(Possible Child Sexual Abuse Content) Josh and Anna 34: Plea Deal in the Making?

[EmCatlyn]

10 hours ago, ifosterkittens said:

So everything I'm saying is based on my understanding of what Emily D Baker has said. I'm not a law professional.  ….

… If the judge does not grant any of the motions (meaning all the evidence, statements, etc come in, nothing is suppressed) then she imagines Josh's attorneys will say to Josh it is time to talk about changing your plea. It is a federal case so the judge will determine the sentencing.  …  There are guidelines, and Emily said because this is his first legal offense (remember the stuff with his sisters did not have a legal outcome) he would likely not get the maximum sentence. 

So essentially, the plea deal (if there is a deal) is up to the judge.  The prosecution may offer to take some charges off the slate in exchange for Josh pleading guilty, but the prosecution can’t negotiate the sentence.

I could see Josh not pleading guilty under the circumstances.

[Idlewild]

I think they moved on from on a lot of the BS that the fans liked- the no TV, limited online, skirts only etc.
It’s clear from comments they have made they watched  TV, many of the unmarrieds have social media and they all have apple watches and smartphones.
It’s no coincidence I think that the show is over so Jana is publicly wearing trousers. It just shows it was a charade- a brand to keep the fans and cash. Now they are trying to reinvent themselves as hip fundies, but that’s a crowded field on social media.

[Jess]

17 hours ago, DalmatianCat said:

If the prosecution has an air-tight case, would they still offer a plea deal just to be safe? Has one possibly already been offered in this case?

Jury members are real people with real opinions and people are unpredictable so there is never sure case. 

[SassyPants]

6 hours ago, Idlewild said:

I think they moved on from on a lot of the BS that the fans liked- the no TV, limited online, skirts only etc.
It’s clear from comments they have made they watched  TV, many of the unmarrieds have social media and they all have apple watches and smartphones.
It’s no coincidence I think that the show is over so Jana is publicly wearing trousers. It just shows it was a charade- a brand to keep the fans and cash. Now they are trying to reinvent themselves as hip fundies, but that’s a crowded field on social media.

This could all be true, but a true conversion would definitely be difficult. Without the show, or any real evidence of education, job training or actual jobs, the adult Duggars just come off as a more worldly and entitled version of the Maxwells. Now the Bates could pull it off. Many of those adults seem to have other more generally socially accepted interests(schooling, training, businesses). Other than the show, what have we ever seen any person named Duggar actually do, let alone do well and to completion? Remember the state of the TTH building process before TLC came along? The Dugs were basically homeless. 

[fluffernutter]

I keep thinking this same thought- I've been waiting for this family to have their reckoning and for the show to be canceled, for some kids/adults to rebel, or for Jim Bob and Michelle's house of cards to fall for a long long time. They are offensive on so many levels, I find myself giddy over it finally happening, but then I remember why it's happened and I just feel sick and sad. Just really all over the place. I'm not sorry they are now on the cover of People over a scandal, I just really wish it wasn't due to such disturbing circumstances. If I were one of his siblings, my fury would be huge. At him for being such a piece of shit, and at his parents, who continue to just pour money and support into him. 

[SassyPants]

19 minutes ago, fluffernutter said:

I keep thinking this same thought- I've been waiting for this family to have their reckoning and for the show to be canceled, for some kids/adults to rebel, or for Jim Bob and Michelle's house of cards to fall for a long long time. They are offensive on so many levels, I find myself giddy over it finally happening, but then I remember why it's happened and I just feel sick and sad. Just really all over the place. I'm not sorry they are now on the cover of People over a scandal, I just really wish it wasn't due to such disturbing circumstances. If I were one of his siblings, my fury would be huge. At him for being such a piece of shit, and at his parents, who continue to just pour money and support into him. 

I remember when the news broke but  before we knew the charges, commenting  that I hoped it was related to finances and that JB would be implicated too. That’s has always been my dream, that the reality of this lifestyle would be revealed for what it really is, a sham.

There’s lots of ways to make money, but not all of them are wholesome or more importantly, healthy!

[Coconut Flan]

7 hours ago, Jess said:

Jury members are real people with real opinions and people are unpredictable so there is never sure case. 

Short story from my life.  There was a worker at the local post office who was stealing gift cards out of the mail.  He was caught on video plus stores like Target had printouts of the gift card use.  I was the purchaser of one of the cards so got the joy of testifying.  The first trial ended in a hung jury.  The prosecutor called me to ask if I was willing to testify again and told me he polled the jury and every person on the jury of the same ethnic heritage of the stealing postal worker voted to acquit even after seeing video of him pocketing multiple gift cards.  On retrial they made sure to not allow a "stacked" jury and he was found guilty.  You never know for sure going in.  It looked like a slam dunk.  I saw the video of him stealing the gift card I mailed.  It was shown at trial with me sitting there identifying it and they could see it go in his pocket yet it didn't matter to that particular jury.

3 hours ago, fluffernutter said:

If I were one of his siblings, my fury would be huge. At him for being such a piece of shit, and at his parents, who continue to just pour money and support into him. 

Exactly.  At what point are JB and Michelle going to allow him to stand on his own?  Supposedly the kids were to leave and cleave.  IMO, Josh should have had to face the consequences of his choices completely on his own.  You created the mess, you clean it up.  It's a lesson for six year olds.

[raayx01]

Not that anyone has respect for Jim bob, but wouldn't he actually get a once of respect ad partly save some of his family name by actually condemning Josh. If you look at the evidence there's no way in hell he's not guilty, so if Jim bob were to make a public statement condemning Josh and refusing to stand by him he might gain back some of his credibility, Family name and his other children back. If you have 19 kids why would you choose the worst one other the other 18.

[patsymae]

8 hours ago, Jess said:

Jury members are real people with real opinions and people are unpredictable so there is never sure case. 

casey Anthony being a case in point

[ifosterkittens]

13 hours ago, EmCatlyn said:

So essentially, the plea deal (if there is a deal) is up to the judge.  The prosecution may offer to take some charges off the slate in exchange for Josh pleading guilty, but the prosecution can’t negotiate the sentence.

I could see Josh not pleading guilty under the circumstances.

Josh has two charges, one of them carries a five year minimum (and you have to serve 85% of your time in federal cases). I don't think it is an option to say I'll plea guilty to the lesser charge is you drop the charge that carries 5 years. (Please correct me if I'm wrong). 

As far as Josh and how he will plead I do wonder how much Jim Bob factors in. If the judge says to the defense I see you put in a lot of time and effort into these motions, but nope all the evidence and statements are coming in, nothing is being suppressed. In that case has Jim Bob decided to tell Josh change the plea to guilty, does Jim Bob say I'm not paying for a trial? Jim Bob probably loves his son, and bought him the best defense team possible (Emily said the motions they created took a lot of time and probably cost a lot of money), but if Jim Bob (as advised by the legal team) sees a guilty verdict as a very likely outcome does he say enough? 

My guess is Jim Bob is looking out for his own bottom line. Jim Bob will pay for a trial if he thinks it is in his (Jim Bob's) best interest. Jim Bob will tell Josh to plead guilty if he thinks it is in his (Jim Bob's) best interest. Jim Bob created the Duggar brand for TLC. The brand is clearly tarnished, and I'm sure JB is looking to rebuild it. 

[FiveAcres]

18 minutes ago, ifosterkittens said:

My guess is Jim Bob is looking out for his own bottom line. Jim Bob will pay for a trial if he thinks it is in his (Jim Bob's) best interest. Jim Bob will tell Josh to plead guilty if he thinks it is in his (Jim Bob's) best interest. Jim Bob created the Duggar brand for TLC. The brand is clearly tarnished, and I'm sure JB is looking to rebuild it. 

I know there is a lot of disagreement about whether Jim Bob can revive his brand with TLC, but my own speculation is that Jim Bob and Michelle have burned their bridges with TLC. I think it is possible that the Duggars were less than candid with TLC about when they learned that Josh was being investigated for possessing CSAM images. Perhaps they even told TLC that the whole matter of the raid had just been overblown and the Federal agents didn't find anything.  I would think that TLC would be less than pleased to be blindsided by the Duggars for the second time. 

 

[SassyPants]

3 hours ago, Coconut Flan said:

Short story from my life.  There was a worker at the local post office who was stealing gift cards out of the mail.  He was caught on video plus stores like Target had printouts of the gift card use.  I was the purchaser of one of the cards so got the joy of testifying.  The first trial ended in a hung jury.  The prosecutor called me to ask if I was willing to testify again and told me he polled the jury and every person on the jury of the same ethnic heritage of the stealing postal worker voted to acquit even after seeing video of him pocketing multiple gift cards.  On retrial they made sure to not allow a "stacked" jury and he was found guilty.  You never know for sure going in.  It looked like a slam dunk.  I saw the video of him stealing the gift card I mailed.  It was shown at trial with me sitting there identifying it and they could see it go in his pocket yet it didn't matter to that particular jury.

Exactly.  At what point are JB and Michelle going to allow him to stand on his own?  Supposedly the kids were to leave and cleave.  IMO, Josh should have had to face the consequences of his choices completely on his own.  You created the mess, you clean it up.  It's a lesson for six year olds.

I sat on a jury that was a slam dunk case. We also had to acquit d/t one juror who “just didn’t believe the evidence.” At one point we asked him to read aloud the testimony from the accused…the guy couldn’t read. At this point and after several weeks of deliberating, the foreman said she thought we were to the point of badgering this juror. This was a federal case. The prosecution was blown away with the verdict.

[mpheels]

 

12 hours ago, Jess said:

Jury members are real people with real opinions and people are unpredictable so there is never sure case. 

I was on a jury for a civil trial once. Plaintiffs were suing for wrongful termination/age discrimination. The defendants presented a ton of evidence showing plaintiff #1 was engaging in fraud and plaintiff #2 was just an unpleasant person to work with. Both plaintiffs were men. The jury unanimously sided with the defense for #2, but only the women on the juror felt the defense was correct to fire #1. It took several hours to convince the men on the jury that using company time/materials to run a private side business really was reason for termination.

[Dandruff]

Could JB be worried about what might be disclosed if Josh goes to prison and is required to undergo therapy?

[feministxtian]

1 hour ago, Dandruff said:

Could JB be worried about what might be disclosed if Josh goes to prison and is required to undergo therapy?

When JB said that molestation was "common" among his community, it set off alarm bells for me. What is JB hiding? What did JB do to the kids? I'm willing to bet there's lots of skeletons in that closet. 

[AussieKrissy]

Well therapy is confidential so nothing will come out unless Josh chooses to have it released to help with sentencing or parole issues 

[EmCatlyn]

5 hours ago, SassyPants said:

I sat on a jury that was a slam dunk case. We also had to acquit d/t one juror who “just didn’t believe the evidence.” At one point we asked him to read aloud the testimony from the accused…the guy couldn’t read. At this point and after several weeks of deliberating, the foreman said she thought we were to the point of badgering this juror. This was a federal case. The prosecution was blown away with the verdict.

I thought when the jurors couldn’t agree it was a “hung jury” — not an acquittal.  

A former relative (ex brother-in-law of my ex) was the accused in a federal drug case.  He was tried and not convicted (but not acquitted either) because the jury couldn’t agree. My then sis-in-law told me it had been a “hung jury” and after a couple of months he was retried and convicted.    This was back in the 1980s. Has it changed?  If the jurors can’t agree, does the accused go free?

Edited September 4, 2021 by EmCatlyn
Edit repetition out.

[NancyDrewFan1989]

8 hours ago, raayx01 said:

Not that anyone has respect for Jim bob, but wouldn't he actually get a once of respect ad partly save some of his family name by actually condemning Josh. If you look at the evidence there's no way in hell he's not guilty, so if Jim bob were to make a public statement condemning Josh and refusing to stand by him he might gain back some of his credibility, Family name and his other children back. If you have 19 kids why would you choose the worst one other the other 18.

I don't think we will hear anymore from Jim Bob until after the trial. I do agree that JB is doing what he can to save his brand right now, so, keeping a low public profile is, probably, in his best interest right now as he is able to bide his time and make a plan once to start up again once all is said and done with Smuggar this time. Plus, even if Jim Bob does make a public statement condemning Josh in order to distance himself I don't see TLC or a channel like UpTV running to the Duggars to do a tell all right away. However, I do foresee in a year or two Jim Bob and Michelle publishing a book about this trial and how their faith got them through and all that crap followed by interviews on morning shows like Good Morning America. TBH, I wouldn't be surprised if he and Michelle are working on a book right now. Give it sometime post-Smuggar scandal and JB will be doing what he can to start the gravy train for his family again. 

As for choosing Josh over the other eighteen children, the Duggars found themselves on the rise when Josh got busted for assaulting his sisters. The family had become more and more noticed by the public and JB and Michelle, probably, knew that if the public found out about Josh then the gravy train would stop right then. Plus, it's not like they could remove Josh, who was a minor at the time, from the house without sparking suspicions from the public about Josh when they started to rise to fame. Basically, what I am trying to say is I don't think they chose Josh over their other eighteen children; JB and Michelle chose fame and fortune at the expense of all of Josh's victims, a gullible and star struck family who happily married off their daughter into a mess, and yet to be born children who have to suffer at the expense of their father's crimes. 

[EmCatlyn]

20 hours ago, Idlewild said:

I think they moved on from on a lot of the BS that the fans liked- the no TV, limited online, skirts only etc.
It’s clear from comments they have made they watched  TV, many of the unmarrieds have social media and they all have apple watches and smartphones.
It’s no coincidence I think that the show is over so Jana is publicly wearing trousers. It just shows it was a charade- a brand to keep the fans and cash. Now they are trying to reinvent themselves as hip fundies, but that’s a crowded field on social media.

To be fair, the family may have evolved in its ideas about clothing, courtship, television, etc. as time passed.  It may not have been a “gimmick” when they started.  I know when I began childrearing I had a lot of things we did which we stopped doing (or did differently) as time passed.

This is not to say they aren’t a bunch of shallow hypocrites, just that having relaxed some of their rules is not proof that they were always pretending.  Their concealing the change, on the other hand, was clearly a ploy because they were worried about their image.

 

 

[EmCatlyn]

6 hours ago, ifosterkittens said:

Josh has two charges, one of them carries a five year minimum (and you have to serve 85% of your time in federal cases). I don't think it is an option to say I'll plea guilty to the lesser charge is you drop the charge that carries 5 years. (Please correct me if I'm wrong). 

I would like to know too.  My question to the lawyers and other experts among us is what would Josh have to gain by pleading guilty if the prosecutor can’t cut him a deal about sentencing and so forth. 

I know that even at the state level a judge may overturn a plea deal, but if I understood previous discussions correctly, it is essentially impossible for a federal prosecutor to make a deal regarding sentencing while state prosecutors can.

So — if Josh is offered a deal, what is it likely to include?

Dropping a charge?  Modifying or reducing the charges?  A recommendation for what kind of prison?  What can the prosecution offer that the accused might prefer to going to trail?

(I agree that Josh’s decision may be strongly influenced by how much JB is willing to pay, but even then, Josh could theoretically decide to go to trial with a public defender if he really doesn’t like the plea deals he is offered.  I don’t see him pleading guilty unless it is clear to him that it is truly his best option.)

 

 

[Dandruff]

2 hours ago, AussieKrissy said:

Well therapy is confidential so nothing will come out unless Josh chooses to have it released to help with sentencing or parole issues 

What if there was information otherwise subject to mandatory reporting?

[AussieKrissy]

42 minutes ago, Dandruff said:

What if there was information otherwise subject to mandatory reporting?

Good point. Josh is stupid but I don’t k know how stupid he is to sink himself or others further. I can see him trying to tell others secrets to save himself. 

[livinginthelight]

4 hours ago, AussieKrissy said:

Well therapy is confidential so nothing will come out unless Josh chooses to have it released to help with sentencing or parole issues 

 

Court ordered therapy doesn't have the same guarantee of confidentiality as other therapeutic relationships. I'm sure it varies by state, but the judge can ask for reports from the therapist. For instance, if a person is ordered into therapy for alcohol abuse, the therapist might report to the court on whether the individual has maintained their sobriety, and how compliant the person is with attending therapy and AA.

[formergothardite]

4 hours ago, AussieKrissy said:

. I can see him trying to tell others secrets to save himself. 

I can see the same thing happening, not even necessarily to save himself but to also exact revenge on people he feel wronged him. If he gets stuck in jail he will have plenty of time to sit around feeling angry and resentful. He seems like the type to blame everyone else and want to get back at them. Who knows what sort of stories he will start telling about the family, Gothard, TLC and even the Bates. 
 

He could drag a whole lot of people down with him, and I expect many of them know that. What will it do to the happy, shiny image of the Bates if Josh starts blabbing that they currently head up the organization that taught him that a child is to be blamed if they are molested? 

[theotherelise]

Anyone else here listened to the Piketon Massacre podcast? Four co-defendants who are family and one of them changed his plea earlier this year to guilty. They all have separate counsel, but the counsel is paid from the same joint family account. 

Point is, Josh is the one who will stand up in court and get asked for a plea every time. Josh is the one who knows what will be talked about at the trial.