Disgraced former reality star Josh Duggar’s trial will not begin until much later this year.
However, that has not stopped his attorneys from filing various motions in attempts to pick holes in the prosecution’s case.
Recently, Josh’s team demanded to see more evidence following the two-year investigation into Josh.
Prosecution pushed back, and lawyers for the defense are demanding details into how the investigation began.
This week, Josh’s attorneys asked the government to provide them with all of the Little Rock Police Department records and related evidence.
They filed a motion to compel on Monday, July 26.
All of this stems from previous discovery that was turned over late this spring.
The prosecution informed the defense team on June 2 that part of their evidence incluced a one-page document described as a screenshot.
What appeared on the screenshot was dated to May 14, 2019 and was allegedly related to Josh Duggar’s IP address.
The defense responded by asking for the date of the screenshot, information related to tabs, and the original format of the screenshot.
In mid-july, the prosecution responded to that request for further information.
The response was a denial.
According to the prosecution’s counter, the requested information was outside of the rules of discovery.
"The information you requested further detailing the downloading of CSAM from your client by 2 other law enforcement agencies," the response began.
The prosecution wrote that this "is extraneous to the present investigation/case and, therefore, is not covered by the rules of discovery."
"If you feel we are wrong," the prosecution added, "please explain to us why the discovery of this information is covered by the rules of evidence."
Additionally, the defense had asked for the reports from Little Rock, Arkansas law enforcement.
It was these reports that they allegedly believe led to the investigation upon which this case is centered.
Prosecution seemingly did not respond to that aspect of the request.
Since then, the Duggar defense team cited Rule 16 in order to explain why this information should be turned over to them.
"Evidence related to the undated screen shot is discoverable pursuant to Rule 16(a)(1)(E)(i) as it is ‘material to preparing the defense,’" they wrote.
The defense continued at length.
"For example, it is the defense’s understanding that when files are downloaded by law enforcement," the defense wrote.
They noted that this would have been done "using the Torrential Downpour software utilized by the Government in this case."
As the name suggests, Torrential Downpour is a program for tracking bittorrent file-sharing, used by the government to track child porn specifically.
According to the defense, "detailed logs are created which provide significant information."
"Specifically, these logs can reveal the type of hardware a file was allegedly downloaded from," they noted.
The defense continued: "(i.e., an Apple computer, a PC computer, a smartphone, etc.)."
"By contrast, an IP address reveals only that a certain internet connection was utilized," the defense noted.
"But," they continued, "does not identify in any manner the device from which the file was downloaded."
Heartbreakingly, this does sound like it could be important.
It’s possible that the prosecution has all of its bases covered and the defense is merely on a fishing expedition.
However, an IP address does only provide internet provider location, not device information.
If you have unsecured wifi at your home and a guest or neighbor uses it, their activity is through your IP address.
The jury trial will not begin until November 30.
Until then, Josh continues to reside on home confinement with family friends, under several restrictions.
It is possible that this evidentiary matter will be settled long before the trial date.