Jump to content
IGNORED

Duggars by the Dozen 29 - A Very Inappropriate Lawsuit


Coconut Flan

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Bad Wolf said:

Didn't JB and M send J and A to a marriage retreat? Wasn't it before anything came out about the molestation? Maybe they knew what was coming down.  Or maybe that didn't happen and I just dreamt it.

Remember Josh was also cheating on Anna, and he May have been acting weird or something

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 582
  • Created
  • Last Reply

@Bad Wolf--If I'm remembering right, JB and Meechelle gave J&A a certificate for a marriage retreat at the end of the sex reveal party with the stupid flamingos. It was before the revelations in In Touch, but there's no way to be sure why they gave it to them. I wouldn't be surprised if JB and M had noticed something off, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So not to distract from the lawsuit too much, but I could never actually recall how I learned about the Duggars. I remember watching some of the episodes on Netflix, but couldn't have told you where I first heard about them or why I decided to watch. I think I found out!

I was going through my twitter recently, which I don't really use anymore, and found a tweet from 9/16/13 that read "so this sounds like hell..." with a link to a People article. 

Spoiler

IMG_0042.thumb.PNG.1a3fc2f8a45d4a51453a2fd9b4700fc5.PNG

The article explains courtship, which was probably the first time I had ever heard that term in my life, and all the rules associated with it. 

Clearly my initial reaction to this family was spot on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Carm_88 said:

Ben looks 12! :o :laughing-rolling:

And just a few years later he is a married man with two children. It's pretty crazy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Duggars are really keeping us on our toes with all these lawsuits. I wonder if all of these lawsuits are being done to distract everyone from some other skeleton in the closet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank God! Josh's inclusion in the lawsuit had to have been one of the Duggars' most ill considered notions EVER!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really want that Duggar tell-all to give us the inside scoop on what went down.  I really hope he got an actual lawyer's advice, who told him "holy shit, not only do you have NO CHANCE, but you'll look even worse, AND hurt your sisters' chances".

Although, knowing the Duggar's JB probably has promised him a cut of the imaginary payout from his sisters' case.... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Sister Mozz said:

Josh has dropped out of the lawsuit.

Good! The fact that that SOB felt he deserved anything for his own transgressions was insane!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could they have possibly thought people would have been sympathetic towards Josh, and when people were outraged at his utter gall that that were taken aback? Most likely they realized the error about him being an adult  when it was filed , and had no case. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

$20 says he was told that the lawyers for his sisters would be opposing his motion to intervene. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know that Inquisitr decided Michelle's bitterness blog was about Jeremy & Derek, but I wonder if it was aimed at Josh?

But the more I think about it...  Wouldn't the daughters taking their lawsuit against the town/In Touch also count as Bitterness?  Gothardism is always beyond me, but I don't understand how, in the Gothard counselling for sexual abuse, the most important thing is for the victim to move on, forgive everyone who hurt them, etc etc....  but they're suing!  

Quite apart from the whole "It going public was more painful than the abuse, which wasn't even abuse" nonsense, it smacks of huge hypocrisy that they can forgive their abuser, but not the Town.In Touch (although I guess that could be the difference between harbouring bitterness against a peson they know, versus organisations?  I don't buy it myself, I think it's more thinking they can make $$$)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If jimbob knew nothing of the demand and forced josh to remove it, josh is less controlled than we thought and as narcissistic as ever. :smiley-signs131:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, apiscue said:

If jimbob knew nothing of the demand and forced josh to remove it, josh is less controlled than we thought and as narcissistic as ever

I don't get that, though - if JimBob forced Josh to rescind it, it means Josh is as under control as ever

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My $20 is on someone explained to Josh's lawyer that a motion to intervene was improper and half his causes of action were past the statue of limitations. He might still try bringing his own suit and moving to consolidate which is the proper procedure.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, Lurky said:

I don't get that, though - if JimBob forced Josh to rescind it, it means Josh is as under control as ever

I dont mean that jimbob doesnt control over josh but that josh could do it without the knowledge of jimbob and who knows what else ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Jess said:

My $20 is on someone explained to Josh's lawyer that a motion to intervene was improper and half his causes of action were past the statue of limitations. He might still try bringing his own suit and moving to consolidate which is the proper procedure.

 

He had to have known the SOL part beforehand though, right? Why else even attempt a motion to intervene?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I couldn't read the article unless I filled out a questionnaire. I'm sure one of the tabloids will pick it up and I'll read it then. What on earth is going on in Duggarland?  :confusion-confused:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, subsaharanafrica said:

He had to have known the SOL part beforehand though, right? Why else even attempt a motion to intervene?

Yes, this thing was fraught with insanity from the start.  If the attorney was sane enough to tell Josh to end it, he would have known the issues in advance.  Including the fact that it probably wouldn't look too good to the fan base, and if he were successful in joining it would likely hurt rather than help his sisters' chances.

Up thread someone said the attorney representing Josh has been known to work for the Duggars which would imply JB's involvement.

I can only think of a couple of things.  Maybe it was a trial balloon to see if Josh could get some quick settlement money.  This wouldn't be the wisest of moves, and it probably gave the defendants nothing more than a chuckle.  But I can see Jim Boob instructing his attorney to file on behalf of Josh, truly believing his boy (and by default JB, himself) was wronged here as well. 

Or maybe Josh, narcissistic pig that he is, did it on his own, thinking it's unfair his sisters get to make claims that he feels he should be entitled to make.  After all, they got their own show!  He's the one with the damaged reputation, stuck back in Arkansas selling used cars.  Maybe the fact that this would have happened post-Ashley Madison anyway somehow has escaped him?

I lean towards something like the first. Also, TLC probably wasn't pleased with either move, but the Josh thing was over the top.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am wagering $10 with the general theory someone told him that legally his motion was crap theory, and $10 with "internal opinion polling" numbers went down -- aka their usual supporters expressing some of the "WTF?" we have when he did this.

4 hours ago, Lurky said:

Quite apart from the whole "It going public was more painful than the abuse, which wasn't even abuse" nonsense, it smacks of huge hypocrisy that they can forgive their abuser, but not the Town.In Touch (although I guess that could be the difference between harbouring bitterness against a peson they know, versus organisations?  I don't buy it myself, I think it's more thinking they can make $$$)

The "liberal media run by porn producers" and the "corrupt officials playing hokey-pokey with the FOIA" are the only targets it's safe within the cult worldview to be angry at.  Their lawsuit even says the painful memories they had to relive wasn't the molestation but the interview process and subsequent investigation.  And that probably WAS traumatic, but made moreso by the cult's ingrained distrust of things outside their families and churches.

It starts with even the mildest forms of blanket training -- teaching a pre-verbal infant it's scary off the blanket, putting your kids through a "Baby Albert" like experience to fear venturing from "safety".  (This happens even if they just make a loud noise or hit the ground outside the blanket with something flexible enough to make noise -- the ones who use this but say they aren't Pearl people because they don't switch infants are still using Pearl methods.)  Then when they are taught that horrific "umbrella of protection" bull, it gives words to that pre-verbal conditioned fear.  The "blanket" they need is the umbrella!  It's safe under the umbrella, and scary outside it. 

If they still cling to that, they can't be angry at Josh because it'd be holding bitterness against someone "in the fold" they forgave.  Being angry at their parents or church authorities would be downright rebellious witchcraft.  So if they were given safe targets to blame (especially back then -- "the secular liberal government wants to make your brother leave us" wouldn't have to be outright said to be heard and associated with blaming the government and not Josh, even if they did say the then-girls had to tell the truth and tried to reassure them) and given they did have the dual trauma of these sheltered young women having to talk about intimate things to strangers and then the strangers releasing what they said... I can see transference of anger they might be really feeling at Josh into anger at the safe targets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:trainwreck:What a dweeb. How dumb and desperate do you have to be to join a lawsuit when you're the predator? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • choralcrusader8613 locked this topic

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.