Aside from presenting evidence of incidence 2 with JD4, the most surprising thing was how far Cohen went off the rails. Saying, “none of the JDs are credible” was an astonishing statement for an attorney. He well KNOWS that the trier of facts is the JURY, not the prosecution nor the defense. That’s the entire purpose of a trial!!! It seemed he was starting to realize he may not have this one in the bag, and panicked. Apparently his panicking looks like a two-year old’s tantrum. 🙄
Yeah I know. Just to think that in about a week's time, we might know the outcome of a case we've all been following for over 5 and a half years. When closing arguments are done and it's handed over to the jury, I have a feeling that's going to be a pretty tense period of waiting.
Great recap. When I listened to the notes, it sure seems l Ike JD4 did a very credible job. I’m still getting the impression that this is going the JDs way - I sure hope so. Thanks for all you do, Tony!
How dramatic! While it's a bummer that LMP does not get to go on the record accusing the criminal organisation known as the "church" of $cientology of trying to use her in an obstruction of justice campaign, I can see how that is not directly relevant as long as the defense does not use the delay in reporting. Maybe that's why the defense finally isn't going there?
Last I heard, Tony is waiting for Substack to get to the point where Android users can start a chat group. Not sure when that'll be though, but it seems that only Apple users can use it (at least in the smart-phone world).
The Android app leaves a lot to be desired, besides not having the chat feature. If I start watching Tony's videos on the app, the screen goes dark after a couple minutes (I can still hear the audio).
It does that on my iPhone as well. I have to use Safari to watch the video. The app takes a while for the videos to load. I do like getting a Push notification though when a new article/update/video is up though.
Does anyone know why the November incident is the charging incident for JD3 instead of the December one? Why is it that only one incident was charged and not both?
Yes. There is a statute of limitations on rape, but not for multiple forcible rapes. "Forcible" rape has to include some element of physical intimidation or violence beyond just the nonconsensual sex, and there has to be more than one incident of this before the special statute kicks in. So, the prosecution has to win two out of three, with the jury agreeing not only that rape was committed, but also that there was "force" in the sense of the statute (as the judge will instruct).
I assume you were the individual mentioned in the end of day report where they asked to look at your notes. If so, can you elaborate any more on that? Do you know what they might have been suspecting you of doing, if anything?
I assume that one of the attorneys must’ve approached Olmedo during a sidebar and raised a concern. Just curious about that, if you’re comfortable elaborating.
Oh, I’m not sure why this person’s comments were deleted. I assume the person who posted has decided that it would be best to delete them. Perhaps they didn’t want their name identified anymore or what they said to be public anymore. Not sure, but whatever the reason, I’ll respect that.
Aside from presenting evidence of incidence 2 with JD4, the most surprising thing was how far Cohen went off the rails. Saying, “none of the JDs are credible” was an astonishing statement for an attorney. He well KNOWS that the trier of facts is the JURY, not the prosecution nor the defense. That’s the entire purpose of a trial!!! It seemed he was starting to realize he may not have this one in the bag, and panicked. Apparently his panicking looks like a two-year old’s tantrum. 🙄
My head is spinning at the fact tomorrow is the final day for the prosecution! All these years and we're already approaching the finishing line.
Yeah I know. Just to think that in about a week's time, we might know the outcome of a case we've all been following for over 5 and a half years. When closing arguments are done and it's handed over to the jury, I have a feeling that's going to be a pretty tense period of waiting.
Agreed....the speed is stunning, but the Judge set that early on. Tony...you are truly doing an amazing job! 🌹
Great recap. When I listened to the notes, it sure seems l Ike JD4 did a very credible job. I’m still getting the impression that this is going the JDs way - I sure hope so. Thanks for all you do, Tony!
I love the fact you are impartial and diligent
for the official Tony Ortega record: Scott Caan and Erewhon (Market) 😁
Late night poster: Man...I cannot believe the speed of this trial. The Judge set it early on, but boy has she moved things along. Respect!
Tony...you have been outstanding keeping us informed. Thank you 100 x's! 🌹👍💙
I've come to enjoy your typos!!😂😂
How dramatic! While it's a bummer that LMP does not get to go on the record accusing the criminal organisation known as the "church" of $cientology of trying to use her in an obstruction of justice campaign, I can see how that is not directly relevant as long as the defense does not use the delay in reporting. Maybe that's why the defense finally isn't going there?
And Brava! to Tricia Vessey.
Could they have traded JD4 incident 2 instead of LMP testimony?
Save LMP full testimony for the civil suit?
Is anyone using the chat feature?
Last I heard, Tony is waiting for Substack to get to the point where Android users can start a chat group. Not sure when that'll be though, but it seems that only Apple users can use it (at least in the smart-phone world).
The Android app leaves a lot to be desired, besides not having the chat feature. If I start watching Tony's videos on the app, the screen goes dark after a couple minutes (I can still hear the audio).
It does that on my iPhone as well. I have to use Safari to watch the video. The app takes a while for the videos to load. I do like getting a Push notification though when a new article/update/video is up though.
Does anyone know why the November incident is the charging incident for JD3 instead of the December one? Why is it that only one incident was charged and not both?
I would say it really doesn’t matter. The jury heard about both of them. If I speculate, I believe because there was hitting involved.
Yes. There is a statute of limitations on rape, but not for multiple forcible rapes. "Forcible" rape has to include some element of physical intimidation or violence beyond just the nonconsensual sex, and there has to be more than one incident of this before the special statute kicks in. So, the prosecution has to win two out of three, with the jury agreeing not only that rape was committed, but also that there was "force" in the sense of the statute (as the judge will instruct).
Yes! 👍💙
Ah that makes sense
Thank you
I assume you were the individual mentioned in the end of day report where they asked to look at your notes. If so, can you elaborate any more on that? Do you know what they might have been suspecting you of doing, if anything?
I assume that one of the attorneys must’ve approached Olmedo during a sidebar and raised a concern. Just curious about that, if you’re comfortable elaborating.
I missed the response (since deleted) 🤔
Oh, I’m not sure why this person’s comments were deleted. I assume the person who posted has decided that it would be best to delete them. Perhaps they didn’t want their name identified anymore or what they said to be public anymore. Not sure, but whatever the reason, I’ll respect that.
Understood. Thank you for your insights.
Super observations, thank you!
Wow - thanks for that insight. I envy you the chance to be in the courtroom, and to meet “our proprietor “😊
This is the part of my evening where I'm supposed to exercise some self control and not interrogate those who read the deleted posts.