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

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
INMO, Josh Duggar's defense is going to be, "It wasn't me, it was..." and shift blame on anyone else. Reasonable Doubt.

That being said, I don't think it will work. From the limited information we have, the evidence has time and date of when the CSAM was downloaded, watched, on the specific device, that was password protected with Josh Duggar's login, on a computer that had a specific design to hide CSAM material on the device.

My opinion is that he should take whatever deal is offered. I doubt that he will. He is probably thinking that he can beat this. That will be amazing. Maybe his legal team can do it.

I wonder if this will be a jury trial or a bench trial? Can he choose?
 
mickey2942 said:
INMO, Josh Duggar's defense is going to be, "It wasn't me, it was..." and shift blame on anyone else. Reasonable Doubt.

That being said, I don't think it will work. From the limited information we have, the evidence has time and date of when the CSAM was downloaded, watched, on the specific device, that was password protected with Josh Duggar's login, on a computer that had a specific design to hide CSAM material on the device.

My opinion is that he should take whatever deal is offered. I doubt that he will. He is probably thinking that he can beat this. That will be amazing. Maybe his legal team can do it.

I wonder if this will be a jury trial or a bench trial? Can he choose?
Click to expand...

I agree. He will (attempt to) shift the blame onto anyone and everyone he can, not take a plea deal, and hopefully (God willing) get sent to the slammer.
 
A big problem is that the CSAM involved toddlers & young children. I can appreciate (not condone, mind you) that a juror or two might regard SA of an older teen as just a hair away from legal materials. Can’t do that kind of mental gymnastics with the ages here. JMO.
 
Shamrock1 said:
A big problem is that the CSAM involved toddlers & young children. I can appreciate (not condone, mind you) that a juror or two might regard SA of an older teen as just a hair away from legal materials. Can’t do that kind of mental gymnastics with the ages here. JMO.
Click to expand...

Exactly. It's not like they were 16. The youngest victim on the CSA material, that we know of, was 18 months old. That's pure, sick evil and pedophilia to the extreme. Nobody can defend that.
 
Josh Duggar Child *advertiser censored* Case: Judge Denies Another Defense Motion to Suppress Evidence Before Trial

Over the past several months, Josh Duggar's legal team has filed five motions regarding the evidence in his ongoing child sex abuse material case — all of which have now been denied by the presiding judge.

In a Monday court filing obtained by PEOPLE, District Judge Timothy L. Brooks denied the fifth and final motion, a request to suppress evidence gathered by law enforcement officials during the execution of a search warrant in November 2019.

The motion also included a request for a Franks hearing, which is a proceeding held to determine whether police lied in order to obtain a search warrant.

Duggar, who has pleaded not guilty to the charges of receiving and possessing child sex abuse material, had criticized "the methods used by law enforcement to obtain the search warrant," and argued that there was no probable cause to issue it.

Thus, he moved to suppress the evidence found during the execution of the warrant — video files downloaded from the computer at his then place of business, a car sales lot.

However, the court found that a Franks hearing is "not warranted" and denied the motion to suppress, meaning the evidence is fair for the government to use at his upcoming Nov. 30 trial.

"[Duggar] has not shown that federal agents acted with reckless disregard for proper procedure. And he certainly has not shown that the agents acted in bad faith," the Monday filing states.

"Moreover, Mr. Duggar cannot show that he was prejudiced by any delay; the devices remained in law enforcement's safe keeping throughout this time period, and the probable cause warranting the initial seizure of the devices remained viable through the date of indictment."
 
mickey2942 said:
INMO, Josh Duggar's defense is going to be, "It wasn't me, it was..." and shift blame on anyone else. Reasonable Doubt.

That being said, I don't think it will work. From the limited information we have, the evidence has time and date of when the CSAM was downloaded, watched, on the specific device, that was password protected with Josh Duggar's login, on a computer that had a specific design to hide CSAM material on the device.

My opinion is that he should take whatever deal is offered. I doubt that he will. He is probably thinking that he can beat this. That will be amazing. Maybe his legal team can do it.

I wonder if this will be a jury trial or a bench trial? Can he choose?
Click to expand...

Josh Duggar's defense team is trying to shift blame onto one of his employees who admitted to watching *advertiser censored* on the job

Your Quote:

"Josh Duggar's defense is going to be, "It wasn't me, it was..." and shift blame on anyone else. Reasonable Doubt."

In their latest effort to get Josh Duggar's child *advertiser censored* case tossed out, the former reality-TV star's defense team suggested that authorities should have looked into a different person of interest: one of Duggar's employees.

Duggar's team sought to cast blame on a person identified in court documents as Witness #1. Federal agents interviewed Witness #1 in December 2019, roughly one month after authorities first executed a search warrant at the dealership.

According to court documents, federal agents originally designated Witness #1 a "person of interest to the investigation."

Witness #1 told the investigators that he worked at Duggar's dealership, and had even stayed there overnight "without Duggar's knowledge or permission," Duggar's lawyers said.

Witness #1 also "admitted to viewing adult *advertiser censored* through websites he accessed through the internet on his cellular phone," though he denied viewing child *advertiser censored*, according to the court filing.

Though federal agents said in their report that they examined Witness #1's cellphone for evidence of child *advertiser censored* and found "negative results," Duggar's lawyers blasted the agents for not preserving any content or metadata from the phone.

According to the court filing, federal agents also interviewed two other people, identified as Witness #2 and Witness #3, who allowed investigators to search through their phones.

Defense Complaint

Duggar's defense team noted that the agents did not preserve evidence from either phone.
 
"Franks Hearing". To determine if LEO lied to obtain search warrant?

The effort to throw everything on the wall, to see what sticks is complete.

Yes, this situation can get more sordid by the day. So much for owning up and taking responsibility for your actions. Josh Duggar must have missed this ethics lesson somewhere along the line.
 
MsJosie said:
Josh Duggar ordered to provide alibi, witnesses before child *advertiser censored* case heads to trial


Trial is set for Nov 30, 2021.
Click to expand...

Didn't want to miss the pre-trial date.
I assume that's when he will provide the info ordered by the judge.

From your link,

Duggar is back in court again on November 18 for pre-trial,...
 
Tiff23fr said:
Mod Note:
I know this is an emotionally charged thread, but please keep in mind the thread is about Josh and his actions. Posts that continue to discuss family members that have not been named as a POI in this case will be removed.

A reminder of the rules can be found below. The Rules

VICTIM FRIENDLY

Websleuths is a victim friendly forum. Attacking or bashing a victim is not allowed. Discussing known victim behavior, good or bad is fine, but do so in a civil and constructive way, and only when such behavior is known to be relevant to the case.

The "victim friendly" rule extends to the family members of victims and suspects. Sleuthing family members, friends, and others who have not been designated as suspects is not allowed. Don't make random accusations, suggest their involvement, nor bash and attack them. Posting their personal information, including names, addresses, and background data -- even if it is public -- is not allowed. That does not mean, however, that statements made by family members and other third parties cannot come into discussion as the facts of the case are reported in the media.
Click to expand...
 
Scrapper18 said:
KARK is the local, Little Rock, AR NBC station. Wonder why the prosecution is just now trying to seize this computer?

Prosecution seeks possession of Josh Duggar's computer
Click to expand...

That's interesting, especially if the judge has to rule on it.

I wonder if LE seized the computer and downloaded files for the prosecution?

I think an all-in-one computer has the hard drive encased in the monitor. It may be hard for the jury to understand if they have never seen one.

I found this link talking about the seizure of the computer and files becoming stale and another link about forfeiture.

Judge refuses to suppress video evidence in Josh Duggar case | KNWA FOX24

Forfeiture
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 214 more.
Total: 4,372 (members: 215, guests: 4,157)

Online statistics

Members online
215
Guests online
4,157
Total visitors
4,372
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,334
Messages
17,967,665
Members
228,750
Latest member
AlternativeLuck
Back
Top