NorthEndZoneDan said:
Yes, your understanding is correct, NEZD. Evidently Doe told the nurse that JJ inserted his entire hand, but testified early during trial that didn't occur.
But I'm not certain that was really IO's question.
-
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 Trial
- Thread starter bluemarlin2
- Start date
Yes, your understanding is correct, NEZD. Evidently Doe told the nurse that JJ inserted his entire hand, but testified early during trial that didn't occur.
But I'm not certain that was really IO's question.
indian-outlaw
Well-known member
That does seem like one hell of a detail to mix up!NorthEndZoneDan said:
No! Oh! Oh, oh no. Oh...oh...nough...oh.....oh...oooohhhhh....oh .... unoh! Repeated over and over in similar sequence via a woman during sex is as old as sex it'self. One of my female trial lawyers in our head office mentioned this to me as she over heard a conversation I was having about this case. She further mentioned the utterance of oh vs no as a defense (by men) is as old as rape trials in America.
So Egriz experts was she ohing or noing? In any event I am sticking with my 80% chance of aquital. I know it is getting into the middle of the second quarter but so far this is how I see it. Forget football for a moment and deal with what this "trial" is all about. Politics large and small. Male hate by extreme liberals and many other extreme types. Nuts posting on this board are in some instances certified nut cases. Others are damn interesting to read.
One must wonder why we get so much wordy traffic about rape on a football board. More now than when the Griz are playing. Very interesting indeed. Yes I will take blame for posting......I sometimes refer this to wasting instead. Carry on.
So Egriz experts was she ohing or noing? In any event I am sticking with my 80% chance of aquital. I know it is getting into the middle of the second quarter but so far this is how I see it. Forget football for a moment and deal with what this "trial" is all about. Politics large and small. Male hate by extreme liberals and many other extreme types. Nuts posting on this board are in some instances certified nut cases. Others are damn interesting to read.
One must wonder why we get so much wordy traffic about rape on a football board. More now than when the Griz are playing. Very interesting indeed. Yes I will take blame for posting......I sometimes refer this to wasting instead. Carry on.
GrizMusician
Well-known member
Wait... what I am trying to figure out is how she got the redness on her chest & bruise on her clavicle from JJ allegedly holding her down when apparently he allegedly raped her doggy style?
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2
GrizMusician
Well-known member
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2
Grisly Fan said:
Why they are spending so much time with Nurse on the stand. The red marks across the chest and the genital abrasions. Problem is that those can also be found after consensual intercourse. She still had to communicate that intercourse wasn't desired. A lot will depend on Johnson's testimony. How he comes off to the jury. Sure he has been well schooled. Classic case of when does no mean no or no means yes. Welcome to the policitically correct world of we will let you know what we meant later.
Griz2k said:
Normal language. Means nothing more than lets proceed.
UMGriz75
Well-known member
Ouch. Literally. Paoli "can" now make a closing argument that the alleged victim told the examiner that a fist was used, because the injuries were consistent with a fist. But, then testifying under oath to a jury that no fist was used that night offers a major inconsistency.indian-outlaw said:
And, the inconsistency isn't the main problem. The implication is, and the Jury will understand that the conflicting testimony raises the possibility, that Jane Doe had some rough sex with someone else, obtained the appropriate abrasions, then knowingly blamed those abrasions on JJ, when she was able to finally get to First Step, after she had breakfast, and make her report before going off to her Super Bowl party.
In other words, "the set up."
The Jury of course has the unenviable task of attempting to determine if this was a "mere" oversight, forgetfulness, or the common problem when an alleged victim is working a little too hard to make the case; the old adage being, it's easy to tell the truth, it's much harder to tell the lie, because things like this happen.
And Paoli can nicely bring in the Prosecution's own expert witness testimony that assault victims are often confused at first, and but later, their memory and recollection can improve. Indeed, he testified that they almost can't tell the truth; they are in denial. They are looking for reasons to believe it didn't really happen. Their initial reports can be false. Later, they can be more accurate.
The State has to live with that testimony.
Well, OK then, Paoli can argue, she told the truth at trial, a year later; but then, how did the evidence of something different happening get there? We know, with medical certainty, that the evidence was there; but the alleged victim herself destroyed the argument that JJ did it.
Who did? When? ... Why?
I can formulate that as an approach for Paoli, I'm having a hard time putting the Prosecution's spin on it.
How do you explain that to a jury?
I have told this story before, but will tell it again, just so I can add my two cents.
When I was twelve, I went to Ohio to visit my father. On my first day there, I answered a knock at the door. There was a policeman with a young girl. He asked her if I was one of the boys that raped her. She said that I was. I was very confused and thank God that I had the sense to ask when this rape occurred and found out it happened one week before. Fortunately, I had kept my airline ticket and presented it to the officer and stated that there was no way I was involved. The girl immediately changed her mind that I was not involved.
Since that day, I have been skeptical.
My point? It is very easy to be labeled a rapist when you aren't.
Once again, I am not trying to diminish rape, just am skeptical of claims.
When I was twelve, I went to Ohio to visit my father. On my first day there, I answered a knock at the door. There was a policeman with a young girl. He asked her if I was one of the boys that raped her. She said that I was. I was very confused and thank God that I had the sense to ask when this rape occurred and found out it happened one week before. Fortunately, I had kept my airline ticket and presented it to the officer and stated that there was no way I was involved. The girl immediately changed her mind that I was not involved.
Since that day, I have been skeptical.
My point? It is very easy to be labeled a rapist when you aren't.
Once again, I am not trying to diminish rape, just am skeptical of claims.
UMGriz75 said:
I understand its just a twitter feed but when I saw Fwen asking wtf I had to go look again. This isnt a minor discrepancy. But then again, my experience with four fingers and a thumb has been limited to measuring whisky in a glass, what do I know?
GrizMusician
Well-known member
GrizMusician said:
Anyone?
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2
Grisly Fan
Well-known member
To me the question is: when the accuser's story changes, how do you prevent reasonable doubt? Yeah, you can talk about the psychology of trauma and all that but with enough inconsistencies, the probability of her lying grows. If the defense doesn't stumble, how does the prosecution stuff that genie back into the bottle? I'm glad I don't have a problem like that waiting for me at the office.
UMGriz75
Well-known member
From the Twitter feed:
The former boyfriend:
Bink says he trusted Doe with his life
Often times Doe visits Bink at work. She cooks him food while he cooks. Bink cares very, very much about her.
Agrees they are still friends and see each other often.
He would find the description of her enjoying celebrity status as "absurd."
Bink is tearing up, sniffling.
Bink has tried, since that day, to help comfort her.
She has never lied to him, he agrees.
Bink says he was supposed to see Doe Feb. 4.
Agrees they made arrangements to meet, tentative plans, the night in question
She said she cancelled to do homework.
Bink says he was surprised to learn of Doe's interaction with Johnson.
She didn't tell him the homework story wasn't true.
Bink didn't know about Doe's cancellation for her hanging out with Johnson. [Wow. The Jury is hearing one of her closest friends admit that she is duplicitous, lies, and that this thing with JJ wasn't just, as roommate Green tried to describe it at first, a casual interest on her part. She was willing to dump her best friend at the last minute for this date with JJ, and then lie to him about it on top of that! This just gets worse and worse. Where did the State get these people and this strategy?].
Bink testified in"university court" that Doe had bruises on her arm, [but here] He remembers her arms were bruised from something else.
Doe told Bink she tried to fend Johnson off by closing her legs. [Presumably, if she was "fending" him off, this was a bit of a struggle, and he of course, won, but Nurse examiner found no marks on the legs, no bruises. Jane Doe testified that she cooperated, that she "assisted" and exercised volitional acts].
Agrees his role is to support his friend. He doesn't want to be involved in the case. Is sounding board.
Bink has described himself as being her support system because this is"her show and it remains her show." ["Show" was an extremely poor choice of words].
------------------------------------------------------
He comes across as a nice guy, but kind of a victim himself. He didn't help this case.
The former boyfriend:
Bink says he trusted Doe with his life
Often times Doe visits Bink at work. She cooks him food while he cooks. Bink cares very, very much about her.
Agrees they are still friends and see each other often.
He would find the description of her enjoying celebrity status as "absurd."
Bink is tearing up, sniffling.
Bink has tried, since that day, to help comfort her.
She has never lied to him, he agrees.
Bink says he was supposed to see Doe Feb. 4.
Agrees they made arrangements to meet, tentative plans, the night in question
She said she cancelled to do homework.
Bink says he was surprised to learn of Doe's interaction with Johnson.
She didn't tell him the homework story wasn't true.
Bink didn't know about Doe's cancellation for her hanging out with Johnson. [Wow. The Jury is hearing one of her closest friends admit that she is duplicitous, lies, and that this thing with JJ wasn't just, as roommate Green tried to describe it at first, a casual interest on her part. She was willing to dump her best friend at the last minute for this date with JJ, and then lie to him about it on top of that! This just gets worse and worse. Where did the State get these people and this strategy?].
Bink testified in"university court" that Doe had bruises on her arm, [but here] He remembers her arms were bruised from something else.
Doe told Bink she tried to fend Johnson off by closing her legs. [Presumably, if she was "fending" him off, this was a bit of a struggle, and he of course, won, but Nurse examiner found no marks on the legs, no bruises. Jane Doe testified that she cooperated, that she "assisted" and exercised volitional acts].
Agrees his role is to support his friend. He doesn't want to be involved in the case. Is sounding board.
Bink has described himself as being her support system because this is"her show and it remains her show." ["Show" was an extremely poor choice of words].
------------------------------------------------------
He comes across as a nice guy, but kind of a victim himself. He didn't help this case.
