JJ Trial

[argh!]

i feel sad for the community that is usually missoula, with such a polarizing event being the headlines everywhere.

 

[JSWNBBY]

Its sad for Montana as a State, Missoula as a community, UM as an institution and an innocent man named Jordan Johnson.

 

[JBS]

i feel sad for the community that is usually missoula, with such a polarizing event being the headlines everywhere.

Well maybe we should just believe everything she says. That would make us "usually Missoula" I think. Maybe your memories of Missoula just revolve around a little section on the North East side of town South of the river, and a little jaunt downtown now and then. If you don't think this would be the main headlines here, and are disgusted by it like you sound, why do you come here? If you are interested in the actual football, I see there are other threads. Basketball has its own forum. Just stay away from this one if you are sad.

 

[grizfnz]

Did the evidence really come out today that the alleged victim lied about her own counselor telling her that Jordan had "raped" other women. If I recall, the alleged victim had stated to friends that she was doing all of this for the others. So she makes up a lie about what her counselor told her for her to get attention and seem like someone who a martyr. And then did I actually read that the counselor admitted that in fact she never said anything of the sort. The counselor admitted that her own client made up a complex lie to gain attention. And that is classified as someone who has PTSD? Did I really read that today?

So of she is willing to lie about what she says her counselor told her in order to get attention like that of a martyr, how can this jury ever believe what she says. She is willing to lie about everyone in her life. This alleged victim is playing a very sick, sick game, in my opinion. This is just an incredible piece of evidence.

You read correctly. Perhaps Paolis train photo was his way of describing the accuser as a Train Wreck: she told the friend that drove her to the crisis nurse that jj used a condom, testified in court that he didn't use one, told the nurse he fisted her, testified in court that he never penetrated her with his hands, didn't bother to tell the nurse about the foreplay leading up to her version of the "rape", admitted to turning over on her own after testifying he grabbed her hips and forced her to her knees, testified that he held her down with his arm across her chest, yet told another person he held her down with his hands.

Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk 2

 

[granitegriz]

JSW~from Twitter record, you are correct. It was the only thing counselor could say as couldn't back up any other explanation. How does Gwen spin this one? She will just not mention it is my guess.

 

[NorthEndZoneDan]

Did the evidence really come out today that the alleged victim lied about her own counselor telling her that Jordan had "raped" other women. If I recall, the alleged victim had stated to friends that she was doing all of this for the others. So she makes up a lie about what her counselor told her for her to get attention and seem like someone who a martyr. And then did I actually read that the counselor admitted that in fact she never said anything of the sort. The counselor admitted that her own client made up a complex lie to gain attention. And that is classified as someone who has PTSD? Did I really read that today?

So of she is willing to lie about what she says her counselor told her in order to get attention like that of a martyr, how can this jury ever believe what she says. She is willing to lie about everyone in her life. This alleged victim is playing a very sick, sick game, in my opinion. This is just an incredible piece of evidence.

I've been wondering about your point as well and was hoping that maybe one of the legal beagles would step up to the plate and clarify. This seems to the peanut gallery to be a major development.

 

[JBS]

Did the evidence really come out today that the alleged victim lied about her own counselor telling her that Jordan had "raped" other women. If I recall, the alleged victim had stated to friends that she was doing all of this for the others. So she makes up a lie about what her counselor told her for her to get attention and seem like someone who a martyr. And then did I actually read that the counselor admitted that in fact she never said anything of the sort. The counselor admitted that her own client made up a complex lie to gain attention. And that is classified as someone who has PTSD? Did I really read that today?

So of she is willing to lie about what she says her counselor told her in order to get attention like that of a martyr, how can this jury ever believe what she says. She is willing to lie about everyone in her life. This alleged victim is playing a very sick, sick game, in my opinion. This is just an incredible piece of evidence.

I've been wondering about your point as well and was hoping that maybe one of the legal beagles would step up to the plate and clarify. This seems to the peanut gallery to be a major development.

Here is what their argument will be. That since she said 1 in 4 women are raped, she is just one of the four, and therefore JJ raped four women. At least that is what someone said would be a plausible explanation earlier. I called BS.

 

[grizfan95]

Did the evidence really come out today that the alleged victim lied about her own counselor telling her that Jordan had "raped" other women. If I recall, the alleged victim had stated to friends that she was doing all of this for the others. So she makes up a lie about what her counselor told her for her to get attention and seem like someone who a martyr. And then did I actually read that the counselor admitted that in fact she never said anything of the sort. The counselor admitted that her own client made up a complex lie to gain attention. And that is classified as someone who has PTSD? Did I really read that today?

So of she is willing to lie about what she says her counselor told her in order to get attention like that of a martyr, how can this jury ever believe what she says. She is willing to lie about everyone in her life. This alleged victim is playing a very sick, sick game, in my opinion. This is just an incredible piece of evidence.

I've been wondering about your point as well and was hoping that maybe one of the legal beagles would step up to the plate and clarify. This seems to the peanut gallery to be a major development.

Here is what their argument will be. That since she said 1 in 4 women are raped, she is just one of the four, and therefore JJ raped four women. At least that is what someone said would be a plausible explanation earlier. I called BS.

That absurd stat does not say if you are raped, 3 other women were raped by the same person. How the heck is that a plausible explanation???

 

[JBS]

Did the evidence really come out today that the alleged victim lied about her own counselor telling her that Jordan had "raped" other women. If I recall, the alleged victim had stated to friends that she was doing all of this for the others. So she makes up a lie about what her counselor told her for her to get attention and seem like someone who a martyr. And then did I actually read that the counselor admitted that in fact she never said anything of the sort. The counselor admitted that her own client made up a complex lie to gain attention. And that is classified as someone who has PTSD? Did I really read that today?

So of she is willing to lie about what she says her counselor told her in order to get attention like that of a martyr, how can this jury ever believe what she says. She is willing to lie about everyone in her life. This alleged victim is playing a very sick, sick game, in my opinion. This is just an incredible piece of evidence.

I've been wondering about your point as well and was hoping that maybe one of the legal beagles would step up to the plate and clarify. This seems to the peanut gallery to be a major development.

Here is what their argument will be. That since she said 1 in 4 women are raped, she is just one of the four, and therefore JJ raped four women. At least that is what someone said would be a plausible explanation earlier. I called BS.

That absurd stat does not say if you are raped, 3 other women were raped by the same person. How the heck is that a plausible explanation???

I don't know. That was just somebodys take on it a few pages back. It is nonsense. I agree.

 

[NorthEndZoneDan]

I'm not interested in the absurdity of the stats. Its the discrepancy between what the counselor testified to about the other alleged rapes and what Jane Doe has claimed thats been nagging at me. Is that what really went down today?

 

[JBS]

I'm not interested in the absurdity of the stats. Its the discrepancy between what the counselor testified to about the other alleged rapes and what Jane Doe has claimed thats been nagging at me. Is that what really went down today?

Yes. Bet you don't see it in the missoulian tomorrow.

 

[Cats2506]

Mod Edit: I've been banned because I wanted to post the accusers name.

at least the mods did something right for once :thumb:

 

[EverettGriz]

I may be wrong, but I haven't read anything where Paoli has conceded that she said "no" even in a baby voice. He was asking the questions from Doe, not answering them. Please show the proof of this cats666?

Precisely. I don't really understand cat2506's point. The accuser testified that she said no in a baby voice. Paoli certainly isn't going to say she's lying by saying, "No you didn't" while she's on the stand. He'll have JJ testify that at no time did he hear the word "no", and then during closing he'll say something along the lines of, "The defendant didn't hear her say no. And while we dispute her testimony that she did, the absolute best the accuser can say is that she said it in a cooing, baby voice". Paoli won HUGE points by getting her to admit she said it only in a baby voice, because it will leave the impression with the jury that it is very plausible that even if she DID say no, that JJ didn't hear it.

 

[EverettGriz]

Mod Edit: I've been banned because I wanted to post the accusers name.

at least the mods did something right for once :thumb:

They've certainly gotten it right each and every time they've banned your ass.

 

[JBS]

Mod Edit: I've been banned because I wanted to post the accusers name.

at least the mods did something right for once :thumb:

Yeah. Nothing good can come from doing that. I understand the temptation, but there are some folks who would harass her, possibly physically. I sure don't want that. If someone wants her name that bad, find it but don't post it.

 

[grizfnz]

Mod Edit: I've been banned because I wanted to post the accusers name.

at least the mods did something right for once :thumb:

It would be nice if the mods would add you to the list as well

Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk 2

 

[PlayerRep]

I thought that he had used a condom. He said in the video that he did not. I was under the impression that she helped him put it on. Did I read that right?

No condom was used. Testimony from prosecution witness on that. The accuser told some people, like the nurse or counselor, that a condom was used. In the motion to dismiss, Johnson says he told her he didn't have a condom, as they were starting to have sex, and she said that was fine.

 

[PlayerRep]

Strange to agree with 2506 here, but if being good with guns, shooting them a lot, and owning a bunch of them somehow makes you lose credibility, it would be pretty hard to find a credible person in this state. At least of the people I know. Maybe nobody "tweeted" about it because nobody cared.

You know you secretly agree with me often, it just isn't PC over here to agree publicly :thumb:

Oh and IMO the whold bringing the gun thing into it is just more smoke and mirrors, the defense doesn't want the jury thinking about what may have actually happened, they are hoping they are distracted by shiny objects.

See, this is why it is strange to agree with you on anything, because what you said is nonsense. The defense will bring in many things to try to connect with jurors of all stripes. Some are silly and most aren't. The defense is kicking ass.

The jury like all of us will take different implications from the evidence. I didn't take the gun reference as an implication to discredit him as a gun nut. I took at is as implication to the jury that if the accuser was as terrified as she testified, why didn't she text the roommate that would help her.

This is what I thought, and why I made the post. The accuser knew that her gun nut roommate was in an adjacent room (he was sleeping), and any big scream by her may have brought him out of his room with a loaded gun to assist her. Notwithstanding any general expert testimony to the contrary, it is inexplicable that she didn't scream or call for help if she thought she was being raped. Both of her male roommates were only 10 or 15 feet away. Johnson knew that one roommate was only feet away.

 

[PlayerRep]

Believe it has been asked earlier. Why would the prosecution show JJ's interview with MPD? I'm not a lawyer, the only thing I can come up with is something is there that the prosecution wants out. Other reasons????

One of the things thy might have wanted out was that 3/4 of the text convos between the woman and JJ were started by JJ. It looks more like he was pursuing her, rather than that she was infatuated with him.

Also that he denies that she ever said no (even in a baby voice) even though his lawyer seems to accept that she did.

Also the "this isn't fair to me and my family" statement.

Granted that I haven't seen this video and am only basing this on the media tweets, but today wants good for JJ IMO.

The text information came from the police detective, not the video.

 

[PlayerRep]

One of the things thy might have wanted out was that 3/4 of the text convos between the woman and JJ were started by JJ. It looks more like he was pursuing her, rather than that she was infatuated with him.

Also that he denies that she ever said no (even in a baby voice) even though his lawyer seems to accept that she did.

Also the "this isn't fair to me and my family" statement.

Granted that I haven't seen this video and am only basing this on the media tweets, but today wants good for JJ IMO.

You are an idiot. Today was a slam dunk for the defense.

Well I am not looking at this through maroon lenses, and I agree that there are some issues with the whole narrative as presented by the prosecution, but today was the first look at JJ's credibility and he took some hits.

My feeling up to here is that this girl really feels she was raped, but that JJ was probably ok if he came across as credible and trustworthy. from my impression he did not do that based on todays interview. He drank 4-6 beers, called her up and thought she was DTF, he seems to be oblivious to her reactions and "thought she liked it" that way

as always I have the disclaimer that I am not there seeing it first hand and am just basing it off of the tweets

The prosecution's biggest hurdle coming into this case was going to be proving that JJ knowingly raped the accuser. I think today's session helped their case a little bit by showing that JJ initiated the majority of the texting and that he may have been impaired from alcohol. Not saying that he is Guilty at all, but the Prosecution did win some battles with this information today.

The methodology used by the detective to make that statement was suspect. She said she merely used a 6 hour rule. If no text had been made for 6 hours, then the next text was deemed to be the initiator. So if JJ is playing in the playoffs or sleeping when the text arrives and 6 hours goes by, then he's the initiator. The period for this analysis didn't seem to include the period of their relationship before December of 2011.