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!
It's very confusing. And I think the jury is confused, and I think that's Cohen's strategy. He just keeps circling around all these different supposed LAPD officers and reports over and over. JD1 not recalling them all makes it appear that she's not credible.
It makes it appear to me as though he’s trying to make her appear not credible by nit picking and she’s holding her own, I hope the jury thinks that too.
Totally, and I understand the strategy, but it just comes off so lame to me. It seems like there were many conversations that took place, in part because the police were so ineffectual at responding to this crime, and I can’t imagine recalling all the specifics of what was said to who even if it was a month after the interviews! To me that’s an example of how a normal person’s memory would function (trying their best, but imperfect in recalling each detail of what was said to who when).
I was just going to comment the same thing.about the efficacy of his questions. Jury not looking at Cohen. I hope his consultant takes the hint and tells him to back off.
Me too. I just don’t get why Cohen thinks this is helping. The jurors may get confused, but in the end they have to determine if there was any forcible rape.
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!
It's very confusing. And I think the jury is confused, and I think that's Cohen's strategy. He just keeps circling around all these different supposed LAPD officers and reports over and over. JD1 not recalling them all makes it appear that she's not credible.
It makes it appear to me as though he’s trying to make her appear not credible by nit picking and she’s holding her own, I hope the jury thinks that too.
Yes, nit picking is a great descriptor, and it doesnt compare very well in impact to her description of being violently raped.
Totally, and I understand the strategy, but it just comes off so lame to me. It seems like there were many conversations that took place, in part because the police were so ineffectual at responding to this crime, and I can’t imagine recalling all the specifics of what was said to who even if it was a month after the interviews! To me that’s an example of how a normal person’s memory would function (trying their best, but imperfect in recalling each detail of what was said to who when).
I actually disagree. To me, it makes it seem like to LAPD was writing things on its own without her input.
I totally agree, that is how it sounds to me too
I was just going to comment the same thing.about the efficacy of his questions. Jury not looking at Cohen. I hope his consultant takes the hint and tells him to back off.
Me too. I just don’t get why Cohen thinks this is helping. The jurors may get confused, but in the end they have to determine if there was any forcible rape.
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.
Does the Prosecutor have the KRs, etc? That seems very important.
Likely hers and other witnesses for the prosecution