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

[sds71]

He could have taken a picture of himself
watching it.

Also, the guys he tried to blame it on weren’t there that day.
One was in jail


Further, because of the thoroughness of law enforcement’s investigation, the government has obtained evidence indicating that none of the three individuals identified in the defendant’s motion were present on the car lot in May 2019, when the defendant’s IP address was used to share child sexual abuse material online and when his computer was used to download such material. The government has also obtained and provided to the defense evidence establishing that the defendant was present on the car lot at this time. Indeed, the car lot belonged to the defendant and, based on his own business records, he appears to have been the only paid employee on the dates his computer was used to download child sexual abuse material.

Response to Motion – #47 in United States v. Duggar (W.D. Ark., 5:21-cr-50014) – CourtListener.com

 

[Shamrock1]

Oh my, not looking good for Josh: one of his co-workers was actually incarcerated for the entire time period that CSAM was accessed at the business. That’s fantastic. JMO.

Response to Motion – #47 in United States v. Duggar (W.D. Ark., 5:21-cr-50014) – CourtListener.com

 

[StarrChance]

The prosecutors filed their responses today.
Here’s part of one.


IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v. Criminal No. 5:21-CR-50014-001 JOSHUA JAMES DUGGAR

UNITED STATES’ RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SUPPRESS PHOTOGRAPHS OF DEFENDANT’S HANDS AND FEET

“The photographs document a scar on the defendant’s hand, which is plainly visible. Law enforcement observed the same scar in images recovered from the defendant’s electronic devices seized pursuant to a search warrant in this case”

Public Access to Court Electronic Records | PACER: Federal Court Records

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.arwd.62817/gov.uscourts.arwd.62817.47.0.pdf

In light of this I hope a judge can stop him having contact with his children.
Can his wife and family continue to support him?

 

[BeckyF]

Wow! So he is trying to blame other's for downloading these images? 1 witness was incarcerated on the dates in question. I wonder if witness 1 and 3 were his brothers. He is toast. These federal prosecutors have their ducks in a row!

 

[BeckyF]

In light of this I hope a judge can stop him having contact with his children.
Can his wife and family continue to support him?

The federal prosecutors already had all of this information. So did the judge. He wasn't charged with distribution of CSAM. JMO but to charge him with distribution, prosecutors would have to get a new indictment. I would have thought this would have already been done if they were going to do it. As long as he doesn't violate any conditions of his release, I don't think a judge will change any of the terms. Just my opinion. I am not a lawyer.

 

[IzzyBlanche]

He could have taken a picture of himself
watching it.


(snipped for focus)

I sincerely hope you are correct and this is the case rather than the horrific alternative.

 

[Shamrock1]

I sincerely hope you are correct and this is the case rather than the horrific alternative.

Maybe that Covenant Eyes software takes photos of the user? No clue.

 

[IzzyBlanche]

Maybe that Covenant Eyes software takes photos of the user? No clue.

That made me curious. I went to their website and nothing there indicates that.

Moreover, IIRC, the CSAM was accessed after Josh partitioned the computer so that part of it was under the Covenant Eyes surveillance and the stuff he was looking at was not.

 

[drama_farmer]

Could also be selfies of JD "pleasing" himself. I didn't see an indication in the document that the photos found on his PC included his identifiable hand and victims. Imo

I sincerely hope you are correct and this is the case rather than the horrific alternative.

 

[sds71]

Court papers exclusively obtained by The Sun reveal he was offered a plea deal in March, weeks before the arrest.

Prosecutors filed a motion in opposition of Josh’s request to “suppress evidence,” which means it can’t be used in court, including all evidence seized from his car lot in November 2019.

The exhibit attached to the filing includes an email from the government to Josh's lawyer that reveals they were offered a plea deal.


Josh Duggar REFUSED to accept a plea deal in child *advertiser censored* case

 

[tayaway]

US Sun (Sept 13), - focuses on JD's hands/feet.

The court filing provided the three images taken while Josh was in custody on April 29, 2021. ...

In the photos, Josh has his hands stretched out over his feet, as the pictures are taken from an angle above him. ...

The Sun can exclusively reveal the government is responding by demanding the judge deny the request.

The court papers claim Josh “expressly consented to having the photographs taken.”

The papers continued: “The photographs document a scar on the defendant’s hand, which is plainly visible.

“Law enforcement observed the same scar in images recovered from the defendant’s electronic devices seized pursuant to a search warrant in this case.”

“Significantly, Duggar’s cellular phone-including text messages he sent and pictures he took places him at the car lot on the date/times the child *advertiser censored* images were downloaded and distributed.”

What kind of photos did JD take of himself and who was the recipient? Do they involve CSAM or do the photos on the computer with his hand/s simply serve to prove he was at the car lot?

 

[Ruminations]

Court papers exclusively obtained by The Sun reveal he was offered a plea deal in March, weeks before the arrest.

Prosecutors filed a motion in opposition of Josh’s request to “suppress evidence,” which means it can’t be used in court, including all evidence seized from his car lot in November 2019.

The exhibit attached to the filing includes an email from the government to Josh's lawyer that reveals they were offered a plea deal.


Josh Duggar REFUSED to accept a plea deal in child *advertiser censored* case

How frustrating that the article does not give us the actual documents obtained.

This does explain Josh’s comment upon arrest, approximately, “Has someone been downloading CP?” He knew of the charges and his plans to plead not guilty. He was treating it like a game.

 

[sds71]

How frustrating that the article does not give us the actual documents obtained.

This does explain Josh’s comment upon arrest, approximately, “Has someone been downloading CP?” He knew of the charges and his plans to plead not guilty. He was treating it like a game.

UNITED STATES’ RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENTS AND REQUEST FOR EVIDENTIARY HEARING
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.arwd.62817/gov.uscourts.arwd.62817.44.0.pdf

UNITED STATES’ RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE AND REQUEST FOR FRANKS HEARINGhttps://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.arwd.62817/gov.uscourts.arwd.62817
.45.0.pdf

UNITED STATES’ RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SUPPRESS PHOTOGRAPHS OF DEFENDANT’S HANDS AND FEET
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.arwd.62817/gov.uscourts.arwd.62817.46.0.pdf

UNITED STATES’ RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO PRESERVE POTENTIALLY EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.arwd.62817/gov.uscourts.arwd.62817.47.0.pdf

UNITED STATES’ RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS INDICTMENT FOR VIOLATION OF THE APPOINTMENT’S CLAUSE
312492https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.arwd.62817/gov.uscourts.arwd.62817.48.0_2.pdf

 

[Shamrock1]

Could this be as simple as Josh’s hand getting in the photo of, say, a car for sale?

 

[TDoc72]

Could this be as simple as Josh’s hand getting in the photo of, say, a car for sale?

That’s what I think. They found his hands in some image or images on his phone. Probably just covering all the bases establishing it was indeed his phone. If they’d found CSA material w/his hands in that image, the charges would be very different.

 

[jessarox]

What kind of photos did JD take of himself and who was the recipient? Do they involve CSAM or do the photos on the computer with his hand/s simply serve to prove he was at the car lot?

My guess is that he was taking photos of cars that were for sale. His hand likely appeared in some of the photos so they can say that it was definitely him and not someone else using his phone. Maybe he sent a photo (or multiple photos) to his wife to prove he was actually at work? With all of his past scandals, I'm guessing that there are some trust issues and he had to send proof when he's "working late."

 

[Shamrock1]

I don’t do selfies, but I found a few recent photos of myself. Most of these are photos of my hand: a photo of a lightbulb or printer cartridge that I used to buy the exact replacement. Sort of how like a used car dealer might need a specific part or paint color? My hand is visible in a lot of texts with contractors. My guess is these photos just tie him to the car lot on a specific day.

 

[tayaway]

Sun US Sept 14

More fallout from the Josh mess. Only 2 of Michelle Duggar's children acknowledged her bday on social media. What is the message that some of them are sending by ignoring her publicly? Like Jim Bob, she stands by Josh.

...Will any of Josh's family members, like his victims, be called as witnesses for the prosecution, or will this case be completely walled off from his past?

 

[Shamrock1]

Sun US Sept 14

More fallout from the Josh mess. Only 2 of Michelle Duggar's children acknowledged her bday on social media. What is the message that some of them are sending by ignoring her publicly? Like Jim Bob, she stands by Josh.

...Will any of Josh's family members, like his victims, be called as witnesses for the prosecution, or will this case be completely walled off from his past?

His CSAM case should be “walled off from his past.” Prior bad acts generally not admissible. FRE 404(b). Basically, you can’t say he was bad in the past and therefore was bad here. There’s an exception for absence of a mistake, but I don’t see that flying here.
Rule 404. Character Evidence; Other Crimes, Wrongs, or Acts

 

[sds71]

No reason to dismiss Josh Duggar child *advertiser censored* case, suppress evidence, government contends