who seriously thinks JJ would stay/play???

[Cats2506]

I must have missed the article where "the BoR (via Clay Christian) has already called into the question the Code's constitutionality"

source please

Why do you think JJ is being allowed to take classes in spite of being convicted of 3 separate Conduct Code violations that would normally ensure expulsion ? Pretty common sense if you're willing to read between the lines. In addition, I know several people who have been closely involved with the defense and that's what I've been told. I don't understand what's at all questionable about my assertion. The BoR is trying to protect the University as much as possible in the event of an acquittal. Hardly earthshaking stuff there pal.

So your post like most here, is based on nothing more than pure speculation

Not speculation on my part at all. Simply what I've been told by people who are involved directly in the case. Before you criticize, what exactly are you bringing to the table??? And what exactly is even remotely controversial about what I'm saying?

Nothing says speculation like saying "if you're willing to read between the lines." :lol:

 

[OrgonGriz]

I have no idea what the outcome of this trial will be. Just from info we have been given and read it would appear JJ is innocent. However that will be up to the courts to decide.

I think JJ has to be in town for many of the reasons stated throught this thread. That being said if JJ is aquited or found innocent he may just want to get out of Missoula and Montana altogether to be able to finally put all this behind him and be able to move on with his life. Being out of Montana may allow for his best path to fully move forward and away from this mess. I would not blame him one bit for leaving UM.

IF JJ is aquited or found not quilty and he wanted to stay in Missoula ans wanted to play football I have a hard time seeing Rolls Royce letting him play. Well more Rolls not letting Mick allowing JJ back on the team. I could see Rolls saying he supports coachs decision in not allow JJ to play as UM feels it would bring or continue to bring less than favorable attention to UM and that UM wants to move on from this. A change in direction if you will! This scenario would not surprise me one bit!

 

[gotgame75]

Why do you think JJ is being allowed to take classes in spite of being convicted of 3 separate Conduct Code violations that would normally ensure expulsion ? Pretty common sense if you're willing to read between the lines. In addition, I know several people who have been closely involved with the defense and that's what I've been told. I don't understand what's at all questionable about my assertion. The BoR is trying to protect the University as much as possible in the event of an acquittal. Hardly earthshaking stuff there pal.

So your post like most here, is based on nothing more than pure speculation

Not speculation on my part at all. Simply what I've been told by people who are involved directly in the case. Before you criticize, what exactly are you bringing to the table??? And what exactly is even remotely controversial about what I'm saying?

Nothing says speculation like saying "if you're willing to read between the lines." :lol:

Wow, I've been stumped by the King of the Obvious! Did I say I was reading between the lines? No. I simply meant that if you were completely uninformed of situation and were looking at it from the outside, it makes sense. I happen to know more than simple speculation, as I stated above. Still flabbergasted that you are keying into something that is hardly contentious. If I'm so wrong, then why is JJ in school right now despite being "convicted" of violations that would leave anyone else expelled?

 

[IntuitiveGriz]

JJ will stay and play because he deserves too. He's one of my favorite players of all-time, and he's only been here 2 years. He's got business to attend to/championships to win :!: :clap:

To those that are under the illusion that trials are crucibles (severe searching test) for the the truth, you are sadly mistaken. Agendas, agendas, agendas. And you better have a strategic plan or you will come out on the wrong end, potentially losing fortune or your freedom :!:

 

[Cats2506]

So your post like most here, is based on nothing more than pure speculation

Not speculation on my part at all. Simply what I've been told by people who are involved directly in the case. Before you criticize, what exactly are you bringing to the table??? And what exactly is even remotely controversial about what I'm saying?

Nothing says speculation like saying "if you're willing to read between the lines." :lol:

Wow, I've been stumped by the King of the Obvious! Did I say I was reading between the lines? No. I simply meant that if you were completely uninformed of situation and were looking at it from the outside, it makes sense. I happen to know more than simple speculation, as I stated above. Still flabbergasted that you are keying into something that is hardly contentious. If I'm so wrong, then why is JJ in school right now despite being "convicted" of violations that would leave anyone else expelled?

I am not saying that you are necessarily wrong you may turn out to be correct, I am just saying that you are passing speculation off as fact, and everything you have posted supports that.

you have still given no source to your statement that the BOR has questioned the constitutionality of the honors court decision. There may be any number of reasons that JJ is still in school, but you have little to support your statement other than hearsay and speculation.

 

[Thurman Murman]

That’s all my surveillance has revealed.

Didn't your surveillance say that Roderick was going to be a Griz?




:lol:

See my post earlier in the thread about that smartie pants.

 

[Washgrizfan1]

Again what evidence exists he was expelled??? (other than an attempt by Paoli to get "confidential" information to the public in a PR attempt? He's a great attorney but criminal defense? That ship needs (and has) a different driver.) If JJ was expelled and the decision held up in the time frames specified, he'd be gone. Most of this is supposition on Egriz.

Dean, I'll let you finish the semester and then you leave, I'm the final authority, Couture is gone

Dave is being assisted in this trial by Kirsten Pabst Lacroix, the former county attorney and Van Valkenburg's old heir apparent. Kirsten is very respected in the legal community and a very capable trial attorney. I think a lot of people were questioning JJ's pick of Paoli for this trial as Dave doesn't normally practice criminal defense. With Lacroix on board, this changes everything.

I know a lot people in the criminal defense community in Missoula and most, if not all, feel JJ has an excellent chance at acquittal. While the Student Conduct Code presents another challenge to JJ's return, the BoR (via Clay Christian) has already called into the question the Code's constitutionality. This is why JJ has been allowed to continue taking classes at the University in spite of his "conviction" of violating the Conduct Code. Suffice to say, the BoR is very nervous at the mountain of litigation coming their way in the event of a not guilty verdict. While all of this by no means ensures JJ's return, the prospect is much brighter than it once seemed.

This is good information. Pabst/Lacroix is a terrific and experienced criminal lawyer, with considerable sexual assault and trial experience. The poster, GotGame75, has good information. Engstrom didn't make the decision to allow Johnson to remain in school, and he won't be making the later decision assuming Johnson is not convicted. This matter moved beyond Engstrom early last summer, and he was overruled upstairs. The university court proceeding was horribly flawed and biased (and a federal court judge said as much), and the university has huge potential liability lingering. The university is probably hoping for a conviction, because an acquittal would probably lead to things unraveling for the university and Engstrom.

 

[bigtyme]

Again what evidence exists he was expelled??? (other than an attempt by Paoli to get "confidential" information to the public in a PR attempt? He's a great attorney but criminal defense? That ship needs (and has) a different driver.) If JJ was expelled and the decision held up in the time frames specified, he'd be gone. Most of this is supposition on Egriz.

Dean, I'll let you finish the semester and then you leave, I'm the final authority, Couture is gone

Dave is being assisted in this trial by Kirsten Pabst Lacroix, the former county attorney and Van Valkenburg's old heir apparent. Kirsten is very respected in the legal community and a very capable trial attorney. I think a lot of people were questioning JJ's pick of Paoli for this trial as Dave doesn't normally practice criminal defense. With Lacroix on board, this changes everything.

I know a lot people in the criminal defense community in Missoula and most, if not all, feel JJ has an excellent chance at acquittal. While the Student Conduct Code presents another challenge to JJ's return, the BoR (via Clay Christian) has already called into the question the Code's constitutionality. This is why JJ has been allowed to continue taking classes at the University in spite of his "conviction" of violating the Conduct Code. Suffice to say, the BoR is very nervous at the mountain of litigation coming their way in the event of a not guilty verdict. While all of this by no means ensures JJ's return, the prospect is much brighter than it once seemed.

This is good information. Pabst/Lacroix is a terrific and experienced criminal lawyer, with considerable sexual assault and trial experience. The poster, GotGame75, has good information. Engstrom didn't make the decision to allow Johnson to remain in school, and he won't be making the later decision assuming Johnson is not convicted. This matter moved beyond Engstrom early last summer, and he was overruled upstairs. The university court proceeding was horribly flawed and biased (and a federal court judge said as much), and the university has huge potential liability lingering. The university is probably hoping for a conviction, because an acquittal would probably lead to things unraveling for the university and Engstrom.

This!

 

[GottaluvGriz]

IF he is found not guilty... why the hell.would he stay and play here (if the administration even let him). NO way! Mick better get that figured out too....either need a new QB or new scheme. Roderick was a shot at someone who could do it...but that's over.

Really?
So hypothetically an accused says he didn't do it, is proven innocent in a court of law and you don't think he wants to return to his life before the accusation? I vote that JJ returns to school and the Grizzlies assuming he is found innocent of the charges. March can't get here soon enough.

 

[mikegriz]

IF he is found not guilty... why the hell.would he stay and play here (if the administration even let him). NO way! Mick better get that figured out too....either need a new QB or new scheme. Roderick was a shot at someone who could do it...but that's over.

I think the question should be "Who believes that he will have any chance to do so?" Not who wishes, or hopes, or thinks he should or shouldn't; but really believes that they will see Jordan back on the field as a Montana Grizzly? I wish the young man no ill-will whatsoever, but I class his return as a very long shot at best. The team would be best to look forward, not back. Same goes for Roderick, I'm not sure why anybody believed he might end up in a Grizzly uniform. Move on.

 

[moose/squirrel]

Not speculation on my part at all. Simply what I've been told by people who are involved directly in the case. Before you criticize, what exactly are you bringing to the table??? And what exactly is even remotely controversial about what I'm saying?

Nothing says speculation like saying "if you're willing to read between the lines." :lol:

Wow, I've been stumped by the King of the Obvious! Did I say I was reading between the lines? No. I simply meant that if you were completely uninformed of situation and were looking at it from the outside, it makes sense. I happen to know more than simple speculation, as I stated above. Still flabbergasted that you are keying into something that is hardly contentious. If I'm so wrong, then why is JJ in school right now despite being "convicted" of violations that would leave anyone else expelled?

I am not saying that you are necessarily wrong you may turn out to be correct, I am just saying that you are passing speculation off as fact, and everything you have posted supports that.

you have still given no source to your statement that the BOR has questioned the constitutionality of the honors court decision. There may be any number of reasons that JJ is still in school, but you have little to support your statement other than hearsay and speculation.

And you are troll from bozo with the same lack of intel as everyone on this board. GFY and return to your litterbox , you serve no useful purpose here.

 

[moose/squirrel]

Not speculation on my part at all. Simply what I've been told by people who are involved directly in the case. Before you criticize, what exactly are you bringing to the table??? And what exactly is even remotely controversial about what I'm saying?

Nothing says speculation like saying "if you're willing to read between the lines." :lol:

Wow, I've been stumped by the King of the Obvious! Did I say I was reading between the lines? No. I simply meant that if you were completely uninformed of situation and were looking at it from the outside, it makes sense. I happen to know more than simple speculation, as I stated above. Still flabbergasted that you are keying into something that is hardly contentious. If I'm so wrong, then why is JJ in school right now despite being "convicted" of violations that would leave anyone else expelled?

I am not saying that you are necessarily wrong you may turn out to be correct, I am just saying that you are passing speculation off as fact, and everything you have posted supports that.

you have still given no source to your statement that the BOR has questioned the constitutionality of the honors court decision. There may be any number of reasons that JJ is still in school, but you have little to support your statement other than hearsay and speculation.

And you are troll from bozo with the same lack of intel as everyone on this board. GFY and return to your litterbox , you serve no useful purpose here.

 

[JJohnson]

Why cant all you people just ask me rather than talking for me??? People these days...

 

[uofmman1122]

Why cant all you people just ask me rather than talking for me??? People these days...

Ummm....Well, would you?

 

[JJohnson]

Why cant all you people just ask me rather than talking for me??? People these days...

Ummm....Well, would you?

Wouldn't you like to know

 

[Raider]

I just hope you guys' sources "people directly involved with the case" aren't the same sources that said Roderick signed with the Griz a month ago. If it is the same people, and they are saying it's a slam dunk that JJ will be aquitted and will be back with the Griz, than he's IN BIG TROUBLE...

Great point.

………..our you can just take the word of those who knew that neither were/are going to happen.

 

[Allezchat]

Just to clarify what I stated earlier...If JJ is found not guilty then as far as the law is concerned, he is not guilty. However, as someone that has sat on a jury involving a similar case in which everyone of us jurors felt that the defendant was guilty but that the prosecution did not prove their case, it is possible to be found not guilty but still be guilty. Again, a not guilty verdict will never be tried again, so in the law's eyes, the defendant is not guilty forever. The honor court, or whatever its called, has a different burden of proof, so the outcome of the two different "courts" is possible to be opposite. I have no idea what is going on with the honor court thing, and 'a person with the defense" or whoever was quoted with knowledge of the proceedings, I question. Is someone on the defense team really going to put out any information that could get out that JJ is guilty?

A great point was made about what you hope, and what you think will happen. I think a lot of hoping going on here. My hope is that justice prevails whatever outcome that is. I think that JJ leaves UM after everything is said and done...no matter the outcome. Just getting a new start on life, and if that is the case, I will wish him well, given a not guilty verdict.

 

[grizfan47]

Just to clarify what I stated earlier...If JJ is found not guilty then as far as the law is concerned, he is not guilty. However, as someone that has sat on a jury involving a similar case in which everyone of us jurors felt that the defendant was guilty but that the prosecution did not prove their case, it is possible to be found not guilty but still be guilty. Again, a not guilty verdict will never be tried again, so in the law's eyes, the defendant is not guilty forever. The honor court, or whatever its called, has a different burden of proof, so the outcome of the two different "courts" is possible to be opposite. I have no idea what is going on with the honor court thing, and 'a person with the defense" or whoever was quoted with knowledge of the proceedings, I question. Is someone on the defense team really going to put out any information that could get out that JJ is guilty?

A great point was made about what you hope, and what you think will happen. I think a lot of hoping going on here. My hope is that justice prevails whatever outcome that is. I think that JJ leaves UM after everything is said and done...no matter the outcome. Just getting a new start on life, and if that is the case, I will wish him well, given a not guilty verdict.

In this day and age of social media and 24/7 sports news do you really think that he would get a new start anywhere else. Here is the headline: Ex-Montana Quarterback aquited of sexual intercourse without consent to play for XXXX University. Then the whole story would be re-hashed for a whole new fan base so that the speculation of guilt and innocence could be decided in the court of public opinion. I doubt that would be the new start in life he would be searching for.

 

[Allezchat]

True, however that would be rehashed for about a week or so. Not almost a year like we've already done here in the state of MT. New fanbase would forget pretty quick. And where as here, everyone has an opinion, a new place would just wonder for a short time.

 

[Gallatin Griz]

Perhaps, as Pflu said, he is a high character kid who made a bad decision (to be with this girl) and if found not guilty, he will stick to his committment no matter how many detractors he may have.

I too am in favor of justice being served no matter the outcome but I am glad I didn't have to pay the most severe consequences for some of the jiblet headed things I did in my youth.