[CW: Child Sex Abuse] Josh&Anna 27:How Many Robocalls Did Michelle Make to Warn People about Her Son

[JenniferJuniper]

36 minutes ago, ofMatthew said:

I found the PACER files for Josh’s case including his arrest warrant, there are some interesting things in them. Hopefully, an FJ attorney or two can help to explain some of it. ?

There are 31 images, and I was too lazy to upload each and put it behind a spoiler, so they are in my album.

https://www.freejinger.org/gallery/album/21-ofmatthew/

  Hide contents

 

 

 

 

Thanks! So the warrant was rec'd by the arresting officer on 4/28 and Josh was arrested the following day. 

[justodd]

21 hours ago, Kjaerringa said:

@browncoatslytheryn: regarding the sex work discussion on the previous thread: yes, I have had many people explain the pay/schedule hellaciousness when explaining why sex workers proven to be the best option for them, as well. Here's where I am still concerned: perhaps you can share your view on this point?

If someone has chosen to be a sex worker because our society refuses to support a living wage and work schedule with good and affordable (read: subsidized) daycare, then isn't our society trapping people into choices they might not otherwise make, just as human traffickers do? Isn't the agency for choice being taken away, albeit by a societal structure, not by an individual? In any case, the choices are limited, just the same. I've had people tell me similar stories for why they began sex work. In my experience, all were economic reasons, and none were because the person chose the work. In every case, the person told me they wanted something different, but they were either paid too little, unable to find child care, or needed (expensive) higher education to achieve their goals. Nobody cited the fact that they freely chose sex work because they loved the job, and it was fulfilling to them. 

So, I wonder if we can truly say that those workers freely chose the work, after all? Is it truly consent if there is no other financial option?

I am interested in responses.

I’m not the person you addressed this to, but I’m going to respond anyway, because I think you do bring up an interesting point. 
 

I was raised in a very catholic home, and that caused me a lot of issues with sex and shame that I wasn’t able to start really dealing with for a few years after I became sexually active. As I became more comfortable with my sexuality, and especially the less “vanilla” aspects, I was stunned by how much better I felt about myself as a whole, and I became very interested in the idea of becoming a sex therapist. Education is expensive in the states, so one of the things I strongly considered doing to help finance my academic pursuits was to work in a local BDSM dungeon as a domme. I ended up not following through for logistical reasons (it was too far from my apartment and I’d just signed a lease), but part of me is still a little “what if?” about it. I’ve known (and dated) a number of people since then who have/had varying levels of discomfort with their desires, and as cheesy as it feels to say, it’s always felt very rewarding to help them find higher levels of comfort with these things. I was never able to make my academic dreams a reality, but I’ve also never felt like I’d have regretted it if I’d gone through with my original plan to finance it. 

I’ve also known a fair number of women and non-binary people who have gone into sex work. One was a single mom who became an escort and got in a little too deep before she decided to back out of the life, and most of what made the experience not ideal for her was tied to Pre existing tendencies and behaviors involving substances and generally poor judgment. She’s the only one of the people I know who would describe it as a negative experience. The rest, who were also largely working in BDSM spaces (and one of whom quit her “straight” job to work for a well known adult video studio), all report it as a positive experience, often citing things like developing friendships with regular clients, personal discovery, and feelings of freedom at the amount of control they had over their own lives. Some did it short term to finance specific goals, while others did it more long term, with at least one I know doing it off and on for over a decade.

Abuse and exploitation happen a lot in sex work; that’s not up for debate. That doesn’t mean it’s a universal experience, or that doing it for the money should be seen as some sort of “see? See?” situation, because there are millions of people who only work at their ( completely unsexy) jobs because they need a paycheck and that job is the best they’ve been able to get. Abuse and exploitation happen in every industry, period. 

[Alisamer]

15 minutes ago, ofMatthew said:

I *think* that now that Josh is in custody, they can continue building a case against Josh. They had enough evidence to indict him but now they can search his home and look for more evidence. There could be more charges coming.

I hope an attorney can confirm or deny this. I was basing this on the Lori Vallow Daybell case.

I hope all the children he regularly has access to are interviewed (by competent people skilled and trained in interviewing children). I hope that he limited his offending to looking at images, but with the sheer number of children he's had access to over his adult life, that needs to be actually ruled out IMO rather than assumed. 

[Satan'sFortress]

2 hours ago, fluffernutter said:

 I’d pretend (this is so embarrassing to type out) that T. Berry Brazelton was visiting and hanging out.

I have been pondering for a decade getting a "What Would Mr. Rogers Do?" tattoo--so I hear ya!

(I just can't decide where to get it!)

[fluffernutter]

10 minutes ago, Satan'sFortress said:

I have been pondering for a decade getting a "What Would Mr. Rogers Do?" tattoo--so I hear ya!

(I just can't decide where to get it!)

Probably not a tramp stamp... ? But that is so sweet. I'd totally get that!

[purple_summer]

In case anyone needs a palate cleanser 

https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMe4wG7rn/ 

 

“Oldest little one” had me on the floor

[QuiverFullofBooks]

1 hour ago, AmazonGrace said:

When was that?

 

March 13, 2014. (Yay, metadata!) Here's a scan of the signature page of my book. Although only the older girls were credited as authors, some others were signing too. The reason why there's a big blank space on one page is that there was a post-it note with my name on it, which none of them thought to move. Only Jessa actually wrote my name (redacted here). It's sad to see Josh and Anna's signatures now. She signed first and then he added his name and a heart. The purple mark was made by Mackynzie, who wanted to feel like she was signing too. Here are the Bible verses for those who added them to their signatures:

Jessa - Acts 4:13 - "Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men, they marvelled; and they took knowledge of them, that they had been with Jesus." 

Joe - Romans 6 - I'm not copying the whole chapter. It ends with "For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."

Jinger and Jana - Col. 3 - Ugh. A highlight here is verse 18, "Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord."

Jill - Psalm 91 - I'm not copying the whole thing, but this one holds up very well. "I will say of the Lord, He is my refuge and my fortress: my God; in him will I trust."

Jim Bob - Romans 8:28 - "And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose." Still feeling that one today, JB?

Michelle - 2 Corinthians 12:9 - "And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me."

and finally, Josh - Matthew 6:33 - "But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you." "These things" refers to "What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed?" in verse 31. This was while he was at FRC and he probably thought that being a professional Christian was going to work out well for him. 

ETA: Did he select that verse to admit quietly that he was just in it for the money?

Edited May 3, 2021 by QuiverFullofBooks
added a thought

[stargate]

This was circulating on twitter today. Mike Huckabee criticized President Obama for letting his daughters listen to 'mental poison' Beyoncé. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/mike-huckabee-criticizes-obamas-allowing-daughters-hear-beyonces-mental-poison Also there is a dig in there about women depending on 'Uncle Sugar' to provide them with birth control because they cannot control their libido.

But here is Fuckabee forgiving Josh in 2015- "Good people make mistakes" https://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/josh-duggar-mike-huckabee-defends-19-kids-counting/story?id=31236959

Moral - Cis white Christian men can get away with rape and they will still be 'good men'. For everyone else, personal choices in music, food, medicine deserves condemnation to hell on earth and in the afterlife. 

[HerNameIsBuffy]

2 minutes ago, stargate said:

This was circulating on twitter today. Mike Huckabee criticized President Obama for letting his daughters listen to 'mental poison' Beyoncé. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/mike-huckabee-criticizes-obamas-allowing-daughters-hear-beyonces-mental-poison Also there is a dig in there about women depending on 'Uncle Sugar' to provide them with birth control because they cannot control their libido.

This is a man who played Cat Scratch Fever with Ted Nugent, and didn't alter the lyrics, on his stupid show 100 years ago.  The hypocrisy of that will never not enrage me.  

As to his 

Quote

"Good people make mistakes"

Yes they do.  Every day.  The fact that in their world sexually assaulting children is a "mistake" says everything.

[MrsFoxx]

2 hours ago, gustava said:

Do we know that Josh abused his own children?

 

Fair. We don't know that. I was responding a little incautiously to the general statements of "she should protect her children from him." I apologize. 

[gustava]

6 minutes ago, MrsFoxx said:

Fair. We don't know that. I was responding a little incautiously to the general statements of "she should protect her children from him." I apologize. 

It's too awful to contemplate.

[browncoatslytherin]

8 minutes ago, stargate said:

Moral - Cis white Christian men can get away with rape and they will still be 'good men'. For everyone else, personal choices in music, food, medicine deserves condemnation to hell on earth and in the afterlife. 

the insidiousness of the hypocrisy is astounding. there's so many layers to their bullshit, the classism, ableism, and racism all inherent to it and propping it up. and of course denial all around. for followers of jesus, they sure don't actually listen to certain parts of his message ... but i suspect that's a feature, not a bug.

[MrsFoxx]

3 hours ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

No one here is simplifying leaving.  Leaving an abusive relationship is a very difficult process under the best of circumstances.   No one is saying it won't be hard.

But a lot of the things we owe our children are hard, but that doesn't mean we aren't obligated.

Personally I would never tell you how to process your former relationship, but I'm not going to shamed into silence regarding Anna's absolute obligation to put the well being of her children first.  Before her husband, her God, or her desire for approval from her cult.  It will be the hardest thing she has ever had to do, and she needs to do it anyway.

 

I agree. And you are not the only person who also grew up in an abusive home. I hear a lot of pain in your response, and I am sorry that is a part of your story. 

Personally, I have severed relationships with my family of origin over that trauma and its perpetuation - I hear you. It's difficult and terrible, and many of us in retrospect wish we could have taken that step to leave more quickly, both for ourselves AND for children. 

What I observe is that casting shame on Anna for where she is in her grappling with her trauma and abuse often leads to us essentially doing a different flavor of us blaming her for Josh's actions and impact on the kids. 

Again, I am sorry to hear of your personal trauma. It is a beast to heal from. 
 

[Alisamer]

5 minutes ago, browncoatslytherin said:

for followers of jesus, they sure don't actually listen to certain parts of his message ... but i suspect that's a feature, not a bug.

I'm convinced that's part of why so many of them insist on the 1611 King James Version of the Bible. It's easier to twist it to mean whatever you want if you assume nobody can understand the language in it anyway.

[EmmieJ]

2 hours ago, Four is Enough said:

AFA visitation, my son is currently incarcerated (not the one accused of child stuff, the other one.) There is NO visiting in the detention center, for a long time now. Only the staff and attorneys can get in.

No personal experience but from watching Crime Talk (with criminal defense atty Scott Reish), I am aware that due to Covid, there are a lot more restrictions on those who are detained than before Covid.  I don't know if convicted felons can have non-attorney visitors at this time either.  

[browncoatslytherin]

1 minute ago, MrsFoxx said:

What I observe is that casting shame on Anna for where she is in her grappling with her trauma and abuse often leads to us essentially doing a different flavor of us blaming her for Josh's actions and impact on the kids. 

while i don't think anna should ever take any part of the blame for josh's actions, at the same time, it's still important to hold her accountable for the harm she *is* perpetuating in her family. i'm sure she intends on being a good mother and taking care of her children, but impact is far greater and more important than intent. and despite her intentions, she is definitely perpetuating a negative impact on her children by the environment she's keeping them in. yes it's all she's known, yes she's been programmed into this lifestyle and even - at least outwardly - appears to revel in it. but she's an adult and as an adult she must take accountability for her actions (or lack thereof). and i don't think that's the same thing as imparting any blame onto her (at least as far as i've seen, though admittedly these threads have been moving *super, super* fast and i've been trying to keep up, but ... i'm sure i've missed some).

[Foudeb]

1 hour ago, justodd said:

Abuse and exploitation happen in every industry, period. 

Sure. But being raped by johns on a regular basis does not happen in every industry. 

There are people for whom sex work is fulfilling, sure. And who have the means and the agency to pick their clients. Great, I guess. 

It doesn't mean that the sex industry on the whole isn't a trash can on fire, whose survivors are more often than not deeply traumatised. 

You want to control your own hours? Do free-lance IT consultancy, the likelihood of PTSD / an std / being killed by a john with the police barely investigating are somewhat lower, and I suspect moving to a different career later in life is also somewhat easier. 

My personal litmus test on empowering vs being brainwashed into thinking your own exploitation is cool remains, are rich, able bodied men doing it in significant numbers. 

If not, you've got your answer. 

 

[formergothardite]

3 minutes ago, MrsFoxx said:

What I observe is that casting shame on Anna for where she is in her grappling with her trauma and abuse often leads to us essentially doing a different flavor of us blaming her for Josh's actions and impact on the kids. 

She is not responsible for Josh’s actions, she is responsible for her own. I don’t think I’ve seen anyone here blame her for what Josh did. I think a lot of us are really tired of watching fundie parents time and time again put children in bad situations. And we are tired of people coming up with excuses for them. This is bullshit. 

There is no evidence Anna is abused. And Anna is in a much better place to leave her shitty husband than so many, many abused fundie women who took the hard steps to protect themselves and their children. She can leave him, she could even use the cult teachings to justify doing so! If she stays, it is because she is choosing to stand by a pedophile. And she is shoulders the blame for that choice if she makes it. 
 

Of course leaving would be hard, but standing by Josh would be even harder on her children. It is time for her to protect her children, even if that means she doesn’t get to live her Instagram #littleduggar lifestyle. 
 

 

[FunDieDumDum]

20 minutes ago, Foudeb said:

My personal litmus test on empowering vs being brainwashed into thinking your own exploitation is cool remains, are rich, able bodied men doing it in significant numbers. 

If not, you've got your answer. 

That’s a pretty profound statement right there. There might be some debate about the “in significant numbers” part for certain specific (historically gendered) professions, but otherwise...

I’ll never tell anyone who feels empowered by whatever career choice they’ve made that they are wrong to feel as they do, but generally speaking your litmus test is pretty goddamn hard to argue with.

ETA: the “rich” part might invite a little discussion as well, but still I think the core of your point is valid. ?

Edited May 3, 2021 by FunDieDumDum
See ETA text at end

[viii]

16 minutes ago, formergothardite said:

She is not responsible for Josh’s actions, she is responsible for her own. I don’t think I’ve seen anyone here blame her for what Josh did. I think a lot of us are really tired of watching fundie parents time and time again put children in bad situations. And we are tired of people coming up with excuses for them. This is bullshit. 

There is no evidence Anna is abused. And Anna is in a much better place to leave her shitty husband than so many, many abused fundie women who took the hard steps to protect themselves and their children. She can leave him, she could even use the cult teachings to justify doing so! If she stays, it is because she is choosing to stand by a pedophile. And she is shoulders the blame for that choice if she makes it. 
 

Of course leaving would be hard, but standing by Josh would be even harder on her children. It is time for her to protect her children, even if that means she doesn’t get to live her Instagram #littleduggar lifestyle. 
 

 

I agree with all of this so much. In 2015, I was one of Anna's defenders because I knew how hard it would be for her to leave and how much pressure she was getting to stay. I do think in 2015 Anna was probably blown away by the revelations and everything that came out. I don't think she knew about Josh's history before she married him. Her father most likely did (so fuck him for putting her in this situation) but I think Anne was pretty innocent. 

However, Anna has grown and changed a lot since 2015. She has plenty of secular resources at her fingertips - including siblings. I feel like sometimes people under-estimate the fundie lifestyle that Anna is a part of and make her out to be some FLDS victim that hasn't left the compound in twenty years. She has evolved a lot since 2015 and if she doesn't choose to leave Josh now, then nothing will convince her. 

[HerNameIsBuffy]

28 minutes ago, MrsFoxx said:

What I observe is that casting shame on Anna for where she is in her grappling with her trauma and abuse often leads to us essentially doing a different flavor of us blaming her for Josh's actions and impact on the kids. 

I think the key here is the word "us."  We aren't doing anything as a collective, just individuals sharing our own POV.  

Thanks for your kind words, but I'm fine.  I was just illustrating that not everyone who is sitting in judgement of Anna is doing so from a cushy past with no idea how hard it is to leave.  Or from some place of superiority where we know we'd be the heroes should this have happened to us, because everyone reacts perfectly hypothetical trauma, kind of like how everyone is a perfect parent until they have kids.

 

 

 

[EmCatlyn]

22 hours ago, luv2laugh said:

I remember back then that there were debates on whether or not he met the diagnosis of a *you know what* and people kept going back and forth about the age of 15 being below 16 along with whether it was a crime of opportunity vs. about children. 

At first, I definitely suspected he was a *you know what* but, after awhile, I started assuming it was about the opportunity. I think my mind assumed it because it’s more comfortable to assume that was the case vs. the other... 

I was one of those who argued that because of Josh’s age when he molested his sisters, his isolation from normal teen-age relations, etc., we should not assume that he was a pedophile.  Given the information we had then, it was entirely possible that his actions were just a “crime of opportunity.”

Now we have more information, I would say that whether or not the initial molestations were “crimes of opportunity,” something got twisted in Josh and he is definitely a pedophile— though I hope he has limited himself to porn (bad enough) instead of abusing children he had physical access to.

As an armchair psychologist, I would like to throw out the theory that many who are sexually attracted by children are fundamentally insecure in themselves as sexual adults.  I see a lot of insecurity in Josh. He is a monster, but I think he was made that way by how his parents both excited and repressed him (as a person and as a sexual being).

Michelle and JB have a lot to answer for.

[Nothing if not critical]

1 minute ago, EmCatlyn said:

I was one of those who argued that because of Josh’s age when he molested his sisters, his isolation from normal teen-age relations, etc., we should not assume that he was a pedophile.  Given the information we had then, it was entirely possible that his actions were just a “crime of opportunity.”

Now we have more information, I would say that whether or not the initial molestations were “crimes of opportunity,” something got twisted in Josh and he is definitely a pedophile—

Same here. While there was still reasonable doubt, I was reluctant to label him a pedophile. Sadly, he's removed all doubt now. And whatever happened to him, the priority now has to be to keep the kids safe.

[SweetLaurel]

2 hours ago, Satan'sFortress said:

5 hours ago, fluffernutter said:

 I’d pretend (this is so embarrassing to type out) that T. Berry Brazelton was visiting and hanging out.

I have been pondering for a decade getting a "What Would Mr. Rogers Do?" tattoo--so I hear ya!

(I just can't decide where to get it!)

I did an in home day care for about 2 years.  I worked 6 to 6  six days a week and I had a  half dozen ish kids under the age of 5 including my own.  I was often so so exhausted, I'd always pretend all the folks had a nanny cam in their diaper bags.  It got me through the day a lot - I totally get that!   Do you want to break down and cry?  Yes.  But the camera is on!   Suck it up!   Thank God for Sesame Street and Mr. Rogers.   Break time!    We do what we can to get through the work day.   

[viii]

Yep, another one here who fought for proper labels and resisted when people called Josh a pedophile. We didn't have any proof of it then and I felt uncomfortable throwing that label on him. He has removed ALL doubt now and will forever be branded by his deeds. 

I hope to God his children are safe.