to disappear unanimously.

He noted that each juror had the power to say no if they had a single reasonable doubt in their minds. "You have the courage to say no," he said.

He made a comparison between computer forensics and DNA and said they followed the evidence "together."

[hathorlive]

5 minutes ago, Lindsay Loo Hoo said:

Well, I'm parked here with my snacks until court ends for the day. Hoping the verdict comes down today because I may suffer stroke if I wait any longer

I'm at work, trying to work, reassuring myself that armchair forensicating IS work and I'm not being bad at all.

2 minutes ago, Lindsay Loo Hoo said:

He made a comparison between computer forensics and DNA and said they followed the evidence "together."

Why yes, yes they do.  Thanks for pointing that, lawyer dude.

[merylinkid]

Just now, hathorlive said:

I'm at work, trying to work, reassuring myself that armchair forensicating IS work and I'm not being bad at all.

Oh hey there we go, armchair lawyering is work.    I'mm not avoiding what I have to do.  

Really think we will get a verdict today.   There's not a lot to go over.  

[Lindsay Loo Hoo]

Gelfand continued, saying the prosecution's case depends on Duggar being behind the computer. "If not, their case crumbles like a house of cards," he added.

Gelfand noted that Michele Bush and James Fottrell agreed that remote access was a possibility, adding that Bush was not able to rule out remote access.

He then went over six reasons why remote access was a possibility.

[CouchTater]

7 minutes ago, iwantcookies said:

Definitely yes.

If I had champagne lol

I've become obsessed recently with a Bath and Body Works scent called 'Champagne Toast.' I'll put on some of the hand creeam to celebrate the verdict.  🙃

[crazy8s]

Just now, mythoughtis said:

In some ways I wish everything was in Anna’s name.  That was she could leave if she ever got a brain.
 

However I am sure it’s actually under the control of JB.   

the thing is there is a financial management co listed on the llcs as well. surely run by men. I doubt she could just sell off whatever assets if she felt like it.  There is at least one piece of property and another llc has a house. The same address josh and anna are listed for in AR voter records. Never been updated to the warehouse address, so if they have been voting it would seem they possibly committed voter fraud as well.

[RedDelicious]

6 minutes ago, Lindsay Loo Hoo said:

He noted that each juror had the power to say no if they had a single reasonable doubt in their minds. "You have the courage to say no," he said.

"You have the courage to say no" is an interesting choice of words, considering that one subset of Josh's alleged victims did not have that same privilege (to say no) and another subset of previous victims were brainwashed to think that they could not or were to young to do so.

Edited December 8, 2021 by RedDelicious

[crazy8s]

Seriously??

Gelfand spoke for the defense for approximately 90 minutes. He reiterated all the points the defense has been making throughout the trial. Gelfand said the investigator in the case ignored other possible suspects because “they were so star struck about the possibility of prosecuting Josh Duggar.”

“So blinded by that focus that they refused to look for anything else,” Gelfand said. “Everything is on the line, the stakes don’t get any higher, we ask that you find him not guilty.”

[CherryMalotte]

13 minutes ago, RedDelicious said:

This is one of those times I really wish cigarettes didn't kill you, because I'd have a full ashtray on my desk.

I smoked for years but have been smoke free for near 13-14 years now.  Can't stand the smell of them any more, and the cost!  But if I had a pack I'd be sore tempted to light up.  That's when I would chain smoke, when I was stressed or aggravated.

Just hoping wishing and praying that whatever higher powers there are will guide this jury to a guilty verdict.  That would make my holiday season.  And peace to the victims in that family and to the victims in the video/pictures.  He needs to be behind bars and away from all children.

Edited December 8, 2021 by CherryMalotte

[monagatuna]

6 hours ago, GeeGolly said:

But the quote is referring to guilt, "... about whether Josh was guilty".

From Google: Beyond a reasonable doubt is a legal standard of proof required to validate a criminal conviction in most adversarial legal systems.

Beyond a reasonable doubt, the defendant is guilty. So if the doubt is unreasonable, wouldn't that point to not guilty?

Thread moves fast, but I don't know if this got an actual answer. But no, if there is "unreasonable doubt," the defendant can still be found guilty. "Reasonable doubt" could be like, well, we don't KNOW where his coworkers were at the time of the Linux installation or access to these materials happened, they said they were at a Wal Mart in a different state, but there's no evidence that they were actually there, AND a cell tower pinged them in a different county in the same state half an hour later."

UNreasonable doubt could be anything from "well Josh says he wasn't there and I believe him despite all the evidence" to "dragons came down, swept Josh away from his computer and installed the OS splitter and DLd the CSAM, them wrenched his eyes open to make him watch it against his will." Most of the legal world operates on a "reasonable person" standard, so the jury has to put themselves in the shoes of the average American and rational thinking. So even if a person's thinking is unreasonable and irrational, they have to use the standards of a reasonable and rational person. If the standard were "beyond an unreasonable doubt," you could make up any old scenario your mind could dream up and the prosecution would have to disprove such scenario before a jury could convict.

I hope this makes sense. I'm not a criminal lawyer so my experience on this is limited, but the reasonableness standard stretches across the legal field and the principles are similar.

[RedDelicious]

1 minute ago, crazy8s said:

Seriously??

Gelfand spoke for the defense for approximately 90 minutes. He reiterated all the points the defense has been making throughout the trial. Gelfand said the investigator in the case ignored other possible suspects because “they were so star struck about the possibility of prosecuting Josh Duggar.”

“So blinded by that focus that they refused to look for anything else,” Gelfand said. “Everything is on the line, the stakes don’t get any higher, we ask that you find him not guilty.”

What in the actual F*CK?? For real? Please, they've fried far bigger fish than Josh Duggar.

[Lindsay Loo Hoo]

The first reason Gelfand noted was the universal plug and play, saying Fottrell testified it would make a network more vulnerable. He noted that the HP computer had plug and play enabled and that its network through the connected router was vulnerable.

Gelfand added as a second reason that the HP streams through a router. He said every video file was streamed and that, while confusing, the data was critical.

"The real evidence is on the router," Gelfand said.

He noted that too much was at stake for Josh Duggar and that the router would tell them what devices were connected.

"Why don't we have the router?" he asked, claiming that the government did nothing to consider remote access.

Gelfand said both experts agreed to the possibility of remote access and that the prosecution didn't mention the forensic data in their closing argument.

[Jeanne222]

10 minutes ago, madpsych78 said:

The defense supposedly made an hour-long closing argument as well - I wonder what they could BS for 1 hour? It doesn't seem like they hardly had any witnesses...

I wonder how much they're charging JB?  

[RedDelicious]

I don't want to jinx anything but I have to laugh at the router. That's not how routers work Dingus (Gelfand), we've been over this.

[Jeanne222]

6 minutes ago, crazy8s said:

the thing is there is a financial management co listed on the llcs as well. surely run by men. I doubt she could just sell off whatever assets if she felt like it.  There is at least one piece of property and another llc has a house. The same address josh and anna are listed for in AR voter records. Never been updated to the warehouse address, so if they have been voting it would seem they possibly committed voter fraud as well.

Speaking of voting isn't JimBob running for something with the voting December 10, Friday???

[Lindsay Loo Hoo]

Gelfand continued with a third reason. He said the small size of the partition suggested whoever set it up knew it was not big enough to keep videos and images.

He claimed that activity was inconsistent with Duggar and made no sense.

Gelfand then noted the short time period of the alleged crimes. He said everything happened over three days in May 2019.

[merylinkid]

3 minutes ago, Lindsay Loo Hoo said:

"The real evidence is on the router," Gelfand said.

He noted that too much was at stake for Josh Duggar and that the router would tell them what devices were connected.

Then why didn't THEY do something about the router.  They are allowed to develop evidence on their own, not just review the Prosecution's evidence.    JB probably got a lawyer on the line the day of the raid.   Why didn't that smarter than the Feds lawyer grab the router?   no search warrant needed if the owner gave permission.   

[Jeanne222]

17 minutes ago, Lindsay Loo Hoo said:

Well, I'm parked here with my snacks until court ends for the day. Hoping the verdict comes down today because I may suffer stroke if I wait any longer

Thank you so much for all the trial data!

[Sile]

6 minutes ago, monagatuna said:

Thread moves fast, but I don't know if this got an actual answer. But no, if there is "unreasonable doubt," the defendant can still be found guilty. "Reasonable doubt" could be like, well, we don't KNOW where his coworkers were at the time of the Linux installation or access to these materials happened, they said they were at a Wal Mart in a different state, but there's no evidence that they were actually there, AND a cell tower pinged them in a different county in the same state half an hour later."

UNreasonable doubt could be anything from "well Josh says he wasn't there and I believe him despite all the evidence" to "dragons came down, swept Josh away from his computer and installed the OS splitter and DLd the CSAM, them wrenched his eyes open to make him watch it against his will." Most of the legal world operates on a "reasonable person" standard, so the jury has to put themselves in the shoes of the average American and rational thinking. So even if a person's thinking is unreasonable and irrational, they have to use the standards of a reasonable and rational person. If the standard were "beyond an unreasonable doubt," you could make up any old scenario your mind could dream up and the prosecution would have to disprove such scenario before a jury could convict.

I hope this makes sense. I'm not a criminal lawyer so my experience on this is limited, but the reasonableness standard stretches across the legal field and the principles are similar.

Lil BUB!!

As much shit is in this life due to human trash like Duggar, seeing BUB always restores my faith in the universe!  I think a few days ago was the 1 year anniversary of her leaving this plane of existence.