(CW: Possible CSA) Josh & Anna 38: Can't Believe I'm Typing This, but YAY Bobye Holt

[Queen Of Hearts]

56 minutes ago, OldFadedStar said:

So I have a thought. 
I’ve seen people say that being happy Austin is there is leghumping. Same with Derrick. 
But they are the *only*family there. The party line is obviously to not show up to the trial. Why? I’m not sure but i suspect after JBs testimony that the party line is this is all cancel culture, satan attacking pest and the family, etc. There’s what, 6 adult couples in NWA and only 2 members  are there? And none of them are blood duggars? 
 

Austin showing up is essentially saying idc what the party line is, I’m going to hear this for myself. It’s quite interesting 

 

(Austin is still who he is)

Austin may be reading all the same news reports that we are and learned the extent of Joy's abuse at the same time we did.  Heck, Joy may not have even been aware (or at least remembered) since she was so young when it happened.  At this point Austin may be seeing JB and Josh for what they really are and is attending to see Josh get what he deserves.  

[Sister Mozz]

Just saw the video of the team leaving the courthouse yesterday. Anna is walking so much farther away from him, and this time she seems a step ahead instead of a step behind. She can't wait to be out of there. I also noticed their hand position, with hers underneath/supporting/leading the way out. Her mannerism  is almost like pulling a child behind her as they go behind the pillar.

 

[Heidijoey]

I think Austin is there to represent Joy. Maybe going to the trial would be too difficult for her but she wants a first hand account of what is going on. I think it is far fetched (Atleast in my mind) that either Austin or Derick would be there to show support for Josh. They are there to support their wives.

[Dominionatrix]

4 hours ago, Smee said:

Do they have a description of the images? I want to read the stuff like the opening statements and transcripts of the car lot interviews but I don’t want more detail about what was done to those children.

One of the articles had a paragraph that seemed to briefly summarize, but I skipped over reading it because I also don’t want details. 

[nokidsmom]

14 minutes ago, Heidijoey said:

.... I think it is far fetched (Atleast in my mind) that either Austin or Derick would be there to show support for Josh. They are there to support their wives.

I agree that both are there to support their wives.  It's also an opportunity to see things for themselves without any family filtering.  In no way do I think Derick in particular was there for Josh, and just because he was polite to both Josh and Anna in court, that's just showing basic courtesy in a public setting, putting any private issues / conflicts aside. He's also being professional which as a future lawyer he should be.  One poster mentioned he may have been staking his place for if / when Jill has to come in and testify.   This is more about Jill / Joy than Josh.

Same for any possible family "edict" to not attend: Derick and Austin are putting their own wives / families first.  But I am not blaming Jeremy and Ben for not attending (thus far).  Possible their wives prefer that they not be there and that is also putting their own wives first. 

[SassyPants]

7 hours ago, neuroticcat said:

Am I wrong to think that all the defense has to do is prove reasonable doubt? As in, someone else could have done it, so if Josh denies it and it isn’t provable, the jury has reasonable doubt because he hasn’t been proven guilty?

I mean, my legal understanding is solely based on TV and novels, though, so could be way off base. But if that is the case, and Josh decided not to take a plea, the defense just has to throw everything that could explain it otherwise at this. I mean, they don’t have much to work with.

I also wonder if Josh’s chronic lying and Jim Bob’s arrogance could work together to make both of them blind to the nothingness of this defense. If the Duggar echo chamber/cult like way is so ingrained that Jim Bob cannot conceive of a reality other than his own and - whether Josh was honest or said, “No, it really wasn’t me,”-  there are still so many layers of codependency and guilt and lying  and abuse all around that maybe they do think it wasn’t him.

Anyway, I also think that if Anna still truly believes the Gothard way it doesn’t matter if she thinks Josh did anything or not. Isn’t that part of the umbrellas of authority teaching? Like, wife, your job is to submit to your husband. If he is in sin, he is responsible to God. You are only responsible for submitting. I think that’s some of the same garbage Debi Pearl taught in her help,etc stuff. Assuming she still holds to that, she may be thinking that keeping quiet and submitting is how she does the right thing and “trusts God.” 

 

Sure, but the key is reasonable. It does not instruct a juror to forego common sense. In the Arbery jury the prosecutor hammered that point in her closing argument. As an example, it is not unreasonable to believe that someone might have bootlegged the car lot Wi-Fi, but it is NOT reasonable to then say that said bootlegger downloaded whatever h/she accessed to Josh’s computer. 

[twoandthrough]

The Redditor who sat behind Derick and Anna yesterday and reported in detail about how the day went has deleted his/her account (or had it removed). Wonder if the Duggar legal team is following and got them removed. 

[SassyPants]

6 hours ago, Idlewild said:

I do find it odd that Derick acted friendly towards Josh and Anna- he doesn’t have to shout ‘Fuck you’ across the court, but he could sit on his hands and look straight ahead. However Derick thinks he’s smarter than all the Duggars rolled into one, so maybe he thinks he’s playing some elaborate mind games.

Running the ‘too thick to download CSA’ defence is all well and good to cast reasonable doubt but in my view it would depend on preventing Josh giving evidence. If he takes the stand he is likely to be exposed, like JB was, for what he is.

From what we’ve seen intellectually speaking, DD is smarter than all of the Duggars , likely rolled into one. Now if he’d just get and keep a job-

[daisyjane1234]

As someone (victim) who has been involved in a three month trial and was grilled on the stand for an entire week, I am not totally surprised by Derrick's behaviour.  In the courtroom there is this weird sense of professional collegiality even when you want to kill the person in front of you. Especially in front of a jury who is carefully watching every move.  You are counselled not to display emotion in certain situations, and to be emotional in other situations. I could cry on the stand, but not in the audience.  I could not appear angry.  I had one (opposing) lawyer shake my hand and tell me "this isn't personal" and then attack me on the stand. For days.  Fortunately the judge believed me. 

[HerNameIsBuffy]

11 hours ago, indianabones said:

The Redditor who is at the trial wrote that only the jurors viewed the CSAM- they each had an individual screen. Even if Anna had stayed (it sounds like she was escorted out by a lawyer well before the videos were shown, rather than "fleeing" the courtroom as some sources reported) she wouldn't have seen it.

The defense is arguing that since Josh's router wasn't password protected someone at the neighboring McDonalds could have downloaded the CSAM. Which makes no sense, of course.

I went over there and caught up on their posts, it's awesome they're reporting back.  Raising a glass to the mods on r/DuggarSnark for doing such a great job keeping up with the traffic, moving posts because people can't sort by new, dealing with newbie questions.  I've only posted over there a few times over the last year or so, but I lurk when there is something newsworthy and they do a great job, IMO.  

[Alisamer]

I think Derrick probably did the right thing. Josh initiated conversation, Josh was calm and polite to him, didn't make a scene. If he's going to be a lawyer, causing a scene in court on a nationally-followed trial is not a good start, IMO. And I have no problem at all with him being nice to Anna. She's not the one on trial, here. He may be deliberately being kind to her to counter anything Jim Bob and Michelle have told her about him. Like "See, look, I'm not an evil hateful person. I'm not toeing the party line but I'm still doing fine. You can too!"

9 hours ago, Ms. Brightside said:

You’re right… I just googled it, and the closest McDonalds is 5.8 miles away from Wholesale Motorcars. What an outrageous idea to even try to introduce that as a possibility!
 

I hope the prosecution calls them out on it. If I was on the jury and learned that, I’d be a little more skeptical about all of the arguments from the defense  

Wow. If wi-fi routers worked well enough to download that amount of images and video from nearly 6 miles away, the cable companies would have them installed on poles in neighborhoods instead of having to run wires to every house. (Ignoring the fact that downloading the images on that wifi still wouldn't put those images on the car lot computer, on the secret partition, password protected with Josh's birth date which is the same password as his bank account...)

9 hours ago, hoipolloi said:

Maybe the defense attorneys are hoping that the judge -- like that asshat Schroeder in the Rittenhouse case -- or the jury are ignorant when it comes to IT and will believe anything someone tells them about the intertubez. So, they're just throwing nonsense out, hoping some of it will stick. Somehow, I don't see this working too well.

My fear is that there might be somebody who is both Christian-identifying and willfully ignorant on the jury who will buy this utter nonsense. It only takes one stupid person to lock up the whole deliberation.

8 hours ago, neuroticcat said:

Am I wrong to think that all the defense has to do is prove reasonable doubt? As in, someone else could have done it, so if Josh denies it and it isn’t provable, the jury has reasonable doubt because he hasn’t been proven guilty?

Yes, but it has to be REASONABLE doubt. Hopefully the jury understands this. Not "any doubt", but "reasonable doubt". 

It's totally possible aliens from the future beamed into the car lot after using a time machine to pause everything, and put those images and videos on the computer without Joshley's knowledge while he was sitting right there. That's doubt. But it's not reasonable doubt.

7 hours ago, The Mother Dust said:

I just don't see how the defense can get around the fact that the password to the partitioned side, was apparently the same password to his bank account??  How on earth do they explain some random "other guy" having that info?

Not only his same password as his bank account, it was apparently also his birth date. Like, would any other random person (or even a co-worker) have that password info? Would any other random person USE that password info? 

Although I will say that is the thing that makes me think Josh might actually be unintelligent. Surely Anna knew that password. If she'd discovered the partition and it asked for a password, surely she'd try that one. 

If I was the defense THAT's the angle I'd be working. "Josh was set up by a co-worker! They deliberately used his birthdate as the password to make it look like it was him!" But no. Some rando at McDonalds nearly 6 miles away magically partitioned the drive, just happened to use Josh's birth date to password protect it, and download the images onto it. For what purpose? Who knows!

(I once managed to guess the password to a locked computer at one of my jobs in only two tries. I knew who had set it up, I knew what kind of password they used, I knew it wasn't meant to be super secure - so I took a guess, and my second one was correct. Anna's brainwashed but not too stupid to try the passwords she knows Josh uses, I'd bet.)

[HerNameIsBuffy]

28 minutes ago, twoandthrough said:

The Redditor who sat behind Derick and Anna yesterday and reported in detail about how the day went has deleted his/her account (or had it removed). Wonder if the Duggar legal team is following and got them removed. 

What?  I know they removed their first post and resposted after removing juror info, but are you saying the entire account is gone?  Heading to reddit...

Edited to add yeah, it's true.  What the hell happened?

Edited December 2, 2021 by HerNameIsBuffy

[Cartman]

I do not think the defence's argument is that the McDonalds internet leacher was inside the McDonalds while getting a signal from Pest's internet.  More like there is a "weirdo" in the area who is leaching off free Wifi wherever he can get it, whether is it by sitting in a McDonalds for hours, or hanging out in front of the car lot to get free Wifi.

Edited December 2, 2021 by Cartman

[Imaginary_Wonderland]

1 minute ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

What?  I know they removed their first post and resposted after removing juror info, but are you saying the entire account is gone?  Heading to reddit...

Yes, it seems all posts and previous comments are gone, as well as their profile being deleted completely too. Not sure what happened though. Mods there say they didn't ban or deleted them. So either the poster themselves did it, or maybe they were hacked?

[libgirl2]

6 minutes ago, Alisamer said:

I think Derrick probably did the right thing. Josh initiated conversation, Josh was calm and polite to him, didn't make a scene. If he's going to be a lawyer, causing a scene in court on a nationally-followed trial is not a good start, IMO. And I have no problem at all with him being nice to Anna. She's not the one on trial, here. He may be deliberately being kind to her to counter anything Jim Bob and Michelle have told her about him. Like "See, look, I'm not an evil hateful person. I'm not toeing the party line but I'm still doing fine. You can too!"

 

 

That sounds plausible. Why cause a scene? And its good to show Anna that he isn't evil. 

[SPHASH]

13 hours ago, Bluebirdbluebell said:

Many people have brown eyes and aren't filled with shit.

 

It's an expression.

 

[punkiepie]

Anna walking in with Josh this morning, thoughts: how much money did they drop at Talbots to outfit in her in all these wife-of-CSAM/molester-appropriate dresses?

And how much time does she spend on her hair every morning? Because those are fresh curls, not day from before curls.  Did they hire someone to make sure she looks the part every damn day? 

[Anne Of Gray Gables]

4 minutes ago, libgirl2 said:

That sounds plausible. Why cause a scene? And its good to show Anna that he isn't evil. 

I'm no fan of Derick but he's an attorney (I think?) in a courtroom and I can't imagine he'd behave in any way but professionally, regardless of how he feels about either Josh or Anna. I also can't imagine Jill being called to testify by the defense. I don't even see how that would be possible.  Josh sexually assaulted her and her sisters.

[AprilQuilt]

this defence line of "it's a MYSTERY, a trail of blood leading to... NOT JOSH DUGGAR!!1!" really sounds like they're ripping off a Netflix true crime special. Or indeed would like to become one. JB must be salivating. Fingers crossed no execs decide that Josh has the Steven Avery/Michael Peterson quality, although I'd love to see a proper Duggar documentary series made, many years down the line.

Derick is right not to make a scene with Josh. Even if he weren't an erstwhile lawyer, a scene like that wouldn't do Jill or the other victims any favours, and extending grace to Anna is just basic good manners AND Christianity 101. Let the attention stay on the trial, where it should be.

[twoandthrough]

22 minutes ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

I went over there and caught up on their posts, it's awesome they're reporting back.  Raising a glass to the mods on r/DuggarSnark for doing such a great job keeping up with the traffic, moving posts because people can't sort by new, dealing with newbie questions.  I've only posted over there a few times over the last year or so, but I lurk when there is something newsworthy and they do a great job, IMO.  

Same! I've never posted or commented in there, but I do lurk when big things happen. I mostly lurk here, too 😛 

[Sister Mozz]

10 minutes ago, punkiepie said:

Anna walking in with Josh this morning, thoughts: how much money did they drop at Talbots to outfit in her in all these wife-of-CSAM/molester-appropriate dresses?

And how much time does she spend on her hair every morning? Because those are fresh curls, not day from before curls.  Did they hire someone to make sure she looks the part every damn day? 

I think that's the same dress from a few days ago. I recognize the zippers. 

[libgirl2]

1 minute ago, Sister Mozz said:

I think that's the same dress from a few days ago. I recognize the zippers. 

Yes it is and yesterday she wore a repeat dress.... Anna needs some more new clothes for court! 

[HerNameIsBuffy]

16 minutes ago, Imaginary_Wonderland said:

Yes, it seems all posts and previous comments are gone, as well as their profile being deleted completely too. Not sure what happened though. Mods there say they didn't ban or deleted them. So either the poster themselves did it, or maybe they were hacked?

Yep, their mods didn't do it and trust me,  from personal experience I know Reddit Admin don't move that fast even when there is open and obvious doxing, and I did read their post last night and nothing in there violated TOU.

There's speculation in this thread...but no one seems to know.    (Holy shit why did that link post so huge?)

 

 

3 minutes ago, Sister Mozz said:

I think that's the same dress from a few days ago. I recognize the zippers. 

Yeah and the one she wore yesterday she'd worn before.  

As a trivial aside can I say I'm pissed Anna and I have practically the same hairstyle now?  She needs to change it because I don't want to.

2 minutes ago, libgirl2 said:

Yes it is and yesterday she wore a repeat dress.... Anna needs some more new clothes for court! 

I'd rather see her money used to get therapy for the kids or counselling for herself to figure a way out, but sadly that will never happen.  

6 minutes ago, Sister Mozz said:

And how much time does she spend on her hair every morning? Because those are fresh curls, not day from before curls.  Did they hire someone to make sure she looks the part every damn day? 

I have that hair LOL - I didn't curl it today, but when I do it's a couple minutes in hot rollers and another 5 min with a curling iron.   When you have straight, fine hair there is no such thing as from day before curls  

[snickerz]

Interesting - Justin, Claire & Hilary are in court today. Derrick and Austin are there again,

Edited December 2, 2021 by snickerz

[GiggleOfGirls]

11 hours ago, EvilAthiest said:

I truly don’t understand how Anna can not believe it’s possible that Josh did this.  Not after everything she already knows about him.

She knows he repeatedly molested his younger sisters.  She knows he went on Ashley Madison to find random people to have sex with and cheat on her with.  She knows he admitted to a porn addiction.  She even had to monitor his computer usage with Covenant Eyes.  Somewhere in the back of her brainwashed mind, she has got to know it’s a possibility that he did this too.  

She may not want to admit it, even to herself.  She may think God is testing her and requires her to stand by him.  She may be frightened about what will become of her and her children if she ever spoke a word of doubt, and the Duggar’s found out.  But somewhere inside of her, I believe she has to have at least an inkling that this could all be true.  

It would be difficult for anyone to realize they are married to a disgusting piece of 💩 who gets off on children being violated.  It would be hard for almost anybody to accept that.  Even more so for someone who’s entire life has been spent in a cult, and who’s entire identity is being his wife and broodmare.  But I think she has got to realize, after everything she already knows about her husband, that it is possible that Josh did this - even if she will never admit it to anybody.

She’s been brainwashed, but not lobotomized.

I hope you’re right. 
 

However, she very well might still buy the “he was tempted by the sisters” nonsense and has (no doubt) been blamed by others for the Ashley Madison stuff (since it’s the wife’s fault in their cult when the husband commits sexual sin) which might make it very difficult for her to objectively examine that piece of Josh’s behavior. 
 

I hope to Rufus that she does understand, that she’s starting to understand, or that she will understand SOON; but I can also see how she might be able to remain in denial a while longer given how victim-blame-y their cult is and how much Anna has been steeped in those beliefs.

 

One thing I still don’t understand about their cult beliefs in general is how anyone can think that a man who is tempted by a small child’s “immodesty” should be in charge over anyone else ever. If their ability to control themself is that nonexistent then how can they possibly be considered leaders or headships over other people? And if a man is so dependent on his wife to keep him from sinning sexually… it just doesn’t scream “leadership qualities” to me.