• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

JJ Trial

Ursus1 said:
I think Paolis only mistake was calling this last witness regarding PTSD...the recall by prosecution is leaving some real thoughts in jurors minds....they never would have had that shot if not for beign able to call rebuttal...should have closed with Jordy's dad......
agreed, but none of the lawyers on either side are top notch by any stretch of the imagination. j.j. had a fairly easy case to win. so easy paoli could do it, as they say. the prosecution has missed on several opportunities to drive home some strong testimony. the two sides were evenly matched though, so it came out about right with a not guilty verdict.
 
SP and KP have shredded Duerk and Boylan for two weeks....absolutely made them look horrid. SP bringing out the "last night you told me that Duerk wrote this?" is KILLER.
 
stubbins said:
SP and KP have shredded Duerk and Boylan for two weeks....absolutely made them look horrid. SP bringing out the "last night you told me that Duerk wrote this?" is KILLER.
no more so than in any trial. the defense needs to be able to shred the prosecution since the prosecution is the one presenting most of the evidence. the defense doesn't provide much evidence so it don't get shredded much.
 
From now on instead of telling people "quit being crazy", I'm just going to say "anxiety state, unspecified". That is pretty catchy. Short and to the point.
 
Bell's symptoms statement is ridiculous. Any person with depression is going to show symptoms of PTSD. But there's a big difference between showing symptoms and actually having PTSD. Just because I show a symptom and swear does not mean I have turrets.
 
Bell is looking like a fool. He's essentially saying now she had PTSD, but wrote a different diagnosis in the medical record. Sounds idiotic. All of the symptoms he describes could be depression/ anxiety and that's what he SAID in her medical record. Now he's trying to change it?
 
AllWeatherFan said:
Going on seven hours of PTSD testimony...
seven wasted hours. most of the testimony in this thing has been a complete waste of time. the jury needed to hear from her, him, the detective, the rape testers all in about two days and then render the verdict we all knew and now know would be coming.
 
Interesting links someone just posted on Twitter about Bell:

Pleads guilty to DUI per se
http://missoulian.com/news/state-and-regional/head-of-um-s-curry-health-center-sentenced-for-dui/article_1b1f4fb8-94af-11e1-bfb9-001a4bcf887a.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Resigns...
http://missoulian.com/news/local/director-of-um-s-curry-health-center-resigns-after-dui/article_707c6db4-bc1a-11e1-894a-0019bb2963f4.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If this is true.. was he still treating this person through UM Health Services?
 
Quick conspiracy item....maybe since he works for the University...he has been told by some big wigs to "help" the prosecution to save their crap storm that will hit them if not guilty
 
Interesting stuff triple G - thanks and hello!

UM legal counsel David Aronofsky likewise refused to comment on any possible sanctions imposed on Bell by the university, also citing the confidentiality of personnel issues.
 
"beyond a reasonable doubt" is in the Constitution so its pretty hard to get around that. Any time a "liberty interest" (i.e. potential imprisonment) is at stake, it is the required standard of proof. As an aside, I have seen nothing in this trial that even approaches the standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt." It was a total waste of state resources and people's valuable time to try this case, and I believe FVV knew that from the outset, but rampant political correctness and political maneuvering dictatde the present course of action.
 
great tweet

#johnsontrial Hypothetically (of course) how much anxiety would it create to know you had accused someone falsely and are in over your head?
 
PolsonGrizFan said:
Interesting stuff triple G - thanks and hello!

UM legal counsel David Aronofsky likewise refused to comment on any possible sanctions imposed on Bell by the university, also citing the confidentiality of personnel issues.
All of these firings and resignations at the University are now coming back in this trial. Wierd. Full circle. And I usually think conspiracy theories are "anxiety state, unspecified".
 
Quick question about twitter..
Can an entire 'history' of a hashtag be recalled/reviewed?
It'd make for some incredibly interesting reading later, as well as the good basis for the LifeTime movie that is sure to follow...
"Trial by Twitter" - Starring Jennifer Love Hewitt as 'Jane Doe' and Josh Duhammell as 'The Accused'
 
Paoli: Would it be fair to say you can't compartmentalize credibility? #johnsontrial Duerk objects, judge sustains.

nice one Paoli

I think Bell is about to burst into flames.
 
missoulian @missoulian

Bell said customer of hers referred to "that b----" in Missoula, not knowing she was the alleged victim. She suffered from it. #johnsontrial
Expand
Reply Retweet Favorite More
Well, you know the old adage, the customer is always right.
 
Legal question: Why is Bell allowed to talk about the alleged victim telling him that someone said "that bitch in Missoula"?

No proof that was ever said or is true? I don't get this hearsay stuff.
 
PolsonGrizFan said:
Paoli: Would it be fair to say you can't compartmentalize credibility? #johnsontrial Duerk objects, judge sustains.

nice one Paoli

I think Bell is about to burst into flames.

I'm thinking if anyone wanted to find the two most un-credible witnesses in town for this diagnoses the couldn't have done better. Stratford has been discredited so many times its ridiculous and Bell has absolutley no qualifications to make a diagnoses for any of it.
 
Back
Top