Duggar trial day 3, unfortunate update, interesting update 4:49 pm EST at bottom of thread.

[Faith-manor]

J, on the sub reddit who is attending the trial, has deleted the account. No one knows why. However, the mods are tracking it down. I wonder about hacking. I have suspended more than one email account over the years for spam and someone hacking in and then sending spam "as me". It happens a lot, and all these online forums and discussion groups are email based for opening an account. But, I am not a tech savvy person so who knows! Just speculation.

So there will not be updates from this trial attendee. 

The prosecution indicated that they have about 3.5 days worth of evidence to present. I have no idea if that estimate includes time for cross examination. So this part of the trial could go through today, tomorrow, and Monday or maybe even longer before getting to the defense.

 

Edited December 2, 2021 by Faith-manor

[Slache]

It is reddit culture to constantly delete and create new accounts. I would not be surprised if he's back in 5 minutes with a new name.

[Scarlett]

1 minute ago, Slache said:

It is reddit culture to constantly delete and create new accounts. I would not be surprised if he's back in 5 minutes with a new name.

I have not ever looked at reddit much....why do they do that?

[AnotherNewName]

1 minute ago, Scarlett said:

I have not ever looked at reddit much....why do they do that?

Reddit is a very strange online ecosystem.

[Faith-manor]

1 minute ago, Scarlett said:

I have not ever looked at reddit much....why do they do that?

No idea. So I am going to see if any of the local tv/radio stations in NWA have someone reporting fro! the courthouse. I don't think the reports would be detailed, but general short summaries are helpful.

[Slache]

1 minute ago, Scarlett said:

I have not ever looked at reddit much....why do they do that?

I have no idea. Redditors are really weird about keeping their identity hidden.

Just now, AnotherNewName said:

Reddit is a very strange online ecosystem.

Very!

[AbcdeDooDah]

J posted detailed information about the jury. When I read it, I was surprised. She deleted it and reposted without that information, but I think she may have been worried about getting in trouble.

Edited December 2, 2021 by AbcdeDooDah

[gardenmom5]

I did read last night one of the jurors had a medical emergency, and was released.  So they are now at 15 jurors (they are not telling them who will be in the room, and who will be alternates.)

[Faith-manor]

32 minutes ago, gardenmom5 said:

I did read last night one of the jurors had a medical emergency, and was released.  So they are now at 15 jurors (they are not telling them who will be in the room, and who will be alternates.)

That is unfortunate. Rough enough to be a juror on a case like this, but then to have a medical emergency and all those people and reporters around??? I feel very sad for that person.

[Ottakee]

1 hour ago, gardenmom5 said:

I did read last night one of the jurors had a medical emergency, and was released.  So they are now at 15 jurors (they are not telling them who will be in the room, and who will be alternates.)

In my ex husband's trial they determined the alternates by lottery after the trial was complete...so all jurors pay attention the entire time.

[Forget-Me-Not]

4 hours ago, AnotherNewName said:

Reddit is a very strange online ecosystem.

It’s a cesspool 

[Slache]

1 minute ago, Forget-Me-Not said:

It’s a cesspool 

I actually get a lot out of my support sub. And my snake care sub. Other subs have tried to eat me alive though.

[Forget-Me-Not]

Just now, Slache said:

I actually get a lot out of my support sub. And my snake care sub. Other subs have tried to eat me alive though.

That’s fair. I agree there are some useful subs there. But some of the busier ones . . . ugh. I’ve learned about some sex-related things by accident there that I wish I could forget (and this wasn’t on sex-related subs). And the misogyny is rampant and unchecked. 

[Katy]

JoyAnna is there today, according to the Sun. 

[Faith-manor]

35 minutes ago, Katy said:

JoyAnna is there today, according to the Sun. 

I am so sad for her. When they finally bring Bobbye to the stand, that is not going to be easy testimony to hear. Gothard husbands tend to be pathetic husbands due to the brainwashing about women, but I really hope Austin steps up. It doesn't seem like his family was quite so heavy into the worst aspects of it.

[gardenmom5]

Okay - re: reddit.  

  5 hours ago, AnotherNewName said:

Reddit is a very strange online ecosystem.

It’s a cesspool 

1 hour ago, Slache said:

I actually get a lot out of my support sub. And my snake care sub. Other subs have tried to eat me alive though.

 

1 hour ago, Forget-Me-Not said:

That’s fair. I agree there are some useful subs there. But some of the busier ones . . . ugh. 

I thought this was on reddit - so I went and found it.  It was on Imgur - 

But I'm sure boardies will find it a delightsome diversion . . . .so, I'm posting it anyway.

A Pride and Prejudice Engagement - Imgur

it's local to me - and there was a news article with more detail, but I can't find that.

[gardenmom5]

45 minutes ago, Faith-manor said:

I am so sad for her. When they finally bring Bobbye to the stand, that is not going to be easy testimony to hear. Gothard husbands tend to be pathetic husbands due to the brainwashing about women, but I really hope Austin steps up. It doesn't seem like his family was quite so heavy into the worst aspects of it.

OK - can we have a scorecard so those of use who didnt' follow as closely know the players?

To whom is JoyAnna married?  To whom is Austin related?  Was JoyAnna one of the girls Josh molested?

[freesia]

8 minutes ago, gardenmom5 said:

OK - can we have a scorecard so those of use who didnt' follow as closely know the players?

To whom is JoyAnna married?  To whom is Austin related?  Was JoyAnna one of the girls Josh molested?

JoyAnna is married to Austin Forsythe.  She is the youngest one molested.  The one who was on his lap.

[Faith-manor]

Can someone please tell Justin that when your brother is on trial for CSAM and his crimes against your sisters is going to be outed in sickening detail to the court, you don't exit the courthouse like this!!!! 😠 It is the Sun. Par for the course for their "journalism", but now I need brain bleach.

 

[Spryte]

8 minutes ago, gardenmom5 said:

OK - can we have a scorecard so those of use who didnt' follow as closely know the players?

To whom is JoyAnna married?  To whom is Austin related?  Was JoyAnna one of the girls Josh molested?

Thank you for asking this. 
 

Also—Jill? 

[Annie G]

6 minutes ago, gardenmom5 said:

OK - can we have a scorecard so those of use who didnt' follow as closely know the players?

To whom is JoyAnna married?  To whom is Austin related?  Was JoyAnna one of the girls Josh molested?

JoyAnna is married to Austin. Although not specifically confirmed, she is the right age to fit the description of the sister molested while sitting on Josh’s lap. I hesitate to even type that. But it does help to know who everyone is. 

[Faith-manor]

14 minutes ago, gardenmom5 said:

OK - can we have a scorecard so those of use who didnt' follow as closely know the players?

To whom is JoyAnna married?  To whom is Austin related?  Was JoyAnna one of the girls Josh molested?

Okay, well. Hm. I guess since every other reporting group is going to say it, and the interview in 2015 said it, and the police report was not properly redacted and then released, I guess I will say it. Yes is assumed to be the other sister victim because she was the only girl of the right age given in the police report. She is married to Austin Forsyth.

Jill/Derrick

Jinger/Jeremy

Justin/Claire

John David/Annie

Joseph/Kendra

Josiah/Lauren

Edited December 2, 2021 by Faith-manor

[GoodnightMoogle]

1 minute ago, Faith-manor said:

Can someone please tell Justin that when your brother is on trial for CSAM and his crimes against your sisters is going to be outed in sickening detail to the court, you don't exit the courthouse like this!!!! 😠 It is the Sun. Par for the course for their "journalism", but now I need brain bleach.

 

Definitely inappropriate, the only excuse I could make for him is that people feel and respond in awkward ways when cameras are on them. 
 

I’m reminded suddenly of the book “Gone Girl,” when the main dude excused of killing his wife suddenly and inexplicably finds himself grinning while the cameras are on him and that’s the image that gets splashed everywhere by the media.

[gardenmom5]

43 minutes ago, GoodnightMoogle said:

Definitely inappropriate, the only excuse I could make for him is that people feel and respond in awkward ways when cameras are on them. 
 

I’m reminded suddenly of the book “Gone Girl,” when the main dude excused of killing his wife suddenly and inexplicably finds himself grinning while the cameras are on him and that’s the image that gets splashed everywhere by the media.

do we know which side he's on?  Maybe he's hoping his brother get's what's coming to him . . . . . . . . . . 

but at this age, and coming from a narcissistic abuse background - inappropriate responses aren't uncommon.

[gardenmom5]

49 minutes ago, Spryte said:

Thank you for asking this. 
 

Also—Jill? 

Oldest? daughter.  Married to Derek (I believe he's a lawyer.  There's a pix of him in doctoral graduation robes with a purple hood.)

Since getting married, has received counseling from a licensed therapist.  reportedly hasn't been to her parents house in several years.

reportedly sued JB for her share of the show's earnings.

[stephanier.1765]

2 minutes ago, gardenmom5 said:

Oldest? daughter.  Married to Derek (I believe he's a lawyer.  There's a pix of him in doctoral graduation robes with a purple hood.)

Since getting married, has received counseling from a licensed therapist.  reportedly hasn't been to her parents house in several years.

reportedly sued JB for her share of the show's earnings.

Josh is the oldest child, then the twins, Jana and David, and then Jill. So second daughter.

[Faith-manor]

24 minutes ago, gardenmom5 said:

do we know which side he's on?  Maybe he's hoping his brother get's what's coming to him . . . . . . . . . . 

but at this age, and coming from a narcissistic abuse background - inappropriate responses aren't uncommon.

Nobody knows what side they are on. Derrick is dressed in his law school finest today and has a legal pad in leather binder for taking notes. That is good. Despite the fact that this is a trial for his brother in law, it is a prime opportunity to learn about all the trial etiquette, procedures, etc. Seeing live cases is about the only way to learn it from what I have been told. He can't share that stuff with Jill though until after she testifies or is told she will no longer be on the witness list.

There are five seats in the family section, and everything else is first come, first serve. So I don't take any clues from whom is sitting where. If you want to sit up front so you can hear well and you are family, you sit in that designated section if you can. Witnesses are only required to speak loud enough to be heard by the jury, the judge, and the attorneys. That is it. They do not have to project their voices. So being in the back or even in the middle means potentially not hearing what is going on.

[Faith-manor]

It appears that the prosecution accused the defense of convincing a witness to lie in both deposition as well as on the stand. Here is a link to some, not all of the testimony. A synopsis.

https://people.com/tv/josh-duggar-trial-prosecution-gets-heated-questioning-relative-colleague/

I chuckle at the judge saying you cane keep beating that horse. So I guess they have moved on, but there was apparently yelling. I also have to wonder if Weller can face charges for lying in the deposition. He seemed to then throw the defense team under the bus with a kind "yup, they made me do it" thing. Very hard to know though. I wish we had a lawyer here to parse it out.

[freesia]

9 minutes ago, Faith-manor said:

It appears that the prosecution accused the defense of convincing a witness to lie in both deposition as well as on the stand. Here is a link to some, not all of the testimony. A synopsis.

https://people.com/tv/josh-duggar-trial-prosecution-gets-heated-questioning-relative-colleague/

I chuckle at the judge saying you cane keep beating that horse. So I guess they have moved on, but there was apparently yelling. I also have to wonder if Weller can face charges for lying in the deposition. He seemed to then throw the defense team under the bus with a kind "yup, they made me do it" thing. Very hard to know though. I wish we had a lawyer here to parse it out.

I'm a little confused by this testimony.  Is it trying to raise doubt that Wellar also knew the pw and could have been the culprit?  What did the defense make him do?

[TheReader]

5 minutes ago, freesia said:

I'm a little confused by this testimony.  Is it trying to raise doubt that Wellar also knew the pw and could have been the culprit?  What did the defense make him do?

if I'm following, it seems like the defense is trying to suggest Waller knew the pw, whereas the prosecution is saying if he knew it, it has to be b/c the defense told him previously -- that the prosecution never mentioned the specifics, so when the defense asked if he recalled it, it was b/c they had said it previously (and so the prosecution is saying that he "remembers" it b/c the defense told it to him prior to the trial).  And then referencing that he can't even remember the normal pw to the main part of the computer, but uses a post-it note to access it, thus trying to say he "remembers" this one doesn't fly. 

 

[lauraw4321]

7 minutes ago, freesia said:

I'm a little confused by this testimony.  Is it trying to raise doubt that Wellar also knew the pw and could have been the culprit?  What did the defense make him do?

Yes. Defense is trying to show that anyone there could have had access to the computer. Prosecution is arguing that the defense planted the “memory” in Waller by asking is “[password]” familiar? Waller previously told prosecution that he didn’t know the password. Then on the stand he said that the password was “vaguely familiar.”  Prosecution is arguing it’s only familiar because Defense told it to him. 

[Faith-manor]

31 minutes ago, freesia said:

I'm a little confused by this testimony.  Is it trying to raise doubt that Wellar also knew the pw and could have been the culprit?  What did the defense make him do?

Well, as near as I can tell, he said in deposition he did not have the password, did not know a password. Then in court under defense cross, he said it suddenly seemed to be familiar to him. The prosecution went a little off because well, that isn't good if the witness lied under oath when questioned, and pressed him. Wellar admitted that when the defense asked him in deposition/prep/briefing not sure which, he said he did not know it, and then they SHOWED him the password so now it is vaguely familiar. Defense said basically, we told him to tell the truth, and Prosecution went after him again to probably make him confirm the defense meddled with his "memory" by showing evidence which should not have been shown or something, and the judge was like "move on". I think! It is an odd exchange, and I am not an attorney nor do I play one on t.v.

It should be noted that even if Wellar did know the password and lied about it, he still couldn't be the one to do the download because his employment with the auto dealership ended a month sooner, and they were not able to produce payroll proof of any employees working at the dealership that week. I find that a little suspicious. Now, I suppose the defense could say Wellar had keys and could have sneaked back a month latter, and let himself in, and did the downloading because he had the partition password. Maybe they will allege that during the defense part of the trial. It seems odd that Wellar would be willing to lie in such a way that throws his own butt under the bus.

But, again, we need a lawyer to really tell us what it means. It is all confusing.

Edited December 2, 2021 by Faith-manor

[Katy]

Emily Baker is covering this case now.  Language warning, and if you watch it later there will be timestamps in the details below so you can skip the bits about other cases.

 

[Faith-manor]

Thanks for posting that Katy. I am not going to read that tonight. I read a synopsis of the written descriptions read aloud in court of some of the images and videos. I thought I was prepared to mind over matter it. I was not, and ended up feeling dizzy and nauseous. I really think that the tax payers need to pay for professional counseling for this jury after the trial.

I will be back tomorrow. I just need to not read any more court stuff tonight.

[gardenmom5]

 

15;40 - she's reading the opinion and order - and it sounds like they want to include the previous stuff to prove he does this.  And there are (inadequate) records, and they would be including them too.

She's talking about how it is so important the prosecutors are very careful lest their is a mistrial and he can't be retried.
 

The judge came out and said "based on a preponderance of the evidence" (lower standard than reasonable doubt) that these incidents (when he was a teenager) did happen.  so - he can be called a child a molester and not be able to sue for defamation. 

JB and M are infuriating.  They knew - even though they "didn't want to know".  They both belong in jail for allowing him to continue to have access to the younger children. 

 

[MerryAtHope]

Here’s a bullet-point update of day 3. https://www.theashleysrealityroundup.com/2021/12/02/live-updates-from-josh-duggars-child-sex-abuse-trial-day-three/

[gardenmom5]

23 minutes ago, MerryAtHope said:

Here’s a bullet-point update of day 3. https://www.theashleysrealityroundup.com/2021/12/02/live-updates-from-josh-duggars-child-sex-abuse-trial-day-three/

JB & M weren't there?  was that so they can say they "don't recall"?  Maybe his lawyers told them to stay away.

 

I hope this wakes Anna up to who Josh is and how much she's been lied to.

[Resilient]

I have a very hard time with the thought that I could have been called as a juror.  That we can ask people to have to look at this sort of ___ (I can't think of a word bad enough) evidence in order to provide a fair trial by a jury of peers ... it just seems beyond what anyone ever world have expected anyone to have to see.

Without going into detail, I am within living memory of a generation which considered this sort of thing handled by the community, without worrying too much about judicial process.  "Judicial process" was reserved for situations that had some ambivalence.

It is likely that I am the descendent of one who murdered an heinous abuser, and of a community that took its survival into its own hands. I heard the stories for years...but it is only in the past few years that I have understood what actually happened...and I'm not sure how I feel about the fact that I am pretty much OK with the way things went down.

It makes me vomit to know that good people have to see the diabolical (devilish, evil, vile, abhorrent) images as part of a trial. Some things are just beyond the pale and that this person is allowed to drag normal, decent people with him into his world is  just...nauseating.

[WildflowerMom]

4 hours ago, Resilient said:

I have a very hard time with the thought that I could have been called as a juror.  That we can ask people to have to look at this sort of ___ (I can't think of a word bad enough) evidence in order to provide a fair trial by a jury of peers ... it just seems beyond what anyone ever world have expected anyone to have to see.

Without going into detail, I am within living memory of a generation which considered this sort of thing handled by the community, without worrying too much about judicial process.  "Judicial process" was reserved for situations that had some ambivalence.

It is likely that I am the descendent of one who murdered an heinous abuser, and of a community that took its survival into its own hands. I heard the stories for years...but it is only in the past few years that I have understood what actually happened...and I'm not sure how I feel about the fact that I am pretty much OK with the way things went down.

It makes me vomit to know that good people have to see the diabolical (devilish, evil, vile, abhorrent) images as part of a trial. Some things are just beyond the pale and that this person is allowed to drag normal, decent people with him into his world is  just...nauseating.

Re the bolded:   I am anti death penalty...  except in the case of csa.   I don't care what that says about me.  I think whoever committed those acts in that video should be done away with.   Other csabusers: gone.  People who download it and willingly watch it?   A cell for life.   Over and done, out of society forever.    
Those jurors will never escape those images.  And josh downloaded and watched them willingly.   He, his dad, and his mom are sick. 

[cbollin]

7 hours ago, gardenmom5 said:

JB & M weren't there?  was that so they can say they "don't recall"?  Maybe his lawyers told them to stay away.

 

 

I don't know for certain.  But if either is a potential witness to be called, then it's common where I have lived that they would not be present until called. example: One case where I was in jury pool, the defendant's probation officer showed up to watch the trial. Judge looked at probation officer and said "hey, did you know you're potential witness in the case?" " no judge I didn't know that. I'm leaving."   turns out that person was not actually called to the stand, but he could not hear other testimony just in case.   Perhaps that works like that in federal court too. or maybe it's other reasons.

so yeah, I'm guessing JB's lawyer said don't show up and of course M wouldn't go if JB said no.  It could be other reasons involved.

[maize]

39 minutes ago, cbollin said:

I don't know for certain.  But if either is a potential witness to be called, then it's common where I have lived that they would not be present until called. example: One case where I was in jury pool, the defendant's probation officer showed up to watch the trial. Judge looked at probation officer and said "hey, did you know you're potential witness in the case?" " no judge I didn't know that. I'm leaving."   turns out that person was not actually called to the stand, but he could not hear other testimony just in case.   Perhaps that works like that in federal court too. or maybe it's other reasons.

so yeah, I'm guessing JB's lawyer said don't show up and of course M wouldn't go if JB said no.  It could be other reasons involved.

This makes sense.

I'm also thinking images of him entering and leaving the courtroom aren't the kind of publicity JB wants for his political campaign.

[PeppermintPattie]

18 hours ago, Faith-manor said:

Okay, well. Hm. I guess since every other reporting group is going to say it, and the interview in 2015 said it, and the police report was not properly redacted and then released, I guess I will say it. Yes is assumed to be the other sister victim because she was the only girl of the right age given in the police report. She is married to Austin Forsyth.

Jill/Derrick

Jinger/Jeremy

Justin/Claire

John David/Annie

Joseph/Kendra

Josiah/Lauren

Do you know how old Joy was when she was molested? I read that she was too young to remember, but I wonder if that's true...

[lauraw4321]

35 minutes ago, maize said:

This makes sense.

I'm also thinking images of him entering and leaving the courtroom aren't the kind of publicity JB wants for his political campaign.

In law it's just referred to as "the Rule."  In a trial, a lawyer can say that she would like to invoke "the rule" and that means that all witnesses (except for the plaintiff and defendant) are required to leave the courtroom and not listen to any testimony prior to their testimony. It prevents witnesses having their testimony tainted by what they hear others say.

[lauraw4321]

Just now, PeppermintPattie said:

Do you know how old Joy was when she was molested? I read that she was too young to remember, but I wonder if that's true...

I believe she was 4 or 5.

[PeppermintPattie]

3 minutes ago, lauraw4321 said:

I believe she was 4 or 5.

Is she the daughter who told her parents about what he did? If so, I'm sure she'll remember.

[Faith-manor]

17 minutes ago, PeppermintPattie said:

Do you know how old Joy was when she was molested? I read that she was too young to remember, but I wonder if that's true...

The youngest victim, again never identified by name in the redacted report, was 8 when the investigation took place and was able to describe in decent detail for an eight year old who was not taught proper language for communicating about something like this. She remembered. However, I doubt that she was ever read the medical and legal definitions of what happened to her which is pretty horrible. So this all may be very frightening and re-traumatizing to that person, and a spouse hearing it for the first time put into those terms is probably having what can only be described as potentially the worst day of his life.

[Faith-manor]

Jill was the one that told. Josh has referred to her in the past as "the snitch".

 

[fairfarmhand]

1 hour ago, Faith-manor said:

Jill was the one that told. Josh has referred to her in the past as "the snitch".

 

That makes me feel literally ill. If the parents knew he was framing it that way, how in the world could they justify his staying around their home? Because the level of hostility and tension that would bring to the girls is unimaginable. And having to pretend all "happy family" with that underlying stress...I wonder about the level of anxiety that is present there. How are those young women not dealing with panic attacks and depression? Or are they just pushing it down and faking their way through life?

[freesia]

5 minutes ago, fairfarmhand said:

That makes me feel literally ill. If the parents knew he was framing it that way, how in the world could they justify his staying around their home? Because the level of hostility and tension that would bring to the girls is unimaginable. And having to pretend all "happy family" with that underlying stress...I wonder about the level of anxiety that is present there. How are those young women not dealing with panic attacks and depression? Or are they just pushing it down and faking their way through life?

Jill is in counseling.  I think Jinger, too, but I'm not sure.

[Faith-manor]

9 minutes ago, fairfarmhand said:

That makes me feel literally ill. If the parents knew he was framing it that way, how in the world could they justify his staying around their home? Because the level of hostility and tension that would bring to the girls is unimaginable. And having to pretend all "happy family" with that underlying stress...I wonder about the level of anxiety that is present there. How are those young women not dealing with panic attacks and depression? Or are they just pushing it down and faking their way through life?

He did it at her wedding. Jbob insisted that Josh give a speech/toast though no alcohol involved. He called her out for tattletaling on him at her own wedding, and JB was complicit.

I sometimes wish judges had the right to do some public penance stuff before peeps began their sentence. You know, like "Joshua Duggar you are hereby ordered to be tied to a tree in the town square with a billboard next to your head letting the community know what kind of piece of trash you are and baskets of tomatoes will be provided for your neighbors and sisters to pummel you with after which you will be remanded to custody to begin your sentence of mining granite with a teaspoon on expired m.r.e. rations with the candy removed at the South Pole."

One can dream. Yes, the cruel and unusual punishment clause of the constitution is utterly lost on me at times like this.

Edited December 3, 2021 by Faith-manor