Article on Motion to Dismiss

[EastCoastGriz]

Just in case somebody doesnt believe Gwen or the Missoulian are not covering this....

http://missoulian.com/news/local/de...cle_c23f3e70-e185-11e1-ba2c-001a4bcf887a.html

The Missoula County Attorney’s Office was trying to send a message that it takes sexual assault seriously when it “cherry-picked” facts in charging former University of Montana quarterback Jordan Johnson with rape, a motion to dismiss that charge claims.

The motion filed by Johnson defense attorney Kirsten Pabst contends the state’s complaint against Johnson omits critical facts, that incomplete information was improperly released to reporters, and that Johnson’s right to due process was violated.

The result: “The world had been told that Jordan is a rapist and regardless of an eventual acquittal, that will never change,” wrote Pabst, who until this spring was the chief deputy in the Missoula County Attorney’s Office.

Johnson pleaded not guilty Tuesday in Missoula County District Court to a charge of sexual intercourse without consent. He’s accused of raping a woman while watching a movie with her at her house on Feb. 4.

Pabst filed her motion late Tuesday afternoon.

The motion notes the “unfortunate context” of the current U.S. Justice Department investigation into how the County Attorney’s Office, the Missoula Police Department and the UM police handle sexual assault cases.

“Understandably, the state would like to demonstrate its reflexive and compassionate response to victims of sexual crimes and demonstrate to the community at large that the county’s hard-line stance against sex crimes is having a deterrent effect,” Pabst’s motion said.

The state could have chosen any number of cases to make that point, it argues, but Johnson’s isn’t one of them.

“When all relevant facts are taken into account and the portrayal of the event is corrected and fleshed out, an entirely different picture emerges of the sexual event between Jordan and ‘Jane Doe’ on Feb. 4,” according to the motion.

Ordigger how long have you been employed by the Missoulian?

 

[go96griz]

https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=...01a4bcf887a/5022b6c6459cf.pdf.pdf&chrome=true

Follow the link to the Motion to Dismiss filed by JJ's attorneys. This is a must read of the account!!!

 

[getgrizzy]

https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=...01a4bcf887a/5022b6c6459cf.pdf.pdf&chrome=true

See the link to the Motion to Dismiss filed by JJ's attorneys. This is a must read of the account!!!

wow, i can't find anywhere in that document where pabst denies that jane doe said no or that he didn't say "roll over or i'll make you." if she said "no" and he said "roll over or i'll make you" and no one is denying that these things happened then i have a sinking feeling for j.j.

(see pg. 5)

 

[GrizBacker04]

https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=...01a4bcf887a/5022b6c6459cf.pdf.pdf&chrome=true

See the link to the Motion to Dismiss filed by JJ's attorneys. This is a must read of the account!!!

wow, i can't find anywhere in that document where pabst denies that jane doe said no or that he didn't say "roll over or i'll make you." if she said "no" and he said "roll over or i'll make you" and no one is denying that these things happened then i have a sinking feeling for j.j.

(see pg. 5)

I think people are misinterpreting page 5. That is the she said-he said portion of the argument. First it is her account of what happened, with the bold indicating holes in her story. The second paragraph is Johnson's account of what happened, showing that the sex was consensual.

 

[goatcreekgriz]

At least the Missoulian is now posting the motion to dismiss.

 

[getgrizzy]

https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=...01a4bcf887a/5022b6c6459cf.pdf.pdf&chrome=true

See the link to the Motion to Dismiss filed by JJ's attorneys. This is a must read of the account!!!

wow, i can't find anywhere in that document where pabst denies that jane doe said no or that he didn't say "roll over or i'll make you." if she said "no" and he said "roll over or i'll make you" and no one is denying that these things happened then i have a sinking feeling for j.j.

(see pg. 5)

I think people are misinterpreting page 5. That is the she said-he said portion of the argument. First it is her account of what happened, with the bold indicating holes in her story. The second paragraph is Johnson's account of what happened, showing that the sex was consensual.

that's what i thought at first, too, but if you read it there's nothing (bold) that addresses those two critical items (not bold). they just skip right over it and address other items.

 

[getgrizzy]

At least the Missoulian is now posting the motion to dismiss.

i don't see it as being all that favorable to j.j. he never drinks and drives...c'mon. he blew his load in his hand...c'mon. they seem to have gone overboard with the details which almost read like penthouse forum...he doesn't remember all that stuff. they should've just left that out. especially the first two. sounds like they're trying to hard to make him look like an angel.

 

[GrizBacker04]

https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=...01a4bcf887a/5022b6c6459cf.pdf.pdf&chrome=true

See the link to the Motion to Dismiss filed by JJ's attorneys. This is a must read of the account!!!

wow, i can't find anywhere in that document where pabst denies that jane doe said no or that he didn't say "roll over or i'll make you." if she said "no" and he said "roll over or i'll make you" and no one is denying that these things happened then i have a sinking feeling for j.j.

(see pg. 5)

I think people are misinterpreting page 5. That is the she said-he said portion of the argument. First it is her account of what happened, with the bold indicating holes in her story. The second paragraph is Johnson's account of what happened, showing that the sex was consensual.

that's what i thought at first, too, but if you read it there's nothing (bold) that addresses those two critical items (not bold). they just skip right over it and address other items.

I am assuming that is because after her account of what happened, next is "According to Jordan..." and then he gives his account of what happened. Jane Doe's account was told first, with Jordan's lawyer pointing out things that are false, out of character or could not have physically happened. Then Johnson tells his account of what happened, refuting the fact that she claims the sex was not consensual.

 

[grizindabox]

getgrizzy, I think GB04 is correct.

 

[billingsgriz]

While I doubt the case gets dismissed, it looks like alleged victim is going to have a lot to answer for when the case proceeds to trial, like her telling JJ in front of Alex Beineman at the Forester's Ball that she would do JJ anytime, her letter to JJ after alleged attack telling him he is a good guy and she's not out to ruin him, and the fact that one of her male roommates was just feet away from her door heard nothing unusual that night.

Not to mention her past history of anxiety disorder and PTSD.

I'll admit to being biased towards JJ. Given that, this motion from Pabst would seem to be good news for JJ and his defense team,

 

[IntuitiveGriz]

A monkey can see holes all over this false accusation of rape (charging document) :!:

The prosecution has vomited, can't wait for the defense to clear this travesty up :!: :!: :!:

 

[GrizPony]

https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=...01a4bcf887a/5022b6c6459cf.pdf.pdf&chrome=true

See the link to the Motion to Dismiss filed by JJ's attorneys. This is a must read of the account!!!

wow, i can't find anywhere in that document where pabst denies that jane doe said no or that he didn't say "roll over or i'll make you." if she said "no" and he said "roll over or i'll make you" and no one is denying that these things happened then i have a sinking feeling for j.j.

(see pg. 5)

You want to have a sinking feeling for JJ. However, if you could read, the texts she sent to O'Day show that she knew JJ was UNAWARE that she didn't want sex. How could she text O'Day, much later and after greater thought about the matter, that JJ was unaware of her feelings about not wanting sex AND still claim to have been clear that she said "no"? That is where her claim fails. To be guilty of rape, JJ has to clearly know that she didn't want to have sex and her own texts admit that there is no way he could have known that because she wasn't clear. She knows she wasn't clear, because she says the allegations will hit him like a ton of bricks. Her inconsistencies will make it pretty hard for the State to convict him beyond a reasonable doubt. Thank goodness the University Court isn't burdened by standards of due process. :?

 

[GrizBacker04]

https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=...01a4bcf887a/5022b6c6459cf.pdf.pdf&chrome=true

See the link to the Motion to Dismiss filed by JJ's attorneys. This is a must read of the account!!!

wow, i can't find anywhere in that document where pabst denies that jane doe said no or that he didn't say "roll over or i'll make you." if she said "no" and he said "roll over or i'll make you" and no one is denying that these things happened then i have a sinking feeling for j.j.

(see pg. 5)

You want to have a sinking feeling for JJ. However, if you could read, the texts she sent to O'Day show that she knew JJ was UNAWARE that she didn't want sex. How could she text O'Day, much later and after greater thought about the matter, that JJ was unaware of her feelings about not wanting sex AND still claim to have been clear that she said "no"? That is where her claim fails. To be guilty of rape, JJ has to clearly know that she didn't want to have sex and her own texts admit that there is no way he could have known that because she wasn't clear. She knows she wasn't clear, because she says the allegations will hit him like a ton of bricks. Her inconsistencies will make it pretty hard for the State to convict him beyond a reasonable doubt. Thank goodness the University Court isn't burdened by standards of due process. :?

No need to make fun of someone reading a court document, which can certainly be confusing. Not everyone on here is lawyer.

 

[AZGrizFan]

Fred Van Valkenburg should be embarrassed. :? :? :? :?

 

[GrizPony]

https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=...01a4bcf887a/5022b6c6459cf.pdf.pdf&chrome=true

See the link to the Motion to Dismiss filed by JJ's attorneys. This is a must read of the account!!!

wow, i can't find anywhere in that document where pabst denies that jane doe said no or that he didn't say "roll over or i'll make you." if she said "no" and he said "roll over or i'll make you" and no one is denying that these things happened then i have a sinking feeling for j.j.

(see pg. 5)

You want to have a sinking feeling for JJ. However, if you could read, the texts she sent to O'Day show that she knew JJ was UNAWARE that she didn't want sex. How could she text O'Day, much later and after greater thought about the matter, that JJ was unaware of her feelings about not wanting sex AND still claim to have been clear that she said "no"? That is where her claim fails. To be guilty of rape, JJ has to clearly know that she didn't want to have sex and her own texts admit that there is no way he could have known that because she wasn't clear. She knows she wasn't clear, because she says the allegations will hit him like a ton of bricks. Her inconsistencies will make it pretty hard for the State to convict him beyond a reasonable doubt. Thank goodness the University Court isn't burdened by standards of due process. :?

No need to make fun of someone reading a court document, which can certainly be confusing. Not everyone on here is lawyer.

My bad. getgrizzy keeps making this contention in other threads too so the overkill overwhelmed me.

 

[GrizBacker04]

wow, i can't find anywhere in that document where pabst denies that jane doe said no or that he didn't say "roll over or i'll make you." if she said "no" and he said "roll over or i'll make you" and no one is denying that these things happened then i have a sinking feeling for j.j.

(see pg. 5)

You want to have a sinking feeling for JJ. However, if you could read, the texts she sent to O'Day show that she knew JJ was UNAWARE that she didn't want sex. How could she text O'Day, much later and after greater thought about the matter, that JJ was unaware of her feelings about not wanting sex AND still claim to have been clear that she said "no"? That is where her claim fails. To be guilty of rape, JJ has to clearly know that she didn't want to have sex and her own texts admit that there is no way he could have known that because she wasn't clear. She knows she wasn't clear, because she says the allegations will hit him like a ton of bricks. Her inconsistencies will make it pretty hard for the State to convict him beyond a reasonable doubt. Thank goodness the University Court isn't burdened by standards of due process. :?

No need to make fun of someone reading a court document, which can certainly be confusing. Not everyone on here is lawyer.

My bad. getgrizzy keeps making this contention in other threads too so the overkill overwhelmed me.

Fair enough.

 

[Grisly Fan]

Sooo.... F.V.V. files the complaint because he has a proverbial Federal gun to his head (perhaps one of the "Fast and Furious" escapes) and so he throws a hanging curve ball and waits for the defense to knock it into the gap. Impossible?

 

[funny water]

Sooo.... F.V.V. files the complaint because he has a proverbial Federal gun to his head (perhaps one of the "Fast and Furious" escapes) and so he throws a hanging curve ball and waits for the defense to knock it into the gap. Impossible?

agree with your premise.... except the defense will put this one out of the stadium.... :thumb:

 

[billingsgriz]

Hey, Grisly, then at least he can tell the feminazis in Missoula, Montana, and the rest of the country, "Okay, we charged the kid, presented a vigorous and thorough prosecution of him, and a jury of 12 of his peers acquitted him."

PS: Get off my a$$ !!! We did not cover up for Jordan Johnson or any of his teammates !

While the feminist community is upset with Fat Freddy, I think most will leave him alone if this case indeed proceeds to trial and results in an acquittal--most, not all. Hopefully, F V V and Suzy Boylan communicate to the alleged victim that she is going to be crucified in court based on the material Kirsten Pabst presented in her motion to dismiss, so if she decides to proceed, at least she'll know what is coming for her: a major sh^t storm !!!

 

[tampa_griz]

She wrote JJ a letter in March? When was the protection order filed?