Defense attorneys had asked for a five-year stretch, the lightest possible punishment, insisting that Duggar, said to be a devoted dad and committed Christian, maintained his innocence and intended to appeal.
They argued that, of the approximately 600 [CSAM] images identified by investigators, only a small portion had been viewed and none of those fell into the category of 'sadistic or masochistic'.
Prosecutors demanded a 20-year term – the maximum possible – arguing that it was hard to think of anything more sadistic that a grown man raping a little girl.
They said Duggar had never sought treatment or shown any acceptance of his warped appetites and thus had a high chance of re-offending.
To illustrate the lasting devastation done to child
victims, the government reproduced testimony from the mother of a young girl who had appeared in one of the videos Duggar downloaded.
'My daughter is a real person,' the mother stated. 'She was horribly victimized to provide this source of 'entertainment'. She is exploited anew each and every time an image of her suffering is copied, traded or sold.
'I asked my daughter what she most wanted to ask of the judge. Her request: 'Please, don't let them pretend no-one's getting hurt!'
'She had some words for the defendant as well: 'don't you know no one should do that to a little girl! Don't you know it hurts!'
Recalling the mother's words in court, Judge Brooks described the testimony as 'chilling'.
'For the victims it never goes away. It's on the internet, probably for forever,' he told the court, which was packed with Duggar's friends and family.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...tice-appeal-child-🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬-conviction.html
It's hard to understand exactly what Josh's defense team is claiming when saying he's innocent because someone at the car dealership could have hacked his computer and downloaded the CSAM. At the same time his defense team argued for leniency in sentencing because they claimed that only a small portion of the 600 images were downloaded and none were 'sadistic or masochistic'.
How is Josh going to enroll in a treatment program if he insists he is innocent?
Does Anna truly believe Josh is innocent and safe to be around her children or is she playing some strategic game in order to assure she and her kids have a home and money to live on? Either way IMO the letter from Anna that's in the DM article is extremely self-serving.
As for the appeal I think it's not going to be successful; in the article it's noted that in evidence is a cell phone photo that shows Josh's reflection on the computer screen. The metadata showed 4:20pm on May 14, 2019 – less than an hour before Duggar's computer downloaded CSAM entitled 'webcam collection'.
There's also a receipt in evidence that Josh transacted a car sale the same day. Josh was specifically named as the salesperson. More info at the link.
P.S. WS censor bot won't properly link the article due to the use of [CSAM] alternative word in the link. Google Josh Duggar and the article will come up.
www.bop.gov
