Well, this is a turn of events. A few months ago, In Touch Weekly had a series of exclusive interviews with Danica Dillon, a p0rn star and stripper who claimed she had sex multiple times with Josh Duggar. Her story was profoundly disturbing. According to Danica, Josh had basically been cyberstalking her and he followed her to Pittsburgh, where he awkwardly flirted with her and then offered to pay her for sex. The sex was, in Danica’s words, “traumatic” and “rough” and “tossing me around like I was a rag doll.” Yeah. Go here and here to re-read those stories. So, after Danica sold (?) her story to In Touch, she ended up finding a good lawyer. And now Danica has sued Josh Duggar for $500,000. Yes.
The oldest son of Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar, Josh, is being sued by porn star Danica Dillon, In Touch magazine has learned exclusively. In the legal papers obtained by In Touch, Danica (real name: Ashley Stamm-Northup), alleges that Josh twice committed battery against her when they had sex in March and April this year — a story In Touch broke in August — and is asking for $500,000 because, she says in court papers, the incidents were so awful they caused her “physical and emotional injuries” and she felt “as if she were being raped.”
Not only does Josh have to answer to Danica, but he’ll likely be questioned about all of his past sexual misconduct. Nothing will be off-limits — including still-hidden details about cheating on his wife and having a porn addiction, as well as how he molested five underage girls, including four of his own sisters, as a teen.
“The defendant may be subject to [having to talk about] his prior bad [or] sexually abusive acts at trial,” Danica’s attorney Marc Frumer tells In Touch exclusively. “They are all relevant if he takes the stand.”
Josh checked into a long-term faith-based rehab program in August in the wake of the Ashley Madison cheating website hack outing him as a paying customer. He then admitted to cheating and having a porn addiction. In September, his family made their way back on TV: TLC announced that Josh’s sisters Jill and Jessa would be starring in their own network specials.
“I don’t believe there should be any spin-off shows whatsoever,” says Stephanie Ovadia, who is Danica’s legal consultant. “I think [the family] needs to have some accountability to the public.”
Jim Bob and Michelle waited at least 16 months to inform authorities after Josh confessed to molesting his sisters in 2002, then tried to cover up his crimes for years. They could be asked about all of Josh’s horrible behavior in an attempt to “show a pattern,” Frumer tells In Touch, especially “if Josh denies the prior bad acts.”
“The defendant has a history of sexual and physical abuse towards women, particularly those he perceives as vulnerable or weak,” Danica’s attorney tells In Touch. “He has to be held responsible for his actions.”
I have no shade for Danica/Ashley whatsoever. I mean, do I think that she herself is somewhat shady? Sure. Of course she is. But I’ll take an honest prostitute over a moralizing, child molesting, hypocritical Josh Duggar any day. Maybe it’s not even about the money, because I seriously doubt Josh has that kind of cash. Maybe it’s just about Danica wanting Josh Duggar to be questioned about all of his stupid, disgusting, hypocritical and criminal acts.
Photos courtesy of social media.
Good. I was hoping it wouldn’t just go away and in 5 years we’d hear that he had opened his own church and no one would care. Team Danica.
I agree. I think he and his family are counting on the public’s short attention span, but I hope all of this follows forever.
Team Danica all the way.
Pretty Lady, isn’ t she?
I wager she is way nicer than all Duggars could ever be.
I’m really glad she’s doing this. I mean, chances are she won’t get much money, but at least all his despicable acts will be dragged out in public and his family will once again be shown for the disgusting hypocrites that they really are.
I know I say this every time, but this family really makes me sick 🙁 I want them to sink and drown in the most spectacular fashion, never to return.
I hope everything is dragged out too, but…
…if he settles…it’ll all be sealed under some sort of non-disclosure agreement.
what she could do, though, is have him admit to everything, publicly, as part of the settlement. ugh, the whole thing is so gross. HE is so gross.
There will be no public drag out, just a speedy behind the scenes settlement. I bet the Duggars are fundraising for that as we speak.
I can just hear Jim Bob now, “Look, Huckabee, we need one more thing for Josh: your donor list.”
Word. Honestly, I don’t know how she’d do in court, considering her argument is that he was so rough both times, it was physically and emotionally traumatizing… except she went back willingly a month after the first traumatic encounter??? No. She knows that he’ll agree to a quick settlement to make the story disappear.
That could be a risky decision for him though, how many other woman will come forward also wanting settlements. I seriously doubt she is the only woman he cheated with!
I applaud her. Anything to keep those money-grubbing people as far away from TV and mainstream success is a good thing. You know their team has been hoping everyone’s memory blanked. Also the amount of shaming she will get is huge. Some people find it inconceivable that sex workers can claim assault or rape.
Agreed. She is doing a good thing, regardless of her occupation. Lol calling him out and making him accountable.
Me too. This isn’t going to be easy for her and I doubt she’ll get much money, but forcing Josh and his parents to testify in court is EXACTLY what needs to happen here. I just hope they won’t be able to buy her off (maybe that’s why she’s suing for so much?) before that happens. As yet, they have barely been held accountable for this mess. Their show was canceled, yes, but they seem to think a few public apologies, some time away for Josh, and shoving Jill and Jessa to the forefront will fix everything.
Even if she just settles out of court, it will have both desired effects: getting her more money, and sending a message to his wife about his behavior. I think she wants both.
I think she’ll get every cent of it, because Josh may not have that sort of cash, but his father does – and their newly-reignited “reality” empire depends upon Josh being cross-examined under oath about all of this. It’s a shame because I think someone needs to hold him accountable for what he’s done, but I doubt this will ever hit a courtroom.
On the upside, if they settle, even if they do so without prejudice then that will be regarded by many as an admission, anyway.
I don’t wish violence on anyone. But why did she see him again by herself after the first time she was man handled? I don’t understand and wish she or someone would explain that.
I imagine someone in her line of employment would have limited choices and have to try to make the best of a bad lot in life. Sometimes you just have to choose the least bad option, but who knows?
swack: I agree. He is obviously a perv, but would she be doing anything if he didn’t have a recognizable name. Like you said, why go back? Makes zero sense. Wish the Duggars would disappear from our view, he, as well as his money, fame seeking sisters. Another pathetic story from the world of “reality” tv. If this is what’s real, I’d rather see fiction.
You’re both blaming her. Develop some humanity.
@huh, not trying to blame her, just trying to figure out WHY she would go back after being roughed up the first time. It wasn’t okay the first time or any time.
Huh: That is a ludicrous accusation. I wasn’t blaming her. I was questioning her common sense to allow him in a second time after the first situation. I try to articulate myself in a way that is understandable, but this time I missed the target.
Nancy and Swack – you should consider yourselves extremely fortunate never to have experienced abuse. There are many resources both online and at any good library or bookstore on the “psychology of abuse” that may help to answer your question as to why a woman wouldn’t immediately leave her abuser.
Money – he must have paid her quite a lot for the 2nd time.
I still struggle to believe she willingly had sex with him – money or no.
Actually read on a different site that the second time was when he came to apologize for the first time (again I take things with a grain of salt). If that is true (and I say IF) then her credibility goes down hill because she chose to be alone for said apology. I in no way am trying to blame her or trying to shame her (no one deserves that type of treatment), I’m just trying to understand why.
And that’s what leaves a bad taste in my mouth about her suing him now. He paid to have sex with her the first time and she was man-handled. He paid her handsomely the second time because now she knew what awaited her re his preferences, and she consented – completely aware of what she was getting herself into and now she’s suing and seeking half a million dollars. She already got paid to have rough sex with him but she’s suing him for monetary damages because he had rough sex with her. Seems like double dipping. She made a conscious decision having all the information. Her lawsuit is bogus. Do I want to see him exposed for all his horrific crimes against his sisters and whomever he molested? YES! Do I beleive Danica is a victim? NO! She victimizes herself for money…by choice.
umm..yeah. I agree JJ
I’m sorry but I have no sympathy for Danice and I dont see her as a victim.
Her story now contradicts her last story when she went public. she even said he was ‘more gentle’ the 2nd time so Im having a hard time believing she was traumatized at all or if she was those extra dollars sure made up for it.
Just read her last statement from the previous articles. sorry but this is nothing more than a money grab. not that im upset but I dont feel she has a leg to stand on as far as portraying herself as a traumatized victim. and that has nothing to do w/ her profession but this was a business transaction. she could have refused to see him a 2nd time. the DV card doesn’t apply here at all.
that said, Im all for anything that keeps this disgusting family off the air but lets not twist words just to make yourself appear to be a victim when she met him again.
>>>because she chose to be alone for said apology.
It’s never okay to blame a woman for being raped! It’s not a woman’s responsibility to avoid being raped. You see the exact same arguments being made, well she chose to get drunk, she chose to wear a short skirt, she chose to be alone with a man she didn’t know…
If you are curious about learning more about why people stay in abusive situations I recommend watching the Ted Talk ‘Why domestic violence victims don’t leave’ by Leslie Morgan Steiner.
One of the important things she touches upon in that talk is that abuse victims pacify their abuser out of a legitimate fear of escalation in the abusers behaviour. Over 70% of domestic violence murders happen when the victims leave the abuser. While Danica wasn’t in a longterm relationship with Josh Duggar he stalked her, followed her to a different city and then raped so presumably she went into survival mode. That was compounded by the fact that victims aren’t generally believed when they make allegations and aren’t always given enough support if they do decide to express distress.
I hope that the outcome of this is that Josh Duggar is brought to justice and found guilty of the sexual assault he has committed. Regardless of the outcome, I’m relieved that we are having more discussions about this topic since abuse thrives in silence.
I realise my reply was lengthy and I hope that is okay! I’m very passionate about abuse and sexual assault since way too many of my friends are survivors.
Thank you. I totally get why she didn’t go to authorities the first time it happened because Josh, the nice “Christian” boy would be believed over the porn star/stripper. I hope he is convicted also. I appreciate the information (not too long) because I don’t know. My daughter was in a relationship as a teen that started to become abusive. He wanted to have a relationship that was just him and her and no one else around. When that happened, thankfully, she ended the relationship. He then threatened to get a gun and shoot her and her family and that did a number on her. Took her to therapy after that. She is still dealing with some of the effects of that relationship.
Nicely written! Not only is it okay, I hope you leave the same comment in every part of the internet! It’s so, so important.
Great suggestion @Marcel. She really nails it in that talk.
Also thanks for your positive feedback everyone! I’ve been following this website for like three years but I’ve been more of a lurker than someone who regularly comments. The level of discourse here is so high and there’s such a lack of trolls that I enjoy reading the comment section as much as I enjoy the articles.
While they weren’t in a relationship per say, he probably pulled out the old “I won’t do it again” line (didn’t she even say that he had?) and offered her more money. She’s got a living to get and I imagine this kind of treatment isn’t totally foreign to her, sadly.
She also said he still owed her money for the first time. So there was an element of “only way to get my full fee” in addition to the element of “he apologized so I’ll give him a second chance”. She’s allowed to have mixed motives for the lawsuit also – money plus the kind of concern she did express earlier about his wife and kids. Getting this documented could help Anna realize what she’s dealing with if she has any illusions about getting back with Josh, and also warn others.
I’m glad your daughter has a supportive parent! I’ve noticed that emotional support is really fundamental to people recovering (alongside therapy depending on how severe the trauma is). I sincerely wish her all the best! It would be such a frightening situation to process.
There’s a book called Men Who Hate Women & the Women Who Love Them by Susan Forward. I read some chapters at a friends house. It helped me see the reason I fell for my controlling ex was because at the beginning he put me on pedestral so he was full of praise for me until he realised I wasn’t living up to the unrealistically high standards he had for me so I fell off the pedestral and was punished for it. Susan is a practicing psychologist so the book has case studies that illustrate the warning signs that a man will be an abuser. I liked it because it was practical and to the point.
I’m not sure if it would be upsetting for your daughter to read but I thought I would mention just in case you find it helpful. You can buy it online (it’s in Australian bookstores but idk if it’s still being sold globally).
Thanks! I really do appreciate all the information you have provided. My daughter is married and has 4 wonderful children. Sorry you went through what you did. I may try and get the book. I had warned my daughter to be careful because she told me some HORRIBLE stories about his childhood (and his mother is a professional). After they broke up, he called her and told her he was in the garage with the car on and was killing himself. I would not let her go over to his house by herself.
Yes, that was my take-away. If he was rough and degrading, don’t take his $$ the second time. But I’m all for the Duggar Humiliation Train to keep on chuggin’ nonetheless.
Does this mean he’ll have to come out of ‘therapy’ to speak to lawyers? Because he’s still not done his ‘treatment’ at that religious centre?
This is totally stealing all of Jessa’s Thunder again! It’s too bad this wasn’t timed just a bit earlier. Would have loved for this to overtake the Spurgeon news. Also, even my autocorrect doesn’t believe that is a real name.
Too funny about the autocorrect.
I was in bed with my husband and I asked if he wants to know the name of the new Duggar baby. He said yes so I whispered in his ear “Spurgeon”. And he got the giggles so bad. That name is stupid enough to give a grown man the giggles!
If Danica had a different hairstyle she could pass for one of Josh’s sisters ( which is disturbing) She may not win this lawsuit but like her lawyer stated Josh might have to talk about prior abusive sexual acts. I wonder if Josh’s sisters would be made to testify?
I still feel that there is some major dirt on Jim Bob that has yet to surface.
I immediately thought she looked like a Dugger sister too. Maybe that’s why he was stalking her. Creeps me out just thinking that!!
I’ve noted more than once that his wife also strongly resembles his sisters. which creeps me out to NO END.
also agree on something dirty on DimBulb that hasn’t yet come out yet.
I thought that too and cringed. If any more women come out of the woodwork and talk about him I bit they’ll look more or less the same. Ugh.
ugh I totally see the resemblance here, and now I feel really sick.
I think his wife looks like his sisters but I don’t think Danica does at all. She’s a pretty brunette but that’s all I see that’s in common. Whereas his wife has the same hair, same face shape, same chin as some of his sisters.
I won’t comment on the actual story because I don’t think we should be commenting when there’s a possible legal case pending.
The only thing I want to say is about Danica’s words regarding that there shouldn’t be any spin off Duggar shows whatsoever because the family needs to take accountability. To me, I strongly disagree because it’s kind of indirectly punishing the victims. Obviously no one’s blaming Jessa and Jill for what happened, (and Danica herself certainly isn’t), but, by saying there should be no spin off shows, while it’s her right to have that opinion, if the network followed that view, it would in effect indirectly cause Jill and Jessa to suffer for what happened. And that’s not fair. Why on earth should Jill and Jessa lose out or suffer because of what Josh did or how their parents handled it? They shouldn’t! They’ve done nothing wrong and if they want spin off shows featuring them and their children they should be able to have them if the TV network offers them! They’ve done nothing wrong, so why should they lose out?
Out of curiosity, what possible harm does it do for posters on a gossip site to comment on a pending legal case?
As for Jessa and Jill, I think what happened to them is terrible, and I think they were Josh’s victims as well as the victim of their parents and their cult. But they are adults now, and they are still hawking the total BS that their cult believes – a woman’s place is to get married, stay home, “please her man” sexually whenever he wants regardless of her own feelings, have a baby every year and never aspire to anything further except the attention of TV viewers. They are sick, brainwashed and ignorant. That’s not their fault. But it doesn’t mean that they should have a tv show platform and benefit from their hypocrisy and misogyny either.
Well in case media speculation in general influenced the trial I guess. Bascially it’s a precaution in case comments jepordised a fair trial from happening. On the Daily Mail, you are not allowed to comment on articles involving current trials for legal reasons and I imagine this is a similar scenario. I’m in the UK. I don’t know, I guess I just don’t feel comfortable.
GNAT- EXACTLY!
“They are sick, brainwashed and ignorant. That’s not their fault. But it doesn’t mean that they should have a tv show platform and benefit from their hypocrisy and misogyny either.”
They shouldn’t have a show because the platform this entire family “preaches” is disgusting. People shouldn’t be allowing anyone in this sick family to profit off this lifestyle.
I don’t want Jessa or Jill punished but is not having your own show a punishment? I don’t think so. Having a TV show is a privilege – a bonus. They never did anything to earn it, so taking it away isn’t really penalizing them – It’s just not happening anymore.
I agree with GNAT in that I don’t feel that family’s “values” should be encouraged via a TV show. What they practice and try to spread or become more acceptable is unhealthy and disrespectful to women. Jill and Jessa need to find a different way to make an income – perhaps getting a job although it’s probably frowned on in their religion to work outside the home, but if that is the case, then why is working on a TV show any different? The hypocracy still sneaks up and shocks me in weird ways like this. No. No show for any of them or the stupid Sister Wives crap! What the hell are they telling our young girls and women? Freedom of speech and freedom of religion are all our rights in this country but does that mean everybody living some kind of alternative lifestyle should have a show to push it on us and influence our vulnerable? No!
@ JenniferJustice: I love what you said about freedom of speech and freedom of religion.
Steven Hassan makes the wonderful argument in his book “Combating Cult Mind Control”, which I cannot possibly recommend enough to everyone interested in cults like the Quiverfull Movement or $cientology, he writes something along the lines of: “I am a firm believer in religious freedom. It is your constitutional right to believe that your dog is The Messiah. However, I strongly object to anybody using undue influence to MAKE other people believe that your dog is The Messiah.”
And that’s exactly what separates a genuine religion from a destructive cult: A reliegion, you can enter and leave upon your own free will. Destructive cults take away that choice. There is never a legitimate reason to leave, you become “of Satan”, or an SP, or whatever the cult lingo makes you out to be. Cults use mind control techniques to take away people’s free will. And that is not okay, and that should CERTAINLY NOT BE ADVERTISED ON NATIONAL TV!
I don’t get it. Jessa and Jill should get stupid TV money and public attention because they did NOT press charges, seek counselling, or call their brother to account for his abuse? They should get rewarded with a TV “career” because they kept silent, excused his behaviour and continue to be the brain washed female dolls they were taught to be? And even if I take the kindest view of their silence i still don’t see how it follows that they somehow deserve a TV show for it. What is wrong with getting a job like everyone else?
What a harsh comment. It’s not that Jessa and Jill ‘deserve’ TV shows, it’s not some kind of reward or prize for having survived abuse. Basically all I’m saying is, they were already TV stars and they shouldn’t have to now hide away and not appear on TV because they were outed as having been victims of abuse when they were children. Are you really saying they should not be on TV because they didn’t deal with the abuse the ‘right’ way? Everyone handles it differently and they were CHILDREN.
They were reality TV personalities before the news story broke about what happened with Josh and they shouldn’t now lose out or be disadvantaged in any way because of what happened to them. None of it was their fault.
I agree with Vauvert 100%
Ditto Vauvert and the comments weren’t “harsh” in the least.
I don’t think they should “hide away” or be ashamed of what happened to them because no, it was NOT their fault. However, I don’t think they should have TV shows. What exactly have they done to “deserve” a show? They didn’t negotiate for the initial show (so having it canceled is not a punishment for their actions), they haven’t done anything cool or exciting (i.e. worth watching), and they continue to parrot their parents’ terrible and damaging cult views. TV shows aren’t rewards for good behavior.
Wren, I’m not saying they’ve been punished. I’m saying if the network were to do as Danica wants and axe the spin off shows it would feel to me a little bit like the young women were taking the brunt of the bad year the family has had recently. Presumably they were involved in negotiations for their own possible spin off show. I am NOT talking about the original show which I can see why it was axed and even agree with it being axed. I am talking about the TV network possibly doing as Danica wants and potentially axing the girls’ spin off show. It hasn’t happened yet, I’m just saying that if it did ever happen I would feel it was unfair. That’s all I’m trying to say, that I don’t agree with Danica’s comments about axing the potential girls spin off show.
But that’s not what Vauvert is saying. He/she didn’t say they deserve to never be on TV again. Vauvert is saying they shouldn’t be making sick money on a TV show that touts and encourages a sick lifestyle and attitude toward women. At least that’s what I get and I agree wholeheartedly. Not being a TV star is not punishment. It’s just not getting to be a TV star. Nobody thinks those two young women did anything wrong. We all know they’ve been brainwashed and continue to be controlled by their parents. They condone and push cult behavior. That shouldn’t be a TV show for anybody of any cult following. It’s dangerous because there are always going to be vulnerable people who are looking for something to beleive in and belong to. I think even Jill and Jessa realize at this point in their lives that their upbringing and beleifs are whack, but they’ll keep doing TV show that puts it in the best light because they want the money and want to beleive they’re not warped.
Bluebell- the girls’ show is just another way to get the Duggars back on TV. I doubt very much that Jim Bob isn’t getting a substantial fraction of the earnings from their show, he is probably set up in some official function even. I also doubt that Ma and Pa Duggar and all of the Little Duggars will be totally absent from the show. It’s just a way to get past the bad publicity that cancelled their original show. They really want both the money and the chance to spread their beliefs. Look up the Quiverfull movement, they are quite serious about out-reproducing the rest of us. While you’re at it, look for “no longer quivering”.
I respectfully disagree, Bluebell. Victim blaming and calling them out for continuing to spread their hateful distortion of so-called Christianity on TV are two very different things. Nobody is blaming them for having been victimized as little girls. People just absolutely don’t want them to continue spreading the hatred – and that, I feel, is completely legitimate.
I never said that anyone was victim-blaming, sauvage. I said that calling for spin off shows to be axed ends up hurting the victims more than anyone else. I realise that is not the intention of the people calling for the shows to be axed, that the people calling for the show to be axed are not doing it to hurt Jessa and Jill. But in effect that’s what it does. And I have a problem with that for the reasons I stated.
I think the situation is that people are so put off by the stuff with Josh that their distaste for the whole family has reached a high point and they don’t want any of them on their TV screens. I understand that, but still think it’s unfair on the young women who are blameless in this.
‘Spreading the hatred’, those are very strong words. I don’t see them (Jill and Jessa etc) as spreading hatred at all. Nobody was calling for the show to be axed before the scandal with Josh broke out. Why now go in so strong to get axed a TV show featuring the younger women? Why should they be tainted by a scandal that they had no fault in?
To be honest, the more internet comments I read about the Duggars, I’m starting to feel the young women and children of the Duggar family would be better off having a life off TV cameras and away from the spotlight.
” I said that calling for spin off shows to be axed ends up hurting the victims more than anyone else.”
why? how does it “hurt” them? because they don’t get to be on TV anymore? they are not entitled to be on TV simply because they were previously.
“They were reality TV personalities before the news story broke about what happened with Josh and they shouldn’t now lose out or be disadvantaged in any way because of what happened to them. None of it was their fault.”
THEY ARE NOT BEING “DISADVANTAGED” IN ANY WAY. no one is entitled to a TV show!
Doofus, they were on the TV show and everything was fine and dandy with the public. The story with Josh broke and now people are calling for them not to be on the air. I can understand people don’t want to see Josh on TV. But I don’t understand why they object to Jessa and Jill. The only reason people object is because of what happened with Josh. They shouldn’t lose their career or TV show because of him. The fact that no one is entitled to a TV show (you’re right, no one is), is irrelevant. They had a TV show. The story with Josh broke. Now people don’t want them to have a TV show any more, and the only reason for that, that I can make out, is because of Josh. That’s what flabbergasts me. It’s not just that people (understandably) don’t want a TV show with Josh. They don’t want a TV show with THEM, the young women, the people who were innocent victims in all this. How is that not punishing the victims, even if it’s not intended to and not meant to be directed at those individual family members in particular? It’s still adversely affecting them. It just strikes me as unfair, that’s all.
“Doofus, they were on the TV show and everything was fine and dandy with the public. The story with Josh broke and now people are calling for them not to be on the air.”
no, it wasn’t fine and dandy. there was controversy long before Josh’s exploits.
“But I don’t understand why they object to Jessa and Jill. The only reason people object is because of what happened with Josh.”
no, people have made that abundantly clear. they represent that misogynistic cult. what Josh did is symptomatic of the problems with that cult, but he’s not the only reason people don’t want them on TV.
the only way that it’s “adversely” affecting them is that they don’t get a TV show. not giving them a TV show is NOT “punishing the victims”. and again, they are not entitled to one. they are not “losing their careers”. a reality TV show is not a “career”. their husbands can (since the cult forbids them from doing it) GET JOBS like regular people.
@ Bluebell –
“‘Spreading the hatred’, those are very strong words. I don’t see them (Jill and Jessa etc) as spreading hatred at all. Nobody was calling for the show to be axed before the scandal with Josh broke out. Why now go in so strong to get axed a TV show featuring the younger women?”
WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!!! Last year, there were boycotts and petitions to cancel the show. The summer of 2014 Michelle Duggar recorded robocalls encouraging people to discriminate against transgender people by voting against a bill that would allow them using public restrooms, calling them child predators and rapists. Meanwhile HER OWN SON was an actual known child predator! When the news broke about Josh and the five victims, the pot had already been stirred and bubbling just beneath the surface. That’s why the backlash and anger seemed to escalate so quickly to cancel the tv show. And again, two of the victims, who were now adult married women with children of their own, who publicly blew off what Josh did to them and made it seem like the public was blowing things out of proportion; even though the police reports, written in THEIR OWN WORDS at the time, said something entirely different and definitely more damaging.
Sorry I’m late to the party in replying, Bluebell, I had to work.
I understand your argument, and I disagree with it. As doofus and Lucky Charm stated: There was controversy before, a lot of it. People were not buying the wholesome image presented; people were wondering very loudly about things like blanket training and not being allowed to express anger or sadness because their cult regards this as an action against God; people were speaking out against the misogony, the hatred for everything LGBT; the list goes on and on. I was among those people. Their cult has been called out for being a cult numerous times by numerous people, including me, and also: including a lot of people who actually got out of the distructive cult that is the Quiverfull movement.
What happened when the Josh Duggar scandal broke was that it finally became blatantly obvious that the truth was even more disturbing, destructive, inhuman than many of us had dared to imagine. And, HELL NO!; I don’t want anybody who is associated with this destructive cult having a platform on TV!
These two young women are very visible parts and spokespeople of this destructive cult. They defended a child molester’s actions. Their behaviour discouraged other victims from speaking up, and cemented the status quo for other victims of sexual abuse, which in itself is something that I cannot, for the life of me, ever condone.
In regards to spreading the hatred: I did not use those words lightly. Jessa herself likened abortion to the WWII Holocaust . She poses with pink guns, cracking very disconcerting “jokes”. Jill’s husband ran over a cat with a snow bob, on camera. Everybody laughed. All of this is unacceptable to me.
Yes, this family, and the whole cult they represent, is made of hatred. The very foundation of this cult is hatred against everybody who is not “them”.
No, I don’t want the representatives of that mindset on TV, whether their childhood sucked or not. Just: NO.
Bluebell – it’s not at all unusual for a show to lose its appeal because of wrongdoing by even one cast member. Consider the abrupt drop in residuals earned by members of the Cosby Show cast as a result of revelations about good ol’ Bill. In the Duggar case, not only Josh but his parents did wrong, and his victims were pressured to whitewash it all on TV. Any Duggar-related show is going to be tainted by this, especially since the religion they are promoyting via their show is quite definitely connmected with the problem.
And the girls are not all sugar and spice and everything nice. Take a look at some of the hateful things they and their husbands have said in the past.
What a crock of … First, gossiping about a legal case has no bearing on the case whatsoever.
Second, let these idiots (all of them – Jessa and Jill included) get real jobs like the rest of world. I hope more people come out of the woodwork to sue Josh and tank the whole Duggar ship. I don’t want to see any of them on tv anymore. They are repressive and backward.
The UK is pretty compact compared to the U.S., so their rules may be different for that reason. This is a huge country, thousands of miles wide and thousands of miles long. Here, the lawyers generally do ask prospective jurors what they already know about the case and can disqualify them if needed. And jurors are sequestered during a trial and not allowed to read media accounts. In local cases, the defense lawyer can ask for a change in venue to a different area if they think too many potential jurors have already formed an opinion. Otherwise, anything goes as far as free discussion on the net about a case is concerned. Only a small percentage of people even read tabloids, so I doubt that we will be reducing the juror pool…
“Why on earth should Jill and Jessa lose out or suffer because of what Josh did or how their parents handled it?
why on earth are they entitled to a show? let them or their husbands GET JOBS like regular people.
Doofus, why can’t they have the same jobs they had before, just because it got made public that Josh assaulted them as children?
“why can’t they have the same jobs they had before”
because, people don’t want to see that misogynistic abusive cult represented as “normal”. it’s not solely due to what Josh did to them. this has been pointed out several times.
Oh okay I’m seeing the comments now that it’s not solely about what Josh did. Okay, I’ll take that on board.
By the way, I wouldn’t describe Jessa and Jill as misogynistic or abusive or even representative of a cult that is. Jill in particular is living quite an adventurous life at the moment doing charitable work in Central/South America so in a way she does have a ‘job’. Do the Duggars actually explicitly state that women shouldn’t work? To be honest I wish the public would give the young women a chance to represent themselves on their own TV show not as a representative of the Duggar clan but just representing themselves and their own family. I just really like the idea of giving them their own voice outside of their parents’ show.
“By the way, I wouldn’t describe Jessa and Jill as misogynistic or abusive or even representative of a cult that is.”
they remain as “church”-going members, and verbally support the cult. they represent it, whether you want to acknowledge that or not.
BTW, Jill may be doing “charitable” work in Central/South America, but she’s doing it in the name of the cult. so, yeah, still representing.
and again, they can represent themselves however they want to, but they aren’t entitled to do it on TV. they can have a voice outside of their parents’ show, and they don’t need to do on TV.
Yeah exactly what Doofus said. “Representing their own voice” isn’t really an option for brainwashed cult members because their “voice” will always be a mouthpiece for the cult that they belong to.
Also, I second this:
“GET A JOB”
Really, get a damn job, ladies. Stop promoting and profiting from a cult that endorses misogyny and protects pedophiles. Ugh. I feel bad that their asshole brother molested them and of course in that sense they are victims, but my sympathy ends there. They’re still protecting their own so they’re still part of the problem, end of.
If not having a TV show is suffering, I am and have been suffering all my life. It’s miserable and torterous that I’ve never had my own TV show. Life is so cruel. What did I do to deserve such punishment?!
Nobody blames the victims, but that doesn’t mean we continue to allow them to spread their warped beliefs and influence young girls and women.
We also need to keep in mind that although these two young women were victimized by their pervert brother and even though their parents made them downplay it and speak in support of him, Jill and Jessa are grown women at this point – having their own children and families and continuing the warped pattern. They are gradually evolving from victims to abusers in raising their own kids with the same jacked female-shame and what not. At some point, they are no longer victims, but becoming victimizers. We can feel sorry for teh little girls they were who were victimized, but once they’re adults making decisions for themselves and choosing the path of their parents, we lose our sympathy in order to protect those who can’t protect themselves.
Bluebell- their “missionary work” in Central America sounds like a scam to me, and I actually know people who have done real missionary work. One of the things they were supposedly doing was “working with gangs” in San Salvador. As if they know anything about “gangs” or San Salvador. Is their Spanish even good enough to help at all? Really, this is a common thing among fundamentalists here. They just go off with no knowledge at all about the other country on some nebulous mission to convert people who already have a religion (oops, they’re Catholics in San Salvador, who don’t count as real Christians to the Duggars and Duggars-in-laws) and get donations from people back home “to build churches”. They don’t actually think about what the locals truly need and don’t need.
The missionaries I know are humbler and bring needed skills to a community (such as doctors or nurses when those are in short supply), and don’t worry about converting anybody who already is doing ok spiritually. They are simply quietly living their own faith.
There is every reason to believe this missionary work is just another way to funnel money to the Duggar clan via donations. If they wanted to really help people in distress, they could have done it within easy driving distance.
They can continue with their chosen profession if they, and their employer, so wish. However, in a free market the public offers feedback to the employer re: if they wish to continue purchasing the product and in this case it appears a large portion do not wish to continue supporting a family that condones child exploitation. Jill and Jessa are not guaranteed a career on television. It has always been at the mercy of the network and the public. I suspect people would have continued to support them if they hadn’t been so vocal in their support of their abuser. Their choice, their consequence.
Love this! You rock!
Bluebell- while I do wish ALL the Duggars crawled under a rock & disappeared I understand the point you are trying to make and agree with you. I think your point is not to blame the victims (which I have seen in these comments about the Duggars). Regardless of what kind of people victims are they are still victims & shouldn’t be held accountable or blamed for the perps behavior. They can still be held accountable for being POS’s but that is separate from the abuse. Vauvert said “because they kept silent, excused his behaviour and continue to be the brain washed female dolls they were taught to be”……..A victim should never be held accountable for being “silent”. That’s the same excuse that Cosby’s using & it’s total BS. Just because you don’t like the victim personally (and the Duggars are the worst) don’t start throwing this stuff around. It’s a slippery & dangerous slope….
Television is a business. Not supporting a family that excuses child sexual abuse is not in and of itself “victim blaming.” Jill and Jessa are clearly victims and their behaviour reflects that. As such, I have tremendous sympathy for them, but it does not mean I wish to watch a program where they absolve the perpetrator and minimize his crimes. In my country a crime is not only committed against the victim it’s committed against the state. Therefore, even if the victim doesn’t wish for charges to be laid the authorities will do so bc it is in the best interests of society. I firmly believe it is in the best interests of society to minimize the scope and reach of the Duggars dangerous values and beliefs.
Television companies have every right to protect their interests and programming If it is a financial and legal liability.
Tonka- I 100% agree with you and think you may have missed my point. I don’t think any of them should have a TV show and why someone would watch it or like them is beyond me. I don’t like Jessa, Jill, all the J’s. I was commenting that I got the spirit of Bluebell’s many comments and that was not to blame these women for being victims or their reactions to said abuse. Should the authorities do something?! Yes! And the officer that Josh spoke to (per the Duggars) in the past should be held accountable. Wasn’t he a mandatory reporter!? Oh- he was a pedo too. Ugh with ALL of them. But I don’t think it’s right to get mad at the victims for being silent even if they are POS’s (as I said above). They suck for all kinds of legitimate reasons but not for being victims & staying quiet about their sexual abuse. Plenty of other mud to sling their way.
“…it would in effect indirectly cause Jill and Jessa to suffer for what happened. And that’s not fair. Why on earth should Jill and Jessa lose out or suffer because of what Josh did or how their parents handled it?…They’ve done nothing wrong, so why should they lose out?”
Firstly, having a canceled reality tv show by no means causes Jill or Jessa any suffering. If they are struggling financially, then their husbands need to do what they should have done in the first place, and that’s to get a job to support them! TV doesn’t last forever, and their dad kept most of that money anyway, since in their cult women aren’t allowed to work or earn their own money.
Secondly, they went on national tv and gave an interview wherein they LIED about what happened, to minimize and downplay the reality so that people would think it wasn’t as bad or awful as it really was. The police report tells a completely different story and they both, as grown adults, tried to turn it into something harmless for their own convenience.
‘Suffer’ was the wrong word I agree, I just meant that they would lose out on the TV show. Sorry I got a bit over-dramatic!
Am glad she’s doing this – the gift of Joshie boy has more to give and am sure it will come out with the law suit. I agree with her lawyer he and his parents have to be held accountable not only to the public but to the law for his and their actions. I cannot believe the sisters have a spin off show – this family is like an STD, once you get it its very hard to completely get rid of it.
As for Dancia – she’ll be lucky to see any money if she wins. He’s already taken steps to protect himself financially – sold his house to a family member/friend. Not he or the Duggars have that kind of money anyway.
I just hope it isn’t settled quietly.
Yessss.
Fun fact: I had a Duggar nightmare last night – I dreamt that Jimbob announced in front of a group of Quiverers that from now on, everybody was prohibited from ever mentioning Josh’s molesting his sisters and the other little girl, ever again. The Quiverers clapped joyfully. I don’t think I have ever in life screamed as loudly as I did in my dream. And nobody cared! A group of young women, one of them Jessa Sewald, ended up trying to lock up both me and my boyfriend in a tiny container, “to keep us from causing further disruptions” – and all of the ladies had the long hair, and the wide grins that don’t reach beyond their empty eyes… GAAAAAAH!
Lol! You have a sharp mind this early in the morning!
You know what I think? Every once in a while, a story or event comes along that accurately diagnoses everything about a specific aspect of a particular society or country that is wrong and unhealthy for the body politic. Every society has them. And for the US, it’s Josh Duggar.
And we all parse those stories endlessly but what it comes down to is this: Josh Duggar is wrong, Josh Duggar is unhealthy, and the existence of Josh Duggar is bad for America.
(cf Jimmy Savile in the UK and how it exposed the seedy underbelly of CSE within our institutions)
I agree. I would add that Josh Duggar was inevitable.
Yes. Exactly.
In the case of Jimmy Savile here, rumours had been swirling for ages about the non-existent handle we had on the extent of child sex exploitation. The Savile story exploded that and made us face up to it. If we are truthful with ourselves, we all knew it was going on but we didn’t do anything about it until Savile.
Likewise with Duggar – I see many people on here – especially you, GNAT! – talking about the malign influence of fundie Christianity in the US, and the hypocrisy within it seems common knowledge. It seems to me that the Josh Duggar revelations serve a similar purpose of exposure of secrets that were never really secrets at all.
Does that make sense?
Exactly.
Sixer- you hit the nail on the head! I think Josh Duggar is a poster child of what is wrong with the “morally superior, more Christian then you, right wing, tea party” fringe in this country that has made some head way in politics, society & US conscientiousness. It’s a fringe but we are feeling their wrath. Side eye to Donal Trump’s political beliefs & how successful- wtf?!- he’s been.
How many conservatives (that are forced due to litigation or public outings) does it take to do a public speech on their own moral failings while they try to punish others with the same failings before people wake up to their false idols?! Yeah- I’m thinking of Rush for one…..
Seriously- as Kaiser said “I’ll take an honest prostitute over a moralizing, child molesting, hypocritical Josh Duggar any day.” Yes, Yes, Yes!!!! Thank you for saying it!!!
Poster child! That’s the expression I was looking for!
I’m glad she’s suing, because I don’t want the family to get any more spin offs or another platform. I would think it was unfair for them to be held accountable for Josh’s behavior, except for two things: the behavior was at least partially caused by the repressive cult abuse he endured, and they hold themselves up as so innocent and sin-free while they try to sell their horrible beliefs to the public.
As for Danica, I think the fact that she had sex with Josh twice will make it more difficult for her to win. No one has the right to abuse anyone else, ever. But if the first occasion was as traumatic as she claims, I think the jury will question why she went willingly the second time. I’m not saying it didn’t happen the way she said it did, but I think that fact will be a roadblock for her.
@GNAT – agree that Danica will have a tough time convincing the jury because she went the second time. I don’t believe anyone should be treated the way she was but I also don’t understand why she saw him a second time.
Totally agree with you, I can see people simplifying it down to “well why did she go back a second time?”. Which is a legitimate question but we don’t know the full context around why she did and it’s probably not as simple as saying she just wanted money. I also feel like she will be judged because of her profession and that people will ask why she didn’t go to the police at the time etc. Not saying any of that is right but I could see it happening that way and good old Joshie gets away with it yet again. I’ve never seen the Duggars programme (live in the UK and only have basic TV) but I know enough about them to despise what they stand for.
I agree with you @GNAT. I hope all of Duggar’s past history is finally exposed and that happening in a courtroom is where it should take place, and not on some social media platform. The man is clearly a menace to women, his family and to society in general with deep seated emotional problems, with his parents being the first ones I hold accountable. I also agree that this woman will have a hard time explaining why she went back to him if her experience was so traumatic. As always in cases such as these, the legal system puts the victim on trial and tries to discredit their character. But I hope the truth about this despicable family is finally exposed; never watched their show but read enough to know I NEVER want to. Someone earlier posted that the Duggars are a good representation of what is wrong with American culture: I could not agree more. And I would throw the Kardashians into that equation. 😉
With respect to the legal case, there will also be an “assumption of the risk” component tacked onto her because of her occupation and going willingly for round two.
Well- that crap needs to change “assumption of risk”……that’s victim blaming to the umpteenth percent. Sure- she should realize that & talk to her therapist about it but it should have 0% baring on her legal case. Just because someone rapes you and you still live with them doesn’t make the 2nd rape any more “okay”. PS- I don’t think you were saying that Santia….just the legal aspects and that s%^t needs to change. A prostitute that is raped is not “just dine & dash” or “shop lifting”. She is someone who was forced or subjected to things she didn’t agree to = rape.
I don’t see how “assumption of risk” could apply unless Ol’ Moonface told her up-front that he planned to have very rough sex with her and she consented to that.
Sadly, it does play into civil cases. If you partake in activity that carries certain risk (in this case, prostitution, but could also be anything – kids getting hurt in paint ball, or sports activities, for instance), the law says you assume that risk.
I’m still failing to see how sexual intercourse is an activity that inherently carries the risk of a violent assault.
Can you help me to understand?
“Assumption of risk is a defense in the law of torts, which bars or reduces a plaintiff’s right to recovery against a negligent tortfeasor if the defendant can demonstrate that the plaintiff voluntarily and knowingly assumed the risks at issue inherent to the dangerous activity in which he was participating at the time of his or her injury.”
Yeah…so again, seems to me that Joshie Boy would have to prove that he told Danica up-front that he planned to have violent sex with her and that she indeed consented to that for “assumed risk” to apply here. But I’m no lawyer so maybe you can clarify.
Initially, she said “rough” sex. Now, it’s morphed into “violent” sex or an “assault.” As a prostitute, there is absolutely a risk that the client may be into rough sex or some sort of “role play.” Hence, the assumption of the risk. Again, not defending “Joshie Boy”; I hate him and his family as much as the next person here. However, that is absolutely an affirmative defense under the law and one that – in my lowly legal opinion – he might actually prevail on. (Of course, if she can show that he “assaulted” or “battered” her beyond what she consented to, that’s a different story. But, frankly, I don’t see it.)
Santia- I don’t see it….If that argument held water then we are all in deep, deep trouble as a society. I’m not saying a lawyer won’t try to use it but if a judge or jury bought it then almost all domestic violence cases could go unpunished. Also date rape. I think your logic is dangerous. When a woman goes back to a husband who has abused her has she “taken on the assumption of risk” and therefore it doesn’t make what he did criminal or have a civil case? This woman has claimed that she consented to sex- not physical abuse which he ended up doing to her (per what she says). Again- I think your thinking is a dangerous slippery slope….
Ok but doesn’t (couldn’t?) “rough sex” insinuate violence? I understand that prostitution could potentially involve rough sex, but again, I would assume that is something that would be discussed beforehand prior to engaging in sex. It seems like what you’re telling me is that violence is considered an inherent risk of prostitution, which is…really f*cked up and depressing.
I’m not sure how to read “lowly legal opinion” but it seems like you’re being defensive, which is odd because I was genuinely asking you because your comments seemed to indicate a law background. My comments weren’t meant to be a challenge to yours.
Anyway, I do appreciate the info and will take your word for it, but I could have done without the unnecessary sarcasm.
I’m just hoping this brings out more photos of Josh with public figures, particularly Republican presidential aspirants, including those who’ve dropped out of the race.
Ooo, ooo, let’s get one with Huckabee’s big fat face and his arm around Jim Bob and plaster it all over America. Who else?
If he has any money left, which I doubt, I assume a large settlement would be taking support away from his wife’s children. Women who engage in sex for profit are well aware that many customers are pervs. Now, because a lawyer wants her 15 minutes for name recognition all the details will be dredged up and reported on. Nobody deserves abusive treatment but when you willingly go back for another payout who is the fool?
Well his wife is staying and having kids with this pervert and child abuser, so maybe she deserves everything she gets as well?
Danica Dillon is the perfect example of why victims do not report their abusers, she has been judged as “less than” because of her occupation and as “deserving it” because of her actions. Because she is not an ideal victim she is dismissed as not deserving justice.
Agree. I said above I understand why she didn’t go immediately to the authorities because good old “christian” Josh will be believed over Danica the porn star/stripper. It’s not right but unfortunately that is pretty much the status quo.
Sex workers don’t deserve to be abused because of their jobs. The fault is always the abuser’s. Always.
This cannot be said often enough and it reminds me of some of the disparaging comments on the Sheen threads.
This mentality is part of why prostitution is such a dangerous job and why people such as Gary Ridgway treat prostitutes like disposable garbage that nobody cares about. It is so SO harmful to perpetuate the idea that sex workers somehow deserve to be assaulted because they “knew what they were getting into”. Instead, how about we put the onus on the John to treat ALL women, regardless of their profession, as human f*cking beings. At the end of the day, sex for money is a business transaction and should be handled as professionally as possible, which includes discussing and agreeing upon the exact sex acts that are being paid for before they happen as well as setting boundaries and disclosing the expectations of either party.
Just because some dude is paying for sex, it does not give him license to do whatever he wants to the woman that he is paying.
Thank you Pedro45 and Kitten. This cannot be reiterated enough.
and his wife allegedly knew about him molesting his sisters before she married him.
by your logic, she’s a “fool” who deserves whatever happens?…
I think what My Two Cents is saying is that Danica is taking the money away from his wife’s children (which are his also) by persuing the law suit. And while his wife doesn’t deserve what he has brought on his family, maybe it’s time she learns to be independent and not depend on him totally for everything. I have the feeling this isn’t the last law suit that will happen.
“If he has any money left, which I doubt, I assume a large settlement would be taking support away from his wife’s children.” Then maybe his wife should grow some and kick him out and start supporting herself. I feel sorry for his wife, but at some point in time one must take responsibility for ones own life. That is what is wrong with this so called religion – the women are not taught independence. It’s not too late to learn.
@MyTwoCents, Josh is responsible for providing for his four children and he is responsible for insuring that his ability to do so is not diminished by his own actions. Danica and her attorney have no obligation to Josh’s kids or his wife.
#charliesheenmentality
Josh’s earning potential probably zoomed downward long ago. But I wouldn’t worry about Anna. Her parents and siblings will help her financially as needed. I doubt she can count on much coming from Josh. And regardless, he is responsible for his own actions and the financial costs of assault. Otherwise, nobody would be sent to jail who had kids because then they couldn’t support their kids. And nobody with kids would be allowed to be the subject of a lawsuit no matter what they did. Really, you can’t absolve people of financial responsibility to those they have wronged simply because they also have a responsibility to their family. It just doesn’t work that way.
I hope she gets every cent of that money. I hope a lot of salacious details come out, resulting in the end of all of the Duggar’s media presence.
Settlement coming in 3 … 2 …
Oh, yeah! TLC is going to get rid of this post-stat; can’t have their cash cows sullied any further.
I believe her, always have. Looking forward to whenever he’s finally sent to Jail.
She didn’t go to the police; she went for the wallet.
Santina- I’m glad she did! Since she would get nothing from the police she’s suing for money (which she rightfully should get imo) and she should get $500,000 for that horrible night. She agreed to $1500 for consensual sex with the terms that acts were consensual. Do you really think she would get any justice with the police even if every detail is true??? Honestly? I’ve heard too many times that raping a prostitute (even beating them while at it) is “dine & dash”. I don’t care if she goes after his freedom, wallet, or d1ck….I’m just glad she’s coming after him.
Yes because law enforcement is always the first organization to step up and protect a prostitute. lol
“Yes because law enforcement is always the first organization to step up and protect a prostitute. lol” – Ooh, great comeback. EXCEPT, I was responding to the “when he’s sent to jail” part. He can’t be sent to jail for a civil suit.
Oh wow thanks for the polite clarification. But that still doesn’t negate my comment in any way.
She hit him in the wallet because that’s what hurts these people the most and because generally, cops turn a deaf ear to claims of violent assault from prostitutes.
The statement “she went for the wallet” smacks of negativity towards her and gives the impression that she’s a money grabber and not a victim. There is a burden of proof with criminal cases that is lower then civil cases. It doesn’t mean that someone found “not guilty” of a crime is innocent (see OJ being found not guilty in a criminal case & guilty in a civil case). I appreciated GNAT’s comment since it was just black & white- this is a civil case so he will not go to jail (ugh) but the fact that she “went after his wallet” just sounded bad. That’s all she has to go after. No criminal charges would likely be filed (I agree with Kitten) & he wouldn’t go to jail- that’s the reality. He didn’t even go to jail after admitting to a cop that he molested four girls?! So she’s going after the only thing she can…….and she deserves every penny she gets. And if she is victim and a money grabber- I hope she grabs every penny she can. It’s not okay for him to go into a verbal contract with someone (sex for money) and then physically abuse them beyond their consent. Period…end…it’s not okay for anyone to be abused for any reason.
I AM negative toward her for not going to the police. The statute of limitations may be up for his offenses against his sisters, but not for this. She could have gone to the police if only to make a point. She chose to go only for money. We don’t know what happened between her and him. You know as much or as little as I do. If she did get abused, I would hope she would try to get him off the streets so he wouldn’t do it to someone else.
Santia- Oh geeze- that’s a loaded comment you just made. Please save your ire for HIM. She would have gotten nothing from the police- I would put ALL my money & chips on that in a poker table & win that bet. He already had told a cop of his abuse of children FYI with 0 consequences. Why oh why are you so angry at her??? She is an admitted prostitute & you think she was “supposed” to go to the police for violent & abusive behavior from a poster child of the Christian Right? You live in la-la land if you think anything other then her being humiliated again for her life choices would have happened (and it looks like you’d be first in line with that so- you know- you kinda proved my point). And- the statue of limitations is NOT up on his crimes against the 4 girls he molested. He just won’t be charged because…….
It’s not victims responsibility to take their abusers off the streets. It’s the abusers responsibility to stop abusing! How do you make any victim feel safe, after being raped or beaten, to go to the police since they will eagerly judge them for every choice they made ahead of time (in a world of Santia’s) & try to blame them for said abuse or cry “well- you assumed the risk!” smdh…. She is doing society a favor with this lawsuit by warning others & trying to keep him accountable for something but you are so busy judging her that you don’t see that. This woman is bringing attention to this creep and I don’t care who she is or what else she does- people are multifaceted- but I’m sure as hell glad she’s doing this! Seriously, try to get off your high horse & think of the bigger picture here. Your logic is so full of holes & dangerous. Try not to blame the victim and keep your anger focused on the admitted child molester & abuser that is getting off scott free.
This is a civil case. He’s not going to jail.
Wow..she is a prettier version of his wife. But they look a-alike. Good for her and I hope she gets some money out of him as well. These types of religious groups be they Christian or Muslim produce very warped children because they never get to grow into adulthood by going to school with their peers. It is just doing work and church. Not an excuse but just an observation.
Put some dark blonde hair on her and some ray bans and we have….Affleck Nanny! She looks EXACTLY like her from the face!
I’m completely creeped out by how much she looks like his sisters!
And good for her. I’m glad this didn’t just get swept under the rug. Too much has with this creepy family.
Good. The Duggars seem to get free passes for all their b.s. I’ll bet there are more women than just this one. And, she resembles the wife.
girlfriend’s going to have a hard time proving that in a court of law. @Anastasia, I was just thinking the same thing. Ick!
When you pay someone for sex, you either get GFE or PSE. Since she is a porn star, he most likely asked for PSE, and tossing around to get into different positions and rough sex in general etc. is part of the deal.
Girlfriend knew exactly what she was getting into. It was a good strategic move for her to sell stories to the gossip rags, but it honestly upsets me when a move like this is pulled, because it prejudices society against honest working strippers or porn stars.
“The sex was, in Danica’s words, “traumatic” and “rough” and “tossing me around like I was a rag doll.” This sounds… familiar. It might be about time to take it to court. Real, honest-to-god court. The hesitation is only on their side. I mean. isn’t that clear by now? Or they can play kangaroo court only for so long (and it’s been two years now), but at some point, all of their internet court only weakens their case. Right?