billingsgriz
Well-known member
I think she had filed that before filing charges with the police--at least the timing was close. She may have violated her own order !
-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!
Article on Motion to Dismiss
- Thread starter PlayerRep
- Start date
i can see what you're saying, but if pabst is exchanging the long section of bold on page six for the section on page five, then she's doing so with a contrasting format style.
there's a consistent flow to how pabst put this together and that is to insert additional information into the affidavit where she feels more information is needed to describe what happened. no additional information is provided where she says "no not tonight" (twice) or where he says "oh, come on" and "turn over or i'll make you." pabst does address the jacket removal, hip-thrusting and bruising evidence, which is in that same paragraph of the affidavit, but says nothing of the dialogue exchanged. then she goes into j.j.'s version of the events.
whatever the case the details in this motion to dismiss aren't as strong as pabst was making them sound. text messages are going to be easy for the prosecution to tear apart, because it's easy for jurors to understand that people become overly emotional in situations like these. they'll carry some weight, but not as much as the physical evidence and expert witness evidence for which the defense will need someone strong to testify for them, because there are all kinds of experts for rape victims. although i don't want it to happen as desperately as most of you do i still think j.j. will be acquitted, but i'm not as sure as i once was.
it's also a poor move by pabst to play the d.o.j. card and making any presentation to the court/media, let alone even be working on this case. her work is probably what the d.o.j. is scrutinizing. why call attention to that and increase the chance that a potential juror is thinking you have something to hide? i wonder why paoli let her do this.
there's a consistent flow to how pabst put this together and that is to insert additional information into the affidavit where she feels more information is needed to describe what happened. no additional information is provided where she says "no not tonight" (twice) or where he says "oh, come on" and "turn over or i'll make you." pabst does address the jacket removal, hip-thrusting and bruising evidence, which is in that same paragraph of the affidavit, but says nothing of the dialogue exchanged. then she goes into j.j.'s version of the events.
whatever the case the details in this motion to dismiss aren't as strong as pabst was making them sound. text messages are going to be easy for the prosecution to tear apart, because it's easy for jurors to understand that people become overly emotional in situations like these. they'll carry some weight, but not as much as the physical evidence and expert witness evidence for which the defense will need someone strong to testify for them, because there are all kinds of experts for rape victims. although i don't want it to happen as desperately as most of you do i still think j.j. will be acquitted, but i'm not as sure as i once was.
it's also a poor move by pabst to play the d.o.j. card and making any presentation to the court/media, let alone even be working on this case. her work is probably what the d.o.j. is scrutinizing. why call attention to that and increase the chance that a potential juror is thinking you have something to hide? i wonder why paoli let her do this.
billingsgriz
Well-known member
JJ's version, though, does contradict alleged victim's claim of "no", "not tonight" (plus her telling JJ in front of Alex Bienemann at the Forester's Ball that "she would do JJ anytime.") when Jordan alleges she helped him remove her pants, when he alleges she asked him if he had a condom and he said "no," and she told him "that's okay."
We're right back to "he said, she said."
And the physical evidence is not that compelling since JJ admitted to having sex with the girl. While I am sure the prosection will present expert witnesses saying she had bruising consistent with rape, on cross, the same witnesses will also have to admit the bruising could have also resulted from normal, vigorous intercourse. And I am sure the defense will back that up with its own expert witnesses.
I am really wondering if this case proceeds to trial. I am thinking when F V V and Suzy Boylan prep the alleged victim for what awaits her in that courtroom, she may not want to proceed.
I'll have to ask my friends that are lawyers if F V V and Suzy Boylan could then still proceed without the alleged victim's permission to prosecute JJ.
We're right back to "he said, she said."
And the physical evidence is not that compelling since JJ admitted to having sex with the girl. While I am sure the prosection will present expert witnesses saying she had bruising consistent with rape, on cross, the same witnesses will also have to admit the bruising could have also resulted from normal, vigorous intercourse. And I am sure the defense will back that up with its own expert witnesses.
I am really wondering if this case proceeds to trial. I am thinking when F V V and Suzy Boylan prep the alleged victim for what awaits her in that courtroom, she may not want to proceed.
I'll have to ask my friends that are lawyers if F V V and Suzy Boylan could then still proceed without the alleged victim's permission to prosecute JJ.
getgrizzy already has the noose hanging in his backyard
billingsgriz said:
i agree that he will get acquitted, but i think it will go to trial. if it doesn't go to trial it won't be all good for j.j. i think he will have to take up residence elsewhere. the only way he plays football for us again is if he goes to trial and is acquitted. i think that's what he wants and that he won't settle for anything less.
grizindabox said:
F you. that's not true at all. the only reason you and people of your ilk think that is because all that matters to you is griz football. i have no idea if he's guilty or not. i'm just not one to only look at the defense evidence and ignore the prosecution's take.
billingsgriz
Well-known member
I agree with you getgrizzy, an outright aquittal would be much better for JJ than if Fat Freddy drops the case because the alleged victim has a change of heart. It would also be much better for Fat Freddy and his office to kill the coverup, conspiracy theories surrounding this case in particular and the football program generally.
I am wondering if the victim will want to proceed and if she doesn't, can F V V and Suzy Boylan prosecute JJ without her permission and cooperation. (The reason I ask is I know when a domestic abuse victim changes her story after the dust settles down and the police arrest her husband/boyfriend, ("No, I gave myself two black eyes when I fell down the stairs, Sugar Boogar never touched me !") the county attorney can and will prosecute anyway.
I am wondering if the victim will want to proceed and if she doesn't, can F V V and Suzy Boylan prosecute JJ without her permission and cooperation. (The reason I ask is I know when a domestic abuse victim changes her story after the dust settles down and the police arrest her husband/boyfriend, ("No, I gave myself two black eyes when I fell down the stairs, Sugar Boogar never touched me !") the county attorney can and will prosecute anyway.
getgrizzy said:
getgrizzy, not true. I have no idea if he is guilty or not, but by looking at the current information, I find it difficult to think he could be found guilty. By looking at everything, I am not even sure how credible the accuser could be with what seem to be more than a few inconsistencies in her story. They will have time to address these as the case proceeds.
goatcreekgriz
Well-known member
The contention in the motion to dismiss about violations of the rules of professional conduct, together with the statement from the prosecutor that the text messages have not been reviewed, indicates that the decision to file now is open to legitmate criticism. There is no statute of limitations problem here. Why now?
billingsgriz
Well-known member
Just a hunch, goatcreek--I could be all wet on this ! Someone from the AD's office, Coach Delaney, or both offices call Fat Freddy and ask him to sh^t or get off the pot: his office had the case since mid March and now over 4 months later with fall camp scheduled to open, still had not made up his mind whether to charge JJ or not.
If I were Delaney and Gee, I would want to know before August 6: "Is JJ going to be here or are you charging him? Quit leaving this up in the air as its has a very negative impact on the team and the coaching staff. We need to either make plans with him or without him!"
Maybe this didn't happen, but Fat Freddy at the very least knew when fall camp is opening, knew that football season is upon us, and knows that everyone concerned--coaches, players, administration, fans--would appreciate a decision sooner rather than later after he's had 4+ months to make up his mind.
If I were Delaney and Gee, I would want to know before August 6: "Is JJ going to be here or are you charging him? Quit leaving this up in the air as its has a very negative impact on the team and the coaching staff. We need to either make plans with him or without him!"
Maybe this didn't happen, but Fat Freddy at the very least knew when fall camp is opening, knew that football season is upon us, and knows that everyone concerned--coaches, players, administration, fans--would appreciate a decision sooner rather than later after he's had 4+ months to make up his mind.
goatcreekgriz
Well-known member
If the prosecutor makes charging decisions based upon pressure from a coach (or anyone else at the university, for that matter), we are in big trouble. And the prosecutor needs to find a position somewhere else.
Grizbeer
Well-known member
The one thing that really sticks out to me from reading the defense affidavit is how important those gag orders were in the Court of Conduct Hearings, and why Foley was so concerned about the accuser being given free reign to tell her side of the story to the media.
Imagine if Johnson had released this information to the press, and she had abided by the gag order instead of the other way around. It does make me wonder if UM will ever be able to enforce a gag order in a code of conduct hearing again, since they allowed the women to make statements to the media without expelling her as they threatened with Johnson?
Imagine if Johnson had released this information to the press, and she had abided by the gag order instead of the other way around. It does make me wonder if UM will ever be able to enforce a gag order in a code of conduct hearing again, since they allowed the women to make statements to the media without expelling her as they threatened with Johnson?
That's what the Cat fans and anti sports folks keep telling me.PTGrizzly said:
