JJ Trial

[argh!]

I wanted family to remember me as that little girl with the curly brown hair.

I am sure "Argh" felt exactly the same way.

ok, now you are just being (d)um75. if this were a football game that would have been a turnover. surely someone with your powers of fictitious invention can do better than that!

 

[UMGriz75]

Congrats 75!

You have won the prestigious E-griz Joseph P. Goebbels Award for 2013! This coveted award goes to the zealous poster that can bury facts and or inconvenient truths and use emotional, non-objective and fictionalized conclusions in influencing the attitude of the E-griz community. Your work truly exemplifies the spirit of the master of propaganda by consistently and unendingly presenting only one side of an argument.

Sieg Heil!

Godwin's Law: "Given enough time, in any online discussion—regardless of topic or scope—some fool inevitably makes a comparison to Hitler or the Nazis."

"There is a tradition in many newsgroups and other Internet discussion forums that once such a comparison is made, the thread is finished and whomever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever debate was in progress."

 

[UMGriz75]

I wanted family to remember me as that little girl with the curly brown hair.

I am sure "Argh" felt exactly the same way.

ok, now you are just being (d)um75. if this were a football game that would have been a turnover. surely someone with your powers of fictitious invention can do better than that!

Now you're pouting.

 

[UMGriz75]

and you did it all while giving the words context that may not have existed! congrats!

And that's exactly how you get to a lawyer (especially those who have little to offer except extreme diarrhea of the mouth) Just change the context on them It drives them nuts especially if they are moving on ego. The few intelligent lawyers posting here (those who aren't playing the old High School debate game "I'll beat you over the head with my 18" double drawer file box") don't do that. The jury will put what they are hearing into context clever cross usually doesn't change it much.

This is great, the idea of "context" coming from the guy who completely fabricated the fiction that a rape was undertaken by an "alcohol-fueled sexual predator," which -- and this is the interesting part about "context" -- not one word has been spoken in this trial that supported that overt lie.

Please "tnt," tell us all more about your refined, informed and honest perspective on "context."

Is it based on your credibility?

 

[1976griz]

I have almost no experience in the courtroom (served on one jury trial). I was wondering if the animosity between the lawyers and the perception of this by the jury could influence their decision? Even if JJ comes off as a quiet, shy, intelligent kid who made one extremely bad decision, could his lawyer's behavior mess this up for him? Having not been in the courtroom, it is hard to tell who is pushing whose buttons.

 

[argh!]

Congrats 75!

You have won the prestigious E-griz Joseph P. Goebbels Award for 2013! This coveted award goes to the zealous poster that can bury facts and or inconvenient truths and use emotional, non-objective and fictionalized conclusions in influencing the attitude of the E-griz community. Your work truly exemplifies the spirit of the master of propaganda by consistently and unendingly presenting only one side of an argument.

Sieg Heil!

Godwin's Law: "Given enough time, in any online discussion—regardless of topic or scope—some fool inevitably makes a comparison to Hitler or the Nazis."

"There is a tradition in many newsgroups and other Internet discussion forums that once such a comparison is made, the thread is finished and whomever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever debate was in progress."

why am i not surprised you need to convince yourself that you are 'winning'? have you ever heard of the tradition in many newsgroups and other internet discussion forums whereby the one who declares himself the 'winner' loses?

 

[UMGriz75]

I have almost no experience in the courtroom (served on one jury trial). I was wondering if the animosity between the lawyers and the perception of this by the jury could influence their decision? Even if JJ comes off as a quiet, shy, intelligent kid who made one extremely bad decision, could his lawyer's behavior mess this up for him? Having not been in the courtroom, it is hard to tell who is pushing whose buttons.

That's a good question that lawyers often ask themselves. Jurors tend to report that this doesn't affect them. Lawyers don't believe them. Clients just pray.

The State Asst AG has come off poorly in this case from that perspective. He is not likeable. Everyone else is somewhere in the middle boundaries of not offensive to the Jury. Jurors do report respecting polite, even-handed attorneys who treat witnesses fairly, but, as I say, theatrics aside, most Jurors report that attorney behavior does not affect their judgment.

 

[UMGriz75]

Congrats 75!

You have won the prestigious E-griz Joseph P. Goebbels Award for 2013! This coveted award goes to the zealous poster that can bury facts and or inconvenient truths and use emotional, non-objective and fictionalized conclusions in influencing the attitude of the E-griz community. Your work truly exemplifies the spirit of the master of propaganda by consistently and unendingly presenting only one side of an argument.

Sieg Heil!

Godwin's Law: "Given enough time, in any online discussion—regardless of topic or scope—some fool inevitably makes a comparison to Hitler or the Nazis."

"There is a tradition in many newsgroups and other Internet discussion forums that once such a comparison is made, the thread is finished and whomever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever debate was in progress."

why am i not surprised you need to convince yourself that you are 'winning'? have you ever heard of the tradition in many newsgroups and other internet discussion forums whereby the one who declares himself the 'winner' loses?

It is typical that you would get this backwards. The note speaks to the side that employs the tactic feels it is losing, something.

You are obsessed. No wonder you are so defensive about Jane Doe's behavior.

 

[ranco]

Congrats 75!

You have won the prestigious E-griz Joseph P. Goebbels Award for 2013! This coveted award goes to the zealous poster that can bury facts and or inconvenient truths and use emotional, non-objective and fictionalized conclusions in influencing the attitude of the E-griz community. Your work truly exemplifies the spirit of the master of propaganda by consistently and unendingly presenting only one side of an argument.

Sieg Heil!

Shouldn't that be called "The Gwen Florio Award?" anyway, Congrats to ol' 75 for winning the Gwen Florio award.

 

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

You guys can point out where I'm wrong, but that would take too much effort and knowledge. I heard UM has a great journalism school, however.

Troll, I think it's wrong that you joined eGriz less than five months ago and have 471 posts.

He's just trying to catch up with Alpha, and will do it in 10-11 years. But, I doubt Alpha will stop posting for that period.

We dont post that much and we are far better at this than he is.




Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2

 

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

I'm actually amazed and impressed one of them hasn't already.

I don't think JJ is guilty of rape . . . BUT . . . I'd personally be willing to help kick the crap out of anyone who decided it would be a good idea to drag this girl's name and reputation through the mud after the trial. What's wrong with some of you people?

Blast away at the prosecutors, DOJ, idiots at First Step and anyone else who gave this girl bad advice. Leave this girl the **** alone.

If it turns out he is innocent, I think someone should advise her on the virtues of not lying, destroying a life, including her own, and, to get some deep therapy.

He won't be found innocent, just not guilty of the charge. Something happened to this girl, real or imagined. I can believe she is emotionally unstable but I can't believe she planned this for some purpose or gain. She should be pitied not harassed.

Yes something did happen to this chick. She got fu*ked just like she planned. Actions have consequences she can deal with it.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2

 

[argh!]

Congrats 75!

You have won the prestigious E-griz Joseph P. Goebbels Award for 2013! This coveted award goes to the zealous poster that can bury facts and or inconvenient truths and use emotional, non-objective and fictionalized conclusions in influencing the attitude of the E-griz community. Your work truly exemplifies the spirit of the master of propaganda by consistently and unendingly presenting only one side of an argument.

Sieg Heil!

Godwin's Law: "Given enough time, in any online discussion—regardless of topic or scope—some fool inevitably makes a comparison to Hitler or the Nazis."

"There is a tradition in many newsgroups and other Internet discussion forums that once such a comparison is made, the thread is finished and whomever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever debate was in progress."

why am i not surprised you need to convince yourself that you are 'winning'? have you ever heard of the tradition in many newsgroups and other internet discussion forums whereby the one who declares himself the 'winner' loses?

It is typical that you would get this backwards. The note speaks to the side that employs the tactic feels it is losing, something.

You are obsessed. No wonder you are so defensive about Jane Doe's behavior.

i hate to break it to you, but i'm not the one writing rapaciously about jane doe and the whole trial - that would be you. me, i'm just laughing at the absurdity of the propaganda posted here, particularly by you. please forget my existence and get back to creating the most johnson-centric "case" you can (as far as a football message board will allow). remember, you are "winning"!

 

[Blgs Griz Fan]

76Griz, I can tell you from experience that the appearance and demeanor of the lawyers does have an effect. The civil case I sat on and was elected forman is just such a case. The two lawyers for the plaintiff were from Oregon, dressed impecably, not a hair out of place and arrogant as could be. Although I weighed the case on the evidence, I can still see one of those lawyers to this day. Did that impact me? Likely subconscienously it did. I still question whether they were represnting thier client of their bank account.

 

[tnt]

and you did it all while giving the words context that may not have existed! congrats!

And that's exactly how you get to a lawyer (especially those who have little to offer except extreme diarrhea of the mouth) Just change the context on them It drives them nuts especially if they are moving on ego. The few intelligent lawyers posting here (those who aren't playing the old High School debate game "I'll beat you over the head with my 18" double drawer file box") don't do that. The jury will put what they are hearing into context clever cross usually doesn't change it much.

This is great, the idea of "context" coming from the guy who completely fabricated the fiction that a rape was undertaken by an "alcohol-fueled sexual predator," which -- and this is the interesting part about "context" -- not one word has been spoken in this trial that supported that overt lie.

Please "tnt," tell us all more about your refined, informed and honest perspective on "context."

Is it based on your credibility?

Who said anything about that.... I only put your statements into a context and have greatly enjoyed your (and other jock sniffers) bloviating about it ever since.

 

[Ursa Major]

Congrats 75!

You have won the prestigious E-griz Joseph P. Goebbels Award for 2013! This coveted award goes to the zealous poster that can bury facts and or inconvenient truths and use emotional, non-objective and fictionalized conclusions in influencing the attitude of the E-griz community. Your work truly exemplifies the spirit of the master of propaganda by consistently and unendingly presenting only one side of an argument.

Sieg Heil!

Godwin's Law: "Given enough time, in any online discussion—regardless of topic or scope—some fool inevitably makes a comparison to Hitler or the Nazis."

"There is a tradition in many newsgroups and other Internet discussion forums that once such a comparison is made, the thread is finished and whomever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever debate was in progress."

Classic response 75! An admitted "non-objective" poster that doesn't weigh or debate the merits of the accusation of being labeled a propagandist but instead goes after the person that made the accusation. THIS is exactly what you have been doing in your comments about this trial. I guess you're just sticking with what you know.

Ask your buddy Goodwin to find me a better example of a propagandist......that's what I thought.

 

[Ursa Major]

Congrats 75!

You have won the prestigious E-griz Joseph P. Goebbels Award for 2013! This coveted award goes to the zealous poster that can bury facts and or inconvenient truths and use emotional, non-objective and fictionalized conclusions in influencing the attitude of the E-griz community. Your work truly exemplifies the spirit of the master of propaganda by consistently and unendingly presenting only one side of an argument.

Sieg Heil!

Shouldn't that be called "The Gwen Florio Award?" anyway, Congrats to ol' 75 for winning the Gwen Florio award.

Damn good point Ranco!

 

[UMGriz75]

Congrats 75!

You have won the prestigious E-griz Joseph P. Goebbels Award for 2013! This coveted award goes to the zealous poster that can bury facts and or inconvenient truths and use emotional, non-objective and fictionalized conclusions in influencing the attitude of the E-griz community. Your work truly exemplifies the spirit of the master of propaganda by consistently and unendingly presenting only one side of an argument.

Sieg Heil!

Godwin's Law: "Given enough time, in any online discussion—regardless of topic or scope—some fool inevitably makes a comparison to Hitler or the Nazis."

"There is a tradition in many newsgroups and other Internet discussion forums that once such a comparison is made, the thread is finished and whomever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever debate was in progress."

Classic response 75! An admitted "non-objective" poster that doesn't weigh or debate the merits of the accusation of being labeled a propogandist but instead goes after the person that made the accusation. THIS is exactly what you have been doing in your comments about this trial. I guess you're just sticking with what you know.

Ask your buddy Goodwin to find me a better example of a propogandist......that's what I thought.

Well, you three are obsessed about something ... and wow, accusing someone of "going after the person that made the accusation ..." . I would say that deserves the oblivious post of the year award. Isn't that what you are all about here?

 

[UMGriz75]

and you did it all while giving the words context that may not have existed! congrats!

And that's exactly how you get to a lawyer (especially those who have little to offer except extreme diarrhea of the mouth) Just change the context on them It drives them nuts especially if they are moving on ego. The few intelligent lawyers posting here (those who aren't playing the old High School debate game "I'll beat you over the head with my 18" double drawer file box") don't do that. The jury will put what they are hearing into context clever cross usually doesn't change it much.

This is great, the idea of "context" coming from the guy who completely fabricated the fiction that a rape was undertaken by an "alcohol-fueled sexual predator," which -- and this is the interesting part about "context" -- not one word has been spoken in this trial that supported that overt lie.

Please "tnt," tell us all more about your refined, informed and honest perspective on "context."

Is it based on your credibility?

Who said anything about that.... I only put your statements into a context and have greatly enjoyed your (and other jock sniffers) bloviating about it ever since.

Agreed, no one could say anything about your credibility. You lied, and it is out there for the world. Now you want to change the subject. Good for you.

 

[granitegriz]

75~What is the likelihood of a directed verdict by Judge Townsend? If this was a civil case, a directed verdict would be imminent as the case has not been proven by even a preponderance of the evidence, but do judges even do this in criminal cases????

 

[tnt]

And that's exactly how you get to a lawyer (especially those who have little to offer except extreme diarrhea of the mouth) Just change the context on them It drives them nuts especially if they are moving on ego. The few intelligent lawyers posting here (those who aren't playing the old High School debate game "I'll beat you over the head with my 18" double drawer file box") don't do that. The jury will put what they are hearing into context clever cross usually doesn't change it much.

This is great, the idea of "context" coming from the guy who completely fabricated the fiction that a rape was undertaken by an "alcohol-fueled sexual predator," which -- and this is the interesting part about "context" -- not one word has been spoken in this trial that supported that overt lie.

Please "tnt," tell us all more about your refined, informed and honest perspective on "context."

Is it based on your credibility?

Who said anything about that.... I only put your statements into a context and have greatly enjoyed your (and other jock sniffers) bloviating about it ever since.

Agreed, no one could say anything about your credibility. You lied, and it is out there for the world. Now you want to change the subject. Good for you.

What subject? Playing games with you and the other sniffers? Nothing has changed. If you believe anypart of "these discussions" is real think again. TNT exists only here