Jump to content
IGNORED

(CW: Possible CSA) Josh & Anna 37: Saving the Cocktail Dresses for Court


nelliebelle1197

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, BernRul said:

The day is finally here. With the judge banning phones, we shouldn't get any updates until  they go on break. 

Got my booster last night and feeling icky.  What will I do without minute by minute updates!?!

  • Upvote 6
  • Haha 11
  • Thank You 1
  • Love 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, EmCatlyn said:

The “sin in the camp” turned out to be the molestation, I think, not just porn.  I believe everyone else was led to believe it was just porn.

No.  According to the podcast "I Pray You Put This Journal Away", he implies that Josh was caught looking at porn while with the Holts.  It was the incident that led to Josh's head being shaved.  He was also punished by being made to dig out a pond on someone's property.  The molestations occured before this.

I recommend everyone listen to that podcast.  Justin was friends with Josh and JD.  He gives a lot of insight on Josh.

  • Upvote 13
  • Thank You 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Alisamer said:

Especially considering it was his own daughters who were being molested. I can't believe he really can't remember what he claims not to remember. Maybe they should have subpoena'd Michelle. I don't think much of her, but I'd bet she remembers what happened. How could she not? Her own daughters were assaulted by their brother! 

She would say the same as JB. Michelle is a useless mother. 

  • Upvote 21
  • I Agree 11
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Hane said:

She’s clinging to him, and he’s strolling along as if she doesn’t even exist.

I agree. If you watch the video, realize there is one room for one person between the pillar and building. Even knowing that, he is still kind of dragging her behind him. He doesn't go through the small space, pause, wait for her to come through and then walk. He keeps walking and it takes several steps for her to catch up. 

I agree with @Antimony and @punkiepie - it does remind me of the hand sex they had while courting. 

I still don't think they will ever divorce (I hope I have to eat crow for typing that). The only way she will distant herself from him is if she moves away from duggar compound. If her life is still wrapped up in duggarville and getting financed by Jim Bob Duggar than she will never be able to look at her life somewhat objectively. If (big if, I don't think it will happen) she moves to be closer to Priscilla she will still have a hard time discerning how horrible Josh is but it might be easier there with physical distance from Jim Bob and Michelle. 

  • Upvote 12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, libgirl2 said:

She would say the same as JB. Michelle is a useless mother. 

She wouldn't even need JB to tell her to "not remember." She'd just follow JB's lead. Useless, indeed.

  • Upvote 10
  • Sad 1
  • I Agree 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Bassett Lady said:

If you are a mandatory reporter, then you are a mandatory reporter, period. Where or how you learn the information is immaterial. 

This is not true in all states. I am not sure about the Arkansas law. In some states, as recently as in statutes enacted in 2019, mandated reporters are only required to report abuse which they learn about in an official capacity. For example, below is the law in New York. Here is the link to the page: https://law.justia.com/codes/new-york/2019/sos/article-6/title-6/413/

but to summarize, the phrase "official capacity" is repeated several times throughout the document.

2019 New York Laws
SOS - Social Services

§ 413. Persons and officials required to report cases of suspected child abuse or maltreatment. 1. (a) The following persons and officials are required to report or cause a report to be made in accordance with this title when they have reasonable cause to suspect that a child coming before them in their professional or official capacity is an abused or maltreated child, or when they have reasonable cause to suspect that a child is an abused or maltreated child where the parent, guardian, custodian or other person legally responsible for such child comes before them in their professional or official capacity and states from personal knowledge facts, conditions or circumstances which, if correct, would render the child an abused or maltreated child: (goes on to give very long list of mandated reporters) 

Edited to add: I just found what I think is the current Arkansas code. @Bassett Ladyis correct for Arkansas, in that a mandated reporter must report ANY abuse they learn of, whether in an official or unofficial capacity. https://law.justia.com/codes/arkansas/2019/title-12/subtitle-2/chapter-18/subchapter-4/section-12-18-402/

So it is different from state to state.

Edited by livinginthelight
  • Upvote 4
  • Thank You 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, RosyDaisy said:

No.  According to the podcast "I Pray You Put This Journal Away", he implies that Josh was caught looking at porn while with the Holts.  It was the incident that led to Josh's head being shaved.  He was also punished by being made to dig out a pond on someone's property.  The molestations occured before this.

I recommend everyone listen to that podcast.  Justin was friends with Josh and JD.  He gives a lot of insight on Josh.

I just started re-listening to this. I love Justin, he is so thoughtful and sweet. I’m glad he made the podcast. I believe him. I’m glad he’s doing better in life. 

  • Upvote 8
  • I Agree 3
  • Love 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do wonder what Jim Bob Duggar would remember if this were Austin or Jill Dillard, someone with a last name other than Duggar? Would his memory suddenly improve and would he tell the truth if their last name was something other than Duggar? 
 

Jim Bob Duggar is a coward.

  • Upvote 18
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Sister Mozz said:

It sounds like perhaps there was the original 2003 conversation and then Jim and Bobye didn't know of any other molestation until 2005. It's still not smart parenting to ask Josh to live with them, but if it had been two years and they hadn't heard anything, plus they believed Jim Bob had dealt with it... I can see some fundie logic, even if I don't agree with it.

I can see that. It's clear that fundies have their normal meters broken in regards to incest and assaults against children. However, I don't think the Holts deserve praise for ending the courtship on March 30, 2003 when they changed their minds by 2005 (see my bolding below). And they may have saved their daughter in the end, but I doubt that Anna knew the level of detail that the Holts knew. Others are right - so many people failed in taking the proper action back in the early 2000s, and while I believe a testimony on stand is the right step, it does little to absolve responsibility. JB is even more reprehensible and I hope his campaign suffers for it.

Spoiler

Bobye said she and her family were staying at their home in Little Rock in the early months of 2005 when they invited Josh to come and stay with them. Her husband was working in the legislative session at the time. Bobye said she still held out hope that Josh and her daughter could reconnect and get married someday, and she wanted Josh to be able to confide in them so they could help get him back on the right path.

 

  • Upvote 9
  • WTF 4
  • I Agree 1
  • Thank You 4
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, livinginthelight said:

This is not true in all states. I am not sure about the Arkansas law. In some states, as recently as in statutes enacted in 2019, mandated reporters are only required to report abuse which they learn about in an official capacity. For example, below is the law in New York. Here is the link to the page: https://law.justia.com/codes/new-york/2019/sos/article-6/title-6/413/

but to summarize, the phrase "official capacity" is repeated several times throughout the document.

2019 New York Laws
SOS - Social Services

§ 413. Persons and officials required to report cases of suspected child abuse or maltreatment. 1. (a) The following persons and officials are required to report or cause a report to be made in accordance with this title when they have reasonable cause to suspect that a child coming before them in their professional or official capacity is an abused or maltreated child, or when they have reasonable cause to suspect that a child is an abused or maltreated child where the parent, guardian, custodian or other person legally responsible for such child comes before them in their professional or official capacity and states from personal knowledge facts, conditions or circumstances which, if correct, would render the child an abused or maltreated child: (goes on to give very long list of mandated reporters)

Bleh, law. Okay. I looked this up and Arkansas code doesn't contain the language of "official capacity" so I imagine it falls under "no matter where or how you get this information". It's non-specific about capacity or not.

To summon my inner Whiteboard-Mapper;

If Bobye = Clergy,
Then, Bobye = Mandated Reporter
∴ privileged communications are null, testimony admissible

Spoiler

From a government report on privileged communications;
"This privilege, however, is not absolute. While clergy-penitent privilege is frequently recognized within the reporting laws, it is typically interpreted narrowly in the child abuse or neglect context. The circumstances under which it is allowed vary from State to State, and in some States it is denied altogether."

Prosecution might have to fight for this angle but I think the law is on their side here in most precedent cases. It's very much like when your doctor/therapist is like "Hey everything between you and me is secrets, unless you are hurting yourself or others."

If Bobye ≠ Clergy
Then, no privileged communications
Then, no mandated report
∴ testimony admissible

Edited by Antimony
  • Upvote 12
  • Love 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jim Bob Duggar is a coward and TBH what he said is not surprising, fully expected. He's paying for the expensive lawyers and what? We expect him to be truthful? Throwing his golden child into the mouths of gators? Please, he's spending his hard-grifted money so the gators couldn't get to his golden child. Who cares about his daughters' feeling? Definitely not him, for sure.

And yes, Michelle will be equally useless. She covered the abuse then, and she'll cover the abuse now. In her eyes it's all her daughters' fault for tempting Josh. It's always the womenfolk fault in their cult, no?

  • Upvote 12
  • I Agree 2
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, BernRul said:

The day is finally here. With the judge banning phones, we shouldn't get any updates until  they go on break. 

Is there any fixed time for a break or it depends on what the judge says?

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Antimony said:

Bleh, law. Okay. I looked this up and Arkansas code doesn't contain the language of "official capacity" so I imagine it falls under "no matter where or how you get this information". It's non-specific about capacity or not.

To summon my inner Whiteboard-Mapper;

If Bobye = Clergy,
Then, Bobye = Mandated Reporter
∴ privileged communications are null, testimony admissible

  Reveal hidden contents

From a government report on privileged communications;
"This privilege, however, is not absolute. While clergy-penitent privilege is frequently recognized within the reporting laws, it is typically interpreted narrowly in the child abuse or neglect context. The circumstances under which it is allowed vary from State to State, and in some States it is denied altogether."

Prosecution might have to fight for this angle but I think the law is on their side here in most precedent cases. It's very much like when your doctor/therapist is like "Hey everything between you and me is secrets, unless you are hurting yourself or others."

If Bobye ≠ Clergy
Then, no privileged communications
Then, no mandated report
∴ testimony admissible

Okay, I admit I'm checking things on the fly getting ready for work. But according to my (fast) reading of the law, it looks like voluntary confessions to clergy are considered privileged and are NOT admissible. So if her husband is on staff, communications to him would be non-reportable as it was in the form of a voluntary confession. They would have a very hard time establishing that Bobye is clergy. So there is no mandate and her testimony would be admissable.

 

 

Edited by livinginthelight
  • Upvote 2
  • Thank You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

JB continued to allow Josh in the house as several more brothers sisters were born.

I’m not assuming or speculating he did abuse any of them, just that Josh lived in the house until the day he married and JB showed no concern for their safety. 

  • Upvote 16
  • I Agree 8
  • Love 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Antimony said:

Bleh, law. Okay. I looked this up and Arkansas code doesn't contain the language of "official capacity" so I imagine it falls under "no matter where or how you get this information". It's non-specific about capacity or not.

To summon my inner Whiteboard-Mapper;

If Bobye = Clergy,
Then, Bobye = Mandated Reporter
∴ privileged communications are null, testimony admissible

  Hide contents

 

If Bobye ≠ Clergy
Then, no privileged communications
Then, no mandated report
∴ testimony admissible

Ok deep dive for law nerds- and I am rusty, so correct me if I am wrong... the bar exam was a long long time ago.

The issue of privilege and issue of mandated reporting are two separate things. 

Privilege:

What law controls for privilege depends on jurisdiction and criminal vs civil cases.

If a fed case is in court b/c of  a violation of fed crim law,  then fed rules of evidence control.  If civil case is in fed court b/c of a diversity claim (two different states, over a certain amount of money), state law about privilege is controlling. Here, it's a federal prosecution of a federal law, so federal common law about privilege is what they will look at. 

 

Whether Mrs Holt was a mandated reporter would be decided looking at local Arkansas rule at the time of the disclosure.  But even if she is a mandated reporter and failed to do that in 2003/05  it really has no bearing on the claim of clerical privilege, which is a ridiculous and almost insulting claim. Women cant even be teachers in IBLP & certainly Josh isn't confiding in her as a member of clergy, especially if there were other people in the room and it was an informal gathering, which based on her testimony yesterday, it was. The audacity here........

4 minutes ago, Jesquire said:

Whether Mrs Holt was a mandated reporter would be decided looking at local Arkansas rule at the time of the disclosure.  But even if she is a mandated reporter and failed to do that in 2003/05  it really has no bearing on the claim of clerical privilege, which is a ridiculous and almost insulting claim. Women cant even be teachers in IBLP & certainly Josh isn't confiding in her as a member of clergy, especially if there were other people in the room and it was an informal gathering, which based on her testimony yesterday, it was. The audacity here........

One more point, privilege means you cant be compelled to testify about it in court.  Not all confidential conversations are privileged.

  • Upvote 5
  • Thank You 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Smee said:

I am unsurprised by JB’s approach. Disgusted at the pathetic excuse for a father he was and continues to be, but not surprised that he went the “I don’t recall” route. He’s a smug asshole who like most narcissists cannot possibly entertain the notion that he might have been wrong.

Bobye’s testimony is so sad. I too was struck by the mention of “snitched” and reminded of how Jill? Or Jessa? One of the victims, anyway - was said to be the family tattletale. I too think it is mind blowingly naive for the Holts to take Josh into their home with minor children after knowing how long he’d been molesting children. But I wish Pa Keller had felt the same about it being a relationship dealbreaker. 

 

Yup, it was Jill.  Josh mentioned it in her wedding special.  Jana then clarified that Jill just cared about people being right with God or something.  I think at the time everyone thought it was if they put a toe out of line.  Now with this context, it's insane to think he would ever refer to her publicly as a tattletale.

  • Upvote 25
  • Sad 10
  • I Agree 2
  • Love 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, detroitrockcity said:

Got my booster last night and feeling icky.  What will I do without minute by minute updates!?!

Thanks for getting your booster

  • Upvote 2
  • I Agree 19
  • Thank You 1
  • Love 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From reddit:  

 

"Jusge just called for 20 min break.

Of note: 52/60 jurors showed up. 4 have been dismissed with a possible 2 more dismissed (but audio was off so we didn't know what the outcome was.

Juror 2: dismissed for distrust of government.

Juror 4: dismissed due to a scheduled medical procedure.

Juror 7: (OMG!) dismissed as he DAUGHTER is married to a Duggar boy (who could this be??) Judge was floored that prior screening didn't prevent this.

Juror 39: dismissed due to scheduled surgery

Juror 17: possibly dismissed due to knowing one of the Prosecution attorneys. They went to law school together:

Juror 5: possibly dismissed due to prior criminal past.

Witness list was read to ask if any juror knew any of them. It was explained that these are POSSIBLE WITNESSES... not guaranteed to testify.

Of note:

Jim Holt Bobye Holt Jill (Duggar) Dillard Jedidiah Duggar Calob Williams.

Note that Jim Bob was not on the list. Maybe prosecution decided not to use him since all he will say is "I can't remember".

Sorry for typos. Writing fast. Gotta go!"

https://www.reddit.com/r/DuggarsSnark/comments/r5su00/day_1_of_trial_jury_selection_update_at_morning/

 

  • Upvote 8
  • Thank You 34
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if Anna is front and center at all of the trial stuff, it's unlikely that she is nursing Madyson. I see a hurry up and get pregnant again situation. What a stupid woman.

  • Upvote 6
  • Downvote 1
  • Disgust 1
  • Confused 1
  • I Agree 2
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • HerNameIsBuffy locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.