[This report was produced live during a court hearing with a lot going on. There will be typos. Please don't email us about typos that you find. We are reporting live from an ongoing trial and we do not have time to make such corrections.] Late morning session
I’m still just so confused how any of Cohen’s questioning is very effective for the defense so far in terms of proving whether or not forcible rape actually occurred. Considering the testimony of JD1 involved all the symptoms of being roofied, although of course there is no direct evidence (big eye roll), it doesn’t seem very impactful to argue over when Masterson apologized after unwanted anal penetration or in what order her horrific memories of crawling to escape from him took place. She seems to be doing an excellent job maintaining her composure and clarity on the stand. No idea how Tony takes notes this fast!
To the people who are commenting that Cohen's line of questioning is making JD1 seem less credible:
That JD1 doesn't recall specific conversations and questions is reasonable given the 18 years since this occurred. If this were any other rape trial, the state would have never brought charges because of this very issue. What makes this case different isn't because of Scientology's poor public image or because Danny is a celebrity. There is clear evidence that something happened. We know this because Scientology requires everything to be reported. Even though the prosecution does not have all documentation related to these incidents, JD1 has copies of her own. She now has the NDA. Etc
Hubbard's rules and dictates may be designed to limit/prevent law enforcement from being involved in any civil or criminal incident involving Scientology but those rules are a major factor in why this case has legs.
I’m still just so confused how any of Cohen’s questioning is very effective for the defense so far in terms of proving whether or not forcible rape actually occurred. Considering the testimony of JD1 involved all the symptoms of being roofied, although of course there is no direct evidence (big eye roll), it doesn’t seem very impactful to argue over when Masterson apologized after unwanted anal penetration or in what order her horrific memories of crawling to escape from him took place. She seems to be doing an excellent job maintaining her composure and clarity on the stand. No idea how Tony takes notes this fast!
Again, Cohen’s performance seems antagonizing. It also seems ineffective. The way it reads to me, he is still badgering the witness.
To the people who are commenting that Cohen's line of questioning is making JD1 seem less credible:
That JD1 doesn't recall specific conversations and questions is reasonable given the 18 years since this occurred. If this were any other rape trial, the state would have never brought charges because of this very issue. What makes this case different isn't because of Scientology's poor public image or because Danny is a celebrity. There is clear evidence that something happened. We know this because Scientology requires everything to be reported. Even though the prosecution does not have all documentation related to these incidents, JD1 has copies of her own. She now has the NDA. Etc
Hubbard's rules and dictates may be designed to limit/prevent law enforcement from being involved in any civil or criminal incident involving Scientology but those rules are a major factor in why this case has legs.