JJ Trial

[UMGriz75]

What is surprising, Mr. 75, is the persistently hysterical nature of your posting. I am all for sharing of opinions. I do find your poor man's Nancy Grace act to be a little silly and to have jumped the shark at this point.

None of the foregoing should be construed as a belief that JJ will, or should, be convicted. I am still willing to say, gasp, I have no idea.

On and on and on.

I think everyone already gathered that you "have no idea."

The real mystery is why you feel a need to complain on an internet forum about people having opinions on internet forums, and why you are on this one, offering your opinion about it?

Speaking of opinions, your opinion, my opinion, Gwen's opinion and everyone else's opinion on this board and elsewhere mean absolutely nothing. The only opinions that matter are 12 individuals. I didnt really need to read 15 pages of the same opinion over and over and over. WE got it....we know your opinion.

Why are you continuing to read this thread? Give it a rest. Put it down. Spend some time with your family.

 

[Ossie Ardiles]

Good heavens this is embarrassing.

Thank you.

 

[GRZFTBL]

Damn, thought the trial was in recess until Wednesday. I see all the experts are testifying today, and probably tomorrow too!

 

[Special K]

She couldn't decide between yes or no and now wants the legal system to say no after the fact on her behalf. She feels righteously entitled to he victimhood only by virtue of a societal bias against the man.

She feels she can hide behind an imagined wrong for no other reason than being female in a land sympathetic to militant feminism.

LOL. Well said young man! Why is it that when one cuts through all of the politically correct B.S. that pervades our society these days, the simple truth is so obvious that it is actually humorous??? :lol:

 

[argh!]

i have been explaining this case to a colleague, and he says that what happened was brutal rape. in other words, he has no clue what happened and is just making shit up based on selective tidbits and his own personal biases. ergo, what 7five is doing, etc etc. if people would quit trying to pass off conjecture as "fact", this thread would be splattered with a lot less mud.

In other words, you disagree with someone else's opinion, and since it is different than yours, you are obsessed with whining about it. Whine away.

:dead:

i believe the point was pretty clear - that i disagree with making shit up based on selectively chosen tidbits, and then posting it as 'fact'. i gotta say, though, that i love your creative interpretations of the things you read!

 

[UMGriz75]

i believe the point was pretty clear - that i disagree with making shit up based on selectively chosen tidbits, and then posting it as 'fact'. i gotta say, though, that i love your creative interpretations of the things you read!

Although you don't disagree with making shit up about JJ, and have never complained about that. A nice and transparent hypocrisy. It's disgusting.

OK, after 15 posts of saying the same thing over and over, got it off your chest yet?

Feel better?

No?

Then keep whining.

 

[#15 Fan]

Over the last week, I've decided to take the bait and attempt to read all 39 pages (so far) of this. And I bit hard, hook, line, and sinker...

Um75, tnt, J Punch, and Ursa Major (if I missed any others, I apologize):

How old exactly are all of you??? Do any of you have families, jobs, or lives? Personally, I feel 75 is the only one who has come remotely close to providing some helpful insight to this trial as he clearly appears to be attending the trial. You all are calling each other names, arguing about "facts" and accusing each other of being biased. No sh!t?! Juries are made up 12 people who attempt to come to a conclusion, but their opinions weigh heavily and their biases play a major role in their decisions. It is human nature, something we cannot avoid. You have successfully managed to take about 15-20 pages of some very interesting views on this trial and turned it into 39 pages. Over half of these pages are full of name-calling posts filled with hate. Clearly we all know where you stand, we get it. 75, please continue to provide insight to what you hear at the trial, but quit falling into the trap laid by others by having to get the "last word" in on everyone calling you out. There are those that clearly think JJ is guilty, even if Jane Doe admits at the end she lied, so just ignore them. As another poster said, we get what your opinion is about what happened that night, and we don't need you to re-hash it every time you respond to someone's post. Some of what you say I think carries a lot of weight, so don't discredit yourself by sinking to the levels of others.

I think Player Rep (I can't believe I'm saying this about him) has probably been the best of providing a good break-down of the day's events...you should provide more. It's pretty much what 75 does, but without your clear opinion being repeated over and over. Also, if anyone is attending the trial and has some insight as to what's being talked about and said, please share! I've unfortunately sat through my fair share of trials (mostly sex assault trials), and I am always eager to read about who testifies, what they say, and how the cross is done.

I like that the majority so far (on here, as well as those I've talked to outside of egriz) are reserving all-out, one-sided judgment til the defense begins their side. I also agree that the prosecution has not done enough to convince a reasonable person that something has happened beyond a reasonable doubt. Though I will say, it only takes one witness/moment to change the entire course of a trial.

It's sad the world we live in today. My personal opinion is agreeable with a lot others here in that this girl might be a few french fries short of a happy meal, and could truly believe she was raped. Whether or not JJ knew it was consensual, that has yet to be determined, but the prosecution hasn't done much to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. The sad thing I see by reading here is all of the people who still partly place blame on JJ. I'm sorry, but I think a LOT of guys and girls have said to each other "we are not having sex tonight"...then by the end of the night they are making momma proud by practicing their baby-making skills. It happens, and to try to say that JJ is a bad guy because he had sex with a girl who, at the beginning of the night said "not tonight", is bad taste. If two consenting adults want to have sex, go ahead! Just be adult enough to accept the responsibilities that come afterward, whether it be pregnancy, STD's, no call-backs, jokes about one's "size", etc. Thankfully the majority of those who are just reading and analyzing are putting both of them in the same boat.

Here's another possible view: what if JJ really liked a girl, took her home, they ended up having sex, and she never talked to him again? What if JJ then became sad, upset, depressed about it, and talked to his friends? His friends would high five him for getting laid, and tell him man up and go find another girl. If roles are reversed and JJ wanted to file charges, he would be laughed right out of the detective's office...gotta love society's double standards.

The problem I feel is this case shows what political motivations can lead to, regardless of who gets hurt in the end. We've already seen the damage done to the former head coach and AD, and to the University from the negative publicity by one of our own Board of Regent members coupled with the already national attention this has received. There will be no winners, and one girl will have to spend the rest of her life fixing her issues while one guy will spend the rest of his life fixing his damaged name. And if something comes out in the next couple of weeks that JJ in fact did rape this girl, string him up by the balls in downtown and let the stoning commence. Unfortunately, I just don't see that happening unless some untold "video" is shown or JJ comes out and admits to it.

I can't wait to start reading intelligent posts about who's testifying and what is being said when the trial resumes. But please, keep the name-calling and bickering back and forth between the few mentioned above to a minimum. I've got work and a family and stuff to do, and reading the daily newspaper provides almost nothing about what is happening at the trial. We've got two weeks left, and God knows we don't need this thread reaching 100+ posts before the 2nd week is up.

 

[Blgs Griz Fan]

I'll probabaly get slammed for this but I am beginning to wonder if Jane Doe is having troubles remembering who did what to her and when?

 

[HighLineGRIZ]

A lot of what ifs, speculation, and bias opinions in this thread. Really dissapointing to read. From what I've seen, the trial is going the way it should and the jury is hearing what they need to hear to come up with a fair verdict. Too bad people decide to hop on here and drag two people, who they don't know, through the mud by creating up their own account of what they think might of happened or what probably happened in their own mind. Guess that's what happens with high profile cases like this though... Sad part of our society...

 

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

Over the last week, I've decided to take the bait and attempt to read all 39 pages (so far) of this. And I bit hard, hook, line, and sinker...

Um75, tnt, J Punch, and Ursa Major (if I missed any others, I apologize):

How old exactly are all of you??? Do any of you have families, jobs, or lives? Personally, I feel 75 is the only one who has come remotely close to providing some helpful insight to this trial as he clearly appears to be attending the trial. You all are calling each other names, arguing about "facts" and accusing each other of being biased. No sh!t?! Juries are made up 12 people who attempt to come to a conclusion, but their opinions weigh heavily and their biases play a major role in their decisions. It is human nature, something we cannot avoid. You have successfully managed to take about 15-20 pages of some very interesting views on this trial and turned it into 39 pages. Over half of these pages are full of name-calling posts filled with hate. Clearly we all know where you stand, we get it. 75, please continue to provide insight to what you hear at the trial, but quit falling into the trap laid by others by having to get the "last word" in on everyone calling you out. There are those that clearly think JJ is guilty, even if Jane Doe admits at the end she lied, so just ignore them. As another poster said, we get what your opinion is about what happened that night, and we don't need you to re-hash it every time you respond to someone's post. Some of what you say I think carries a lot of weight, so don't discredit yourself by sinking to the levels of others.

I think Player Rep (I can't believe I'm saying this about him) has probably been the best of providing a good break-down of the day's events...you should provide more. It's pretty much what 75 does, but without your clear opinion being repeated over and over. Also, if anyone is attending the trial and has some insight as to what's being talked about and said, please share! I've unfortunately sat through my fair share of trials (mostly sex assault trials), and I am always eager to read about who testifies, what they say, and how the cross is done.

I like that the majority so far (on here, as well as those I've talked to outside of egriz) are reserving all-out, one-sided judgment til the defense begins their side. I also agree that the prosecution has not done enough to convince a reasonable person that something has happened beyond a reasonable doubt. Though I will say, it only takes one witness/moment to change the entire course of a trial.

It's sad the world we live in today. My personal opinion is agreeable with a lot others here in that this girl might be a few french fries short of a happy meal, and could truly believe she was raped. Whether or not JJ knew it was consensual, that has yet to be determined, but the prosecution hasn't done much to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. The sad thing I see by reading here is all of the people who still partly place blame on JJ. I'm sorry, but I think a LOT of guys and girls have said to each other "we are not having sex tonight"...then by the end of the night they are making momma proud by practicing their baby-making skills. It happens, and to try to say that JJ is a bad guy because he had sex with a girl who, at the beginning of the night said "not tonight", is bad taste. If two consenting adults want to have sex, go ahead! Just be adult enough to accept the responsibilities that come afterward, whether it be pregnancy, STD's, no call-backs, jokes about one's "size", etc. Thankfully the majority of those who are just reading and analyzing are putting both of them in the same boat.

Here's another possible view: what if JJ really liked a girl, took her home, they ended up having sex, and she never talked to him again? What if JJ then became sad, upset, depressed about it, and talked to his friends? His friends would high five him for getting laid, and tell him man up and go find another girl. If roles are reversed and JJ wanted to file charges, he would be laughed right out of the detective's office...gotta love society's double standards.

The problem I feel is this case shows what political motivations can lead to, regardless of who gets hurt in the end. We've already seen the damage done to the former head coach and AD, and to the University from the negative publicity by one of our own Board of Regent members coupled with the already national attention this has received. There will be no winners, and one girl will have to spend the rest of her life fixing her issues while one guy will spend the rest of his life fixing his damaged name. And if something comes out in the next couple of weeks that JJ in fact did rape this girl, string him up by the balls in downtown and let the stoning commence. Unfortunately, I just don't see that happening unless some untold "video" is shown or JJ comes out and admits to it.

I can't wait to start reading intelligent posts about who's testifying and what is being said when the trial resumes. But please, keep the name-calling and bickering back and forth between the few mentioned above to a minimum. I've got work and a family and stuff to do, and reading the daily newspaper provides almost nothing about what is happening at the trial. We've got two weeks left, and God knows we don't need this thread reaching 100+ posts before the 2nd week is up.

You do realize when people see posts this long they rarely ever read them dont you?

I know I didnt.

 

[TxGriz]

I think the trial was driven by the force of the negative publicity surrounding all parties involved - the legal system, the university and the football program. No one wanted to dismiss the case for lack of merit out of fear of the public backlash, so they just put it all on the backs of the taxpayers to dispose of it through a jury verdict.

 

[mtgrizrule]

Thank God a few of you are not on the jury. A few of you would keep this case going on being the only one with guilty or not guilty verdict. I hope for the sake of this case and jurors, there are not any jurors with the mindset and stubbornness a few of you have here. Let the jurors decide and debate as they do. Please keep it there. It is obvious to me, a few of you are not going to change your mind. This is a damn message board, why the need to post over and over to get a few people to try changing their opinion?

Before the trial started, I was about 55% to 60% thinking JJ is not guilty. I was originally told by a few legal minds from that area, or knowing legal minds to expect nothing to be presented by prosecution that could prove JJ being guilty without reasonable doubt. They told me,if I am expecting hardcore definitive evidence, I would be disappointed. Sure enough, so far they are right. Unless prosecution pulls a miracle witness, evidence, or JJ admits to guilt, I honestly see a not guilty verdict.

Not only do I question how a jury can find him guilty, but question how even one juror can honestly 100% be sure he is guilty. How can anyone, when the accuser is not even sure? Granted anything can happen when it comes to a jury, with what we know now, I would be shocked if he is found guilty.

Then again, I was convinced OJ and Casey (sp?) Anythony were surely guilty and they got off. So who knows when it comes to a jury.

 

[mtgrizrule]

I think the trial was driven by the force of the negative publicity surrounding all parties involved - the legal system, the university and the football program. No one wanted to dismiss the case for lack of merit out of fear of the public backlash, so they just put it all on the backs of the taxpayers to dispose of it through a jury verdict.

I believe this too.

 

[GrizSpartan]

I agree. Please stop the personal attacks. They add nothing to the board. It would be nice for people to stop: name-calling, swearing, and discrediting each other. Some of the guys who are attacking others or defending temselves actually make good points. But they discredit themselves and egriz with their words. I urge you to refrain from the attacks.

Please stop the personal vendettas. There is a lot more at stake here than your fragile little egos.

 

[PTGrizzly]

I'll never claim to be a lawyer, or even know much about the law for that matter, but I do remember taking a law class in college at one point. One of the few things I remember from it, is that our teacher (a practicing lawyer), told us that trying to figure out how a jury will react by just reading the transcript is basically pointless. We're not seeing how the jury reacts to how the defendant/plaintiff is dressed, how the lawyers are acting, and other things like that. Those things do matter more than most think.

 

[Griz2k]

I think the trial was driven by the force of the negative publicity surrounding all parties involved - the legal system, the university and the football program. No one wanted to dismiss the case for lack of merit out of fear of the public backlash, so they just put it all on the backs of the taxpayers to dispose of it through a jury verdict.

100% spot on analysis.

 

[Jerry Punch]

She couldn't decide between yes or no and now wants the legal system to say no after the fact on her behalf. She feels righteously entitled to he victimhood only by virtue of a societal bias against the man.

She feels she can hide behind an imagined wrong for no other reason than being female in a land sympathetic to militant feminism.

LOL. Well said young man! Why is it that when one cuts through all of the politically correct B.S. that pervades our society these days, the simple truth is so obvious that it is actually humorous??? :lol:

If it is so obvious and humorous, I ask you again: Nut up or shut up. You talk a big game when it comes to revealing real-world names on a message board. This is Egriz. This isn't the real world. You believe this alleged victim deserves to be exposed, so do it or stop talking the big game.

 

[GRZFTBL]

JP on board bright-n-early.

 

[Jerry Punch]

What is surprising, Mr. 75, is the persistently hysterical nature of your posting. I am all for sharing of opinions. I do find your poor man's Nancy Grace act to be a little silly and to have jumped the shark at this point.

None of the foregoing should be construed as a belief that JJ will, or should, be convicted. I am still willing to say, gasp, I have no idea.

On and on and on.

I think everyone already gathered that you "have no idea."

The real mystery is why you feel a need to complain on an internet forum about people having opinions on internet forums, and why you are on this one, offering your opinion about it?

Speaking of opinions, your opinion, my opinion, Gwen's opinion and everyone else's opinion on this board and elsewhere mean absolutely nothing. The only opinions that matter are 12 individuals. I didnt really need to read 15 pages of the same opinion over and over and over. WE got it....we know your opinion.

Why are you continuing to read this thread? Give it a rest. Put it down. Spend some time with your family.

This, coming from the guy who has briefed the entire goings on of the Trial and submitted them to Egrizzers for their own consumption. Do not be fooled, ladies and gentlemen, by UMGriz's bloviating. It isn't the law. It isn't the standard. It is his own opinion. If you disagree, the results are staggaring and hilarious. You are an idiot, unable to read, unable to think, etc. Let it be, UMGriz. Your opinion is as worthwhile as mine or anyone else's when it comes to the outcome of this trial.

And I know you'll be the first "I told you so" at the end of the game. I'll give you a "congrats" in advance of your gloating and the end of a trial in which there will not be one winner, no matter the outcome.

 

[Jerry Punch]

JP on board bright-n-early.

Good morning!