Josh Duggar’s lawyers filed two motions to dismiss: could this actually happen?

Josh Duggar appears to smirk for his arrest photo

In 2019, Homeland Security raided Josh Duggar’s place of business, the car dealership where he works in Arkansas. There were always rumors about the dealership and how there were shady financials and perhaps even money laundering happening, and people thought at the time that the raid was about undocumented immigrants or fraud. But no, the raid was about Josh Duggar accessing dark-web sites with images of the sexual abuse of children. Duggar was arrested several months ago in connection with the images found on his work computer in 2019. I bring up the timeline because from what we’ve seen so far, Homeland Security got all of their proverbial ducks in a row on this case. They wanted this case bulletproof, which is likely why it took so long for Duggar to be arrested and charged after the 2019 raid. According to Duggar’s lawyers though, the case is some kind of mess and it should be dismissed.

Josh Duggar’s family has filed two motions to dismiss his child porn case, according to documents obtained by PEOPLE. In motions filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Arkansas on Friday, Duggar’s attorneys argue that his case should be dismissed because of technicalities over who was running the Department of Homeland Security at the time of their investigation. They also say investigators failed to “preserve potentially exculpatory evidence.”

Duggar pleaded not guilty to charges of receiving and possessing child pornography in April. Prosecutors said that the former reality TV personality had more than 200 images of children on his computer.

A virtual hearing was held in May, where agent Gerald Faulkner provided a summary of DHS’ forensic analysis of Duggar’s devices, including an HP computer and a Macbook that included a backup of an iPhone. Faulkner said multiple torrent files had been downloaded from a child abuse series he described as within the “top five of the worst of the worst” that he has ever examined.

Agents conducted a search of Duggar’s Springdale, Arkansas, car dealership in November 2019, including his electronic devices. Agents also conducted interviews of people who had access to those devices, and did not find child pornography on any of their devices.

In one of the motions filed Friday, Duggar’s lawyers suggest that child pornography could have been transferred from one of those devices onto Duggar’s, but claim investigators “preserved no evidence whatsoever” from the witnesses’ devices. Duggar’s lawyers argue that that evidence could have been “exculpatory.”

“The problem is that [DHS’ Homeland Security Investigations division] may have not identified evidence of child pornography during the field examination of these devices — but failed to preserve other potentially exculpatory evidence,” the motion says. “For example, the devices may have contained content as to whether these devices had any relevant internet search history, any evidence associated with the so-called ‘dark web’ and/or the Bit Torrent network, any metadata that might pinpoint the whereabouts of the devices at various dates and times, and the list goes on,” the motion says.

While Duggar’s criminal trial was initially set to begin in early July, it was delayed in June to November 30 after the defense said it needed more time to forensically analyze all of the electronic devices involved in the investigation.

[From People]

From what I understand, Duggar’s lawyers are arguing that someone else could have downloaded the images onto his work computer, backup laptop and phone, and that while DHS investigated that possibility, DHS did not provide the evidence of other people’s child-abuse-free computers. That argument seems bullsh-tty to me, but I’m actually pretty concerned that the court has been too obsequious to Josh’s wants and needs. The court gave him unlimited access to his children, for God’s sake. Anyway, I hope DHS prepared their case properly and I hope the prosecutor is really good.

josh duggar 4

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Instagram.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

19 Responses to “Josh Duggar’s lawyers filed two motions to dismiss: could this actually happen?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Mko says:

    It’s allegedly bc one of the officers involved in his case was found with CP shared with Duggar. It’s completely ruined the case.

    • Jensies says:

      Whoa! Srsly? Any links?

    • Layla Beans says:

      I think you’re thinking of the first time Josh was busted when he offended on his sisters. The cop the parents went to about it was eventually caught with CSA images.

  2. Lucky Charm says:

    Josh Duggar and his parents are slimeballs. He should be behind bars right now, not hanging out at his dad’s friends house until the trial. Jim Bob should be in jail right along with him for all of his criminal deeds and cover-ups.

  3. Steph says:

    Does anyone know enough about the laws in AK to be able to tell me if the unlimited access to his children was a choice on the judges part? Could he have denied that?

    I want to the judge’s ruling. I don’t know anything about Arkansas but I know in many places just receiving/ sending a nude of a minor is a crime. Even if it’s the exchange is between minors. Consent on receiving the image has no baring.

  4. Sam the Pink says:

    I highly doubt the case will be thrown out. Most downloaded images will contain information as to their point of origin in the metadata, which would certainly have been preserved. His lawyers are throwing everything they can and seeing what sticks. I am sort of surprised that they are not trying to argue that some kind of malware was used to plant the images (that’s a common defense), but my suspicion is that they already analyzed his computer and found no evidence o that, so they need to come up with something else.

    Also, the government does not have an affirmative duty to preserve all possible evidence – holding that would create am impossible standard. When you put forth an affirmative defense 0 which is what this is – the defense bears the burden of that argument. It is on them to put forth the argument that the evidence was planted and to present a viable theory as to how and why it happened.

    • anna says:

      i hope you are right.

    • Lizzie Bathory says:

      I agree that they won’t get it dismissed. His lawyers are doing their job in the sense that they’re trying whatever they can think of to get it thrown out. But the reality is he had over *200* images on his devices, all of which are illegal to possess or distribute (since he was frequenting torrent sites, I’m guessing he was also sharing some of the content). And one of the videos he had is notoriously one of the most horrific out there. I do not see him skating on this, though the case may take some time.

  5. Aud says:

    Child services needs to step in. They shouldn’t have custody of those kids.

  6. Shannon Prestridge says:

    I’m confused by the terminology of “Josh Duggar’s family” – what exactly does that mean? Is this not just a situation with his attorneys and the prosecutors? Has his family become involved now, and how and why?
    Regardless, this man – and this family with a few exceptions and those who are too young to call – have shown who they are. It’s amazing how much “evangelicalism” can be used to cover so many sins. He’s gross, they’re gross, I hate that they’re even famous. Not a huge Kardashian fan but omfg … I’d probably let the Kardashians/their nannies babysit my child for a bit. Would not let the Duggars babysit my dog.

    • Abby says:

      I saw that too and my thought is that it’s well-know his daddy is bankrolling the lawyer fees, so that might be why. Additionally, JB was the one who reached out to the “family friends” to beg/plead for them to take Josh in while awaiting trial.

      • Lucky Charm says:

        I also think Jim Bob set up their daughter with Anna’s brother as one more way of keeping them under his thumb and control. Bringing them into the family so to speak.

      • Moonlampje says:

        @lucky charm: I think you’re confusing the duggars with the rodrigues family. They had their daughter to marry anna’s brother, that was not a duggar daughter.

  7. Veronica S. says:

    Could this actually happen? Possibly. Most of his victims were girls. We know they don’t consider those people.

  8. grabbyhands says:

    Of course it could happen – he’s a white conservative “Christian” man with money. He’s smirking in that mugshot for a reason.

  9. Zapp Brannigan says:

    If this case gets tossed it will be a travesty. He alledgedly accessed one of the worst videos ever produced, it is notorious among his type and many won’t watch it as it’s so horrific. There was a write up about the video and the guy who made it on Daily Mail and even though not graphic, just reading about it made my skin crawl.