Joseph Duggar Begs to See Kids Amid Sex Assault Case

Joseph Duggar is begging the court to. let him be with his kids while at the. same time getting approval by the court. to question the investigators in his. child sexual abuse case out of Florida. We want to get into all of these new. legal developments in the case of the. former reality TV show star now accused. of child molestation. Welcome to Sidebar. presented by Law & Crime. I'm Jesse. Weber. Look, if you've been following us here. on Sidebar, you know we've been covering. the story from the very beginning, every.

update. And the reason we can do that, the reason we can stay on top of a story. like this is because of the incredible. partnership we have with Morgan &. Morgan, okay? This is America's largest. injury law firm. For over 35 years. they've been fighting for the people and. they have recovered more than 30 billion. dollars for their clients. Look, the. proof is in the track record. With more. than a thousand lawyers across a hundred. offices nationwide, hiring Morgan &. Morgan is like hiring an army to go into. battle for you, a team that will fight. hard to get their clients the.

compensation they deserve. And look, not. all law firms are the same. You hire the. wrong one, you may be beat before you. even start. So, if you're ever injured, you can check out Morgan & Morgan. Their. fee is free unless you win. For more. information, you can go to. forthepeople.com/lcsidebar, click the link below, or scan the QR. code on screen. Okay, so we got some updates in the. Joseph Duggar criminal cases that we. want to get into. And we know that. Joseph Duggar is not only trying to see. his kids, which we'll talk about, but.

now he also has a chance to question the. investigators that were looking into. claims that he molested a young girl. Now, I'm going to explain all of this, okay? Because first, let me set the. stage. Before we even break all that. down, Joseph Duggar, you know, one of. the members of the Duggar clan rose to. fame with the TLC show 19 Kids and. Counting, featured him, his wife, the. family. He's been charged in Florida. with felony counts of lewd and. lascivious molestation of a victim under. 12 years old and lewd and lascivious.

behavior by a person 18 years or older. for allegedly sexually abusing a. 9-year-old girl during a family vacation. back in 2020. Now, the issue for him, and which we'll talk about more, is that. he allegedly confessed during a phone. call with the alleged victim's father. and a detective. At the same time, he. and his wife, 27-year-old Kendra, are. also facing charges out in Arkansas. You. see, apparently, as part of an ongoing. investigation, authorities there charged. them with misdemeanor counts, four.

counts of endangering the welfare of a. minor second degree, and four counts of. false imprisonment second degree. Now, to be clear, those Arkansas charges are. not directly related to what Joseph is. accused of doing and what he's facing in. Florida. It's different. What are these. Arkansas charges about? We're not. entirely sure. We can't 100% confirm. They may be related to this reporting of. alleged locks on their kids' doors in. their house, on the exterior of the. doors. We know the couple has four kids, but we can't confirm that. What I can.

tell you is that there was this news. release from the Tontitown Police. Department that says, "This remains an. active and ongoing investigation. Arkansas law strictly limits the. information that may be released in. cases involving minors and other. sensitive circumstances to protect the. integrity of the investigation and the. privacy of those involved, no further. details will be provided at this time.". By the way, both have pleaded not guilty. to all the charges. Okay, so there are. multiple developments I got to talk. about. And for that, I'm bringing on. Matt Man Gino, criminal defense.

attorney, former prosecutor. Matt, always good to see you. You actually did. double duty. You were just on Court TV, now came on here. Thank you for being so. generous with your time. It's good to. see you. >> Thank you. >> Okay, so first update I want to get into. is that a judge has approved Joseph. Duggar's request to question the. investigators in the Florida case. So, the representatives of the Department of. Children and Families, the child. protection team, the children's advocacy. center, they all have to sit for.

depositions. Matt, is this a big deal? Is this a big win for him? >> Well, I think it is a big deal, especially in terms of the depositions. Uh you know, it's it's not uncommon in. criminal cases for discovery requests to. be made. You want to review all the. reports, you want to review all the. documents, and that's standard practice. In this situation, it's taken it a step. further in terms of discovery, giving. you an opportunity to depose these. witnesses before trial. And that's.

really a bonus for a defense attorneys. to actually have this testimony. available to review and even to prepare. for the defense in this case. So, discovery is normal. Depositions are a bit uh unusual. >> A lot of questions I have for this. Number one, if they sit for depositions, anything they say, if when they testify. at a trial, they can be questioned. about, right? So, they could be Well, you're saying this on the stand now, you. said this in the deposition. You can.

impeach their credibility through what. they say in depositions. And by the way, just to be clear, that's there's not. always depositions in criminal cases. like you're explaining, right? >> Mhm. Well, yeah. I mean, you know, as as a criminal defense attorney, there's nothing I like better than. having a witness's testimony already. So, an example might be a witness. testifies at a preliminary hearing or a. pretrial hearing. I have that testimony. available to me. If they testify at.

trial inconsistent with what they said. under oath prior to that, that's some. good material to use to impeach the. credibility of that witness. To tell the. jury, "Hey, you know, this person has. testified inconsistently. uh in the past. You can disregard. everything that they said now.". >> Talk to me about the First of all, I I. have more questions about what the. strategy would be here, but I thought. one of the complications is that it's. not always a given in these time kinds. of cases that these agencies, these. investigators will be allowed to sit for.

depositions because of confidentiality. laws. I mean, am I wrong about that? If. you're dealing with these kinds of cases. of alleged child abuse, aren't there. confidentiality laws that could be an. issue in terms of what is handed over, what they can testify to, what they can. speak about? Am I looking at it the. wrong way? >> No, I think you're I think you're right. on, and that's what makes this a bit. unusual. You know, for for instance, one. of the things that that they're going to.

be able to do is to depose the forensic. examiner. And that's a person who's. typically called in by law enforcement. and district attorney's office to. conduct a forensic examination of the. victim in this case. A child. Yeah, the. child. And so, now you're going to be. able to not only have what the child. said at the forensic interview, but how. that child was questioned. And so, now. you have an an ability to both to to.

attack the credibility and believability. not only of the child based on that. forensic interview, but also the person. who conducted that interview. Was there. any bias? And that's what you're really. looking at here. Was this child directed. to answer these questions through this. forensic interview? I mean, that's great. stuff if you're a defense attorney. >> What what's an example of that? Like, what would be improper? What would be a. line of questioning that you would say. you kind of I guess the argument is you. fed this accuser, this child accused.

you, you fed them an answer, you led. them a certain way. Like, what's an. example of that? What are they going to. be looking out for in terms of this. interview? Because let me let me be. clear about something. And And judge. said, you know, the agencies have to. hand over to the defense all the. evidence that the prosecution could use. in the case. TMZ reporting that this. could be videos and audio recordings and. reports and physical evidence. So, imagine there is a recorded forensic. interview of this accuser. What's a. prime area that could be problematic for. the prosecution? >> Well, a prime area in in a situation.

like this. And if we think about a. courtroom setting for instance, you. know, you call a witness whether it's. the prosecution or the defense. And. sometimes when you're dealing with child. victims, it's a little different. But. you can't ask, you know, leading. questions to a witness, your own. witness. Your witness has to testify, okay? What could happen or may have. happened in this forensic interview, one. thing I'm looking for are leading. questions. So, all you're getting out of. this this victim is yes, no, yes, he.

did, no, he didn't. That's leading that. witness to a specific answer that you. want. So, you're basically intervening. as the person who's testifying. They're. just agreeing with you. And I think that. is. an example of how. you know, bias can seep into a forensic. interview. >> By the way, just to be clear, are these interviews normally taped, fully audio, visual, the the forensic. interviews?

>> In my experience, they are. Um you know, when when I was a. prosecutor, uh we created a a uh child advocacy. center so that we could do these type. types of forensic interviews. And this. was. a couple of decades ago. But, you know, one of the premises is that you tape. these and that there's no accusation. that, you know, you're dreaming up these. charges or you're embellishing these. charges. You want that tape of the. forensic interview. >> How do you challenge a reported.

14-year-old's account of be of them. being allegedly molested when they were. 9 years old? Now, again, let's be clear. He's innocent until proven guilty. Hasn't been found guilty of anything. These are just allegations. But as a. defense attorney, how do you prepare. that? I guess there's two parts this, right? Is there a way you can challenge. the credibility of this child accuser. in a way where the charges can be thrown. out even before trial? And B, how do you. take all this information and.

potentially use it to challenge this. accuser in court? Because I have to. imagine if this goes to trial, this, you. know, accuser's going to have to testify, right? >> Well, I I I agree, Jesse. And And And. that's an important um question you ask. If I'm a defense attorney, I'm doing. everything in my power to try to get. this case dismissed before it gets to. trial. So, I'm challenging the victim's. statements in pretrial hearings. I'm.

using the information that I glean from. these depositions and other reports. And. I'm trying to go full force to challenge. the victim's credibility before we ever. get to trial. Because once you get to. trial, it becomes a very delicate. situation when you have a child victim. It's not like you're going to go into. that courtroom and pound your fist on. the table and go at that child. You got. to do that work before you ever get into. the courtroom and hopefully do it well. enough to get the charges dismissed. based on that. You know, when you get to.

trial and you're sitting there with a. 14-year-old girl who it's alleged was, you know, molested when she was 9 years. old, you're going at it with kid gloves. and you're trying to find a way, you. know, not. to go after this witness, but at the. same time convince the jury that maybe. her recollection isn't what it what it. appears to be. >> Interviewing all these investigators, um. you know, conducting depositions, reviewing all this evidence, how is. Joseph Duggar and his defense team going.

to use that to challenge his alleged. confession. I mean, arguably the most. important piece of evidence in this case. or potential evidence because reportedly. Joseph confessed to this alleged. victim's father, they say on March 17th. This is according to a copy of the. arrest warrant affidavit that was filed. by the Bay County Sheriff's Office in. Florida. Apparently the next day, March. 18th, the alleged victim, now 14 years. old, sits down for that forensic. interview like we've been talking about. with a detective in Arkansas. Quote, described several incidents of.

sexual abuse. And I'm sorry, but I just. got to go through this. It's. you know, sensitive and. you know, I've general as possible, but. according to the affidavit, Joseph would. allegedly cover them both in a blanket, then quote, pulled the victim's dress up. and that he would quote, touch the top. portions of her thighs and would inch. higher and higher, you know, essentially. closer to the waistline and that he. allegedly grazed this accuser's private. area and that his hand was outside of. her underwear and that he allegedly.

apologized. Now, according to the. affidavit, the interview was then shared. with Bay County, Florida law enforcement. and the deputy sheriff there had the. detective and the accuser's father call. Joseph and that is when, again, this is. the allegation, Joseph allegedly quote, admitted his actions stating he touched. the victim over her clothing during the. call and then admitted his intentions. were not pure. Matt, I go back to you. How does this develop? Now the defense. is going to have access to these. investigators, have access to this new.

evidence. How do they challenge this. alleged confession? >> Well, yeah, that that is um. going to be the funny thing about it, Jesse, is you can win these small. battles as you go through. a case, but it doesn't eliminate sort of. the big picture here. Okay, so so you. have a confession, a confession that is. probably going to be corroborated by the. evidence. I'm sure that the forensic. evidence, and his interviews going to. show that it's similar to what he.

admitted to doing. You can attack the. interviewer as someone who's got some. bias or a victim who doesn't fully. recollect exactly what happened or has. changed her version of the events, but. ultimately the defendant has admitted. what he did. And he didn't admit it to. the police, so you're not going to be. able to come up and say, "Hey, I should. have been Mirandized. I was in a in a. custodial interrogation.". No, he did a third party and you don't. have those same protections. You know, a.

third party doesn't have to tell you, "Hey, you have the right to talk to an. attorney before you talk to me about. this." That's not the case. And so that. makes it even more difficult with regard. to the confession. >> I guess they have to still somehow argue. that he voluntarily didn't make this. admission or or it's being. mischaracterized. >> I mean, yeah, obviously you can say that. you know, maybe the father is biased. You know, that. the little girl told him something and. he he you know, talked to Duggar about.

it and and you know, he's not being. completely. honest himself with regard to the. conversation. I mean, yeah, you have to. you have to present something to counter. that. >> I want to go to the second development, the second issue of this episode. And. that is that Joseph is trying to amend a. no contact order regarding his four. young kids. They're ages 3 to 7. As well. as by the way, his two youngest. siblings. Makes the argument that he. hasn't been able to communicate with his. own children since his first court.

appearance in March. The big argument is. that this alleged victim in this case is. not one of his biological children. That. he's presumed innocent. That him not. being able to speak with his children, not having contact with them, it's. creating a hardship for the family. This. is going to be argued in court on June. 20th, but does he make a good argument? Is he right, Matt? >> Well, you know, I think it's an. appropriate argument and that argument. is made all the time. You're presumed. innocent, okay? And and and therefore, I.

haven't been convicted of any crime. You. know, why are these additional. conditions, you know, on my on my bond. that I that I can't have contact with my. own children? So, um you know, are they successful all the. time? No, uh they're not because, you. know, judges get a a little uneasy about. a situation. They certainly don't want. to say, "Oh, okay, yeah, lift the. conditions." And then all of a sudden, something else happens. It's a lot. about, you know, CYA in these situations. for judges. They don't want to to to.

expose themselves uh to public uh. ridicule if something bad should happen. uh you know, with his own children. Now, there's been no allegations like that. Although, there are criminal charges in. Arkansas that deal with welfare of the. children and unlawful confinement or. something like that. I'm related to to. these criminal. >> Kendra, his wife had a no-contact order. and remember, she's only charged in. Arkansas. That was dissolved. She was. back with the kids. Does it matter that. that was the case for her and it's.

different from him maybe or. >> Yeah, I mean, the only thing is uh. obviously, these charges against Joseph. are, you know, more serious and and they. deal with the molestation of a young. child and he has young children. But. again, is it fair not only to him, but. to the children to not be able to have. contact with their father in some way? Okay, let let let's make it some sort of. supervised contact. There's different. ways to to do this so that the children. get an opportunity to be with the father. and the father uh gets an opportunity to.

be with his family. >> I was hoping you could clarify something. because the defense motion requests the. court to modify the order to allow, quote, these family members to have. peaceful contact. What does that mean? >> That terminology, you know, I haven't. necessarily heard in the past, peaceful. And obviously, you know, whatever. contact you're going to have with your. family is going to be peaceful contact. I think it's just that Yeah, it's a it's. kind of I guess maybe a term of art that. hey, we want to have, you know, a family.

reunification of some sort. But I I I. don't think that that. >> Does he need like a supervisor, like. somebody watching over them or. >> Yeah, and and I would I would offer that. to the court if I was the defense. attorney because hey, it it's not about. lifting the no contact. I don't care. about that if I'm a father. I just want. to be able to have contact. So, let's. have it supervised. Let's do it, you. know, in a neutral place. Let's do it at. the advocacy center. You know, I just. want to be able to sit with my children,

spend some time with them, talk to them, reassure them that everything's fine and. that, you know, I still love you. It's. I'm not, you know, avoiding you. That. kind of thing cuz it can be traumatic. for children. All of a sudden father's. gone and and and there's no explanation. >> What's the standard of proof, by the. way, in order for a court to determine. to lift a no contact order? >> Yeah, so so this would be a civil. matter. You know, so so it would be. certainly isn't the standard that we all. commonly think of here is beyond a.

reasonable doubt. You know, it it's it's a lesser standard. of ponderance of the evidence that that. you know, he would not his children. would not be threatened by having. contact with him. >> Okay, final point. So, in the Arkansas. case, Kendra and Joseph, they're now set. to make their first court appearance. August 10th. I believe there's a. pre-trial hearing in the Florida case. for Joseph July 14th. What can we expect. from. both of these hearings? And by the way,

just overarching question, how does one. case affect the other case? >> Well, I don't really think that one case. would affect the other case um as. they're. you know, going through the process. because you know, in Arkansas you have. endangerment of children and unlawful. confinement as I understand it when they. went to do a home inspection after this. charge the children's services found. that they had locks on the outside of.

the door instead of the inside. >> the report. We don't know for sure like. what it what makes it up. I mean, we're. kind of like taking a guess here. >> so that's you know, that's the issue. there. That issue's not going to come up. in the Florida case. The Florida case is. not going to come up in the Arkansas. case. They're going to run parallel to. one another as they proceed. >> And anything crazy to expect from these. hearings or are they pretty pro forma? >> Well, you know, based on. the Florida case and and and the judge. signing an order that they can conduct.

this discovery, I would assume that. we're going to see some pre-trial. motions evolve out of those depositions. or other review of documents. So, expect. to see some real movement in the Florida. case specifically from the defense. pre-trial motions challenging the. evidence, challenging witnesses, challenging the whole investigation. Arkansas, it's unclear. That appears to. be more of a case of children youth. services sort of intervention. You know, some sort of dependency with regard to.

children. Let's correct these problems. Let's get some counseling. You know, let's get you know, this family you. know, moving in the right direction. You know, more oversight than than criminal. accountability. >> All right, Matt Mangino. Thank you. You. gave us some things to think about. Always appreciate it. Great seeing you. >> Good to see you, Jesse. Thank you. >> That's all we have for you right now. here on Sidebar. Everybody, thank you so. much for joining us. And as always, please subscribe on YouTube, Apple. Podcast, Spotify, wherever you should.

get your podcast. You can also check us. out on NBC's Peacock as well. If If want. to follow me, X, Instagram, my. NewsNation show, Jesse Weber LIVE, Monday through Friday, 11:00 p.m. Eastern. I'll see you next time, everybody.