Duggars by the Dozen 28 - A Mild Inappropriate Lawsuit

[Jess]

4 minutes ago, Fundie Bunny said:

It was definetly newsworthy the fact that their parents chose to protect their daughter's moelster over them. Nevermind he was their son. If there's a situation in wich you should express a preference over your children, this was one

Well I agree with the sentiment I don't think that was what the news articles wrote. IIRC it was basically Josh molested five people here are the reports (which is how people figured out the identities.) If they had ran that news article you might have a point.

[moriah]

2 minutes ago, Jess said:

It is also important to remember there is a difference between releasing Josh's names and actions, (he would never win a case which is why he didn't sue) and releasing the girls names as victims. Well they are connected they are different. Was it newsworthy that Josh committed these acts? Yes. Was it newsworthy that the duggar girls were victims of childhood sexual assault more then a decade before the release? That's the question.

Was it newsworthy that their parents denied him adequate treatment, that the church covered it up, and the Duggars only got counseling for their daughters because the late-opened DHS case required it?  Yep.

Again, why the daughters are suing and not JB/M.  

Did their parents do something that made them likely to draw attention to things that had been old news?  Yes, when Michelle made robocalls about transgender people being likely to molest little girls in the bathroom.  That they'd say that when young women had more to fear in their home because of their inaction in March of 2002 that led to three more girls being molested...  that's the kind of statement that brings "newsworthy" back into the realm of defense.

[Jess]

2 minutes ago, moriah said:

Was it newsworthy that their parents denied him adequate treatment, that the church covered it up, and the Duggars only got counseling for their daughters because the late-opened DHS case required it?  Yep.

Again, why the daughters are suing and not JB/M.  

Did their parents do something that made them likely to draw attention to things that had been old news?  Yes, when Michelle made robocalls about transgender people being likely to molest little girls in the bathroom.  That they'd say that when young women had more to fear in their home because of their inaction in March of 2002 that led to three more girls being molested...  that's the kind of statement that brings "newsworthy" back into the realm of defense.

I don't necessarily disagree. Do you remember if the first article from in touch that disclosed the reports included that information? It's a better defense if they actually reported on it that way. 

[Trynn]

My mom was very insistent that I at least know the basics of sex. She also told me I had a "vulva," though for years I thought that the clitoris was a vulva. My mom wasn't so open about what made sex pleasurable and masturbation was still off limits, but she insisted I at least learn age appropriate things about sex and development.

She kinda dropped the ball with my brother, though. She wanted dad to teach him, but dad didn't explain it well. So he came to me. And that is how I ended up explaining periods to a child who didn't even know how women got pregnant. (My brother noticed I got sick once a month and thought I was dying. I was 14 and not equipped to handle this question from a 7 year old child.)

So then I had a talk with my mother about how I felt she had put me in an awkward position and that she should go talk to my brother.... And she did. She apologized and said I was right, I should never have had to do that. She had a talk with him.

This kind of thing is abnormal in the SDA circles in which I was raised. Most parents were not so open with their kids about even the basics. Most parents would crucify me if I told their son I was on my period. Even if their son thought I was sick and dying.

[moriah]

1 hour ago, Jess said:

I don't necessarily disagree. Do you remember if the first article from in touch that disclosed the reports included that information? It's a better defense if they actually reported on it that way. 

Here are the first two articles.  The first does nothing to identify victims.  

The second comes down HARD on JimBob and Michelle.  It doesn't say they'd made those robocalls in the article, but the timeline is close.  Salon was the outlet that connected the two the next day.  Less than a year prior had been when the robocalls were made, and also the robocalls were allegedly the reason the person tipped off InTouch that the records existed. 

Edit:  The third article with the Washington County police report was released on June 3rd, naming the victims as sisters.  But it'd already either been deducted by others or in other articles by InTouch I haven't found because an article talking about Megyn Kelly landing an interview to talk to Jim Bob and Michelle mentioned "daughters" on May 30th.  

Second edit: the Blaze (trigger warning) made the connection that the victims were sisters despite InTouch not specifically saying it in a May 22nd article.  So as early as the 22nd they put the pieces together.

[Evangeline]

6 hours ago, moriah said:

There are several higher court rulings, while old, that haven't been overturned saying that information that is "public record" is never a "private fact" for the media.  They have been relied on by other high court decisions that exculpated the media when the government made mistakes in releasing information.  All have shifted the burden to the municipality that released the information instead of the media agencies that published it because of concerns about chilling effects against the First Amendment and freedom of the press.

Thanks for the explanation! This is consistent with my training and experience WRT public records. I also believe there is no case against In Touch. 

[Breaking Good]

If there is one thing that will tear the Duggars apart or have them leave the cult, it is fighting over money. I watched my family act in disgusting ways after the death of a family member all because of money. I think that these lawsuits will really test their family unity, especially if they don't go well.

[neurogirl]

Total law newbie here: Will the J ladies get to hear these arguments against the case/against their parents in court? Idk how involved they will be in the hearings, but if they are present, I hope these fantastic arguments are made against JB/Michelle and that the undeniable hypocrisy would cause at least one J slave to go through a new cycle of healing. I can't imagine how painful it has been/would be to reconcile these truths, but I wish it for them all the same.

[MadeItOut]

I'm not a lawyer and I'm European, so I can't tell you if they will for sure, but I was married to a fundie man so I do have some receiving end experience of the controls we've seen modelled over the years and the ones they ascribe to.

Unfortunately, when you're in that deep it can become so ingrained that the sense in things you just don't see anymore - or by reflex you read it as particularly dangerous temptation that seems reasonable.

I know it sounds nuts - it's really hard to explain.

Don't forget that through the prism they've been lifelong conditioned to look, their folks, Dad especially, has a direct line to God, so KNOWS exactly what God wants for them. If things go the way Dad says, then that's cool, the World is bending to God's will and all is as it should be. If there is resistance, then it's the influence of that other guy sending all his rage etc to defeat and disrupt God's holy servant. The more opposition, the greater the trial, the more 'proof' this is the right thing to do.

To this day, 13 yrs  away from him and 9 yrs  out completely, even having done therapy and a LOT of work, I'm still rediscovering stuff that's making me cringe and go 'what was I thinking?!' - what I was thinking was, this man is God's truly amazing gift to a worthless ingrate like me. I'm so lucky he has sent him to keep me safe from the world.

Even at the point you do start to realise the sense in things, it's a very long way to getting out (assuming you do - not everyone does).

It does have the potential to be a significant moment, but I doubt we'll see any of them detach. If the case goes their way, then it's SNAFU, if it doesn't, then it's their role to caretake  and provide easy, peaceful home/family situation for the rest. Potentially there's the most chance for Jinger going off the geographic distance, however that would take Jeremy being a very rare, strong and secure man to enable it.

...also, I'm wondering if it's the same in the States as in Europe where a pregnant woman/her midwife can say it's not in the interests of the child for her to sit in court and be exposed to that level of stress?

[Jess]

9 hours ago, neurogirl said:

Total law newbie here: Will the J ladies get to hear these arguments against the case/against their parents in court? Idk how involved they will be in the hearings, but if they are present, I hope these fantastic arguments are made against JB/Michelle and that the undeniable hypocrisy would cause at least one J slave to go through a new cycle of healing. I can't imagine how painful it has been/would be to reconcile these truths, but I wish it for them all the same.

As parties they will be allowed in the court room. They could go to the depositions but at least here it's incredibly unusual for the parties to attend the depositions. They usually only do it if your trying to psych out whoever is being deposed.

[Sister Mozz]

5 hours ago, MadeItOut said:

To this day, 13 yrs  away from him and 9 yrs  out completely, even having done therapy and a LOT of work, I'm still rediscovering stuff that's making me cringe and go 'what was I thinking?!' - what I was thinking was, this man is God's truly amazing gift to a worthless ingrate like me. I'm so lucky he has sent him to keep me safe from the world.

Thanks for sharing this. I'm glad you got out. You are valuable and important and a gift to the world. Having been raised by fundie-lite parents, I know a taste of this, but I can't imagine how much more difficult it would be in marriage.

[Lyle Lanley]

13 hours ago, Breaking Good said:

If there is one thing that will tear the Duggars apart or have them leave the cult, it is fighting over money. I watched my family act in disgusting ways after the death of a family member all because of money. I think that these lawsuits will really test their family unity, especially if they don't go well.

There's 19 kids. JB and Michelle are supporting 17 of them to some extent. Joy and Austin are unknown at this point. Depends on if Austin wants to follow in Dullard's footsteps but here's to hoping he has his parents' business to fall back on if things go to hell. Jinger and Jeremy are likely self sufficient. Josh, JD, and Joe may have some outside employment but is likely token employment. Then add in Anna, Dullard, Bin, and soon to be Kendra. Plus the 7 grandchildren (soon to be 9). That's at least 30 people, not including themselves and Grandma Mary.

There is no way JB and Michelle have enough money to support all of them, keep them accustomed to the lifestyle they currently lead, and have a sizable inheritance for every single one to live off of. I doubt Josh saved any money from his time with the FRC. They parrot the "buy used and save the difference" line yet they all spend money like there's no tomorrow. The TLC gravy train is going to run out. The fans are going to stop hitting the donate button. At some point the Smuggars, Dullards and Benessa are going to have to step back and re-evaluate.

I don't think the Duggars are well equipped to deal with the eventuality that the money is going to run out. No more planes. No more fancy dinners. No more going to Central America and playing White American Jesus. No more sitting around and popping out child after child expecting money and head pats for doing so. No more money for nothing. It's not going to be pretty when JB and Michelle are no longer able to provide them all with a lifestyle they are accustomed to.

[SassyPants]

1 hour ago, Lyle Lanley said:

 No more money for nothing. It's not going to be pretty when JB and Michelle are no longer able to provide them all with a lifestyle they are accustomed to.

And, I don't think JB will give a rip either. 

He's a classic user and taker. He used those kids to support a lifestyle he wanted.

Sadly, the majority of kids are not educated, experienced or skilled enough to support themselves, let along a mega family.

It will not end well for most of the kids.

[Bad Wolf]

I wonder how old the kids are (especially the girls) when they realize how limited their choices are. Jenni wants to be a vet, Jordyn an artist. Sorry girls, you get wife and mother.

[allthegoodnamesrgone]

2 hours ago, SassyPants said:

And, I don't think JB will give a rip either. 

He's a classic user and taker. He used those kids to support a lifestyle he wanted.

Sadly, the majority of kids are not educated, experienced or skilled enough to support themselves, let along a mega family.

It will not end well for most of the kids.

If the remaining girls marry hard working men they will be OK, IF they don't have eleventy children. It is really too late for Josh, it is already bad for him and Anna and their kids, they need to STOP having children.  All of them will be fine if they keep it to 3 or 4 kids each, well I guess I shouldn't say that, it depends on who they marry, if any of the ladies get a Josh like husband that will not be good for them.  Ben isn't bad, he's just so young but he's got potential. Jeremy seems to be OK, but they haven't had kids yet and it remains to be seen what will happen with those 2. As for JoStin who knows, they are both so young Joy is practically a child Austin must be pretty decent, I can't see JD or Joe letting him near Joy if he wasn't and her sisters and Jeremy seem to like him, where he dislikes Josh & Derick, so he has some sense about him. 

[allthegoodnamesrgone]

49 minutes ago, Bad Wolf said:

I wonder how old the kids are (especially the girls) when they realize how limited their choices are. Jenni wants to be a vet, Jordyn an artist. Sorry girls, you get wife and mother.

I'm pretty sure Hannie has it figured out, and Jenni is catching on if she hasn't already.  With the exception of Josie, Jordyn & Joy and maybe Jinger a little bit all the girls were playing sister mom at at 7 or 8 years old, and cooking and doing laundry and cleaning the house. Jana, Jill, Jessa, Jinger, Hannie and Jenni really got the short end of the stick.  I  think poor Jordyn is just plain old forgotten about,  and Josie is the golden child the blessed youngest miracle child.  I think Joy had it best she had 4 older sisters to dote on her and all these boys born around her to play with.  She didn't have to do any "ladies work" because the sisters picked that up and by the time she was old enough and some sisters moved out she only had to play servant for 2 years before she got herself out of there.

[moriah]

17 hours ago, neurogirl said:

Total law newbie here: Will the J ladies get to hear these arguments against the case/against their parents in court? Idk how involved they will be in the hearings, but if they are present, I hope these fantastic arguments are made against JB/Michelle and that the undeniable hypocrisy would cause at least one J slave to go through a new cycle of healing. I can't imagine how painful it has been/would be to reconcile these truths, but I wish it for them all the same.

I'm definitely not a lawyer, FYI, just more familiar with my own state's law and once defended myself against a debt collection company that wasn't properly licensed and won, much to their surprise (heck, I'd went to an attorney and they didn't know if my argument would work, so I figured why pay someone who didn't know the theory I wanted to try -- it's case law now here, because of someone else appealing a default judgment based on the same reasoning).

Fortunately the "IANAL" disclosure is more necessary if somebody is asking for legal advice.  Still, want to make sure people understand that it's more like I stayed in a Holiday Inn last night than me having any legal qualifications.

At first we (with PACER access, really do need to reactivate my account) will see legal arguments on paper, the first being the answers after each defendant is properly served.  They will file an "Answer" to the Complaint, where they essentially "admit" or "deny" each allegation and assert/reserve any affirmative defenses they might have.  The "Answers" in most cases are boring, and can be boilerplate and still leave room open for further development of defenses.  So even when those are filed they might not be scintillating.  After that things move into the "discovery" phase, where both sides can request information.

Sometimes PACER entries will show evidence of discovery requests, particularly if there's an argument over whether a request made is reasonable or if they stall.  A lot of testimony will probably be in depositions during discovery, which it's unlikely we will see or the other Duggars will witness.  They're pretty big to put on PACER.  After discovery, usually a lot of motions are made, including for summary judgment.  They will be arguing whether there remains, after discovery, anything left for a "trier of fact" to decide.  I expect that there will be at least one MSJ from InTouch and they should get the "public disclosure of private fact" decided in their favor at least before a jury would see it.  There will be attempts at mediation for settlement after those.

IF there is a trial, the daughters, if they are in the courtroom, will hear arguments made, and testimony before a jury, but it's unlikely such testimony will be public verbatim (either in transcript or broadcast media).  And we'll see what arguments are made.

[karen77]

3 hours ago, moriah said:

Sometimes PACER entries will show evidence of discovery requests, particularly if there's an argument over whether a request made is reasonable or if they stall. 

will the PACER account show who gets deposed at least??

[JesusCampSongs]

7 hours ago, Lyle Lanley said:

There's 19 kids. JB and Michelle are supporting 17 of them to some extent. Joy and Austin are unknown at this point. Depends on if Austin wants to follow in Dullard's footsteps but here's to hoping he has his parents' business to fall back on if things go to hell. Jinger and Jeremy are likely self sufficient. Josh, JD, and Joe may have some outside employment but is likely token employment. Then add in Anna, Dullard, Bin, and soon to be Kendra. Plus the 7 grandchildren (soon to be 9). That's at least 30 people, not including themselves and Grandma Mary.

There is no way JB and Michelle have enough money to support all of them, keep them accustomed to the lifestyle they currently lead, and have a sizable inheritance for every single one to live off of.

I think Austin is currently working at renovating homes. If he is a contractor and/or has certifications in skilled trades (especially if he has licenses in plumbing and electric), he could make a decent living in the short term-- longer, if they don't have a millionty kids. 

Personally, I've always been skeptical of the whole JB as a secret real estate mogul thing. I think the whole family's finances are a big house of cards that could come tumbling down at any moment. 

[SassyPants]

5 hours ago, Bad Wolf said:

wife and mother

And not just wife and mother, but no birth control and kid after kid after kid... that likely none of them could independently afford to support.

It's so cruel!

[Diggingupdirt]

11 hours ago, moriah said:

I'm definitely not a lawyer

I am surprised by that!! You seem to know more about the law then some of the lawyers I know. Kudos to you for taking the time to do the research and understanding the law enough to represent yourself and winning. 

 

PS what is a pacer account?? Is it available to anyone?

[CreationMuseumSeasonPass]

OK, I didn't know exactly the best place to post this, but I knew I had to share it with you guys after all the times this Mormon mom and her children's names have been snarked on here. Apparently this lady gets mocked all over the Internet, not just with us. And, if you don't get Covfefe, it's another Trump Twitter fiasco. Enjoy!

[catlady]

I am feverishly praying to Rufus and the FSM that no trumpster ever names their baby Covfefe.

[CreationMuseumSeasonPass]

Newscasters don't even agree on how to pronounce it. I've heard Cov-pheh-fee, Cov-fee-fee, Cov-fehf.  I prefer the fee-fee pronunciation. Oh man, our President. Give me strength here, Almighty Rufus.

[General Jinjur]

You just made me snort covfefe out my nose. Thanks.

Mad props to everyone for the great legal information. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out. I really hope they don't get one cent. In a perfect world Boob and Michelle would be sued for being crappy parents.