Josh & Anna Smuggar: A Series of Unfortunate Events

[satrunrose]

If Anna is fighting with JB, I think it's likely one of 2 possibilities,

1- JB realizes that if he's going to be the father of a Golden Boy, he's going to have to lie low and cut off public support for FF. Everything the Duggars do, especially since the trial and the doc, is being seen through the lens of "The family that raised the perv" which means Jed! will be in the used car business forever unless JB can somehow change the narrative (I doubt he can since Jed! is such a little twerp, but that's another story). If Anna is one of the last True Believers in Josh-u-a's persecution, that would royally piss her off.

2- The opposite, Anna has finally realized what life is like as a single mom (the horror!) with a large family. She wants to cut ties but JB won't let her. 

With everything we've heard, I'd say 1 is more likely than 2. I also agree with Gee Golly, though, getting Anna out of the TTH and off to Texas is probably an option that works well for Anna and JB.

[Scarlett45]

20 hours ago, satrunrose said:

If Anna is fighting with JB, I think it's likely one of 2 possibilities,

1- JB realizes that if he's going to be the father of a Golden Boy, he's going to have to lie low and cut off public support for FF. Everything the Duggars do, especially since the trial and the doc, is being seen through the lens of "The family that raised the perv" which means Jed! will be in the used car business forever unless JB can somehow change the narrative (I doubt he can since Jed! is such a little twerp, but that's another story). If Anna is one of the last True Believers in Josh-u-a's persecution, that would royally piss her off.

2- The opposite, Anna has finally realized what life is like as a single mom (the horror!) with a large family. She wants to cut ties but JB won't let her. 

With everything we've heard, I'd say 1 is more likely than 2. I also agree with Gee Golly, though, getting Anna out of the TTH and off to Texas is probably an option that works well for Anna and JB.

I don’t think (2) is likely (the rest of your post is spot on). Cutting ties as a single mom would just make Anna’s life harder. I think if Anna was done with Josh, so long as she didn’t spout that publicly from the rooftops, JB/Michelle wouldn’t care. Having Anna at the TTH isn’t costing JB more than sending her to TX would. (It’s cheaper)

I think it’s likely JB just wants Anna out of his hair about Josh or the case etc. if Anna wants to go visit him/call/put money on his books I don’t think that annoys JB, but he wants her to quit talking about it. JB is done paying for lawyers. Any money sent to Josh will have to come out of Anna’s pocket money. 

[Minivanessa]

I've been online much more than necessary the last few days. Hobbled by a sore knee, I've been sitting around a lot (today the knee's much happier, thank goodness). 

Somewhere in all my browsing - reddit? - I saw a great new alternative name for FF: "J'inmate."

Apologies if it's been used here already, but I don't remember seeing it before and I follow this topic pretty closely.

[Stevie Nicks]

23 hours ago, satrunrose said:

 

With everything we've heard, I'd say 1 is more likely than 2. I also agree with Gee Golly, though, getting Anna out of the TTH and off to Texas is probably an option that works well for Anna and JB.

Would Anna be allowed to go and live in Texas alone with no accountability partner? Or is it okay because she's married? 

[Gemma Violet]

6 minutes ago, Stevie Nicks said:

Would Anna be allowed to go and live in Texas alone with no accountability partner? Or is it okay because she's married? 

I guess her oldest child would be her accountability partner.  I remember when the older sisters went somewhere on their courting dates, one of the younger siblings would go along.

[CalicoKitty]

Anna's headship would probably be transferred to Pecan Thief.  He would definitely keep both eyes on her.  She would never be left to her own devises.  And I doubt Anna would know how to live without a man telling what she can and can't do.

Just like Not Nurie--she has been under BME's thumb forever, and has never been allowed to make important decisions on her own.  Any ability to run her own live has been squelched from birth.  Sadly, she needs her mom there to run the show.  Also sadly, Not Nurie's husband seems incapable of standing up to Jill.  That is one very sad situation.

[Heathen]

59 minutes ago, Stevie Nicks said:

Would Anna be allowed to go and live in Texas alone with no accountability partner? Or is it okay because she's married? 

My guess is that Anna's parents and in-laws wouldn't approve, but if she wanted to live alone with no warden accountability partner, they couldn't do anything about it because she's a married adult. Since it's Ofsmuggar and hell would freeze over before she was independent, my guess is that her brother-in-law would keep watch over her, or one of the younger Duggars would be sent to live with her as a servant companion. 

[BetyBee]

2 hours ago, Stevie Nicks said:

Would Anna be allowed to go and live in Texas alone with no accountability partner? Or is it okay because she's married? 

It's too bad Gothard didn't cover who becomes headship during the time when one's headship is in Federal prison for possession of CSAM. You would think a perv like Gothard would have a contingency umbrella plan for such circumstances, a contingency plan that would make it clear that everything is the wife's fault!

[farmgal4]

On 6/30/2023 at 1:24 PM, auntieminem said:

When she was telling her story about Gothard and the male assistant who witnessed Gothard groom her, my first thought it was David Waller.  Now people are adding this to comments on the church's FB page.  The comments are on non-related reels.  Hillary had better get on this. 

What’s the name and location of the church?  I want to read the comments.  David Waller may be without a job soon.

[Salacious Kitty]

Fairpark Baptist Church in Fort Worth, TX. 

[AstridM]

1 hour ago, Salacious Kitty said:

Fairpark Baptist Church in Fort Worth, TX. 

Not to be confused with this guy, yikes.  Not too far from him though. 
 

Round Rock pastor pleads guilty to child sexual abuse material charge

David Lloyd Walter, 57, of Georgetownpled guilty June 27 to an enhanced charge of possession of child pornography.

https://www.fox7austin.com/news/round-rock-pastor-child-pornography-charge-guilty-plea-david-walther.amp

 

 

[farmgal4]

4 hours ago, Salacious Kitty said:

Fairpark Baptist Church in Fort Worth, TX. 

Thank you.  I scrolled through a little bit of the church’s Facebook page and with the exception of one of the newer posts, all negative comments have been deleted.  David Waller is a cowardly asswipe.

[Salacious Kitty]

6 minutes ago, farmgal4 said:

Thank you.  I scrolled through a little bit of the church’s Facebook page and with the exception of one of the newer posts, all negative comments have been deleted.  David Waller is a cowardly asswipe.

We knew that. 😃 

He announced last week that they would no longer be live streaming their sermons. They would be put on ice for peer review and possible editing before hitting the You Tube page. 

Edited July 10, 2023 by Salacious Kitty

[awaken]

8 minutes ago, Salacious Kitty said:

We knew that. 😃 

He announced last week that they would no longer be live streaming their sermons. They would be put on ice for peer review and possible editing before hitting the You Tube page. 

Ha, imagine the barrage of comments if they live-streamed after this current mess!

[Minivanessa]

20 hours ago, Salacious Kitty said:

We knew that. 😃 

He announced last week that they would no longer be live streaming their sermons. They would be put on ice for peer review and possible editing before hitting the You Tube page. 

Yes. Pa Keller got a little too frank in a public setting, in saying what they all really believe. It's one thing to preach it to the congregation in the church, quite another to put it out on the innernetz for the world to see. 

David W's an asswipe, but canny enough after years at IBLP, to know you need to curate the content that the outside world will see.

For example, you don't hit people with the Pearls' book about beating babies when you're trying to recruit them into ATI; you talk about children obeying their parents, seduce them with the idea that God's umbrella of authority can protect their family, and promise that there's a homeschooling curriculum that will not only protect their kids but set them up for success. The "man is the authority" and blanket training deets are revealed after the suckers are signed up.

ETA: Of course I don't know for sure that ATI soft-pedaled the Pearls' book, but it seems a harsh thing to throw at people when you're not sure they've bought into the cult doctrines yet. I've read and listened to ex-IBLP people and some of them say their parents weren't much into the corporal punishment although they were in IBLP. That makes me feel a little better about humanity, TBH. 

Edited July 10, 2023 by Jeeves

[mimionthebeach]

On 7/9/2023 at 10:02 PM, farmgal4 said:

Thank you.  I scrolled through a little bit of the church’s Facebook page and with the exception of one of the newer posts, all negative comments have been deleted.  David Waller is a cowardly asswipe.

I'm not a David Waller fan by any stretch, but, in all seriousness, what would you have him do? It's his workplace page. 

Edited July 11, 2023 by mimionthebeach

[AstridM]

1 hour ago, mimionthebeach said:

I'm not a David Waller fan by any stretch, but, in all seriousness, what would you have him do? It's his workplace page. 

Let the truth stand?

[merylinkid]

4 hours ago, mimionthebeach said:

I'm not a David Waller fan by any stretch, but, in all seriousness, what would you have him do? It's his workplace page. 

Don't be a bigoted arse if you don't want people calling you a bigoted arse on your workplace page?

[MaryAnneSpier]

On 7/9/2023 at 1:06 PM, Heathen said:

My guess is that Anna's parents and in-laws wouldn't approve, but if she wanted to live alone with no warden accountability partner, they couldn't do anything about it because she's a married adult. Since it's Ofsmuggar and hell would freeze over before she was independent, my guess is that her brother-in-law would keep watch over her, or one of the younger Duggars would be sent to live with her as a servant companion. 

If they really follow the Bible, I would think all responsibility for Anna and her offspring with Josh would fall under Jim Bob Duggar.  Anna took the Duggar name when she married into the family.  She left hers to cleave to her husband’s.

[Quilt Fairy]

I thought J'felon (J'inmate?) did not want her to leave the compound and move to Texas. 

[GeeGolly]

Read an article today saying TX prisons are struggling with heat. Apparently the FF's prison is not fully air conditioned. One can hope the devil has built a fortress in the FF's cell.

[dariafan]

Shower thought from the other day .. no hear me out ….   Since j boob and kootie from sister wives are very similar( especially in fame ho ness ).   Anna “marries “ kootie.  Double polygamy !  Patriarchy gone insane   Dogs cats living together. Mass hysteria ( please get the reference 😂) 

[Natalie68]

18 hours ago, GeeGolly said:

Read an article today saying TX prisons are struggling with heat. Apparently the FF's prison is not fully air conditioned. One can hope the devil has built a fortress in the FF's cell.

I think a good sweat would be just what the pest needs.  He probably smells like hot dogs and BO

On 7/9/2023 at 7:08 PM, Salacious Kitty said:

We knew that. 😃 

He announced last week that they would no longer be live streaming their sermons. They would be put on ice for peer review and possible editing before hitting the You Tube page. 

So the message is ok for the church but they don't want outsiders to know they are barely educated racists and homophobes.  Got it.  David, hiding the bad parts doesn't make it better!

[Gemma Violet]

2 hours ago, Natalie68 said:

I think a good sweat would be just what the pest needs.

The thing is, there are many employees who work there.  I worked for local government before I retired and when our jail facilities lost their A/C for a couple of weeks in August a while back, my cousin later told me he had no problem with them not having A/C, as it was their own fault they were there.  I said to him, "But what about all the employees who work there?"  He was sort of shocked, like he hadn't thought about that.  

Edited July 13, 2023 by Gemma Violet

[Natalie68]

9 minutes ago, Gemma Violet said:

The thing is, there are many employees who work there.  I work for local government and when our jail facilities lost their A/C for a couple of weeks in August a while back, my cousin later told me he had no problem with them not having A/C, as it was their own fault they were there.  I said to him, "But what about all the employees who work there?"  He was sort of shocked, like he hadn't thought about that.  

Well that is true.  

[oliviabenson]

Anna’s show on TLC can be called:

I still have a (jail bird) husband 

[sagittarius sue]

I came across this headline when I received my Washington Post email this morning.

"Judge blocks Ark. law banning librarians from giving minors ‘harmful’ books"

I wasn't surprised to see that the judge was Timothy Brooks, the judge in Josh's trial.  Good going, Judge Brooks!

[Zella]

5 hours ago, sagittarius sue said:

I came across this headline when I received my Washington Post email this morning.

"Judge blocks Ark. law banning librarians from giving minors ‘harmful’ books"

I wasn't surprised to see that the judge was Timothy Brooks, the judge in Josh's trial.  Good going, Judge Brooks!

My library has been following that case very closely (as have been all libraries in the state.) When I saw it went to Brooks, I was relieved and figured we were in the clear (for now) but didn't want to explain to any of my coworkers why I was so familiar with Brooks' record as a judge. "Because I spend a lot of time snarking on the Duggars online, I feel we are in good hands. He embarrassed Jim Bob Duggar publicly--he's all right in my book. Kthnxbye." 

Edited July 30, 2023 by Zella

[Minivanessa]

J'inmate has lost his appeal. http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/23/08/222178P.pdf

I haven't even read it yet but couldn't wait to share the good news.

[ginger90]

“We accordingly affirm the judgment of the district court.”

👍

[merylinkid]

Oh hell nah, he dumber than we thought.    I never knew this little factoid:

"He then let it slip that he was “familiar with” file-sharing software and had installed it on “all of” his electronic devices, including “the computer in the office.”"

Dude ADMITTED he put file sharing software on the computer.   Then thought a "Must have been that felon I hired did it" defense would work.

[GeeGolly]

I guess this is "the rest of the story". Well at least until his day of release, 10ish years from now.

[Stevie Nicks]

Wonderful news for a Monday!! 

 

[Teriacky]

Anna is NOT going to be pleased. 

[Laura Holt]

I almost posted the other day to see if I'd missed hearing about the results of his appeal!  Totally agree @Stevie Nicks great start to the week!

[Minivanessa]

I read the opinion issued today by the U S Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in the appeal filed by J’inmate (aka Appellant). Here’s a quick drive-by, in case anybody wants to know. Just scroll on past if you don’t.

Appellant raised three issues on appeal. The Eighth Circuit found against him on all three. They were:

FIRST ISSUE: Appellant claimed that the trial court deprived him of his right to present a complete defense when it ruled that although he could call a prior employee – Caleb Williams - as a witness, he couldn’t ask Caleb about, or introduce evidence of, Caleb’s prior sex-offense conviction. The defense didn't call the witness at all, apparently because of that ruling. The appeals court ruled that the district court had “unquestionably constitutional” discretion to prohibit inquiry into the witness’ sex-offense conviction on the grounds that such evidence would present the danger of confusing the issues.

The legal point here is that generally, a witness may be impeached by introduction of a prior felony conviction. However, that prior conviction is only for the purpose of casting doubt on the witness’s credibility. IOW, “you can consider the fact that she was convicted of felony theft when deciding if you believe she testified truthfully here.” However, under circumstances of this case, the danger of introducing Caleb’s prior conviction would be that the “jury might think he did it because he was a sex offender, even though the conviction was only potentially admissible as impeachment evidence.”

SECOND ISSUE: Appellant argued that his incriminating statements during the search at the car dealership should have been suppressed. The appellate court reviewed and analyzed this extensively in the opinion, and ruled that under the circumstances, not only was Appellant not in custody, a reasonable person would not have thought he was in custody, and therefore his right to counsel had not attached, and the statements were admissible.

Fun factoid: Although he wasn’t arrested or otherwise restrained by the federal agents on the scene, they did read him his Miranda rights, I suppose in an abundance of caution. The court said “But when Duggar signed a form acknowledging his rights, he had the agents ‘scratch . . . out’ the portion saying that he was being ‘taken into custody.’ Modifying the form made it clear he was free to leave.” The extra fun part is that the court opinion then includes the image of the final para of the form, with the scratchouts and J’inmate’s signature. Heh. The big issue about admissibility of statements like this, is whether the suspect was in custody – or reasonably thought they were. I’m still chuckling about J’inmate scratching out the custodial language - and then his lawyers having to pursue this loser issue of admissibility clear up to the Eighth Circuit. I’m sure he thought he was showing those agents how smart he was.

THIRD ISSUE: Appellant challenged the government’s analyst’s qualifications and methods, and the limitations placed on the defense expert witness, regarding the testimony about the metadata in Appellant’s iPhone. That information placed him firmly at the dealership at the time the CSAM was downloaded. The court found the trial court didn’t err in allowing the government’s analyst to testify, nor in limiting the defense expert’s testimony. BTW, the court noted “it would have been ‘pure conjecture’ for her [the defense expert witness] to suggest there were errors in metadata she never examined.”

FOOTNOTE: In case anyone wondered, the term “router” doesn’t appear in the opinion. I ran a search, just to be sure.

 

[ozziemom]

12 minutes ago, Jeeves said:

I read the opinion issued today by the U S Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in the appeal filed by J’inmate (aka Appellant). Here’s a quick drive-by, in case anybody wants to know. Just scroll on past if you don’t.

Appellant raised three issues on appeal. The Eighth Circuit found against him on all three. They were:

FIRST ISSUE: Appellant claimed that the trial court deprived him of his right to present a complete defense when it ruled that although he could call a prior employee – Caleb Williams - as a witness, he couldn’t ask Caleb about, or introduce evidence of, Caleb’s prior sex-offense conviction. The defense didn't call the witness at all, apparently because of that ruling. The appeals court ruled that the district court had “unquestionably constitutional” discretion to prohibit inquiry into the witness’ sex-offense conviction on the grounds that such evidence would present the danger of confusing the issues.

The legal point here is that generally, a witness may be impeached by introduction of a prior felony conviction. However, that prior conviction is only for the purpose of casting doubt on the witness’s credibility. IOW, “you can consider the fact that she was convicted of felony theft when deciding if you believe she testified truthfully here.” However, under circumstances of this case, the danger of introducing Caleb’s prior conviction would be that the “jury might think he did it because he was a sex offender, even though the conviction was only potentially admissible as impeachment evidence.”

SECOND ISSUE: Appellant argued that his incriminating statements during the search at the car dealership should have been suppressed. The appellate court reviewed and analyzed this extensively in the opinion, and ruled that under the circumstances, not only was Appellant not in custody, a reasonable person would not have thought he was in custody, and therefore his right to counsel had not attached, and the statements were admissible.

Fun factoid: Although he wasn’t arrested or otherwise restrained by the federal agents on the scene, they did read him his Miranda rights, I suppose in an abundance of caution. The court said “But when Duggar signed a form acknowledging his rights, he had the agents ‘scratch . . . out’ the portion saying that he was being ‘taken into custody.’ Modifying the form made it clear he was free to leave.” The extra fun part is that the court opinion then includes the image of the final para of the form, with the scratchouts and J’inmate’s signature. Heh. The big issue about admissibility of statements like this, is whether the suspect was in custody – or reasonably thought they were. I’m still chuckling about J’inmate scratching out the custodial language - and then his lawyers having to pursue this loser issue of admissibility clear up to the Eighth Circuit. I’m sure he thought he was showing those agents how smart he was.

THIRD ISSUE: Appellant challenged the government’s analyst’s qualifications and methods, and the limitations placed on the defense expert witness, regarding the testimony about the metadata in Appellant’s iPhone. That information placed him firmly at the dealership at the time the CSAM was downloaded. The court found the trial court didn’t err in allowing the government’s analyst to testify, nor in limiting the defense expert’s testimony. BTW, the court noted “it would have been ‘pure conjecture’ for her [the defense expert witness] to suggest there were errors in metadata she never examined.”

FOOTNOTE: In case anyone wondered, the term “router” doesn’t appear in the opinion. I ran a search, just to be sure.

 

Thank for summarizing all that. Hopefully this is the last ditch effort and J’appellent can enjoy the rest of his sentence. Now that we know he won’t be released anytime soon, will Anna’s situation change?

[peppergal]

Gotta love the phrasing of the Arkansas Times reporting on the ruling.  Opening sentence "Josh Duggar of “19 Kids and Counting” and child pornography scandal fame will not get a new trial." 

[Salacious Kitty]

2 minutes ago, peppergal said:

Gotta love the phrasing of the Arkansas Times reporting on the ruling.  Opening sentence "Josh Duggar of “19 Kids and Counting” and child pornography scandal fame will not get a new trial." 

It's a pity that CC McCandless moved to Vegas. His articles during this ordeal were snark GOLD. 

[CalicoKitty]

Josh has no idea how many people he has hurt.  His wife, children, future grandchildren, siblings, nieces and nephews will all be tied to this scandal for years and years.  The internet is forever, and Josh will be mentioned in any article, newscast or obituary tied to his family members for many, many years to come.

Great parenting, Michelle and Jim Bob.  Really great job.  You wanted "fame".  Well, you have it.

[Minivanessa]

1 hour ago, ozziemom said:

Thank for summarizing all that. Hopefully this is the last ditch effort and J’appellent can enjoy the rest of his sentence. Now that we know he won’t be released anytime soon, will Anna’s situation change?

You're welcome. And that's a good question. I wonder if Anna's attitude will change now that the conviction's been affirmed on appeal. For all practical purposes, today's opinion means this case is over. She's been angry and has had her nose in the air and she's been all in denial with "There's more to the story!" ever since the conviction. I'm sorry for her situation. I don't know if she'll ever accept the facts, or just stay in denial and angry. As to her living situation, that's a tough one. I don't see JB ever withdrawing support for her and her children, if only out of concern for his own reputation and standing in the fundie world. 

I can see Anna insisting it's not all over yet. And indeed, assuming there's money to pay the lawyers? There are some more steps J'inmate's appellate lawyers can take. Although the odds are against any of them succeeding.

Just for general information - I'm not a federal appellate lawyer, LOL -  they may file a petition for rehearing with the three-judge panel of the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals that decided the case or, with the entire Eighth Circuit Court en banc.  I don't believe those petitions are often granted. 

If that petition is denied, or if it's granted but on rehearing the conviction is still affirmed by the Eighth Circuit, the Appellant may file a petition for review (Petition for Certiorari) in the United States Supreme Court. However, the Supreme Court rarely grants such a petition. IOW there's no right of appeal past the Eighth Circuit, only a chance to file a petition with the Supremes that has a low low low chance of being accepted.

[ScorpioSoul]

Glad all the Perv's appeals were denied.

[MaryAnneSpier]

I hope and wonder if this can give a slight sense of closure to Anna and JB and Michelle. Josh will be away for a decade because his final appeal was a no-go, so it's time to sit down and come up with a ten-year plan for Anna and her kids. 

[libgirl2]

7 hours ago, MaryAnneSpier said:

I hope and wonder if this can give a slight sense of closure to Anna and JB and Michelle. Josh will be away for a decade because his final appeal was a no-go, so it's time to sit down and come up with a ten-year plan for Anna and her kids. 

They won't. 

[merylinkid]

Agreed @libgirl2 they won't.   Because 1) that involves planning ahead, which the Duggars do not do.   Plus Anna is never going to accept the reality that he did what he did.    This is all some trial sent by God.   Which also means God can perform a miracle and release FF any day.   Because he didn't do it, the evil router did.

[Minivanessa]

44 minutes ago, merylinkid said:

Agreed @libgirl2 they won't.   Because 1) that involves planning ahead, which the Duggars do not do.   Plus Anna is never going to accept the reality that he did what he did.    This is all some trial sent by God.   Which also means God can perform a miracle and release FF any day.   Because he didn't do it, the evil router did.

I wonder if there will be some tense discussions about the next steps for J'inmate's appellate lawyers to take. Because, money. I mentioned above that they can file a petition for rehearing at this point, although AFAIK the statistics are firmly tilted against that being granted.

It's up to J'inmate to decide if he wants his lawyers to proceed - assuming there's money to pay them. 

Knowing the family dynamics, I believe JB will be involved in some discussions about that, as will Anna. But for the lawyers, it's Ethics 101. Meaning that even if someone else is writing the checks to pay the lawyers, the lawyers' duty is to their client, in this case J'inmate. And to nobody else. 

[merylinkid]

Just saw it framed this way by Law & Crime Network:

Conservative appellate panel refuses to give ex-’19 Kids and Counting’ star #JoshDuggar another chance to blame conviction on sex offender

Makes me wonder if Josh thought he was being "clever" by hiring the guy figuring he could always blame the other guy if he, Josh, got caught.   That would sounds like the kind of stupid but thinks he's so smart thinking that the FF and quite frankly JB is known for.

[Zella]

19 hours ago, Jeeves said:

The court said “But when Duggar signed a form acknowledging his rights, he had the agents ‘scratch . . . out’ the portion saying that he was being ‘taken into custody.’ Modifying the form made it clear he was free to leave.”

That is hilarious! I don't ever remember hearing that in the original trial, but there was so much information I may have just overlooked it. 

[oliviabenson]

Anna is probably depressed: no more blessings and stuck living under JB thumb and relying on his charity.

What is she going to do once JB won’t pay her bills? 
 

 

All these people depend on JB to support them because JB stunted them/refused to educate them and send them out into the world. How sad. 

[dariafan]

5 hours ago, merylinkid said:

Agreed @libgirl2 they won't.   Because 1) that involves planning ahead, which the Duggars do not do.   Plus Anna is never going to accept the reality that he did what he did.    This is all some trial sent by God.   Which also means God can perform a miracle and release FF any day.   Because he didn't do it, the evil router did.

And she’s probably being blamed for him falling and then blaming herself and questioning what she did or didn’t do