No Way JJ Can Be Convicted

[UMGriz75]

I'm not sure the Brian banks issue is necessarily the best way to reference anything. There have been a fair number of guilty people walk in this community alone. Pretty recently a fellow who turned out to be serial rapist and more than one chimo. So using that logic JJ should already be in Deer Lodge.

I have no idea from this post why JJ should be in Deer Lodge.

 

[funny water]

In all seriousness tnt you are as messed up as Jane Doe. She in effect by her poor decision making and loose actions has ruined not only one carreer but many others as well. Reading the garbage that you have spewed tends to make me believe you are determined to make an agenda point. I feel horrible for the real rape victims who will in one way or another have to be associated with this text. This case is a travesty and politically motivated. No way in hell (even the prosecutor knows) will they get a conviction. They are using the court system to ruin a young man's life. I will reiterate my point that the County Attorney should have never brought these charges forward. They cannot and will not win so why expend the resources. What a farce!!

Agree with all of this!

 

[PTGrizzly]

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.

She told him the night before she'd "do him any time." She'd broken off her only college boyfriend relationship "because of her relationship" with JJ -- a relationship that didn't exist!

She's drunk as a skunk at the Ball, finally gets JJ away from Kelly and gets two dances; her fantasy. He asks her to the "Marriage" booth at the Ball. She's in Seventh Heaven. She's still angry and bitter the next day for being left in the "marriage line" at the Forester's Ball when JJ saw Kelly across the gym and left her standing there ... alone.

And if you think there was anything on her mind but that humiliation, you've never raised teenage girls. Jurors, however, will understand exactly what was happening here.

Next day, he's feeling kind of bad about the whole thing, and decides to try and make up. She picks him up, drives him to her house, takes him directly to her bedroom, sticks in her favorite movie about a college age girl who invents sexual fantasies (!), takes her shirt off, takes his shirt off, and sits on him.

She's pretty sure, now, that those were "mixed signals."

Which ones?

Once again, all of this info is based off of what JJ is saying. Now I know we all want to believe JJ is innocent, but who are we to say that JJ's version is correct and that the girls isn't?

I know it's difficult, but I think it would be best if we all refrained from commenting until the this case is settled, obviously none of us know what actually went on and are at best, speculating at what happened. Just give it some time and wait it out, and hope that justice is served, whether JJ is innocent or not.

 

[PTGrizzly]

On another note, and I know for sure that I'll get ripped for this one, but maybe if more kids these days were waiting a little longer to have sex we wouldn't have as many of these problems. I know it's not a popular view point today, but I'll stand by it.

 

[UMGriz75]

Once again, all of this info is based off of what JJ is saying.

That's false. Virtually all of the factual information is taken from Jane Doe's affidavit or interviews.

That's why I have said that Jane Doe has a credibility problem ... and that problem is Jane Doe.

The difficulty is with telling a consistent story about something that didn't happen, and confusing key facts with incidents that did happen. The consistencies in her various versions are consistent with JJ's. The portions of her story that become inconsistent with each telling illuminate at each key point a consistency with JJ's, and expose an inconsistency with her previous versions.

It is always easier to tell the truth than to tell a lie.

 

[EverettGriz]

On another note, and I know for sure that I'll get ripped for this one, but maybe if more kids these days were waiting a little longer to have sex we wouldn't have as many of these problems. I know it's not a popular view point today, but I'll stand by it.

:? :roll:


:lol:

Ask your grandmother at what age she first had sex.

 

[argh!]

Once again, all of this info is based off of what JJ is saying.

That's false. Virtually all of the factual information is taken from Jane Doe's affidavit or interviews.

That's why I have said that Jane Doe has a credibility problem ... and that problem is Jane Doe.

The difficulty is with telling a consistent story about something that didn't happen, and confusing key facts with incidents that did happen. The consistencies in her various versions are consistent with JJ's. The portions of her story that become inconsistent with each telling illuminate at each key point a consistency with JJ's, and expose an inconsistency with her previous versions.

It is always easier to tell the truth than to tell a lie.

gawd, you are insufferable. we get it - you are all seeing, all knowing, and have this whole thing figured out due to your incredible ability to 'read between the lines', and conjure up meanings that support your bias. way to go!

 

[GrizPony]

Once again, all of this info is based off of what JJ is saying.

That's false. Virtually all of the factual information is taken from Jane Doe's affidavit or interviews.

That's why I have said that Jane Doe has a credibility problem ... and that problem is Jane Doe.

The difficulty is with telling a consistent story about something that didn't happen, and confusing key facts with incidents that did happen. The consistencies in her various versions are consistent with JJ's. The portions of her story that become inconsistent with each telling illuminate at each key point a consistency with JJ's, and expose an inconsistency with her previous versions.

It is always easier to tell the truth than to tell a lie.

gawd, you are insufferable. we get it - you are all seeing, all knowing, and have this whole thing figured out due to your incredible ability to 'read between the lines', and conjure up meanings that support your bias. way to go!

Aaaaaarrrrrrgggghhhhh! "I am a pirate that can't stand your ability UMGriz75 to actually read texts from the accuser that are inconsistent with other statements she has made. It requires no reading between the lines, but my entire argument against JJ does require a fabrication of make believe facts. Aaaaarrrrrgggghhhh! The truth is damaging my agenda. Shiver me timber!"

 

[tnt]

Before we get back to the guessing and second guessing.....


I have trouble believing that crack is an attorney unless his practice consists of cutting and pasting demand letters to insurance companies, But apparently he was sniffing ambulance fumes the days the talked about child welfare. The are a number of ways kids come through the system or get into it. Youth court is one of them. It perhaps is the most efficient.

Say a six year old is ticketed for stealing... Turns out he was stealing from a grocery store and mom was gone for the 3rd day in a row with her newest boy friend leaving the kid on his own and no food. Now CPS can be called and go through the 18 month process of counseling in and out of foster care attention home etc. etc saving the "family" until finally, after yet another boyfriend decided to "discipline" the child a district court judge issues a permanent removal order. A youth court judge on the other hand figures out the situation pretty quickly especially since they have dealt with another child in this "family"and initiate "supervision" Adjudication (which BTW Crack happens in District court)is not necessary and technically they aren't a "bad kid" until adjudicated.

Say a 9 year old foster child diagnosed with Border line Developmental disability and/or spectrum disorder and has been on a waiting list for services from the Child Development Center or Western Montana mental Health Center for 2 years takes swing at another kid at school, (they ticket them now days) Guess what he meets with the Youth court "judge" and he is no longer on the waiting list. 9 years later he enters and completes a program at a Job Center and becomes a cook and later lead chef at a High end Restraunt in Pueblo Colorado. Turns out he was neither retarded or Autistic but as suspected molested by a "boyfriend" of moms

Pretty soon experienced foster homes learn who can help and when. Yup bad kids and bad parents.

Its too bad that in the name of "rights" that two kids that not so many years ago BOTH could have been dealt with out of the public eye and the fear of a long prison term for one of them. But instead one has to be right and one wrong or their rights have been trampled. 18 doesn't make them adults, just available for the military. But like you say I'm too old and too old fashioned. Seems a shame that that period between 18 and 21 doesn't have some flexibility anymore. Youthful stupidity has to either be a crime of perfectly Okay when its neither.

 

[GrizPony]

Perhaps I was too hasty in my condemnation of your parenting and I'm sorry. The fact that your "Judge" and "Psych" children are willing to condemn someone after reading a charging affidavit still points to some pretty clueless parenting.

 

[getgrizzy]

That's false. Virtually all of the factual information is taken from Jane Doe's affidavit or interviews.

That's why I have said that Jane Doe has a credibility problem ... and that problem is Jane Doe.

The difficulty is with telling a consistent story about something that didn't happen, and confusing key facts with incidents that did happen. The consistencies in her various versions are consistent with JJ's. The portions of her story that become inconsistent with each telling illuminate at each key point a consistency with JJ's, and expose an inconsistency with her previous versions.

It is always easier to tell the truth than to tell a lie.

well if that's the case then j.j. has the same problem since he has admitted to not being truthful (cheating on girlfriend). part of it will boil down to who the jury is going to believe is more credible and who has the most to gain by not telling the truth. it doesn't seem like either of them has the clear upper hand in terms of credibility. j.j. has a lot more to protect. there's physical evidence. i do think j.j. will be acquitted, but it's not a slam dunk by any stretch of the imagination. i think both parties would be better off by settling out of court.

it seems like she just wants him out of town. i would take that if i were j.j. what does the future hold for him here? there is already a solid transfer in place and surely we'll be out to find another drop-down q.b. in the off-season fi no one works out this year. can he even win the starting job back if he's acquitted? will the b.o.r. expel him anyway?

 

[BDizzle]

That's false. Virtually all of the factual information is taken from Jane Doe's affidavit or interviews.

That's why I have said that Jane Doe has a credibility problem ... and that problem is Jane Doe.

The difficulty is with telling a consistent story about something that didn't happen, and confusing key facts with incidents that did happen. The consistencies in her various versions are consistent with JJ's. The portions of her story that become inconsistent with each telling illuminate at each key point a consistency with JJ's, and expose an inconsistency with her previous versions.

It is always easier to tell the truth than to tell a lie.

well if that's the case then j.j. has the same problem since he has admitted to not being truthful (cheating on girlfriend). part of it will boil down to who the jury is going to believe is more credible and who has the most to gain by not telling the truth. it doesn't seem like either of them has the clear upper hand in terms of credibility. j.j. has a lot more to protect. there's physical evidence. i do think j.j. will be acquitted, but it's not a slam dunk by any stretch of the imagination.

Not like its a huge difference but he didn't have a gf. He just liked another girl.

 

[nzone]

there's physical evidence

What is the physical evidence?

 

[Growler1]

There is no way that JJ is convicted of this rape. The best thing that could happen, is for the court to dismiss the case. If JJ still wants to play for the Griz, he should then be red-shirted this season, and return next year as a junior with two years of eligibility left.

 

[nzone]

Finally a voice of reason. :clap:

 

[getgrizzy]

there's physical evidence

What is the physical evidence?

red mark on her chest consistent with someone pinning her down. abrasions around and inside the vaginal area consistent with someone missing the mark and penetrating an unstimulated vagina. can all that be explained? probably, but that is yet to be seen.

 

[tnt]

Perhaps I was too hasty in my condemnation of your parenting and I'm sorry. The fact that your "Judge" and "Psych" children are willing to condemn someone after reading a charging affidavit still points to some pretty clueless parenting.

Condemn is your word.

Expressing an opinion that based on their experience after reading both documents and hearing the defense attorney claim mens rea as a defense in a press conference (also a a bad choice)the defendent was a lot more guilty than was being assumed, is no different than what you have been doing, only YOU have been assuming the girl was the guilty party. Are you the victim of bad parenting? At best he didn't know when to stop and ignorant of his actions at the worst guilty of misdemeanor sexual assault. If in fact his "mood" did change as the original charging document stated, there COULD be some pretty severe problems that if intervened now could keep him out severe trouble later. As is generally well known, Rape is NOT a sexual crime, but rather a violence and control.

The "social worker" who BTW is a practicing clinician figured what happened, is the girlwas as suggested pissed after the ball,but so was JJ , he was home "alone" drinking as you recall. She decided to bring him home lead him on, get him good and hot, and then cut him off at the pass to humiliate him. Problem is it didn't work out that way, he finished (as any good quarter back should) what he started. Thus her "confusion," although most victims go back and forth between blaming the guy and blaming themselves as the pretend no big thing really happened and try to blow it off. While false accusations are pretty rare, they do happen, BUT generally when they do are not the result as elaborate a plan as suggested here and generally as one attorney here suggested fall part pretty quickly.

They both suggested that were this not so public and so charged, a deferred sentence and guilty plea to a lesser assault charge, a year off from school and ball while being evaluated for a potential "real problem" including chemical dependency, and following the recommendations from that evaluation would serve "justice" and JJ.

 

[GrizPony]

Way to read stuff into the physical report. Let's try: red mark consistent with the flush that comes over some liars. Jesus you are pushing your agenda.

 

[UMGriz75]

gawd, you are insufferable. we get it - you are all seeing, all knowing, and have this whole thing figured out due to your incredible ability to 'read between the lines', and conjure up meanings that support your bias. way to go!

Let me be just a little more insufferable.

The problem here, and it is very likely the reason that the Defense put up a Motion to Dismiss in a criminal case where it is ordinarily unusual. And, it was necessary in this case.

Firstly, Fred Van Valkenburg has a time bomb. Her name is Jane Doe. By her admissions, she is a psychologically damaged young women unable and unwilling to engage in normal boyfriend/girlfriend relationships in college "because of her relationship with JJ."

A relationship that she also acknowledges didn't actually exist.

But she's got some fantasies. She "knew" that someday they would have a relationship and would "have consensual sex." JJ, she notes, was a really nice guy. He would go out with her once in a while, but he was developing a relationship with Kelly. For some reason, she goes alone to the Forester's Ball, and is pretty well three sheets to the wind already. She sees JJ and Kelly dancing. She goes over to them, and separates JJ from Kelly, saying in front of witnesses that she'd "do him any time," and convinces him to dance with her. He's a nice guy, he does so. Kelly's likely standing over there wondering "what this is all about."

Jane Doe is really enjoying herself. Everyone is seeing her in her fantasy, as JJ's girlfriend in a very public place; the most public social event on the UM campus. She asks him to go the "Marriage booth," and they are standing in line. Jane knows that JJ was at the Ball with Kelly. She seems to want to make a public statement. JJ sees Kelly across the gym floor, and realizes he's got a social problem brewing. He leaves Jane Doe standing there. Kelly likely has some words to say.

Everyone sees what happened. Jane is humiliated.

JJ feels terrible about the whole thing, but you know, this is all pretty normal college-age behavior. Relationships are being sorted out. So the next day, BECAUSE HE IS A NICE GUY, he texts her, hey let's do something.

Her admissions on what happens during that afternoon are positively bizarre, and not just because she offers different versions of it at different points ("he took off my shirt," "I took off my shirt"). She wants to watch a movie. Her favorite movie. About a college age girl who invents sexual fantasies involving herself.

Now, we are at the weird part. You strip your male companion after taking off your own clothes, and straddle him. You have what appears to be a fairly weird soft porn movie playing. Her favorite movie.

Now, at that point, it's her house, it's her bed, it's her idea, and it's her weird movie.

And, she's mad about last night.

She discloses during the investigation that she was abused at a younger age. She was diagnosed with PTSD. She suffers from depression and she has ideated suicide. Now, she is in the middle of a bizarre and public case in which she has demonstrated a pattern of behavior that suggests an obsession with Jordan Johnson. After a very public humiliation by Jordan, she gets him over to her house, sets up the soft porn movie and takes off her clothes, straddling JJ.

The next morning, she goes to get the rape kit, isn't really interested in fully cooperating, just wants to make sure she's got a "report" on file. Goes to a Superbowl party. Texts a friend a couple of days later sounding almost giddy. "It's all good." She's seems fully aware that a rape charge will hit JJ "like a ton of bricks."

Hmmm. Wonder why she thinks that?

Four weeks later, just so we are on the same page here, she writes JJ a letter that doesn't mention rape, it accuses him of "humiliating" her. That's the emotional driver here.

He doesn't respond. "Dammit, then I'm going to file for a TRO, that I am in fear of bodily harm," a claim completely inconsistent with everything she ever said about JJ, and for which in fact, there was no basis for the claim. It was clearly retaliatory for NOT contacting her or responding to her letter. She would "teach" him.

Now, Fred has this file on his desk. And I can hear Fred as he is reading it. "Oh sh....".

Jane Doe has pretty much fabricated a case, out of an unsuccessful fantasy relationship that she had been pursuing. The clue is found in her changing stories. It always is.

Fred knows there's a huge problem with the case. He's got DOJ sniffing around. He's under some public pressure. And that's not his main concern. His main concern is that the public tailwind around this case is driving to a very public conclusion that will likely not be favorable to a very fragile young woman with a history of problems.

And I will tell you as a fact just from knowing Fred for 40 years, he is concerned about where this is going, and it has less to do with JJ than it does with a young woman for whom her fantasies got out of control and she has precipitated a very public spectacle of what can still be an unfolding tragedy.

She has already complained about a public humiliation, and that it was JJ's "fault." The "humiliation," in her own words, has very much driven her escalating behavior. And it may drive it farther. Fred knows that. He knows this case cannot go to trial.

And that conclusion has very little to do with Jordan Johnson.

 

[GrizPony]

Perhaps I was too hasty in my condemnation of your parenting and I'm sorry. The fact that your "Judge" and "Psych" children are willing to condemn someone after reading a charging affidavit still points to some pretty clueless parenting.

Condemn is your word.

Expressing an opinion that based on their experience after reading both documents and hearing the defense attorney claim mens rea as a defense in a press conference (also a a bad choice)the defendent was a lot more guilty than was being assumed, is no different than what you have been doing, only YOU have been assuming the girl was the guilty party. Are you the victim of bad parenting? At best he didn't know when to stop and ignorant of his actions at the worst guilty of misdemeanor sexual assault. If in fact his "mood" did change as the original charging document stated, there COULD be some pretty severe problems that if intervened now could keep him out severe trouble later. As is generally well known, Rape is NOT a sexual crime, but rather a violence and control.

The "social worker" who BTW is a practicing clinician figured what happened, is the girlwas as suggested pissed after the ball,but so was JJ , he was home "alone" drinking as you recall. She decided to bring him home lead him on, get him good and hot, and then cut him off at the pass to humiliate him. Problem is it didn't work out that way, he finished (as any good quarter back should) what he started. Thus her "confusion," although most victims go back and forth between blaming the guy and blaming themselves as the pretend no big thing really happened and try to blow it off. While false accusations are pretty rare, they do happen, BUT generally when they do are not the result as elaborate a plan as suggested here and generally as one attorney here suggested fall part pretty quickly.

They both suggested that were this not so public and so charged, a deferred sentence and guilty plea to a lesser assault charge, a year off from school and ball while being evaluated for a potential "real problem" including chemical dependency, and following the recommendations from that evaluation would serve "justice" and JJ.

Old man I never assumed the accuser was guilty. Show me the post. I said she has inconsistencies in HER own statements and texts. That is fact.