No Way JJ Can Be Convicted

[NorthwestFresh]

JFC, some of you are looking through Maroon colored glasses.

Just as it's completely unfair to assume the information in the charging documents is the unadulterated truth, it's also completely unfair to assume the information in the motion to dismiss is the unadulterated truth. Both of them are simply the accounts of each party, presented to best support their case. It's unfortunate for all parties involved, and hopefully the courts will be able to discover the truth of the matter. Until then it's all just biased, speculative BS. :twocents:

Nope, you're not right. People are now looking at what both sides have said. In addition, much of what the defense added in the motion is what the accuser as well as third parties have said. This looks like it is likely pretty close to the full story.

You also said there was no way that JJ would even be charged. Why should anyone believe you at this point?

 

[grizindabox]

mmmmmm, #popcorn

 

[PlayerRep]

The desperation for acquittal by posters is sad and comical. Let the trial run it's course, the jury will make the correct decision. Some will like it, some won't, Geeeez [/quote

I wonder if the case will even go to trial. I wonder if the prosecutor or accuser will give up, assuming the judge doesn't toss it out. This is a loser case for the prosecution, based on what is now publicly known, in my view.

 

[mtgrizrule]

Argh, it was not intended for you, or anyone, to agree with, or even debate.

Do you know this girl, or family? I do not expect a comment. Speaking of agitation, it seems you are agitated when someone mentions a possibility, that does not look good for her side.

Sorry, did not mean to "agitate" you.

So ... are you on the defense witness list? Or are you just trying to intimidate the alleged victim via this very odd website?

How is anyone intimidating someone? That would be quite a feat, to be in Denver, not knowing either party, personally, and being on a witness list. :thumb:

I was just reading a quote that apparently was posted on this board about somebody making the alleged victim's life miserable if she follows through on this. Sorry if that wasn't you who was quoted.

It was not me, but, I think the poster is/was actually concerned about the victim. As of today, there is a lot of information from the court documents that can be linked to find out who the victim is. Which, if some psycho, or media member wanted to use links, it would not be hard to cause some trouble, or even scare her. I hope it does not happen, but there are some fans, of any team, that would go extremes to protect a player on that team.

Before the posters comment, I questioned the confidentiality of the released information. I would be upset if I were the accuser, her family, friends, or lawyer. I believe the follow up poster was adding to the list, and also questioning, why is some of this public knowledge, at this stage?

 

[NorthwestFresh]

Almost every single case has a motion to dismiss. You'd be stupid not to try.

With that said, it does look shaky for the prosecutor, however I still believe this will go to trial and that this will be a messy case. Not going to be fun for anybody.

Nope, motions to dismiss are not common in criminal cases (excluding white collar crimes). I suppose you think onside kicks are common in football.

Motions to dismiss are standard in rape cases.

Nice thread by the way. Way to lower the public's opinion of lawyers even lower than they are now. :thumb:

 

[NorthwestFresh]

The desperation for acquittal by posters is sad and comical. Let the trial run it's course, the jury will make the correct decision. Some will like it, some won't, Geeeez [/quote

I wonder if the case will even go to trial. I wonder if the prosecutor or accuser will give up, assuming the judge doesn't toss it out. This is a loser case for the prosecution, based on what is now publicly known, in my view.

Yes, we also know that your view was that there was no way Jordan would even be charged.

Yet, here we are...

 

[MTGriz87]

^Bingo, mtgrizrule, that was indeed what I was saying. Seems the names should have been censored if it was to be made public. I understand the rest of it is public record, but doesn't make sense to give so much detail about the victim and witnesses.

 

[grizindabox]

If the glove don't fit you must acquit

Had to be said

 

[Cats2506]

I think there is too much talk about this in Missoula and the trial (if JJ doesnt plea out) needs to be moved to Bozeman :shock:

 

[PlayerRep]

JFC, some of you are looking through Maroon colored glasses.

Just as it's completely unfair to assume the information in the charging documents is the unadulterated truth, it's also completely unfair to assume the information in the motion to dismiss is the unadulterated truth. Both of them are simply the accounts of each party, presented to best support their case. It's unfortunate for all parties involved, and hopefully the courts will be able to discover the truth of the matter. Until then it's all just biased, speculative BS. :twocents:

Nope, you're not right. People are now looking at what both sides have said. In addition, much of what the defense added in the motion is what the accuser as well as third parties have said. This looks like it is likely pretty close to the full story.

You also said there was no way that JJ would even be charged. Why should anyone believe you at this point?

You are a liar. I said no such thing. I have said very little about this matter and its criminal side (but did talk about the university proceeding), prior today. You, on the other hand, are making incorrect statements and threatening individual posters.

 

[PlayerRep]

The desperation for acquittal by posters is sad and comical. Let the trial run it's course, the jury will make the correct decision. Some will like it, some won't, Geeeez [/quote

I wonder if the case will even go to trial. I wonder if the prosecutor or accuser will give up, assuming the judge doesn't toss it out. This is a loser case for the prosecution, based on what is now publicly known, in my view.

Yes, we also know that your view was that there was no way Jordan would even be charged.

Yet, here we are...

Nope, I didn't say JJ wouldn't be charged. I have said very little on the criminal side of this matter.

 

[mtgrizrule]

^Bingo, mtgrizrule, that was indeed what I was saying. Seems the names should have been censored if it was to be made public. I understand the rest of it is public record, but doesn't make sense to give so much detail about the victim and witnesses.

I also questioned the public information, with the charging documents. Got to admit, it is interesting to follow both sides of the legal system, but I just do not like names being disclosed to the public, before trial.

One never knows who reads them, and who will take them out of context, and be set on destroying someone, or acting on what is going on? Having this much public information, just does not seem right to either party, legal teams, or the legal system.

Seriously, we all know where she grew up, about how old she is, who knows her. It would be pretty easy to have someone reveal her identity, now. Even with JJ, who knows what femi nazi could take what is public knowledge, and use it to cause him problems, too?

I really am surprised, and shocked, what is public knowledge. It concerns me, a lot.

 

[PlayerRep]

Almost every single case has a motion to dismiss. You'd be stupid not to try.

With that said, it does look shaky for the prosecutor, however I still believe this will go to trial and that this will be a messy case. Not going to be fun for anybody.

Nope, motions to dismiss are not common in criminal cases (excluding white collar crimes). I suppose you think onside kicks are common in football.

Motions to dismiss are standard in rape cases.

Nice thread by the way. Way to lower the public's opinion of lawyers even lower than they are now. :thumb:

No, they are not standard. They are not even common. They certainly aren't filed immediately after charges are filed.

 

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

No way this gets dismissed next week unless the psychos on this board actually find out who the victim is and intimidate her into refusing to testify. Even then, the DA can continue to prosecute.

Already working on it.............................

 

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

Way to lower the public's opinion of lawyers even lower than they are now. :thumb:

Is this even possible?

 

[argh!]

The desperation for acquittal by posters is sad and comical. Let the trial run it's course, the jury will make the correct decision. Some will like it, some won't, Geeeez [/quote

I wonder if the case will even go to trial. I wonder if the prosecutor or accuser will give up, assuming the judge doesn't toss it out. This is a loser case for the prosecution, based on what is now publicly known, in my view.

the point gets proven again. and again. and again.

 

[go96griz]

After reading the motion to dismiss, several things just don't add up for me assuming the information is true. Why would the accuser take the time to have a snack after the alleged incident and before getting rid of JJ? Also, if she was afraid of being hit by JJ and just let him finish, then why would she give him a ride home? Why wouldn't she ask her male roommate to come with her. These actions aren't consistent with the story. I would think you would get rid of your attacker asap without taking the time to prepare and eat a snack in front of them. Further, if you were afraid would you really drive your attacker home alone? It definitely smells fishy.

Am I the only one who believes these actions don't add up?

 

[Skookum-Jim]

I wouldn't want to sit in front of a jury with the evidence I have read in that affidavit against JJ. I personally think it's probably a bit of a gray area. He obviously thinks she invited him over to have sex, it sounds like he already has a girlfriend and just went over there to bite a chunk off. She invited him over to dangle a little tail in his face to keep him chasing but didn't want to give it up right away. He didn't want to invest to much time and just took it because he could. It pissed her off, hurt her feelings and here we are.

 

[tnt]

After reading the motion to dismiss, several things just don't add up for me assuming the information is true. Why would the accuser take the time to have a snack after the alleged incident and before getting rid of JJ? Also, if she was afraid of being hit by JJ and just let him finish, then why would she give him a ride home? Why wouldn't she ask her male roommate to come with her. These actions aren't consistent with the story. I would think you would get rid of your attacker asap without taking the time to prepare and eat a snack in front of them. Further, if you were afraid would you really drive your attacker home alone? It definitely smells fishy.

Am I the only one who believes these actions don't add up?

Guys you can second guess this all you want too......... Maybe the "playful" talk included I.ll make you, maybe this "experienced" girl found his quick performance so lacking, she figured he wasn't goig to be up for anything very soon, maybe the whole thing was so nauseating she felt the need to get some food in her stomach before
throwing up...... Thats what trial is for, not a writing contest for lawyers. Its becoming increasingly harder for defense attorneys to attack plaintiffs. Prosecuters are prepared for it.

 

[granitegriz]

Seriously, NW and Argh!! are just dense and are :hater: NW is not an attorney but he did stay in a holiday inn express last night. No grand jury process in Montana...what gives you this idea, NWunfresh?