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

[WiseGirl]

People has a few articles about Smuggar. I'm not a fan of the unlimited contact.

This stood out to me "However, he has been granted "unlimited contact" with his children, so long as Anna is present. Duggar may not see any other minor child, including his nieces and nephews.

"Don't make me regret this decision," the judge advised Duggar, 33, before adjourning."

https://people.com/tv/josh-duggar-will-be-released-from-prison-while-awaiting-trial-child-porn-case/

https://people.com/tv/josh-duggar-hearing-agent-reveals-timeline-child-porn-case/

He's a fucking pig and burning in Hell is too good of a consequence for him.

[Kjaerringa]

Oh!! Y'all, go read the People article. Josh had an iPhone, not a flip phone, and his comments to the investigators when they arrived at the car lot were....illuminating. seriously. He actually asked them if they were there because someone had downloaded child porn...and when they asked him if HE had done so/viewed any, he said he'd rather not answer that question.

And...the very scary thing... he pulled out his iPhone and they took it as evidence. He said he wanted to call his lawyer, but apparently there was no other phone? So this maybe a procedural error. Please, let this not be something g that gets the case thrown out...ironically, if he HAD a flip phone, he probably could have kept it. So, legal eagles...what rule is primary? Do they get to confiscate evidence even if it means he can't contact an attorney immediately as they have taken all his devices?? (Please say the danger of him deleting evidence is greater than his right to his phone. Oh, how I want that to be true...)

[purple_summer]

2 minutes ago, RainbowSky said:

And how many people just found out how to get around it? Ugh.

Everyone I've ever known who had it installed on their devices knew how to get around it.

[OrchidBlossom]

27 minutes ago, llucie said:

Josh admited to porn adiction when the Ashley Madison scandal, that explains them finding necesary to use Covenant Eyes, and not any suspicion on him doing CP.

 

I'm saying that the installation of a partition doesn't necessarily preclude Anna from knowing about his activities on the dark web or with CSA because he may well have tried to access that before installing the partition, had to give her some weird explanation, then planned to install the partition and went from there.

ETA: I'm not saying Anna did know. I'm just saying we can't look at the partition as definitive proof that she couldn't have known.

Edited May 6, 2021 by OrchidBlossom

[HerNameIsBuffy]

1 minute ago, luv2laugh said:

I can't figure out how the Josh supporters in the family are going to spin this given that the password was the same and the graphic details announced... I wasn't ready to read those details and I'm not sure how the "sheltered" Duggars are going to react.

Easy.  OMG the hacker used Josh's password.  Josh's only mistake was using a password they could guess!

 

[llucie]

There is a lot of exceptions to the no children contacts though, including church where is nieces and nephews would also be. I understand it is kinda standard procedure to release on bond, but TBH i was hoping more for a home arrest type of deal.

[Antimony]

I don't believe Anna knew, and she is responsible for herself now that she does know, but as other posters have covered;

• It's easy to split the drive.
• Covanent Eyes doesn't block any websites on certain versions. 
• Even though it takes screenshots a lot, it has to recognize something as obscene. A terrible job for a computer. We saw this when Tumblr banned porn -- the algorithm they used started also banning pictures of sand dunes, and pepperoni pizza because to a machine learning program, the curve of a sand dune looks like the butt of a tan woman and a pepperonia pizza looks like a bunch of nipples. Computers don't see images like we do. 
• Because of this, I bet CE is shit at actually analyzing anything. If I were to sell such a project well...I'd teach it things like the PornHub logo before I taught it what a human looks like. (AI have been consistently bad at recognizing people's faces and bodies.) The Dark Web won't have these logos. 
• You need source material to train a machine learning based program. To train it to know porn when it sees it, you have to feed it a lot of images of porn. To train it to recognize child porn, you'd have to feed it a lot of child porn...which would be illegal. 
• I guess it's possible this is done by humans but based on the sheer volume of images it collects and the number of subscriptions and the fact that that risks making your employees see porn also, I'd be it's an algorithm.

Anna knows now. But there's no evidence she knew it wasn't just run of the mill PornHub watching before this. 

[JmW]

I can't help but think the entire extended family, including the Kellers, have been well aware of Josh's problem for a long time. I remember reading David Waller's blog that when he called Mike Keller to ask for Priscilla's hand he was asked two questions. 1. Are you willing to trust God with the size of your family? and 2. Are you willing to be accountable to Priscilla for your Internet use? The second question triggers a little red flag for me. Not a typical question asked of a future son-in-law. Of course, Dad Keller does not impress me a judge of character in any of his sons-in-law.

[HerNameIsBuffy]

I was so glad that they let the previous molestation in to be considered, until I realized that even that doesn't matter.

I have very little faith in the justice system as it is...today dropped the bar even lower.

1 minute ago, JmW said:

I can't help but think the entire extended family, including the Kellers, have been well aware of Josh's problem for a long time. I remember reading David Waller's blog that when he called Mike Keller to ask for Priscilla's hand he was asked two questions. 1. Are you willing to trust God with the size of your family? and 2. Are you willing to be accountable to Priscilla for your Internet use? The second question triggers a little red flag for me. Not a typical question asked of a future son-in-law. Of course, Dad Keller does not impress me a judge of character in any of his sons-in-law.

They all do that about the wife and the internet use.  Idk what the Keller's know and when they learned it, but that doesn't point to anything.  It's recommended in their stupid teachings.

[Jess]

2 minutes ago, Kjaerringa said:

Oh!! Y'all, go read the People article. Josh had an iPhone, not a flip phone, and his comments to the investigators when they arrived at the car lot were....illuminating. seriously. He actually asked them if they were there because someone had downloaded child porn...and when they asked him if HE had done so/viewed any, he said he'd rather not answer that question.

And...the very scary thing... he pulled out his iPhone and they took it as evidence. He said he wanted to call his lawyer, but apparently there was no other phone? So this maybe a procedural error. Please, let this not be something g that gets the case thrown out...ironically, if he HAD a flip phone, he probably could have kept it. So, legal eagles...what rule is primary? Do they get to confiscate evidence even if it means he can't contact an attorney immediately as they have taken all his devices?? (Please say the danger of him deleting evidence is greater than his right to his phone. Oh, how I want that to be true...)

I do not know all the details obviously, but I doubt it would preclude any evidence. They had a warrant to collect his phone and they did. Sounds like the min stuff is on his computer a lawyer would not have been able to stop them executing the search warrant. At best I would guess it’s slightly possible any statements made after they took the phone would be excluded. I am like 99.99% sure he will take a plea deal anyway. Almost everyone takes a plea deal and from what we heard today they have good evidence. 

[RainbowSky]

2 minutes ago, JmW said:

I can't help but think the entire extended family, including the Kellers, have been well aware of Josh's problem for a long time. I remember reading David Waller's blog that when he called Mike Keller to ask for Priscilla's hand he was asked two questions. 1. Are you willing to trust God with the size of your family? and 2. Are you willing to be accountable to Priscilla for your Internet use? The second question triggers a little red flag for me. Not a typical question asked of a future son-in-law. Of course, Dad Keller does not impress me a judge of character in any of his sons-in-law.

Nah, that's just so he won't be out of line with their beliefs. The wimminz need to protect the menz from their own eyeballs. 

 

[Giraffe]

Just now, HerNameIsBuffy said:

I was so glad that they let the previous molestation in to be considered, until I realized that even that doesn't matter.

I have very little faith in the justice system as it is...today dropped the bar even lower.

I'm sitting here thinking this very thing. I actually have no hope he'll even be convicted at this point. 

[luv2laugh]

4 minutes ago, JmW said:

I can't help but think the entire extended family, including the Kellers, have been well aware of Josh's problem for a long time. I remember reading David Waller's blog that when he called Mike Keller to ask for Priscilla's hand he was asked two questions. 1. Are you willing to trust God with the size of your family? and 2. Are you willing to be accountable to Priscilla for your Internet use? The second question triggers a little red flag for me. 

I don't understand what you mean. Regular porn is not the same as what Josh has been charged for... 
CSA crimes=/=porn. 

Edited May 6, 2021 by luv2laugh

[Satan'sFortress]

16 minutes ago, Kjaerringa said:

It sounds like he is not allowed to leave the custodians' home. Their adult daughter must teach piano lessons at a different location, and the firearms removed from the home, as there is no gun safe. They are to somehow keep him from accessing internet...how? Locking his bedroom at night and giving him a chamber pot?

He can leave for work, church, lawyer visits, etc.

[browncoatslytherin]

1 minute ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

I was so glad that they let the previous molestation in to be considered, until I realized that even that doesn't matter.

I have very little faith in the justice system as it is...today dropped the bar even lower.

same here. and yet so many others sit in jail for far, *far* lesser crimes. it's ridiculous. it's sad. it's a thousand other adjectives i can't even process right now.

for tonight, i'm breaking my no-meat-in-2021 rule and getting arby's. i think this calls for it.

[OrchidBlossom]

6 minutes ago, Kjaerringa said:

Oh!! Y'all, go read the People article. Josh had an iPhone, not a flip phone, and his comments to the investigators when they arrived at the car lot were....illuminating. seriously. He actually asked them if they were there because someone had downloaded child porn...and when they asked him if HE had done so/viewed any, he said he'd rather not answer that question.

And...the very scary thing... he pulled out his iPhone and they took it as evidence. He said he wanted to call his lawyer, but apparently there was no other phone? So this maybe a procedural error. Please, let this not be something g that gets the case thrown out...ironically, if he HAD a flip phone, he probably could have kept it. So, legal eagles...what rule is primary? Do they get to confiscate evidence even if it means he can't contact an attorney immediately as they have taken all his devices?? (Please say the danger of him deleting evidence is greater than his right to his phone. Oh, how I want that to be true...)

They had a warrant to seize the device. Not letting him use it and possibly tamper with it is standard. I can't imagine that being an issue at all. He wasn't under arrest, even, so the right to contact an attorney didn't come into play. That's if you're being detained. If you aren't you're free to haul your ass to the nearest pay phone/gas station/friend's house to use a different phone.

[Satan'sFortress]

7 minutes ago, Kjaerringa said:

Josh had an iPhone, not a flip phone, and his comments to the investigators when they arrived at the car lot were....illuminating. seriously.

This was discussed in the last thread. The title of this thread refers to the judge''s direction that he can now only possess a flip phone to call his lawyers.

[Antimony]

4 minutes ago, Giraffe said:

I'm sitting here thinking this very thing. I actually have no hope he'll even be convicted at this point. 

I don't know why everybody thinks this. This being called a "close call" for a case like this is extremely unusual. Presumed innocence is a good thing in the legal system. The length of the hearing and the closeness of the call all point to the strength of the evidence the prosecution has provided. 

Getting bail/bond is normal because we've decided that it is not right to hold somebody for a crime they haven't been convicted of. It's frustrating here (but only because we feel we know these people better than the magistrate), but it's the right decision for the system overall. 

Edit: I get everybody's frustration over the way racial and class disparity plays out in our system but I believe that the solution to this is that Rich White Men get the treatment that is most aligned with the values we've called humane, and that the answer is not to punish the Rich White Man more, but to punish the Poor Nonwhite Everybody less. 

Edited May 6, 2021 by Antimony

[TN-peach]

I hope the 5 victims from 2002-2003 realize a Federal Judge validated the abuse perpetrated against them was abuse and was BAD. That the Judge blamed Josh for that abuse. That there was no language that put the blame on them. It must’ve been traumatic to hear about their abuse again but maybe they can hear some validation in their status as the victims and survivors not as the ones to blame. 

[fundiefan]

22 minutes ago, MayMay1123 said:

Who told him/taught him how to do that? I don't know that's something you can just google... and would covenant eyes catch a google search like that? Does it send everything to the monitoring person? 

Actually there are about a billion resources online about creating additional partitions and anything else you want to do on your computer. They are not nefarious & there are as many legitimate uses/reasons to create additional partitions as there are people. 

Also, considering how sadly prevalent the dark web is, I would imagine it just takes one bit of information you can run with in order to find what you want? I mean, people find & use it all the time, it can't be buried behind mountains of complex coding? 

Edited May 6, 2021 by fundiefan

[luv2laugh]

I am legitimately concerned for the Ms and the other million kids around TTH. I am going to have to find ways to not let this keep me up at night.  It's very unsettling.

They are all about fetuses and not the children.

Edited May 6, 2021 by luv2laugh

[Hera]

Well. That was ... a lot to take in. All I’ve got is that I honestly don’t know anyone that I could ask to rearrange their entire lives and take in a pedophile and they’d say yes. Much less a non-family member. Even less a non-family member who’d do so over the clear objections and at the expense of the other persons living in their home.

So what do we suppose the Duggars offered these fine folks for this “favor”? Cause friendship and ministry only go so far. 

[Satan'sFortress]

I think if my kid was taking piano lessons from Mrs. Reber, I might have them take some time off.

[GlitterJam]

I guess my question is: as josh is allowed to leave his custodians' property for church, and he usually attends church with the Duggars, who homechurch at the TTH - is this a loophole that might allow him back into the TTH? Or can he be forced to find a new church while he's awaiting trial?

[Xan]

Just now, Hera said:

Well. That was ... a lot to take in. All I’ve got is that I honestly don’t know anyone that I could ask to rearrange their entire lives and take in a pedophile and they’d say yes. Much less a non-family member. Even less a non-family member who’d do so over the clear objections and at the expense of the other persons living in their home.

So what do we suppose the Duggars offered these fine folks for this “favor”? Cause friendship and ministry only go so far. 

My guess?   $$$$  

And, yes, he's presumed innocent until found guilty.  They even let some murderers out before trial if the judge is convinced that they're not a danger to others and won't flee.  I'm not surprised that they let him temporarily go.  I still think he'll serve time for this.  The case sounds pretty convincing.