• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

No Way JJ Can Be Convicted

granitegriz said:
The reason why the texts and other evidence are so important right now is that the defense has a response brief due and needs to have everything the prosecution has to make the best possible argument. As PR said, it is to the prosecution's advantage to be slow, but come on...this information should have been reviewed before charging JJ. They only had months and months to do it already.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily months and months, a lot of those texts etc were from the University in regards to the expulsion hearing.
 
PlayerRep said:
After looking at the motion to dismiss, there would seem to be no way JJ could be convicted (beyond a reasonable doubt), in my view. The significant additional facts are very helpful to JJ and put the statements in the charging affidavit in context. The motion makes a strong argument for dismissal of the case. The motion is very well done and persuasive.

As others have said, the motion is a must read, especially the factual portion. It details what occurred, starting in 2011 or earlier. As others have said, the defense has used the affidavit, but supplemented it with additional facts and information. Very cleverly done by the defense.

I can see why some, including of course his attorney, have said that JJ was unfairly and wrongly charged. I am starting to wonder if the poster who once said JJ was eventually going to own the university and the city/county may be have been onto something.

While I feel sorry for the parties, it will be interesting to see how this one plays out.
Click to expand...
do you still feel there's 'no way...'? looks like the defense doesn't have enough evidence to clear j.j.

based on fred's response do you also think the motion is all that well done?
 
getgrizzy said:
PlayerRep said:
After looking at the motion to dismiss, there would seem to be no way JJ could be convicted (beyond a reasonable doubt), in my view. The significant additional facts are very helpful to JJ and put the statements in the charging affidavit in context. The motion makes a strong argument for dismissal of the case. The motion is very well done and persuasive.

As others have said, the motion is a must read, especially the factual portion. It details what occurred, starting in 2011 or earlier. As others have said, the defense has used the affidavit, but supplemented it with additional facts and information. Very cleverly done by the defense.

I can see why some, including of course his attorney, have said that JJ was unfairly and wrongly charged. I am starting to wonder if the poster who once said JJ was eventually going to own the university and the city/county may be have been onto something.

While I feel sorry for the parties, it will be interesting to see how this one plays out.
Click to expand...
do you still feel there's 'no way...'? looks like the defense doesn't have enough evidence to clear j.j.

based on fred's response do you also think the motion is all that well done?
Click to expand...

I haven't read the prosecution's response, only the news blurb, and it doesn't report the arguments, only the conclusions. As I noted in previous posts, I think Pabst made a good legal argument as to why the charges should be dismissed. The news blurb just says the prosecution "asked the court not to dismiss the charges" but doesn't provide the grounds. If someone could post a link to the prosecution's response I'd like to read it. But based simply on what KPAX reported I haven't changed my opinion that Pabst made a very good legal argument to dismiss the case, and if it isn't dismissed, the prosecution is going to have any extremely difficult time to convicting him.
 
30 pages of banter that could be summed on one page.


Since you hit 30 pages now I have some new questions?

Can you idiots get to 45 pages? (I know I want this)

Will Titleless swoop in and think for everyone by saying this thread has run its course? (where was he 27 pages ago?)

If anyone talks poorly about Pabst.....would this be considered a Pabst-smear?

Will anyone that is actually reading this finally get to the bottom of this? I mean seriously how many pages can it take to realize that no matter how much data you try to clog the interweb with you will never get the truth.

Will somebody please post the "victims" name........I know who it is but like most things dont need to feed my ego by being the first lawyer to break the story. Plus if I did that the post would get deleted and then the whiney bunch would start a thread wondering if doing that I gave JJ an advantage of some sort. :roll:

:coffee:
 
ALPHAGRIZ1 said:
30 pages of banter that could be summed on one page.


Since you hit 30 pages now I have some new questions?

Can you idiots get to 45 pages? (I know I want this)

Will Titleless swoop in and think for everyone by saying this thread has run its course? (where was he 27 pages ago?)

If anyone talks poorly about Pabst.....would this be considered a Pabst-smear?

Will anyone that is actually reading this finally get to the bottom of this? I mean seriously how many pages can it take to realize that no matter how much data you try to clog the interweb with you will never get the truth.

Will somebody please post the "victims" name........I know who it is but like most things dont need to feed my ego by being the first lawyer to break the story. Plus if I did that the post would get deleted and then the whiney bunch would start a thread wondering if doing that I gave JJ an advantage of some sort. :roll:

:coffee:
Click to expand...

'feeding your ego' is exactly what you are doing, you man's man, you.
 
argh! said:
here's an article written by a lawyer who was raped. in it she says that in her law school introduction to rape cases, the professor read/stated that in these cases, it is the victim who is on trial, not the rapist.

go figure.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/22/opinion/prewitt-rapist-visitation-rights/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
Click to expand...

That is why, if you truly care about the victim, you don't bring charges unless you have reviewed all available evidence and can prevail beyond a reasonable doubt: two things not done in this case.
 
fred's response is on the missoulian website. he says there are 35,000 texts, not 1,000. i don't see how anyone after reading his response can think the defense's motion to dismiss was well done. he totally dresses down paoli, pabst and company.
 
UMGriz75 said:
Too, just that fact that there were so many text messages offers a "Chatty Cathy" piece of evidence all by itself which is at odds with the normal response of victims to violent rape trauma; depression, withdrawal, lack of communicativeness.
Click to expand...

Just to indulge your ever present need to expound... just how many texts should a rape victim submit. Is there an exact number or can an expert such as yourself give a range? If you choose to answer (which of course you will) please keep to the parameters of the subject.
 
35,000 texts? That's not inconsistent with 1,000 pages at 35 lines per page. That's 2 reams of paper, about 4 inches high. It should take an afternoon to review. The most troubling aspect of this case is that there was no need to file charges now because the statute of limitations for charging the defendant will not run for years. There is simply no excuse for not carefully reviewing all of the evidence before filing charges, and therefore there is no excuse for not being prepared to disclose all relevant evidence to the defendant.
 
goatcreekgriz said:
35,000 texts? That's not inconsistent with 1,000 pages at 35 lines per page. That's 2 reams of paper, about 4 inches high. It should take an afternoon to review. The most troubling aspect of this case is that there was no need to file charges now because the statute of limitations for charging the defendant will not run for years. There is simply no excuse for not carefully reviewing all of the evidence before filing charges, and therefore there is no excuse for not being prepared to disclose all relevant evidence to the defendant.
Click to expand...

This is so indicative of what really happened. Though they try to deny it, if there was no pressure on them to file the charge, why would the County Attorney file before reviewing all evidence? Kind of makes you wonder if we have the right "elected" County Attorney. I would hate to have a friend or family member charged with onerous conduct, only to find out later that the prosecution had evidence that would have obviated the need to file, in their possession....that they had NOT read before filing the charges.
 
crackgina said:
argh! said:
here's an article written by a lawyer who was raped. in it she says that in her law school introduction to rape cases, the professor read/stated that in these cases, it is the victim who is on trial, not the rapist.

go figure.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/22/opinion/prewitt-rapist-visitation-rights/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
Click to expand...

That is why, if you truly care about the victim, you don't bring charges unless you have reviewed all available evidence and can prevail beyond a reasonable doubt: two things not done in this case.
Click to expand...

or is it why a defense lawyer will go out of his/her way to get as much unrelated info about the victim out to the public, so that football hero worshiping clowns will go off spouting claims like 'the victim stated she'd have sex with jj in front of 1499 other people at the foresters ball' when discovering she made a flirtatious comment to him that was apparently heard by all of one other person, who is also a football player?
 
argh!: A lot of the commentary is unfortunate and inappropriate, and I do not necessarily agree with the defense strategy. That being said, the prosecutors clearly brought this on themselves by unecessarily rushing to file charges without fully reviewing available relevant evidence. This point is indisputable and the decision to file charges now is inexcusable. I do not care if the defendant plays football or washes dishes at the Shack, it is unacceptable. This situation was caused entirely by prosecutorial decisions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top