Posted on 11/04/2021 4:30:30 PM PDT by Morgana
FAYETTEVILLE, Ark. (KNWA/KFTA) — The prosecution in the Josh Duggar child pornography case filed multiple motions on November 3, asking the judge to allow them to discuss Duggar’s past sexual molestation allegations.
Duggar, 33, is charged in a two-count indictment alleging one count of receipt of child pornography and one count of possession of child pornography. Duggar has pleaded not guilty to both counts.
According to court documents, the prosecution says it may seek to introduce evidence at trial that Duggar committed other acts of sexual molestation.
The prosecution anticipates the evidence will consist of testimony that Duggar was investigated for, admitted to, and received counseling for sexually molesting minor females, beginning around 2002.
In light of this anticipated defense and pursuant to Federal Rules of Evidence 414 and 404(b), the government now provides the defendant with notice that it may seek to introduce evidence at trial that the defendant committed other acts of child molestation, as that term is defined by Rule 414. Specifically, the government notices its intent to introduce evidence that in approximately 2002 and 2003, before he committed the offenses charged in the indictment in this case and while living in Arkansas, the defendant attempted to and did commit a crime as defined by Arkansas state law involving contact between any part of the defendant’s body and a child’s genitals or anus—namely, sexual assault in the second degree, presently codified at Ark. Code Ann. § 5-14-125. If introduced, the government anticipates that the evidence will consist of testimony that the defendant was investigated for, admitted to, and received counseling for touching and sexually molesting multiple minor females, including at least one instance involving the digital penetration of a prepubescent minor. Western District of Arkansas
(Excerpt) Read more at nwahomepage.com ...
It could be devastating to the defense, if the judge allows evidence involving his admitted viewing of pornography.
Legally there is a distinction between adult pornography and child pornography. The jury could conclude if he’s into adult pornography, that it’s likely he got into child pornography as well.
From what I understand, they have the evidence of child pornography on his system, but his defense involves denying he
downloaded it from the internet.
Seems doubtful these minor females were strangers...how did he know them and were they relatives?
4 of his sisters, a babysitter and possibly someone from his church. That last one is speculation as I’m getting that information off Reddit.
His juvy records were sealed but In Touch magazine got a hold of them from a FOIA and spilled the beans back in 2015.
Looks like now the sisters and that babysitter may be called to testify.
The prosecutor brings this up and he’s done for.
“It could be devastating to the defense, if the judge allows evidence involving his admitted viewing of pornography.”
What about what he did to his sisters? That in itself proves he is a predator and will abuse little girls.
“From what I understand, they have the evidence of child pornography on his system, but his defense involves denying he
downloaded it from the internet.”
About a week ago he lost his bid to prove an “alibi”. If you recall he’s trying to say others using the computer did the crime. It would seem the crime occurred after the car lot was closed and only Josh was there. Strange Anna does not wonder why he does not come home?
Also those three he is trying to throw under the bus? They are relatives! They are inlaws the Duggars had working for them. So yes this is how low Jim Bob is and how in the slime he will go to protect “poor little Josh”.
Now do you see why there are so many youtube channels wanting to see Josh in prison? There is also Reddit forums but they massive and I really can’t keep up with those.
This family really is that nasty
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.