All Activity

It's commonly tossed around that JB is financing his defense, and while that's very likely it might not be the case if Josh sold of properties and such to fund his own. That would make it technically Josh's money, even if Daddy did gift him the properties originally. For the sake of argument let's assume Josh is funding his own appeal. How would that work if his financial assets were held jointly with his wife and she didn't want to spend the last of their money on this. Yes, we know Anna would never stand up for herself, but in the hypothetical when one spouse wants to spend hundreds of thousands on their appeal and the non-convicted spouse wants to use that money to provide for their children how does that work? If money is jointly held can the spouse not locked up in protective custody move it to another account where the convicted spouse would have to sue her for access? I'm just curious how that works in cases where the free spouse isn't just a human banana slug that fused after mating and too stupid to chew.

Erin seems to be the one who would most likely dig in and ignore. Does that make sense?

They said an old band member would be joining them for a few days in Mexico. I’m guessing it is Joe.

Yeah, as best I could tell it seemed based on people’s’ observations and opinions. I think it’s absolutely possible to say the parenting choices in ATI/IBLP are objectively abusive (hello SAHDs and TTUAC), but the Reddit speculation was regarding interactions with Gothard.

Perhaps they should start calling it "a Duggar Defense" from now on 😉😉😉

This is odd wording, I don't even understand the inference. Thanks so much for the breakdown, this is very insightful. IANAL either, but in over 20 years in IT I could see how solid the feds case was and this changes nothing for me. The texts at the time of the downloads put Josh in front of the computer at that time. This is what us non-fundies call a hail Mary, it's not going to work. (What term do fundies use for the concept of fuck it just toss anything and pray for a miracle?)

Pronounced like she is on a game show. Come on down, DebraJooooooy.

Here ya go: The pecan thieves with their ill-gotten gain:

That’s decent spacing for a quiverful fundie. Michelle, Kelly, Jill, and a few other fundie moms had their first 6 in much closer spacing than that. Maybe that’s partly why David and Priscilla seem more at ease with their family life.

I loved it as a kid, but a few years ago one of my kids bought it by accident and I was so excited for a blast from the past...until it hit my mouth. It was so sweet my teeth immediately got together and formed a union to protect. If you ever find yourself in that position a shot of vodka cuts the sweetness. Just sayin.

Yea, I've kind of changed my mind on this a little and you're more right. The first reading I did about the passwords comes from the Defense's actual trial document, where they've taken that out of context from the rest of his email to the Government, which does make him look a tad bit more stupid. (Which I'm sure is part of the Defense's point.) The passwords in question, though, apparently relate to Josiah and Jed's social media accounts. Jed has a fake Facebook account that Caleb could access. So, in general, I think the passwords are kind of immaterial to the Defense's case, unless the whole family shared one password. Maybe they did, since apparently they were willing to give Caleb their passwords on things too. The whole thing is super weird. Jed (and maybe Josiah) were using Facebook sock accounts to...sell vehicles. It's just bizarre behavior. I think he was aware that the Defense wanted to tie him to this because; Yea, no shit Sherlock. I wouldn't have wanted to the Defense to know I knew those passwords, I suppose, was my initial thought. But who knows what Williams understands about discovery and the fact that the Defense would eventually get this information. It's also worth noting that Williams sent this email to the Defense that he "found more passwords" on the first day of the Trial. Utterly bizarre. Why so late? Why on the first day of the trial? The Defense is pissed that the Government didn't bring this up, but if those passwords weren't Intel1988, it seems irrelevant. This, to me, seems like a genuine mistake. The prosecution was in Court all day long through this whole week of the trial. It seems to me that the prosecution might also not even have realized this was in their inbox at the time. (Worth noting this email went to one attorney, not the whole prosecutorial team.) But it might not matter because this looks like what the heated discussions in the Judge's chambers were about. To the best of my recollection, reporters indicated that the trial was slowed at some point because of discussions in the chambers after which Gelfand came out looking heated; Then, it looks like the Defense argued with The Court (read: The Judge) about this for a while and blah blah blah legal precedent blah blah. The Court specifically asks, "Are you trying to pin this on Williams?" to which the Defense responds; Then, the Court said, "Alright my guy, you can call Williams to the stand but we have some rules about it." which were; At this point, I don't understand legalese but I read this as, "Listen buddy, you can't just implicate whoever you want as an alternative perpetrator because that violates some other Court Rule that Antimony doesn't know nothing about." And then the Defense...didn't call Williams, which seems strange. They could have done it. I suspect they chose not to so they could make this the crux of their post-trial motion and also because then Williams would be on cross. If I were a Defense attorney, and I only play one in Ace Attorney, I wouldn't want a witness who didn't want to talk to me to be on cross with the Government, who he was on good terms with. This strikes me as odd. I'm not a lawyer so I assume Josh's lawyers are better lawyer's than me, by virtue of being a lawyer, but...duh? This is how testimony works. It's under oath but people still lie. Like...why write this, I guess? Anyway, I don't think this matters because the Judge already ruled on this in the chambers. I don't understand who gets their eyeballs on the post trial Judge, but if it is also Brooks, I imagine this won't fly. Edit: BONUS Armchair Lawyering. Here's Rule 403; I snorted reading this. Rule 609 is all about trying to attack a witness based on a previous criminal conviction (which Williams has). So, I guess the Judge feels the Defense is introducing bias/prejudice if they try to bring up that Williams is also a sex offender, because that (almost) doesn't matter here if he simply needs to testify about password knowledge, and they're not going to allow that. William's sex offender status can't prove he did it, but it also will make the jury prejudiced against him (in this case, probably unfairly) and it throws a wrench in the whole system.

I'm wondering if this is an American specific thing because at least in my country I never heard about different versions of the Bible aside from Old Testament and New Testament. Maybe I should check local bookstores and ask my Christian friends. Maybe because in general, in my country it's mostly splits in two: if you're a Christian, then you're a Catholic or Protestant. Never heard of any specific denominations aside from Advent Christians. Speaking of which, I learnt that IBLP teachings has reached my country from this forum. A friend of the Duggars from my country brought it here.

Found this picture of the Romeike family plus Trace on Lydia‘s brother’s insta. My, but they look so very German… 😂 Anyway, seems he’s pretty much part of the family already.

It’s Jeremiah 1:5, the favorite verse of the pro-life movement. “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Note that the KJV says “belly” instead of “womb,” so Jill Rodrigues might have mixed feelings about it.

I don’t question she had suicidal thoughts. I am not certain that she really was suicidal because of her history of exaggeration. It doesn’t matter, if someone mentions suicide, you take them seriously. Telling someone you feel like killing yourself when it isn’t true is definitely the worst sort of manipulation. I think it’s a little different when you are honestly reporting suicidal thoughts, but you may be doing so only because it will serve your goals/get you the attention you want. It is hard to tell what really went on with Meghan when she was in the UK because some of her accounts stretch credibility. In particular, her account of how she sought help and didn’t get it doesn’t ring true. People have been blaming Harry for not having been there for her, for not getting her help. I think it is possible that she was invested in being “the strong one,” and didn’t show her despair (only her anger) until she decided that they needed to “find freedom.” It would be no less a power move, but that doesn’t make her feelings less real. As I said, I agree we can’t know her feelings except for what she tells us.

Thanks for posting this. I disagree that he was stupid to admit he knew the passwords, though. If I knew I wasn't guilty of the crime at hand especially if I didn't know how much info the feds had I'd be completely upfront with them. I wouldn't want them thinking I lied because I was complicit and trying to tie me into this.

Yeah, HI-C is like a juice but it's still questionable to give that to a sick child since it's basically pure sugar (keep in mind it's "juice" and not juice).

That definitely would be a horrible way to find out you are seasick!

@ofDany you got it. 😉

Mitchell Bosch, eh? I doubt he is related to the people who manufacture machines to keep things clean. However, he may be a descendant of Heironymous!

Egg-zactly. I think she would have been very happy as a child-free interior decorator. Still a narcissist probably, but happy.

This is the key to this whole forum, I think. Here's the handy dandy graphic my church once posted about some of the many different translations of the Bible. Generally they all want to be as accurate as possible, but take different paths to get there. Like is getting each specific word translated exactly right more important, or is making sure each thought or sentence means the same as the source material (even if the words are not exact) more important? My church (Baptist, in the South, but a bit more liberal than many) if I remember correctly "officially" chose the ESV for the pew Bibles, but everyone is encouraged to use the Bible that they prefer. Our previous pastor would frequently use more than one translation to help clarify things, and even refer back to the original wording in some cases. Anyone doing a reading in church uses whichever Bible they choose. One lady always uses KJV. Others use different ones. I think my dad carries The Living Bible to church, maybe. You can even get Bibles that are "parallel" Bibles with multiple translations in the same book, which sounds cool - you can look up a verse and see it in multiple translations.

Deborah and Dinah would have been at the top of my list if they hadn’t gone with slightly more unusual girl names in the past. Not my fave name (it was wildly popular in the 50s and 60s so I knew tons of Deborahs/Debras/Debbies/Debs growing up). However, it’s a pretty, classic name and I’m surprised it isn’t used more often among Biblical types. In terms of future blessings, I’m guessing 2 more before they slow down, then possibly a straggler once she hits her 40s. David is competitive, so I’m sure he wants more kids than Josh and Anna. They are one of the few families that actually seems to enjoy having all these kids.