Good news for AJ Johnson

[butchna]

Depends on who you worked for butch.....a private company that kept records for corporate security or a telecommunications company like Verizon or AT&T. The two have entirely different data retention requirements one would thank.

I didn't have any of the giants, so that's true.

 

[ru4real-really?]

speedy trial goes away when you have to file an appeal that takes years to determine because you are the one who is causing the delay

if we only had time machines

 

[WilliamDuVOL]

I love people like you. People were adding to the conversation then you add the arbitrary speedy trial myth. Please, get over the speedy trial thing people.

Why shouldn't it be a right? I understand collecting evidence takes time, and in this instance the trial taking months even, I can understand, but YEARS of your life put on hold that you will never get back, and probably no way to get ANY compensation for not just money, but time sacrificed? I don't see why it's okay for a potentially innocent party to put their life, their dreams on hold for YEARS then be told "screw you" it's the justice system. I also don't see why if the accused is guilty, the victim should have to wait years to see justice.

It's a valid complaint. Justice, regardless of which way it goes, should not take 3, 4 , 5, or however many years to be delivered.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

It is terrible that we live in a society with these problems. Either a young lady was raped or a young star has had his future taken from him. Neither outcome is acceptable.

Women are always given the benefit of doubt, however. A man's life and freedom don't matter.

Disgusting turn of events for Mr. Johnson.

 

[greenbacknative]

As long as morning after regret translates to a rape accusation, going to college and having fun is over for athletes, especially star athletes.

1) ONE girlfriend in college - choose wisely
2) Condom everytime
3) Text with her often = good as saying yes for the most part
4) Print all FB conversations both her site and yours
5) Keep your phone for at least 10 years
6) Don't invite your posse in the bedroom to create issues.
7) And if she says no, IT MEANS NO.

I don't know, add to the list. I don't believe there is anyway to prevent this from happening occasionally with today's litigious society.

All excellent choices.. especially #7.. boys really need to pay attention when those words come out.. There's no way on knowing how often this type of thing happens..:thumbsup:

 

[VolsnRavens]

I keep seeing Social Media as "Facebook, Twitter, etc", however, even your private texts on your phone fall under the category of "Social Media", and I'm betting that it was phone texts between the women that the defense is wanting to see. And the phone companies, in criminal cases, do turn over that evidence with a court order as it is kept by law for a certain number of years, usually 10, of course, at the speed of this trial, maybe that's what the prosecution is trying to do, wait it out. Sad.

 

[VolNExile]

6) Don't invite your posse in the bedroom to create issues.
7) And if she says no, IT MEANS NO.

These. Especially #6. Eeeww. What good could possibly result from that. Geeze, people. :yuck:

 

[WilliamDuVOL]

These. Especially #6. Eeeww. What good could possibly result from that. Geeze, people. :yuck:

I think he meant possum.

They're very calming creatures. I definitely recommend attempting to pet them in the wild.

 

[1974Vol]

I keep seeing Social Media as "Facebook, Twitter, etc", however, even your private texts on your phone fall under the category of "Social Media", and I'm betting that it was phone texts between the women that the defense is wanting to see. And the phone companies, in criminal cases, do turn over that evidence with a court order as it is kept by law for a certain number of years, usually 10, of course, at the speed of this trial, maybe that's what the prosecution is trying to do, wait it out. Sad.

If I understood the law as explained in the article, prior to the judge’s ruling that the defense could subpoena for the “texts” directly themselves, the only way the defense could acquire subpoenaed evidence was through the prosecution. By law the prosecution must turn over any exculpatory evidence they may acquire to the defense. However, if the prosecution doesn’t subpoena and acquire the “texts” then even if the “texts” are exculpatory then the defense would have no way to access to them; at least prior to the judge’s ruling.

 

[1982Alum]

Who says the speedy trial is being held up by the prosecutor? Probably more likely the defensive team of AJ anyhow.

 

[pimo1]

I appreciate your opinion, but I do this professionally. My opinions are based on real world practical experience that involves investigating criminal behavior. What do you base your opinion on?

I'll base my opinion on being a server admin for a webhosting company that hosts over 200 websites and 500 servers (seems like a lot but a fairly small company). If you were talking about rinkydink billybobs' startup website you might have a point or even the local phone company. When you start talking about google and facebook you get in a whole different ballgame. Information is their business and they keep everything for years.

The question is the effort it takes to find that specific information once its been archived. Much like Msoft they grab lots of data and keep all kinds of messages and such but it is mostly used strictly for analytics after a certain period of time. Mining such data for specific information on a specific person is a lot more involved than you might think when you aggregate data on that scale. It is one reason the hilarity of people worrying about windows "gathering" your personal data makes me chuckle inside.

If this was done via facebook/twitter the chances the data is still out there and accessible is very high. If its texts that might be a totally different ballgame depending on who their provider is. Verizon/sprint probably still has the texts... random pay as you go crapfire less likely.

It really depends on who you get on the line and how you ask for it. The case has been in the news quite a while so you had best believe the providers involved know of it and probably flagged those files long ago just in case they have to produce them. Their initial response is almost always going to be no because that's how it goes they hope no makes you go away.. its how you react to that no that determines if and when you actually get them.

If you work in the field of law this should be familiar to you as its basically the core business model how all law firms and insurance companies and rebates are set up to work. Always deny first request and 50% of people are gonna give up right there and you just saved a ton of time and money.

 

[Headed For Home]

If I understood the law as explained in the article, prior to the judge’s ruling that the defense could subpoena for the “texts” directly themselves, the only way the defense could acquire subpoenaed evidence was through the prosecution. By law the prosecution must turn over any exculpatory evidence they may acquire to the defense. However, if the prosecution doesn’t subpoena and acquire the “texts” then even if the “texts” are exculpatory then the defense would have no way to access to them; at least prior to the judge’s ruling.

This is one of the big issues I have had with the prosecution on this case. It would seem to me that the text messages would prove one party or the other to be lying. It makes no sense that the prosecution would not want that info, unless they are intentionally steering the case despite the evidence.

 

[EZE]

Seems like the DA is hanging the case on the co-defendant. Anybody know EXACTLY what he did or was he was accused of? Was it a DP move and after she reflected back on it, it made her feel less worthy?

That's the only thing I can think of.

I don't know, but I will propose a scenario. Say a Girl willingly had sex with one guy. Who then brought in his uninvited buddy to participate. One might be charged with rape and the other an accessory. Possible?

 

[1974Vol]

This is one of the big issues I have had with the prosecution on this case. It would seem to me that the text messages would prove one party or the other to be lying. It makes no sense that the prosecution would not want that info, unless they are intentionally steering the case despite the evidence.

My guess would be the prosecution didn't want to have to produce that evidence because they either knew or feared it was exculpatory and you are not required to turn over something not in your possession.

 

[tim]

So you have "experience" dealing with telecommunications companies instantly deleting texts and social media? Hence the "notorious"? Internet security was my field and my clients kept EVERYTHING dating back 10 years. The information is there...a court order may not be enough to tap it tho.

There is only 1 carrier that holds text messaging for a week. Investigators must send a letter of preservation to this carrier to hold it longer. Dont ask me which carrier it is, I wont tell. 👹👹

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

My guess would be the prosecution didn't want to have to produce that evidence because they either knew or feared it was exculpatory and you are not required to turn over something not in your possession.

Is the prosecution in the truth and justice business or in the business of just getting a conviction? If it were about truth and justice, then why be concerned about exculpatory evidence?

 

[Remy]

Who says the speedy trial is being held up by the prosecutor? Probably more likely the defensive team of AJ anyhow.

This makes more sense IF the defense of team of AJ is stretching it out. He and everybody in the USA has a 6th amendment RIGHT to a speedy trial, it's not a %$#king myth, far from it. However the right to keep and bear arms does not mean everyone must exercise it and own a firearm, therefore it makes sense if AJ is drawing this thing out rather than the prosecution.

 

[Roustabout]

Is the prosecution in the truth and justice business or in the business of just getting a conviction? If it were about truth and justice, then why be concerned about exculpatory evidence?

Huh? They might be concerned with Victim's rights and an attempt to smear the victim's name or poison potential jurors.

 

[smokey0625]

Why shouldn't it be a right? I understand collecting evidence takes time, and in this instance the trial taking months even, I can understand, but YEARS of your life put on hold that you will never get back, and probably no way to get ANY compensation for not just money, but time sacrificed? I don't see why it's okay for a potentially innocent party to put their life, their dreams on hold for YEARS then be told "screw you" it's the justice system. I also don't see why if the accused is guilty, the victim should have to wait years to see justice.

It's a valid complaint. Justice, regardless of which way it goes, should not take 3, 4 , 5, or however many years to be delivered.

I just don't care about crap that won't ever change.

 

[gunner]

There is only 1 carrier that holds text messaging for a week. Investigators must send a letter of preservation to this carrier to hold it longer. Dont ask me which carrier it is, I wont tell. 👹👹

You obviously are in law enforcement or have experience conducting these types of investigations as based on my training and experience you are correct unlike many in this thread who are completely clueless in regards to their knowledge of this topic.

 

[1974Vol]

Is the prosecution in the truth and justice business or in the business of just getting a conviction? If it were about truth and justice, then why be concerned about exculpatory evidence?

From my limited experience with the criminal justice system no one is in the "truth and justice business". The prosecution wants convictions and the defense wants acquittals. The beauty of the system is that the result of these adversarial positions is more often than not justice.

 

[walkenvol]

There is only 1 carrier that holds text messaging for a week. Investigators must send a letter of preservation to this carrier to hold it longer. Dont ask me which carrier it is, I wont tell. ����

You obviously don't watch Homeland or 24!

 

[LA Vol]

The law and justice are not the same thing. An unjust law can be enforced. Immoral acts aren't always punishable by law. Innocent parties can be wronged within the confines of the law. And guilty parties can escape prosecution through legal loopholes or the unethical acts of others. The outcome of a case doesn't mean justice was served-- it just means one set of lawyers played a better game of chess.

 

[wildorange]

This is a textbook case a bad justice, this should have been dropped a long time ago. I was chewed out and mocked at the mere thought that most of this crap was made up and it is now pretty much fact it was. AJ is guilty of messing around with a jealous woman, he should have used better judgment but shame on the women that lied and twist the truth. They should go to jail, in fact anyone that makes up a crime and accuses someone of it should go to jail for the offense they made up on that person. The law justice wheels turned way to slow and common sense to way to long in the name of political correctness. GBO!!!!

 

[VolsnRavens]

If I understood the law as explained in the article, prior to the judge’s ruling that the defense could subpoena for the “texts” directly themselves, the only way the defense could acquire subpoenaed evidence was through the prosecution. By law the prosecution must turn over any exculpatory evidence they may acquire to the defense. However, if the prosecution doesn’t subpoena and acquire the “texts” then even if the “texts” are exculpatory then the defense would have no way to access to them; at least prior to the judge’s ruling.

You are correct on that the prosecution has all the power there. I think my statement didn't relay that part. Which is why I was saying that they were trying to "wait it out". If the defense could have just gotten a court order, I believe this case would have already been resolved.