Josh Duggar charged with Receipt/Possession Child Sexual Abuse Material, 29 April 2021 #2

[Laughing]

I thought I read that somewhere. But aside from that, the rest is mind boggling. If you are going to go to the lengths to find this type of material, spend the time to learn how to mask your IP. And other means to lose your identity.

Josh Duggar may as well have put a red marker on the used car dealership on Google maps for LEO to find him.

Sitting on my hands, want to respond to this!

Yes, he could split the drive & hide the 'new' one, but didn't set a virtual -- whatever?

I'm old, I know that exists, I could certainly figure out how to mask my Internet provider.

Wow!

jmho ymmv lrr

 

[mickey2942]

Josh Duggar Granted Request To Ban Past Admission Of Porn Addiction In Upcoming Trial: Report

This is the case!

 

[Shamrock1]

Josh Duggar Granted Request To Ban Past Admission Of Porn Addiction In Upcoming Trial: Report

This is the case!

It is not the case. The case is that he downloaded CSAM, not that he was a hypocrite/addicted/unfaithful. Those statements are not crucial to the case. The existence of the Covenant Eyes software is somewhat important, but even if the existence of that software isn't allowed, it's hardly fatal to the prosecution. The fact that he set up the Tor partition will do. The jurors can make their own reasonable inferences about why someone would use Tor to view CSAM but then use Firefox or Internet Explorer to do banking, social media, etc.

I do think the judge ruled correctly here. He's not on trial for being a hypocrite/addicted/unfaithful.

JMO.

 

[BeckyF]

It is not the case. The case is that he downloaded CSAM, not that he was a hypocrite/addicted/unfaithful. Those statements are not crucial to the case. The existence of the Covenant Eyes software is somewhat important, but even if the existence of that software isn't allowed, it's hardly fatal to the prosecution. The fact that he set up the Tor partition will do. The jurors can make their own reasonable inferences about why someone would use Tor to view CSAM but then use Firefox or Internet Explorer to do banking, social media, etc.

I do think the judge ruled correctly here. He's not on trial for being a hypocrite/addicted/unfaithful.

JMO.

I agree. I believe the government has a strong case. I’m basing some of my opinion on the guilty verdicts in other CSAM cases I’ve researched and it certainly appears to me they have a strong case.

 

[IzzyBlanche]

Interesting that prosecutor said Jim Bob had been “impossible to reach.” Judge calls for evidentiary hearing during Josh Duggar child pornography pre-trial conference

He's too busy running for public office to be bothered by a trivial thing like a subpoena in his son's CSAM trial.

 

[watcher9]

I thought the Judge had ordered Josh to provide an alibi of where he was that day and list of any witnesses to the court at this hearing? I haven't seen anything about an alibi and the only witness is his dad? Did his "new" attorney not have the time?

 

[sds71]

The judge stated that he will blend the two and include jury instructions in an upcoming Statement of the Case.

Judge Brooks scheduled an evidentiary hearing for November 29 that will include the witnesses at issue in opposing court filings. Jury selection is scheduled to begin on November 30 at the Fayetteville District Court.


Trial protocols, jury selection procedures outlined in Josh Duggar child porn pretrial hearing

 

[BeckyF]

Free access to the court docket is here.
United States v. Duggar, 5:21-cr-50014 – CourtListener.com

 

[Scrapper18]

Judge addresses witness lists and opening statements in Josh Duggar child porn pretrial hearing

 

[mickey2942]

"Duggar faces up to 20 years in prison and fines of up to $250,000 on each count if convicted".

How many charges does he have?

I wonder if this is a jury or bench trial? JMO, I wouldn't be able to serve on this jury if you had to view the CSAM.

 

[MsMarple]

Free access to the court docket is here.
United States v. Duggar, 5:21-cr-50014 – CourtListener.com

Thanks for the link! So it looks like no media will be allowed to report directly from the courtroom during the trial.

From Judge addresses witness lists and opening statements in Josh Duggar child porn pretrial hearing:
After initially requesting up to 45 minutes for an opening statement, the prosecution agreed on keeping it to 30 minutes as long as the defense does as well.

The judge commented on the possibility of the attorneys using graphic displays during opening statements, such as a PowerPoint presentation. He stated that such a visual aid, if it can be put into words, can be used without prior clearance.
...
When asked how long they anticipated the trial might take, the prosecution estimated that their case could entail “a solid three days of evidence,” with a chance of “bleeding into a fourth.”
...
An evidentiary hearing is scheduled for November 29. Jury selection is set to begin on November 30 at the Fayetteville District Court.

 

[Scrapper18]

Josh Duggar child porn trial: No phones, laptops or recording devices allowed in courtroom, judge rules

 

[Ruminations]

In my ideal world everything would be admitted at trial but all we can do is wait and see what the court decides. I do wonder if any of his past molestation charges could be brought into the sentencing phase if he's convicted. I would think that it should be shown that past counseling didn't prevent Josh's attraction to violent CSAM so maybe probation or a shortened sentence wouldn't be appropriate.

Didn't Josh also molest a non-family member? I wonder if she could testify. If she was willing of course.

That witnesses testimony could be quite off-topic, or extremely relevant, depending on what happened. She might have been a victim closest in age to him, showing his early disregard for consent... but that sounds more incriminating for a rape charge. On the other hand, if they were not close in age, or if he expressed verbally his sexual interest in Girl children and babies, it would be very on topic. If her testimony would be helpful:

1) she could be subpoenaed, willing or not . But who wants to torture an unwilling witness who would give the most unhelpful version of the truth, at best, if forced to testify. The prosecution looks mean and gets little information, if the witness does not lie, and no info or exculpatory testimony if she does like.

2) It could be arranged to have the witness interviewed by a forensic psychologist with her appearance pixilized and voice disguised. Then the psychologist could testify. This would be an option if the witness wanted the jury to know what happened, but wanted her ID protected from those who don’t already run in those circles, and know. It seems to me that she would be shamed and blamed - IMO - based on what I know of this circle of independent Baptist’s.

 

[Shamrock1]

That witnesses testimony could be quite off-topic, or extremely relevant, depending on what happened. She might have been a victim closest in age to him, showing his early disregard for consent... but that sounds more incriminating for a rape charge. On the other hand, if they were not close in age, or if he expressed verbally his sexual interest in Girl children and babies, it would be very on topic. If her testimony would be helpful:

1) she could be subpoenaed, willing or not . But who wants to torture an unwilling witness who would give the most unhelpful version of the truth, at best, if forced to testify. The prosecution looks mean and gets little information, if the witness does not lie, and no info or exculpatory testimony if she does like.

2) It could be arranged to have the witness interviewed by a forensic psychologist with her appearance pixilized and voice disguised. Then the psychologist could testify. This would be an option if the witness wanted the jury to know what happened, but wanted her ID protected from those who don’t already run in those circles, and know. It seems to me that she would be shamed and blamed - IMO - based on what I know of this circle of independent Baptist’s.

I’d be very surprised if molestation testimony is allowed. Even if molestation from early 2000s is relevant to downloading CSAM in 2019, it’s so prejudicial. He’s not on trial for molestation. (Definitely relevant from a common-sense perspective, of course). JMO.

 

[Kristin Esq.]

"Duggar faces up to 20 years in prison and fines of up to $250,000 on each count if convicted".

How many charges does he have?

I wonder if this is a jury or bench trial? JMO, I wouldn't be able to serve on this jury if you had to view the CSAM.

It's a two count indictment.

 

[Kristin Esq.]

Members of the public and media are prohibited from entering the courthouse with cell phones, recording devices, or any other electronic device such as laptops or tablets, unless the court grants specific, advance permissions.

This is for the evidentiary hearing and the trial.

 

[mickey2942]

It's a two count indictment.

So, he could face 40 years in federal prison if convicted on both counts? Federal charges are mandatory minimum sentences, 20 years, each count?

The reporting on this hasn't been exactly clear.

 

[Kristin Esq.]

So, he could face 40 years in federal prison if convicted on both counts? Federal charges are mandatory minimum sentences, 20 years, each count?

The reporting on this hasn't been exactly clear.

18 USC 2252A(a)(2) - can be sentenced between 15-40 years.
18 USC 2252A(A)(5)(B) - can be sentenced between 10-20 years depending on the age of the child.

 

[mickey2942]

So, minimum for both counts is 25 years. Up to 60 years if he gets the maximum for both counts.

Wow.

 

[Rose in SC]

So, minimum for both counts is 25 years. Up to 60 years if he gets the maximum for both counts.

Wow.

Sixty sounds good to me.

And there is no parole on federal charges?