Joshley Madison Pt 8: Are We Still Talking About This?

[browncoatslytherin]

So, guesses- will the Duggars pick a lawyer based on their credentials or by their faith?

lol the duggars only abide by their principles when it suits them. i don't doubt they have a REAL attorney.

[quiversR4hunting]

Usually I just lurk (mostly b/c I hate my username).  Anyway, I just can't resist...this is Fame Whoring at Its Finest.

which is perfect since duggers are fame whores :)

[notfundy]

When I look closely at the blurred out addresses on the complaint (is that the right word?) I'm pretty sure I can make out the cities. Can we take that as confirmation of Josh's recent whereabouts? I mean, would Danica's attorney be privy to Josh's correct address, or could he just be using the address where he believed Josh was at the time? I hope this makes sense. I'm being a bit vague for SEO reasons.

Whoa!  Good eyes.   Yup - -  I can see it, too.   I don't think her attorney would necessarily be privy to Josh's address so it may just be that he used the address where he believed Josh to be, in order to have the papers served.  The timing is very interesting, what with the plane trip, etc.  

soooooo interesting.  I agree it seems awfully opportunistic; "Danica" didn't call the police or file charges earlier since it is likely she didn't know who Josh was, plus she likely did not want to call attention to any illegal activity with which she was involved.

I predict this will settle WAY WAY before there are any public proceedings.   

[DuggarWatch]

So, guesses- will the Duggars pick a lawyer based on their credentials or by their faith? 

It has to be someone licensed to practice law in Pennsylvania.  (This is going to cost them!)

[justoneoftwo]

Her lawyer probably took this on a contingency, which means that Danica doesn't pay anything if she loses.  The one who wins the lawsuit can ask the judge to award attorney fees and court costs.  That happens all the time.  This is not a case in small claims court.

Costs yes, attorneys fees generally not, and I'm not talking about small claims court.  Unless there is a contract or statute saying otherwise, each party pays their attorneys.  Contingency fees are an exception, in which case her lawyer would get 30-50% of whatever she is awarded.

[ShepherdontheRock]

On another note, Josh Duggar is trending. Again. Some of the tweets are quiet dark.

But I do agree with Pat Brown that Josh Duggar is a "garbage human fuccboi hybrid."  LOL

[apandaaries]

I haven't read any of the details yet, I just need to express my glee over this. Guys, a lawsuit means a deposition. A deposition means we're going to get a whole lot of dirt. I. CANNOT. WAIT!

 

The threat of a deposition makes me feel like JB will be quick to try to settle this out of court.  I am not ashamed to admit that I can't wait to see how this plays out.  

It seems opportunistic to this American as well.

I agree about this, but seriously, the woman is a porn star doing lap dances and...uh, short term contract work on the side.  I think a lot of girls who do that work are okay with extra publicity and also okay with money earned...somewhat disreputably, in the views of some. She's sold her story elsewhere.  Her working days are limited. Why not keep pushing for more pay days? Given the material she has at her disposal, who thinks JB won't move to settle out of court? 

 If it didn't involve a sanctimonious, hypocritical, self-reported "Christian" interested in curtailing the rights of others, I would be more sympathetic.  But Josh has brought all of this upon himself, and unfortunately, also upon his family, simply by association. While I feel for Anna, she's willingly associated with a hate group for years, and used her children to help propagate their causes.  I hope this is enough to get her to leave, but it's hard to speculate where her mind might be.  I truly feel for her children; they have no control over this situation nor over how others will perceive them as a result.   

Adultery is one of the few get-out-of-marriage-cards-free that the fundies have, right?  I know it is for orthodox Jews who adhere to the Old Testament  (though few, of course, would ever dream of using it).  Perhaps someone who knows more of the ways of Gothard/ATI can answer that, but I hope she goes and takes her children with her.  I would not bet on it, though.  

Something illegal did occur. He paid her to have sex with him.  But neither will admit it because both are guilty.  They will both say that he gave her a "gift" and (unrelated to the gift)  she  was willing to have sex with him.

So the real issue for a civil court will be if he abused her by being rougher than she consented.  I have no idea if it is true or not, but the as suit is definitely opportunistic.  

 

This part is always interesting to me.  It's true that their paid encounter violated existing laws, but it seems likely that her lawyer has prepared some kind of wordy, circuitous route to explain that.  In Sweden, it's illegal to buy sex, not to sell it, affording sex workers much more legal protection (which they badly need, because it's not like making more laws against selling sex will end the world's oldest profession).  We're not that progressive in the States, but whatever the lawyer has planned, this aspect is completely foreseeable.  

[grandmadugger]

Oh what a glorious "Welcome Back to FJ" for me Joshie.  

I looked at the blurred out address Ida Lincoln Lincoln Ida Nora Ocean Ida Sam.  

[Kelsey]

I'm pretty sure she could get attorney fees because battery is an intentional tort. You don't batter someone accidentally, it's a choice you make and thus, are responsible for the outcome.

[withaj]

Well, tbh i was kind of hoping that the NFV would sue, but I guess this is close enough.

On another note, at the top of my google results, it says "Josh Duggar Sued for Allegedly Assaulting Mother of Two"

http://www.starpulse.com/news/index.php/2015/11/18/josh-duggar-sued-for-allegedly-assault

Wonder if that's the angle they'll be putting Danica/Ashley in.

And yes, @Grimalkin. That's why a lot of defendants with money settle, regardless of whether they're actually at fault; it's often cheaper than going to trial.

I'm not looking at this in terms of her career prejudicing jurors, which is likely what her team is concerned with, but I think the adult film industry angle is more telling than the mom angle. It shows that Josh pursued something way outside the realm of a "normal" affair, which puts him in a worse light. At least in media coverage, I think that is more effective.

[SassyPants]

Remember the story years ago about Josh and possibly JB at the strip club?

 

[justoneoftwo]

I'm pretty sure she could get attorney fees because battery is an intentional tort. You don't batter someone accidentally, it's a choice you make and thus, are responsible for the outcome.

It doesn't usually matter that it is an intentional tort.  Unless PA has a statute that says you can get attorneys fees for battery, you can't.  

[ljohnson2006]

Anna needs to herself, and her children a favor... And divorce this pig.

 

 

Wonder how Mama and Daddy Duggar will get Smugs out of this mess.

[DuggarWatch]

Costs yes, attorneys fees generally not, and I'm not talking about small claims court.  Unless there is a contract or statute saying otherwise, each party pays their attorneys.  Contingency fees are an exception, in which case her lawyer would get 30-50% of whatever she is awarded.

That simply isn't true.  Here's the law for Pennsylvania:

The statutory authority for awarding attorney’s fees in § 1983 cases is set forth in 42 U.S.C. § 1988 (b). The pertinent portion of § 1988 provides (b) Attorney's fees In any action or proceeding to enforce a provision of sections 1981, 1981a, 1982, 1983, 1985, and 1986 of this title . . . the court, in its discretion, may allow the prevailing party, other than the United States, a reasonable attorney's fee as part of the costs. 42 U.S.C. § 1988 (b). In order to recover an award of attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1988, a party must demonstrate that: (1) it prevailed, (2) the hourly rate upon which the request is based is reasonable, and (3) the hours expended were reasonable. See Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 433, 103 S. Ct. 1933 (1983).

The attorney Danica is using once got an award of $20,000 for attorney fees for a case where the judgment against the respondent was for $20,000.  In other words, the respondent had to pay $40,000 all together.

[Whoosh]

In some jurisdictions, the judge can award attorney's fees if it is in the interest of justice (or something) even without a statute that explicitly allows for recovery of attorney's fees.  It isn't common (that I know of), but can happen.

[ClaraOswin]

I know this is dumb...but I can't wait to see a photo of Josh once he resurfaces...because I hope the food was terrible wherever he is and that he looks miserable and gaunt.

[livinginthelight]

Am I the only one to wonder if a magazine paid her to do this, so that that magazine can sell issues while covering it?

[nelliebelle1197]

This is not going to trial. I doubt it will make it passed an initial hearing. I don't understand what her claims may be. So she is filing a civil action based on the notion that she was sexually assaulted by Josh because the sex acts made her feel dirty? There have been no criminal charges filed against Josh, she was willingly and without coercion engaging in an illegal act of prostitution when the alleged assault occurred, she engaged in a second illegal act of prostitution with the same party, and then sold a story to the media in which she admits to said acts of prostitution. In order to recoup money in civil based on a criminal act such as sexual assault,  there first has to be a criminal act such as sexual assault. Then she will have to demonstrate harm or damages. Yeah, good luck.

A hooker feeling icky after having sex with a john does not equal a legitimate civil action. If it did, we'd have very few hookers with very few customers. Hiring a lawyer does not mean you have hired good lawyer.

 

[justoneoftwo]

That simply isn't true.  Here's the law for Pennsylvania:

The statutory authority for awarding attorney’s fees in § 1983 cases is set forth in 42 U.S.C. § 1988 (b). The pertinent portion of § 1988 provides (b) Attorney's fees In any action or proceeding to enforce a provision of sections 1981, 1981a, 1982, 1983, 1985, and 1986 of this title . . . the court, in its discretion, may allow the prevailing party, other than the United States, a reasonable attorney's fee as part of the costs. 42 U.S.C. § 1988 (b). In order to recover an award of attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1988, a party must demonstrate that: (1) it prevailed, (2) the hourly rate upon which the request is based is reasonable, and (3) the hours expended were reasonable. See Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 433, 103 S. Ct. 1933 (1983).

The attorney Danica is using once got an award of $20,000 for attorney fees for a case where the judgment against the respondent was for $20,000.  In other words, the respondent had to pay $40,000 all together.

Is she suing under any of these statutes?  a 1983 case is one against a state actor.  It is a specific statute, in federal law, about suing state actors for violations of your civil liberties.  

I don't practice law in PA, maybe they are allowed, but it is not the general american rule.  Further in general, a battery suit would be under state and not federal law.

[lascuba]

I have zero opinions on the merits of this particular lawsuit, except to say that I'm generally ok with lots of suits that may seem "frivolous," if only because it's often the only option available to punish people. Nothing like losing lots of money over your actions to really hammer home the message that you fucked up. 

That said, no jury is going to side with her, no matter what arguments are made in court. "Perfect" victims of rape are invalidated all the time, because lawyers know who to pick stupid wastes of spaces for juries...no way is a porn star/stripper who traded sex for money with a married man is going to see a dime. 

[JenniferJuniper]

That simply isn't true.  Here's the law for Pennsylvania:

The statutory authority for awarding attorney’s fees in § 1983 cases is set forth in 42 U.S.C. § 1988 (b). The pertinent portion of § 1988 provides (b) Attorney's fees In any action or proceeding to enforce a provision of sections 1981, 1981a, 1982, 1983, 1985, and 1986 of this title . . . the court, in its discretion, may allow the prevailing party, other than the United States, a reasonable attorney's fee as part of the costs. 42 U.S.C. § 1988 (b). In order to recover an award of attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1988, a party must demonstrate that: (1) it prevailed, (2) the hourly rate upon which the request is based is reasonable, and (3) the hours expended were reasonable. See Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 433, 103 S. Ct. 1933 (1983).

The attorney Danica is using once got an award of $20,000 for attorney fees for a case where the judgment against the respondent was for $20,000.  In other words, the respondent had to pay $40,000 all together.

I'm pretty sure 42 U.S.C. 1988 pertains to civil rights violations?

[justoneoftwo]

Just one other thing, the fact that there is no criminal charge does not mean there is no civil assault or battery.  Further, the victim does not necessarily get to decide if there will be criminal charges, the state decides.  

[DuggarWatch]

Is she suing under any of these statutes?  a 1983 case is one against a state actor.  It is a specific statute, in federal law, about suing state actors for violations of your civil liberties.  

I don't practice law in PA, maybe they are allowed, but it is not the general american rule.  Further in general, a battery suit would be under state and not federal law.

That's the exact wording on the petition the same attorney used in a civil case in Pennsylvania and he was awarded attorney fees.

[Sundaymorning]

Anna needs to herself, and her children a favor... And divorce this pig.

 

 

Wonder how Mama and Daddy Duggar will get Smugs out of this mess.

The question is if they even have enough money to pay her in order for her to settle. If they really have nothing else to hide, they might conclude that it's much cheaper for them to throw Joshy under the bus. His reputation is destroyed anyways, and if he gets convicted to pay this woman money, but is broke anyways, there is nothing much the plaintiff can do, is there? So, instead of ruining the whole families finances, they might as well just let Joshy deal with this himself.

[ari_belle]

TLC had better cancel those fucking specials already.