(CW: CSA) Josh & Anna 43: Defense Rested After an Expert Witness with No Expertise

[3KidsAndStopped]

The rebuttal is going to shred this IMO

[imokit]

1 minute ago, Chewing Gum said:

Finally I have an advantage with the time difference between here and the USA, I get to go to sleep and wake up to (hopefully) a verdict.

I had the best advantage, went to hospital for day case op.  Got home in time to watch for updates while recuperating - England.

[seraaa]

How does the jury deliberation work? Are they given any instruction before they go to deliberate?

[sansan]

3 hours ago, MedicineWoman said:

Jury instructions are next and then they'll deliberate. I saw some discussion yesterday from people who had served on a jury before that they waited to announce their decision until after they got their free lunch. I don't think it will take them long but I wouldn't be surprised if it was after lunch. It would give me so much satisfaction if they only deliberated a few minutes though

I was on a murder trial and the trial lasted five and a half days. We never talked about lunch other than we were getting hungry. We were in downtown Houston so our dining options were top notch. When we went into deliberations, if I remember correctly, it took us about three hours. I think if everyone voted immediately to convict him I would suggest hanging out for a while. Nothing would be worse than throwing out a verdict because you didn’t take the time to really consider all the facts. I would be pissed to have it thrown out after having to go through the disgusting evidence and boring technical stuff, but that’s just me.

[Antipatriarch]

1 minute ago, 3KidsAndStopped said:

Gelfand said the prosecution "dug up" allegations about Josh Duggar that were 20 years old when he was going through puberty, noting that Duggar went to his ex-girlfriend's mother to confess.

"That's not why we are here," he said

Tricky to thread that needle. It may be important to put bounds around the case, but every time you mention stuff like that, it reminds the jury what kind of person he is.

[Xan]

The late Mr. Xan was, alas, a Republican.  He's been dead for a few years now so this was before politics had become so toxic.  We watched the Bush/Gore debate together and started talking about it after it was over.  It was a that moment that I realized he had heard something entirely different than I had heard.  He cackled about how Bush was striding around on stage like a rooster and how he owned the space.  I had heard Gore speaking intelligently and I had heard Bush dodging hard questions.

I thought about this just now with the trial.  I think it's possible that Jim Bob and Josh are hearing something entirely different from what others in the courtroom are hearing.  Hearing can be very selective.  Maybe they're pleased with the job the lawyers did and think they're headed for an acquittal.

[3KidsAndStopped]

Wow the prosecution WENT IN

Final closing

Dustin Roberts with the prosecution then did a final closing.

He told the jurors Gelfand was making them believe a fantasy and that he treated the truth like he was throwing it at the wall to see what sticks.

"This case is not complicated," he added, saying the car lot had signs that people were being recorded and didn't seem like a place where a high-end cyber attack would occur.

"Why would a hacker install Linux?" he asked, saying it benefited one person.

He then said "there he is" and pointed at Josh Duggar.

 

password

Roberts then reminded the jurors of the Intel1988 password.

"Everyone has a password," he said, that they use as their signature password. He said Duggar used it for other accounts like his bank and electric accounts.

"How does that make sense?" he asked, asking why a hacker would download Linux to only benefit themselves using that signature password.

[EmmieJ]

9 minutes ago, 3KidsAndStopped said:

I am afraid I must preface this one with a "For Fs Sake". Sorry.

'Starstruck'

Gelfand suggested next that the prosecution was starstruck, and that when they realized the house from the search warrant wasn't Josh Duggar's, they sent someone "laser-focused" on finding him at the car lot.

He said the government didn't look at anyone else and had "excuses for everything."

Yes, because Federal agents are so easily star struck by a D-list former reality tv bit player like Josh Duggar.  A relatively small portion of the U.S. population is even aware of the Duggars and their TV show.  It's quite possible the agents involved had no idea who Josh Duggar was.  (Although, if they have an IP address, I guess a name would be associated with that IP address - would that be either JB or Josh?)  

8 minutes ago, imokit said:

The prosecution didn't get it, because they couldn't get a warrant to cover it.

So if the prosecution doesn't have the router, where is it and why couldn't Josh provide it to his defense team?  Just more bullshit from the defense, because they have nothing else.

[sndral]

34 minutes ago, sixcatatty said:

I hope it lost something from hearing to posting. Every doubt does not have to disappear; it's a reasonable doubt. In other words, you may continue to have doubts but are they reasonable? There's also a term called residual doubt which usually is argued in sentencing for less time.

Fellow lawyer peeps: I don't practice in the Eighth Circuit and can't get to Westlaw at the moment. Do their Pattern Instructions call for defining reasonable doubt?

3.11

“Reasonable doubt is based upon reason and common sense, and not doubt based on speculation. A reasonable doubt may arise from careful and impartial consideration of all of the evidence, or from a lack of evidence. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is proof of such a convincing character that a reasonable person, after careful consideration, would not hesitate to rely and act upon that proof in life’s most important decisions. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is proof that leaves you firmly convinced of the defendant’s guilt. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt does not mean proof beyond all possible doubt.”

page 78 in 8th Cir. Crim. Jury Instructions https://ecf.mowd.uscourts.gov/jmi/Criminal-Jury-Instructions-2020.pdf

[MedicineWoman]

13 minutes ago, Antipatriarch said:

You never know! There's a lot of "deconstruction" going on in Christian circles these days. It doesn't always end with deconversion; a lot of Christians are shedding the toxic parts of their faith and arriving at a place that's much more affirming for themselves and others. Maybe not "liberals" but I wouldn't be surprised by "progressive Christians" and that would be a big improvement too. They've already moved significantly from where they were.

Progressive christians tend to be liberals. I'm pretty deep in the deconversion spaces and about 7 years into my own deconversion. 

[yeahthatsme74]

Finally caught up. I'm desperately hoping he gets put away for a LONG time! Like many others here on FJ, this whole ordeal touches on personal territory. The suspense of waiting for a verdict is exhausting. 

[Freejin]

I have not refreshed my page this frequently in a long time!  

[neuroticcat]

21 minutes ago, 3KidsAndStopped said:

No connection

Gelfand said the thumb drive with two documents and one Powerpoint was plugged into the HP computer and files were downloaded, but that there was no connection to Josh Duggar.

He also noted the Dell_One username, and said no Dell has been connected to Duggar. "Josh is a Mac guy," he said.

Gelfand then brought up uTorrent, Tor, VLC, and command lines, telling the jurors Bush said the Snap Store had no uTorrent option.

The he is a Mac guy defense will never fail to be funny to me. I think his defense attorneys are more professional than this, but I can almost imagine Josh trying to coach them through what to say: but I am a MAC guy! That means I wouldn’t have used a PC! As though the snobbish stereotypes of MAC superiority is a defense against serious crimes.

 

it’s like opting for the toupee …like if I’m going down, I’m going to let the world see good hair…I’m going to let the world know I USE MAC I’m a good person, I promise? 😂😅

Edited December 8, 2021 by neuroticcat

[viii]

So if the jury does come back with a guilty verdict (PLEASE) when will sentencing take place? Where will Josh be in the meantime?

 

[Cheetah]

Oh snap!  "Roberts continued, saying you can't unsee child sexual abuse material and that it hits "your gut and heart."

He added that James Fottrell is the person teaching the sort of courses Michele Bush takes."

[3KidsAndStopped]

States Fottrell teaches the kind of course Bush takes 🤣

 

Heartfelt, but painful to read

Spoiler

Roberts continued, saying you can't unsee child sexual abuse material and that it hits "your gut and heart."

He added that James Fottrell is the person teaching the sort of courses Michele Bush takes.

He also refuted the defense's homeschooling comments about Duggar, noting that he was a "power user" of technology.

He told the jurors Gelfand wanted them to think Tor is normal, but that it allows someone to view CSAM or buy a child.

Roberts said the small partition size suggested it was for receiving and possessing the material, not storing it. 

 

Roberts added that Josh Duggar owned an HP and wasn't just a Mac guy.

He said Bush told them her purpose was to find remote hacking.

He added that it wasn't reasonable for a hacker to download a partition personal to Duggar on May 11 and that they wouldn't have known Covenant Eyes was on there.

As for the hat in the reflection of the computer on May 14, Roberts suggested the text from Duggar's phone about getting stuck at the car lot meant he was there when child sexual abuse material was downloaded.

"The bad stuff didn't happen when he wasn't there," he said.

Edited December 8, 2021 by 3KidsAndStopped

[neuroticcat]

19 minutes ago, 3KidsAndStopped said:

I am afraid I must preface this one with a "For Fs Sake". Sorry.

'Starstruck'

Gelfand suggested next that the prosecution was starstruck, and that when they realized the house from the search warrant wasn't Josh Duggar's, they sent someone "laser-focused" on finding him at the car lot.

He said the government didn't look at anyone else and had "excuses for everything."

I mean can the officers sue for slander? Like, you just said I’m  so star struck by a c list celebrity the people in our community don’t like that I failed to do the job entrusted to me.

[Freejin]

Does the jury need to have a majority or be unanimous?

[EyesOpen]

Unanimous or it is a hung jury

[3KidsAndStopped]

Recordings of Josh Duggar

A recording of Josh Duggar explaining peer-to-peer software was on the iPhone, laptop, and HP computer - the office computer - was played.

The recording of Duggar saying he didn't want to say if he was guilty or innocent was also played.

[OHFL2009]

11 minutes ago, sansan said:

I was on a murder trial and the trial lasted five and a half days. We never talked about lunch other than we were getting hungry. We were in downtown Houston so our dining options were top notch. When we went into deliberations, if I remember correctly, it took us about three hours. I think if everyone voted immediately to convict him I would suggest hanging out for a while. Nothing would be worse than throwing out a verdict because you didn’t take the time to really consider all the facts. I would be pissed to have it thrown out after having to go through the disgusting evidence and boring technical stuff, but that’s just me.

I was on a civil trial jury a few years ago, and when we went into deliberations, we started with a quick show of hands to see where people stood. Everyone agreed in favor of the the defendant, but we deliberated for about an hour to make sure we were all on the same page in regards to all the evidence, no one had missed something or misunderstood something, etc. Even though we pretty much all were convinced, we wanted to make sure we gave both parties a thorough effort. 

[Cheetah]

Just now, Freejin said:

Does the jury need to have a majority or be unanimous?

Needs to be unanimous for a criminal trial.  

[karenb4729]

1 minute ago, Freejin said:

Does the jury need to have a majority or be unanimous?

Unanimous

[neuroticcat]

18 minutes ago, 3KidsAndStopped said:

Smoking gun'

Gelfand said the only piece of evidence the government brought forth from May 13 was a single photo, that that was their "smoking gun."

He then turned to the evidence from May 15, when Josh said he was at the car lot and a customer said he would be there in 10 minutes.

10 minutes later, Gelfand noted, the child sexual abuse material was downloaded.

He added that the customer was expected to show up at any moment when that occurred

Because clearly Josh was telling his wife the truth about the customer. I mean, if he was going to download CSAM, he would’ve just said it, am I right? Sorry, honey, I’ll be late, because …

[Beermeet]

Geaux prosecution!