No Way JJ Can Be Convicted

[snap]

9 kids?

 

[AZGrizFan]

It may old fashioned but it would SEEM that somehwere along the line someone would have told these kids that it was a real good idea to keep their pants on while watching a movie and for someone to have told JJ, his chance of being the college football star were pretty much dependent on his keeping his on. Frankly IF that message were transmitted there wouldn't have been group blow jobs, or a "rape problem" and believe it or not that is NOT normal college behavior for most.

Really? Did you go to college? Because I spent ONE year at U of M and it was pretty close to that. Hell, I even knew guys that were sleeping with our professors. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Actually I did go to college(several of them) as did nine of my kids and wife only two of us went to U of M. They ran in different crowds than you apparently, but then that might be why they all have grad degrees from notable schools, and are much to my dismay lawyers, Judges, psychologists and worst of all professional athletes. There are two pastors as well. Of course they could be lying in which case they had enough intelligence to only be doing one at a time and inside of a relationship. They are older though ranging from 23 - 47 so that could be a difference.

Well, somehow I made it out of there with minimal psychological impact and have carved out a decent living... :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[argh!]

8 weeks after the event I'm not sure what wanna get some lunch means? Maybe she was Hungry??? Think she might have been able to eat after a couple months???

Well, before she gave him a ride home, she did so "after fixing herself a snack In her kItchen and eating it." Perhaps it was just normal routine trauma-induced munchies. The next day she managed a trauma-induced Super Bowl Party with her friends.

I understand the theory. All evidence of frustration means she was raped. All unusual behaviors means she was raped. All perfectly normal behaviors means she was raped. Leading a perfectly normal life means she was raped. Seeking revenge for a jilted one-sided love affair means she was raped. If she was hungry, it means she was raped. If she wasn't hungry, it means she was raped. Saying she thought JJ really didn't do anything wrong means she was raped.

I understand the theory.

the next day she managed to go to the rape trauma center (or whatever it is called), too.

you must have a very interesting life, what with your ability to travel back to the past and read people's minds.

 

[tnt]

9 kids?

Yup,they are adopted age ranged from 6-12 when we got them. (One girl was 4) I'm only 60 going on 90. Still know the youth court judges by their first name.

 

[grizindabox]

9 kids?

Yup,they are adopted age ranged from 6-12 when we got them. (One girl was 4) I'm only 60 going on 90. Still know the youth court judges by their first name.

must have kept your pants on! :thumb:

 

[tnt]

9 kids?

Yup,they are adopted age ranged from 6-12 when we got them. (One girl was 4) I'm only 60 going on 90. Still know the youth court judges by their first name.

must have kept your pants on! :thumb:

After seein what those kids went through and any number of those we fostered, i certainly know the value of keeping them on :lol:

The reality is JJ is the victim of very poor/lax parenting or bad messages from other adults in his life. No kid should be the victim of these kinds of decisions without having his eyes wide open first. Both of these kids could use some "help" but I think they outlawed woodsheds a while ago. But the "legal system" isn 't the answer (I don't think)

 

[UMGriz75]

the next day she managed to go to the rape trauma center (or whatever it is called), too.

you must have a very interesting life, what with your ability to travel back to the past and read people's minds.

Let's see, if I wasn't sure I had been raped, I ... go to a rape trauma center? They need to tell me ... what? Oh yeah, it's to "make that record" that I might want "use" later. And of course, if I am serious about the "rape" part, I give them all the evidence, right?

"At First Step, Doe was instructed to collect her blanket for evidentiary purposes but she declined to do so because she didn't want to give up her blanket."

You'd think with all the trauma and sandwiches flying around, it would be the "object of horror" and she would gladly follow their professional advice. But, she wanted to keep it. SHE WANTED TO KEEP IT! That's what trauma victims do!

"After her First Step exam. Doe attended a Super Bowl party and then later that evening went to work at the Ronald McDonald House. Doe mentioned attending the party in her first written statement but, in later ve~ions, including the one she later used to get an order of protection, Doe asserts that after the First Step exam, she remained home for the rest of the day, with the exception of the Ronald McDonald House. The reference to the Super Bowl party had been deleted In her "official" statement to University officials."

But, then she waits four weeks, no word from JJ. She writes a letter to him. Her "feelings are hurt."

He doesn't respond.

She then claims under oath that she has an imminent fear of bodily harm from somebody she hasn't heard from in six weeks, but most significantly, hadn't responded to her contact with him, and to her "hurt feelings."

 

[poorgriz]

8 weeks after the event I'm not sure what wanna get some lunch means? Maybe she was Hungry??? Think she might have been able to eat after a couple months???

The incident was February 4. The text messages were February 7:

"It will hit him like a ton of bricks which I'm okay with, so wanna gel lunch Thursday?"

"I don't think he did anything wrong to be honest ... he didn't show any remorse or anything so idk :/" [ed. idk, "I don't know."]

... "I'm not super sensitive about the Subject too much anymore so Its all good...and I don't think he thinks he did anything wrong."

Here's the key witness testimony from the only two people there: "I don't think he did anything wrong," and "he doesn't think he did anything wrong."

But, In her letter to JJ of March 6, "she continually refers to her feelings being hurt."

Those are the pivot points of this case.

Is it just me or does anyone think that second text may actually hurt JJ? It looks to me like she may have made a typo and meant to say "I don't think he THINKS he did anything wrong?" In the context of the rest of the message, that's the only thing that makes sense?

 

[grizindabox]

8 weeks after the event I'm not sure what wanna get some lunch means? Maybe she was Hungry??? Think she might have been able to eat after a couple months???

The incident was February 4. The text messages were February 7:

"It will hit him like a ton of bricks which I'm okay with, so wanna gel lunch Thursday?"

"I don't think he did anything wrong to be honest ... he didn't show any remorse or anything so idk :/" [ed. idk, "I don't know."]

... "I'm not super sensitive about the Subject too much anymore so Its all good...and I don't think he thinks he did anything wrong."

Here's the key witness testimony from the only two people there: "I don't think he did anything wrong," and "he doesn't think he did anything wrong."

But, In her letter to JJ of March 6, "she continually refers to her feelings being hurt."

Those are the pivot points of this case.

Is it just me or does anyone think that second text may actually hurt JJ? It looks to me like she may have made a typo and meant to say "I don't think he THINKS he did anything wrong?" In the context of the rest of the message, that's the only thing that makes sense?

Just you.

 

[snap]

tnt. If you're gonna have 9 kids, that's the way to do it (assuming you still got laid for god's sakes). Nice job. Please tell me that the athlete in your family is that chick (Spanish?) dancing before the start of the 100m hurdles at the jr world championships.

 

[goatcreekgriz]

The context probably depends more on what the ellipses substitutes for the actual text. I do not doubt these are accurate quotes but the full text and sequencing of messages can be revealing. I am not sure these are as black and white as they appear, but I am sure that tnt should be commended for adopting nine children. :clap: :clap:

 

[BDizzle]

8 weeks after the event I'm not sure what wanna get some lunch means? Maybe she was Hungry??? Think she might have been able to eat after a couple months???

The incident was February 4. The text messages were February 7:

"It will hit him like a ton of bricks which I'm okay with, so wanna gel lunch Thursday?"

"I don't think he did anything wrong to be honest ... he didn't show any remorse or anything so idk :/" [ed. idk, "I don't know."]

... "I'm not super sensitive about the Subject too much anymore so Its all good...and I don't think he thinks he did anything wrong."

Here's the key witness testimony from the only two people there: "I don't think he did anything wrong," and "he doesn't think he did anything wrong."

But, In her letter to JJ of March 6, "she continually refers to her feelings being hurt."

Those are the pivot points of this case.

Is it just me or does anyone think that second text may actually hurt JJ? It looks to me like she may have made a typo and meant to say "I don't think he THINKS he did anything wrong?" In the context of the rest of the message, that's the only thing that makes sense?

Actually when I first read that I was under the impression that she wrote it too fast and missed the two very important words. Seems like an honest mistake since the words "think he thinks he" could be skipped over.

 

[tnt]

8 weeks after the event I'm not sure what wanna get some lunch means? Maybe she was Hungry??? Think she might have been able to eat after a couple months???

The incident was February 4. The text messages were February 7:

"It will hit him like a ton of bricks which I'm okay with, so wanna gel lunch Thursday?"

"I don't think he did anything wrong to be honest ... he didn't show any remorse or anything so idk :/" [ed. idk, "I don't know."]

... "I'm not super sensitive about the Subject too much anymore so Its all good...and I don't think he thinks he did anything wrong."

Here's the key witness testimony from the only two people there: "I don't think he did anything wrong," and "he doesn't think he did anything wrong."

But, In her letter to JJ of March 6, "she continually refers to her feelings being hurt."

Those are the pivot points of this case.

Is it just me or does anyone think that second text may actually hurt JJ? It looks to me like she may have made a typo and meant to say "I don't think he THINKS he did anything wrong?" In the context of the rest of the message, that's the only thing that makes sense?

No its not just you. The conversation at my house got the same impression from ALL of the texts, he took what he thought he had coming without another thought. Even the "easiest" girl on campus hates that and will shut down if they think that's whats happening. She well could have figured out all he was after was a quick cum job and tryed to stop it there, he came so quick he had to have been close for a while. A guys brain isn't always registering at that point....... In that context all the texts make sense.

 

[firstdown-montana...]

Can we now refer to Jane Doe as .

 

[goatcreekgriz]

Unless you can see the entirety of the texts in the sequence they were written, all of this is a wild-ass guess. Maybe the failure to type a few words was a Freudian slip? Who the heck knows, and it is all speculation without more context.

 

[tnt]

True there are anothe 997 or so

 

[uofmman1122]

8 weeks after the event I'm not sure what wanna get some lunch means? Maybe she was Hungry??? Think she might have been able to eat after a couple months???

The incident was February 4. The text messages were February 7:

"It will hit him like a ton of bricks which I'm okay with, so wanna gel lunch Thursday?"

"I don't think he did anything wrong to be honest ... he didn't show any remorse or anything so idk :/" [ed. idk, "I don't know."]

... "I'm not super sensitive about the Subject too much anymore so Its all good...and I don't think he thinks he did anything wrong."

Here's the key witness testimony from the only two people there: "I don't think he did anything wrong," and "he doesn't think he did anything wrong."

But, In her letter to JJ of March 6, "she continually refers to her feelings being hurt."

Those are the pivot points of this case.

Is it just me or does anyone think that second text may actually hurt JJ? It looks to me like she may have made a typo and meant to say "I don't think he THINKS he did anything wrong?" In the context of the rest of the message, that's the only thing that makes sense?

You should have capitalized the second "he", too, since she forgot both words.

You could analyze that 100 ways to prove either point, but IMO its highly unlikely to be a typo. They'd have much better chance just arguing that she was traumatized and that's why she said it, or something.

 

[tnt]

I'm not thinking they check texts for punctuation, capitalization or grammar. Heck half the time they make NO sense unlike eGriz

 

[JBS]

9 kids?

Yup,they are adopted age ranged from 6-12 when we got them. (One girl was 4) I'm only 60 going on 90. Still know the youth court judges by their first name.

Good thing they are all adopted, or else your uterus would be shot.

 

[JBS]

I wouldn't want to sit in front of a jury with the evidence I have read in that affidavit against JJ. I personally think it's probably a bit of a gray area. He obviously thinks she invited him over to have sex, it sounds like he already has a girlfriend and just went over there to bite a chunk off. She invited him over to dangle a little tail in his face to keep him chasing but didn't want to give it up right away. He didn't want to invest to much time and just took it because he could. It pissed her off, hurt her feelings and here we are.

I wouldn't want to be the prosecutor trying to win a case with facts like this.

Probably not, when one puts maroon colored glasses over rose colored glasses, you can't see anything. FWIW I listened to my wife and too adult daughters screaming at the TV last night - specifically at Pabst. I would hate to try to win a cases when my defense boiled down to "he's innocent because he didn't know he was raping her." As all three gave thier "opinion", I would guess Skookum-Jim prolly has it right, with the addition he took it because he could, and INDEED would be surprised to find out he couldn't.

When one puts on pink colored glasses they start acting like activist social workers. Try hanging out with guys once in a while. BTW, I hope that one of the daughters who had this reaction wasn't the supposed Judge from Kansas. If she was shocked by a motion from a defense attorney, she has no right being a Judge.