Josh Duggar arrested and in federal custody

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t see him pleading guilty because he had never faced any consequences for anything he has done.

Really? It wouldn’t take much viewing of the material for the jury to want to vote to have him drawn and quartered right there in the courtroom. He’d be a fool to choose anything other than a plea.

I think he actually would plead guilty, in order to control the story. He's charged with possessing/downloading the material. He can "admit" to that and spin it his own way, as is typical. He "admitted" to molesting his sisters, but it was spun as a sinful, confused teenager making mistakes (...over and over) and he was counseled and punished, and has repented. He and the family can spin this as well--he can admit his guilt, and frame it as a momentary lapse in judgment (...over and over) which is part of his ongoing addiction, for which he is in treatment/being counseled/praying for deliverance, etc. To plead not guilty and then be convicted would be allowing someone in power to outright determine that he is a liar, and that can never happen. He's never faced any consequences, and pleading guilty allows him to avoid the most serious ones.

Not in federal court. Pleading guilty in federal court is very different than state court.

But there will probably be some negotiation and incentive to plead guilty rather than roll the dice, right? Otherwise, how do US Attorneys get anyone to take a plea?

There are minimum sentences. The benefit to a plea is not airing all of his dirty laundry.

[Anonymous]

I should have added that he will only take a plea when his efforts to suppress evidence fail.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Child advocacy groups and the federal government are both trying to get the language changed from Child Pornography to Child Sexual Abuse Material. Many are already using this term. The laws haven’t caught up yet so they have to charge him officially with CP for now.

I agree with the problematic language, because if you think about it, there can be no such thing as "child porn."

100

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t see him pleading guilty because he had never faced any consequences for anything he has done.

Really? It wouldn’t take much viewing of the material for the jury to want to vote to have him drawn and quartered right there in the courtroom. He’d be a fool to choose anything other than a plea.

I think he actually would plead guilty, in order to control the story. He's charged with possessing/downloading the material. He can "admit" to that and spin it his own way, as is typical. He "admitted" to molesting his sisters, but it was spun as a sinful, confused teenager making mistakes (...over and over) and he was counseled and punished, and has repented. He and the family can spin this as well--he can admit his guilt, and frame it as a momentary lapse in judgment (...over and over) which is part of his ongoing addiction, for which he is in treatment/being counseled/praying for deliverance, etc. To plead not guilty and then be convicted would be allowing someone in power to outright determine that he is a liar, and that can never happen. He's never faced any consequences, and pleading guilty allows him to avoid the most serious ones.

Not in federal court. Pleading guilty in federal court is very different than state court.

But there will probably be some negotiation and incentive to plead guilty rather than roll the dice, right? Otherwise, how do US Attorneys get anyone to take a plea?

There are minimum sentences. The benefit to a plea is not airing all of his dirty laundry.

No, in federal court the benefit is avoiding trial, that's it. Not better/lesser charges and sentencing.

[Anonymous]

I'm half hoping he pleads not guilty. Let someone outside of the Cult determine his fate. Jim Bob will be far too involved in any plea deal.

Give the decision to someone/people he has no influence over.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm half hoping he pleads not guilty. Let someone outside of the Cult determine his fate. Jim Bob will be far too involved in any plea deal.

Give the decision to someone/people he has no influence over.

+1
I want to see him literally judged. For the POS he and his family are.

[Anonymous]

I'm definitely not a federal crime expert, but it isn't true that there's no advantage to a plea agreement in federal court. The sentences have ranges, right? While there may be mandatory minimums, if you're found guilty at trial, the penalty can be worse than what the AUSA recommends in a plea agreement. If there were no difference between a plea agreement sentence and a post-conviction sentence, why wouldn't more federal criminal defendants be taking the chance of going to trial and being found not guilty?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t see him pleading guilty because he had never faced any consequences for anything he has done.

Really? It wouldn’t take much viewing of the material for the jury to want to vote to have him drawn and quartered right there in the courtroom. He’d be a fool to choose anything other than a plea.

I think he actually would plead guilty, in order to control the story. He's charged with possessing/downloading the material. He can "admit" to that and spin it his own way, as is typical. He "admitted" to molesting his sisters, but it was spun as a sinful, confused teenager making mistakes (...over and over) and he was counseled and punished, and has repented. He and the family can spin this as well--he can admit his guilt, and frame it as a momentary lapse in judgment (...over and over) which is part of his ongoing addiction, for which he is in treatment/being counseled/praying for deliverance, etc. To plead not guilty and then be convicted would be allowing someone in power to outright determine that he is a liar, and that can never happen. He's never faced any consequences, and pleading guilty allows him to avoid the most serious ones.

Not in federal court. Pleading guilty in federal court is very different than state court.

But there will probably be some negotiation and incentive to plead guilty rather than roll the dice, right? Otherwise, how do US Attorneys get anyone to take a plea?

There are minimum sentences. The benefit to a plea is not airing all of his dirty laundry.

No, in federal court the benefit is avoiding trial, that's it. Not better/lesser charges and sentencing.

We are saying the same thing. I’m saying that given the problematic nature of the videos and pictures on his electronics, he can avoid having them shown or described in court by taking a plea.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t see him pleading guilty because he had never faced any consequences for anything he has done.

Really? It wouldn’t take much viewing of the material for the jury to want to vote to have him drawn and quartered right there in the courtroom. He’d be a fool to choose anything other than a plea.

I think he actually would plead guilty, in order to control the story. He's charged with possessing/downloading the material. He can "admit" to that and spin it his own way, as is typical. He "admitted" to molesting his sisters, but it was spun as a sinful, confused teenager making mistakes (...over and over) and he was counseled and punished, and has repented. He and the family can spin this as well--he can admit his guilt, and frame it as a momentary lapse in judgment (...over and over) which is part of his ongoing addiction, for which he is in treatment/being counseled/praying for deliverance, etc. To plead not guilty and then be convicted would be allowing someone in power to outright determine that he is a liar, and that can never happen. He's never faced any consequences, and pleading guilty allows him to avoid the most serious ones.

Not in federal court. Pleading guilty in federal court is very different than state court.

But there will probably be some negotiation and incentive to plead guilty rather than roll the dice, right? Otherwise, how do US Attorneys get anyone to take a plea?

There are minimum sentences. The benefit to a plea is not airing all of his dirty laundry.

No, in federal court the benefit is avoiding trial, that's it. Not better/lesser charges and sentencing.

We are saying the same thing. I’m saying that given the problematic nature of the videos and pictures on his electronics, he can avoid having them shown or described in court by taking a plea.

I don’t think he cares. I also think that these child abusers have lost touch with what is appropriate. Obviously he knows it’s bad and bad enough to hide, but on some level, I don’t think these terrible people think it’s that bad and his personal history has taught him that he will get away with everything. That seems unlikely to me given what everyone has said about the conviction rates in federal courts, but he has no problem traumatizing a jury in a pursuit he will think is destined to get him out on the street again.

[Anonymous]

What do others think his defense will be? Just simply that he did not do it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What do others think his defense will be? Just simply that he did not do it?

I think he will plead guilty. But if he did go to trial, I would say:
(1) Suppression arguments to try and keep some of the evidence out
(2) Exclude prior acts at trial
(3) Create reasonable doubt with the possibility that someone else could have logged in with his password and done it.
That's all I see at the moment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What do others think his defense will be? Just simply that he did not do it?

He had an ex con working at the car lot at one point in time. I bet he'd happily say it might have been that guy instead. Or even possibly one of his brothers or a customer or or or...I don't think he has any shame about throwing someone else under the bus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm half hoping he pleads not guilty. Let someone outside of the Cult determine his fate. Jim Bob will be far too involved in any plea deal.

Give the decision to someone/people he has no influence over.

+1
I want to see him literally judged. For the POS he and his family are.

ME TOO

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do others think his defense will be? Just simply that he did not do it?

He had an ex con working at the car lot at one point in time. I bet he'd happily say it might have been that guy instead. Or even possibly one of his brothers or a customer or or or...I don't think he has any shame about throwing someone else under the bus.

Or, his lawyers will say...Would he testify?

[Anonymous]

None of these sisters are virtuous. They just get married when they are teens so that they can have sex. Then they pop out kids. They basically allowed a sex offender to remain and now they are wringing their hands to distance themselves from him because the gravy train will stop.

We need to cancel TLC. It is a disgusting organization.