(CW: Child Sex Abuse) Josh & Anna 29: Left with Nothing but a Flip Phone Full of Shame

[libgirl2]

3 minutes ago, luv2laugh said:

Per the prosecution team, they argued he be detain by saying Josh has an attraction to kids. I am not happy that he's allowed to see the children before being proven not guilty.  Sometimes, children aren't able to understand what is in their best interest and in my opinion, that means not seeing Josh.

IMO, at a minimum the child supervisor should've been a social worker appointed by the court.

This! i get he can see his kids but there should have been someone else to supervise besides Anna. 

[luv2laugh]

Also, one more thing: I'm not saying Anna is complicit. I don't know anything about her or what could've gone on. However, we all know that Anna is incentivized to think the best about Josh.

Serious Question: If Josh asked to change a diaper or bathe the children, why would she suspect it was a red flag other than a basic parental duty?

[HerNameIsBuffy]

Nothing to see here.

Edited May 6, 2021 by HerNameIsBuffy

[sixcatatty]

4 hours ago, Cam said:

Seems to me you don’t hire and pay exorbitant fees for this kind of high profile lawyer hoping the lawyer will get you a plea deal. What Josh and his parental units hope is that he gets the charges dropped and does no time in jail/prison. They either want Lawyer to twist the evidence to make it look like the downloads were the actions of someone other than Josh, or they hope Josh gets away with his crimes due to a technicality wherein the arresting authorities didn’t follow correct procedure or something. I’m not saying either of these will happen, but those are the kinds of tactics often used, according to my extensive viewing of Law and Order reruns and Dateline episodes!

I want Josh Duggar jailed as much as anybody but those "technicalities" are called Constitutional rights, specifically the FOurth Amendment right. He has a right to present a defense, including one that doesn't hold water. Even Josh Duggar has them. I want this trial done right (constitutionally) so that he has no winning appealable issue.

[luv2laugh]

1 minute ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

Is anyone suggesting that?

No. It's just a question I have based on what we know of the CSA Josh was looking at. I'm not trying to say anything else happened but I am concerned.

Edited May 6, 2021 by luv2laugh

[SassyPants]

28 minutes ago, Jackie3 said:

A healthy young man with no particular skill set? Lots of families have a father like this. They earn a living through unskilled labor. They aren't rich, but I'd hardly call them "fucked." I know plenty of families like this, who are perfectly happy, and have no idea that others think they are fucked.

Because these folks haven’t lived that reality as an adult, married couple with a young family. Joe hasn’t lived that reality since 2005 when he was still a boy. OTOH, it would still be better in the long run-

[violynn]

3 hours ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

<snip>

  My outrage is that the judge expressed verbally that there were concerns about letting Anna supervise and allowed it anyway.

The wording of the judge when she said "Don't make me regret this." Means she knew there was a risk in letting him out and chose to do so anyway, with structures in place to try to mitigate that risk with regards to every child but his own.  His own who are most vulnerable not only to danger, but to being silenced due to the parental bond.  
<snip>

For me presumption of innocence is sacred, but that doesn't mean risk to public safety of children is okay.  This is a country that has incarcerated people for years on low level non-violent drug offenses, but a guy who is clearly a danger to children is allowed to be out where he'll be more comfortable.  Just because we are aware of how the system works doesn't mean we have to agree with it.

 

The fact that judges and juries generally let pedophiles and ppl charged with CSA and CP crimes be around their own children is absolutely galling and naive.  Assuming that one's own children are safe from predation and abuse just because of the familial bond yet isn't allowed around other children is beyond the pale.  Of course we'd all like to believe that pedophiles don't abuse their own kids but go after other kids in the same age range and often friends of their own kids, but that's not the way it goes.  Allowing the defendant's children around Joshua but no one else's is possibly endangering the M's because those are the only children in his age range.  Society needs to stop pretending that pedophiles aren't also incestuous. 

Edited May 6, 2021 by violynn

[Jackie3]

43 minutes ago, luv2laugh said:

I've been reading that a lot of child molesters tend to be an immediate family member. I'm trying to figure out if Anna would've known to look out for signs of Josh doing anything? Couldn't basic fatherly duties look similar? If the children are young and the father is helping to clean them, I'm trying to think of how Anna could've known.

I think it's more accurate to say that it's more common for predators to molest children in their family/social circle, as opposed to total strangers. You often hear about children molested by uncles, grandfathers, friends of their big brother, stepfathers. You rarely hear about a child molested by a man who approaches them in the public library (though it has happened). 

It makes sense. Predators have better access to children in their families. They have had a chance to groom the children and gain their trust. The adults nearby don't have their guard up.

 

10 minutes ago, sixcatatty said:

I want this trial done right (constitutionally) so that he has no winning appealable issue.

Absolutely. It would be terrible if a conviction were overturned on appeal.

[luv2laugh]

3 minutes ago, Jackie3 said:

I think it's more accurate to say that it's more common for predators to molest children in their family/social circle, as opposed to total strangers. You often hear about children molested by uncles, grandfathers, friends of their big brother, stepfathers. 

 

Quote

"The Awareness Center also included 2003 statistics from the Children's Cove, an agency working with child sexual abuse victims. Data from their agency shows:  Boys are almost as likely as girls to be sexually abused, with estimated rate of 47% to 53%. After age 10, the percentage of male victims drops to 27%. Biological father were reported as the offender more often than the combination of stepfathers, intimate partners, and uncles."

https://www.mosac.net/Statistics.aspx

[Jackie3]

6 minutes ago, SassyPants said:

Because these folks haven’t lived that reality as an adult, married couple with a young family.

They'll learn. Heck, Joe hasn't even been an adult that long. Lots of people go into adulthood without many skills, from a dysfunctional family. Of course it's harder, but Joe and Kendra have lots of advantages (healthy parents and kids, for example). They'll be fine.

Just now, luv2laugh said:

https://www.mosac.net/Statistics.aspx

Yes, exactly. Predators offend most often within their family/social circle. I didn't mean to exclude biological fathers, I just forgot to include them (I guess it just seems so unbelievable that a father would do such a thing). But fathers, stepfathers, uncles. . . and it's not always men, either. Women do this stuff too.

[IsmeWeatherwax]

I've still not caught up yet! I just wanted to say that its surprising how many people will call a child a liar and support the pedo. Also, how many people have been sexually assaulted as a minor (that is the legal name in UK) is quite shocking.

[SassyPants]

2 minutes ago, Jackie3 said:

They'll learn. Heck, Joe hasn't even been an adult that long. Lots of people go into adulthood without many skills, from a dysfunctional family. Of course it's harder, but Joe and Kendra have lots of advantages (healthy parents and kids, for example). They'll be fine.

In the long run JB’s resources have actually hindered these folks. Look at the Bateses et al...most of those couples have an income base outside of their family’s show. Obviously, this does not mitigate for their horrible beliefs- 

[luv2laugh]

13 minutes ago, Jackie3 said:

I didn't mean to exclude biological fathers, I just forgot to include them (I guess it just seems so unbelievable that a father would do such a thing). But fathers, stepfathers, uncles. . . and it's not always men, either. Women do this stuff too. Women do this stuff too.

I know it's hard to believe but maybe if there's more awareness about it, the "unbelievable" will make more people aware so that victims are believed. While women have offended, it's far more rare compared to male offenders:
 

Quote

Out of the sexual abuse cases reported to CPS in 2013, 47,000 men and 5,000 women were the alleged perpetrators.6

In 88% of the sexual abuse claims that CPS substantiates or finds supporting evidence of, the perpetrator is male. In 9% of cases they are female, and 3% are unknown.6

https://www.rainn.org/statistics/children-and-teens

Edited May 6, 2021 by luv2laugh

[Twirling Dervish]

5 hours ago, Cam said:

Seems to me you don’t hire and pay exorbitant fees for this kind of high profile lawyer hoping the lawyer will get you a plea deal. What Josh and his parental units hope is that he gets the charges dropped and does no time in jail/prison. They either want Lawyer to twist the evidence to make it look like the downloads were the actions of someone other than Josh, or they hope Josh gets away with his crimes due to a technicality wherein the arresting authorities didn’t follow correct procedure or something. I’m not saying either of these will happen, but those are the kinds of tactics often used, according to my extensive viewing of Law and Order reruns and Dateline episodes!

The actual practice of a criminal defense attorney bares NO resemblance to Law and Order episodes. It's unfortunate that so  many believe that what they see on TV is what actually happens in a real life criminal trial. My ex-husband was a defense attorney for thirty years. He considered it to be his job to insure that his client received a fair trial and would be judged accordingly, even when he knew that his client was guilty. We should all be grateful that our Constitution protects us from the draconian practices of many other countries. 

[gustava]

4 hours ago, The Baby Humanist said:

I actually did search for "QAnon" but must have done it incorrectly because nothing came up. Even if it had, though, THIS post of mine really is very specifically about JD and yesterday's revealation of the very young age of his victims, since those are the very victim QAnons are focused on, and the Duggar scandal is the most publicized scandal in the media today.

 

JD is NOT JOSH DUGGAR.  PAY ATTENTION TO THE MODS.

[JenniferJuniper]

26 minutes ago, luv2laugh said:

 I am not happy that he's allowed to see the children before being proven not guilty.  

In the US, he doesn't have to prove he's not guility.  The entire basis of the US criminal system is based upon the opposite idea  - that he must be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.  This hasn't happened yet. 

I hate Smuggar too, but he's still needs to be treated same as any other dirtbag in this situation.  Equal justice under the law and all that. 

[Talitha Cumi]

46 minutes ago, SnarkyLawyer said:

I would love to see more restorative and restitutional justice, in our country. And, for all of the naysayers who say it's too expensive, something tells me it would be a lot less expensive in the long run than the money we are currently paying private prison systems, and the continued toll on our society from the endless loop of recidivism and prison. 

But, but the private prisons are corporations, and everyone knows corporations are the most favored children of God! If our society has to suffer to enable them to profit, that's God's will!

(Good grief, it's taken me days to catch up. Another daughter returned to her FJ headship!)

[luv2laugh]

5 minutes ago, JenniferJuniper said:

In the US, he doesn't have to prove he's not guility.  The entire basis of the US criminal system is based upon the opposite idea  - that he must be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.  This hasn't happened yet. 

I hate Smuggar too, but he's still needs to be treated same as any other dirtbag in this situation.  Equal justice under the law and all that. 

I understand that but it doesn't erase how uncomfortable I feel about it.

[gustava]

1 hour ago, SassyPants said:

I thought Ben was employed as a preacher? I also think that DD and Jill are no longer in the Duggar fold. I believe  they parted ways with the pay out. 

What does John David do?

[JenniferJuniper]

1 minute ago, luv2laugh said:

I understand that but it doesn't erase how uncomfortable I feel about it.

It's awful, I hear you.  But our discomfort doesn't enter into it, and he can't be treated any differently than the guys he was sharing those photos with.  And he's currently completely innocent in eyes of the law.  

[luv2laugh]

1 minute ago, JenniferJuniper said:

 And he's currently completely innocent in eyes of the law.  

I've made almost every single post with the words "if he is guilty" because I do understand that.  However, the evidence that they have is still disturbing to me.

Edited May 6, 2021 by luv2laugh

[violynn]

2 hours ago, luv2laugh said:

60 minutes did a documentary with some of the victims of the CSA material that Josh downloaded. It's very traumatic. This is a lot to take in and process.  The family members that support Josh should be forced to watch the 60 min documentary. Josh is a very dangerous man.

How do you know which CSA material that Josh downloaded?  I didn't see anything mentioned in the reddit thread where the trial was being described about particular identified CP.  And there's a documentary on it?  I'm sure it's horrifically traumatic.

[SassyPants]

3 minutes ago, gustava said:

What does John David do?

He’s a pilot??

Actually, I have zero idea.

[luv2laugh]

3 minutes ago, violynn said:

How do you know which CSA material that Josh downloaded?  I didn't see anything mentioned in the reddit thread where the trial was being described about particular identified CP.  And there's a documentary on it?  I'm sure it's horrifically traumatic.

Someone posted earlier in the thread that the CSA material he downloaded was made by a notorious criminal. 60 Minutes made a documentary on him and the agents who investigated the material he produced. The prosecution team wanted to reinstate the death penalty in the Philippines to sentence him

Edited May 6, 2021 by luv2laugh

[SPHASH]

If Josh tries to pin this on Josiah or any other family member there is a special place in hell waiting for him.

Edited May 6, 2021 by SPHASH
eta