Joseph Duggar's Lawyer ACCUSED of LEAKING CONFIDENTIAL Information By Florida Prosecutors

Añadido: 2026-05-23

[00:00:00]you're irritating me. And so because I am impatient and frustrated with you, um, get out of my way. Because if that's ever the attitude, then they realize they have a higher responsibility for God to have the sweetness and the love that God tells them to have because the one that is is older, God requires more of them. And when you are being impatient with them, you're giving them the message of, you know what, you're not valuable to me. You're in my way.

[00:00:51]Hey besties, welcome back to my channel.

[00:00:55]Joseph Duggar truly believes he is above the law. And I quite honestly after what has happened this week and within the last two weeks with his behavior, I'm starting to believe that he might be worse than his brother Josh. And I don't say that lightly. He could be just as bad as his brother Josh, but he's a lot more sloppy than his brother Josh. and he's very blatant and he has no regard whatsoever for the law. That's my opinion based on what I've witnessed this week. He files that he wants to be able to see his kids. And in his motion to the court, he indirectly doesn't tell the court that, you know, when he wants to see his children that there's an active case against him in Arkansas. he just completely leaves that out and that it's causing hardship to his family unit that he can't see his kids. And then that same day, he then filed a subsequent motion to modify no contact as it related to his properties that he owns.

[00:02:03]And with the this pattern of behavior happening, what I started to think is like Joseph is looking at what's happening in his life right now is just this like ignoying obstacle that's preventing him from leading living his life to the fullest. And he wants to just get back to life as he knows it and ignore the fact that while this is going on, he's currently facing a felony that could put him in life away for life.

[00:02:33]That's the charge. It's a life felony.

[00:02:35]But he's annoyed by the stipulations of a very very very loose like loose release conditions, right? He only has to do bare minimum here. Not go anywhere where kids are and not talk to his children and stay away from the person impacted by him and her family. And apparently none of these things are happening. And so on Monday, he filed the notice to amend the no contact orders times two, the second one including property addresses. And after review of the property addresses, it was clear that the top address listed in this document was the address associated with the person impacted by Joseph and her family. and it was directly outing the family in this court docket because under the law in the state of Florida, there's this law called Marcy's law. Um, confidential information that would publicly identify the location or the identity of the impacted person is strictly confidential and current addresses and former addresses are included. So, even if they don't live there anymore, it's still confidential because anyone can search the address and see what people are located or who's attached to the address. And that's exactly what happened. The address that he claimed that he needed to go to is the former address of his in-laws. And then he misdirected to the court that they abandoned the home, which isn't true. They moved out after they were forced to leave by him and his brothers and now that they've abandoned it, he wants to go there. And I didn't mention this yesterday, but there's a no contact order. And so what the no contact order includes is that you can't be 500 ft from where that person is. It means that you or agents representing you are not supposed to go anywhere near where this person is because that can be considered intimidation. Joseph doesn't have a neutral third party managing the property. His brothers were managing it which was shouldn't have ever been happening. And so how would Joseph know that the property is abandoned? He didn't tell the court how he knew the property was abandoned. He stated that they abandoned the property, packed up their belongings, and moved. How would he know that unless someone went to the property and verified that there was nothing there? None of us here have seen any photographs that this property is empty. We have no clue the status of it.

[00:05:22]So, someone had to go to that property on Joseph's behalf to verify if anyone was there, putting them within 500 ft of the home prior to a no contact order being modified. So, in the same motion where he filed PII and the former address, he also knowingly admitted to acknowledging the form that the person that is impacted by him is no longer there. He's not supposed to know where they are at all. But now he's telling the court, "I know she's not there anymore." And then didn't tell the court how he knows that she's not there anymore. He didn't. He could have easily said, "Pursuant to a notice from prosecutions that this person has moved X, Y, and Z, right? This is why we know it's abandoned or pursuant to a third-party property management company X, Y, and Z." But he didn't say that. He just said he knew that it was abandoned.

[00:06:21]He knew they had moved and yet he's not supposed to know that and he's not supposed to have contact with any of them. No one, no third parties are supposed to have contact. He's not supposed to go there. His associates aren't supposed to go there. And yet, that's precisely what clearly happened.

[00:06:37]How else would they know that the property is abandoned? They would have to representing to a court that the property has no belongings in it means they had to verify it with their own eyes. Someone had to. So who who did?

[00:06:49]Please tell me.

[00:06:51]So yesterday I had emailed the prosecutor for a request for comment about the conviction that Joseph had for failure to appear along with his traffic tickets and or yeah his speeding tickets. And then I also referenced this document that was on the public docket exposing an address in violation of Marcy's law and that it was exposing the identity and location of this person and that it was being reported media-wise that he's outing that location of this person and why is it still there? Well, they didn't respond to comment. They simply said they don't speak about active cases, but they did state that my concerns were disclosed or provided to the parties involved, meaning my concerns about the public docket or something were given to the prosecutor.

[00:07:51]And this morning, this was filed by the state. Notice of confidential information within a court filing pursuant to Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 242D2.

[00:08:07]and they certify that the title type of document is a motion filed by the defense on May 18th of 2026 and the confidential information within the document is precisely located at page two shown as exhibit A. It then lists the address of Joseph's attorney and his full name of who the defense is that filed the document. And then it says, "A document was previously filed in this case that contains confidential information as described in rule 2420 D1B.

[00:08:50]But a notice of confidential information within a court filing was not filed with the document and the confidential information was not maintained as confidential by the clerk of the court.

[00:09:02]I hereby notify the clerk that this confidential information is located as follows. Motion filed the by the defense on 518 2026.

[00:09:13]The filing was on 518. The date of the document was 518. The precise location is shown at exhibit A. And then he again includes Joseph's attorney's name and address. And then that's filed by JP Ferrer who is the attorney, the prosecutor for the state of Florida. And then it says, "Note that the clerk of the court shall review filings identified as containing confidential information to determine whether the information is facially subject to confidentiality under subdivision D1B.

[00:09:49]The clerk shall notify the filer in writing within 5 days if the clerk determines that the information is not subject to confidentiality and the record shall not be held as confidential for more than 10 days unless a motion is filed pursuant to subdivision D3 of the rule of Florida R Judicial Administration 24D2.

[00:10:13]So, I had to do quite a bit of research on Florida laws in order to do this and make sense of what this is. But this is step one of a much lengthier process because in cases that involves CSA, there's a duty of all officers of the court, including the defense, the state, and any the clerk of the court, the DCFS workers, the police, everyone involved must protect the confidential information of the child. And so that means nothing can be filed onto the court docket that can identify them publicly. Nothing. It's very strict when it comes to these cases. And because of that, the prosecutor is telling them in the court like this attorney was required under this rule to file this with this redacted and with this notice.

[00:11:04]And unless a clerk receives this notice, they won't know that the information is containing confidential information. So the failure of the clerk is not really their failure. The onus goes on to Joseph's attorney. And because he's bound by those rules, he violated the rule by filing this onto a public docket without redaction. And because it's his duty as the defense to know what the addresses are, what the former addresses are, and it's his duty to know what is confidential versus what is not confidential. He can't claim ignorance.

[00:11:42]He can't claim, "Well, I didn't know that that was her address." He would know because discovery is open to his side and his attorney is allowed to know those details. They are just not allowed to publicly disclose those details.

[00:11:57]Clerical errors happen a lot. And he might have just missed the box that he needed to check to make it confidential.

[00:12:07]Although that seems like a very big oversight, the motion to me felt intentional at the time, like they were trying to get around the fact that this was the address and they were trying to lie that this wasn't the actual victim's address by not saying what the victim's address was and then simultaneously saying what the victim's address was.

[00:12:27]His attorneys were trying to get around a loophole. Now, in order for him to get in trouble, they would have to prove that he did this maliciously and that it was done in violation for in bad faith.

[00:12:40]And if that's the case, they can determine he be held in contempt. He can be sanctioned. He can have reports made to the bar, the state bar for violating the confidentiality of a victim. That doesn't happen very often. It could just be as simple as this is it. The judge it is now sealed. Nobody contests that it's conf confidential. Like his attorneys could say no, I think it's not confidential and then make a whole spectacle out of it. I think the bigger issue isn't I mean the bigger issue is how do you give a how do you grant a modification to a no contact order when the attorney who's seemingly filing this on behalf of his client. Right? So a a defense attorney that's seeking to make a modification request is doing so at the direction of Mr. Duggar. Mr. Duggar is the one that wants to go there. It's not like his attorney was like, "Hey, do you want me to modify so you can go to work?" No, it was like his attorney, he contacted his attorney and goes, "I need to go to work." Okay, so what do you need to do? I need to go to my property.

[00:13:51]I need to go landscape. I need to go fix stuff. He doesn't have to do any of those things. He can hire someone. In fact, he could hire a third-party property manager, neutral and completely unaffiliated with his family, so that he doesn't ever accidentally run into this person because they still own property near him. They still own a parcel of land with a home on it. Even if it's not even if they're not there right now, they still own a property there. He's they still lived at that property. How could he ever be able to prove to the court that they wouldn't ever go back and go back to the tiny home that they built that's near his properties? He has no way of knowing whether or not they would return. So, I don't know what his grounds would be for a judge to like loosen his restrictions when first of all, how does he tell the court he knows this, right? So, in the same motion where he's seeking modification, he simultaneously posts the address of the person, but pretends like he's not posting the address of him, just claiming that they're within 500 ft of that address, knowing full well that they lived at that address. Everyone who filed that document knew who that belonged to. And yes, they own a parcel close by. And so, his justification was, they've abandoned all properties. They still own property right by you. I think more than anything what it does is it just gives the prosecution ammunition to have this denied and say like first of all judge how does he know it's abandoned? Second of all he's not supposed to know where they are. Why? How does he who g who gave him this information? We haven't updated the location of them. We haven't told you where they are or where they aren't. we haven't disclosed to you their current location or if they have they can go part of what's called the uh there's a way in Florida courts that they can have an address that goes directly through an advoc the advocacy group so that where they are and their location is is confidential so Joseph doesn't know exactly where they are and if they if they enroll in that he wouldn't know their current address so how would he then know where they are or where they aren't unless he sent someone there to see if the property was vacant.

[00:16:17]And if he did that, then he's violated the no contact order already. The attorney doesn't know this information on his own, right? Like, how would he know? He'd have to have gotten it from Joseph because the attorney is not in Arkansas. The attorney is located in Florida. And here's the bigger issue is that just because they were living there and just because they had a lease and just because they may have had an agreement like they agreed to move out by May 1st, we heard that Kendra said that that they had said they would be out in a month, right? Even though they agreed to that, that doesn't override a no contact order. So that means that nobody connected to Joseph or Kendra because Kendra can't go there because she's still with her husband and she can't have contact with her family as long as she stays with Joseph. Jo Kendra can put out a million statements um or through her anonymous sources that she's distancing herself from her family. That's just a PR strategy, which instead is that she's choosing to stay with Joseph, which by law bars her from contacting her parents. Nobody connected to Joseph can contact them. No one. his family members, his friends. And that also means that until a no contact order is modified, absolutely no one should be monitoring that home. Nobody should go go there to confirm that it's empty. And legally speaking, he used the term abandoned, which doesn't make sense.

[00:18:04]It's like how would again how would he know it was abandoned unless he was actively monitoring it. A lease expiring is not in abandonment. Moving out is not abandonment.

[00:18:16]Regardless, getting back to this confidential information being leaked, I just think that there could be sanctions very rarely. They could be held in contempt to court the attorney for violating this confidentiality.

[00:18:30]They could just move on to next. The prosecutors the prosecutors can use this to try to confirm if some sort of violation has happened with his bond. He could have his bond revoked that may or may not happened. Or more probable, they can use this as ammunition to have his motion denied because he's in the one breath asking for a modification in the next exposing the address of the victim, nullifying the entire motion altogether, placing her in danger and exposing her identity to the world. The bigger issue is that the bell was rung. They can't unring the bell. The attorney had a had a job to do and that was to protect the victim and the defense doesn't seem to care to follow the rules. The defense is demonstrating levels of incompetence I wasn't aware of. I mean, not knowing about Joseph's failure to appear, not knowing about Joseph's previous traffic tickets, not knowing that this address he's about to publish is the victim's address. I mean, these are very basic lawyer 101 things. And then Joseph somehow finding a way to manipulate him so that he's publishing the addresses as though he doesn't know. I don't buy that. I just don't buy that they didn't know that this address was hers. And I don't buy that they didn't just not file this address not knowing it was hers and didn't think that they would be exposing her identity by doing this. There's no way. But that's just my opinion. I'm jaded when it comes to the Duggars because it seems like they get lots of rope when they're out on bond and they don't care to follow the rules. I just worry about the children and the victim and the victim's family that are being impacted by all of this nonsense. And we'll see if further consequences come.

[00:20:24]There definitely are mechanisms in place where they can penalize his attorneys.

[00:20:29]Joseph could certainly have grounds for bond revocation if they wanted to go that far. It would be rare, but it could happen, but he's in trouble for sure. He was accused of leaking confidential information, exposing the victim. So, there's that. Tell me what your thoughts are in the comments below. Make sure to give this video a thumbs up. Make sure to subscribe to my channel if you haven't subscribed and click the bell so you never miss a video. Thanks so much for watching. Bye, bestie.