[CW: Child Sex Abuse] Josh & Anna 33: Ohhh Honey It Is Already a Disaster.....

[SorenaJ]

4 hours ago, CarrotCake said:

But will she live in the TTH again? Or is it close enough for them to be in the warehouse on the premise? I don't think a women is allowed to live alone right? It will be about 10 years before the oldest son is an adult and she does not have any single brothers anymore to join her.

I would guess she would live at the TTH. I don't think they would allow her to live alone at the warehouse, but I don't know. I do think she would need a man to live with her and lead her. Michael (aged 10) is probably not old quite enough. 

Edited July 28, 2021 by SorenaJ

[Travelfan]

46 minutes ago, SorenaJ said:

I would guess she would live at the TTH. I don't think they would allow her to live alone at the warehouse, but I don't know. I do think she would need a man to live with her and lead her. Michael (aged 10) is probably not old quite enough. 

Hmm I’ve never thought of wether fundy women are allowed to live alone. Certainly it seems they all (male & female) live at home until marriage. But what if a fundy wife and mother is suddenly widowed? Would a woman with several children not continue living in her own home raising her children if her husband died? I only know the Duggars, are there any examples in other fundy families where this has happened (husbands death) and what did they do? I would THINK in a case like Anna’s, where they probably assume Josh’s absence is temporary ?, that she would stay where she was and not move all the children…but who knows…

[EmCatlyn]

8 hours ago, CarrotCake said:

But will she live in the TTH again? Or is it close enough for them to be in the warehouse on the premise? I don't think a women is allowed to live alone right? It will be about 10 years before the oldest son is an adult and she does not have any single brothers anymore to join her.

I think it is premature to wonder where she will live if/when Josh goes to prison.  The speculation right now seems focused on where she is now. (Is she spending some nights with Josh? Has she moved to the TTH?  Where are the kids?)

For the long run, it may depend on how long a sentence Josh gets.  But I wouldn’t be surprised at all if she moves into the TTH even if it’s a relatively short sentence because that will cut costs for JB.

Then the question becomes whether she would sleep with all the girls (including her daughters) or get a private room.  When she stayed there before, she slept with the girls.

We may never know because, as we were saying, the tabloids are unreliable.

 

[EmCatlyn]

4 hours ago, Travelfan said:

Hmm I’ve never thought of wether fundy women are allowed to live alone. Certainly it seems they all (male & female) live at home until marriage. But what if a fundy wife and mother is suddenly widowed? Would a woman with several children not continue living in her own home raising her children if her husband died? I only know the Duggars, are there any examples in other fundy families where this has happened (husbands death) and what did they do? I would THINK in a case like Anna’s, where they probably assume Josh’s absence is temporary ?, that she would stay where she was and not move all the children…but who knows…

The question is not just who would act as her headship but who would support her and the kids.  JB may prefer to move Josh’s family to the TTH to save costs (not support two households) especially since most of his kids have moved out.   JB seems to be spending a lot on Josh’s defense and the TLC money has dried up, so shutting down Anna and Josh’s house would probably make sense.

If Anna were a widow with some resources it might be different. 

[Idlewild]

Maybe Anna’s brother was staying with her, and that’s how he hooked up with Hannah Reber.

[QuiverFullofBooks]

2 hours ago, EmCatlyn said:

The question is not just who would act as her headship but who would support her and the kids.  JB may prefer to move Josh’s family to the TTH to save costs (not support two households) especially since most of his kids have moved out.   JB seems to be spending a lot on Josh’s defense and the TLC money has dried up, so shutting down Anna and Josh’s house would probably make sense.

If Anna were a widow with some resources it might be different. 

JB owns Anna’s house (which is more like an annex of his house anyway), and her utilities bill can’t be all that much. There’s not much to be saved by consolidating other costs. The TTH is still home to JB, Michelle, Jana (for now), Jeremiah (for now), Jason, James, Jackson, Tyler, Johannah, Jenny, Jordyn, and Josie. And they’re bigger than they used to be, and the grandkids are around a lot too. No need to move in an additional seven children and one adult when there are other options. 

 

[EmCatlyn]

1 hour ago, QuiverFullofBooks said:

JB owns Anna’s house (which is more like an annex of his house anyway), and her utilities bill can’t be all that much. There’s not much to be saved by consolidating other costs. The TTH is still home to JB, Michelle, Jana (for now), Jeremiah (for now), Jason, James, Jackson, Tyler, Johannah, Jenny, Jordyn, and Josie. And they’re bigger than they used to be, and the grandkids are around a lot too. No need to move in an additional seven children and one adult when there are other options. 

 

Good point.  It just comes down to what JB would prefer, I think.

[libgirl2]

5 hours ago, EmCatlyn said:

If Anna were a widow with some resources it might be different. 

She could also quickly remarry. 

[Jackie3]

It's interesting that most think that Anna *should* leave (of course I agree). And that she *can* leave. 

When Toby Willis was found guilty of raping his daughters, I said that Brenda Willis should have left years ago. It seemed like a no-brainer, she'd known for years what was happening.

Many people rushed to her defense and said she "couldn't" leave, that it was too scary, how would she support herself, etc, etc.   You can see these comments on the Willis page right now. Nearly everyone (except me) thought she had really no alternative but to stay (which meant her daughters would be sexually abused for another decade).

What is the difference between Brenda and Anna? I'm asking out of genuine curiosity.  Why it's so obvious and doable that Anna should leave and Brenda "could not"?

If it's about money, I believe that Toby's family is wealthy, like the Duggars. (they got a huge settlement from the car accident, I think).

If it's about having small kids, they're both in the same season. Brenda had many small children under 12 when she learned of Toby's disgusting deeds. Anna has many as well. 

But it isn't just about money or children, but the idea that it would've been too emotionally too stressful for Brenda to leave, while people seem to think that Anna should do it.

 

 

Edited July 29, 2021 by Jackie3

[Bethy]

7 hours ago, EmCatlyn said:

Then the question becomes whether she would sleep with all the girls (including her daughters) or get a private room.  When she stayed there before, she slept with the girls.

But when she was there before, her husband was merely off for a short time rehabbing because of a problem with unfaithfulness, not criminal images on his computer. Because CSA materials are in play here, will CPS have Anna under the magnifying glass? It's my understanding that in a CPS investigation, they expect the children to have sleeping quarters that are not shared with a parent (with the exception of a child under 12 months, which I think all of the expert organizations agree ought to room in with the parent or parents.) Before, it was a short-term arrangement while Josh got his ducks in a row so sharing a room with the girls might not have been frowned on, but if Josh gets a lengthy prison term and CPS is looking their way, that room sharing might not fly.

[Mama Mia]

14 minutes ago, Bethy said:

But when she was there before, her husband was merely off for a short time rehabbing because of a problem with unfaithfulness, not criminal images on his computer. Because CSA materials are in play here, will CPS have Anna under the magnifying glass? It's my understanding that in a CPS investigation, they expect the children to have sleeping quarters that are not shared with a parent (with the exception of a child under 12 months, which I think all of the expert organizations agree ought to room in with the parent or parents.) Before, it was a short-term arrangement while Josh got his ducks in a row so sharing a room with the girls might not have been frowned on, but if Josh gets a lengthy prison term and CPS is looking their way, that room sharing might not fly.

That would certainly vary by area. In my experience parents are not required to have separate bedrooms than their children. This is different than the requirements for placement in foster care, where there are lots of guidelines regarding room sharing and space. I live in a super expensive area though, so we might be necessarily more flexible in those areas. 

[BlondeAgent007]

https://www.nwahomepage.com/northwest-arkansas-news/duggar-attorneys-accuse-the-government-of-withholding-evidence-in-child-porn-case/

Josh's team is really grasping here.

[CarrotCake]

7 hours ago, Jackie3 said:

It's interesting that most think that Anna *should* leave (of course I agree). And that she *can* leave. 

When Toby Willis was found guilty of raping his daughters, I said that Brenda Willis should have left years ago. It seemed like a no-brainer, she'd known for years what was happening.

Many people rushed to her defense and said she "couldn't" leave, that it was too scary, how would she support herself, etc, etc.   You can see these comments on the Willis page right now. Nearly everyone (except me) thought she had really no alternative but to stay (which meant her daughters would be sexually abused for another decade).

What is the difference between Brenda and Anna? I'm asking out of genuine curiosity.  Why it's so obvious and doable that Anna should leave and Brenda "could not"?

If it's about money, I believe that Toby's family is wealthy, like the Duggars. (they got a huge settlement from the car accident, I think).

If it's about having small kids, they're both in the same season. Brenda had many small children under 12 when she learned of Toby's disgusting deeds. Anna has many as well. 

But it isn't just about money or children, but the idea that it would've been too emotionally too stressful for Brenda to leave, while people seem to think that Anna should do it.

 

 

Although I agree with you that Brenda should have left, it might be different for them if the crime is public or not. If Brenda would have left right when she knew, she might have ran into a situation where her community would not believe her or even blame her for pressing charges. In Anna's case the crime is already public without her being involved in the prosecution. It might be easier for her to get support from the community because of that.

[sixcatatty]

9 hours ago, BlondeAgent007 said:

https://www.nwahomepage.com/northwest-arkansas-news/duggar-attorneys-accuse-the-government-of-withholding-evidence-in-child-porn-case/

Josh's team is really grasping here.

They may not be. I would have done the same thing. You never know what might turn up in police and other documents. Not to mention, he has a Constitutional right to present his defense and a SCOTUS case called Kyles v. Whitley speaks about that sort of evidence could call into question the investigation.

These motions are hard to win but  you have a duty to zealously represent your client, not to mention protect the record for appeal.

[Four is Enough]

I thought any case gave the defendant the right to have the discovery from the prosecution. Josh's attorneys have to ask for it, but he's entitled to it.

[EmCatlyn]

14 hours ago, Jackie3 said:

It's interesting that most think that Anna *should* leave (of course I agree). And that she *can* leave. 

When Toby Willis was found guilty of raping his daughters, I said that Brenda Willis should have left years ago. It seemed like a no-brainer, she'd known for years what was happening.

Many people rushed to her defense and said she "couldn't" leave, that it was too scary, how would she support herself, etc, etc.   You can see these comments on the Willis page right now. Nearly everyone (except me) thought she had really no alternative but to stay (which meant her daughters would be sexually abused for another decade).

What is the difference between Brenda and Anna? I'm asking out of genuine curiosity.  Why it's so obvious and doable that Anna should leave and Brenda "could not"?

If it's about money, I believe that Toby's family is wealthy, like the Duggars. (they got a huge settlement from the car accident, I think).

If it's about having small kids, they're both in the same season. Brenda had many small children under 12 when she learned of Toby's disgusting deeds. Anna has many as well. 

But it isn't just about money or children, but the idea that it would've been too emotionally too stressful for Brenda to leave, while people seem to think that Anna should do it.

 

 

You got me down the Willis rabbit hole with this question.  Thanks for some fascinating reading.  (I was vaguely aware of the family and the story, but never looked closely.)

My best guess for why some people are readier to understand why Brenda Willis didn’t leave is that she didn’t, while with Anna there is still the hope that she will.  In other words, Brenda’s choice was in the past, so condemning her seemed cruel when she was obviously suffering.  With Anna we are responding in the present: she can still leave.

[Jackie3]

2 hours ago, EmCatlyn said:

You got me down the Willis rabbit hole with this question.  Thanks for some fascinating reading.  (I was vaguely aware of the family and the story, but never looked closely.)

My best guess for why some people are readier to understand why Brenda Willis didn’t leave is that she didn’t, while with Anna there is still the hope that she will.  In other words, Brenda’s choice was in the past, so condemning her seemed cruel when she was obviously suffering.  With Anna we are responding in the present: she can still leave.

This is a very smart analysis of the situation. I hadn't thought of that. 

So if it was 2001 and we'd just learned that 9-year oldJessica Willis had told her mom she was being sexually abused by her dad. . . we'd naturally hope desperately that Brenda could find the strength to leave. Like we do with Anna.

I wonder, then, why people insisted that Brenda "couldn't leave." It seems that the truth was, she hadn't left because she had been in denial, which was a terrible mistake. As a result of this denial, her girls were sexually abused for another 10 years or so.

I hope that Anna avoids that mistake. I wonder if Brenda lives with a lot of guilt. I still don't think she deserves a lot of support for ignoring her kid, and I don't think Anna will deserve a lot of support if something happens to their children.

9 hours ago, CarrotCake said:

Although I agree with you that Brenda should have left, it might be different for them if the crime is public or not. If Brenda would have left right when she knew, she might have ran into a situation where her community would not believe her or even blame her for pressing charges. In Anna's case the crime is already public without her being involved in the prosecution. It might be easier for her to get support from the community because of that.

This is another good point! Brenda was also free to give in to denial, because no one knew about the crimes (except her and her child).

[EmCatlyn]

1 hour ago, Jackie3 said:

This is a very smart analysis of the situation. I hadn't thought of that. 

So if it was 2001 and we'd just learned that 9-year oldJessica Willis had told her mom she was being sexually abused by her dad. . . we'd naturally hope desperately that Brenda could find the strength to leave. Like we do with Anna.

I wonder, then, why people insisted that Brenda "couldn't leave." It seems that the truth was, she hadn't left because she had been in denial, which was a terrible mistake. As a result of this denial, her girls were sexually abused for another 10 years or so.

I hope that Anna avoids that mistake. I wonder if Brenda lives with a lot of guilt. I still don't think she deserves a lot of support for ignoring her kid, and I don't think Anna will deserve a lot of support if something happens to their children.

This is another good point! Brenda was also free to give in to denial, because no one knew about the crimes (except her and her child).

I got the impression that when the oldest daughter was 9, Brenda became suspicious and asked some questions but apparently didn’t ask the right question(s) to get a full idea of what was going on.  It was only years later (after, apparently, the sexual abuse had stopped because he seems to have preferred younger victims ?) that she wrote the multi-page letter.  Apparently the letter included the earlier sexual abuse along with the ongoing and escalating physical abuse in greater detail than, perhaps, Brenda had suspected/known. The other incident in the blog that suggests “Brenda knew all along” is the time a couple of the other sisters and Brenda meet the older daughter in her room, and all of them crying.  The interesting thing about this account is that the oldest daughter says “she knew” her father had done it again (or something like that) but there is a suggestion that they don’t discuss it.  In the Daily Mail interview, the then-youngest daughter said that each of the daughters thought that she was the only one being sexually abused.  This suggests that it was not discussed.  

All of the evidence suggests that Brenda and all the siblings knew about the physical abuse, which was also (apparently) visited on the boys and probably on Brenda itself.  To me, this would be sufficient to say Brenda “should have left” after the first bad beating of a child, if not sooner.  But if, for whatever reason, Brenda got used to accepting that her husband would beat and emotionally abuse their children, she may not have been able to process either the escalation of the abuse or the information that her daughters were being sexually violated by their father.  She had, perhaps, become numb to this aspect of her life, the way some people who are being raped for an extended period of time report “going away” mentally and emotionally during the abuse to survive.  We should remember also that through much of the time this was happening, Brenda was either pregnant or recovering from pregnancy and possibly not able to think straight.

All this is not to “excuse” Brenda.  And, believe it or not, I think it is relevant to Anna and Josh. (Bear with me.)

I like to distinguish between “guilt” and “responsibility,” between “blaming” and “holding responsible.”   So I would say that we should hold Brenda (and Anna) responsible for not acting to protect their kids, but I am not sure that I can condemn them.  They are definitely responsible, but how much they can be “blamed” depends on their mental and emotional situation, their understanding of their options, their motivation.  I cannot know that, so I try to be compassionate.

Back to Anna, I just hope that what she is failing to protect her kids for is not as bad as what Brenda failed to protect hers.  Both cases are sad and potentially tragic.

[AprilQuilt]

4 hours ago, EmCatlyn said:

You got me down the Willis rabbit hole with this question.  Thanks for some fascinating reading.  (I was vaguely aware of the family and the story, but never looked closely.)

My best guess for why some people are readier to understand why Brenda Willis didn’t leave is that she didn’t, while with Anna there is still the hope that she will.  In other words, Brenda’s choice was in the past, so condemning her seemed cruel when she was obviously suffering.  With Anna we are responding in the present: she can still leave.

This, but I think in this case there is also the fact that it's not Anna's first rodeo. With the historic sexual assaults of his sisters, the Ashley Madison incident, and now the CSA images on his computer, she has had three highly public scandals and for all except the latest he has admitted that he did it. What she knew about his teenage behaviour is still a grey area but it's obviously something the whole family knows how to justify. The Ashley Madison/Danica Dillon stuff must have taken her to pieces but hmm yeah I get why she might have chosen to stay. This time... how many strikes do you need? Really? 

Mind you, I also totally get why a woman in this position "can't" leave. Coercive control is hard for anyone to break free from and tbh their entire cults are one great big theatre of coercive control. Plus they have no education; no skills or training; no money that isn't controlled by the husband; in both cases their entire identity and livelihood is tied up in a family business that requires them to be a unit... in such a situation nobody wants to believe that their spouse is a monster and they might genuinely not be capable of getting their head around it. I cannot personally imagine staying with a man who sexually abused our children, let alone continuing to enable the children's abuse, but then I have my own income, monetisable skills, an equal relationship, the confidence to stand up for myself, and the knowledge that marriage does not have to be forever. It's horrific but once you're trapped it only gets harder to leave.

[Jackie3]

42 minutes ago, AprilQuilt said:

I cannot personally imagine staying with a man who sexually abused our children, let alone continuing to enable the children's abuse, but then I have my own income, monetisable skills, an equal relationship, the confidence to stand up for myself, and the knowledge that marriage does not have to be forever. It's horrific but once you're trapped it only gets harder to leave.

That's another thing. Brenda knew that her daughter was being sexually assaulted. So far as we know, Anna knows that Josh watched CSA, and there's no evidence of anything else.

So Brenda ignored her 9-year's statement that she was being raped. Anna is ignoring the feds statement that her husband watched CSA.

Brenda's denial is far worse than Anna's, imo. But Anna is thought to be foolish for remaining with her husband.

Even the post title ("Oh, honey, it's . . . ") implies that the situation is so terrible that divorce is the best option. If watching CSA is a reason to go (and it certainly is!), then a little girl being assaulted should also be one.

Both women had the same serious issues (lack of money, skills, childcare) that made leaving very difficult. I'm not sure why they should be held to a different standard.

Most of all, though, I feel  sorry for Jessica Willis. It must be hard to be close to her mother. If the police hadn't become involved (thanks to Jessica), Toby would be assaulting the youngest Willis girls right now.  Brenda showed no signs of doing anything to protect them.

 

[AprilQuilt]

26 minutes ago, Jackie3 said:

That's another thing. Brenda knew that her daughter was being sexually assaulted. So far as we know, Anna knows that Josh watched CSA, and there's no evidence of anything else.

So Brenda ignored her 9-year's statement that she was being raped. Anna is ignoring the feds statement that her husband watched CSA.

Brenda's denial is far worse than Anna's, imo. But Anna is thought to be foolish for remaining with her husband.

Even the post title ("Oh, honey, it's . . . ") implies that the situation is so terrible that divorce is the best option. If watching CSA is a reason to go (and it certainly is!), then a little girl being assaulted should also be one.

Both women had the same serious issues (lack of money, skills, childcare) that made leaving very difficult. I'm not sure why they should be held to a different standard.

Most of all, though, I feel  sorry for Jessica Willis. It must be hard to be close to her mother. If the police hadn't become involved (thanks to Jessica), Toby would be assaulting the youngest Willis girls right now.  Brenda showed no signs of doing anything to protect them.

 

this is the thing, I'm repelled by Brenda's decision. Jessica tried to tell her when she was 9 years old, but apparently was unable to articulate exactly what her father was doing to her (and surely this is the perfect example of why children need to be given the vocabulary to talk about their own bodies, and not be ashamed to do so). The children it was happening to weren't even able to fully discuss it among themselves because they didn't have the words or reference points to do so. They were ignorant and scared, and he was slick like a lot of abusers are. But if I were Brenda and I had even an inkling that something was 'off', I wouldn't stop til I'd got to the bottom of it. I would not let him smooth it over, as she did. I definitely wouldn't have a load more children with him.

But I know she isn't the only woman to do this. I feel fortunate that I can't understand it, because to walk in those shoes either means you are in a truly desperate position in which your children being sexually abused is a best case scenario, OR you are pretty evil yourself. I can't discount the possibility that Brenda was terrified, helpless, brainwashed etc etc etc. That doesn't mean I am not disgusted and horrified by it. She knew and she let it happen.

[Smee]

I don’t hold them to a different standard. I have sympathy for Anna too, and while I still HOPE she will find the strength to leave, I can understand why she might not be able to. I’m currently reading “See What You Made Me Do” by Jess Hill, which is an excellent and highly researched book about power, coercive control and domestic abuse - I believe there are now UK and US editions of it and I highly recommend if you can get your hands on a copy. It delves in to a lot of the abuse that Anna would be experiencing, why women stay, why men continue to abuse them, and what needs to be done in the broader system and society to change things. And to be clear, when I say “abuse” here I am not speculating that Josh beat Anna, I’m speaking about the kind of abuse that we know fundie women experience, where they are isolated and broken and financially controlled, expected to provide sex on tap, meet impossible standards, and blamed for everything.

Anna has a responsibility to get her children out, but Josh also has a responsibility to not be a disgusting piece of shit and unworthy father, and him failing to meet that responsibility is a far bigger failure than Anna’s.

[Natalie22]

I think there are some misconceptions about the Willis case.  First, the sexual abuse did start when they were young, but Jessica mentions that the latest assault happened to her when she was 17.  It clearly was not a one time thing.  It is also clear from what she said about her experience reporting it is that her father seems to have a history of making violent threats and had been physically abusive.  The law enforcement team investigating this told her to cut of contact to her family in case she triggered something that caused her dad to react violently.  They were very careful to arrest him at a time when they could get him away from the family.  There is a lot of evidence that the most dangerous time for victims of abuse is when they leave their abuser, not before.  Depending on what he had threatened before, Brenda may have feared that he would kill her and the kids if she tried to leave.  We do not know of there being a similar case with the Duggars.  

The other important distinction is both Brenda and Anna's behaviour AFTER the arrests.  Brenda stopped all publicity and worked to focus on her children's wellbeing, including fully cooperating with law enforcement.  Her children have also all made statements of wanting nothing to do with their father and it seems that no one has visited him since he went to prison.  Anna seems to be in complete denial and continues to want her children to be around Josh.  If she didn't she could start proceedings in family court to change this.

[Jackie3]

53 minutes ago, Natalie22 said:

Brenda stopped all publicity and worked to focus on her children's wellbeing, including fully cooperating with law enforcement.

I think you could argue that she didn't focus on their wellbeing until people were watching to see if she was focused on their wellbeing.

While Toby seems like a scary dude, there was no evidence that he abused his wife. No evidence Josh did either. I mean, it wouldn't surprise me if Toby did, but there's never been any evidence of it (there is evidence he hit his kids, though). 

I also think that if you walk into a police station and tell them your husband is raping his daughters, that man will be arrested and is no longer a threat. The children's honesty could easily be confirmed by a doctor.

Honestly, if my daughter told me something like that, I'd pack up the kids and move to a hotel so my child wouldn't have to have one more night under the roof of her rapist. If I couldn't pay the hotel bill, oh well. Better than my kid being harmed. 

Since Brenda had over ten years of denial, I think one can excuse Anna's denial, since she only learned of the CSA charge a couple of years ago. Even if you include the earlier scandal, it hasn't been 10 years. 

I honestly think if (God forbid) one of Anna's daughters were being sexually assaulted by Josh, she would protect that child.

 

3 hours ago, AprilQuilt said:

Jessica tried to tell her when she was 9 years old, but apparently was unable to articulate exactly what her father was doing to her (and surely this is the perfect example of why children need to be given the vocabulary to talk about their own bodies, and not be ashamed to do so).

Exactly. However, any mother who hears "Dad got into my bed while I was sleeping and took off his pajamas." is going to ask more questions. Brenda was a grown woman and knew what that could mean. Very few young children have the correct language, yet pedophiles are caught and convicted.

 

[Tatar-tot]

If I was Michelle I would not want Anna in the house if Josh is locked up.  8 extra people to support & deal with -no thank you.