Josh Duggar charged with Receipt/Possession Child Sexual Abuse Material, 29 April 2021 #1

[killarney rose]

If Biden were going to set someone up, why would he choose Josh who is irrelevant to most people, especially in politics?
Conspiracy theories don’t have to make sense, though.

disclaimer: not a Biden(or Trump)fan here.

why on earth would she think Biden has it in for Josh , even knows who he is for that matter? He’s a very small fish in a very large sea. I’m sure Biden has way too much on his plate to go after a smarmy used car salesman in Arkansas. Just shows how deep into the kool aid and out of touch with reality that Anna is.

 

[mickey2942]

disclaimer: not a Biden(or Trump)fan here.

why on earth would she think Biden has it in for Josh , even knows who he is for that matter? He’s a very small fish in a very large sea. I’m sure Biden has way too much on his plate to go after a smarmy used car salesman in Arkansas. Just shows how deep into the kool aid and out of touch with reality that Anna is.

Which is exactly why Anna should not be allowed to "supervise" Josh around their children.

The Judge is out to lunch here.

 

[BeckyF]

If Biden were going to set someone up, why would he choose Josh who is irrelevant to most people, especially in politics?
Conspiracy theories don’t have to make sense, though.

The Duggar’s are staunch Republicans. Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee supported Michelle and Jim Bob after the molestation scandal was revealed. I’m not judging them for their political choices at all. Just interesting in light of what Anna said.
Josh Duggar: Mike Huckabee Defends the '19 Kids and Counting' Star

 

[Inthedetails]

No, the jury should see it.

I think the jury should see it too. Or, at least have it described to them in detail. CP is not Playboy pictures except with a 17yo instead of 18. I really don't think people get it. CP is images of graphic assault on kids and, in Josh's case, toddlers. It's graphic violence against children and the viewers are entertained by it. The jury needs to know exactly how bad it is.

jmo

 

[rjay]

The Duggar’s are staunch Republicans. Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee supported Michelle and Jim Bob after the molestation scandal was revealed. I’m not judging them for their political choices at all. Just interesting in light of what Anna said.
Josh Duggar: Mike Huckabee Defends the '19 Kids and Counting' Star

Interesting article. He admits that people do “regrettable and disgusting things”. Well? Then should he not have to face the consequences of these “regrettable” and by the way, illegal “things”?

(adding) - MOO

 

[tayaway]

If you believe what is in this article, I’m curious as to why Anna has cut off contact with the other family members. She is supporting Josh and his parents have minimized the seriousness of his previous actions for years. So why are they on the outs?

The article itself notes that she's in denial and blames his parents for the way they dealt with him when he molested 4 of his sisters and a babysitter. MOO: Even with her lifelong cult brainwashing, she can't handle the reality that her husband is a pedophile. It's easier to push his family away as the bad guy then to admit who she married.

The Duggar’s are staunch Republicans. Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee supported Michelle and Jim Bob after the molestation scandal was revealed. I’m not judging them for their political choices at all. Just interesting in light of what Anna said.
Josh Duggar: Mike Huckabee Defends the '19 Kids and Counting' Star

Yes, as the article states, Huckabee supported him in 2015, but does he now?

 

[rjay]

The article itself notes that she's in denial and blames his parents for the way they dealt with him when he molested 4 of his sisters and a babysitter. MOO: Even with her lifelong cult brainwashing, she can't handle the reality that her husband is a pedophile. It's easier to push his family away as the bad guy then to admit who she married.



Yes, as the article states, Huckabee supported him in 2015, but does he now?

I agree with most of what you have said here. But I would add that she while she was aware of JD’s “discretions” from when he was a teen, there’s little doubt in my mind that Jim and Michelle minimized the extent of his actions and sugar coated the situation with religious sprinkles on top.

However, she is right, they bear some or much of the burden of fault, simply because they did not report the assault of the minor victims. Anna may not have made good choices, but certainly Josh did not receive sufficient punishment and effective counselling to prevent re-offending.

Anna is a victim as well.

MOO

 

[jessarox]

I agree with most of what you have said here. But I would add that she while she was aware of JD’s “discretions” from when he was a teen, there’s little doubt in my mind that Jim and Michelle minimized the extent of his actions and sugar coated the situation with religious sprinkles on top.

However, she is right, they bear some or much of the burden of fault, simply because they did not report the assault of the minor victims. Anna may not have made good choices, but certainly Josh did not receive sufficient punishment and effective counselling to prevent re-offending.

Anna is a victim as well.

MOO

I 100% agree. Anyone can look at the interviews that Jim Bob and Michelle did after the molestation became public knowledge and compare it to the police report and see that they LIED. They made it out like Josh was just "curious" and touched the girls when they were asleep and the girls didn't know about it. But the police report indicated that the girls knew and it wasn't just when they were asleep. There was one incident where he touched a girl on his lap while reading a book and IIRC other children were around too. There was another incident where he cornered a girl in the laundry room.

I have no doubt in my mind that they downplayed it to Anna and she likely still has no idea the extent of what he did because she can't or doesn't want to go in search of the truth. It's not like Anna is likely to go searching the internet for the truth about her husband, she has likely been told over and over not to trust outsiders. You can see it in action if you ever see a negative or criticizing comment about the family, Josh, etc. on her social media profiles. The comment will be deleted and the profile is blocked.

 

[CrimeAway]

I think the jury should see it too. Or, at least have it described to them in detail. CP is not Playboy pictures except with a 17yo instead of 18. I really don't think people get it. CP is images of graphic assault on kids and, in Josh's case, toddlers. It's graphic violence against children and the viewers are entertained by it. The jury needs to know exactly how bad it is.

jmo

I agree.

When I searched to try and find a general idea of what "DD" might refer to, I was horrified. Somewhere along the way, I came across a YouTube documentary that discussed hurtporn, a term I was not familiar with. It's really horrific what is out there, and I can't imagine the trauma of the victims.

Part of me regrets even learning about the existence of hurtporn, but I also feel it's important to acknowledge what evil and depravity exists, so we can root it out and prevent more children becoming victims. Ugh

 

[usnuzuloose]

After hearing and learning more, I think this judge out of her mind.

 

[Tutter]

After hearing and learning more, I think this judge out of her mind.

I get that he was released, but having Anna be his supervisor for the kids is not appropriate on any level. It is so wrong and infuriating. Based on what he allegedly downloaded, he shouldn’t be around any kids at all period IMO, but a neutral party should be supervising his visits.

I do feel it likely he will violate some restriction and have to return to custody. I don’t think any of his sitters will tell on him, but I am fairly confident he is being watched closely by the feds.

 

[jessarox]

After hearing and learning more, I think this judge out of her mind.

I'm torn on whether the judge did the right thing. On one hand, she let someone out that is (to us) a danger to society. On the other hand, he has no prior convictions of anything. Even though he has admitted to hurting people, he's never been tried and convicted before. It's a tough situation to be in.

I think she ultimately made the decision she did so that the courts would not be tied up in litigation on whether Josh's constitutional rights were being violated by being held without bond. I think we're going to see some very scummy loophole arguments from the defense in this case.

There's already going to be a dispute on whether his rights were violated when the investigators confiscated his phone when he asked for a lawyer. The timing of that action may result in some evidence being inadmissible but I'm hoping everything was done 100% by the book so that everything they have can be used.

Another thing to consider is that she basically gave Josh just enough rope to hang himself with. If he violates any of the terms of his release, he's in for a rude awakening and likely more time on his sentence.

 

[Inthedetails]

I'm torn on whether the judge did the right thing. On one hand, she let someone out that is (to us) a danger to society. On the other hand, he has no prior convictions of anything. Even though he has admitted to hurting people, he's never been tried and convicted before. It's a tough situation to be in.

I think she ultimately made the decision she did so that the courts would not be tied up in litigation on whether Josh's constitutional rights were being violated by being held without bond. I think we're going to see some very scummy loophole arguments from the defense in this case.

There's already going to be a dispute on whether his rights were violated when the investigators confiscated his phone when he asked for a lawyer. The timing of that action may result in some evidence being inadmissible but I'm hoping everything was done 100% by the book so that everything they have can be used.

Another thing to consider is that she basically gave Josh just enough rope to hang himself with. If he violates any of the terms of his release, he's in for a rude awakening and likely more time on his sentence.

I agree. Given the legal information she had to go by, I think he was going to be released.

However, she didn't have to agree to a caregiver who has misgivings and no experience in this type of situation. I think the judge could have insisted on placement more appropriate for everyone involved, not just for Josh.

jmo

 

[BeckyF]

Interesting article. He admits that people do “regrettable and disgusting things”. Well? Then should he not have to face the consequences of these “regrettable” and by the way, illegal “things”?

(adding) - MOO

Of course he should. <modsnip>

 

[Alethea]

I wish the media would start referring to it as Child Sex Abuse Material (CSAM). It's not . It's not consenting adults making a movie. It's filming the rape and abuse of children. What's happening is a crime. Filming it is a crime. Watching it is a crime. No one should watch the violent rape and abuse of a child.

 

[usnuzuloose]

Has anyone read the police report from 06? If not it may change people's minds.

 

[usnuzuloose]

I wish the media would start referring to it as Child Sex Abuse Material (CSAM). It's not . It's not consenting adults making a movie. It's filming the rape and abuse of children. What's happening is a crime. Filming it is a crime. Watching it is a crime. No one should watch the violent rape and abuse of a child.

According to the feds he was in a very dark web of the issue. Just trying to keep it as kindly as I can. I guess it was very disturbing. Josh has gone beyond the limits with the kind of exposure.

 

[Ontario Mom]

I wish the media would start referring to it as Child Sex Abuse Material (CSAM). It's not . It's not consenting adults making a movie. It's filming the rape and abuse of children. What's happening is a crime. Filming it is a crime. Watching it is a crime. No one should watch the violent rape and abuse of a child.

I'm in complete agreement on this.
I've never called it that, and have always hated that it IS called that.

 

[Ontario Mom]

Has anyone read the police report from 06? If not it may change people's minds.

Do you have a link handy for accessing the report?

 

[Inthedetails]

I'm in complete agreement on this.
I've never called it that, and have always hated that it IS called that.

I totally get it, but please keep in mind that some of us (me included) aren't up to date with the correct terminology and it's hard to break old habits. I called it CP knowing it is not "" but fell back into the out-dated term

Using and repeating the right terms helps the rest of us get into the right habits. It's not an intentional downplaying of what the material is, at least not in all cases. Public education is worthwhile, but does take time, even for those of us open to change.

jmo