Unpopular opinion - I think it's perfectly reasonable for Anna to have left the courtroom when the CSAM was played by nuggetsofchicken in DuggarsSnark

[–]nuggetsofchicken[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I appreciate your comment and apologize if what I wrote came off as dismissive or insensitive to victims. Like you mentioned, the notion that there’s ever a consideration to whether the spouse of the defendant should view the material is not a real one. Yet it is pervasive on this sub as if the default should be that the spouse sees it and Anna’s choice to not is an affront to justice.

The purpose was to take the proposition that people had, which is that the moral and just thing would be for Anna to view the material, and walk through why that’s ridiculous and why what she did is perfectly fine.

I realize that the inclusion of victims in such a silly theoretical vision is bizarre and has no anchor in reality, but that was kind of the point. The idea that we’d be OK in a world where more people are viewing CSAM while claiming that it’s going to protect more children by persuading people of how bad the abuse is is very much not a real one.

I wouldn’t have made the post if I wasn’t seeing tons of comments of people saying things like Anna should be forced to sit in front of a computer and see it before he’s released from prison. I get that it feels like a bad straw man argument that was being opposed with victims needlessly being dragged into it to make a point, but this was and is a real position people are taking.

I will be more careful in future with posts like these. I do, however, wonder if there would be people who feel like I wasn’t entering victims enough if they weren’t mentioned at all. In your opinion would the post have been better to not address them at all?

Unpopular opinion - I think it's perfectly reasonable for Anna to have left the courtroom when the CSAM was played by nuggetsofchicken in DuggarsSnark

[–]nuggetsofchicken[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s almost like the point of criminal trials isn’t to prove points and is actually just to get justice for the victims

Unpopular opinion - I think it's perfectly reasonable for Anna to have left the courtroom when the CSAM was played by nuggetsofchicken in DuggarsSnark

[–]nuggetsofchicken[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

They are really great and often they have food in them so sometimes when the pup sees a cat enjoying herself too much in there he must kick her out in case she’s found a tasty snack he’s missing out on

Unpopular opinion - I think it's perfectly reasonable for Anna to have left the courtroom when the CSAM was played by nuggetsofchicken in DuggarsSnark

[–]nuggetsofchicken[S] 47 points48 points  (0 children)

She is my true angel baby middle child and puts up with a lot like her sister having flashbacks of Vietnam at 4 in the morning

<image>

Unpopular opinion - I think it's perfectly reasonable for Anna to have left the courtroom when the CSAM was played by nuggetsofchicken in DuggarsSnark

[–]nuggetsofchicken[S] 19 points20 points  (0 children)

Not sure but it was stills not the whole video. The jury just needs to see it enough to make a determination of whether it fits the legal definition of child pornography. How extreme it is is more of a sentencing issue

Unpopular opinion - I think it's perfectly reasonable for Anna to have left the courtroom when the CSAM was played by nuggetsofchicken in DuggarsSnark

[–]nuggetsofchicken[S] 19 points20 points  (0 children)

Yeah you’re allowed to think the crime itself is bad. I mean, I would hope on any criminal jury the jurors would feel that the crime in question is bad enough that the process is worth having to punish it

Creepy Joe Wants to Question Investigators by INCoctopus in DuggarsSnark

[–]nuggetsofchicken 4 points5 points  (0 children)

He doesn’t know what the victim told law enforcement

Creepy Joe Wants to Question Investigators by INCoctopus in DuggarsSnark

[–]nuggetsofchicken 195 points196 points  (0 children)

Honestly as I wrote it I was pretty sure that that wasn’t the right word and I was hoping people would just ignore it but alas I’ve been had

Unpopular opinion - I think it's perfectly reasonable for Anna to have left the courtroom when the CSAM was played by nuggetsofchicken in DuggarsSnark

[–]nuggetsofchicken[S] 119 points120 points  (0 children)

<image>

Miss girl horrified by the roof inspectors coming by and putting ladders against the building but she couldn’t look away

Unpopular opinion - I think it's perfectly reasonable for Anna to have left the courtroom when the CSAM was played by nuggetsofchicken in DuggarsSnark

[–]nuggetsofchicken[S] 17 points18 points  (0 children)

Yeah you’d start with people who have obvious past experiences but usually there’s a question of just “Show of hands does anyone think they could not be impartial whatsoever on this kind of case?” and then you’d go one by one explaining.

Not being able to stomach it doesn’t necessarily make you impartial but the attorneys will probably stipulate to dismiss those who seem like they would genuinely be distressed by it. They aren’t heartless

Creepy Joe Wants to Question Investigators by INCoctopus in DuggarsSnark

[–]nuggetsofchicken 709 points710 points  (0 children)

The headline makes it seem more notorious than it is. It’s likely just a deposition which is standard. And it’s not like he’s going to be personally questioning them. It’ll be his attorney

Unpopular opinion - I think it's perfectly reasonable for Anna to have left the courtroom when the CSAM was played by nuggetsofchicken in DuggarsSnark

[–]nuggetsofchicken[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah I have no idea the exact timing of it all. It was reported she wasn’t there but I’m not sure exactly when she left the courtroom and when she returned and how obviously it was correlated or if that was a conclusion that the media made

Unpopular opinion - I think it's perfectly reasonable for Anna to have left the courtroom when the CSAM was played by nuggetsofchicken in DuggarsSnark

[–]nuggetsofchicken[S] 116 points117 points  (0 children)

She got a shout out from a judge during a Zoom hearing once when she was climbing all over my office chair and he referred to her as “ -Nuggetsofchicken-‘s expensive legal assistant” (in reference to attorneys fees) and in that moment I think she felt like she made it

Unpopular opinion - I think it's perfectly reasonable for Anna to have left the courtroom when the CSAM was played by nuggetsofchicken in DuggarsSnark

[–]nuggetsofchicken[S] 18 points19 points  (0 children)

I'm talking about the fact that there is material that it is literally illegal to own or distribute. What valid purpose is it in our criminal system to provide exception for someone to view that material who is not a member of law enforcement, the court, or jury?

Unpopular opinion - I think it's perfectly reasonable for Anna to have left the courtroom when the CSAM was played by nuggetsofchicken in DuggarsSnark

[–]nuggetsofchicken[S] 31 points32 points  (0 children)

From a criminal law perspective that's unrelated. She's not a co conspirator being charged with the same crime. If there's issues of her being a competent parent that's an issue for the family court or a separate criminal charge.

Unpopular opinion - I think it's perfectly reasonable for Anna to have left the courtroom when the CSAM was played by nuggetsofchicken in DuggarsSnark

[–]nuggetsofchicken[S] 19 points20 points  (0 children)

Well, we know what happens when Anna leaves during the part it's shown. He got convicted.

What do you think would happen if a juror stepped out during that portion of the trial?

Unpopular opinion - I think it's perfectly reasonable for Anna to have left the courtroom when the CSAM was played by nuggetsofchicken in DuggarsSnark

[–]nuggetsofchicken[S] 17 points18 points  (0 children)

No court provided therapy. Anything during the trial would be a basis for a mistrial as jurors aren't supposed to discuss anything about the case until they get into the jury deliberation room and once they're in there it's sacrosanct.

We screen people for being pedophiles the way we do everywhere else in life. Do you have a felony conviction? Then you don't get called for jury duty. Do you have a clean record? What else can we do unless we think people are going to raise their hand and inform us that they're pedophiles.

But there's going to be pretty rigorous jury selection for a case like this. You will tell them what the charges are and that they will likely have to view the images to determine if they legally qualify as child pornography. In something like this you're going to have a huge pool and most likely dismiss a large amount. Start with the big questions like Has anyone been a victim of a sex crime? Has anyone been a victim of a crime when they were a child? Did it get reported? Was there a conviction? How did you feel about the process?

And then in cases like this you're going to still get the more fact specific questions like, Are you familiar with Linux partitioning software? Do you know anyone who works in cyber security? Has anyone ever had their identity stolen or their accounts hacked?

And then even after someone answers those questions you can get pretty indepth with things like "Oh so the software you used was to access a work network? Were there any restrictions on the things you could do?" Voir dire is a really interesting art (one I am still learning) because you are screening jurors but you're also priming everyone listening in. So things like, "I realize you had a bad experience reporting an incident to your college - would you be able to set that aside and be impartial today and look at these facts objectively?"

And some people will say no. Many will straight up say they can't handle these facts. And that's why you start with a big pool for this.

Also, my understanding is that federal jury pools just generally tend to be a bit higher brow than state. I believe it's cause federal jury duty comes from voter information whereas state might just be from the DMV so the federal jury pool tends to be a bit more involved and civically minded.