No Way JJ Can Be Convicted

[PlayerRep]

Jeez, this is the internet. People discuss, surmise, speculate, analyze, guess, etc. I suppose everyone is welcome to suggest how other posters should, and shouldn't, post, but I don't think it will do much good. I used to laugh when people would complain that a bathroom stunk. This two situations seem similar.

I find it amusing when posters seem to think that no one has the right to comment or speculate on a situation, because they weren't there. Only two people were there in this situation. So only they get to talk about it? You can't be serious.

And the comment that no one knows what occurred because only two people were there. I call BS to that. The prosecution and defense attorneys weren't there, but they are commenting. People can read what the parties said or wrote, or the attorneys said they said or write, and make assessments and judgments. Also, there often is considerable information "out there", some of which is good information. To posters who say that no one on the board knows what happened (in a particular situation), so no one should talk about it, I say "speak for yourself". Just because you don't know what happened, doesn't mean someone else doesn't have good or credible information.

 

[br fan]

I understand the theory: if she said it, it's what happened. If he said it, "it's he said, she said." In this case, there are witness statements for JJ's "version." She has not substantively contradicted those statements.

I was, by the way, at this year's Forester's Ball.

Wrong. It's all "he said, she said" at this point. Prosecution hasn't had the opportunity to contradict JJ's motion yet. Guess that's why they have a trial... Nice try on trying to categorize my position though. Again. Only position I have is that people shouldn't be dreaming up speculations of what happened or make judgements on the character of people they don't know. You can't know what happened strictly from an affidavid and a motion to dismiss. It's classical "he said, she said" without any evidence or testimony to support either view. Trial will bring that information out for discussion and analysis. All we have now is bias interpretation of the two documents. You obviously have made your choice on who you support, TNT on his. I only support a fair trial for both parties involved that results in the correct ruling.

With the motion the defense in essence is arguing we have not yet reached the "he said, she said" point. Whether JJ knowingly committed the crime is based on "she said" evidence, and the defense is arguing that as a matter of law the prosecution cannot cherry pick some "she said" evidence which alleges he did know, while ignoring other "she said" evidence that suggests he did not know, to find probable cause. Assuming the court denies the motion I agree with Highline that this will be a "he said/she said" case that a jury will need to decide. Right now though, we're still at a "she said/she said" point that the defense is asking the court to decide.

I can agree with that. The court will have to find admissible evidence at trial that there is "she said, she said" that is enough to throw this out. That evidence might be there but it hasn't been displayed yet and will have to be at trial. I have a tough time that the "she said" evidence is enough to throw out the case. I'm sure it could have an effect on the jurors and that is why we have a trial.

I was just repeating what Pabst said in her motion. The prosecution has to have probable cause as to each element of the crime. Proving JJ's mental state is where the defense feels the burden was not not met, i.e. was it reasonable based on the evidence available to determine JJ "probably" knew he was having sex with her without her consent. Parsed by me, the available evidence consists of:

Evidence he knew: Her testimony she told him no but he had sex with her anyway.

Evidence he did not know: Text from her "this is going to hit him like a ton of bricks"
Text from her "I think he thinks he did nothing wrong"

Based strictly on this evidence, the issue is "was it reasonable for the prosecution to determine JJ "probably" knew he was having sex with her without her consent, when the only evidence as to JJ's mental state comes from the victim herself, and she has provided conflicting evidence. The defense is arguing there is insufficient evidence as a matter of law to charge JJ with "knowingly" committing the crime.

 

[Spanky]

Gina....don't be so sure about tennis players :thumb:

 

[Sportin' Life]

Anyways the only reason Johnson has had the privilege of your oh-so-sought after attention is because he is a football player. We all know that his jock would never have the pleasure of such a good sniffing if he were on the tennis team.

You're jealous, aren't you?

You're 12, aren't you?

 

[UMGriz75]

Anyways the only reason Johnson has had the privilege of your oh-so-sought after attention is because he is a football player. We all know that his jock would never have the pleasure of such a good sniffing if he were on the tennis team.

You're jealous, aren't you?

You're 12, aren't you?

An astonishingly clever comeback. Well thought out, grounded firmly in Western philosophy, and including elements of Greek comic opera.

Almost as though you recognized a kindred 12 year old spirit.

But, no, I am not your kindred spirit.

It would be too embarrassing.

 

[HighLineGRIZ]

Jeez, this is the internet. People discuss, surmise, speculate, analyze, guess, etc. I suppose everyone is welcome to suggest how other posters should, and shouldn't, post, but I don't think it will do much good. I used to laugh when people would complain that a bathroom stunk. This two situations seem similar.

I find it amusing when posters seem to think that no one has the right to comment or speculate on a situation, because they weren't there. Only two people were there in this situation. So only they get to talk about it? You can't be serious.

And the comment that no one knows what occurred because only two people were there. I call BS to that. The prosecution and defense attorneys weren't there, but they are commenting. People can read what the parties said or wrote, or the attorneys said they said or write, and make assessments and judgments. Also, there often is considerable information "out there", some of which is good information. To posters who say that no one on the board knows what happened (in a particular situation), so no one should talk about it, I say "speak for yourself". Just because you don't know what happened, doesn't mean someone else doesn't have good or credible information.

So it's OK for people who never met JJ to post on a public forum that he is a rapist, jerk, and womanizer or for people who never met Jane Doe to call her a slut, liar, and mental case?? I'm sure thheir lives are miserable enough right now as it is and I'm sure both are facing a great deal of public scrutiny right now.

Have no problem with discussion on the case, but attacking the character of these two people on a public forum under an annonymous name, without any idea of who they are or what happended, is chickenshit.

 

[PlayerRep]

Jeez, this is the internet. People discuss, surmise, speculate, analyze, guess, etc. I suppose everyone is welcome to suggest how other posters should, and shouldn't, post, but I don't think it will do much good. I used to laugh when people would complain that a bathroom stunk. This two situations seem similar.

I find it amusing when posters seem to think that no one has the right to comment or speculate on a situation, because they weren't there. Only two people were there in this situation. So only they get to talk about it? You can't be serious.

And the comment that no one knows what occurred because only two people were there. I call BS to that. The prosecution and defense attorneys weren't there, but they are commenting. People can read what the parties said or wrote, or the attorneys said they said or write, and make assessments and judgments. Also, there often is considerable information "out there", some of which is good information. To posters who say that no one on the board knows what happened (in a particular situation), so no one should talk about it, I say "speak for yourself". Just because you don't know what happened, doesn't mean someone else doesn't have good or credible information.

So it's OK for people who never met JJ to post on a public forum that he is a rapist, jerk, and womanizer or for people who never met Jane Doe to call her a slut, liar, and mental case?? I'm sure thheir lives are miserable enough right now as it is and I'm sure both are facing a great deal of public scrutiny right now.

Have no problem with discussion on the case, but attacking the character of these two people on a public forum under an annonymous name, without any idea of who they are or what happended, is chickenshit.

This is what I said: "People discuss, surmise, speculate, analyze, guess, etc." Note that it doesn't include the things you have brought up. Has anyone called Doe a "slut, liar, and mental case"? I haven't noticed that. Maybe it's there somewhere.

 

[tnt]

Should go back PR, in between the discussion, speculation, analyzing, guessing etc and name calling and accusing by those doing it are a few who don't get that that is just what it is. The slut, liar, and mental case and worse have been applied to her as well as the other females involved. And I'm sure its gotten out of hand more than once.

What they really don't get is you would be the first to kick a players ass from here to Bozeman and back if he were guilty, and I would be thrilled to find they are not.

 

[argh!]

Yeah we only care about football, we could never know Jordan and think he is a good person and an honor student. The only good person here is the accuser and her defenders? Do you think before you post, ever?

How do you consistently manage to screw up the quote feature --eta oops that was a mistake that I quoted without looking.

Anyways the only reason Johnson has had the privilege of your oh-so-sought after attention is because he is a football player. We all know that his jock would never have the pleasure of such a good sniffing if he were on the tennis team.

First I heard that he is an honor student.

And 75 goin' at it like it is your job. Must be a weird sort of internship, but I still think that you would do better by learning to research case law. I know the page hits number must make it seem like most of western montana has read this thread, but really that is likely mostly just argh being obsessive.

guilty as charged. like a rat pressing a bar to get a reward, i click on this thread repeatedly in order to read whatever pompous nonsense has been posted in the last few minutes. sure enough, the rewards keep coming.

 

[jagur1]

It's a race. JJ charged with rape winning on hits and No way JJ can be conviceted winning on posts.

 

[UMGriz75]

What happens if an actual slut, a liar, and a mental case files a false rape charge?

What do you call her?

http://blacksportsonline.com/home/2012/05/wanetta-gibsons-mom-wanda-rhodes-plotted-brian-banks-false-rape-accusation-for-money/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[UMGriz75]

guilty as charged. like a rat pressing a bar to get a reward, i click on this thread repeatedly in order to read whatever pompous nonsense has been posted in the last few minutes. sure enough, the rewards keep coming.

In your case, it is politely called "self gratification."

 

[GrizPony]

Gina....don't be so sure about tennis players :thumb:

Someone else said that and then it got quoted wrong in that post. I think this would get just as many posts if it was a tennis player. Mariani played tennis.

 

[NorthwestFresh]

Tell all of you what...... if J.J. goes to trial, and is convicted of rape, i'll kiss any 10 of your sorry arses on the steps of the Missoula County court house!

haha.. that's bold, Growler. Do you pick who goes first?

Growler knows how to pick an arse. Don't doubt him on this one.

 

[moose/squirrel]

DIE THREAD DIE, DIE THREAD DIE...I'll go back to the rerun of "Tin Cup" and get a couple more chuckles that I get every time I see it agian.

 

[Umista]

I'm starting to get the feeling we can't make 30 plus pages. Reluctant posters decided to have a regression and this thing is stalling out.

Hell, most football fans know Johnson is clean and only had sex because she made him. Then she really got mad when he mentioned he loved his girl friend right after she seduced him. All evidence points that way.
A scorned woman is a mad woman, sorry for Johnson. Perhaps he learns not to talk to the girl after sex about how much he likes another girl. Lots of things to learn.

He gets off and life goes on. Not great for him but he gets off. The girl? She gets off also. She keeps wishing she had not filed, fled and got into such a spot. I wish this had not occurred..........@ but again both these young kids got screwed.

This thing gets settled out of court. Hell, we all get off.

Now I have done my part to rile someone, keep this yawner going girls. 30 pages or bust!

 

[PlayerRep]

The defense filed another motion yesterday, to obtain the requested information from the county attorney. Production of documents and information has apparently not been forthcoming from the county attorney.

"The defense wants evidence including police interviews with the alleged victim and the witnesses in this case. They also want text messages, emails, names and addresses of all the witnesses in this case and the alleged victim's school and medical records and an interview with her as soon as possible."

http://www.kxlf.com/news/defense-files-another-motion-in-jordan-johnson-s-case/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[AZGrizFan]

I'm starting to get the feeling we can't make 30 plus pages. Reluctant posters decided to have a regression and this thing is stalling out.

Hell, most football fans know Johnson is clean and only had sex because she made him. Then she really got mad when he mentioned he loved his girl friend right after she seduced him. All evidence points that way.
A scorned woman is a mad woman, sorry for Johnson. Perhaps he learns not to talk to the girl after sex about how much he likes another girl. Lots of things to learn.

He gets off and life goes on. Not great for him but he gets off. The girl? She gets off also. She keeps wishing she had not filed, fled and got into such a spot. I wish this had not occurred..........@ but again both these young kids got screwed.

This thing gets settled out of court. Hell, we all get off.

Now I have done my part to rile someone, keep this yawner going girls. 30 pages or bust!

Your fishing expedition is coming up empty, mista! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[bigkid]

The defense filed another motion yesterday, to obtain the requested information from the county attorney. Production of documents and information has apparently not been forthcoming from the county attorney.

Is this thing common in these cases or is the prosecution being asked for things that may not exist?

 

[SoCalGriz]

Researchers: More than 2,000 false convictions in past 23 years

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/05/21/11756575-researchers-more-than-2000-false-convictions-in-past-23-years?lite&__utma=14933801.1354368945.1345565669.1345565669.1345567948.2&__utmb=14933801.2.10.1345567948&__utmc=14933801&__utmx=-&__utmz=14933801.1345567948.2.2.utmcsr=msn.com|utmccn=(referral" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false|utmcmd=referral|utmcct=/&__utmv=14933801.|8=Earned%20By=msnbc%7Cus%20news%7Cusnewsfranchise=1^12=Landing%20Content=Original=1^13=Landing%20Hostname=usnews.nbcnews.com=1^30=Visit%20Type%20to%20Content=Internal%20to%20Original=1&__utmk=120175624

I did not want to start another post for this article, so I picked the JJ subject that was closest to the top.
Just like the Banks kid in CA, I believe JJ is innocent and obviously false accusations happen a lot.

Over 2,000 false convictions in past 23 years are only the ones they know about. The actual number is probably far greater.
People are so quick to jump on the victim's band wagon, thus the wave of public outcry takes over and you can get knee jerk reactions like you did with Williams. Plus too many cops/prosecutors and even media want the credit/notoriety of a successful guilty plea and will hide information that would hurt their case.