Josh Duggar trial day 2. This will be the updates thread, and probably not have much until after 5 pm CST. Here is a link. Significant update several posts down.

[Faith-manor]

I am following a reddit reporter who is using his own money to attend the trial and report. He is pretty nuts and bolts, takes good notes, and his facts from day 1 have been verified by other news reports from mainstream outlets as well as the release of court documents. He sits in the audio only room for the general public. The courtroom is not huge, and is pretty much reserved for journalists with press passes, family of the accused, etc. He goes by J is for jail. Don't read the comments. It doesn't bring anything to the table. And when he does his daily update, I will inner a link only, and try to do some sort of summary for those who don't want to read a blow by blow.

 

TRIGGER WARNING!!!!!!

 

 

 

 

In that sense, I am glad for his sake that he is only hearing it, and not in view of the evidence. Once the images and video, the law enforcement descriptions start being presented, this becomes a very traumatizing case for everyone. I can't imagine being on the jury. A local acquaintance who works for CPS says to expect breaks for the jurors because many will break down, some may feel like they are going to faint, and some may vomit. She is aware of the video, and though has never seen it, has herself thrown up from an investigative report on it, and she says she has seen seasoned LEO's with years of experience break down and cry over this particular video. I hope they only have to play enough to just verify to the jury that it is in fact CSAM, and then can stop it and go with a written only report which is bad enough!

I will try to keep the really bad stuff to a minimum. But I don't think it is possible to follow this trial and NOT read stuff that is going to be really upsettting.

ETA: midday break update below, link only, very brief description. I didn't want to have to leave a trigger warning for that post so please visit the link if you want more details.

Edited December 1, 2021 by Faith-manor

[PeppermintPattie]

Is it a sure thing that testimony of Josh molesting his sisters (and a babysitter??) will be allowed in? Will the prosecutor be obligated to include charges for those offenses?

I'm also wondering if Anna was in the courtroom yesterday. Did we hear about that? Has anyone reported on which family members are attending?

 

[Faith-manor]

15 minutes ago, PeppermintPattie said:

Is it a sure thing that testimony of Josh molesting his sisters (and a babysitter??) will be allowed in? Will the prosecutor be obligated to include charges for those offenses?

I'm also wondering if Anna was in the courtroom yesterday. Did we hear about that? Has anyone reported on which family members are attending?

 

Not at this time. We have not had an update on the judge's ruling. And whether or not it can be used hinges a lot on IF the defense wants to use witnesses to paint a picture of "good Christian character". That opens it up for the prosecutor to then bring anti-character witnesses. Many states do not allow past crimes or allegations of past crimes to be used against a defendent. But, federal law rule 414 does allow it if the defense there. I am not a lawyer and do not play one on t.v. However, I have been doing some digging, and it seems that likely the defense attempting to have Bobbye Holt's testimony deemed clergy privilege was an attempt to have damning character testimony barred from the trial so they could try to paint a " good boy who would never think of doing this bad thing" image of Josh. If the ruling goes against them, I would imagine they will not open the character debate. However, again, I have no experience with this. When my own father was on trial for something bad - he was hallucinating at the time due to brain Hypoxia and Michigan no longer allows a temporary insanity plea - his defense lawyer did bring character witnesses in to try to reduce the chances of a stiff sentence from the judge. Laughably, the D.A. tried like hell to find people who would testify that my otherwise law abiding, upstanding, small business owner in the community who was profoundly generous and helpful, was a terrible person. He couldn't find a single human to do it. So that was interesting to watch. I thought he would chew his own face off because the defense had so many character witnesses that the trial would have gone on for days if the judge didn't rein it in. And it did help, the judge said he was taking into account that the medical circumstances made it impossible for my dad to distinguish reality from fiction, that the character witnesses clearly painted the picture of a person who would never have done such a thing if his collapsed lung had been properly treated (medical malpractice and that suit is still pending six years later, sigh....), and that he would sentence him to the bare minimum allowed by law since there is no not-guilty by reason of temporary insanity plea in this state. He got five years probation and died 9 months later at home on hospice. The representative of our district then used his position, dad's military service and exemplary record, etc. etc. and got the conviction expunged. That was after he died, but it made my mom and brother feel better. For other reasons, I did not have a dog in that fight and did not care about expunging the record.

So that is really all I know about the whole character witness thing.

[maize]

28 minutes ago, PeppermintPattie said:

Is it a sure thing that testimony of Josh molesting his sisters (and a babysitter??) will be allowed in? Will the prosecutor be obligated to include charges for those offenses?

I'm also wondering if Anna was in the courtroom yesterday. Did we hear about that? Has anyone reported on which family members are attending?

 

Charges for Josh's juvenile offenses will not be brought at this trial. These are federal prosecutors pressing charges related to inter-state matters that fall under federal jurisdiction(downloading CSA materials).

If evidence related to past offenses is presented it will be to address questions of character and patterns of behavior.

[Faith-manor]

Just now, maize said:

Charges for Josh's juvenile offenses will not be brought at this trial. These are federal prosecutors pressing charges related to inter-state matters that fall under federal jurisdiction(downloading CSA materials).

If evidence related to past offenses is presented it will be to address questions of character and patterns of behavior.

And charges cannot be brought, those would be state charges not federal, because at the time of the offenders the statute of limitations was short and had expired by the time it all came out. There is no way to get him on criminal charges.

But, the state can go after him when the feds are done on the CSA materials. And the girls can go after him in civil court for damages because he confessed and so did his parents. Civil court only requires a preponderance of evidence not beyond reasonable doubt so they are easier cases to prove. I would imagine they won't go after Josh for money because of Anna and the kids. I however think in the long run they should go after Josh, JB, and IBLP and bankrupt them. Anna having to go to school and get a job, placing the kids in school is actually in those children's best interests. JB being bankrupt and no longer having any platform on which to preach his rubbish is good. The younger siblings not having a gob of money to live off as young adults and instead having to go for post homeschool education and training to get jobs that are not ont he family dole is good. Forcing these sibs to see something beyond the Duggar compound and daddy control, and IBLP control is good. And I think the case against IBLP would be pretty good. Some of us have copies of their counseling materials in which they blame victims for the abuse, make them thank god for the abuse because it "draws them closer to god", and forces them to thank their abusers for the abuse. No.joke. and this was all done to them as minors. I am pretty sure the average jury sitting on that case is going to go 😯😯😯😠😠😠😠😠. Oh Billy Boy Gothard is worth tens of millions. 

I feat they will not have the courage to do it. But, I sure dream of the day when IBLP is extinct!

[City Mouse]

29 minutes ago, PeppermintPattie said:

Is it a sure thing that testimony of Josh molesting his sisters (and a babysitter??) will be allowed in? Will the prosecutor be obligated to include charges for those offenses?

I'm also wondering if Anna was in the courtroom yesterday. Did we hear about that? Has anyone reported on which family members are attending?

 

From other reports I have watched, it sounds like what he did to his sisters will be allowed in to show pattern of behavior. If I remember correctly, the stuff about what he did as an adult (adult website stuff) was not allowed because those things are not illegal.

What he did to his sisters would be a state offense not federal, so the federal prosecutors can’t charge for it. I don’t know what the statute of limitations is in Arkansas, but I would guess that it has run out and that he can’t be prosecuted for those instances.

[Carrie12345]

26 minutes ago, City Mouse said:

rom other reports I have watched, it sounds like what he did to his sisters will be allowed in to show pattern of behavior. If I remember correctly, the stuff about what he did as an adult (adult website stuff) was not allowed because those things are not illegal.

That would be a pity. If character is allowed to be called into question, I’d think that a history of marriage betrayal when one professes to be all family-oriented pure and good might mean something.

[Annie G]

I hope the defense tries to paint Josh as a good Christian husband and father, just so Jill gets a chance to testify.  I hate for her to have to do it, but she might be looking forward to the chance. Yesterday she had her hair colored and it looks beautiful. With Jim Bob not on the witness list, he might sit in the courtroom and listen to testimony and I would love for him to have to squirm through Jill’s testimony.   Josh isn’t on trial for what he did to his sisters and never will be, so this might be the only chance for Jill to really have her say. 

[Katy]

1 hour ago, Carrie12345 said:

That would be a pity. If character is allowed to be called into question, I’d think that a history of marriage betrayal when one professes to be all family-oriented pure and good might mean something.

Cheating isn’t illegal.  Raping a 6 year old is. If the woman who had the worst accusations against him had pressed charges I’d think that would apply, because she accused him of rape and thought he was going to choke her to death. Since the nature of these materials wasn’t only CSAM, but hurting small children. But she didn’t go to police, she just filed a civil suit. And then accepted a settlement.  So that’s out. 

I wish Arkansas would repeal statute of limitations laws for children and then both Josh & his dad would go to jail. 

In the mean time the judge said during the evidence hearing that he’d looked up federal cases and several had been overturned for excluding past history of criminal sexual behaviors, so unless the defense has something extraordinary the judge already indicated it would be allowed.  And since Bobye’s testimony was not only that it had been going on for years but the parents didn’t want to know that it was ongoing, there’s no way his history of child abuse won’t be included.  

All those kids need abuse evaluations.  All of them. 

[gardenmom5]

10 minutes ago, Katy said:

Cheating isn’t illegal.  Raping a 6 year old is. If the woman who had the worst accusations against him had pressed charges I’d think that would apply, because she accused him of rape and thought he was going to choke her to death. Since the nature of these materials wasn’t only CSAM, but hurting small children. But she didn’t go to police, she just filed a civil suit. And then accepted a settlement.  So that’s out. 

I wish Arkansas would repeal statute of limitations laws for children and then both Josh & his dad would go to jail. 

In the mean time the judge said during the evidence hearing that he’d looked up federal cases and several had been overturned for excluding past history of criminal sexual behaviors, so unless the defense has something extraordinary the judge already indicated it would be allowed.  And since Bobye’s testimony was not only that it had been going on for years but the parents didn’t want to know that it was ongoing, there’s no way his history of child abuse won’t be included.  

All those kids need abuse evaluations.  All of them. 

this has me confused.  Cases are overturned after a conviction - why would excluding past history during a trial lead to something being overturned?  or did you mean including past history?

Younger siblings need to be checked too - as well as his own kids.  or any kids to which he had access.

[AbcdeDooDah]

Judge is allowing the testimony of past molestation

[lauraw4321]

13 minutes ago, AbcdeDooDah said:

Judge is allowing the testimony of past molestation

I hope Jill testifies and destroys him. I hope it's healing for her. 

[gardenmom5]

1 minute ago, lauraw4321 said:

I hope Jill testifies and destroys him. I hope it's healing for her. 

I hope JB and M are never taken seriously again.  Especially JB.  

[lauraw4321]

1 minute ago, gardenmom5 said:

I hope JB and M are never taken seriously again.  Especially JB.  

My real hope is that by some miracle Anna wakes up and realizes she's married to a pedophile, files for divorce, gets a restraining order, moves across the country and does whatever the hell she wants to do with her life and gets lots and lots of therapy for her and for her kids. 

One can only hope.

[Faith-manor]

Update: The judge is allowing the testimony of Bobbye Holt about the molestations. The Defense protested and was put down. The legalese is kind of fun because it feels like if you could have access to Judge Brooks actual thoughts, they would NOT be kind towards the motion, and that makes me feel like there was a small victory today for hearing the truth from victims and those who know what happened. Here is a link to the recap of the decision.

https://www.reddit.com/r/DuggarsSnark/comments/r6iofo/breaking_judge_grants_motion_to_allow_testimony/

 

[Catwoman]

So far, this has not been a good day for Josh Duggar and his defense team.

YAY!!!

[Katy]

26 minutes ago, gardenmom5 said:

this has me confused.  Cases are overturned after a conviction - why would excluding past history during a trial lead to something being overturned?  or did you mean including past history?

Younger siblings need to be checked too - as well as his own kids.  or any kids to which he had access.

I mean what I said. I don’t understand it either, but that’s what a few different lawyers that have commented on the case have said. My guess is the appeals exist to determine precedent even if a person is found not guilty. So the person was found not guilty but prosecutors appealed to make sure in future cases the criminals would be locked away longer.  

We’re not talking about about a situation within the bounds of normal here. He’s been interested in pre-pubescent children since the age of 12. 

[Faith-manor]

5 minutes ago, Catwoman said:

So far, this has not been a good day for Josh Duggar and his defense team.

YAY!!!

Some light in the darkness to be sure. Hugs to Jill, Jinger, Jessa, and Joy, the not named 5th victim, and anyone else he probably abused but was never brought to light. And hugs to Anna. I think she is a daft, attention seeking, lousy and probably-should -not-have-custody-of-her-kids mother, but she is also a victim of these p.o.s. people and her stupid parents who KNEW what he had done because not only were they told, but it had become common knowledge in the church, married her off to him young anyway. There is a steaming pile of people who need be taken down. And hugs to Josiah and Jedidiah, because the pond scum has actually tried to throw his brothers under the bus for it. 😠

I volunteer for the cleanup crew to go to Alcatraz Island, and get it ready for Josh and JB. I would do that. 

In good news, RAINN has some sponsors matching all donations today, might even be during the entire trial. I was going to donate, but a local retired judge here is trying to expand the DV and children's shelter for our county. He says they need a men's/dad's wing because we have men who have had to flee from abusive partners or relatives often with their children. I commend him for wanting to make a difference in every abuse victim's life, and we decided to make a stout donation to that cause. I hope a lot of folks in this nation think about what they could do, even if it is just taking a bag of apples to the shelter or donating a blanket, or whatever. Acts of caring and kidness. We can't motivate the powers that be to do anything if we the people are indifferent.

[Faith-manor]

In case you are interested in the language, which you might find refreshing, the judge referred to JB's testimony as, "Self-serving, contradictory, and lacking credibility." So there you have it. JB got spanked by the judge.

 

[Annie G]

‘Self serving, contradictory, and lacking in credibility’ - sounds like the judge has accurately pegged Jim Bob. 

[Faith-manor]

Also, there is a Sun article. I am not a fan of the Sun. I mean they can be 😲😜. But, the reporter in the courtroom is just doing a nuts and bolts recap without much commentary except to say that when a small portion of video and some images entered into evidence were shown, the jury looked uncomfortable. Ya. Probably an understatement. I am finding as I do the research that even the tabloid like paparazzi normally unreliable folks want a victory for the prosecution so badly, they are reining in the ratings gig, and trying not to rile anything up that the defense could use. Good on them.

As for the reddit report, J for Jail, he is doing a bang up job, and we probably won't get that summary until after court lets out. He is a law student, and he did get to the courthouse in time today to be seated in the trial room instead of the audio overflow. I have no idea if screens were turned so the audience could see the images. If they were, my hat is off to him for being willing to see that filth and summarize the case foe the rest of us who would not be able to stomach it!

[gardenmom5]

1 hour ago, lauraw4321 said:

My real hope is that by some miracle Anna wakes up and realizes she's married to a pedophile, files for divorce, gets a restraining order, moves across the country and does whatever the hell she wants to do with her life and gets lots and lots of therapy for her and for her kids. 

One can only hope.

I think all we can do is hope.  She is in deep.  My understanding is her brother tried to get her out several years ago, and she turned him down.  She has zero job skills, and seven (eight?) kids.

1 hour ago, Catwoman said:

So far, this has not been a good day for Josh Duggar and his defense team.

YAY!!!

hm . . c'est la vie . . . .

1 hour ago, Faith-manor said:

Some light in the darkness to be sure. Hugs to Jill, Jinger, Jessa, and Joy, the not named 5th victim, and anyone else he probably abused but was never brought to light. And hugs to Anna. I think she is a daft, attention seeking, lousy and probably-should -not-have-custody-of-her-kids mother, but she is also a victim of these p.o.s. people and her stupid parents who KNEW what he had done because not only were they told, but it had become common knowledge in the church, married her off to him young anyway. There is a steaming pile of people who need be taken down. And hugs to Josiah and Jedidiah, because the pond scum has actually tried to throw his brothers under the bus for it. 😠

I volunteer for the cleanup crew to go to Alcatraz Island, and get it ready for Josh and JB. I would do that. 

In good news, RAINN has some sponsors matching all donations today, might even be during the entire trial. I was going to donate, but a local retired judge here is trying to expand the DV and children's shelter for our county. He says they need a men's/dad's wing because we have men who have had to flee from abusive partners or relatives often with their children. I commend him for wanting to make a difference in every abuse victim's life, and we decided to make a stout donation to that cause. I hope a lot of folks in this nation think about what they could do, even if it is just taking a bag of apples to the shelter or donating a blanket, or whatever. Acts of caring and kidness. We can't motivate the powers that be to do anything if we the people are indifferent.

Anna's shortsighted parents who were likely blinded by JB flaunting his bank statement.

 

[Guest]

4 hours ago, lauraw4321 said:

My real hope is that by some miracle Anna wakes up and realizes she's married to a pedophile, files for divorce, gets a restraining order, moves across the country and does whatever the hell she wants to do with her life and gets lots and lots of therapy for her and for her kids. 

One can only hope.

And changes the baby’s name to Madelyn or something. 

[QueenCat]

2 hours ago, gardenmom5 said:

I think all we can do is hope.  She is in deep.  My understanding is her brother tried to get her out several years ago, and she turned him down.  She has zero job skills, and seven (eight?) kids.

hm . . c'est la vie . . . .

Anna's shortsighted parents who were likely blinded by JB flaunting his bank statement.

 

My hope is that her brother will try again, after the trial is over. With a conviction, maybe she'll start believing it. 

[Faith-manor]

So to cyber investigators for the prosecution testified today. It was technical, but also understandable testimony. The defense response was something along the lines of how do you know a human downloaded it. Hmmmm...the alien defense doesn't wash with me. 

Their rebuttal was, wait for it all you homeschool moms and find a piece of leather to chew while you read......................Josh was home schooled and only had a GED so he was in fact too dumb to partition the hard drive. Oh, and Josh was not a "Dell" man, but a "Mac" man.

Court would let out, and J has not posted the full recap. I will not post the most recent Sun article because the jerks went all ridiculous drama pot stirring about stuff they could not possibly know like why Austin didn't sit with Derrick or Anna.

Oh, it was confirmed that Anna left the room when some of the CSA images were produced.

[prairiewindmomma]

I was just coming to post about Anna leaving when the CSA images were produced. I think they were shown to the jury only, but I still think that is a poor call. The only excuse I would find tolerable would be if she was leaving to go pump.....

I wonder how much of this is new information for her, and how much of it she had heard before. 

[Faith-manor]

8 minutes ago, prairiewindmomma said:

I was just coming to post about Anna leaving when the CSA images were produced. I think they were shown to the jury only, but I still think that is a poor call. The only excuse I would find tolerable would be if she was leaving to go pump.....

I wonder how much of this is new information for her, and how much of it she had heard before. 

I have no idea. I mean she does have a six week old so it would seem reasonable for her to step out now and again. It could be IBLP crap too. JB or Josh may have told her she couldn't stay, and she did the dutiful joyfully submissive thing and left. Could be his lawyers didn't want her there in case she broke down and started sobbing or yelling or whatever. I am sure she is being coached by them, at least if they are doing their jobs correctly.

[Annie G]

1 hour ago, prairiewindmomma said:

I was just coming to post about Anna leaving when the CSA images were produced. I think they were shown to the jury only, but I still think that is a poor call. The only excuse I would find tolerable would be if she was leaving to go pump.....

I wonder how much of this is new information for her, and how much of it she had heard before. 

She also may truly not believe Josh did it, or that Satan is responsible. If so, she might think it’s sinful to see the images.   Or the defense might be afraid she’ll freak out and hurt the case. I’m not defending her, just thinking of reasons she might leave.  
 

I do wonder why Derick was sitting beside her. Surely he feels bad for her, but if she is standing by her man, why is Derick beside her instead of, say, sitting with Austin?

[HS Mom in NC]

So if they show that JB and M knew their son was a sexually abusing the children, no therapy was given,  and they chose to let him stay in their house, would that be enough for CPS to remove the younger Dugger kids from JB and M's custody because they knowingly endangered children long term? Does that happen?

[prairiewindmomma]

I was wondering if Derick was beside her because:

1. families get preferred and reserved seating so he didn't have to fight for a seat in a crowded and limited area

2. so he could be in line of sight if Jill was called (not likely, since we were still in early days of testimony)

3. he feels sorry for her and doesn't dislike her as a person

4. so he could stare down J every time he looked to Anna for reassurance

Edited December 2, 2021 by prairiewindmomma

[prairiewindmomma]

2 minutes ago, HS Mom in NC said:

So if they show that JB and M knew their son was a sexually abusing the children, no therapy was given,  and they chose to let him stay in their house, would that be enough for CPS to remove the younger Dugger kids from JB and M's custody because they knowingly endangered children long term? Does that happen?

It happens in some states....allowing continued access of an abuser to children is a failure to protect and a failure to supervise. The state of Arkansas interviewed, should have come to the proper facts about the nature of the repeated pattern of abuse, but apparently did not proceed with removal based on the interviews in 2006.

 

[Guest]

I like reason #4 and hope that’s it. 

[Faith-manor]

1 hour ago, Annie G said:

She also may truly not believe Josh did it, or that Satan is responsible. If so, she might think it’s sinful to see the images.   Or the defense might be afraid she’ll freak out and hurt the case. I’m not defending her, just thinking of reasons she might leave.  
 

I do wonder why Derick was sitting beside her. Surely he feels bad for her, but if she is standing by her man, why is Derick beside her instead of, say, sitting with Austin?

Chairs are first come first serve and only five reserved for family and friends/support people. The Sun is making a big deal over nothing. They like to leave out details to create drama. The family section is for friends too. Five chairs. Anna is in one, Derrick in another the Sun did not report who else was there. Chances are Austin was in the back because he was lucky to get a seat at all. I would not make much of it. And despite how much Derrick appears to despise his father and brother in law, it doesn't mean he is burning all his bridges knowing there are seven little M's who didn't ask for this but will suffer the consequences of it. My guess? Just trying to be the nice guy.

[gardenmom5]

 

3 hours ago, Faith-manor said:

Oh, it was confirmed that Anna left the room when some of the CSA images were produced.

 

3 hours ago, prairiewindmomma said:

I was just coming to post about Anna leaving when the CSA images were produced. I think they were shown to the jury only, but I still think that is a poor call. The only excuse I would find tolerable would be if she was leaving to go pump.....

 

I'm not sure I'd even give pumping as a valid excuse.  She should see what her husband was getting off on - maybe THAT would wake her up!

 

I could see the defense attorney's demanding she not be there.  I could also see JB and co demanding she be the good little wife and not see what her husband was really doing.

they were going with the "we're being persecuted for being Christian's" defense . . . . (um, . . . no.)

1 hour ago, prairiewindmomma said:

I was wondering if Derick was beside her because:

1. families get preferred and reserved seating so he didn't have to fight for a seat in a crowded and limited area

2. so he could be in line of sight if Jill was called (not likely, since we were still in early days of testimony)

3. he feels sorry for her and doesn't dislike her as a person

4. so he could stare down J every time he looked to Anna for reassurance

Sounds good to me.

I saw his mugshot.  He has no shame - he was smirking in it.

[Faith-manor]

1 hour ago, prairiewindmomma said:

It happens in some states....allowing continued access of an abuser to children is a failure to protect and a failure to supervise. The state of Arkansas interviewed, should have come to the proper facts about the nature of the repeated pattern of abuse, but apparently did not proceed with removal based on the interviews in 2006.

 

And we are a country that A. Really has a tendency to look the other way when people claim religious belief over the veneer of how they treat their kids and handle crap and B. Have no concept of children's rights and treat them as merely property of the people that biologically produced them. This leads to a view of insanely strong parental rights at the expense of children's lives. Katie Travis Sitler's 18 month old was not taken away from her even though she knowingly married a pedophile in an arranged marriage by her father and Doug Wilson to a pedophile (who made the most ungodly plea deal ever meaning hardly serving any time at all in exchange for providing the names or identifying information of all his victims, more than 30!!!!!!), had the child with said pedophile, was ordered by the court to only allow supervised visitation with the child and perv was not allowed to live in the home so she promptly let him change diapers and be alone with the child, and he then sexually assaulted his own child. And she STILL HAS CUSTODY! (Not yelling at you. That is just my brain exploding.) 

This is what we get as a nation for continuing to have medieval "family values" and a lack of Bill of Rights for children. Isn't going to change so long as we have this many evil s.o.b.'s in office. But maybe just maybe Jbob might not got elected. Not holding my breath on that.

[Faith-manor]

3 hours ago, HS Mom in NC said:

So if they show that JB and M knew their son was a sexually abusing the children, no therapy was given,  and they chose to let him stay in their house, would that be enough for CPS to remove the younger Dugger kids from JB and M's custody because they knowingly endangered children long term? Does that happen?

We'd like to think so. But I wouldn't bet the farm on it. The first excuse defense attorneys will make is "But the peep doesn't live there anymore", and the court will think, " Well hell, I don't even know where we are going to find that many foster beds for them and it fricking costs a lot of money to do home studies on all those adult siblings to see if they can be spread around the relatives, and grandma is dead so.....okay, sounds good to me." Or something like that.

I am jaded. Seen this crap too many times.

We have friends that were doing foster care and one of their children was returned to bio mom after she served 5 of 10 years for trying to kill her boyfriend with a mailbox bomb. When the social worker protested, the judge said, "Well just because she wanted to kill her boyfriend doesn't mean she would be a bad mom." And 30 days later a little boy who had lived with them since he was two and did not remember any mommy and daddy but my friends was bludgeoned to death by his "mother". There is a reason many social workers don't last long in the system.

Edited December 2, 2021 by Faith-manor

[lauraw4321]

3 hours ago, Faith-manor said:

So to cyber investigators for the prosecution testified today. It was technical, but also understandable testimony. The defense response was something along the lines of how do you know a human downloaded it. Hmmmm...the alien defense doesn't wash with me. 

Their rebuttal was, wait for it all you homeschool moms and find a piece of leather to chew while you read......................Josh was home schooled and only had a GED so he was in fact too dumb to partition the hard drive. Oh, and Josh was not a "Dell" man, but a "Mac" man.

Court would let out, and J has not posted the full recap. I will not post the most recent Sun article because the jerks went all ridiculous drama pot stirring about stuff they could not possibly know like why Austin didn't sit with Derrick or Anna.

Oh, it was confirmed that Anna left the room when some of the CSA images were produced.

How did they present evidence that he’s not smart enough without him taking the stand?

[lauraw4321]

39 minutes ago, lauraw4321 said:

How did they present evidence that he’s not smart enough without him taking the stand?

Read the update. Opening statements. 

[Annie G]

1 hour ago, Faith-manor said:

And despite how much Derrick appears to despise his father and brother in law, it doesn't mean he is burning all his bridges knowing there are seven little M's who didn't ask for this but will suffer the consequences of it. My guess? Just trying to be the nice guy.

I’ll give him credit- if he’s being nice to Anna because of the M’s he’s a better person than I am. She needs people to tell her that she should put her children first. Like, she’s needed that kind of advice for a long time. She and J made the latest baby after the raid on the car lot…the girl needs to wake up. 
 

I think it’s probably like you said- limited seating, and he’s just being polite. Which is the right thing to do in court. 

Edited December 2, 2021 by Annie G

[Faith-manor]

Here is a link to a good summary.

They did not show the CSAM to the gallery. It was on screens, something like tablets or whatever, for each juror. No one else in the room saw it. If you think about, that is good. The children in those images and videos have a right to NOT be paraded out for a gallery of people just because people want Anna to be confronted with it. They are ILLEGAL images. It is bad enough that the jury has to see them, and of course the judge has reviewed them, and all the experts, invrstigators, attorneys,  and Josh who got his rocks off on them also got to see them again in discovery. So let's not make CSAM viewers of every journalist, family member, member of the public sitting in to see the trial, the baliff, the court recorder.....this was handled properly. We can't lose sight of the fact that some of these children may still be alive, still be rescued, may still be out there. We side on the side of the innocent wherever we can or at least we should.

The defense said he was too dumb to do it, and then totally contradicted themselves saying he had to use the Dark Web, Tor, and Bit-Tor, and a partition for privacy because of paparazzi! No joke. Sure. Because Josh Duggar is Brad Pitt or Alex Baldwin. 🙄 The slam dunk was them producing proof of Josh felling someone else he used this stuff. Oy vey! I have a feeling these are very good lawyers doing the best they can to give him a proper defense so that the constitutional requirements are met, and the likely hood of appeal is low. BUT, they are defending Josh and to some degree by extension though not on trial, Jbob, and that is like trying to defend Abbott and Costello! How they will get out of this without looking inept, I do not know. I guess the money must be good.

So here is the link.

https://www.reddit.com/r/DuggarsSnark/comments/r6x11i/day_2_of_trial_dec_1_2021_summary_from_inside/

 

[Annie G]

When I click the link it says the post was deleted by the poster. Comments are there, though. 

[Faith-manor]

1 minute ago, Annie G said:

When I click the link it says the post was deleted by the poster. Comments are there, though. 

Okay, trying again. He did some editing so he took it down and just reposted it.

https://www.reddit.com/r/DuggarsSnark/comments/r6y2ux/trial_day_2_summary_reposting_to_remove_jury_info/

 

[Faith-manor]

1 hour ago, lauraw4321 said:

How did they present evidence that he’s not smart enough without him taking the stand?

They didn't. They made the statement that he was not smart enough because he was home schooled and only had a GED.

That said they hosed themselves. Josh admitted, after being read his rights at the time and waving having an attorney present because he was not in custody/arrested, on a recording no less, to the lead investigators that he knew how to use TOR, BIT-Tor, etc. I mean, these lawyers are defending Daddy Duck here.

In pretrial filings, Josh took the 5th amendment. So he is not taking the stand. Yup, no joke. This would be like Yosemite Sam trying to defend Wile E Coyote on Assault with the intent to Eat Roadrunner charges. it isn't going to go well, and Wile E.  is guilty as sin and too smug not to keep his trap shut.

[Katy]

4 hours ago, Annie G said:

I do wonder why Derick was sitting beside her. Surely he feels bad for her, but if she is standing by her man, why is Derick beside her instead of, say, sitting with Austin?

Someone already covered this, but in one of the pretrial hearings the judge indicated there would be a certain number of seats allocated for family (I think it was 18), and the rest would be used first-come-first-served by journalists.  Others could go to an overflow room where there would be live audio but no video.

I'm under the impression there are 2 rows of 9 chairs directly behind Josh. All family must sit there.  Anna is not allowed to sit at the table with Josh.

I'm also under the impression from social media posts that Jill and Derrick are sincere about their faith, and are doing their best to take the high road when it comes to Anna.  They congratulate her publicly when there are events.  Derrick might hate his father in law, they don't seem to have any animosity to anyone but him.

Katie Joy had a video today speculating (I think?  If she said she had a source I missed it) that Austin had previously taken Jim Bob's word for what happened, and since he heard the details of what happened to his wife from the testimony in the hearing and the full extent of what happened this is the first time he's understood how bad it was (it was called rape in court), that it happened for 4 years, and that Jim Bob and Michelle weren't interested in hearing that it was continuing to happen.  They served the girls up on a platter and looked the other way.  This is not at all the curious kid playing doctor girls were asleep and didn't remember scenario JB pretended it was. I can't imagine how much that infuriated Austin. DH said in his place he'd be imagining murder.

Also I think on Reddit I saw Bobbye quoted as stating she had called CPS and the police at the time and both looked the other way.

 

[gardenmom5]

42 minutes ago, Faith-manor said:

  This would be like Yosemite Sam trying to defend Wile E Coyote on Assault with the intent to Eat Roadrunner charges. it isn't going to go well, and Wile E.  is guilty as sin and too smug not to keep his trap shut.

but I have rooted for Wile E Coyote - mostly because I'm sick of road runner's "beep beep".

that said - I'm hopeful Josh is going away for a very long time.

Now  - If only JB could join him . . . . . 

[gardenmom5]

4 minutes ago, Katy said:

S 

Katie Joy had a video today speculating (I think?  If she said she had a source I missed it) that Austin had previously taken Jim Bob's word for what happened, and since he heard the details of what happened to his wife from the testimony in the hearing and the full extent of what happened this is the first time he's understood how bad it was (it was called rape in court), that it happened for 4 years, and that Jim Bob and Michelle weren't interested in hearing that it was continuing to happen.  They served the girls up on a platter and looked the other way.  This is not at all the curious kid playing doctor girls were asleep and didn't remember scenario JB pretended it was. I can't imagine how much that infuriated Austin. DH said in his place he'd be imagining murder.

Also I think on Reddit I saw Bobbye quoted as stating she had called CPS and the police at the time and both looked the other way.

 

JB needs to turn in his 'dad' card.  He should be in jail too for having allowed this.  And he did allow this.

[AnotherNewName]

I have to admit I am a bit perplexed by the judge allowing Josh's prior history into the trial.  It seems to me to be more prejudicial than probative and imo opens up an avenue for appeal. Generally, there has to be a more of a direct connection or pattern of behavior that connects the prior act to the crimes the defendant is currently facing.  The judge is allowing a tenuous tie between uncharged crimes as a youth to be used to support the accusation that he has downloaded CSAM.  What he did as a teen does not prove that he was in possession of material as an adult, and to me it gives the jury an out to accept less compelling evidence from the state and still bring back a charge of guilty.

Based on what I have read the case should be strong enough without the prior bad acts. It likely doesn't matter in the end as I would expect him to lose at retrial, but I don't like it when judges give this much of an edge to the prosecution without a better foundation.

[Faith-manor]

7 hours ago, Katy said:

Someone already covered this, but in one of the pretrial hearings the judge indicated there would be a certain number of seats allocated for family (I think it was 18), and the rest would be used first-come-first-served by journalists.  Others could go to an overflow room where there would be live audio but no video.

I'm under the impression there are 2 rows of 9 chairs directly behind Josh. All family must sit there.  Anna is not allowed to sit at the table with Josh.

I'm also under the impression from social media posts that Jill and Derrick are sincere about their faith, and are doing their best to take the high road when it comes to Anna.  They congratulate her publicly when there are events.  Derrick might hate his father in law, they don't seem to have any animosity to anyone but him.

Katie Joy had a video today speculating (I think?  If she said she had a source I missed it) that Austin had previously taken Jim Bob's word for what happened, and since he heard the details of what happened to his wife from the testimony in the hearing and the full extent of what happened this is the first time he's understood how bad it was (it was called rape in court), that it happened for 4 years, and that Jim Bob and Michelle weren't interested in hearing that it was continuing to happen.  They served the girls up on a platter and looked the other way.  This is not at all the curious kid playing doctor girls were asleep and didn't remember scenario JB pretended it was. I can't imagine how much that infuriated Austin. DH said in his place he'd be imagining murder.

Also I think on Reddit I saw Bobbye quoted as stating she had called CPS and the police at the time and both looked the other way.

 

I don't know who Katie Joy is as a person, but she was kicked off Reddit for some nor good stuff one of which was plagiarism and taking credit for other people's research and posts. She is doing that now.

She doesn't have a secret source. The info about Michelle and JB not wanting to hear what happened is in court documents and comes from the testimony of Bobbye Holt who was put on the stand at the pre-trial hearing. She testified that she and her husband Jim tried to confront them about what Josh confessed to because it was worse than they had been told when they were asked to reinstate the courtship with their daughter, and took place over a longer period of time and the parental response was that they were not interested in hearing it. Bobbye had a very hard time keeping her composure on the stand. Duggar were told by Jim and Bobby Holt that they had to turn Josh in to authorities. They waited nine months and then refused to produce the children for interviews and the state of Arkansas represented by local CPS and family court did nothing. They took Josh to confess to a pedophile pervert already facing trial for CSAM who was a police officer no less who attended their church and had confessed his crimes to the church already in order to get his forgive and forget, it's all good, we all make mistakes sometimes, pardon from leadership. Josh received a "talking to" from this person. A year later or so (can't remember the exact amount of gap) the slime bag was sentenced to 54 years in prison. 54 years. That's how bad his crimes were. My guess is he simply took Josh aside and told him where he could find this stuff and how to try to hide it better than he did!

Be careful following Katie Joy. She has gotten into a lot of trouble with the reddit mods.

The testimony was embedded in the link I posted from Nov. 29 updates if you want to read it from the horse's mouth. One of the law students on the sub reddit is attending the trial and reporting from the courthouse on the breaks as well as screenshots of testimony and judges statements and notes as they become available. Federal trial court reporters seem to be quite fast at getting this stuff out.

JB and Michelle are evil people. Jim Holt himself is no better. He wasn't the one that called the police. It should also be noted that Bobbye testified that the two Jim's fell asleep during the discussion, right in front of her and Josh. So such for "male leadership"! 🙄

Caleb Williams, a young man that at one time JB tried to fix up with Jana for a courtship and Jana thank goodness rebelled, is now a registered sex offender convicted of rape and trying to get custody of the child that came from that rape. Jbob employed a registered sex offender at one of his businesses, and there are links to more sex offenders if you go read through the entirety of the prosecutions witness list. It is, in my mind, no coincidence that JB is in a sex cult, promotes a sex cult, has a deviant son he refused to protect his daughter's from, and is friends with sex offenders as well as has employed them. I believe JB himself whether he has acted on it or not has a major problem with sex addiction of some kind or even worse. I also suspect Keller of the same because he was made aware by the Holts that Josh was the " Sin in the camp" that caused Jim Holt to lose his election (No Jim People didn't like you and your messed up cult.). He was also told about the molestations, and Keller still married off Anna to him. Now Anna bears some blame. She said the vows, she signed the marriage license. She could have refused. But, let's not forget she has been raised in this evil cult from birth and trained to believe she has no agency because her reproductive organs don't dangle, and that god will smite her down with a mighty sword if she goes against her headship, daddkins. Keller has to be a deviant as well. At least Holt isn't. Prior to Anna when approached by JB and Josh approached Holt about restarting the courtship with their eldest daughter, Holt was like NOPE not going to happen. A few years later one of the younger boys tried to court a Holt daughter and that never got off the ground either. This is the ONLY credit I give Holt. He is otherwise your basic IBLP vermin.

Birds of a feather......

[Katy]

6 hours ago, AnotherNewName said:

I have to admit I am a bit perplexed by the judge allowing Josh's prior history into the trial.  It seems to me to be more prejudicial than probative and imo opens up an avenue for appeal. Generally, there has to be a more of a direct connection or pattern of behavior that connects the prior act to the crimes the defendant is currently facing.  The judge is allowing a tenuous tie between uncharged crimes as a youth to be used to support the accusation that he has downloaded CSAM.  What he did as a teen does not prove that he was in possession of material as an adult, and to me it gives the jury an out to accept less compelling evidence from the state and still bring back a charge of guilty.

Based on what I have read the case should be strong enough without the prior bad acts. It likely doesn't matter in the end as I would expect him to lose at retrial, but I don't like it when judges give this much of an edge to the prosecution without a better foundation.

Not in federal cases about sex crimes for children. If you go back and look at the transcripts the judge referred to several rulings that said history must be included.  

[Faith-manor]

7 hours ago, AnotherNewName said:

I have to admit I am a bit perplexed by the judge allowing Josh's prior history into the trial.  It seems to me to be more prejudicial than probative and imo opens up an avenue for appeal. Generally, there has to be a more of a direct connection or pattern of behavior that connects the prior act to the crimes the defendant is currently facing.  The judge is allowing a tenuous tie between uncharged crimes as a youth to be used to support the accusation that he has downloaded CSAM.  What he did as a teen does not prove that he was in possession of material as an adult, and to me it gives the jury an out to accept less compelling evidence from the state and still bring back a charge of guilty.

Based on what I have read the case should be strong enough without the prior bad acts. It likely doesn't matter in the end as I would expect him to lose at retrial, but I don't like it when judges give this much of an edge to the prosecution without a better foundation.

It doesn't open up an avenue of appeal. This is a federal case not state. Federal statute 414 allows for this. All the prosecution has to show is a preponderance of the evidence that the past allegations were true to be allowed. They have Jbob and Michelle's Primetime Megan Kelly interview admissions, Josh written admission, a police report admission, the cop in jail for 54 years admission, the girls interviews, the letter sent to Oprah which started the dumpster fire, and Bobbye Golf's testimony plus Jill agreed to testify which means there is pre-trial deposition from a victim. They have plenty of evidence. Judge Brooks is very experienced. Rule 414 has been invoked in other cases many times before. We just never hear about it because those cases are not minor celebrities and celebrities.

Appeal overturns of federal convictions for these crimes is exceedingly rare. Federal judges are way more experienced and seasoned than most state judges so less likely to make a mistake, and federal prosecutors are the rock stars of the legal world. Their conviction rates are huge, and on CSAM are usually as close to a slam dunk as you can get.