Jill Dillard and husband Derick opened up after the court announced Josh Duggar (Jill’s brother) guilty in the child pornography case on Thursday.
The defendant was charged with two counts of child pornography and 20 years of sentencing in prison with a $250,000 fine after the court deliberations ended on Thursday.
“Today was difficult for our family. Our hearts go out to the victims of child abuse or any kind of exploitation,” reads the statement posted on Dillard’s family website.
“We are thankful for the hard work of law enforcement, including investigators, forensic analysts, prosecutors, and all others involved who save kids and hold accountable those responsible for their abuse.”
The couple’s joint statement continued saying, “nobody is above the law. It applies equally to everybody, no matter your wealth, status, associations, gender, race, or any other factor.”
They expressed their emotions that, “they have been lied to so much that we wanted to hear the evidence for ourselves in court. After seeing all the evidence as it was presented, we believe that the jury reached a just verdict today, consistent with the truth beyond a reasonable doubt.”
“Josh’s actions have rippled far beyond the epicenter of the offense itself. Children have scars, but his family is also suffering the fallout of his actions.”
The court filings documented that back in 2019, Josh Duggar apparently downloaded child pornography videos on his desktop and some of that even depicted child sexual abuse below age 12.
The trial for the child pornography case began last week and was rested on Monday, reported the Associated Press.
During the trial, when Duggar’s attorney questioned the witness Michele Bush, a computer analyst, she responded that the desktop on which the child porn videos were downloaded could have been retrieved remotely, while the attorney argued that someone else could have placed those videos on the desktop.
In October, Josh Duggar attorney filed a motion to hide the evidence that was retrieved from his workplace desktop, arguing that “ the case had become stale since so much time had passed between the time federal agents downloaded the files and the time they obtained a search warrant”, The Associated Press reported. Even though the time between the videos downloading and the court’s search warrant had been elapsed, the judge decided to use the videos found on the devices as evidence.