The Accuser...

[Buttegrizzle]

? huh ? She had her day in court and lost, but I am pretty sure she would never have filed a criminal charge if not for the manipulation of agenda-driven folks around her (save your vitriol for them - they deserve it). This is a pitiful, immature girl who lacked a realistic sense of her situation, felt anger /remorse and made the mistake of mentioning it to others. Perfect for the County to use to show DOJ how "tough" they are on sex assault cases. Van Valkenberg's ass, the DOJ pricks, and the femi-nazi nurses or councilors should be every bit in the spotlight as this woman.

 

[G&B]

To be clear, I'm not asking "egriz" to release her name, just questioning why she (or any accuser) for that matter gets to stay anonymous. It would make my day if Florio was forced to name the "accuser" in a missoulian article.

Because releasing her name may keep a future rape victim from reporting.

...........it might also keep a chick like this one from making up bogus accusations because they cant hide behind anonymity.

:shock::shock::shock:

...I actually agree with AG1...

:shock::shock::shock:

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2[/quo

I agree with Alpha 90% of the time. He is right about this too.

 

[Buttegrizzle]

Whoooo boy! you showed us! Just because we don't agree with how things are going down (even though we "get it"), ergo, we can't be fathers. Ouch man. ouch. Go ahead and get the judge to send out legal ramifications to everyone in the court room at the end when they blabber-mouthed her name a bunch.

So if your daughter got assaulted in college (actually assaulted) you would not favor the rule protecting her identity if she filed charges? Look, it was clear from the outset that this was a pathetic legal case. I have a son and daughter and can see both sides. Both are learning from this situation. As I posted elsewhere, IF, at the APROPRIATE TIME a legal defense fund is established to assist JJ and his family, I will give generously. Also, I will go on record that any of you misogynistic sons a bitches think attacking J'Doe now is appropriate, I would seriously enjoy kicking your ass.

[disclaimer - AG1 is an acknowledged and proud misogynist and as such is entitled to some leeway, for purposed of humor]

FYI, I'm not wanting to attack "J'Doe" or anything like that. But, if you can falsely accuse someone of something, and have no repercussions? That's just messed up. I do see both sides also. I understand the purpose, but then don't understand. Who's protecting the accused when their name is plastered all out in public? They are equally in danger as the accuser. The truth should be enough to speak for itself. And please, don't take this as me calling out your griz fandom, support, or anything like that. I'm just disagreeing with what you are saying. And, my previous response to you was some humor as well. In the end, I'd have no problem having a beer with you and talking about this. Hope that helps, even though we both disagree with each other.

ps. Besides! I like you well enough that I posted the link in your Bball thread!

Yes you did! Thanks!

 

[smarsh]

don't know who she is, don't care. but the fact remains that Johnson is filmed/tweeted/identified/labeled/photographed/judged throughout the entire ordeal, but she is 100% shielded. at the onset of this trial, NEITHER of them was presumed guilty (theoretically), but only ONE of them is identified.

even though we all knew this case involved JJ, efforts should've been in place to protect him as much as her, because he was as "alleged" of a rapist as she is as "alleged" as a vicitm.

i'm not advocating divulging her identity, as there are some crazy mutherfuggers out there...but part of me thinks it's only fair.

 

[Buttegrizzle]

Whoooo boy! you showed us! Just because we don't agree with how things are going down (even though we "get it"), ergo, we can't be fathers. Ouch man. ouch. Go ahead and get the judge to send out legal ramifications to everyone in the court room at the end when they blabber-mouthed her name a bunch.

So if your daughter got assaulted in college (actually assaulted) you would not favor the rule protecting her identity if she filed charges? Look, it was clear from the outset that this was a pathetic legal case. I have a son and daughter and can see both sides. Both are learning from this situation. As I posted elsewhere, IF, at the APROPRIATE TIME a legal defense fund is established to assist JJ and his family, I will give generously. Also, I will go on record that any of you misogynistic sons a bitches think attacking J'Doe now is appropriate, I would seriously enjoy kicking your ass.

[disclaimer - AG1 is an acknowledged and proud misogynist and as such is entitled to some leeway, for purposed of humor]

has anyone, at anytime EVER heard someone threaten this woman? Strawman much....for key-rist's sake. and whose to say you wouldn't get your ass kicked right back at ya......

Cause I am from Butte, Stubby!

 

[Copper Griz]

? huh ? She had her day in court and lost, but I am pretty sure she would never have filed a criminal charge if not for the manipulation of agenda-driven folks around her (save your vitriol for them - they deserve it). This is a pitiful, immature girl who lacked a realistic sense of her situation, felt anger /remorse and made the mistake of mentioning it to others. Perfect for the County to use to show DOJ how "tough" they are on sex assault cases. Van Valkenberg's ass, the DOJ pricks, and the femi-nazi nurses or councilors should be every bit in the spotlight as this woman.[/quote


So help me understand this. Everyone other than the alleged victim is to blame? You save your own damn vitriol. That is just messed up. How about personal responsibility? The poor messed up girl sh*t Is not going to fly with me dude. Pure BS.

 

[MissoulaMarinerFan]

Whoooo boy! you showed us! Just because we don't agree with how things are going down (even though we "get it"), ergo, we can't be fathers. Ouch man. ouch. Go ahead and get the judge to send out legal ramifications to everyone in the court room at the end when they blabber-mouthed her name a bunch.

So if your daughter got assaulted in college (actually assaulted) you would not favor the rule protecting her identity if she filed charges? Look, it was clear from the outset that this was a pathetic legal case. I have a son and daughter and can see both sides. Both are learning from this situation. As I posted elsewhere, IF, at the APROPRIATE TIME a legal defense fund is established to assist JJ and his family, I will give generously. Also, I will go on record that any of you misogynistic sons a bitches think attacking J'Doe now is appropriate, I would seriously enjoy kicking your ass.

[disclaimer - AG1 is an acknowledged and proud misogynist and as such is entitled to some leeway, for purposed of humor]

has anyone, at anytime EVER heard someone threaten this woman? Strawman much....for key-rist's sake. and whose to say you wouldn't get your ass kicked right back at ya......

Cause I am from Butte, Stubby!

Careful there Buttegrizzle - there is a fine line between "butte tough" and "butte stupid." :twisted:

 

[JBS]

I don't think this particular case is a very good example for this argument. I think both names should be protected, but obviously that would be impossible here, because people tend to notice and get curious when the QB misses an entire season. Also, Gweno wouldn't have any qualms about putting his name front page top of the fold. I personally wouldn't release her name because, I shit you not, there are some crazies on this board who would hound and harass her. I wouldn't want that.

 

[Buttegrizzle]

OK Copper, I agree she carries blame for what transpired. Still, it is very possible she believes she was raped, even tho most of us, myself included see the situation as entirely seductive and permissive. See my earlier posts - I never defended her charge. Anyway, its better to do something positive for Jordy and just move forward.

 

[Buttegrizzle]

Careful there Buttegrizzle - there is a fine line between "butte tough" and "butte stupid." \

Same thing really. I am sure my HE-MAN WOMAN HATERS CLUB card has been revoked by now... I give up. Going over to the basketball thread - tomorrow is gameday.

 

[Caustic]

You guys are such hypocrites. Many of you were all for the accused and condemned JJ and demanded his head on a stake. Now that he was acquitted you're all, ok calm down guys lets just let it go and let her have her life back. She doesn't deserve a life. She tried to take away 10 years from an innocent guy all because he didn't want to be her boyfriend. She deserves to be ostracized. I don't want her working for me. I don't want to do business with her. She's a liability and a risk and the public has a right to know who she is so they can avoid her. We have to send a message to the community that it's not ok to falsely claim rape. There will be consequences if you're lying. I doubt that disclosing a liar to the public will prevent women from reporting legitimate rapes. Victims have had anonymity protections for years and the reporting rate is till only 46% by some statistics.(RAINN). JJ already lost a year of school while she's going to graduate with her friends. We as a society simply cannot allow someone to do this without repercussions. You're just trading one victimization for another. And avoidance by the eGriz staff isn't doing anyone any favors.

 

[Copper Griz]

OK Copper, I agree she carries blame for what transpired. Still, it is very possible she believes she was raped, even tho most of us, myself included see the situation as entirely seductive and permissive. See my earlier posts - I never defended her charge. Anyway, its better to do something positive for Jordy and just move forward.

We can certainly agree on one thing. It is time to do something positive for Jordy and just move forward. I feel like a damn dog chasing his tail with this trial. The thing is over and I am still friggin posting about it. I also agree - in some twisted way she truly believes she was raped and the real folks who deserve blame are the puppet masters/handlers. GF, the state and the DOJ.

 

[mtgrizrule]

I have not read much of this thread. If her name is revealed, leave her the hell alone. Her and JJ, have already been through hell and back.

Also consider the environment and timing of this. Short of herself vindicating herself, how on God's Earth could have she stopped this from going to trial, and ending it? The city was and still is under a huge microscope. At this point we don't know the variables and politics, as to why this went to trial. I have been told by a few people with legal background,

was no way this case would not go to trial, based on the scrutiny everyone involved was under.

In a sense, common sense decisions were not an option. A lot of people under a lot of pressure in this case. I am thinking both JJ and Jane Doe were victims of the time and environment. I don't care to know the truth on what happened that night. I do care to know in time, the variables behind why this went to trial? It did not make sense from the beginning, and still does not make sense.

Besides, I bet there are potential hollywood people ready to turn this into a movie from the accusers point of view and some sort of "Unauthorized Biography" movie. If not that, someone will make a movie with this kind of story line, and she will be a big part of the making of whatever the movie.

Hell, with the legal expenses ran up in this nightmare, it would not surprise me one bit if either party let it go hollywood within the next 5 to 7 years.

I really do hope the locals can lay off this girl, and JJ and let them live their lives. They have been through hell and back already.

 

[ilovethecats]

it's just all about perspective. i am glad jj is getting his life back. he did what you do in america when you are accused of something like this. you go to trial. state your case. and let a jury of 12 decide your fate.

but remember...there was still only 2 people in that room that night. just because the jury determined he was not guilty...doesn't mean they KNOW what happened. it just means there wasn't enough evidence to send a man to prison. and i agree and i'm happy for him.

we often talk about the oj trial. to this day people have strong opinions on whether he is guilty or not. he was found not guilty. can you imagine if people started bashing the families of goldman abd brown-simpson because oj obviously was innocent?! it's just not the right way to do things.

jj was found not guilty. i think it's time for everyone to move on and not pretend they know everything that happened. :twocents:

 

[GottaluvGriz]

it's just all about perspective. i am glad jj is getting his life back. he did what you do in america when you are accused of something like this. you go to trial. state your case. and let a jury of 12 decide your fate.

but remember...there was still only 2 people in that room that night. just because the jury determined he was not guilty...doesn't mean they KNOW what happened. it just means there wasn't enough evidence to send a man to prison. and i agree and i'm happy for him.

we often talk about the oj trial. to this day people have strong opinions on whether he is guilty or not. he was found not guilty. can you imagine if people started bashing the families of goldman abd brown-simpson because oj obviously was innocent?! it's just not the right way to do things.

jj was found not guilty. i think it's time for everyone to move on and not pretend they know everything that happened. :twocents:

How long does Jane Doe get referred to as the "victim"? Just watched KPAX sister in Billings Q2 10 pm news. They had a former Attorney General on that continued to use the description of victim in reference to Jane Doe. I call Bullshit....

 

[ilovethecats]

How long does Jane Doe get referred to as the "victim"? Just watched KPAX sister in Billings Q2 10 pm news. They had a former Attorney General on that continued to use the description of victim in reference to Jane Doe. I call Bullshit....

no i get what you're saying man, i really do. my point i guess is to say that no matter what a jury decides...NO ONE still knows what happened in that bedroom that night. but that's why america is great. please understand that i'm not suggesting that jj is guilty. i'm simply saying that a conclusion from a jury isn't an exact representation of what really happened. they just make the best decision they can based on the evidence. and that is what they should do.

put the shoe on the other foot. if jj would have been found guilty do you think he would have been blasted on this board? maybe by some. but others would have disregarded the verdict and proclaimed his innocence. and that would have been fine too.

i maintain that unless you were the woman, or jj....it's better for us all to just move on.

hope to see jj in bozeman in november.

 

[reinell30]

How long does Jane Doe get referred to as the "victim"? Just watched KPAX sister in Billings Q2 10 pm news. They had a former Attorney General on that continued to use the description of victim in reference to Jane Doe. I call Bullshit....

no i get what you're saying man, i really do. my point i guess is to say that no matter what a jury decides...NO ONE still knows what happened in that bedroom that night. but that's why america is great. please understand that i'm not suggesting that jj is guilty. i'm simply saying that a conclusion from a jury isn't an exact representation of what really happened. they just make the best decision they can based on the evidence. and that is what they should do.

put the shoe on the other foot. if jj would have been found guilty do you think he would have been blasted on this board? maybe by some. but others would have disregarded the verdict and proclaimed his innocence. and that would have been fine too.

i maintain that unless you were the woman, or jj....it's better for us all to just move on.

hope to see jj in bozeman in november.

It is nobody's business what happened that night except JJ and Jane Doe...people get over it, Leave it alone and let's get ready for a national championship run!

 

[GrizPony]

How long does Jane Doe get referred to as the "victim"? Just watched KPAX sister in Billings Q2 10 pm news. They had a former Attorney General on that continued to use the description of victim in reference to Jane Doe. I call Bullshit....

no i get what you're saying man, i really do. my point i guess is to say that no matter what a jury decides...NO ONE still knows what happened in that bedroom that night. but that's why america is great. please understand that i'm not suggesting that jj is guilty. i'm simply saying that a conclusion from a jury isn't an exact representation of what really happened. they just make the best decision they can based on the evidence. and that is what they should do.

put the shoe on the other foot. if jj would have been found guilty do you think he would have been blasted on this board? maybe by some. but others would have disregarded the verdict and proclaimed his innocence. and that would have been fine too.

i maintain that unless you were the woman, or jj....it's better for us all to just move on.

hope to see jj in bozeman in november.

The would have changed his moniker to "criminal". If his changes with the verdict, so should hers.

 

[ilovethecats]

The would have changed his moniker to "criminal". If his changes with the verdict, so should hers.

well if it's so important to some to know who this girl is plenty of people know. i did a 5 minute facebook "investigation" and found out. and by all means feel free to call her out, curse at her, make her life a living hell. but just remember that you weren't there. you don't know what happened. just my take. unless i'm 100% sure of something....i try to not make an ass of myself.

 

[BWahlberg]

How long does Jane Doe get referred to as the "victim"? Just watched KPAX sister in Billings Q2 10 pm news. They had a former Attorney General on that continued to use the description of victim in reference to Jane Doe. I call Bullshit....

no i get what you're saying man, i really do. my point i guess is to say that no matter what a jury decides...NO ONE still knows what happened in that bedroom that night. but that's why america is great. please understand that i'm not suggesting that jj is guilty. i'm simply saying that a conclusion from a jury isn't an exact representation of what really happened. they just make the best decision they can based on the evidence. and that is what they should do.

put the shoe on the other foot. if jj would have been found guilty do you think he would have been blasted on this board? maybe by some. but others would have disregarded the verdict and proclaimed his innocence. and that would have been fine too.

i maintain that unless you were the woman, or jj....it's better for us all to just move on.

hope to see jj in bozeman in november.

Very well put ILTC