JJ Trial

[WaGriz4life]

All I can say is that I know he doesn't want to be in a romantic relationship with her. That's all.

For a guy who doesn't seem to want to rekindle his relationship with his ex, Bink sure has a lot of pictures of him and her on his Facebook account?

Great start. Welcome to egriz

 

[Bear Axed]

Maybe he did come off poorly, I have no way of knowing, I wasn't there.

All I can say is that I know he doesn't want to be in a romantic relationship with her. That's all.

Says the kitten fan that still wants everyone to believe he's not just posing as a Griz fan :roll:
While protecting his good buddy the real "Jilted Lover"

 

[ilovethecats]

All I can say is that I know he doesn't want to be in a romantic relationship with her. That's all.

For a guy who doesn't seem to want to rekindle his relationship with his ex, Bink sure has a lot of pictures of him and her on his Facebook account?

Great start. Welcome to egriz

seriously. jesus. :?

 

[WaGriz4life]

All I can say is that I know he doesn't want to be in a romantic relationship with her. That's all.

For a guy who doesn't seem to want to rekindle his relationship with his ex, Bink sure has a lot of pictures of him and her on his Facebook account?

Great start. Welcome to egriz

seriously. jesus. :?

Calling PT out on his bs is always a good thing

 

[UMGriz75]

It was pretty amusing to see him testify very clearly that the accuser had never lied to him, and then for it be pointed out to him that she had lied to him after having to study the night she was with Johnson.

As I noted that day, this was the weird take-away for the jury from that last witness for the day; how this sweet kid, still holding a flame, claiming she "would never lie to him," inadvertently exposed her as this truly ruthless and manipulative creature, using those closest to her for her own conveniences and selfish pleasures, because she did lie, and directly to him, and it was all about JJ, but then running back to her "support group" when things "didn't work out," looking for sympathy.

He did more damage to her in court than she did.

And it was obvious that, somehow, she never did disclose during all of this that she ditched him because of her date with JJ, and for some reason, he never figured it out until Paoli asked him the question.

And then, Bink describes the whole ordeal as well, "now it's her show!"

A poor choice of words, no doubt, but that of course is exactly what the Defense is claiming.

Was he a Prosecution witness ... or a Defense witness?

 

[grizfan95]

It was pretty amusing to see him testify very clearly that the accuser had never lied to him, and then for it be pointed out to him that she had lied to him after having to study the night she was with Johnson.

As I noted that day, this was the weird take-away for the jury from that last witness for the day; how this sweet kid, still holding a flame, claiming she "would never lie to him," inadvertently exposed her as this truly ruthless and manipulative creature, using those closest to her for her own conveniences and selfish pleasures, because she did lie, and directly to him, then running back to them when things "didn't work out."

He did more damage to her in court than she did.

And it was obvious that, somehow, she never did disclose during all of this that she ditched him because of her date with JJ, and for some reason, he never figured it out until Paoli asked him the question.

And then, Bink describes the whole ordeal as well, "now it's her show!"

A poor choice of words, no doubt, but that of course is exactly what the Defense is claiming.

Was he a Prosecution witness ... or a Defense witness?

I believe they've all been prosecution witnesses thus far. Anyone else know for certain?

 

[UMGriz75]

And then, Bink describes the whole ordeal as well, "now it's her show!"

A poor choice of words, no doubt, but that of course is exactly what the Defense is claiming.

Was he a Prosecution witness ... or a Defense witness?

I believe they've all been prosecution witnesses thus far. Anyone else know for certain?

A poor choice of words. It was a rhetorical question. He was a prosecution witness.

 

[TxGriz]

I've been following from a distance and reading this closely, and I'll have to say - this witness testimony was the most intriguing to me and what I have spent the most time thinking about. I wonder if the prosecution debated the value of his testimony that could by the mere circumstances could be turned against them? What could hoped to be gained from a jilted lover's testimony? A character witness for someone who deceived them, did any of Bernie Madoff's victims testify on behalf of his character? Very strange. I'm sure any good defense lawyer would be licking their chops at an opportunity served up by the prosecution as it was here. The only other thing I can think of is the prosecution is secretly in the bag for getting this thing acquitted and out of the public eye.

 

[Copper Griz]

I've been following from a distance and reading this closely, and I'll have to say - this witness testimony was the most intriguing to me and what I have spent the most time thinking about. I wonder if the prosecution debated the value of his testimony that could by the mere circumstances could be turned against them? What could hoped to be gained from a jilted lover's testimony? A character witness for someone who deceived them, did any of Bernie Madoff's victims testify on behalf of his character? Very strange. I'm sure any good defense lawyer would be licking their chops at an opportunity served up by the prosecution as it was here. The only other thing I can think of is the prosecution is secretly in the bag for getting this thing acquitted and out of the public eye.

And LBJ had Kennedy killed.

 

[Sportin' Life]

I've been following from a distance and reading this closely, and I'll have to say - this witness testimony was the most intriguing to me and what I have spent the most time thinking about. I wonder if the prosecution debated the value of his testimony that could by the mere circumstances could be turned against them? What could hoped to be gained from a jilted lover's testimony? A character witness for someone who deceived them, did any of Bernie Madoff's victims testify on behalf of his character? Very strange. I'm sure any good defense lawyer would be licking their chops at an opportunity served up by the prosecution as it was here. The only other thing I can think of is the prosecution is secretly in the bag for getting this thing acquitted and out of the public eye.

The disconnect likely comes from the source of you information. Likely the kid is a friend of Jane Doe's who testified that he thinks she is an honest person and he cares about her. And not a lot else. The rest of the 'jilted lover' narrative was added in later by an interpretation of the testimony.

 

[TxGriz]

Paoli never asked the question of the boyfriend about Jane Doe lying to him about her whereabouts the night of the date with JJ or the contradiction of that and his testiomony that she was "honest"?

What about her parents not testifying on her behalf, was that all blown up too in this thread? Maybe I've watched too many episodes of law and order but I would lead with JJ's parents for his character witnesseses, thinking that any juror who is still wide awake at that point might ask where the defendant's parents were.

 

[PlayerRep]

Paoli never asked the question of the boyfriend about Jane Doe lying to him about her whereabouts the night of the date with JJ or the contradiction of that and his testiomony that she was "honest"?

What about her parents not testifying on her behalf, was that all blown up too in this thread? Maybe I've watched too many episodes of law and order but I would lead with JJ's parents for his character witnesseses, thinking that any juror who is still wide awake at that point might ask where the defendant's parents were.

Paoli didn't question Bink. Pabst did. She is the one who asked him those questions. It was later in his testimony. The exchange is in the twitter feed.

 

[Jerry Punch]

It was pretty amusing to see him testify very clearly that the accuser had never lied to him, and then for it be pointed out to him that she had lied to him after having to study the night she was with Johnson.

As I noted that day, this was the weird take-away for the jury from that last witness for the day; how this sweet kid, still holding a flame, claiming she "would never lie to him," inadvertently exposed her as this truly ruthless and manipulative creature, using those closest to her for her own conveniences and selfish pleasures, because she did lie, and directly to him, and it was all about JJ, but then running back to her "support group" when things "didn't work out," looking for sympathy.

He did more damage to her in court than she did.

And it was obvious that, somehow, she never did disclose during all of this that she ditched him because of her date with JJ, and for some reason, he never figured it out until Paoli asked him the question.

And then, Bink describes the whole ordeal as well, "now it's her show!"

A poor choice of words, no doubt, but that of course is exactly what the Defense is claiming.

Was he a Prosecution witness ... or a Defense witness?

Did he really say it with an exclamation point? The distinction there is important, as you know.

So, you're saying that PT's own personal knowledge of Bink is less reliable than your perception of Bink? Good one.

 

[granitegriz]

It is very funny that all the armchair attorneys on here are bashing the real attorneys on this board who are giving good analysis...we will see who is right in the end. The posters on here have better coverage than Greta V. could give working full time on this and yet the "arghs" of the world just want to bash. Thanks to UM75 and others for your insight.

 

[Jerry Punch]

It is very funny that all the armchair attorneys on here are bashing the real attorneys on this board who are giving good analysis...we will see who is right in the end. The posters on here have better coverage than Greta V. could give working full time on this and yet the "arghs" of the world just want to bash. Thanks to UM75 and others for your insight.

Insight is not the same as fact. UMGriz is providing us with a version of the events as he sees it. With that being the basis for his recollection of the events, please take it with a pound of salt.

 

[argh!]

It is very funny that all the armchair attorneys on here are bashing the real attorneys on this board who are giving good analysis...we will see who is right in the end. The posters on here have better coverage than Greta V. could give working full time on this and yet the "arghs" of the world just want to bash. Thanks to UM75 and others for your insight.

um75 is the one doing the bashing, and not of the cartoon characters on egriz. if you wish to believe his creative interpretations, fine, but there isn't anything wrong with others pointing out that they are nothing more than that.... creative interpretations.

 

[kemajic]

So when does the show resume today?

 

[GrizMusician]

So when does the show resume today?

Lawyers, judge, jurors, etc. apparently just entered the court room.

 

[GrizMusician]

Dafuq?

Woman of Arts,Issues @Lgpguin

Private PI hired by defense came to alleged #rape victim's home BEFORE she filed police report. http://bit.ly/11VcPzr" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; via @missoulian

 

[GrizMusician]

Dafuq?

Woman of Arts,Issues @Lgpguin

Private PI hired by defense came to alleged #rape victim's home BEFORE she filed police report. http://bit.ly/11VcPzr" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; via @missoulian

The private investigator. This person has not testified, but the woman said on the stand that within a week or two after the incident, a private investigator hired by defense attorney David Paoli came to her home and attempted to interview her roommates. Later, he went to her tiny high school in north-central Montana and spoke to her teachers, the woman said.

His visit to her home apparently occurred before the woman made a police report on March 21 about the incident with Johnson, and even before she successfully sought a restraining order against him – citing sexual assault as the reason – on March 9.

http://missoulian.com/news/local/article_38e92b84-7b10-11e2-b1db-001a4bcf887a.html#.UST0Vw_lLGk.twitter" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;