Sol, Torbin, I'm going to need you both to re-read The Prime Directive before you go on your next away mission. It's a good guideline on how to interact with new unknown cultures. That said, the Coven is not innocent in this. Mother Aniseya was willing to let her girls choose their destiny while Mother Koril and the rest were going to choose for them. Worse the Coven let fear guide their actions and make them aggressive which put the Jedi on Edge. What needed to happen for a peaceful resolution to all this was for Master Indara and Mother Aniseya to sit down, have some tea and a chat about this since they were clearly the only adults on that planet.
Jonathan Majors was supposed to learn his fate today -- but the matter got kicked down the road ... because his team is asking a judge to va
"The motion in question … we're told his team is asking to set aside the verdict that came down in December, when a jury found him guilty of two counts, but not the other 2 -- which were far more serious. Remember, he was convicted of reckless assault in the 3rd degree and harassment.
Sources with direct knowledge tell TMZ … Jonathan's lawyers feel like they have several grounds for their motion to be granted -- including insufficient evidence presented at trial, inconsistent charges, and the idea that prosecutors pursuing a "reckless" theory was BS.
Long story short … we're told JM's team believes prosecutors argued that the assault was intentional throughout the trial … but then they ended up giving the jury instructions about convicting him for a "reckless" assault -- offering up a separate option for a potential conviction on something they weren't really arguing throughout the course of the trial.
That's why his lawyers believe presenting the "reckless" assault to the jury wasn't justified, and should've never been on the table at all. Bottom line … Jon's team doesn't feel like he got a fair shake, and because of that -- they're asking the judge here to throw out the verdict."
Interesting. If memory serves Jabari's own testimony states Majors never struck her before the incident, the driver of the vehicle said Major's never struck her during the incident and none of the three people Jabari talked with on the street and partied with could confirm she had a gash on her ear or marks on her neck. One of them DID mention that Jabari needed ice for her finger which was found to be fractured at a later medical exam. So the only injury that seems to come from the initial incident is that injured finger which could be enough to claim 'reckless' assault. That said I don't know if a Judge would go for the argument that the Prosecution never made a case for Reckless assault and just added it on as a way to 'get' the defendant on at least a lesser charge.
The woman who accused actor Jonathan Majors of assaulting her during a dispute in March was arrested Wednesday night on suspicion of assault
"The woman who accused actor Jonathan Majors of assaulting her during a dispute in March was arrested Wednesday night on suspicion of assault and criminal mischief related to the same incident, according to a source with knowledge of the matter."
Interesting, whelp we shall learn more in Late November.
Jonathan Majors' domestic violence case now includes police in London, according to court documents obtained Tuesday by The Messenger.
"The filing obtained Tuesday also makes mention to Jabbari, who is expected to be charged with assault, the New York Police Department confirmed to The Messenger on Monday. The papers note that prosecutors were granted a protective order so a "wanted" flyer — including Jabbari's name, photo and that there was "probable cause" against her — would not be issued."
I take it this is the "Wanted Poster" Variety was talking about.
As to the Written Statements previously mentioned by Rolling Stone
"Rolling Stone also misrepresented the circumstances under which it was provided written statements from individuals who know Jonathan Majors," Pusch told The Messenger. "The statements were provided to Rolling Stone off the record and not for publication expressly to protect the privacy of the individuals and to make sure they could decide for themselves whether and how to comment, and Rolling Stone was encouraged to reach out to the individuals directly for that purpose. The statements were not manufactured, and there was plainly no intention to misrepresent the opinions of these individuals, each of whom Mr. Majors deeply respects."
I'll admit this always struck me as weird, as any lawyer worth their degree wouldn't try to falsify a witness statement, especially when a call to witness will expose the truth. Perhaps Majors lawyers are that bad... or perhaps it's as Pusch says. It wouldn't be the first time a Journalist tried to twist a story.
The following is a guest post by Arlene Balkansky. Arlene recently retired from being a librarian in the Newspaper and Current Periodical Re
Sorry not sorry but that RollingStone article is extremely hard to believe. I could be wrong but I can’t see a lawyer putting their reputation and career on the line by fabricating witness statements especially knowing that the truth will come out. Fabricating statements by their witness thats gonna be questioned on the stand… yeah that doesn’t make any sense. Maybe y’all are blinded by your unsubstantiated disdain for Majors and will believe anything that’s against him. Or maybe I’m blinded by our right to presumption of innocence and won’t believe just anything negatively said by a hit piece article without proof. Everything I’ve seen points to him being innocent and her being emotionally unstable. After all, she attempted to manipulate him by staging an unalive attempt and once that didn’t work she decided to paint him as this abuser. Why didn’t we see bruises on her in that vivid security video? Why didn’t she seem to be in pain? Even hours after the incident? Why when she texted her friend did she only mentioned “being scrappy” with Majors and not remembering how she got her bruises? If Majors did in fact hurt her why didn’t she tell anyone? If she was so in fear of her life from Majors, why didn’t she want to leave his penthouse? She had to be forced out/convinced to leave. Why did she wait until Majors was on his way to attempt to “unalive” herself? Y’all see it as me supporting an abuser but I haven’t seen anything that suggests or proves him to be so. She was allegedly strangled… false. Every charge the police corroborated.. dropped. Majors allegedly put her arm behind her back.. how does that make him an abuser? Could it be he did that to prevent her from continuously attacking him? She already admitted to witnesses and on camera that he jumped from the car and ran away. She was too focused on him that she hopped out leaving her purse/bag inside of car. Shouldn’t she be trying to get away from her abuser and not chasing him? After all the driver would’ve been her witness, right? He allegedly hurt her finger from grabbing his phone from her hands… how does that make him an abuser? Now you got me at him allegedly slapping her but where is the proof? And if the slap caused her ear to bleed, why wasn’t that seen in the vivid video? If her finger was sprained or broken, why wasn’t that seen in that video? We had a clear view of her right ear thanks to her putting her hair in a ponytail and it looked perfectly fine. In fact, she used the same hand that her finger was allegedly sprained/broken. A witness even grabs that same hand and Jabbari snatches it away, not in pain, but so she could reach out to Majors but he pulls away almost likes he afraid of her.
Neither one of them are innocent in this entire situation but I don’t believe he’s an abuser. They’ve been in an alleged toxic relationship for a while and instead of both walking away they stayed for whatever reason and this was the result.
The truth will be revealed. And when it does, I hope I was right. But if I’m proven wrong then I’d truly be disappointed.
Jonathan Majors’ trial on domestic violence charges once again has been delayed and may not happen until late this year now. In a reschedule
So, if I understand the legal timeline, the DA's office should've responded to the motion to dismiss on October 6th, the Defense will have to respond to the DA's response by October 13th and the judge will make a ruling on that initial motion by October 25 at a pre-trial hearing. So at this point we won't even know if there will BE a full on Court Trial until we are half way through season 2 of Loki, since the Judge could dismiss the case on October 25. Any legal experts please correct me if I am wrong.
So, if the Trial does move forward after October 25th, it might not even begin until after Season 2 of Loki is over.
I am curious to see the evidence of both sides in this one.
I will admit, after the strangulation charge was dropped I began to consider that the Ex-Girlfriend was coerced by the arresting Officers to make the accusation due to the Officers jumping to a conclusion. Initially the Officer said he saw strangulation marks on her neck, but if that's not backed up by a subsequent medical exam I can see why the accusation would be dropped by the DA. As for why the Ex didn't drop the charges, New York state does not allow individuals to drop domestic violence charges, and even if they are false, the state will attempt to assemble evidence against the alleged offender. I understand the logic of this, as it's in the interest of the state to remove those willing to commit DV from the streets. Here's how that could go wrong. Cops have worn innocent people down until they make false statements before (See the case of the Central Park 5). So the Ex is coerced into making an Accusation by the arresting officers, and later on realizes this is bad and tries to drop the charges. She can't due to New York law works. Now she's dragged along in this case because of the DA/Cops and is essentially stuck in a no-win scenario since her career depends on Movie Studios trusting her and if it's discovered she deliberately or was coerced into lying.... that's probably the end of her livelihood.
As for the report of multiple victims cooperating with the DA, that was from a Variety article and neither NBC or ABC were able to corroborate that at the time, so it might just be bad journalism.
Again, I am interested to see the actual evidence both sides have in this. One of the best pieces of advice a Judge gave me was that you have to assume someone is innocent at the start, listen to all the evidence provided then come to your conclusion. To do otherwise risks putting innocent people in jail or worse, letting the real perpetrators of a crime escape Justice.
Jonathan Majors wants his assault case dropped. He claims the DA hid video of accuser Grace Jabbari seeming unharmed minutes after the alleg
An attorney for actor Jonathan Majors on Wednesday denied a new report of allegations of abuse by the Marvel star.
The part that interest me:
"When reached by CNN Wednesday night, a spokesperson for theManhattan district attorney declined to comment. CNN has not been able to independently confirm additional alleged victims have come forward."
If some idiot at Variety posted BS information I am going to be highly annoyed. This is why I tend to ignore the media until we have actual facts, not enough journalist have the integrity to actual verify information before rushing to publish it. Don henley wrote a song called 'Dirty Laundry' back in 1982 and it's just as true today as it was then.
