[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.] After lunch session. The Masterson clan grows on. At the lunch break, we noticed that Ben Shulman has joined the group, the first time we have seen him at the trial. Also, we recognize Alanna Masterson's husband, restaurateur Paul Longo. This is a very big group now, perhaps more than 20, and takes up about half of the entire courtroom.
Nov 15, 2022·edited Nov 15, 2022Liked by Tony Ortega
And speaking of inconsistencies ... Let's see if the jury caught a big one from Cohen: In one sentence he states, "Look, a woman can report a rape at any time, whether it's two minutes, two years, or 23 years. I never questioned anybody about why they waited so long." And then a few sentences later, he states, "Then we have Tricia V. She was very interesting because even though her allegation isn't charged, she crystallized so much. She waited 23 years to tell anyone about what happened." Isn't that kinda "questioning" the time that passed? If THAT isn't an "evolution" of statements (to use Cohen's own phrasing), then I don't know what is!
Ok, let’s preface this fact with the fact that I wouldn’t be on the jury, I would have been excluded for half a dozen reasons before being seated. But, had I been seated, I would have stopped listening to Cohen about the same time I stopped processing anything I was reading in his closing argument. He said if the rapist believed he had consent and woke up smiling, it wasn’t rape.
“The defendant is not guilty if he reasonably believed he had consent, even if he's wrong. Even if he's wrong. Wakes up smiling (and thinks that he had consent.)”. WTAF
And speaking of inconsistencies ... Let's see if the jury caught a big one from Cohen: In one sentence he states, "Look, a woman can report a rape at any time, whether it's two minutes, two years, or 23 years. I never questioned anybody about why they waited so long." And then a few sentences later, he states, "Then we have Tricia V. She was very interesting because even though her allegation isn't charged, she crystallized so much. She waited 23 years to tell anyone about what happened." Isn't that kinda "questioning" the time that passed? If THAT isn't an "evolution" of statements (to use Cohen's own phrasing), then I don't know what is!
Ok, let’s preface this fact with the fact that I wouldn’t be on the jury, I would have been excluded for half a dozen reasons before being seated. But, had I been seated, I would have stopped listening to Cohen about the same time I stopped processing anything I was reading in his closing argument. He said if the rapist believed he had consent and woke up smiling, it wasn’t rape.
W T F
“The defendant is not guilty if he reasonably believed he had consent, even if he's wrong. Even if he's wrong. Wakes up smiling (and thinks that he had consent.)”. WTAF
Couldn't read all of it. If he was that sure of Danny's innocence - where were all of his character witnesses. Grrr. Disgusted.
That was hard to read. 🙄
I'm so curious about what the jury must be thinking.
Great job Tony.... Thanks
I feel so dicombobulated after reading Cohen's closing statements.
Good finish for Coen. Enough reasonable doubt planted. Takes 2 convictions or he walks.