Josh Duggar Charged With Receipt/Possession Child Sexual Abuse Material *Guilty* #4

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
True. My son got one through just signing up online. Easy to get in my State. A dime a dozen.

But Anna has 7 children to feed and her food bill, plus non-food grocery items, must be astronomical!
I can't imagine the cost.

She must be getting food stamps and using free food pantries and getting welfare benefits including Medicaid from the State. And there should be a lot of church support for her. Must be the case if she makes next to nothing with her LLC's. My opinion only.
I'd be surprised if mom and dad Duggar would cut Anna loose, if only because it would tarnish *their* reputation. How would it look to stop supporting Anna while their own son spends time in prison for sex crimes? IMO it's all about appearances.
 
I'd be surprised if mom and dad Duggar would cut Anna loose, if only because it would tarnish *their* reputation. How would it look to stop supporting Anna while their own son spends time in prison for sex crimes? IMO it's all about appearances.

I wonder how much a media outlet might pay Anna for an exclusive interview???
 
Josh Duggar doesn't think or care about anyone but himself. I am still very disturbed by the content he downloaded. I wish that I had never looked it up. I am aghast that things like this existed, and someone like Josh Duggar had to really look for this content. I hope he gets help. But, I doubt he will change. Just get more stealthy when he gets out.
 

Merry Christmas! Meanwhile, Anna will probably be going to "Toys for Tots" to get Christmas presents for seven children. She has probably signed up for government assistance for food at this point. Church welfare. I don't see Jim Bob really stepping up to help much, except that she can live rent free in a shed, no windows.
Why shouldn't she get the help that's offered to others in her situation, essentially a single parent home? I hear hostility directed at Anna. She and her children are innocent in this.
 
To be clear, I do not blame Anna for Josh’s crimes. In no way, shape or form do I blame her for what he has done. What she chooses to do from now on to protect herself and her children is up to her. There are many resources available to her. Her children need her now more than ever.
 
Why shouldn't she get the help that's offered to others in her situation, essentially a single parent home? I hear hostility directed at Anna. She and her children are innocent in this.
No hostility towards Anna or her children. Just her reality. Josh Duggar's selfishness is epic. He didn't care about providing for his family or consequences of his actions. And his family pays the penalty.
 
No hostility towards Anna or her children. Just her reality. Josh Duggar's selfishness is epic. He didn't care about providing for his family or consequences of his actions. And his family pays the penalty.

Not towards Anna -- but plenty of hostility toward the trap she seems to be caught in.

Hypothetically, of course.
 

A representative from Seagoville exclusively told The U.S. Sun Josh will be allowed visitation on both New Year’s Eve and New Year’s Day.

Breakfast on New Year’s Day will include hot oatmeal, breakfast cake, whole wheat bread, and fresh fruit, as well as assorted jelly and margarine.

Josh has the option of skim or chocolate milk.

As for lunch, the options include grilled steak with steak sauce, garden salad with broccoli and cheese, vegetable lasagna, baked potato with bacon bits, cheddar cheese and sour cream, and garlic bread.
Lunch will also include fruit, assorted holiday pie and assorted beverages.

Dinner will be light on the holiday, as Josh has the option of a chicken sandwich or a peanut butter and jelly sandwich.

He will also have potato chips, dessert and a beverage.

The spokesperson told The U.S. Sun of activities: “We will be showing the movie The Invitation on News Year’s Day as a holiday activity.”

The Invitation was released in 2022 and is a horror/mystery film.

Though Josh was convicted of child *advertiser censored*, all inmates receive the same treatment regardless of their offense.
 
Last edited:
I am so glad that criminals behind bars are getting well fed for the holidays, enjoying their time off and visits. It is comforting to know that all of their needs and wants are catered to. With free housing, food, medical care, no real problems like keeping a job, paying bills, fixing the car, or taking care of kids and elderly parents.

It doesn't even seem like punishment or negative consequences of bad behavior.
 
I am so glad that criminals behind bars are getting well fed for the holidays, enjoying their time off and visits. It is comforting to know that all of their needs and wants are catered to. With free housing, food, medical care, no real problems like keeping a job, paying bills, fixing the car, or taking care of kids and elderly parents.

It doesn't even seem like punishment or negative consequences of bad behavior.
Not like old times
 
I am so glad that criminals behind bars are getting well fed for the holidays, enjoying their time off and visits. It is comforting to know that all of their needs and wants are catered to. With free housing, food, medical care, no real problems like keeping a job, paying bills, fixing the car, or taking care of kids and elderly parents.

It doesn't even seem like punishment or negative consequences of bad behavior.
The important thing is that he is out of society and can't offend while he's behind bars.

In my very personal opinion that is one of the main purposes of incarceration.


The second is rehabilitation. Unfortunately, we all know the recidivism rates for his types of crimes. There is a good chance that he will be back in society in 10 years. I don't know if harsher punishment in prison would have an impact on his behavior in 10 years. The ideal situation would be for him to have a much longer prison sentence than he currently has, but until sentencing guidelines change, this is what we have.
 


The document states three specific issues in requesting an appeal of Duggar’s conviction:

1) “Whether the district court violated Duggar’s constitutional right to present a complete defense by precluding Duggar from calling and, if necessary, impeaching a critical witness at trial.”

2) “Whether the district court erred by denying Duggar’s motion to suppress statements after a federal agent physically stopped him from contacting his attorney and subsequently interrogated him outside the presence of his counsel.”

3) “Whether the district court erred by permitting the Government’s expert to offer testimony on EXIF metadata and prohibiting Duggar’s expert from testifying to the unreliability of the methodology used by the Government’s expert.”

The filing says that after federal agents told Duggar that they were executing a federal search warrant, he “took his cell phone out of his pocket and stated he was calling his attorney.”

The brief then states that one of the special agents “physically grabbed the phone out of Duggar’s hand, confiscated it, and stopped Duggar from speaking with counsel.”

The filing continues by describing an interview conducted with Duggar shortly after that, which he consented to. The brief notes that “no attorney was present for any portion of this interview.”

JOSH DUGGAR APPEAL BRIEF, OCTOBER 3
"Because the subsequent interrogation with Duggar was custodial and law enforcement continued to question him without his attorney present, Duggar’s statements should have been suppressed. On de novo review, this Court should reverse Duggar’s conviction, suppress the statement, and grant Duggar a new trial."
 
Last edited:
Josh Duggar should have a "do over", and this time the Prosecution can only use evidence, not his statements.

Wouldn't matter, the evidence is more than enough for me. I vote ""No" on another trial. This is just more money going towards a defense that should have been a plea deal.
 
Josh Duggar should have a "do over", and this time the Prosecution can only use evidence, not his statements.

Wouldn't matter, the evidence is more than enough for me. I vote ""No" on another trial. This is just more money going towards a defense that should have been a plea deal.

Right. The evidence is on his computer. Period. Can't hide it. Like people who work for a business then use the business credit card for personal expenses, happens all the time, it's called embezzlement. Stealing items from an employer is larceny.

My point is that when you embezzle from a company you leave a money digital trail, it is all there in the records an auditor can see, or simply on the credit card statement for everyone to see.

Josh left the digital footprint of his crime on his computer and it was "easy" through computer forensics to prove it. At any rate, like embezzlement, his Case was not winnable with the stark computer evidence.

I agree, Josh should have copped a plea for maybe 5 years if possible. Something in the lower sentence range. A decade in prison is not worth a trial.

Did you notice how his dad got on board real quick with high priced out of state attorneys that Josh was innocent and "set up" or whatever. Or someone else at the business did it, etc...
Point is, I think Josh's dad needed Josh to plead innocent and go to trial to save face for the family. Also,
if Josh's dad could have gotten a not guilty verdict maybe the Duggars could go back to TV.

But with clear evidence against Josh, and defendants almost never going to trial or winning their Cases against the federal government, Josh should have tried for a plea deal pleading guilty.

But pleading guilty, again, would not "save face" for the family.

But it backfired. Most seem to think Josh is guilty, he got a decade in prison far away from the Federal Prison in Arkansas, and the Duggar's lucrative TV career ended.

So Josh's dad pushed hard for a trial but at the expense of basically throwing his son under the bus. His son got the long sentence but hey, his dad can tell everyone that Josh is innocent, didn't get a fair trial, was set up, whatever, and so the Duggar's can "save face" because their son didn't really do this.

Opinion
 
https://www.the-sun.com/entertainme...ining-him-appeal-child-*advertiser censored*/

JOSH Duggar has accused armed officers of “restraining” him while he was interrogated for child *advertiser censored*, as he is demanding a new trial.

The disgraced reality star filed an appeal to the conviction in October 2022.

The U.S. Sun can exclusively reveal he claimed in court papers that armed federal agents retrained him during the interrogation at his Arkansas car lot.

The court papers read: “Federal agents surveilled Duggar’s business, waiting for him to arrive. The business was accessible only by a divided highway with no sidewalk and was ‘in the middle of nowhere.’

"When Duggar arrived, agents—armed and wearing tactical gear—converged in six vehicles.
 

JOSH Duggar has accused armed officers of “restraining” him while he was interrogated for child *advertiser censored*, as he is demanding a new trial.

The disgraced reality star filed an appeal to the conviction in October 2022.

The U.S. Sun can exclusively reveal he claimed in court papers that armed federal agents retrained him during the interrogation at his Arkansas car lot.

The court papers read: “Federal agents surveilled Duggar’s business, waiting for him to arrive. The business was accessible only by a divided highway with no sidewalk and was ‘in the middle of nowhere.’

"When Duggar arrived, agents—armed and wearing tactical gear—converged in six vehicles.

Sounds like LE did the job that the taxpayers hire 'em to do, imho.

Good!
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
121
Guests online
2,298
Total visitors
2,419

Forum statistics

Threads
601,842
Messages
18,130,523
Members
231,160
Latest member
jamiestews06
Back
Top