Isn't this the point where jury s/b pretty sure of guilt?

[GottaluvGriz]

So after 3 days of the prosecution presenting their case, isn't it to the point where the jury should start to sway toward the belief the accused is guilty?
If not, what does the prosecution have left to call to sway the jury that direction?
I am trying to be open minded and have been surprised many times before, but I sure would not be convinced so far if I was a juror, without any doubt, that the accused knew he was sexually assaulting the accuser.
Prosecutions case is weak so far to prove guilt without a doubt. Unless a bombshell is to come, one has to wonder how this case has come this far.
Accuser is somewhat questionable in her testimony. Many questions remain after both testimony and cross. Which leaves the defense the opportunity to fill in blanks.
Expert witness had not visited with either the accused or the "victim". Can't give expert opinion in this cases facts. Only gives theory opinion of rape in general.... Leaves the defense to bring their own expert to refute many of the claims of both prosecution and prosecutions expert witness.
Witness friend thought text was an exaggeration and did not bother to intercede. Even doubt remains over the "victims" actions after the alleged rape, ie. how much time she remained in the bedroom before she left, did she make a snack after, was she upset leaving?
If the jury is not pretty damn sure of guilt at this point, it is really hard to believe that after the defense brings their case that their won't be much doubt and an acquittal is forthcoming.

 

[tourist]

Political prosecution, no more, no less.

 

[indian-outlaw]

Anybody that thinks there will be an acquittal is in for a rude awakening. A hung jury is likely but an acquittal is just not going to happen folks.

 

[Cats2506]

Anybody that thinks there will be an acquittal is in for a rude awakening. A hung jury is likely but an acquittal is just not going to happen folks.

that is the feeling I am getting too.

 

[GRZFTBL]

Anybody that thinks there will be an acquittal is in for a rude awakening. A hung jury is likely but an acquittal is just not going to happen folks.

I agree.

 

[grizfnz]

For the legal minds, Is there a precedent for acquittal if an accuser is proven to have committed perjury? Not that that has happened, but I read some tweets of Paoli explicitly asking the accuser on a couple of different occasions if she understands how important her answers to his questions are. There was also a tweet about her answering a question from the state in which Paoli picked up the text binder as if implying he has evidence to disprove her answer.

Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk 2

 

[AllWeatherFan]

You don't have to "prove" anything to get an acquittal. It's the prosecutor who has the burden of proof, not the defense. Of course, the defense will expose errors, inconsistencies and even untruths in prosecution witnesses' testimony during cross-examination, but that is a far cry from a perjury case. So maybe the lawyers (of which I am not) can address just how rare it is for a perjury case to arise from a criminal case like this one.

 

[Glendivegriz]

Perjury cases are very rare from trials. Usually, the statements are seen as inconsistencies with mitigating factors and not blatant attemps to mislead. Also, not likely the prosecution would be interested in charging the alleged victim unless she were to recant the entire story.
Who knows about juries to address the previous point. Generally, it is believed that the jury has pretty much made up their mind after the victim testified. They either believe her or not. The expert probably didn't make much a difference for most. At this point they are probably daydreaming through a lot of testimony. A lot of the testimony is trying to corroborate the alleged victims testimony with a couple of points for the jury. They will be waiting for Johnson's testimony if he does testify which I don't see how he can't unless the Judge grants a directed verdict which is unheard.

 

[Silvertip]

My money too is on a hung jury - and with the county making a prudent decision not to go to trial a second time. The county attorney's office must know by now that they have a tainted accuser plus taxpayers would storm the courthouse with pitchforks and torches if required to finance another trial with more $325 an hour "experts" who know zero about the facts of the case. Without a conviction it's over...

 

[Grisly Fan]

My money is on acquittal, not because I want JJ to be not guilty but because no one should lose due to such a weak case for the prosecution. And yes by saying that I mean that unless JJ is acquitted, he will still have black cloud over his head and will have lost the ability to get past this, i.e. he still loses. He will always be to some "the football player who got away with rape" which is not as bad as incarceration but...

 

[TxGriz]

My money too is on a hung jury - and with the county making a prudent decision not to go to trial a second time.

I say that is the worst case scenario playing out in my mind, but unless Missoula is some liberal Shangri-La, I would be dumb struck that a jury won't find for acquittal. If the jury somehow sees the facts of this case as having merit then there would be an avalanche of rape charges. The girl could have shut it down at any time, but she was wishy washy and indecisive and not sure herself until after time had passed lord help the legal system if this constitutes a lack of consent as intended by the statutes against sexual assault.

 

[Ursa Major]

Perjury cases are very rare from trials. Usually, the statements are seen as inconsistencies with mitigating factors and not blatant attemps to mislead. Also, not likely the prosecution would be interested in charging the alleged victim unless she were to recant the entire story.
Who knows about juries to address the previous point. Generally, it is believed that the jury has pretty much made up their mind after the victim testified. They either believe her or not. The expert probably didn't make much a difference for most. At this point they are probably daydreaming through a lot of testimony. A lot of the testimony is trying to corroborate the alleged victims testimony with a couple of points for the jury. They will be waiting for Johnson's testimony if he does testify which I don't see how he can't unless the Judge grants a directed verdict which is unheard.

Thanks Glendive! I appreciate your experience and your posts. Great info.