• 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!

JJ Charged With Rape

crackgina said:
No, I am saying I know but can't say because I am a lawyer with direct knowledge. So you will soon be educated. Don't doubt little one. :thumb:
Click to expand...

Is he questioning you? Does he KNOW who he's talking to? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Irregardless, I hope you're correct. :thumb: :D
 
getgrizzy said:
crackgina: there is exculpatory evidence in the affidavit. it states she was kissing him back and that she removed his jacket and shirt.

you're probably thinking the text messages should be included, but i don't think they need to be included, because those texts only led him to continue to want to meet her and have sex at some point in time, not to having sex at that moment. even if they did state she wanted to have sex at that point in time, she is entitled to changing her mind for any number of reasons. his breath stunk, he was drunk, he smelled, she began feeling ill...
Click to expand...

What about the texts with her admissions against interest? ;)
 
crackgina said:
getgrizzy said:
crackgina: there is exculpatory evidence in the affidavit. it states she was kissing him back and that she removed his jacket and shirt.

you're probably thinking the text messages should be included, but i don't think they need to be included, because those texts only led him to continue to want to meet her and have sex at some point in time, not to having sex at that moment. even if they did state she wanted to have sex at that point in time, she is entitled to changing her mind for any number of reasons. his breath stunk, he was drunk, he smelled, she began feeling ill...
Click to expand...

What about the texts with her admissions against interest? ;)
Click to expand...
if you're saying that she sent him a text afterwards stating that she was glad she had sex with him and enjoyed it and wants to do it again, then that will be interesting. ;) saying she wanted to have sex with him after the fact still doesn't mean she wanted to have sex with at that point in time.
 
I think we will let the texts speak for themselves when they come out. I still stand by my opinion that the affidavit is not balanced, as it should be, ethically. Nothing more, nothing less.
 
crackgina said:
I think we will let the texts speak for themselves when they come out. I still stand by my opinion that the affidavit is not balanced, as it should be, ethically. Nothing more, nothing less.
Click to expand...

The texts were at the very least addressed in the post "rape" counseling and psych Dx (rape ptsd etc) and as several others pointed out unless they can be shown to be directly related to the state of mind of either party at the time of the "rape" will be less than helpful and certainly NOT exculpatory. At which point you would have to depend on the average dumbass on a jury who is likey NOT aconcerned witrh who the Griz Quarter back is, and like most out ther with a above an eigth grade education laughs at at chest pounding lawyers and roll up their pant legs to avoid the bullshit.

As it stands I'm afraid your proprietorial misconduct argument wil have to go on the conspiracy list three down from the Arofonsky calling the DOJ to take the heat of the U.
 
crackgina said:
I think we will let the texts speak for themselves when they come out. I still stand by my opinion that the affidavit is not balanced, as it should be, ethically. Nothing more, nothing less.
Click to expand...

so the clown with the most offensive, un-clever alias on egriz is (or claims to be) a lawyer? can you do me a favor and let your female clients know the name you post under? it works well as a self-descriptor for you, and i think they would appreciate knowing.

that is if you have any female clients, of course.
 
tnt said:
What exculpatory evidence? Are you sure it hasn't been given to Paoli in discovery? Has there even been discovery? What was redacted in the charging documents? I didn't see anything (not that I couldn't have missed it) Wasn't aware there was an preliminary hearing yet, when was it?? The Supreme Court has held that due process does not require the disclosure of material exculpatory impeachment information before a defendant enters into a plea bargain. Should the case actually go to trial it would have to be disclosed.....
Click to expand...

Agreed. There is no prosecutorial misconduct in that affidavit. It is a charging affidavit. Spare me. It reads the same as every other charging affidavit. That's why it's an allegation.
 
crackgina said:
I guess we will see. At least you didn't resort to ad hominim attacks.
Click to expand...

unlike you

Disambiguation seems to be more you and PR's approach so far the two of you have been far more incorrect than correct.
 
Well (no suprise) they didn't dismiss the charges. I assume he is being booked and released

http://www.nbcmontana.com/news/Griz-quarterback-pleads-not-guilty-to-rape-charge/-/14594602/15999020/-/xekkys/-/index.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 
tnt said:
Well (no suprise) they didn't dismiss the charges. I assume he is being booked and released

http://www.nbcmontana.com/news/Griz-quarterback-pleads-not-guilty-to-rape-charge/-/14594602/15999020/-/xekkys/-/index.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Click to expand...

Interesting. Until crackgina's posts and the link you gave I was under the impression there were only two relevant text messages, the one from the victim to her roommate, and the alleged one from the victim to JJ. According to the link, Paoli has requested copies of dozens of text messages between students and UM administrators. Paoli may be on fishing expedition, but I have the feeling he either already has a copy of the messages, or knows what they will say, and wants official or authenticated copies for his case. If there are relevant texts, I won't speculate on whether it was prosecutorial misconduct for the prosecutor not mentioning them in the charging affidavit. I am troubled, however, that if there are relevant text messages, that this material was not already turned over by UM to Paoli as part of the honor court proceeding.
 
tnt said:
crackgina said:
I guess we will see. At least you didn't resort to ad hominim attacks.
Click to expand...

unlike you

Disambiguation seems to be more you and PR's approach so far the two of you have been far more incorrect than correct.
Click to expand...

Why don't you find all those posts where I was wrong? You are full of shit, at best.
 
argh! said:
crackgina said:
I think we will let the texts speak for themselves when they come out. I still stand by my opinion that the affidavit is not balanced, as it should be, ethically. Nothing more, nothing less.
Click to expand...

so the clown with the most offensive, un-clever alias on egriz is (or claims to be) a lawyer? can you do me a favor and let your female clients know the name you post under? it works well as a self-descriptor for you, and i think they would appreciate knowing.

that is if you have any female clients, of course.
Click to expand...
The name reminds me only of Orangina, a nice European soda....now I have another image and I'm too old for that, I think. But, I digress....this case might well be considered for a change of venue. Just don't see justice being done here either way, unless the evidence is not being publicized.
 
tnt said:
crackgina said:
I think we will let the texts speak for themselves when they come out. I still stand by my opinion that the affidavit is not balanced, as it should be, ethically. Nothing more, nothing less.
Click to expand...

The texts were at the very least addressed in the post "rape" counseling and psych Dx (rape ptsd etc) and as several others pointed out unless they can be shown to be directly related to the state of mind of either party at the time of the "rape" will be less than helpful and certainly NOT exculpatory. At which point you would have to depend on the average dumbass on a jury who is likey NOT aconcerned witrh who the Griz Quarter back is, and like most out ther with a above an eigth grade education laughs at at chest pounding lawyers and roll up their pant legs to avoid the bullshit.

As it stands I'm afraid your proprietorial misconduct argument wil have to go on the conspiracy list three down from the Arofonsky calling the DOJ to take the heat of the U.
Click to expand...

First off, you may want to find out when she was first diagnosed with PTSD. May have been quite a while ago. ;) Secondly, you talk about "dumbass" jurors then go on to spell "likey", "aconcerned", "witrh", "Quarter back", "a above" (sic), and "ther" in the SAME SENTENCE!!! Who is the dumbass, seriously? Then you question my "proprietorial misconduct" claim when it is actually prosecutorial misconduct. If you are going to question people's intelligence, you should at least feign intelligence yourself by using spell-check. :thumb:
 
perky0731 said:
tnt said:
What exculpatory evidence? Are you sure it hasn't been given to Paoli in discovery? Has there even been discovery? What was redacted in the charging documents? I didn't see anything (not that I couldn't have missed it) Wasn't aware there was an preliminary hearing yet, when was it?? The Supreme Court has held that due process does not require the disclosure of material exculpatory impeachment information before a defendant enters into a plea bargain. Should the case actually go to trial it would have to be disclosed.....
Click to expand...

Agreed. There is no prosecutorial misconduct in that affidavit. It is a charging affidavit. Spare me. It reads the same as every other charging affidavit. That's why it's an allegation.
Click to expand...

Spare you? Fred is that you? Suzy? :?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top