TSJ Thread

[rtbritt]

17 years ago, before I married into my husband's family and started to spend more time with black folks, I might have agreed with you. Me now simply can't. I'm not playing when I say that those men look nothing alike to me. From what I see, TSJ has much closer set eyes, thinner eyebrows, and locs aren't similar to twists at all. The facial hair and complexion is the only similarity. In addition, Morris has a wider/fuller mouth. If they're close enough to touch you, you'd be able to tell them apart, even if you saw them in a dark bar.

That's why the only thing that makes sense to me is what was suggested earlier in this thread: she wasn't looking at them and just picked a dude at random which means there's still a miscarriage of justice going on.

While I would never argue that what you are saying is absolutely true for you, if she is white and from a white culture, I could absolutely see how she (or anyone) could confuse them. I am white, my son is Chinese, and we live in a tiny town of predominantly white people, and he thinks a lot of people look alike! And if another Chinese kid was visiting a random family in town that I don't know, and people saw them maybe on a walk or up at the park, it is highly likely people would think my kid was the one they saw.

I think you are basically admitting that you wouldn't say they look alike, because you are in a culture that their differences are noticeable to you, but maybe they weren't to her....or maybe they would be..who knows.

 

[ever]

That is different than what Det. Josh Leitner wrote in the PCA. There, he wrote, "The video also showed a person identical to Shannon off camera in the same area where <redacted> was off camera." Here, the redacted name seems to be M.N.'s, and Leiter seems to be saying this based on having watched who previously entered that area and/or who later left that area. If the video itself is used as evidence, then the jury can make their own judgements whether Shannon and M.N. were in the same area of the Martini Room at the time of the alleged incident. It also seems that Leitner will testify and give his interpretation of this video to the jury again.

Depending on the size of the "area", there's possibly a difference between "in the same room" and "within touching distance". The video seems to be evidence of the former, but not the latter.

 

[aaeismacgychel]

That is different than what Det. Josh Leitner wrote in the PCA. There, he wrote, "The video also showed a person identical to Shannon off camera in the same area where <redacted> was off camera." Here, the redacted name seems to be M.N.'s, and Leiter seems to be saying this based on having watched who previously entered that area and/or who later left that area. If the video itself is used as evidence, then the jury can make their own judgements whether Shannon and M.N. were in the same area of the Martini Room at the time of the alleged incident. It also seems that Leitner will testify and give his interpretation of this video to the jury again.

The OP stating that at this time there is no known video of the alleged victim and TSJ being within close enough distance to have physical contact is not contrary to what the detective wrote even if that detective were to try testifying as such. As you stated, there is video evidence that the two were in the same area (off-screen of camera) at the time the victim claimed she was assaulted. But that is not the same as there being video evidence that the two actually had physical contact or that they were close enough to have physical contact. Pretty much any lawyer can and will make that case. And if the detective were to testify that it means a likelihood of physical contact, he'd be shredded on the stand. You cannot make a case that a person definitively had physical contact with someone just because they are in the same room.

And just for the sake of logic in this, recall any time you were in a classroom. Your desk at any given point was within 5-10ft of probably over 10 other students. While yes, close proximity, that still isn't proof you had physical contact with all of them on any given day. And if nobody, including the alleged victim saw TSJ make physical contact with her and there is no video evidence, or DNA evidence implicating TSJ (as it stands now barring any unreleased State's evidence), the detective can make whatever claims he wants, but any good lawyer will absolutely skewer him for making conclusions that are absolutely not based on the evidence or facts of the case.

 

[IlliniFan42]

They were previously subpoenaed to testify for Shannon. Are they being called for the prosecution now?

Yes, not sure if it matters or not. As long as they're told to show up to court by one side, the other side will have a chance to question them. Interestingly I have not seen anything for DyShawn Hobson. I understand his testimony would overlap with the players in terms of what he could provide, but he claims to have been sober and is the closest thing to an authority figure in the situation.

 

[cjw1901]

The OP stating that at this time there is no known video of the alleged victim and TSJ being within close enough distance to have physical contact is not contrary to what the detective wrote even if that detective were to try testifying as such. As you stated, there is video evidence that the two were in the same area (off-screen of camera) at the time the victim claimed she was assaulted. But that is not the same as there being video evidence that the two actually had physical contact or that they were close enough to have physical contact. Pretty much any lawyer can and will make that case. And if the detective were to testify that it means a likelihood of physical contact, he'd be shredded on the stand. You cannot make a case that a person definitively had physical contact with someone just because they are in the same room.

And just for the sake of logic in this, recall any time you were in a classroom. Your desk at any given point was within 5-10ft of probably over 10 other students. While yes, close proximity, that still isn't proof you had physical contact with all of them on any given day. And if nobody, including the alleged victim saw TSJ make physical contact with her and there is no video evidence, or DNA evidence implicating TSJ (as it stands now barring any unreleased State's evidence), the detective can make whatever claims he wants, but any good lawyer will absolutely skewer him for making conclusions that are absolutely not based on the evidence or facts of the case.

Well, if the prosecution submits it and the judge allows it, then there will be surveillance video evidence in this trial. How to interpret that video evidence will be up the jury (assuming it's a jury trial). As I said, the jury can either make their own judgements of the evidence or listen to the opinion of others, like the Det. Leitner or the lawyers on both sides.

BTW, I don't think Leitner's point in the PCA was that the video, by itself, proved a crime occurred. Instead, that fact that he mentioned the cell phone records and surveillance video near the end of the 4-page affidavit made it look like he felt they supported M.N.'s allegation, since they put Shannon in the same area of the same room of the bar at the time she alleges he touched her. I said it was different just because the police and prosecutors will be citing this stuff (and maybe the DNA too, if that is admitted) as things which they feel are roughly consistent with her allegation, although each one doesn't, individually, prove it.

 

[IlliniKat91]

While I would never argue that what you are saying is absolutely true for you, if she is white and from a white culture, I could absolutely see how she (or anyone) could confuse them. I am white, my son is Chinese, and we live in a tiny town of predominantly white people, and he thinks a lot of people look alike! And if another Chinese kid was visiting a random family in town that I don't know, and people saw them maybe on a walk or up at the park, it is highly likely people would think my kid was the one they saw.

I think you are basically admitting that you wouldn't say they look alike, because you are in a culture that their differences are noticeable to you, but maybe they weren't to her....or maybe they would be..who knows.

You're 100% right, and it's been shown that an eyewitness of a different race or ethnicity is more likely to misidentify someone of a different race or ethnicity.

The point of my post was to refute those saying they look the same. If you spend a lot of time with black folks (or are black yourself), it's more likely you'd say they don't look the same. After 17 years of being involved with a black family and working in schools where black and Hispanic kids are the majority populations, it's easier for me to tell those who don't look like me apart. The kid I was at 19 wouldn't have been able to do that.

The way it ties in to this case is that the accuser is black, meaning it's less likely she'd misidentify them if she'd seen them head on. But the accuser is black, meaning it's less likely she'd misidentify them if she'd seen them head on. According to her story, she had her back turned and didn't see who did it, which makes it more shady (in my opinion) that charges were even brought against TSJ.

 

[FAR Penthouse]

My concern is can the prosecutor argue that Morris shouldn't even be allowed to see the witness stand due to the charge being dismissed and knowing he will invoke the 5th? As in, legally speaking, does the dismissed charge protect Morris? In which case the jury would not see this other possible suspect.

I'm just trying to predict how it would go, where the defense can ask him if he was there and he has to answer that but bringing up a dismissed charge which the prosecutor is fighting to keep sealed would lead to a sustained objection. Maybe they could bring up his charge at his prior school that is on his record?

Although there are always exceptions, calling a witness you know wil invoke the 5th violates the ABA code of conduct. The prosecutor, as soon as Morris is called, will immediately request a sidebar and have the Judge advise him of his 5th Amendment right, determine he understands it and determine if he is waiving it. Then, and only then would he testify. Also, evidence of "prior bad acts," a form of character evidence, is extremely difficult to get admitted.

 

[Battle89]

According to her story, she had her back turned and didn't see who did it, which makes it more shady (in my opinion) that charges were even brought against TSJ.

If the above is true (not seeing him) then I 100% agree. No visual ID, no DNA, 100 people in close proximity in a bar. How is he charged?

And I still maintain the online research after the fact to identify a player is fishy. A woman attending a local Kansas community college is going to get a lot less grief if she chooses an out-of-state player to accuse, than if she chose a KU player. Whether this is a conscious money grab or a subconscious need for retribution / justice for an actual act, TSJ was the path of least resistance (again all this predicated on her not seeing who actually did it).

 

[derrick6]

This has gotten very strange. I hope his case is a bit more on solid ground that would not rely on calling attention to another person that isn’t accused, suspected or on trial.

I am hopeful because Shannon seems to be of high character, confident on his day in court, and well represented.

 

[Navy_illini]

Although there are always exceptions, calling a witness you know wil invoke the 5th violates the ABA code of conduct. The prosecutor, as soon as Morris is called, will immediately request a sidebar and have the Judge advise him of his 5th Amendment right, determine he understands it and determine if he is waiving it. Then, and only then would he testify. Also, evidence of "prior bad acts," a form of character evidence, is extremely difficult to get admitted.

The defense doesn’t need to call Morris. They do not need to prove who could have done this incident or something a couple weeks prior. They just need to enter as evidence the similar incident and TSJ was in Champaign during the other incident. Prosecution would probably object to this because you can’t prove the two incidents are related but you probably could get the investigating officer to admit that similar incidents have occurred recently

I think the Defense is going to call people who they know will support there case like the teammates who were with him and wrote statements

Did you see TSJ commit the act answer no
During cross examination of the accuser and friend did you see TSJ commit the act. Answer based on previous posts would be no and the accuser could say TSJ was the closest to her and then the defense could ask do you know who was behind you answer no

At this point the only concrete evidence the prosecution is TSJ and the accuser were in the same bar at the same time. There is no DNA that is able to link anyone to the incident

For the lawyers out there when does the prosecution have to give the defense all the evidence they are going to use?

 

[IlliniKat91]

If the above is true (not seeing him) then I 100% agree. No visual ID, no DNA, 100 people in close proximity in a bar. How is he charged?

And I still maintain the online research after the fact to identify a player is fishy. A woman attending a local Kansas community college is going to get a lot less grief if she chooses an out-of-state player to accuse, than if she chose a KU player. Whether this is a conscious money grab or a subconscious need for retribution / justice for an actual act, TSJ was the path of least resistance (again all this predicated on her not seeing who actually did it).

The thing I've grown uneasy about is the fact that Morris supposedly had another complaint like this filed against him that was later thrown out. It's not beyond the realm of possibility that if he was next to TSJ and did it, she turned around to see them both and picked TSJ as the assailant for whatever reason.

For a buzzed girl in a bar, the reaction is understandable. You want whoever grabbed you to pay for what they did. For a DA to run with a case that weak is deeply concerning.

 

[Battle89]

The thing I've grown uneasy about is the fact that Morris supposedly had another complaint like this filed against him that was later thrown out. It's not beyond the realm of possibility that if he was next to TSJ and did it, she turned around to see them both and picked TSJ as the assailant for whatever reason.

For a buzzed girl in a bar, the reaction is understandable. You want whoever grabbed you to pay for what they did. For a DA to run with a case that weak is deeply concerning.

However by her own (questionable) testimony she was NOT buzzed. Visited at least three bars but had only two sips of a Red Bull & vodka.

That is why I lean towards more a conscious act.

 

[IlliniFan42]

You're 100% right, and it's been shown that an eyewitness of a different race or ethnicity is more likely to misidentify someone of a different race or ethnicity.

The point of my post was to refute those saying they look the same. If you spend a lot of time with black folks (or are black yourself), it's more likely you'd say they don't look the same. After 17 years of being involved with a black family and working in schools where black and Hispanic kids are the majority populations, it's easier for me to tell those who don't look like me apart. The kid I was at 19 wouldn't have been able to do that.

The way it ties in to this case is that the accuser is black, meaning it's less likely she'd misidentify them if she'd seen them head on. But the accuser is black, meaning it's less likely she'd misidentify them if she'd seen them head on. According to her story, she had her back turned and didn't see who did it, which makes it more shady (in my opinion) that charges were even brought against TSJ.

The accuser isn't black.

 

[Mr. Tibbs]

it really seems to me the DA is pursuing this case not because she thinks she will win, but because she has political reasons to do so and make it seem like she is trying hard

 

[ILL-Intentions]

2 things for me here… first is with Dickinson called to testify. I will not and have never rooted for him on the court but I sure hope his testimony helps TSJ. Second, how much of this will be public when the trial starts? Will we know the play by play or is it all kept inside the courtroom until a verdict is handed down?

 

[IlliniFan42]

2 things for me here… first is with Dickinson called to testify. I will not and have never rooted for him on the court but I sure hope his testimony helps TSJ. Second, how much of this will be public when the trial starts? Will we know the play by play or is it all kept inside the courtroom until a verdict is handed down?

I think it would be unusual for it to be private, so it's really up to somebody being there that wants to publish what they hear. I would expect a daily update, maybe midday and end of day if we're lucky.

 

[CoalCity]

Might have to build some more prisons

 

[Mr. Tibbs]

it’s open court .

there will be some limited amount of press allowed inside .

 

[BWBW]

I think it would be unusual for it to be private, so it's really up to somebody being there that wants to publish what they hear. I would expect a daily update, maybe midday and end of day if we're lucky.

I certainly hope there are sober, factual reports providing full transparency of the proceedings. We need to know what happens in the courtroom. It seems to me that anything short of transparency plays into the hands of a shady prosecutor's office and those who may want to "put one over" on Justice.

 

[ever]

According to her story, she had her back turned and didn't see who did it, which makes it more shady (in my opinion) that charges were even brought against TSJ.

The original investigative report says:
"""
[The accuser] stated she reentered the room and began making her way towards the male. [The accuser] stated once she got close to her (him?), the male started "grabbing" on her and "grabbing my butt" to pull her towards him. [The accuser] stated the male started grabbing her buttocks on the outside of her clothing before putting his hands under her skirt and grabbing her buttocks. [The accuser] stated he pulled her to him and nearly immediately placed his finger under her underwear and inserted it into her [female private parts]. [The accuser] stated because of how crowded the room was, and her position next to the male and the wall, she couldn't move or "do anything" while this happened. ... [The accuser] stated the male used one hand to pull her towards him and said she was not sure which hand went inside her [female private parts]. [The accuser] stated the male's hand was around behind her buttocks and entered her [female private parts] from behind.
"""

In the May 10 hearing, she reportedly said (link, hit stop before the pop-up to read it):
"""
She said the bar was too crowded and she and her friend were about to leave when, on their way out, a man, whom she later identified as Shannon, caught her eye and waved her over. She said Shannon was seated with KU basketball player Kevin McCullar. She said she had never met either man but recognized McCullar from watching games.

She said Shannon was cute and she wanted to talk with him. She and her friend stepped outside of the Martini Room and she told her friend about the man who had waved her over. Her friend said she should go back in to talk to him. The woman testified that she then pushed her way back through the crowded bar to meet Shannon. She said her elbows were pinned to her side with her hands in the air, a drink in one hand and her phone in the other.

As she approached, she said Shannon could see her struggle through the crowd. She said a woman was next to him “grinding” on him. She said he reached out and pulled her close to him as she approached, his hand moving down to her “hip and butt,” which she said was OK.

“I didn’t necessarily have a problem with him touching me over my clothes,” the woman said.

Within a few seconds, though, she said Shannon’s hands moved her underwear to the side and she felt his finger or fingers penetrate her."
"""

She clearly thought she was having an interaction with the person who assaulted her (rather than being grabbed out of nowhere, turning around, and assuming it was the first person she saw). It still could have been a different male who assaulted her while TSJ (or even someone else altogether) was harmlessly pulling her to him. There are so many different ways this could have happened, and I don't think any of us know enough to have a good opinion. If there was a crowd of people behind her, perhaps it was a different person's hand under her skirt. But if her positioning (relative to the wall, the crowd, etc) makes it far-fetched to think another person could have done this, then it all comes down to her ability to ID TSJ (which I think is very believable given the other details leading up to the assault), and/or whether the jury thinks she purposefully made the whole thing up.

 

[nichi]

I think it would be unusual for it to be private, so it's really up to somebody being there that wants to publish what they hear. I would expect a daily update, maybe midday and end of day if we're lucky.

Do we have transcripts of testimony from the preliminary hearings?

I know we have a motion from the defense that represents part of what the accuser said. It would be interesting to see it her own words to compare with the original police report.

 

[IlliniFan42]

it all comes down to her ability to ID TSJ (which I think is very believable given the other details leading up to the assault)

Why is it believable? She didn't know anybody on the rosters of any of the teams. She doesn't attend KU. She misidentified Harmon as a KU player. She admits to consuming some amount of alcohol.

 

[IlliniFan42]

Do we have transcripts of testimony from the preliminary hearings?

I know we have a motion from the defense that represents part of what the accuser said. It would be interesting to see it her own words to compare with the original police report.

At this time, no transcripts were uploaded to the court system regarding preliminary hearing transcripts.

 

[BretMyBeachHouse]

The original investigative report says:
"""
[The accuser] stated she reentered the room and began making her way towards the male. [The accuser] stated once she got close to her (him?), the male started "grabbing" on her and "grabbing my butt" to pull her towards him. [The accuser] stated the male started grabbing her buttocks on the outside of her clothing before putting his hands under her skirt and grabbing her buttocks. [The accuser] stated he pulled her to him and nearly immediately placed his finger under her underwear and inserted it into her [female private parts]. [The accuser] stated because of how crowded the room was, and her position next to the male and the wall, she couldn't move or "do anything" while this happened. ... [The accuser] stated the male used one hand to pull her towards him and said she was not sure which hand went inside her [female private parts]. [The accuser] stated the male's hand was around behind her buttocks and entered her [female private parts] from behind.
"""

In the May 10 hearing, she reportedly said (link, hit stop before the pop-up to read it):
"""
She said the bar was too crowded and she and her friend were about to leave when, on their way out, a man, whom she later identified as Shannon, caught her eye and waved her over. She said Shannon was seated with KU basketball player Kevin McCullar. She said she had never met either man but recognized McCullar from watching games.

She said Shannon was cute and she wanted to talk with him. She and her friend stepped outside of the Martini Room and she told her friend about the man who had waved her over. Her friend said she should go back in to talk to him. The woman testified that she then pushed her way back through the crowded bar to meet Shannon. She said her elbows were pinned to her side with her hands in the air, a drink in one hand and her phone in the other.

As she approached, she said Shannon could see her struggle through the crowd. She said a woman was next to him “grinding” on him. She said he reached out and pulled her close to him as she approached, his hand moving down to her “hip and butt,” which she said was OK.

“I didn’t necessarily have a problem with him touching me over my clothes,” the woman said.

Within a few seconds, though, she said Shannon’s hands moved her underwear to the side and she felt his finger or fingers penetrate her."
"""

She clearly thought she was having an interaction with the person who assaulted her (rather than being grabbed out of nowhere, turning around, and assuming it was the first person she saw). It still could have been a different male who assaulted her while TSJ (or even someone else altogether) was harmlessly pulling her to him. There are so many different ways this could have happened, and I don't think any of us know enough to have a good opinion. If there was a crowd of people behind her, perhaps it was a different person's hand under her skirt. But if her positioning (relative to the wall, the crowd, etc) makes it far-fetched to think another person could have done this, then it all comes down to her ability to ID TSJ (which I think is very believable given the other details leading up to the assault), and/or whether the jury thinks she purposefully made the whole thing up.

You give her all credibility and none to Shannon. Interesting.

 

[RabidDawgClassic]

I’m not sure the accuser could even win a civil case. Even by the preponderance of the evidence standard, the case seems pretty weak.