Right now, all eyes are on Josh Duggar, his arrest, and his family … and their roles as his unwitting enablers.
Some Duggars are firmly Team Josh.
Others in the family have put some distance between themselves, and made unsubtle calls for justice.
So when a member of the Duggar family is going to be testifying in court, that gets some notice.
The events of the past few weeks have been a shock to the system for many, and at the same time not
Some have posited that Josh’s latest scandal is simply a reminder that the Duggars were always bad.
Those critics certainly have plenty of ammunition.
Not everything is about Josh Duggar, either. Austin Forsyth has his own legal troubles, it appears.
Joy-Anna Duggar is married to Austin, which … is not new information to fans of the family.
We also already knew that her 27-year-old husband is in the process of being sued.
The suit was brought in October of 2019.
According to multiple media reports, Austin is currently being sued for alleged fraud and negligence.
From what we understand, he renovated and sold a home, one whose new owners are unhappy.
The purchasers are accusing him of not getting the proper permits for the home’s septic system.
Now, a year and a half later, UK tabloid The Sun has gotten a hold of current court documents.
(Lawsuits, as many of us know, are a slow and often miserable process for all of those involved.)
The homeowners who brought forward the suit have provided the court with their list of witnesses.
One of the witnesses who will be called to the stand will be none other than Austin himself.
(This is not a criminal trial, so yes, they can just do that – compel him to testify.)
The plaintiffs themselves also intend to testify, as well as to hear testimony from experts.
Evidence to be presented at the trial will include the real estate contract.
This was an agreement between Austin and the homeowners.
Additionally, evidence will include a septic system evaluation.
The jury trial for Austin is set for May 25, 2021.
Given the nature of the lawsuit, the trial is expected to last all of one day.
The presence of the jury is by request of the two plaintiffs, who brought the suit.
So what happened is that the two homeowners purchased the home in June of 2018.
They paid $140,000 for the Arkansas house.
Unfortunately, it was not long after that they allegedly discovered a problem with their purchase.
Shortly after making the purchase, court records show that the buyers detected … a bad smell.
Specifically, "an unmistakable foul odor of human waste emanated from their yard."
That is simply never a good thing.
Allegedly, the smell was "constant and unbearable."
Furthermore, the situation was both "unsanitary and downright disgusting."
Regrettably, one member of the family was more directly impacted.
The buyers reported that their dog "became ill" after drinking "water" in the yard.
Some research and an expert consultation told them that the septic system that was installed was unsuitable for the type of land.
Unfortunately, purchasing and installing the correct type of system for their property would be "extremely expensive."
Court papers say that the Washington County Health Department is supposed to issue a certificate or permit for any property sold with a septic system.
This can be an annoying piece of red tape to many, but like most safety requirements, exists for a reason.
Unfortunately, court documents claim that Austin obtained nothing of the sort … but claimed to have received all of the necessary permits.
So, to be clear, the claim is not merely that the septic system is bad and was the wrong kind for the property.
It is also that Austin never obtained proper certification for the system and the property.
Additionally, the plaintiffs are claiming that Austin falsely stated that all of the necessary permits were there, and that everything was up to code.
So how expensive would it be to get a new septic tank?
The plaintiffs report that this will cost them over $20,000.
It is unclear if installation (and safe removal of the old system) are included in that estimate.
Interestingly, Austin’s formal response to the lawsuit does not necessarily refute all points.
Rather, he alleges that he was "not required to obtain a permit."
He also insists that he committed neither fraud nor negligence.
Many of the details of this case are gross, but it is almost a relief to discuss raw sewage in the literal sense.
When it comes to the Duggars now, they are in so much figurative s–t that this seems relatively pleasant.
After all, Josh Duggar is accused of disturbing crimes related to the abuse and ruined lives of little children.
Fatigued and sickened fans who follow news about the Duggars may consider Austin’s troubles a welcome topic.
Or at least a distraction.