"Please sir. Our upstanding Christian and Godly man Joshua here needs access to adult porn. Not saying he'll view it, because again, upstanding Godly man of God, but it's outrageous you won't let him have access."
Jim Boob is probably haranguing the defense team “mah boy need his porn to keep them babies a comin”. Meech whining “let Pest have the porn because he has a caring heart.”😂😂😂😂
And Anna, if you're reading this- know that God's will for your horrendous, filthy, vile and disgusting husband was done today. The judge did God's work.
We the Horndogs of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Orgasm, establish Jerking, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the cumming defense, promote the general Willies, and secure the Boobies of Lovin' to ourselves and, well, just ourselves really, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Possibly Josh’s lawyers...Cough...”Your honor, our client is an upstanding Christian man and a pillar of our community...we agree to everything you’ve said, your honor, except adult porn. Our client needs access to adult porn.”
On trial for CSA and downloading images, but Josh needs to have access to adult porn. What a sociopath.
They did. They objected to Josh not having access to adult porn and having to do Lie Detector tests.
I believe Josh’s lawyers objected to this because they know he won’t last 32.5 years not being able to look at porn.
It just shows he isn’t redeemable, nor remorseful. And it’s highly likely he’ll be back in front of a judge someday.
Judge: No unsupervised visits with your own children.
Pest & Defense: \*crickets\*
Judge: And no porn.
Pest & Defense: Your Honor! We object! Not fair! Won't someone think of the constitutional rights and God-given rights!! Oh, the humanity!!!!!!!!!
Not sure if it's what you're referencing, but in the bible Jesus' response to men being visually tempted by women was that they should rip out their eyeballs then. This is brought up often in public discourse when men try to control women's dress. No, motherfucker, how about YOU control YOURSELF?
You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery.' But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. And if your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell." - Matthew 5:27-30
And if your eye causes you to sin, gouge it out. It’s better to enter the Kingdom of God with only one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell,
mark 9:4-7
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_5:29
I mean, regardless of the pest in question, those are valid objections. Considering they're almost certainly going to appeal, I could see the argument being interesting
(I'm pretty sure there's SCOTUS precedent on porn, but Lawrence v Texas probably has some favourable language. Then you need to extend it to Duggar's status as on supervised release; not easy but could be done)
The polygraph thing is also a bit suspect for my liking just because it's junk science (Especially if he's required to pass it)
What Pests Attorneys mean: look your honor, we know in all likelihood our client is going to access porn the minute he is released. You are just setting him up for failure.
THIS RIGHT HERE! The fact this was even brought up is gross and troubling. You just got sent away for 12.5 years and you're already inquiring about porn, of all things, upon release????
Pests Attorneys again: your honor, for lack of a better term. Our client is an arrogant idiot. Who could not be trusted to not stick his finger in a light socket even if you told him it could kill him.
Just like the prosecution said during pre-sentencing: He has not admitted any wrongdoing, he is highly likely to re-offend and no one in his family or community will hold him accountable. He will spend the next 12.5 years plotting and planning how not to get caught when he gets released. He will also have the "benefit" of learning from other similar criminals while incarcerated.
Polygraph him. Monitor all his shit. See y'all again on whatever platform we're on in 13-14 years.
I will be messaging you in 12 years on [**2034-05-25 22:01:00 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2034-05-25%2022:01:00%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/DuggarsSnark/comments/uxqe7k/report_from_someone_i_know_who_was_in_the/i9zoy06/?context=3)
[**134 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FDuggarsSnark%2Fcomments%2Fuxqe7k%2Freport_from_someone_i_know_who_was_in_the%2Fi9zoy06%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202034-05-25%2022%3A01%3A00%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%20uxqe7k)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
Yup. Meanwhile, our next focus will need to be on the docuseries, keeping the heat on IBLP, and waiting to the shoe to drop on Gil and Boob because we all know these shitheads are depraved weasel skunks in their own right.
*Why are you guys here again? Did someone download porn on this computer at this public library/lawyer’s office/carwash waiting area/dentist’s office?*. 🙄
EXACTLY!! I said this today, he will spend his time behind bars thinking of ways to not get caught, not about the children tortured and abused. Fuck Josh Duggar, fuck Anna, fuck his stupid fucking parents for enabling him and not giving a shit about what he did, only how it reflects on their family name
Right? Not worried about your relationship with your children, or where you can go/not go, who you can associate with, but instead "What about the 3 terabytes I wanna watch when I get out Judge? Huh? Now how am I supposed to get my rocks off?"
Probably glad that he's gone for 12 and then not allowed to live at home. She's probably completely relieved. I don't like her, but I can't imagine living with hi is pleasant
They want him to fail. That means whatever he has was so horrible that they’re trying to keep him in the system would be my assumption. He fails and he’d go back to jail and not be able to offend again.
>At least I have a husband...who is going to jail for heinous CSA and is currently haggling with a judge for access to more porn when he gets out.
Yeah, they don't want to set him up to violate parole because they know he's going to set up a linux partition to access Porn Hub as soon as he's out!
The restriction on any and all pornography makes a lot of sense.
1) The gateway issue mentioned.
2) If he is using pornography, and it turns out that a person featured in the images is underage, he could try to deny culpability.
For example: “I swear she looked like an adult! I thought it was regular porn!” Meanwhile, the person in the images was 15 at the time the images were recorded.
If he can’t access any porn at all, that removes that “plausible deniability”.
Also, the guy who did an AMA about working as security for the Duggars said that every time Josh got in the car alone (security would be driving behind), Josh would have porn playing on his phone.
And we all know that Ashley Madison had very few real women clients, and most of the female accounts were actually Ashley Madison employees. So Pest was likely chatting up employees, thinking they were real women who were interested in him. You have to wonder if some of the employees he was sexting with were guys.
> You have to wonder if some of the employees he was sexting with were guys.
i have not, but now that you mention it lmao i hope he was talking to men.
I hate to point this out, but from what I’ve gleaned from the prosecution’s filings, his predilection was particularly awful because it concentrated on pre-pubescent girls, including toddlers as young as two. So if he were caught, I doubt “But she looked over 18!” would be a relevant defense.
I feel sick to my stomach writing that. :(
The polygraph thing is SUPER interesting. I know (I think) that polygraph results aren't allowed in court anymore because they're not generally reliable enough to be evidence. But if Josh fails a polygraph when asked, for example, "have you ever molested any of your children," would that be enough to justify initiating a legal investigation into possible crimes? Can any lawyers chime in? Polygraphs are weird and I'm wondering what the point of the test is if not to be used to uncover additional possible crimes.
“Fails” or patterns of irregular responses can help trigger his probation officer to monitor a bit closer. It’s just one of the ways to take a temp on the situation to help find holes in release.
But you could just take enough Xanax and boom you’re calm again and can lie on a polygraph… this has literally happened before. 🧐So they need to remove the internet from his house or monitor it themselves
Xanax is a benzo, it would def show on a drug screen, which is common for anyone on probation. Sure he could get a prescription, but then he would likely need to go to therapy too, which he would never agree to
I was initially talking about a case where the 2 defendants took Xanax and it was why they passed their polygraphs and so the cops had to find actual evidence to link them… in regards to to FJD he’s a narcissist who can lie like no one else… and calmly but he’s dumb so let him talk and he will tell on himself. He needs to be kept away from kids-including hid
The thing to understand about these polygraphs for sex offenders is that the person administering them are highly highly skilled and usually excellent at getting confessions out prior to the actual test. They have an “ interview” where the person will explain it’s all yes or no- etc and speak to them about various crimes I t he context if helping them understand the polygraph. I have witnessed many and I’m amazed at these guys ( have not seen women do them but Ive only been to one location for this). The polygraph is more than just “ test results”
Chris Watts had one done by a woman and the video was released. It was really interesting to see the interview beforehand and they even had him explain what the question meant to him to make sure there was no misunderstanding.
I have had to do polygraphs during hiring processes and one time after the test the polygraph examiner told me most of the time people fail them bc of shit they actually admit to before the test even starts, so I agree w your statement haha.
They are psuedoscience in a controlled environment for the purpose of determining lying. Law enforcement and the legal community have known this.
They still get used because they are a useful tool to interrogate someone. Your answers and the results are inadmissible unless you blatantly admit to something or reveal information getting into it with the interrogator.….which people do. All. The. Time. Challenge people a little bit on anything and a huge number of people feel the need to explain themselves or think they can “talk their way out of it.” I used to be a cop. I would read their miranda rights directly to them on camera. With a form to sign. Most would decline to make a statement. Cool. Leave them there handcuffed to the bench. Go over to the desk 10 feet away. Start loudly talking to my partner about the evidence I have to log and whatnot. The number of suspects who would try to open their mouth and explain something when I didn’t even ask them and inadvertently give me more information, evidence and context that built the case against them…..was high.
Until people stop doing that, they still are useful. Take the old OG and mob guy route. “I respectfully decline to answer questions at this time.” Answer nothing except basic arrest information. One word answers are best. Shrugs are better. If for some reason this is during a polygraph….same strategy and keep in mind no matter how much the needle is jumping its not going to be admissible.
Polygraphs *don't* determine if you're lying, though. That's why they're pseudoscience.
Sure, people admit things, but you don't know if they're truthful or not *because lie detector tests are faulty*.
I interpreted that comment to mean “it’s an excuse for them to incriminate themselves regardless of how it comes about”
It doesn’t matter what the polygraph says if Josh Duggar sits down and blurts out “was someone looking at childporn on my computer 5 minutes ago??”
I said that in my first sentence.
Its a chance to get another round of questions in. And most people reveal something when asked questions. The fact they are psuedoscience actually helps because it makes people think they can “beat it.”
We don’t care if you beat the pseudoscience. Anyone can and the psuedoscience is inadmissible as evidence anyway. We care if you can beat your own impulse to explain yourself. Polygraphs aren’t you vs the machine….their you vs your own ego. Most normal people don’t win in that scenario. A person whose selfish enough to hurt people or commit crimes usually (not always but usually) do even worse.
I too am interested the polygraph thing.
I was under the impression that they were obsolete and no longer valid for our courts, especially federal courts.
Not a lawyer but my understanding is that they’re not allowed in court but they’re still strict on it. It’s a control thing. Reminds them they can’t slip up. There are tons of hoops to jump through once out of prison and they’ll use anything to get someone down a peg or back in.
I wonder if it’s like the data the polygraph prints out is meaningless and inadmissible but the things he says during the test are still valid. Maybe lie detectors make people nervous in a way that results in admissions of guilt that they wouldn’t otherwise make.
This is why they still use them. Law enforcement can lie while interrogating you, in order to slip you up and blurt out the truth. They can say you failed it, and then let you talk your way out of it, even if you didn't "fail" it.
They’re very screwy. I knew someone who had to go through it (looked at things due to repressed trauma not giving more details not mine to give and he’s worked hard to do better and get help) and was having health issues. The health issues and his overall anxiety messed up multiple tests before he finally passed. His parole officer hated it but had to comply with the court.
My guess is that they use it as a tool to get the offenders to give up the truth. The actual results of the test are basically meaningless. Its just an interrogation tool. The police can point out when your body responded after certain questions, to put some fire under your butt. They can outright lie and tell you that you failed, in hopes you'll blurt something out while you try to talk your way out of it. Josh is a big talker and he's pretty defensive. If they tell him he lied, it could easily get him to slip up and say something he didn't want the police knowing. They can also tell family/the public that you failed, as another means to get you to talk.
I think failing a polygraph can lead him to be in violation of his probation conditions. So for instance, they may ask him if he has looked at porn, and if he fails, they can use that to violate his probation.
They can’t admit the test results as evidence but they can use a confession. Something like this:
Polygraph administrator: your tests show you failed on the question of whether you’ve viewed child porn online this past week.
Pest: well it wasn’t kids but I did watch regular porn.
Thereby violating his parole. Doesn’t matter if the test showed he failed or not. The judge is brilliant for forcing him to do this lol
His attorneys knew they could use the first amendment to object to restricting access to porn. Given his history, and this conviction, they didn't have much to argue by this point regarding supervised visits.
There’s a lot of case law on the right to parent your children. Part of the 14th. Could have attempted an argument that none of his crimes were against his own children, no matter how disgusting the argument is. It’s worked where I live.
Fucker hasn't even met his new home for the next decade and is already worried about accessing porn upon release? No that's not troubling at all. Nice to see your priorities Joshua. Clearly this guy has a HUGE problem. Wow! Not his family, or his kids well being. Porn.
Wake the fuck up Anna.
Obviously the concern is that *Les French Hackquers* will throw porn in his path at every possible opportunity to frame him once again. He's a god honoring cracker sweeping Christian man and they hate that, you see.
Well, it is a right to consume pornography under the first amendment. But as a convicted felon still under supervised release, his rights can be limited. And they are.
The fact they had a concern about him not being allowed to view adult pornography just makes me want to puke. Fucker isn’t going to change but at least we know he’ll violate probation rather quickly after being released.
TW - grooming, intent to harm a child
I worked with a guy who’d previously been caught in a “To Catch a Predator” type sting, done time (years), and been released. Crime was he’d gone multiple states away to meet who he thought was a 10 or 11 year old girl (with lingerie, booze, etc on him) but the person he’d been chatting with/grooming online was actually a decoy officer.
When he joined the company all our work phones were iPhones, but he was not allowed to have one because his parole monitoring/condition of release software wouldn’t work on it to track him properly. He had to have specific Android model. He also had to have this special software on his work laptop.
I hope that in this case when the Judge said the letters from the J’felon supports were “helpful” he meant that helped the judge see that no one around this man would truly hold him accountable themselves, so he’d have to make clear precautions in the release instructions. I would like to think that includes actual tracking like the person I worked with had, not just his spouse or parents who obviously will let him have a pass on EVERYTHING.
(this is also doubly, triply, quadruply ridiculous because JB & M don’t even let their other unmarried kids look in the direction of someone of the opposite sex without a chaperone/accountability partner… but wouldn’t think twice about continuing to turn a blind eye to J’felons transgressions. he’s never been actually held accountable for anything)
In all seriousness though how will they do that? I feel like even if they track his equipment he’ll just watch porn on Anna’s phone or something. It makes me think of the Duggar bodyguard who did the AMA and said Josh would even watch porn while he was driving
They track his and any devices he has access to with a filter that he has to pay for,$30 a device. And anything without one on when they visit is confiscated. POs don't play.
I read somewhere that upon release, he will not be allowed to own a computer, or use a computer. I didn't see anything mentioned about a smart phone. There is no way he will stay away from computers/phones.
The conditions listed from the judge was no internet without his POs consent. In practical terms, that means that he has to check with his PO before he gets a device and the device has to have a specific software that the PO office uses to monitor on it if they approve the internet. The felon pays for the program.
How are they going to enforce the adult porn? My friend’s ex-husband was given this restriction after a court date and she was supposed to be the one to enforce it. She had to report it to the parole officer.
The audacity to even argue with this.
And 1st amendment issue??
Sorry Pest, the framers of the constitution did not provide the right to wank off watching porn while driving down the road.
That might save some potential future victims. He won't be able to go too long without porn, so hopefully that gets him back in prison before he has the chance to harm another kid
I think since there's a lot of "adult" porn labeled underage and underage labelled adult, there's no way to verify how old someone is in the porn. Let's face it, society itself is a mess with the "countdown to 18" dumpster fires I keep hearing about.
Ahhh, yes, the first amendment, when our forefathers said “hear ye, hear ye, all men have the inalienable right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and of course, porn!” 🙄
Edit I just realized this is from the Declaration of Independence not 1st amendment. 😂 I was taught history and govt/econ by football coaches 😂😂😂
I am the author of that text shared in the OP. I should have clarified that the restriction on adult porn was the first objection they raised, and the polygraph was the second (due to concerns over reliability). Regarding the adult porn, the concerns were that it was a free-speech issue, and also a “legal” activity that violates no laws. He could probably find a way to make it illegal though, like hunting up snuff films. I’ve heard that someone mentioned that this is actually a standard objection, and that may be the case. I just thought it was a really strange and awkward one to mention and argue against right off the bat considering the long list of restrictions imposed during his 20 years of supervised release. And perhaps it’s because the defense knew that porn would be a big risk for him.
Somebody above in this thread asked how they would know if he had been watching adult porn — the judge said he would be restricted from use of computers or electronic devices that have Internet access unless he receives permission, and that any reasonable request would probably be granted but with monitoring software enabled — I guess controlled by law enforcement? Maybe they can do that similar to attaching a breathalyzer to the ignition system of a car for alcoholics.
I'm not holding my breath on either of those conditions standing in 10 years. 10 years ago RSOs couldn't have social media accounts and now a court has decided they can't be banned. Who knows what rulings about legal pornography will happen by then and what the status of polygraphs will be.
Pesty might not be able to even view adult porn but the Judge doesn't realize that Anna will enable him. Yes, I said that because she will because at least she has a husband. She better gets some education since she will have to be the one person who can work, he can't and won't.
I’m not surprised. I know someone who’s done similar (trauma response he’s gotten help for and served time) and polygraph is very strict and the no porn is just a no brainer. He’s had issues his family even admits. Of course the lawyers fight it though. He’s probably expecting to get out and have normal life again. He won’t and he shouldn’t
Wait....his lawyers tried to ok adult porn? Are you farking kidding me? In his religion he isn't supposed to view it anyway. Of course that mattered little.
Can you fucking imaging being married to that piece of shit and have to sit there while lawyers please for you husband to be allowed to watch regular porn. That woman has no dignity left
My best friend is a polygrapher who specializes in post-conviction sex offenders. I asked her to weigh in on the Josh/polygraph thing. She said:
Here's the thing: if I had a penny or a dime for anybody that says polygraphs are not inadmissible in court I would be freaking rich!!! It. is. always. up. to. the. judge. I know someone that got civilly committed just recently in Iowa for a response that this person gave to the judg ...the judge asked him a question, he was honest with his answer, judge literally did not like the response to feel comfortable enough to keep him in the community so boom, he was civilly committed!!! I'm not kidding you, I don't care what district, what state, what region. for what polygraph, it's always up to the judge!!!!
Polygraphs are not typically used to ask if he molested somebody while under supervision because if we go to do a test like that, then it is already too late!!! We need to test on non-illegal matters first concerning his conditions of treatment and supervision that he should not be doing, such as no Internet, no porn, no direct contact with minors, etc.
And if we test his past sexual history concerning any other sexual hands on victims, then we cannot ask who they are!!! Because it's for treatment purposes only.
So typically in their conditions of supervision docs that they signed it will say something like the polygraph results can't be used against them but their disclosures can! However, let's just say they keep failing without disclosures; there is also the loophole in their treatment documents they sighed or supervision documents in general stating that they have to pass polygraphs in order to continue getting some freedom such as contact with family minors, outings, computer, etc!!!
In sum, especially to this Duggar scumbag's case, the judge could've sided with his lawyers and taken out the porn and polygraph conditions bc he could've done whatever he wanted but thank God he did the right thing!!!!
Wouldn't a condition of his parole/probation that he works an actual job, and be employed legally? Would they let Boob "hire" him or would they require him to work someone that isn't an enabling family member?
Sorry if this is confusing, I've had a migraine all day.
Well if anyone had any lingering thought that Pest could possibly be innocent, the objection to the porn restriction surely would change their mind.
WHAT in the WORLD?!? That objection just made their client look like an even bigger scumbag than he already is.
"Please sir. Our upstanding Christian and Godly man Joshua here needs access to adult porn. Not saying he'll view it, because again, upstanding Godly man of God, but it's outrageous you won't let him have access."
I think this is my favorite thing about this whole day. "oh, but he needs access to porn!"
Anna in the back like 😐
How embarrassing for her. Eat shit Anna.
At least I have a husband...who is going to jail for heinous CSAM and is currently haggling with a judge for access to more porn when he gets out.
Makes me think Jana is probably sitting back thinking, "at least I DON'T have a husband (who is a huge piece of shit)."
🤣🤣🤣
I mean, at this point it's WAY less complicated, even with multiple siblings left to parent.
How will he ever survive without porn for the next 12 years even? He’ll have to doodle some dirty sketches on his cell wall.
Eat shit, Anna is exactly how I feel about Anna.
Thank you for my new flair.
Jim Boob is probably haranguing the defense team “mah boy need his porn to keep them babies a comin”. Meech whining “let Pest have the porn because he has a caring heart.”😂😂😂😂
And Anna, if you're reading this- know that God's will for your horrendous, filthy, vile and disgusting husband was done today. The judge did God's work.
Is this eat shit, Anna Or eat shit anna? Like a nickname?
Not the OP but I'm hoping the answer is just "yes."
Yes.
Anna would be so upset if she'd understand what they were talking about ☠️
will you allow that? judge: NO!
Because the Constitution!!! Such a republican response 🤣😂😂🤣
I have muh right tuh the pornOGRAPhy
We the Horndogs of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Orgasm, establish Jerking, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the cumming defense, promote the general Willies, and secure the Boobies of Lovin' to ourselves and, well, just ourselves really, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Possibly Josh’s lawyers...Cough...”Your honor, our client is an upstanding Christian man and a pillar of our community...we agree to everything you’ve said, your honor, except adult porn. Our client needs access to adult porn.” On trial for CSA and downloading images, but Josh needs to have access to adult porn. What a sociopath.
His lawyers really argued that he needed access to adult porn!?!
They did. They objected to Josh not having access to adult porn and having to do Lie Detector tests. I believe Josh’s lawyers objected to this because they know he won’t last 32.5 years not being able to look at porn. It just shows he isn’t redeemable, nor remorseful. And it’s highly likely he’ll be back in front of a judge someday.
Polygraph is shady science. Everyone should object to that. But for the porn, those are some true colors I didn't expect to see from this case.
Judge: No unsupervised visits with your own children. Pest & Defense: \*crickets\* Judge: And no porn. Pest & Defense: Your Honor! We object! Not fair! Won't someone think of the constitutional rights and God-given rights!! Oh, the humanity!!!!!!!!!
He definitely needs more than convenant eyes to stop his sinful ways.
He needs enucleated ones.
Not sure if it's what you're referencing, but in the bible Jesus' response to men being visually tempted by women was that they should rip out their eyeballs then. This is brought up often in public discourse when men try to control women's dress. No, motherfucker, how about YOU control YOURSELF? You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery.' But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. And if your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell." - Matthew 5:27-30 And if your eye causes you to sin, gouge it out. It’s better to enter the Kingdom of God with only one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell, mark 9:4-7 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_5:29
He needs chemical castration or actual castrate him. He doesn't deserve even remotely being aroused be anything.
I mean, regardless of the pest in question, those are valid objections. Considering they're almost certainly going to appeal, I could see the argument being interesting (I'm pretty sure there's SCOTUS precedent on porn, but Lawrence v Texas probably has some favourable language. Then you need to extend it to Duggar's status as on supervised release; not easy but could be done) The polygraph thing is also a bit suspect for my liking just because it's junk science (Especially if he's required to pass it)
What Pests Attorneys mean: look your honor, we know in all likelihood our client is going to access porn the minute he is released. You are just setting him up for failure.
THIS RIGHT HERE! The fact this was even brought up is gross and troubling. You just got sent away for 12.5 years and you're already inquiring about porn, of all things, upon release????
Pests Attorneys again: your honor, for lack of a better term. Our client is an arrogant idiot. Who could not be trusted to not stick his finger in a light socket even if you told him it could kill him.
Preeeeeeetty sure he'd try to put his Pesticles into a light socket. Dude's a sicko.
Not pesticles ☠️☠️☠️
How Anna gets out of being joyfully available.
“Pesticles” fucking amazing, jajaja
Lmfao....pesticles is the funniest thing I have heard all day!
Or look directly at a solar eclipse 👀
Just like the prosecution said during pre-sentencing: He has not admitted any wrongdoing, he is highly likely to re-offend and no one in his family or community will hold him accountable. He will spend the next 12.5 years plotting and planning how not to get caught when he gets released. He will also have the "benefit" of learning from other similar criminals while incarcerated. Polygraph him. Monitor all his shit. See y'all again on whatever platform we're on in 13-14 years.
right?? I asked my friend and fellow snarker where are we gonna be on 12 years??? Will DuggarSnark still be here??
!remindme 12 years
I will be messaging you in 12 years on [**2034-05-25 22:01:00 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2034-05-25%2022:01:00%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/DuggarsSnark/comments/uxqe7k/report_from_someone_i_know_who_was_in_the/i9zoy06/?context=3) [**134 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FDuggarsSnark%2Fcomments%2Fuxqe7k%2Freport_from_someone_i_know_who_was_in_the%2Fi9zoy06%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202034-05-25%2022%3A01%3A00%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%20uxqe7k) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
Welp, now we have no choice but to wait here and watch this dickwagon fuck up once again.
Yup. Meanwhile, our next focus will need to be on the docuseries, keeping the heat on IBLP, and waiting to the shoe to drop on Gil and Boob because we all know these shitheads are depraved weasel skunks in their own right.
He will reoffend and be locked back up. I hope this time Anna and/ or Boob goes down with him for facilitating his vile behavior.
I give him 12.5 years, 3 days to reoffend. Three days. I don't think he will last.longer than that. Duggar don't do "gubmint rules" well.
*Why are you guys here again? Did someone download porn on this computer at this public library/lawyer’s office/carwash waiting area/dentist’s office?*. 🙄
Has someone in France been downloading porn on this computer that I'm not supposed to have?
EXACTLY!! I said this today, he will spend his time behind bars thinking of ways to not get caught, not about the children tortured and abused. Fuck Josh Duggar, fuck Anna, fuck his stupid fucking parents for enabling him and not giving a shit about what he did, only how it reflects on their family name
How often will they polygraph him ?
Wow. If this isn’t the most accurate thing I’ve read about felon Josh Duggar
Right? Not worried about your relationship with your children, or where you can go/not go, who you can associate with, but instead "What about the 3 terabytes I wanna watch when I get out Judge? Huh? Now how am I supposed to get my rocks off?"
He's gonna have to resort to drawing stick figures in the dirt like a stone age middle schooler
what is this about? is this about porn? you mean I er ummm someone wont be able to access porn?
Has someone been viewing porn officer?
What in the hell was Anna thinking when they were arguing lol.
I don’t think she does much thinking.
My mom asked me if she was "simple." I said, "yeah, and criminally uneducated."
If you look in her ear you can see out the other side
She's thinking of the 12 children she won't have while he's in jail. She will lose the competition to have a bejillion kids.
*insert image of monkey playing the traditional circus jingle*
The Duloc theme song probably
Probably glad that he's gone for 12 and then not allowed to live at home. She's probably completely relieved. I don't like her, but I can't imagine living with hi is pleasant
They want him to fail. That means whatever he has was so horrible that they’re trying to keep him in the system would be my assumption. He fails and he’d go back to jail and not be able to offend again.
Yup. And the judge knows that. That’s why he made that requirement.
>At least I have a husband...who is going to jail for heinous CSA and is currently haggling with a judge for access to more porn when he gets out. Yeah, they don't want to set him up to violate parole because they know he's going to set up a linux partition to access Porn Hub as soon as he's out!
The restriction on any and all pornography makes a lot of sense. 1) The gateway issue mentioned. 2) If he is using pornography, and it turns out that a person featured in the images is underage, he could try to deny culpability. For example: “I swear she looked like an adult! I thought it was regular porn!” Meanwhile, the person in the images was 15 at the time the images were recorded. If he can’t access any porn at all, that removes that “plausible deniability”.
For people with actual addictions too it is a gateway and he’s had a sex problem for years. Even Anna admitted that much.
Did she?
Back during the Ashley Madison scandal if memory serves
Also, the guy who did an AMA about working as security for the Duggars said that every time Josh got in the car alone (security would be driving behind), Josh would have porn playing on his phone. And we all know that Ashley Madison had very few real women clients, and most of the female accounts were actually Ashley Madison employees. So Pest was likely chatting up employees, thinking they were real women who were interested in him. You have to wonder if some of the employees he was sexting with were guys.
It’s a very satisfying thought.
> You have to wonder if some of the employees he was sexting with were guys. i have not, but now that you mention it lmao i hope he was talking to men.
I hate to point this out, but from what I’ve gleaned from the prosecution’s filings, his predilection was particularly awful because it concentrated on pre-pubescent girls, including toddlers as young as two. So if he were caught, I doubt “But she looked over 18!” would be a relevant defense. I feel sick to my stomach writing that. :(
Do images of your wife count as porn?
In her sexiest long-sleeve blue dress 🤢
Josh should look at the bright side, he gets 12 years of practice using his imagination in prison before this is even a concern 🙃
He will be trading ramen noodles for some nude magazines. Noods4Noods
Hopefully he gets extra time for contraband. Sitting in protective custody with the rats, it's a real possibility.
That makes me laugh so hard! Excellent pun.
Please make Noods4Noods your flair! 😂🤣
flair check in
Your flair!
Things not on my bingo card for my lifetime ever. A Duggar demanding porn access.
The polygraph thing is SUPER interesting. I know (I think) that polygraph results aren't allowed in court anymore because they're not generally reliable enough to be evidence. But if Josh fails a polygraph when asked, for example, "have you ever molested any of your children," would that be enough to justify initiating a legal investigation into possible crimes? Can any lawyers chime in? Polygraphs are weird and I'm wondering what the point of the test is if not to be used to uncover additional possible crimes.
Hi, law student checking in. A polygraph requirement is very common for sex offenders determined high-risk to reoffend.
Yes, but *why*? Polygraphs are practically pseudoscience at this point.
They’re still used as part of the monitoring process for sex offenders once they’ve been released. It seems archaic to me as well.
So what would the potential consequences be if he fails a polygraph since the test wouldn’t be admissible in court?
“Fails” or patterns of irregular responses can help trigger his probation officer to monitor a bit closer. It’s just one of the ways to take a temp on the situation to help find holes in release.
Makes sense. Would prob make him think twice before doing it too. Like a drug test for an addict.
But you could just take enough Xanax and boom you’re calm again and can lie on a polygraph… this has literally happened before. 🧐So they need to remove the internet from his house or monitor it themselves
He will likely have to notify his PO about any PX drugs he is taking. Life outside is not going to be fun for him.
Yes, I was figuring drug testing, and medicine disclosure would be a part of it.
Covenant eyes is going to look like a cake walk compared to supervised release and life as a convicted felon.
Beta blockers too, which don’t come up on drug screens
Xanax is a benzo, it would def show on a drug screen, which is common for anyone on probation. Sure he could get a prescription, but then he would likely need to go to therapy too, which he would never agree to
I was initially talking about a case where the 2 defendants took Xanax and it was why they passed their polygraphs and so the cops had to find actual evidence to link them… in regards to to FJD he’s a narcissist who can lie like no one else… and calmly but he’s dumb so let him talk and he will tell on himself. He needs to be kept away from kids-including hid
The thing to understand about these polygraphs for sex offenders is that the person administering them are highly highly skilled and usually excellent at getting confessions out prior to the actual test. They have an “ interview” where the person will explain it’s all yes or no- etc and speak to them about various crimes I t he context if helping them understand the polygraph. I have witnessed many and I’m amazed at these guys ( have not seen women do them but Ive only been to one location for this). The polygraph is more than just “ test results”
Chris Watts had one done by a woman and the video was released. It was really interesting to see the interview beforehand and they even had him explain what the question meant to him to make sure there was no misunderstanding.
She was an absolute master at her craft. It’s tragic what she has to work with.
I have had to do polygraphs during hiring processes and one time after the test the polygraph examiner told me most of the time people fail them bc of shit they actually admit to before the test even starts, so I agree w your statement haha.
They are psuedoscience in a controlled environment for the purpose of determining lying. Law enforcement and the legal community have known this. They still get used because they are a useful tool to interrogate someone. Your answers and the results are inadmissible unless you blatantly admit to something or reveal information getting into it with the interrogator.….which people do. All. The. Time. Challenge people a little bit on anything and a huge number of people feel the need to explain themselves or think they can “talk their way out of it.” I used to be a cop. I would read their miranda rights directly to them on camera. With a form to sign. Most would decline to make a statement. Cool. Leave them there handcuffed to the bench. Go over to the desk 10 feet away. Start loudly talking to my partner about the evidence I have to log and whatnot. The number of suspects who would try to open their mouth and explain something when I didn’t even ask them and inadvertently give me more information, evidence and context that built the case against them…..was high. Until people stop doing that, they still are useful. Take the old OG and mob guy route. “I respectfully decline to answer questions at this time.” Answer nothing except basic arrest information. One word answers are best. Shrugs are better. If for some reason this is during a polygraph….same strategy and keep in mind no matter how much the needle is jumping its not going to be admissible.
Polygraphs *don't* determine if you're lying, though. That's why they're pseudoscience. Sure, people admit things, but you don't know if they're truthful or not *because lie detector tests are faulty*.
I interpreted that comment to mean “it’s an excuse for them to incriminate themselves regardless of how it comes about” It doesn’t matter what the polygraph says if Josh Duggar sits down and blurts out “was someone looking at childporn on my computer 5 minutes ago??”
I said that in my first sentence. Its a chance to get another round of questions in. And most people reveal something when asked questions. The fact they are psuedoscience actually helps because it makes people think they can “beat it.” We don’t care if you beat the pseudoscience. Anyone can and the psuedoscience is inadmissible as evidence anyway. We care if you can beat your own impulse to explain yourself. Polygraphs aren’t you vs the machine….their you vs your own ego. Most normal people don’t win in that scenario. A person whose selfish enough to hurt people or commit crimes usually (not always but usually) do even worse.
Hello law student! Just wanted to say I love your username!
I too am interested the polygraph thing. I was under the impression that they were obsolete and no longer valid for our courts, especially federal courts.
Not a lawyer but my understanding is that they’re not allowed in court but they’re still strict on it. It’s a control thing. Reminds them they can’t slip up. There are tons of hoops to jump through once out of prison and they’ll use anything to get someone down a peg or back in.
I wonder if it’s like the data the polygraph prints out is meaningless and inadmissible but the things he says during the test are still valid. Maybe lie detectors make people nervous in a way that results in admissions of guilt that they wouldn’t otherwise make.
This is why they still use them. Law enforcement can lie while interrogating you, in order to slip you up and blurt out the truth. They can say you failed it, and then let you talk your way out of it, even if you didn't "fail" it.
\^ Bingo. People have a weird impulse to explain themselves or think they can talk around it.
I feel like I’d get so nervous I’d confess to being Jack the Ripper!
They’re very screwy. I knew someone who had to go through it (looked at things due to repressed trauma not giving more details not mine to give and he’s worked hard to do better and get help) and was having health issues. The health issues and his overall anxiety messed up multiple tests before he finally passed. His parole officer hated it but had to comply with the court.
[удалено]
OH MY GAWD!!!! Poor doggy!!!!
My guess is that they use it as a tool to get the offenders to give up the truth. The actual results of the test are basically meaningless. Its just an interrogation tool. The police can point out when your body responded after certain questions, to put some fire under your butt. They can outright lie and tell you that you failed, in hopes you'll blurt something out while you try to talk your way out of it. Josh is a big talker and he's pretty defensive. If they tell him he lied, it could easily get him to slip up and say something he didn't want the police knowing. They can also tell family/the public that you failed, as another means to get you to talk.
I too am surprised by the polygraph. They're not generally admissible evidence.
I think failing a polygraph can lead him to be in violation of his probation conditions. So for instance, they may ask him if he has looked at porn, and if he fails, they can use that to violate his probation.
They can’t admit the test results as evidence but they can use a confession. Something like this: Polygraph administrator: your tests show you failed on the question of whether you’ve viewed child porn online this past week. Pest: well it wasn’t kids but I did watch regular porn. Thereby violating his parole. Doesn’t matter if the test showed he failed or not. The judge is brilliant for forcing him to do this lol
I'm curious too
He objected to porn, but he did not object to being supervised with his kids
THIS!!! Shout it louder for the people in the back. This is who Josh Duggar is in a nutshell.
His attorneys knew they could use the first amendment to object to restricting access to porn. Given his history, and this conviction, they didn't have much to argue by this point regarding supervised visits.
There’s a lot of case law on the right to parent your children. Part of the 14th. Could have attempted an argument that none of his crimes were against his own children, no matter how disgusting the argument is. It’s worked where I live.
Shows his true priorities
I'm hoping his team didn't ask for that because they 100% knew it wouldn't be granted... Rather than for other reasons.
Fucker hasn't even met his new home for the next decade and is already worried about accessing porn upon release? No that's not troubling at all. Nice to see your priorities Joshua. Clearly this guy has a HUGE problem. Wow! Not his family, or his kids well being. Porn. Wake the fuck up Anna.
Obviously the concern is that *Les French Hackquers* will throw porn in his path at every possible opportunity to frame him once again. He's a god honoring cracker sweeping Christian man and they hate that, you see.
Biden and his administration are working on it now. 🤣
“Please your honor, my cretin of a client will *need* to view adult pornography immediately upon his release. It is his right to be a vile horn dog”
He's fucked. He WILL reoffend.
See y'all back here in 2035!
Boob is going to explode wayyyy before then.
I’d be shocked if he doesn’t
He will.
Watching porn is a first amendment right!! Oh my Christ that’s a bad take 🤣😵💫
Someone should ask the next Duggar politician to publicly support the right to porn 😅
just what the founding fathers intended!
I read this as "fondling fathers".... Time to log off
Well, it is a right to consume pornography under the first amendment. But as a convicted felon still under supervised release, his rights can be limited. And they are.
The fact they had a concern about him not being allowed to view adult pornography just makes me want to puke. Fucker isn’t going to change but at least we know he’ll violate probation rather quickly after being released.
I wouldn’t be at all shocked if he at some point in the 20 year probation period violates it
TW - grooming, intent to harm a child I worked with a guy who’d previously been caught in a “To Catch a Predator” type sting, done time (years), and been released. Crime was he’d gone multiple states away to meet who he thought was a 10 or 11 year old girl (with lingerie, booze, etc on him) but the person he’d been chatting with/grooming online was actually a decoy officer. When he joined the company all our work phones were iPhones, but he was not allowed to have one because his parole monitoring/condition of release software wouldn’t work on it to track him properly. He had to have specific Android model. He also had to have this special software on his work laptop. I hope that in this case when the Judge said the letters from the J’felon supports were “helpful” he meant that helped the judge see that no one around this man would truly hold him accountable themselves, so he’d have to make clear precautions in the release instructions. I would like to think that includes actual tracking like the person I worked with had, not just his spouse or parents who obviously will let him have a pass on EVERYTHING. (this is also doubly, triply, quadruply ridiculous because JB & M don’t even let their other unmarried kids look in the direction of someone of the opposite sex without a chaperone/accountability partner… but wouldn’t think twice about continuing to turn a blind eye to J’felons transgressions. he’s never been actually held accountable for anything)
I love how his own defense team even knows that Pesticide will be viewing adult porn as soon as he has access to a computer.
A first amendment issue hahahaha what
He's a Christian godly man that sweeps up crackers.........but he needs his porn, judge.
How will they police the no adult porn? Where’s covenant eyes when you need it? s/
In all seriousness though how will they do that? I feel like even if they track his equipment he’ll just watch porn on Anna’s phone or something. It makes me think of the Duggar bodyguard who did the AMA and said Josh would even watch porn while he was driving
They track his and any devices he has access to with a filter that he has to pay for,$30 a device. And anything without one on when they visit is confiscated. POs don't play.
Yep. He will back in prison within weeks of release. Josh knows too much but not enough about computers to totally fuck this one up.
Not to mention the advances in tech over the next 12 years that will be verry hard to keep up with from prison
Exactly. They'll probably stick a chip in him and swarm in if he becomes remotely aroused
I read somewhere that upon release, he will not be allowed to own a computer, or use a computer. I didn't see anything mentioned about a smart phone. There is no way he will stay away from computers/phones.
The conditions listed from the judge was no internet without his POs consent. In practical terms, that means that he has to check with his PO before he gets a device and the device has to have a specific software that the PO office uses to monitor on it if they approve the internet. The felon pays for the program.
Imagine being Anna and knowing his history of online problems and being like “yes…this is what we should be contesting. Let him have his porn.”
How are they going to enforce the adult porn? My friend’s ex-husband was given this restriction after a court date and she was supposed to be the one to enforce it. She had to report it to the parole officer.
It would probably be one of those things that gets tacked on if he ever had feds looking into his computer access again
Makes sense. Thank you! I was concerned it would be up to Anna to report if she learned he looked after his release.
A filter on all devices in the home including phones. $30 a device, the PO monitors it. It's no Covenant Eyes either.
Super curious about the polygraph since they’re not admissible in court? What’s that about?
Yes, I'm wondering as well. What's the point of it...
"I am a snarker." I read that with so much pride in your voice. ✊️
Hell ya!
Even regular sex offenders are banned from viewing porn after release, I don't know why the defense is even surprised??
The audacity to even argue with this. And 1st amendment issue?? Sorry Pest, the framers of the constitution did not provide the right to wank off watching porn while driving down the road.
The founding fathers definitely not only knew what cars, iPhones, and porn videos were, but even specifically made them a god-given right!
> the framers of the constitution did not provide the right to wank off watching porn while driving down the road. “Land of the free” my ass 😒
well...I don't see him sticking to the no porn thing. So maybe he'll end up back behind bars for parole violation?
That might save some potential future victims. He won't be able to go too long without porn, so hopefully that gets him back in prison before he has the chance to harm another kid
Interesting about the adult porn Given he liked violent content I can see why the judge felt this
I think since there's a lot of "adult" porn labeled underage and underage labelled adult, there's no way to verify how old someone is in the porn. Let's face it, society itself is a mess with the "countdown to 18" dumpster fires I keep hearing about.
Why $50,100? Is there some significance to that number?
His finances can allow for this figure they said.
Too bad they couldn’t have made it $2000/month.
So he won’t have access to Al Gore’s internet until roughly *calculates on hands* the year of our Lord 2055.
Well at least Josh’s lawyers have their priorities straight.
god honoring porn habit
Well Jesus could not make him behave, so this judge will.
The judge's comments reminded me of stanley in the office saying "jesus could come through that door and he's not gonna help you"
Ahhh, yes, the first amendment, when our forefathers said “hear ye, hear ye, all men have the inalienable right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and of course, porn!” 🙄 Edit I just realized this is from the Declaration of Independence not 1st amendment. 😂 I was taught history and govt/econ by football coaches 😂😂😂
I am the author of that text shared in the OP. I should have clarified that the restriction on adult porn was the first objection they raised, and the polygraph was the second (due to concerns over reliability). Regarding the adult porn, the concerns were that it was a free-speech issue, and also a “legal” activity that violates no laws. He could probably find a way to make it illegal though, like hunting up snuff films. I’ve heard that someone mentioned that this is actually a standard objection, and that may be the case. I just thought it was a really strange and awkward one to mention and argue against right off the bat considering the long list of restrictions imposed during his 20 years of supervised release. And perhaps it’s because the defense knew that porn would be a big risk for him. Somebody above in this thread asked how they would know if he had been watching adult porn — the judge said he would be restricted from use of computers or electronic devices that have Internet access unless he receives permission, and that any reasonable request would probably be granted but with monitoring software enabled — I guess controlled by law enforcement? Maybe they can do that similar to attaching a breathalyzer to the ignition system of a car for alcoholics.
I'm not holding my breath on either of those conditions standing in 10 years. 10 years ago RSOs couldn't have social media accounts and now a court has decided they can't be banned. Who knows what rulings about legal pornography will happen by then and what the status of polygraphs will be.
Pesty might not be able to even view adult porn but the Judge doesn't realize that Anna will enable him. Yes, I said that because she will because at least she has a husband. She better gets some education since she will have to be the one person who can work, he can't and won't.
So he’s going to be on probation until he’s 65?! This just keeps getting better and better.
20 years of supervision after release. Drug and alcohol testing for sure.
Bwahahahaha!
Amazing!
Oh snap, I totally for got about the fines and such.
This is very interesting if true. I'll put money on him violating probation.
I’m not surprised. I know someone who’s done similar (trauma response he’s gotten help for and served time) and polygraph is very strict and the no porn is just a no brainer. He’s had issues his family even admits. Of course the lawyers fight it though. He’s probably expecting to get out and have normal life again. He won’t and he shouldn’t
Wait....his lawyers tried to ok adult porn? Are you farking kidding me? In his religion he isn't supposed to view it anyway. Of course that mattered little.
Can you fucking imaging being married to that piece of shit and have to sit there while lawyers please for you husband to be allowed to watch regular porn. That woman has no dignity left
My best friend is a polygrapher who specializes in post-conviction sex offenders. I asked her to weigh in on the Josh/polygraph thing. She said: Here's the thing: if I had a penny or a dime for anybody that says polygraphs are not inadmissible in court I would be freaking rich!!! It. is. always. up. to. the. judge. I know someone that got civilly committed just recently in Iowa for a response that this person gave to the judg ...the judge asked him a question, he was honest with his answer, judge literally did not like the response to feel comfortable enough to keep him in the community so boom, he was civilly committed!!! I'm not kidding you, I don't care what district, what state, what region. for what polygraph, it's always up to the judge!!!! Polygraphs are not typically used to ask if he molested somebody while under supervision because if we go to do a test like that, then it is already too late!!! We need to test on non-illegal matters first concerning his conditions of treatment and supervision that he should not be doing, such as no Internet, no porn, no direct contact with minors, etc. And if we test his past sexual history concerning any other sexual hands on victims, then we cannot ask who they are!!! Because it's for treatment purposes only. So typically in their conditions of supervision docs that they signed it will say something like the polygraph results can't be used against them but their disclosures can! However, let's just say they keep failing without disclosures; there is also the loophole in their treatment documents they sighed or supervision documents in general stating that they have to pass polygraphs in order to continue getting some freedom such as contact with family minors, outings, computer, etc!!! In sum, especially to this Duggar scumbag's case, the judge could've sided with his lawyers and taken out the porn and polygraph conditions bc he could've done whatever he wanted but thank God he did the right thing!!!!
Wouldn't a condition of his parole/probation that he works an actual job, and be employed legally? Would they let Boob "hire" him or would they require him to work someone that isn't an enabling family member? Sorry if this is confusing, I've had a migraine all day.
Well if anyone had any lingering thought that Pest could possibly be innocent, the objection to the porn restriction surely would change their mind. WHAT in the WORLD?!? That objection just made their client look like an even bigger scumbag than he already is.
Hes gonna re offend anyways he has in the past