AJ Johnson Update [verdict: NOT guilty]

#427
#427
There were a several things in her testimony that made me question. Not going into all of them here, but I wonder if the defense knows the concept of back lighting. Of course, that is supposing the KNS is accurately reporting (I was reading the KNS (free😀) at a restaurant). Quick read, you want to shoot the guys, second thought you sort of go hmmmmm.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#434
#434
Kristy* said:
Delayed 4 years for this defense. Seems like a lot of wasted time.
Click to expand...

The defense established a few issues for appeal during the States's case. So a guilty verdict wouldn't be the end of the road. But there are several other issues I figured they'd want to get out there. Very surprised.
 
#435
#435
Maybe there is a plea going on behind closed doors? I thought the trauma nurses would be crucial for the defense since the State didn't call them.
 
#437
#437
BlueHalo said:
Smart as long as the jury is competent. We shall see, maybe today.
Click to expand...

I don't know, from the article that I read and linked above from a day or so ago, it didn't sound good for AJ and Mike. I don't feel good about their chances. And, if they had no defense, then so be it.
 
#438
#438
82_VOL_83 said:
I don't know, from the article that I read and linked above from a day or so ago, it didn't sound good for AJ and Mike. I don't feel good about their chances. And, if they had no defense, then so be it.
Click to expand...

Very good strategy for Defense IMO.

I tried a civil case in Anderson County a few years ago on the defense side and there were so many contradictions in the Plaintiff's proof that we decided to put no one on the stand and rested. We made a relatively short closing argument and we received a defense verdict.

Far different burden of proof (much lower burden of proof in civil case).

A number of contradictions/inconsistencies between accuser and Lawn. But they were consistent in wiping and getting rid of their cell phones within 48 hrs of each other (coincidence???).

Lots of doubts as to guilt in this mind (a legal mind at that).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#439
#439
patrick said:
But they were consistent in wiping and getting rid of their cell phones within 48 hrs of each other (coincidence???).
Click to expand...

Given that the jury has to draw some kind of inference from the destruction of the phones, do you think the defense established a solid enough case for a negative inference?
 
#440
#440
bamawriter said:
Given that the jury has to draw some kind of inference from the destruction of the phones, do you think the defense established a solid enough case for a negative inference?
Click to expand...

I'm interested in reading Patrick's response as well, but my thoughts on the question:

Seems to me the defense didn't have to establish anything. The girls sanitizing and disposing of their phones within a day of each other looks plenty suspicious all on its own.

"Beyond a reasonable doubt" is a pretty high bar to get over in a 'he said, she said' case. With baggage like that dragging them down, might be very tough for the prosecutors to get up that high, with our without an active defense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#441
#441
patrick said:
Very good strategy for Defense IMO.

I tried a civil case in Anderson County a few years ago on the defense side and there were so many contradictions in the Plaintiff's proof that we decided to put no one on the stand and rested. We made a relatively short closing argument and we received a defense verdict.

Far different burden of proof (much lower burden of proof in civil case).

A number of contradictions/inconsistencies between accuser and Lawn. But they were consistent in wiping and getting rid of their cell phones within 48 hrs of each other (coincidence???).

Lots of doubts as to guilt in this mind (a legal mind at that).
Click to expand...

They also don’t put the defendants on the stand...but don’t appear to be ducking that move. Any benefits?
 
#442
#442
VFL-82-JP said:
I'm interested in reading Patrick's response as well, but my thoughts on the question:

Seems to me the defense didn't have to establish anything. The girls sanitizing and disposing of their phones within a day of each other looks plenty suspicious all on its own.

"Beyond a reasonable doubt" is a pretty high bar to get over in a 'he said, she said' case. With baggage like that dragging them down, might be very tough for the prosecutors to get up that high, with our without an active defense.
Click to expand...

As stated herein previously - the Defense doesn't have to prove anything.

Literally the Burden rest squarely on the Prosecution to prove its case against each defendant beyond a reasonable doubt.

I have doubts as to the state's case and in my opinion the state did not carry the burden. However I did not actually hear the testimony or see the expressions on the faces of the witnesses.

The jurors must make up their minds individually not collectively.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#444
#444
bamawriter said:
The majority of rape cases are he said/she said. And the majority of rape trials, like the majority of all trials, end in convictions.
Click to expand...

True. But that's only because prosecutors will usually not take weak cases to trial, but will plea the case out or simply drop charges altogether. The win rate is going to be very high if you (generally) only take sure winners into the court room.

One set of exceptions to that rule are the high-profile cases (like this case, which is pretty high-profile for Knoxville and within Tennessee). Prosecutors feel pressure to see those through even if they don't like their odds. They can (and do) try to get the defendants to accept a plea bargain, but if that doesn't work, they are forced into trying a weak case.

That may be what's happened here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#445
#445
I thought they had reasonable doubt before the state rested. But it's an emotional case and jury composition could be a factor. No physical evidence, inconsistencies, conflicting testimony-- I don't see how the state met the standard of proof. But juries are unpredictable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#449
#449
So does our current TBI director have some dirt on him now? Was hearing some talk about he did some shady stuff with the investigation of this case when he was a cop
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top