A question about the jury pool

[GrizMusician]

WTF did I just read? Some of you guys need to back away from the keyboard.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

or what?


You send another email to Delaney telling him you are very very upset?









I will take the chance...............................

 

[GrizMusician]

or what?


You send another email to Delaney telling him you are very very upset?









I will take the chance...............................

Haha I doubt he would give a shit.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Ursa Major]

The prosecution raised the issue of the accuser's mental state. As part of their case the prosecution is claiming the accuser has suffered from something akin to "post traumatic syndrome" since the incident to imply she's telling the truth about what happened. It would be malpractice for Paoli to advise JJ to stipulate to that. Paoli asked for the accuser's medical records from age 5 to see whether she has been previously treated.

Since Post Traumatic Stress is by definition caused by a traumatic experience then ANY traumatic experience could cause it -- including a lie that would ruin another person's life, especially if the person telling the lie is being coerced into proceding when he/she would rather not. That could be EXTREMELY traumatizing.

I am not saying that this is what is happening but it is absolutely impossible to prove what event or chain of events has caused PTSD in a particular individual (ignoring the fact that proving a person is suffering from PTSD is far from easy) and wanting to rely on it to prove a particular event caused it is weak at the very best. The defense's job in part is to ensure the that burden is on the prosecution to prove that only the alleged rape (and nothing else) could have caused it. If the defense offers other reasonable explanations -- or can prove prior stress treatment through medical records -- then poof goes that attack. This had better not be a cornerstone of the prosecutions case.

That is patently false.

309.81 Posttraumatic Stress Disorder

Diagnostic Features

The essential feature of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder is the development of characteristic symptoms following exposure to an extreme traumatic stressor involving direct personal experience of an event that involves actual or threatened death or serious injury, or other threat to one's physical integrity; or witnessing an event that involves death, injury, or a threat to the physical integrity of another person; or learning about unexpected or violent death, serious harm, or threat of death or injury experienced by a family member or other close associate (Criterion A1).

Back off buddy............your definition is no different than any of the others considering that all of this crap is made up psychobabble to keep weak minded people feeling like they are not the pussies they really are in the real world.

These "excuses" are just "doctors" making up a mental participation trophy..........nothing more.

No, that too is patently false. The definition is from the DSM-IV-TR which is the standard used for diagnosing mental health disorders in the good ol' US of A. Any American doctor or clinician that would make a diagnosis (or want to be reimbursed) would use the above definition. Any lawyer attempting to prove or disprove a claim of a mental health diagnosis would be using the very same definition and associated criteria.

Made up or not that is the standard definition................................

 

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

or what?


You send another email to Delaney telling him you are very very upset?









I will take the chance...............................

Haha I doubt he would give a shit.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

I know we dont...........

 

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

Since Post Traumatic Stress is by definition caused by a traumatic experience then ANY traumatic experience could cause it -- including a lie that would ruin another person's life, especially if the person telling the lie is being coerced into proceding when he/she would rather not. That could be EXTREMELY traumatizing.

I am not saying that this is what is happening but it is absolutely impossible to prove what event or chain of events has caused PTSD in a particular individual (ignoring the fact that proving a person is suffering from PTSD is far from easy) and wanting to rely on it to prove a particular event caused it is weak at the very best. The defense's job in part is to ensure the that burden is on the prosecution to prove that only the alleged rape (and nothing else) could have caused it. If the defense offers other reasonable explanations -- or can prove prior stress treatment through medical records -- then poof goes that attack. This had better not be a cornerstone of the prosecutions case.

That is patently false.

309.81 Posttraumatic Stress Disorder

Diagnostic Features

The essential feature of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder is the development of characteristic symptoms following exposure to an extreme traumatic stressor involving direct personal experience of an event that involves actual or threatened death or serious injury, or other threat to one's physical integrity; or witnessing an event that involves death, injury, or a threat to the physical integrity of another person; or learning about unexpected or violent death, serious harm, or threat of death or injury experienced by a family member or other close associate (Criterion A1).

Back off buddy............your definition is no different than any of the others considering that all of this crap is made up psychobabble to keep weak minded people feeling like they are not the pussies they really are in the real world.

These "excuses" are just "doctors" making up a mental participation trophy..........nothing more.

No, that too is patently false. The definition is from the DSM-IV-TR which is the standard used for diagnosing mental health disorders in the good ol' US of A. Any American doctor or clinician that would make a diagnosis (or want to be reimbursed) would use the above definition. Any lawyer attempting to prove or disprove a claim of a mental health diagnosis would be using the very same definition and associated criteria.

Made up or not that is the standard definition................................

Well my definition is completely different........


BTW you can purchase my definition for 4 easy payments of $79.95 order now before Christmas

 

[granitegriz]

Do you accept credit cards? Either answer and you are patently false.

 

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

Do you accept credit cards? Either answer and you are patently false.

Cash only.............

 

[mtgrizrule]

Talk about a derailed or hijacked thread. The originating poster ask what was a very legitimate and good question, and we get a handful of legitimate posts pertaining to the actual question. Thank you UMGRIZ75 for the best answer and one of the few on topic answers.

 

[GrizMusician]

or what?


You send another email to Delaney telling him you are very very upset?









I will take the chance...............................

Haha I doubt he would give a shit.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

I know we dont...........

Do you have a point?

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[GrizMusician]

Talk about a derailed or hijacked thread. The originating poster ask what was a very legitimate and good question, and we get a handful of legitimate posts pertaining to the actual question. Thank you UMGRIZ75 for the best answer and one of the few on topic answers.

This is eGriz... there's no room for legitimate questions or answers.....

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[NorthEndZoneDan]

Talk about a derailed or hijacked thread. The originating poster ask what was a very legitimate and good question, and we get a handful of legitimate posts pertaining to the actual question. Thank you UMGRIZ75 for the best answer and one of the few on topic answers.

its actually quite interesting watching how threads go off the rails and turn into a pissing match :lol:
Grizlaw took a shot at answering my question fairly early on, then the thread went to the Yaak via Alzada

 

[cclarkblues]

Haven't read the thread. I'm afraid...






to wade into the Jury pool.

Pete Townshend say, "Have a fu*kin beer!"

 

[Copper Griz]

Haven't read the thread. I'm afraid...






to wade into the Jury pool.

Pete Townshend say, "Have a fu*kin beer!"

Great idea. Just imagine what the threads are going to look like come February. This thing is going to get nasty.

 

[mtgrizrule]

A friend of mine studying law is going to be following this case closely for a paper. He honestly feels if the girls medical history to help prove her level of PSD as a result of this is not permitted, the judge is setting this up for a big mistrial and even moved out of the area, if JJ is found guilty.

He asked his professor about this. His professor told him, it sounds like the prosecution is grasping at straws to make it as hard as possible to the inside information on the accuser. He feels JJ is not getting a fair shake to date. He did think it is possible the way it is being handled is to help show everyone they are trying as hard as they can to just drop this, where they cannot take as much heat on this if JJ is found not guilty. Basically a lot posturing by the prosecution for public perception.

 

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

Talk about a derailed or hijacked thread. The originating poster ask what was a very legitimate and good question, and we get a handful of legitimate posts pertaining to the actual question. Thank you UMGRIZ75 for the best answer and one of the few on topic answers.

Its that fu*king Alpo.........he needs to be band from here the way Growler is.

 

[HorribilisFanatic]

I don't like to get too much into this non football stuff, but my interpretation is that the accuser has been facing some type of threats. Does anyone else read it that way?

Could be, or it could be that someone close to the victim has threatened JJ in some way. The only reason I suggest that is that the judge was asking the defense about it, which may suggest that they're the ones driving the investigation.

Like I said, though (and I cannot emphasize this strongly enough) -- we don't know the facts, and I don't want to speculate too much. Whatever this is, it's clear that the parties are keeping it very quiet, and I don't want anything that's said here to become the stuff of rumors.

Solid point....I guess I focused more on "threat" and "victim" and my mind wandered down the path of someone threatening the victim, and hadn't considered the alternative.

You're right though....I should probably stop speculating, as it doesn't do anyone any good.

I recently heard that the FBI talked to a law student in Chicago that was formerly a UM student. This person was supposedly sending emails to the "victim" through a fake email account. Not sure if this is what the article was referring to.

You are right on.

 

[PTGrizzly]

Could be, or it could be that someone close to the victim has threatened JJ in some way. The only reason I suggest that is that the judge was asking the defense about it, which may suggest that they're the ones driving the investigation.

Like I said, though (and I cannot emphasize this strongly enough) -- we don't know the facts, and I don't want to speculate too much. Whatever this is, it's clear that the parties are keeping it very quiet, and I don't want anything that's said here to become the stuff of rumors.

Solid point....I guess I focused more on "threat" and "victim" and my mind wandered down the path of someone threatening the victim, and hadn't considered the alternative.

You're right though....I should probably stop speculating, as it doesn't do anyone any good.

I recently heard that the FBI talked to a law student in Chicago that was formerly a UM student. This person was supposedly sending emails to the "victim" through a fake email account. Not sure if this is what the article was referring to.

You are right on.

Well that's just outstanding. What an idiot.

 

[Jerry Punch]

Classy, former UM student. Classy.

 

[Ursa Major]

A law student?

let us take a moment and bask in the irony...