Josh Duggar: Part 10- Will "Rehab" Ever End?

[Whoosh]

Is this a "good person" whistle-blowing a fame whore or a fame whore throwing her sister under the bus?  The mind boggles. I would add a popcorn smiley, but this whole situation is just terrible for any parties involved who are either innocent (like the 6 kids involved) or being victimized here.  What a world we live in, huh?

[Bad Wolf]

I don't know who's right or wrong, of course, but I'm glad I don't have a sister like that.

[Ofglen]

6 minutes ago, HRM1216 said:

Ahh this is my first post on FJ!

But I agree, how could she have foreseen the shit show that would follow sleeping with Josh since it only happened after the Ashley Madison leak? I don't know that I think the Duggars paid her to speak out, but I could see someone wanting their own 15 minutes.

Definitely agree.

Congrats on your first post!! 

[2manyKidzzz]

Tfwo pregnant women in Illinois have tested positive for the Zika virus. This is a total game changer.

 

I hope this is the right place for this. I'm confused.

[Lachlanne]

On 1/19/2016 at 6:18 PM, 2manyKidzzz said:

Tfwo pregnant women in Illinois have tested positive for the Zika virus. This is a total game changer.

 

I hope this is the right place for this. I'm confused.

Is any place the right place for the Zika virus? [emoji6]

[halcionne]

3 hours ago, ChickenettiLuvr said:

P.S.  This Slim Mcshady Mike Schadt character has me curious.  His shit-eating Cheshire-cat grin is obnoxiously annoying.  So I'd like to get the skinny on him, FJ style.
Does anyone have the link to Schadt-grifting, Part 1?  Thankyaverymuch.

 

 

[Drala]

2 hours ago, Bad Wolf said:

I don't know who's right or wrong, of course, but I'm glad I don't have a sister like that.

My thoughts exactly.  Talk about dysfunctional families...

[Mercer]

I find it hard to believe that if Danica had really "followed" Josh "around the country" for half a year, her sister's claims would be the first/only indication of it happening. There should be travel records more often than chance would allow placing her in the same areas Josh was known to be in, unexplained absences from her shoots, photos or security footage where she's caught in the background, people wondering why an adult film actress was repeatedly turning up around extremely conservative religious gatherings, etc. You can't just chase a person around the country for six months without leaving some sort of trail or raising any questions, let alone a D-list celebrity that some people actually pay attention to.

Obviously we have no way of knowing for sure whether Danica is telling the truth or not, but her sister's particular rebuttal of her claims just doesn't pass the logic test for me unless some sort of objective proof turns up confirming what she's saying. 

[crazysnark]

I can by into the fact that she was at least a fan girl of Josh. If you look at her twitter she made a joke about going to Utah and "finding a sister wife". This leads me to believe that she at least watched TLC. She told the media that she didn't even know who Josh was. I find this hard to believe.

[Mercer]

Hm, I don't know if the "sister wife" joke really means anything about whether she watches TLC. I don't have television, but I can still make that type of superficial joke about shows that are on just by hearing other people talk about them. You don't really have to have watched that show to know the basic premise and/or to have picked up that term for plural marriage through general pop culture exposure.

It's entirely possible she was a Josh fan, I just think reading that into a comment that might or might not mean she watches a different show on the same network is a bit of a stretch.

[Whoosh]

14 minutes ago, crazysnark said:

I can by into the fact that she was at least a fan girl of Josh. If you look at her twitter she made a joke about going to Utah and "finding a sister wife". This leads me to believe that she at least watched TLC. She told the media that she didn't even know who Josh was. I find this hard to believe.

I was just looking for the tweets that were supposed to have talked about this trip and found something else random.  The Danica Dillon I found on Twitter (I know nothing about Twitter) was saying that she was doing a Q&A today on the @Hustlermag twitter.  I looked, but I don't see all that much over there - just a few random tweets or whatever.  Anyway, if anyone wants to make sure I am not just missing it - 

https://twitter.com/HustlerMag?lang=en

2 minutes ago, Mercer said:

Hm, I don't know if the "sister wife" joke really means anything about whether she watches TLC. I don't have television, but I can still make that type of superficial joke about shows that are on just by hearing other people talk about them. You don't really have to have watched that show to know the basic premise and/or to have picked up that term for plural marriage through general pop culture exposure.

It's entirely possible she was a Josh fan, I just think reading that into a comment that might or might not mean she watches a different show on the same network is a bit of a stretch.

Further, the fact that you could go to Utah etc to see sister wives was true and at least fairly well known long before any TLC show of that name came about.  I honestly wouldn't connect a joke about sister wives with the show (even after reading FJ for 6 months today!), but I also lived in Utah for a bit.

OK guys - I think I am just this out of touch and uh, whatever.  I think perhaps she wasn't doing a Q&A but announcing that she is featured in Hustler and would be sharing some photos on their Twitter?  Someone help me out here LOL.  Sorry I have no idea what I am saying.

[bashfulpixie]

Honestly, I almost never watch TLC.  When I hear sisterwife, the first thing I think of is the show Big Love.

[Front Hugging Fiend]

9 minutes ago, bashfulpixie said:

Honestly, I almost never watch TLC.  When I hear sisterwife, the first thing I think of is the show Big Love.

I'm with you on that one. I think of Big Love first and from there, it's just a polygamist phrase. 

4 hours ago, Whoosh said:

Is this a "good person" whistle-blowing a fame whore or a fame whore throwing her sister under the bus?  The mind boggles. I would add a popcorn smiley, but this whole situation is just terrible for any parties involved who are either innocent (like the 6 kids involved) or being victimized here.  What a world we live in, huh?

I think she's both. I know some people who have siblings who do horrendous things, and they're just waiting for the right moment to speak out. This was her chance to speak out. It's ultimately damaging to Dillon's reputation regardless of its authenticity - some people already had trouble believing her, but with her sister speaking out like this, her credibility just gets weaker and weaker. Sounds like her sister also wants her moment in the spotlight - but that being said, can we ever believe anything in the media from someone lusting after their 30 seconds of fame?

[Kittikatz]

Not sure what i believe about all this, or if we will ever really know, but I'm thinking that this sister is doing some serious fame whoring or was paid off.

If Josh was cheating or looking to cheat (as his AM account indicates) on Anna from the time she was preggo with M2, and Danica was stalking him, he would have been easy prey for her. I may be wrong, but I just can't see someone as boring, uneducated and physically uninspiring as Josh, (who is activley looking for a hookup) turning down an attractive and available woman such as Danica.  If Danica wanted to make some money, or even have some sort of 'insurance policy', against Josh turning on her in the future, someone in Danica's profession would likely have had the ability to get pics or video of her encounters with Joshly without him even realising it was happening. ..

[downtherabbithole]

I just can't see her stalking him for months. I could see that he showed up at the strip club and when Danica noticed who he was, she offered herself up knowing that she could get her 15 minutes of fame and possibly $$. 

[diplomat]

 

the latest developments in the lawsuit:

• On Monday, Josh's attorney filed another motion asking the court to compel Danica to comply with the discovery order and make her pay his expenses for filing the motion. She was supposed to have turned everything over by Jan. 15 (and Josh was supposed to respond on Jan. 19), but Josh's attorney said she hadn't yet provided any medical records, documents regarding lost wages, nor any "alleged text exchanges and e-mails between them which she claims to possess." Josh's attorney also "leaked" all the discovery materials already provided by Danica by attaching them as an exhibit to his motion.
• The court agreed with Josh that Danica's disclosures are not yet complete, but denied Josh's motion because he didn't include some kind of required certification. The court also ordered that, from now on, any evidence provided by Danica regarding her medical records or lost wages must be "strictly held... for attorney eyes only" unless the court orders otherwise. (Maybe the judge is upset that Josh's attorney attached Danica's materials to a publicly-filed motion?)
• In another pleading filed on Tuesday, Josh's attorney says that Josh "does not anticipate a settlement at this stage, other than one in which [Danica] agrees to voluntarily dismiss her claims and publicize a statement on her Instagram and Twitter accounts that [Josh] is not the individual who injured her." He also says it's "highly unlikely that any compensation would be offered" to Danica.
• Josh's attorney also claims that his phone calls to Danica's attorney go to voicemail and are not promptly returned, and that, in response to his demands for the rest of the discovery materials Danica was supposed to have provided already, Danica's attorney has "offered only to provide photographs that his client plans to release to the tabloids after they are released to the tabloids."  
• Finally, both parties had to submit affidavits on Tuesday regarding venue, i.e., whether the lawsuit properly belongs in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Josh says he wasn't in Pennsylvania on the dates of the alleged assaults (because he was in Texas, Maryland, DC, or flying from Texas to Maryland), but that he has no reason to doubt that someone assaulted Danica when and where she claims; he says Danica is "mistaken, not about where she sustained her injuries, but about who caused them." Danica says "she was accosted and assaulted" by Josh in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, so it's the right place for her lawsuit.
• A status conference is scheduled for Thursday, Jan. 21.

[socalrules]

Since I don't believe Danica's story, I am in the camp that Danica and her sister are basically two sides of the same coin. Both want attention and both want easy money. I already find you suspect if you go to Radaronline to tell any story. I don't buy Danica stalking Josh. Of all people to stalk, Josh should be at the bottom of the list. I don't think the sister was paid off, I think she is just looking for a quick buck for an interview. Danica may have had sex with Josh but I have a hard time believing she was basically chasing him for months. 

[LittleSpouseOnThePrairie]

On January 19, 2016 at 0:07 PM, vienna said:

 

Danica Dillon, who slapped the disgraced reality star with a $500,000 lawsuit late last year, alleging he followed her to a strip club and then assaulted her during two nights of rough sex, actually instigated the trysts, the adult film actress’ sister exclusively tells RadarOnline.com.

...

“If someone did that the first time, why go back a second time?” Stamm asked. “I don’t feel bad for her.”

 

Let me preface this with a hearty "i am not defending Josh."

question: If the Ashley Madison hack had never exposed Josh, would we have ever heard from Danica?  And would people have ever known to look for/find his OkCupid profiles, etc.?

If she really was traumatized, why didn't Danica say anything/sue right away long before all the cheating douchey-ness was revealed?

Bigger issue to me is that she claimed she did him twice.

I kinda feel like she is trapping herself by having sex with him twice and then suing for emotional damages. I'm thinking it should be more like: Aggressively hump me once shame on you, aggressively hump me twice, shame on me...

Either she was desperate for the money so she went back for seconds, or she just had two crappy sex sessions and then saw an opportunity to hop on the "josh is d-bag" train and try for an extra $500,000 cash in addition to her 15 minutes of fame.

[2manyKidzzz]

I find her lawsuit unbelievable. 

[Lachlanne]

29 minutes ago, diplomat said:

• In another pleading filed on Tuesday, Josh's attorney says that Josh "does not anticipate a settlement at this stage, other than one in which [Danica] agrees to voluntarily dismiss her claims and publicize a statement on her Instagram and Twitter accounts that [Josh] is not the individual who injured her." He also says it's "highly unlikely that any compensation would be offered" to Danica.

 

Hmmm.  Am I interpreting this correctly?  Josh's attorney wants Danica to publicly say Josh isn't the one who injured her ... but not that Josh didn't have sex with her?  If I'm reading that right, it's kind of interesting.  Well, to me, anyhow. 

 

18 minutes ago, LittleSpouseOnThePrairie said:

question: If the Ashley Madison hack had never exposed Josh, would we have ever heard from Danica?  And would people have ever known to look for/find his OkCupid profiles, etc.?

If she really was traumatized, why didn't Danica say anything/sue right away long before all the cheating douchey-ness was revealed?

 

We may have still heard from her, if her account of what transpired between them is accurate.

I doubt anyone would have been prompted to look for his OkCupid account.  It may have come out at some point, but I'm sure after the AM scandal broke, lots of folks were scouring the Internet, looking for more traces of him.

As for why Danica didn't come forward right away, well ... that's getting into another area altogether.  I'm not saying this particularly applies to Danica, but for ages upon ages women were discouraged from speaking out after a sexual attack.  Then, if they did speak out after a period of time had passed, that delay was held against them.  "She must be lying.  If it had really happened, she would have spoken up sooner."  In my opinion, it's not a question/comment that should be entertained because it sets us back about 20 to 20,000 years.

 

 

[Mercer]

25 minutes ago, LittleSpouseOnThePrairie said:

If she really was traumatized, why didn't Danica say anything/sue right away long before all the cheating douchey-ness was revealed?

Maybe because before the scandals, he was seen as the golden boy of a wholesome Christian family and had a job as the mouthpiece of right-wing morality, and afterward he was known to be someone who molested children and cheated on his wife?

I can't speak for Danica, but if the allegation is true and I were in her shoes, I wouldn't have bothered before the scandals because I would have assumed no one would believe me when it was my word against his. Now at least there's a chance, because his credibility is shot.

[Whoosh]

I really don't know what to believe about all of this, but I will say that lots of different scenarios might make a story similar to Dillon's make sense.  There are lots of different things that could be mentioned, but consider the following hypothetical life events of a hypothetical person.

Say a girl is raised to believe that her only worth as a person is between her legs (not true of all sex workers by a long shot, but not entirely uncommon for sex workers).  

Add some type of childhood abuse that was never acknowledged and no one came to her aid when she cried out for help.  There are all kinds of ways that women become sex workers and this not an uncommon scenario part of the background of some.

Throw in some substance use/abuse to try to deal with both the past realities and the present realities.  Also common.  Remember substance use is often at it's highest when the person is performing.

I have no idea why any given individual becomes a sex worker and I would never speculate on something like that unless I was involved in their medical care in some way.  I'm certainly not saying any of the things I am talking about are true in any given case.  I do think that there are possibly lots of factors that might be in play if a situation like this were to arise that might make the seemingly unbelievable story suddenly make a lot of sense.

Again - I have no idea about the truth of any situation and I am not suggesting or implying anything about this particular case.  I simply think there are all kinds of factors that may explain some confusing parts of a story.

[vienna]

What really bothers me is that the sister's story plays well for what the fundi women want to believe: Josh was   seduced (by a slutty person with an evil plan).

[diplomat]

7 hours ago, Lachlanne said:

Am I interpreting this correctly?  Josh's attorney wants Danica to publicly say Josh isn't the one who injured her ... but not that Josh didn't have sex with her?  If I'm reading that right, it's kind of interesting.  Well, to me, anyhow.

I suspect the word "injured" is being used in the legal sense, here, in that a plaintiff has to prove some "injury" in order to win a civil lawsuit. Danica's complaint alleged two separate theories for relief:  intentional battery and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Both theories rely on the same alleged facts, specifically, that Josh sexually assaulted her in a "violent and outrageous" manner, exceeded the scope of her consent for their interaction, and caused severe physical and emotional injuries as a result. Josh's attorney wants Danica to publicly say Josh didn't do any of the things Danica alleged in the lawsuit against him. For purposes of the lawsuit, I think it's irrelevant whether they ever had consensual sex.

[HRM1216]

10 hours ago, LittleSpouseOnThePrairie said:

Let me preface this with a hearty "i am not defending Josh."

question: If the Ashley Madison hack had never exposed Josh, would we have ever heard from Danica?  And would people have ever known to look for/find his OkCupid profiles, etc.?

If she really was traumatized, why didn't Danica say anything/sue right away long before all the cheating douchey-ness was revealed?

Bigger issue to me is that she claimed she did him twice.

I kinda feel like she is trapping herself by having sex with him twice and then suing for emotional damages. I'm thinking it should be more like: Aggressively hump me once shame on you, aggressively hump me twice, shame on me...

Either she was desperate for the money so she went back for seconds, or she just had two crappy sex sessions and then saw an opportunity to hop on the "josh is d-bag" train and try for an extra $500,000 cash in addition to her 15 minutes of fame.

I kind of agree with everything you're saying. I go back and forth between if I believe Danica or not and these reasons are exactly why. I did see further down that someone said maybe she thought no one would believe her--a sad and terrible reality in and of itself--but I also wonder if she's not an opportunist. 

 

I don't like Josh and would never dream of defending his actions, but I also am not okay with the idea that someone is falsely accusing him of something so serious.