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

[EmmieJ]

23 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.

Seriously.  None of my siblings would ever bad mouth me to any non-family member.  Now, between ourselves, we can talk some shit.  But to a non-family member, no way in hell. 

[HerNameIsBuffy]

11 minutes ago, EmmieJ said:

Seriously.  None of my siblings would ever bad mouth me to any non-family member.  Now, between ourselves, we can talk some shit.  But to a non-family member, no way in hell. 

You got that right!  My brother had moments of being ...let's say less than grateful for my obnoxious and much younger company at times.  He was quite uninhibited in expressing this, but when the neighbor kid agreed that I was a brat...

That didn't end well and the neighbor kid learned a little something about family loyalty and boundaries.  And how to get his basketball off his roof while stemming the flow of a bloody nose.  

And I learned my brother clearly adored me and wanted me to keep being bratty despite what he said, or why would he defend me?

Lessons learned all around that day.

[picklepizzas]

5 hours ago, vienna said:

What if...

First of all, personally I give her the benift of the doubt.  Why should she not deserve it (over Josh!)? Also I rather be wrongly on her side than beeing false in not believing her.

Be this as it may, I just read through the latest court documents.

Let's assume her claims are true but that she got the explicit date of her encounter with Josh wrong. Has the case to get dismissed then (because of the wrong dates)? If so, it would make sense not to show the evidence they have if the plan is to fill another suit with the right dates ( if this is even possible). Us lawyers here; what are the options if you got the dates wrong? But either way, if this is the case I would not give away my evidence for a lost cause and think about a new strategy.

 i wouldn't... i know this isn't a criminal case, but 'innocent until proven guilty' still comes to mind. just because josh is a scumbag and committed a previous crime doesn't mean we should assume he committed this one... personally, i'd feel much worse if i jumped to condemn the accused when upon examination they were actually innocent than if i'd doubted the accuser when they were  telling the truth but hadn't yet presented their full case. 

[vienna]

14 minutes ago, picklepizzas said:

 i wouldn't... i know this isn't a criminal case, but 'innocent until proven guilty' still comes to mind. just because josh is a scumbag and committed a previous crime doesn't mean we should assume he committed this one... personally, i'd feel much worse if i jumped to condemn the accused when upon examination they were actually innocent than if i'd doubted the accuser when they were  telling the truth but hadn't yet presented their full case. 

I get your point. I just have the ompression that  - not your statement in particular but the whole discussion here -  would be  different if she would not be a porn star. And this thought bothers me a lot.

The thing about "innocent until proven guilty" is that it can be applied both ways: i don´t believe or assume that Danica is lying or a fame whore until proven guilty.

[jacduggar]

On 1/13/2016 at 0:53 AM, diplomat said:

So I checked the court docket myself, and here's the timeline of recent events, along with some info I thought interesting:

• December 30: Josh moved to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing that Danica only offered a "formulaic recitation of elements" for her claims without alleging sufficient facts upon which she could win. (It's a standard motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim.)
• January 6: The judge denied Josh's motion, finding that Danica "sufficiently but barely" had pleaded her claims. At this stage of the proceedings, everyone has to presume that all of the facts alleged by the plaintiff (Danica) are true.
• January 7: Josh filed his answer to Danica's claims. In it, he admitted that he "has stayed at Reformers' Unanimous in Rockford, Illinois." He insisted, however, that he "has never met" Danica, that he "was not in Pennsylvania" on March 12-14 or April 17-18, 2015, that he "has never approached [Danica] anywhere," that he "has never propositioned" her, that he has "never been in a hotel room" with her, and that he has "never had any direct contact whatsoever" with her. Josh also repeated his earlier argument that Danica failed to state a claim and he alleged several other affirmative defenses. (Among other things, he says Danica can't win because she was engaged in illegal activity at the time, because she didn't make sufficient efforts to mitigate damages, and because she failed to "name an indispensable party," although I'm not sure what that last one is about.)
• January 8: Josh filed a motion asking the court to force Danica to comply with the scheduling order for turning over her discovery. As part of that motion, Josh said he'd already given over 100 pages of alibi documents, plus video footage, to Danica's attorney. But the court had already granted Danica's extension for more time to turn over her stuff to Josh--she has until January 15, and Josh has a few days after that to respond--so Josh's motion to compel was denied as moot.

March 12-14 Josh was in Texas with the rest of the clan and there are hundreds of pictures on the internet to prove it. I just typed it into Google and got it, I am no expert, but that sticks a pretty big hole in this girl's story.

I think Josh deserves to go to the cleaners, but this was far too obvious to just not point out.

[JenniferJuniper]

30 minutes ago, vienna said:

I get your point. I just have the ompression that  - not your statement in particular but the whole discussion here -  would be  different if she would not be a porn star. And this thought bothers me a lot.

The thing about "innocent until proven guilty" is that it can be applied both ways: i don´t believe or assume that Danica is lying or a fame whore until proven guilty.

I don't necessarily agree that her profession is driving any doubt about her story of being assaulted.

For me at least, I'd have the same questions if she were just some random woman - or man - who went on ET with the exact same same story, minus the financial transaction.  If fact, I might be inclined to believe her more because she is a prostitute, because someone who accepts cash for sex might be less likely to come forward and admit their own role in illegal activity.

Regardless, everyone should have doubts about her story until enough evidence surfaces to support her claims.  People make shit up all the time - for attention, for money, for god knows what.  Sex workers are no more virtuous or less crazy than the rest of the population.

I don't see this as "giving the benefit of the doubt" to Josh either.  We know he is a dirt bag who is capable of doing what is claimed - and worse. (15 or not - the girl in the laundry room). He'll get no "benefit" of anything from me.   It's just that as of yet, his accuser appears to have come up with nothing that even connects her to Josh.

Someone mentioned Bill Cosby up thread.  Do I believe he drugged and raped women?  Absolutely.  The sheer volume of accusers coupled with his own admissions convince me of this.  Do I believe every single woman who makes claims against him is telling the truth?  Not necessarily. 

 And so with Josh and Danica, I am currently neutral.  Neutral, yet curious.

    

[justoneoftwo]

44 minutes ago, jacduggar said:

March 12-14 Josh was in Texas with the rest of the clan and there are hundreds of pictures on the internet to prove it. I just typed it into Google and got it, I am no expert, but that sticks a pretty big hole in this girl's story.

I think Josh deserves to go to the cleaners, but this was far too obvious to just not point out.

This is a big part of why i don't think she is telling the whole truth.  I am willing to be shown evidence that says otherwise, but it doesn't even seem like a well thought out story.

[RosyDaisy]

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

I would never, ever do something like that to my sister. Our conversations would be private. No amount of money or fame would convince me to do that.

[Trynn]

I'd never sell out my brother.

[karen77]

14 hours ago, jacduggar said:

March 12-14 Josh was in Texas with the rest of the clan and there are hundreds of pictures on the internet to prove it. I just typed it into Google and got it, I am no expert, but that sticks a pretty big hole in this girl's story.

I think Josh deserves to go to the cleaners, but this was far too obvious to just not point out.

You'd think that her lawyer would have noticed that tidbit, not hard to find. So, something is up.

[NotAnIncubator]

18 hours ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

What Halcionne said.   I was going to reply as soon as I could scroll back and see the reference to this being verified.

@NotAnIncubator the only place this rumor keeps coming up in here and from you....if this were something people could have verified all the tabloids would have run with it.  Not because it was posted here, but because they were no doubt crawling all sites like this looking for a bigger story.

I'm really uncomfortable that this keeps getting brought up here with absolutely zero confirmation - repeating a rumor over and over doesn't make it true.  

Its not a rumor. It was something I found. I just simply stated why I believed it was plausable based on my beliefs. Answered someone else and get attacked. Fine.

 

I ammend my original statement. I believe josh did it because he's a predator and a douche.

[jacduggar]

I just had a chance to sit down and Google and saw Jessa & Bin were on their way to ATI conference in Big Sandy on April 19. I'm going to assume that Josh Duggar family also attended said conference (he was tagged in Jessa's post and was shown in a picture at the conference). I guess it's possible that he was at said club on the 18th of April, but photos show the family in their RV that day and an airport the next so I'm going to say it's unlikely. 

 

Joshly, I accept official checks, major credit cards, and cash. 

[JenniferJuniper]

3 minutes ago, jacduggar said:

I just had a chance to sit down and Google and saw Jessa & Bin were on their way to ATI conference in Big Sandy on April 19. I'm going to assume that Josh Duggar family also attended said conference (he was tagged in Jessa's post and was shown in a picture at the conference). I guess it's possible that he was at said club on the 18th of April, but photos show the family in their RV that day and an airport the next so I'm going to say it's unlikely. 

 

One would think if Danica were truly a Josh stalker (really, can there even be such a a thing?) as claimed by her sister, she would know things like this or at least know where to look it up. 

As for nasty siblings, they do indeed exist.

[Lysistrata]

On January 6, 2016 at 2:26 PM, Mothership said:

What do we really know about Joshley and porn?

My recollection is that HE blamed a porn addiction as the root of his unfaithfulness  Until he responded to the AM claims, porn was never suggested..  But, we have no real collaboration. In Duggarville, porn is the epitome of the evil secular world and makes a great excuse for Joshley with the leghumpers.  It also is realitively simple fix with Jesus camp and limited internet in the short term.

What does he even mean by porn?  His AM profile was completely boring.  Bubble baths?  Is the Duggar definition of porn "The Young and the Restless"?   Even the lawsuit has everything to do with violence--which so far isn't being excused by his supposed porn addiction. 

I have no problem believing that Smugs is capable of violence.  I think the early molestation is about control and power and if the accusations in the lawsuit are to believed, even that is about power and not about sex.

I'm just throwing this out there.  Do we have any collaboration about the porn?

Also, I know there's a FJ expert who can really speak to whether porn addiction is a recognized pathology.

 

 

When scandal 1 first broke (i.e. before police reports) people were speculating oh it was probably an over reaction to him kissing a girl etc. because you know how those Duggars think.  However, we found out it was molestation.  When Josh said porn addiction, I believe he meant porn porn and not spicy tv.  I'm done erring on the side of oh "maybe it's not so bad" when it comes to Josh.  

There were rumors (not sure how corroborated) that teen Josh got busted for watching porn on computers at Holt campaign HQ.

[Bad Wolf]

I guess it's possible that it's a case of mistaken identity, and that there's a Joshly look alike out there. Scary thought. All we can do is speculate, as it's he said, she said, sister said. We may never know the truth.

[SpoonfulOSugar]

23 hours ago, NotAnIncubator said:

The day joshley Madison hit, I searched a popular bdsm website for him and found a profile with the same likes listed and another with a fake pic located in the same area. If he was on there, it wouldn't surprise me about him getting rough. Also with a longtime porn addicition,  I'm sure he's not into just your basic boy-girl romp.

 

21 hours ago, NotAnIncubator said:

Bubble baths for two was a dead giveaway. Plus the popular oral sex, sex toys and schoolgirls.

 

29 minutes ago, NotAnIncubator said:

Its not a rumor. It was something I found. I just simply stated why I believed it was plausable based on my beliefs. Answered someone else and get attacked. Fine.

 

I ammend my original statement. I believe josh did it because he's a predator and a douche.

It IS a rumor.  You have no corroborating evidence.  You took things that are common and tried to turn a profile into something you cannot support.

You didn't ANSWER someone else and get attacked; you made a statement which has no foundation and that statement was attacked.

Do you honestly believe bubble baths, oral sex, sex toys or schoolgirls are unusual sexual turn-ons?  

[2manyKidzzz]

What I do not understand:

After this long, why the dates and times have not been officially corroborrated. I mean really. Either it can be proved he was there at certain times or not. So, why is this dragging on? 

My siblings are totally nasty and would do this but I am not a porn star. Really, I'm not. They drink and are nasty. Fun. 

Also, I do not understand how she can have any proof so long after the fact, since she may well have seen another client on the same day. 

So I guess I would not have made a good lawyer. 

[HerNameIsBuffy]

43 minutes ago, NotAnIncubator said:

Its not a rumor. It was something I found. I just simply stated why I believed it was plausable based on my beliefs. Answered someone else and get attacked. Fine.

 

I ammend my original statement. I believe josh did it because he's a predator and a douche.

Repeating something that has absolutely no credible substance to it is the definition of a rumor.  

Tabloids and news outlets have been crawling through everything online and off for almost a year trying to find dirt on Josh - they would LOVE to find something like this and be able to spin it as plausible because the traffic it would generate = money.  The fact that the only place this is being mentioned is on one message board by one poster is a pretty big sign that there is nothing to it.

People posted in objection to you bringing up this completely baseless rumor, but no one attacked you.  

 

 

[Redandbluenights]

On 1/5/2016 at 11:01 PM, candygirl200413 said:

If you don't I am also willing to take one for the team cause I'm about 10-15 minutes away from center city.

Me too! I'm just ten minutes from the bridges.

[jacduggar]

15 minutes ago, 2manyKidzzz said:

What I do not understand:

After this long, why the dates and times have not been officially corroborrated. I mean really. Either it can be proved he was there at certain times or not. So, why is this dragging on? 

My siblings are totally nasty and would do this but I am not a porn star. Really, I'm not. They drink and are nasty. Fun. 

Also, I do not understand how she can have any proof so long after the fact, since she may well have seen another client on the same day. 

So I guess I would not have made a good lawyer. 

Because I'm already too far into creepy internet stalker-ville to back out now, according to the Twitter accounts for the clubs she's claiming he was at, the dates listed above are when she was headlining, there was tons of social media PR about it. In April she for sure was back in California "shooting" (ick) the very next day.

 

Ok I'm done reading about these people and I'm going to go shower all the yuck off of me. Side note-stalking a porn star on Twitter really opened my eyes to all of the explicit pictures that apparently can be posted there. 

[Whoosh]

Quoted from @2manyKidzzz

Also, I do not understand how she can have any proof so long after the fact, since she may well have seen another client on the same day. 

I guess I get maybe you are saying that it is hard for a woman to win this type of case in court and if that is what you are saying, I agree.  It is often damn hard for women to prove that they were sexually assaulted and/or raped by a particular individual in a court of law. I don't see how Dillon's situation is any different than any other women ever who has brought allegations of sexual assault and/or rape ever in any civil or criminal court. In order to win these types of cases, the woman must prove the following under the applicable standard of proof:

• An unlawful act occurred
• She was the victim of that unlawful act
• She has suffered a harm that allows for recovery under the law (civil only)
• The defendant/respondent is the person that was the perpetrator of that illegal act

That is what every woman ever who has ever been involved in this type of case needs to prove in a court of law.  In terms of Dillon v Duggar, Dillon will need to prove all of that.  Just like every other woman would have to. 

Do we even know if Dillon has ever sold sex to a private individual in this way (i.e. not part of making a film or putting on a show in a club)?  I don't think I have read anything about that.  I don't know as it matters if Dillon had a string of men lined out the door every night or if this was a one time occurrence.  If a woman was assaulted while walking through a park, she would have to prove that 1) the assault happened and 2) it was the defendant/respondent that committed that assault, not anyone else that may or may NOT have been in the park.  

Honestly, this is a requirement in pretty much every civil or criminal case ever I think - the prosecution or plaintiff needs to prove not just that something unlawful happened, but that it was the defendant who did it.

[justoneoftwo]

8 minutes ago, Whoosh said:

I guess I get maybe you are saying that it is hard for a woman to win this type of case in court and if that is what you are saying, I agree.  It is often damn hard for women to prove that they were sexually assaulted and/or raped by a particular individual in a court of law. I don't see how Dillon's situation is any different than any other women ever who has brought allegations of sexual assault and/or rape ever in any civil or criminal court. In order to win these types of cases, the woman must prove the following under the applicable standard of proof:

• An unlawful act occurred
• She was the victim of that unlawful act
• She has suffered a harm that allows for recovery under the law (civil only)
• The defendant/respondent is the person that was the perpetrator of that illegal act

That is what every woman ever who has ever been involved in this type of case needs to prove in a court of law.  In terms of Dillon v Duggar, Dillon will need to prove all of that.  Just like every other woman would have to. 

Do we even know if Dillon has ever sold sex to a private individual in this way (i.e. not part of making a film or putting on a show in a club)?  I don't think I have read anything about that.  I don't know as it matters if Dillon had a string of men lined out the door every night or if this was a one time occurrence.  If a woman was assaulted while walking through a park, she would have to prove that 1) the assault happened and 2) it was the defendant/respondent that committed that assault, not anyone else that may or may NOT have been in the park.  

Honestly, this is a requirement in pretty much every civil or criminal case ever I think - the prosecution or plaintiff needs to prove not just that something unlawful happened, but that it was the defendant who did it.

One of the biggest differences with these kinds of cases and others is which part must be proven.  In most crimes the fact that the crime occurred is a given, the question is who did it.  With rape the question usually ends up being did the crime occur, as we know who was involved. It seems to me that people feel attacked because there is no assumption that a crime happened, and being asked to prove that is difficult and emotionally challenging, particularly if you take into account what makes the same acts not a crime.  All of this is very difficult for any plaintiff to prove, and I'm not sure her profession matters much.   

[EmmieJ]

16 hours ago, JenniferJuniper said:

Someone mentioned Bill Cosby up thread.  Do I believe he drugged and raped women?  Absolutely.  The sheer volume of accusers coupled with his own admissions convince me of this.  Do I believe every single woman who makes claims against him is telling the truth?  Not necessarily. 

And so with Josh and Danica, I am currently neutral.  Neutral, yet curious.   

Me too.  I am waiting to see what evidence we are allowed to know.  Some things we can check for ourselves, like someone else mentioned about doing a Google search for particular dates and finding evidence of where Josh was on that day/those days.  Some things we probably won't be privy to, if the parties follow the court's orders to keep items provided in discovery private and confidential. 

[silverspoons]

Do we know that Josh was in Texas the whole time March 12-14th? How easy would it have been for him to fly back to DC for work a day early? It seemed like his job had him doing quick travel all the time. Josh would fly just for the day to shake some senator's hand and have a FRC photo op and across the country and then back.

I think Josh really wanted to meet one of his favorite porn stars and he found a way. He was probably mad her appearance in the club was close by to DC and he was suppose to be in TX so he went to TX and found a way to leave early. I'm embarrassed to admit this but I had a crush on an American Gladiator back in college. I had been a pretty good kid all my life but when this American Gladiator was signing autographs I had to go. I found a ride home and my parents were away and I took their car without them knowing. It was a blizzard and I crashed the car, left it on the side of the road and found a way to take a bus the rest of the way to meet Laser. This was so out of character for me but my desire to meet this person made me find a way. I just have a feeling Josh found a way to meet his porn star and have his fantasy come true.

[sawasdee]

3 minutes ago, silverspoons said:

Do we know that Josh was in Texas the whole time March 12-14th? How easy would it have been for him to fly back to DC for work a day early? It seemed like his job had him doing quick travel all the time. Josh would fly just for the day to shake some senator's hand and have a FRC photo op and across the country and then back.

I think Josh really wanted to meet one of his favorite porn stars and he found a way. He was probably mad her appearance in the club was close by to DC and he was suppose to be in TX so he went to TX and found a way to leave early. I'm embarrassed to admit this but I had a crush on an American Gladiator back in college. I had been a pretty good kid all my life but when this American Gladiator was signing autographs I had to go. I found a ride home and my parents were away and I took their car without them knowing. It was a blizzard and I crashed the car, left it on the side of the road and found a way to take a bus the rest of the way to meet Laser. This was so out of character for me but my desire to meet this person made me find a way. I just have a feeling Josh found a way to meet his porn star and have his fantasy come true.

I think you may still be in fantasy land - there is zero evidence for what you say, and rather a lot countering it.