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

[AussieKrissy]

7 hours ago, AussieKrissy said:

lordy that is a short dress by duggar standards JB is obs having to fork out for Anna's new wardrobe too 

How many black dresses is she gunna have by the end of the year?

And I should add after the trial she is never going to be “allowed” to wear them again or “want” to wear them again…. Waste of money on a waste of space…. 

7 hours ago, justmy2cents said:

She dressed like this when they were living in DC. The defense might have suggested she look polished, but it’s not a new style for Anna.

I never saw Anna this polished. I still thought she was pretty dam frumpy in dc 

7 hours ago, EvilAthiest said:

JB’s “I don’t remember” is beyond disgraceful.  It’s another slap in the face to his daughters. 

If Jill testifies she would be subject to cross examination, including about what she said during the Megyn Kelly interview.  One of the sisters that did not appear on Megyn Kelly’s show would probably be a better witness because of the cross-examination.  But I don’t see that happening.

JB forced (my opinion) Jill & Jessa to do the Megyn Kelly interview, and it is still benefitting Josh the predator over his sisters the victims.  As it was meant to.

This crossed my mind too. The cross examination may make Jill look unrealiable because of how she downplayed it on the tv interview. It worries me that the jury may not understand the nuances of the coercion of her cult and family. I’ll be praying for Jill too. #freejill also Amy is on tHe posts. 

Spoiler

 

[Tatar-tot]

38 minutes ago, AussieKrissy said:

And I should add after the trial she is never going to be “allowed” to wear them again or “want” to wear them again…. Waste of money on a waste of space…. 

I never saw Anna this polished. I still thought she was pretty dam frumpy in dc 

This crossed my mind too. The cross examination may make Jill look unrealiable because of how she downplayed it on the tv interview. It worries me that the jury may not understand the nuances of the coercion of her cult and family. I’ll be praying for Jill too. #freejill also Amy is on tHe posts. 

  Hide contents

 

The prosecutors have prepared Jill to testify. They have walked through every possible question they can think of.  The prosecutors will control the narrative and address why did her story change.  At this point Jill has probably been deposed along Jinger, Jessa and Joy.  My guess is Jill is the most reliable witness.  

[AussieKrissy]

3 minutes ago, Tatar-tot said:

The prosecutors have prepared Jill to testify. They have walked through every possible question they can think of.  The prosecutors will control the narrative and address why did her story change.  At this point Jill has probably been deposed along Jinger, Jessa and Joy.  My guess is Jill is the most reliable witness.  

That makes me feel better (for her) thanks for that info. She is a victim and I just (like all us on here) don’t want her victimised anymore and I was worried about her on the stand. 

[Mama Mia]

39 minutes ago, Tatar-tot said:

The prosecutors have prepared Jill to testify. They have walked through every possible question they can think of.  The prosecutors will control the narrative and address why did her story change.  At this point Jill has probably been deposed along Jinger, Jessa and Joy.  My guess is Jill is the most reliable witness.  

Poor Joy having to listen to all this. I hope that she’s getting lots of love and support. Even though she’s deep in the kool-aid, her husband seems genuinely caring. She seems to be close to Abbie -at least they do lots of outings together - and JD is clearly not a Josh fan, hopefully at least some of the family has her back. 

[Idlewild]

I don’t think it’s a question of whether siblings are friendly with Josh- none of them ever give the impression of being so. Some are friendly with Anna and the children; Derick thanked Josh for a donation to one if his grifts. The real issue is loyalty/ dependence on JB. Jill will do her own thing; my guess is JD, Jinger, Jessa , Josiah and Joy will try and stay out of it all. I see Jed, Jason and Jana being firmly pro JB- l’d love to be proved wrong though. 

Edited December 1, 2021 by Idlewild

[Satan'sFortress]

6 hours ago, indianabones said:

The reporters who were in the room with her today think that the Duggars are going to try and fill the seats in the courtroom for the public with their friends and supporters to keep out as many reporters as possible.

If true, that is absolutely absurd and shows just how deluded they are.  All of their friends and supporters (my hunch is they'll all be male) would be there to hear and see every single detail? WTF. If it were me or my son being tried, I believe I'd want my friends and supporters as far away as possible.

Edited December 1, 2021 by Satan'sFortress
Typos

[QuiverFullOfCondoms]

7 hours ago, coffeebean7 said:

Anna being there means nothing about whether she is breastfeeding Madyson. She could step out to pump, pump during breaks, etc. I also think that he is narcissistic and genuinely thinks he will not be found guilty (because why else would you go through with this trial), so maybe they aren't rushing to conceive again? I could definitely see them doing that though, and hadn't even thought about it. So GROSS.

I don’t think Josh Duggar The Pedophile is thinking about conceiving (nor does he seem to care about fathering as many children as humanly possible). It’s Anna who is into that. If anyone is trying it would be her. Stress isn’t good for fertility so I wouldn’t worry too much.

Edited December 1, 2021 by QuiverFullOfCondoms

[SongRed7]

11 hours ago, Expectopatronus said:

So glad that I am not a juror. 

I wish I was a juror. And I actually would be impartial and if the facts presented are anything (and more I presume) than what was presented at his original arraignment, he is 100 guilty. No reasonable doubt at all. 

[sndral]

6 hours ago, Tatar-tot said:

The prosecutors have prepared Jill to testify. They have walked through every possible question they can think of.  The prosecutors will control the narrative and address why did her story change.  At this point Jill has probably been deposed along Jinger, Jessa and Joy.  My guess is Jill is the most reliable witness.  

Depositions happen in civil cases as part of discovery, they are very rare in criminal cases (see Federal criminal procedure rule 15.) The US attorneys have most likely spoken with all of their witnesses including Jill. There is a Federal Victim Assistance program that would support vulnerable victims & witnesses including among other services accompanying them to court.

I’m curious how the Judge will rule on the prosecution’s motion to admit Josh’s prior bad acts since, unlike traditional Rule 404 type evidence, Rule 414(a) - applicable only in child molestation cases - clearly allows introduction of “[t]he defendant’s commission of another offense or offenses of child molestation…[which] may be considered for its bearing on any matter to which it is relevant.”

Typically when 404 evidence comes in there’s a jury instruction advising the jury that the evidence is only relevant to the specific reason it came in, the broad language of 414 suggests to me that if the evidence comes in there’ll be no need for a limiting jury instruction.

[SongRed7]

13 hours ago, SassyPants said:

God Lord Anna. I wonder if she’s allowed meds or support beyond Jesus. I just can’t imagine willingly staying with Josh or attending the trial.

I was just thinking this too,. Besides the obvious reasons of this being about one of the worst crimes imaginable, can you imagine her sitting through Bobye Holt's testimonial about Josh and their daughter and how they were dating/courting, everyone assumed/hoped they would marry and even after first finding out about Josh's crimes, them still hoping there would be some reconciliation?

Does Anna know that she WASN'T the chosen one for Josh but rather a consolation?  Someone young and naive enough that she wouldn't question or be concerned with the past or savvy enough to questions the version of the past that was presented to her.  After all the scandal they tamped down, the Duggars were anxious to marry Josh off and Anna was a convenient (and maybe starry eyed) alternative. 

Their marriage wasn't the great fundie love story they tried to convince viewers about. It was always about putting on a show. 

[sndral]

Link to an article w/ details about the questions asked of the potential jurors. https://www.kxan.com/news/national-news/jurors-alternates-selected-in-josh-duggars-child-pornography-trial-jim-bob-duggar-wont-testify/

[Giraffe]

Jill's testifying after years of therapy. I was sexually abused as a child and - after several years of therapy* - would have gladly taken the witness stand. I doubt Jill's being coerced into testifying and hope she's doing it willingly. Just my take on it and I could be wrong but I hope for her she's testifying from a position of strength and a way of taking back the power that was brutally taken from her as a child. 

 

*For anyone wondering how this would "work," my experience after therapy is that I no longer see myself as defined by the abuse. It's something that happened to me but it no longer defines me as it did when I first entered therapy (and before). 

Edited December 1, 2021 by Giraffe
still talking

[church_of_dog]

I have an awkward question -- awkward because I don't want to be seen as defending Josh, and also awkward because I don't want to suggest that anyone here would know the answer to this, although some of you in the legal world may have some knowledge from past CSAM cases.

My question is this:  would a person have an opportunity to view the actual content of the CSAM before deciding to download it?  Or would they only see perhaps a title and maybe a description before choosing which files to download?

I'm stuck on the apparent violence in the video and can't imagine someone  -- even a pedophile -- intentionally choosing it, although obviously some people have done so.

[Free Felicity]

Jim Bob Duggar's icky behavior yesterday has me wondering if he would extend the same amount of energy if his other sons had done and been accused of things just as heinous. We know his "umbrella of protection" is quite leaky for the girls. If he wouldn't go to bat for the other sons, why does he do so for Josh? 

Not all implying that any other kid has done these things. Just wondering how special Josh's treatment is or if it extends to all the male children. 

 

[SassyPants]

Raise your right hand. Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God? All that Jesus talk washed away in an instant. God has no use for liars or those who obfuscate. It is in the good book you so often reference. The commandments apply in all instances, and not just when it’s convenient for you. 

[EyesOpen]

9 minutes ago, Free Felicity said:

Jim Bob Duggar's icky behavior yesterday has me wondering if he would extend the same amount of energy if his other sons had done and been accused of things just as heinous. We know his "umbrella of protection" is quite leaky for the girls. If he wouldn't go to bat for the other sons, why does he do so for Josh? 

Not all implying that any other kid has done these things. Just wondering how special Josh's treatment is or if it extends to all the male children. 

 

I think his energy is 100% preserving his perceived reputation and the family’s reputation… their ‘status’ or whatever… I think he’d behave this way over anything that would tarnish their name or income opportunities… I don’t think he cares at all About what happened to his daughters or their feelings… only how it affects him and the public’s perspective. 

[Alisamer]

7 minutes ago, church_of_dog said:

My question is this:  would a person have an opportunity to view the actual content of the CSAM before deciding to download it?  Or would they only see perhaps a title and maybe a description before choosing which files to download?

That's a good question. I have no idea but maybe someone here does.

I wouldn't think "I didn't know what it was" would be an excuse that court would accept, considering all the trouble he went through to get the stuff in the first place (I know that's not what you're saying though!). I personally knew the dark web existed but before all this started up had no idea how anyone accessed it and still only have the vaguest conception - yet he somehow seems to have very quickly been able to set up the partition, the browser, and find and download exactly what he was looking for.

Maybe more info will come out in the trial - he can't have just been plain old fundie Josh Duggar and suddenly just known how to access this nastiness. How did he figure it out? He had to have learned somewhere. And if he'd been googling it or on an email list or communicating with other offenders online surely Covenant Eyes would have caught part of it. 

There's a step missing that hasn't been talked about yet. Josh is a tool but he's not a sharp one, yet he somehow figured all this out on his own with nobody explaining anything to him and was able to access and download part of one of the most notorious CSA videos ever made? 

I don't buy it. He learned how to get this stuff from somebody or some place. He had to have known where to look, how to access it, etc. Hopefully part of the purpose of this trial is also to help find out how he managed all this, and who else is involved. Josh Duggar is a small fish, but hopefully he'll lead the police to bigger fish. 

 

[quiversR4hunting]

36 minutes ago, sndral said:

Link to an article w/ details about the questions asked of the potential jurors. https://www.kxan.com/news/national-news/jurors-alternates-selected-in-josh-duggars-child-pornography-trial-jim-bob-duggar-wont-testify/

From the article:

Quote

Another man stood and said he is related to the Duggar family. He said his daughter is currently married to one of the Duggar’s sons. Judge Brooks immediately excused him, saying he thought they had better screening for such connections to a case.

My guess is they do have a good screening system. In my county the jury questionnaire doesn't say the case you are being called for, it asks general questions and if they are related to a person isn't brought up until they go to be seated. In the jury room (waiting to go into the courtroom to be asked questions) we aren't allowed to talk to each other and there wasn't another questionnaire given. When I made it in the courtroom, we all rose and swore to tell the truth then he asked general questions - such as "are you related to the prosecutor/defense/defendant and that is when we rose our hands (or not). the ones that rose their hands were then asked who they know and how. My experience has only been with circuit court. I don't know if the potential jurors are given another questionnaire and the attorneys vet the list and suggest a list of people to dismiss. 

[nokidsmom]

I can't for the life of me understand why Bobye would to give Josh another chance at a relationship with her daughter after hearing what he did the first time.   I get that she and her husband were close to the Duggar family and wanted to give Josh the benefit of the doubt, but did the benefit of the doubt really mean still wanting their daughter to forge a relationship with a confessed child molester?  Good grief.   It was good they called a halt to things after hearing Josh confess the first time but still they were so steeped in the patriarchy that they were willing to try again?!?  Only after he confessed to Bobye to doing it again with some graphic details did she finally get it.      

When I learned that my ex-fiance did some pretty creepy, inappropriate stuff which was before we met, I wrote him off forever.  In spite of many "christian" people around us refusing see him for the sick MF'er messed up individual he really was, allowing him to get away with it, and just generally shoving his behavior under the rug.   Incidentally I heard a number of pretty damning things for a couple of years afterward.   And the poor woman he married had no real idea of all that, I am fairly certain.  

49 minutes ago, SongRed7 said:

Does Anna know that she WASN'T the chosen one for Josh but rather a consolation?  Someone young and naive enough that she wouldn't question or be concerned with the past or savvy enough to questions the version of the past that was presented to her.  After all the scandal they tamped down, the Duggars were anxious to marry Josh off and Anna was a convenient (and maybe starry eyed) alternative. 

Back in the days where all we knew of Josh's crimes was the vague "sin in the camp", it was sadly speculated that Josh was pushed into marriage to keep him from falling into sexual sin.  And now knowing that the Holts had the sense finally to cut things off, I can see why they would gravitate to someone like Anna who was not just young and naive but she came with a father was naive/dumb enough to give his approval to his daughter marrying Josh though I can't see JB giving anything that would amount to a full, honest disclosure. 

Edited December 1, 2021 by nokidsmom
Riffles

[Giraffe]

29 minutes ago, church_of_dog said:

I have an awkward question -- awkward because I don't want to be seen as defending Josh, and also awkward because I don't want to suggest that anyone here would know the answer to this, although some of you in the legal world may have some knowledge from past CSAM cases.

My question is this:  would a person have an opportunity to view the actual content of the CSAM before deciding to download it?  Or would they only see perhaps a title and maybe a description before choosing which files to download?

I'm stuck on the apparent violence in the video and can't imagine someone  -- even a pedophile -- intentionally choosing it, although obviously some people have done so.

My guess is someone looking for the kind of evil abuse material he was looking for wouldn't care about a preview. 

[quiversR4hunting]

29 minutes ago, Alisamer said:

That's a good question. I have no idea but maybe someone here does.

I wouldn't think "I didn't know what it was" would be an excuse that court would accept, considering all the trouble he went through to get the stuff in the first place (I know that's not what you're saying though!). I personally knew the dark web existed but before all this started up had no idea how anyone accessed it and still only have the vaguest conception - yet he somehow seems to have very quickly been able to set up the partition, the browser, and find and download exactly what he was looking for.

Maybe more info will come out in the trial - he can't have just been plain old fundie Josh Duggar and suddenly just known how to access this nastiness. How did he figure it out? He had to have learned somewhere. And if he'd been googling it or on an email list or communicating with other offenders online surely Covenant Eyes would have caught part of it. 

There's a step missing that hasn't been talked about yet. Josh is a tool but he's not a sharp one, yet he somehow figured all this out on his own with nobody explaining anything to him and was able to access and download part of one of the most notorious CSA videos ever made? 

I don't buy it. He learned how to get this stuff from somebody or some place. He had to have known where to look, how to access it, etc. Hopefully part of the purpose of this trial is also to help find out how he managed all this, and who else is involved. Josh Duggar is a small fish, but hopefully he'll lead the police to bigger fish. 

I agree with all of what you said. I think the prosecution will also show how much time he spent on these sites.

Anecdote - a long long time ago, I mistyped Hallmark to go look at virtual cards to send. I forgot an L. Well that particular site was not cards at all, it was porn. (This was back in the day before companies bought up domains with similar names to prevent this issue.) I quickly clicked off and cleaned everything. The electronic trail could show all of that and Josh couldn't claim "oops" if he was on it for several minutes or longer. It took me seconds to click off it. This just adds to everything you said that he knew how to set up a partition, and circumvent covenant eyes, etc. Like you, I know what the dark web is however have never been curious to go look for how to access it. Nope, no thanking there is enough bad stuff on the regular web. That isn't the case with Josh, at least according to the court papers so far. 

Edited December 1, 2021 by quiversR4hunting
wrong site/sights - doh!

[AprilQuilt]

32 minutes ago, Giraffe said:

Jill's testifying after years of therapy. I was sexually abused as a child and - after several years of therapy* - would have gladly taken the witness stand. I doubt Jill's being coerced into testifying and hope she's doing it willingly. Just my take on it and I could be wrong but I hope for her she's testifying from a position of strength and a way of taking back the power that was brutally taken from her as a child. 

 

*For anyone wondering how this would "work," my experience after therapy is that I no longer see myself as defined by the abuse. It's something that happened to me but it no longer defines me as it did when I first entered therapy (and before). 

I'm so sorry for what you experienced and thank you for sharing with us. I'm glad you've reached a point where you know that this doesn't define you.

Re Jill, I wonder if her taking the stand is also a means of preserving her sisters. She's the one who's done the most work on herself in this regard (as far as we know): she has already put distance between herself and her family; her sense of self is not defined by them and nor is she reliant on them for money. The other daughters may feel less able to speak even if they believe what Josh did is wrong. Their relationships are too entangled, or they're too dependent financially, or they are too conflict-averse, or they are not ready to accept what happened.

If Jill is the one testifying, it means that the others can still keep their heads down if they choose. It also means that they will likely get a 'good' witness - ie one who is not afraid, knows what is expected of her, is confident in her support network - and therefore potentially a better outcome. I simply cannot imagine that Joy is in a place to stand up in court to talk about being digitally penetrated by her brother when she was five; Jessa is JB's golden girl right now; Jinger is too anxious and image-focussed.

Jill has been the 'snitch' since day 1, when what that really means is that she's always had a strong sense of justice and isn't afraid to speak up when she feels that's been violated. I'm so glad that the 11-year-old Jill, who raised the alarm about her and her sisters' assault and was then dismissed and bullied to the point that she went on TV to minimise it, is now in a position where she can once again safely speak up.

[Idlewild]

@EyesOpen I agree 100%. JB is all about him, his beliefs, his standing and his money. He does not care about the welfare of his children, any of them. He cares about people seeing him as important and money. If he cared about his children, they’d have had decent educations, therapy, privacy. They got none of that- they were put to work to further his cause, but he didn’t even pay them. He was livid when 19KAC was cancelled and only reluctantly accepted Counting On- but wanted to worm his way back in. Now he’s whining about cancel culture again, like he has a right to a TV show. He is a disgrace.

 

[nokidsmom]

8 hours ago, AussieKrissy said:

I never saw Anna this polished. I still thought she was pretty dam frumpy in dc 

I think she "dressed up" a bit more according to her own modesty standards, but she was by no means a sharp dresser.

Actually watching her toddle into the courthouse on those heels, I thought "ow, that's gotta hurt".

[SassyPants]

16 minutes ago, EyesOpen said:

I think his energy is 100% preserving his perceived reputation and the family’s reputation… their ‘status’ or whatever… I think he’d behave this way over anything that would tarnish their name or income opportunities… I don’t think he cares at all About what happened to his daughters or their feelings… only how it affects him and the public’s perspective. 

Agreed. I this applies to Josh as well. If Josh’s last name was anything but Duggar, JB would have likely thrown Josh under the bus as well. I think JB’s behavior are much more about protecting the Duggar name and potential future earnings vs protecting any golden child.

I think the Seewalds and Vuolos are far more financially dependent on JB vs Joy and Austin. The Seewalds, for the obvious reasons, young dad from a family who likely can not help much, plus lots of kids. The Vuolos because of a more pricey life style. Austin’s family clearly has resources and greater employment opportunities for Joy and Austin, plus the F’s seem to live a fairly simple life.