JJ Trial

[mikewphoto]

I will preface this post with the disclaimer that I might be the only one on here who's not a lawyer. I am curious at what the prosecution is trying to accomplish by bringing a bunch of people onto the stand that simply tell the court that, yes she did in fact tell me that Jordan Johnson raped me. Isn't that just the simplest form of heresay?

 

[biga75]

I will preface this post with the disclaimer that I might be the only one on here who's not a lawyer. I am curious at what the prosecution is trying to accomplish by bringing a bunch of people onto the stand that simply tell the court that, yes she did in fact tell me that Jordan Johnson raped me. Isn't that just the simplest form of heresay?

I've been wondering that too. All of these friends and former roomates are saying the same things.
Is it any help to their case to :dead: ?

 

[Griz2k]

I will preface this post with the disclaimer that I might be the only one on here who's not a lawyer. I am curious at what the prosecution is trying to accomplish by bringing a bunch of people onto the stand that simply tell the court that, yes she did in fact tell me that Jordan Johnson raped me. Isn't that just the simplest form of heresay?

I think it's that and the fact they are all saying she was acting different after the alleged incident. I'm not a lawyer either but it just seems like a lot of smoke and mirrors and a ton of over dramatic behavior. Running out of a classroom crying? Really?

 

[PolsonGrizFan]

If anybody wrote these kinds of things any more, this whole event would make a good law review or journalism review article, similar to the Duke LaCrosse case, about how certain elements of the community made the "rush to judgment." The Nurse Examiner certainly came across that way. She was invested in this case and the finding of rape. The Missoulian reporter likewise has established a record of selective reporting that I have never seen before in the Missoulian.

This wasn't reporting, this was "expose'" writing, and she thought she had a big one. The hubris in the writing is not just both profound and disturbing, it represents the ultimate contamination of a jury pool with no regard for the ethical obligation that "hard news" used to claim for itself as a justification for its First Amendment protections. Then, when she was allowed to go after her critics in the "news columns" with the single most misleading and deceitful reporting I have ever seen, relying on "quotes" from the local YWCA director -- a sure authority on any of this, and who I am sure just wandered in the door one day with a bunch of spontaneous quotes -- it was then that the editorial collusion in this could be seen as pervasive.

It discredited the whole enterprise.

And they don't "get it."

There's no Martin Hutchens or Ed Coyle anymore at the Missoulian standing there demanding, "what in the hell are you doing?"

Well written. What I've been trying to put into words is all captured right here. Thank you.

 

[GrizPony]

If anybody wrote these kinds of things any more, this whole event would make a good law review or journalism review article, similar to the Duke LaCrosse case, about how certain elements of the community made the "rush to judgment." The Nurse Examiner certainly came across that way. She was invested in this case and the finding of rape. The Missoulian reporter likewise has established a record of selective reporting that I have never seen before in the Missoulian.

This wasn't reporting, this was "expose'" writing, and she thought she had a big one. The hubris in the writing is not just both profound and disturbing, it represents the ultimate contamination of a jury pool with no regard for the ethical obligation that "hard news" used to claim for itself as a justification for its First Amendment protections. Then, when she was allowed to go after her critics in the "news columns" with the single most misleading and deceitful reporting I have ever seen, relying on "quotes" from the local YWCA director -- a sure authority on any of this -- it was then that the editorial collusion in could be seen as pervasive.

It discredited the whole enterprise.

And they don't "get it."

There's no Martin Hutchens or Ed Coyle anymore at the Missoulian standing there demanding, "what in the hell are you doing?"

No, they don't. But - I wanted to know: Did Bink really say "This is her show!" with an exclamation point? Or was that you projecting again?

Erik Anderson ‏@ErikCAnderson
Bink has described himself as being her support system because this is"her show and it remains her show." #JohnsonTrial
Followed by Gwen Florio and 1 other
Collapse Reply Retweet Favorite More
3:46 p.m. - Feb 15, 2013 · Details

No, I got the quote, but I was wondering if he said it with exclamation as UMGriz75 repeated in his post. I think it adds a totally different tone to his testimony if he said "This is her show!" as opposed to "This is her show."

I agree that it is a complete show. But I'm not so certain that Bink was as excited about it as UMGriz said he was.

Jesus you are an idiot. Just leave.

 

[fanofzoo]

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.

Well not so fast there, there is an interesting read on it.

 

[Jerry Punch]

Pony, if you are part of this trial and know 100%, why are you posting on a public internet forum?

 

[tnt]

I will preface this post with the disclaimer that I might be the only one on here who's not a lawyer. I am curious at what the prosecution is trying to accomplish by bringing a bunch of people onto the stand that simply tell the court that, yes she did in fact tell me that Jordan Johnson raped me. Isn't that just the simplest form of heresay?

I've been wondering that too. All of these friends and former roomates are saying the same things.
Is it any help to their case to :dead: ?

Each one seems to be involved with a different text messages.

 

[GrizPony]

Pony, if you are part of this trial and know 100%, why are you posting on a public internet forum?

Why are you?

 

[spokaneman]

You're wasting your time arguing with that b1tch Brint. She never lets a little thing like facts get in the way of reporting.

Why don't all of you Junior GMen start a list of all the "LIES" that the Missoulian and Florio published. I am Sure JJ would appreciate the list as he could use it for a civil case if he is found innocent.... So feel free to start below......

 

[Liquor up front!]

It is time to play a game; In the world of "Social Media", the Defense and Prosecution both have members on Egriz, Missoulian(comment section), twitter and etc. putting the slant towards their side. If you had to guess from reading this thread who was on the payroll for each side, who would it be?

PS- The "Social Media Teams" are usually not too obvious and are able to drop good intel to make the other side come out of hiding?

Fill in your guess of which Poster's are on which side?

Defense "Social Media" Team members:

Prosecution "Social Media" Team members:








.

 

[Jerry Punch]

Pony, if you are part of this trial and know 100%, why are you posting on a public internet forum?

Why are you?

Come on, man. I learned this trick in the 3rd grade. Unfortunately, it only works on 2nd graders. So again, if you are a part of the case, why post on an internet forum?

I can tell you that I'm interested in the case, I know that Jordy has been made an example of by the UM leadership, and recognize the weaknesses of the alleged victim's story. Remember, though, that the UM process is quite a different one than the criminal process.That is all being played out right now. But I am a firm believer in the judicial process - that if the alleged victim's story is weak, it will be exposed. But that isn't for pretrial bloviating and Defense Attorneys on the Law.

 

[PolsonGrizFan]

You're wasting your time arguing with that b1tch Brint. She never lets a little thing like facts get in the way of reporting.

Why don't all of you Junior GMen start a list of all the "LIES" that the Missoulian and Florio published. I am Sure JJ would appreciate the list as he could use it for a civil case if he is found innocent.... So feel free to start below......

Sure Gwen, will get right on that after you make us sammich's.

 

[spokaneman]

You're wasting your time arguing with that b1tch Brint. She never lets a little thing like facts get in the way of reporting.

Why don't all of you Junior GMen start a list of all the "LIES" that the Missoulian and Florio published. I am Sure JJ would appreciate the list as he could use it for a civil case if he is found innocent.... So feel free to start below......

Sure Gwen, will get right on that after you make us sammich's.

Honestly - I am dead serious! This board is FULL of comments of how Florio and Missoulian Lied in their reporting. A solid list of these lies will help the defendant when he files his certain civil case... So here is your REAL chance to help out JJ by listing her lies....

 

[spokaneman]

But I am a firm believer in the judicial process .

so.... if the jury in your opinion "gets it wrong" and somehow finds the defendant guilty, you will accept that decision and not b!&ch and moan about it here??

 

[Grisly Fan]

You're wasting your time arguing with that b1tch Brint. She never lets a little thing like facts get in the way of reporting.

Why don't all of you Junior GMen start a list of all the "LIES" that the Missoulian and Florio published. I am Sure JJ would appreciate the list as he could use it for a civil case if he is found innocent.... So feel free to start below......

Sure Gwen, will get right on that after you make us sammich's.

Honestly - I am dead serious! This board is FULL of comments of how Florio and Missoulian Lied in their reporting. A solid list of these lies will help the defendant when he files his certain civil case... So here is your REAL chance to help out JJ by listing her lies....

And don't forget "lies of omission". Remember, its the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Fine, a newpaper is not a court of law but since we are talking a legal case here then I don't think that a newspaper should have a lower standard in the process of reporting on one.

 

[RobGriz]

But I am a firm believer in the judicial process .

so.... if the jury in your opinion "gets it wrong" and somehow finds the defendant guilty, you will accept that decision and not b!&ch and moan about it here??

Gwen, don't you have something better to do then hang around eGriz. Maybe you could go write a story tying the events of 9/11 into the Jordy Johnson case. Here I'll help you out

World Trade Centers->Saudi Arabians->Exchange student->alleged rape->Jordy Johnson

 

[AllWeatherFan]

In the continual ebb and flow of a trial like this, today seems like a pretty good day for the prosecution thus far. The witnesses aren't really there to provide evidence that a rape occurred - they're being called more to offer their own observations regarding changes in the accuser's behavior/demeanor, and to refute the defense's arguments that the accuser is in it for the attention. The defense isn't getting a whole lot on cross.

Any disagreement from Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.?

 

[jagur1]

In the continual ebb and flow of a trial like this, today seems like a pretty good day for the prosecution thus far. The witnesses aren't really there to provide evidence that a rape occurred - they're being called more to offer their own observations regarding changes in the accuser's behavior/demeanor, and to refute the defense's arguments that the accuser is in it for the attention. The defense isn't getting a whole lot on cross.

Any disagreement from Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.?

for a person who didn't want anyone to know a lot of people are in the know.

 

[Jerry Punch]

But I am a firm believer in the judicial process .

so.... if the jury in your opinion "gets it wrong" and somehow finds the defendant guilty, you will accept that decision and not b!&ch and moan about it here??

I will accept whatever the decision of the jury is. Anyone can look at my posts on JJ. I have never concluded anything about him. I just hope the jury does its job and arrives at a fair decision without pressure or input from the world outside the trial.