Current Events > Jonathan Majors' lawyer releases texts to TMZ from his girlfriend

(+) Yeah! (+)

ArchNemo posted...

"I grabbed your phone" suddenly became "violent, aggressive advance to take his phone" but I'm the one making things up? Lol.

Sources from the start have connected the grabbing of the phone to the violent incident.

And depending how it is attempted trying to snatch a phone can be violent. Nothing made up.

Like I said, Majors lawyers best attempt to try to defend their client is so bad, that literally saying nothing would have been a better choice.

That's not their best attempt. Thats context if anything that proves to us that the accuser has propensity to lie and possible unpredictable violent behavior. It doesn't exonerate majors but it doesn't make her look good either.

Also it's funny how you're bringing up eyewitness testimony and video we also haven't seen as proof that he didn't do it, while saying people who are using evidence that has been released have nothing to go off of.

I never said he didn't do it. I said you csnt prove he did yet. Thats how it works.

Evidence that apparently completely exohonerates him and would make a trial unnecessary in the first place, they're apparently going to wait to bust out at the 11th hour like a Phoenix Wright game.

Waiting for the trial to present relevant evidence is fairly normal procedure. Do you not understand why trials are a thing or do you just think a Twitter poll shod decide his innocence or guilt? Why would they release anything independently when that gives the plaintiff(on this case the city of ny) to further spin their case againsbias.

In a trial they csn provide context and other relevant info and protect their witnesses. But no I guess they should throw them under the bus too?

Also nobody is saying he personally forced her so dunno where you're getting that from.

Thags exactly what is being insinuated, at best.

sorry but "This sounds like an abuse victim" doesn't actually make someone an abuse victim. We need to see more.

IfGodCouldDie posted...

So we are back to you just having already made up your mind about people with no proof. Have a good night.

Its hilarious hes trying to pretend otherwise.

Now he's resorted to making things up about YOU in order to defend his indefensible stance.

And let's be clear. Majors looks bad just being attached to this. He very well may be guilty and if he is he deserves whats coming.

But this text ain't even C L O S E to enough to convict or even judge based on nothing but preconceived vias.

IfGodCouldDie posted...

So we are back to you just having already made up your mind about people with no proof. Have a good night.

Actually it's back to me making an educated guess based on the (very damning) evidence that's been released so far. I've been very open about the fact I think he did it, but I'm also not a criminal court. I have no power to condemn him one way or another, and if I had any power to effect him I'd likely keep my mouth shut.

However, since I'm not, I'm not going to say "It looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, but let me jump through hoops to explain why it's actually not a duck.

Also let's not ignore the fact that one of Toonstrucks first arguments was "Well if it was a MAN he wouldn't get the same benefit of the doubt as a WOMAN"

Toonstrack posted...

If this chick's posted texts that show majors saying "it's not your fault im sorry, they saw we had a fight i told them it wasn't you" do you think eveyeone would be saying "nah he was forced into saying that"

So pretty obvious what his real issue here is.

ArchNemo posted...

Actually it's back to me making an educated guess based on the (very damning) evidence that's been released so far. I've been very open about the fact I think he did it, but I'm also not a criminal court. I have no power to condemn him one way or another, and if I had any power to effect him I'd likely keep my mouth shut.

However, since I'm not, I'm not going to say "It looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, but let me jump through hoops to explain why it's actually not a duck.

Also let's not ignore the fact that one of Toonstrucks first arguments was "Well if it was a MAN he wouldn't get the same benefit of the doubt as a WOMAN"

Daaaaarn right that what I'm saying. And you agree with me too.

This has nothing to do with her being a woman and him being a man though. Hes in a bad position socially.

Power differential. Being a black man accused by a white woman. Hes batting 100.

ArchNemo posted...

Also let's not ignore the fact that one of Toonstrucks first arguments was "Well if it was a MAN he wouldn't get the same benefit of the doubt as a WOMAN"

Well it's not the worst argument he's made to defend an individual who has about a 90% chance of being an abuser.

Toonstrack posted...

Power differential. Being a black man accused by a white woman. Hes batting 100.

Ah sorry, you're going to have to link me to where it says she's a white woman? Only thing I've seen is 30 year old woman...

ArchNemo posted...

Ah sorry, you're going to have to link me to where it says she's a white woman? Only thing I've seen is 30 year old woman...

Hes only ever officially been attached to one woman, and she's white. They also have a child together.
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/5/6/6/AAcjnMAAEVe2.jpg

Its maybe possible this is a different girl but I doubt it.

dancing_cactuar posted...

Well it's not the worst argument he's made to defend

Didn't defend. Just ain't condemning yet.

There IS a difference you know.

Toonstrack posted...

Waiting for the trial to present relevant evidence is fairly normal procedure. Do you not understand why trials are a thing or do you just think a Twitter poll shod decide his innocence or guilt? Why would they release anything independently when that gives the plaintiff(on this case the city of ny) to further spin their case againsbias.

In a trial they csn provide context and other relevant info and protect their witnesses. But no I guess they should throw them under the bus too?

Actually it's fairly normal procedure to not bring pointless cases to trial when you have evidence that definitively proves, without a doubt, that your client didn't commit a crime. In fact, less than 1% of criminal cases go to trial.

Toonstrack posted...

Its maybe possible this is a different girl but I doubt it.

Oh the irony lmao

Imagine arguing several posts that basing an opinion on the fact that the most obvious conclusion is usually correct is wrong, and then saying we should assume this is the victim because it's the most obvious conclusion and therefore likely correct.

Amazing.

ArchNemo posted...

based on the (very damning) evidence that's been released

Which is what exactly?

IfGodCouldDie posted...

Which is what exactly?

We know there was a fight, we know she went to the hospital with marks, we know she made a statement that he assaulted her, we know she suddenly recanted that statement, and we know that his lawyers released texts that make her sound like a pretty typical abuse victim. These are all facts.

People wanna draw conclusions to Amber Heard while ignoring the fact that Amber Heard was actively going for Depps throat, whereas this woman is very clearly trying to protect Majors.

ArchNemo posted...

Actually it's fairly normal procedure to not bring pointless cases to trial when you have evidence that definitively proves, without a doubt, that your client didn't commit a crime. In fact, less than 1% of criminal cases go to trial.

That's nice but that doesn't apply here.

Due to the nature of the charges its entirely possible for Majors to be exonerated of assault crimes and still get harassment for example.

ArchNemo posted...

We know there was a fight,

A "fight" can be verbal not necessarily physical. We do NOT know definitively there was a physical altercation.

we know she went to the hospital with marks,

No hospital report on this yet, could ge any number of things from a tattoo to an unrelated bruise or she could have injuries from something major didnt do, after all she claims she passed out.

we know she made a statement that he assaulted her,

A a statement she later admitted to making under false pretenses, not to mention has now stated of her own volition that at some point she was not conscious putting into question what she did or did not actually perceive.

we know she suddenly recanted that statement

No, given the times of the text being sent the recasting of the statement was confirmed somewhere in the nearly 12 hour gap of time between the two initial texts. Plenty of time to consider options and intentions and cool down after an altercation for example.

and we know that his lawyers released texts that make her sound like a pretty typical abuse victim.

No, they released text that show her denying majors had any fault in this, implicating herself for lying to the police, not wanting charges included stating she wants the judge to know this and that she was told by officers charges wouldn't be pressed, that a few armchair psychologists are projecting their childhoods onto to decided she was a quote "typical abuse victim"

These are all facts.

They are not all facts. Especially not that last paragraph. But no almost none of them are actually.

People wanna draw conclusions to Amber Heard while ignoring the fact that Amber Heard was actively going for Depps throat, whereas this woman is very clearly trying to protect Majors.

So... if the woman was vehement and unrelenting about Majors guilt... that would make him... less likely to be guilty???

The HOOPS man. The hoops.

.....thank you for helping me prove categorically via this post why we have trials. And why actual qualified professionals with years of experience and training are called to handle them, not gamefaqs users who clearly barely understand even the most basic aspects of due process given their post history.

ArchNemo posted...

Oh, like "when" they find out Majors didn't do this, not "if"

Tell me more about how I'm the one who has already decided what happened?

Putting words in my mouth again. Doesnt feel like youre arguing in good faith here.

@toonstrack why do you care so much that people are misrepresenting your view on a dying video game message board with a history of many of the accounts being there solely to argue in bad faith? Even if youre right. And I think you do make some compelling points. You arent going to win against people who have no interest in arguing logically and rationally.

SHRlKE posted...

@toonstrack why do you care so much that people are misrepresenting your view on a dying video game message board with a history of many of the accounts being there solely to argue in bad faith? Even if youre right.

I dont really "do" half measures. Thats why.

And I think you do make some compelling points. You arent going to win against people who have no interest in arguing logically and rationally.

I know that. But thats no excuse for me not to be genuine even here.

Heck majors may very well end up convicted.. I want to make it clear im not exonrrating him nor condemning him yet. This will see an outcome and its gonna be one or the other.

Im simply being Ernest in my perspective as well as more objective statements about how this whole process even works. This is a hot topic on the internet because of who's involved but this happens all the time and frankly we've barely seen anything definitive. All we can *truly* say is something happened, there was an occurrence, Majors and this girl were involved and the city saw fit to charge him regardless of the wishes of the woman.

Yikes at those texts.

I wonder if the Kang storyline is done and they're just gonna go with another villain at this point. Probably the best course vs variants or recasting.

Zonbei posted...

Me too. The time I sat up from in between my partners legs (she was on the couch and I was on the ground while we watched a movie) and my head hit the bottom of her beer bottle. It hit her in the mouth. Completely an accident, and she wasnt even trying to grab anything from me. People are fragile.

When I was even younger I was pushing someone on a swing, they fell off, broke their fingers. Straight to the hospital. You seem to be thinking people arent fragile. A nose can get broken in a second, even by something like a phone being let go and going straight back into the nose of the person pulling on it. (As an example, not likely to be the case here.) Ive been hit pretty hard by accident myself by people while doing innocuous things, let alone grappling for control of a phone.

I have ALSO been domestically abused, beat badly enough to need a hospital visit.

So, again, Im not trying to deny domestic violence is common. I understand the fawning response exists. There just isnt remotely enough info in these couple texts to draw that conclusion, and pretending like its the only possible thing that could have happened is, at best, dumb. At worst its having decided on what you want to have happened and refusing to consider any other possibility.

i mean he was arrested and charged with assault and his victim was hospitalized from said assault. we should generally believe domestic violence victims, especially with the supposed exculpatory evidence making him look worse

archedsoul posted...

Yikes at those texts.

I wonder if the Kang storyline is done and they're just gonna go with another villain at this point. Probably the best course vs variants or recasting.

No, the character is an easy recast, and thats exactly what will happen if he is fired.

andel posted...

i mean he was arrested and charged with assault and his victim was hospitalized from said assault. we should generally believe domestic violence victims, especially with the supposed exculpatory evidence making him look worse

If that was true I wouldnt be saying what Im saying. We dont have any evidence he assaulted her or that she was hospitalized due to him assaulting her. The only la risky evidence we have so far (which is barely that) is that the person assaulted said he didnt and doesnt want him charged. That makes you the one not believing her. Charges are not evidence. Charges come before evidence. We have trials for a reason. Evidence will be provided, and a decision will be made.

I dont feel confident that I know enough to make a decision myself, and its strange everyone else does.

Toonstrack posted...

No, the character is an easy recast, and thats exactly what will happen if he is fired.

They might not bother because people might always associate Kang with Majors and the stink.

Especially if the rumors about Kang Dynasty are true.

Easier to just end Kang in something like Loki. We got a huge slate of big villains available.

Zonbei posted...

If that was true I wouldnt be saying what Im saying. We dont have any evidence he assaulted her or that she was hospitalized due to him assaulting her. The only la risky evidence we have so far (which is barely that) is that the person assaulted said he didnt and doesnt want him charged. That makes you the one not believing her. Charges are not evidence. Charges come before evidence. We have trials for a reason. Evidence will be provided, and a decision will be made.

I dont feel confident that I know enough to make a decision myself, and its strange everyone else does.

multiple people have spoken out about he has been violent and abusive for years

andel posted...

multiple people have spoken out about he has been violent and abusive for years

If by multiple you mean literally two people, both literally no one, one who vagueposted ages ago and the other who deleted their account once people pointed out they didnt have an ounce of evidence.

again, Im not denying its possible. He could very well be a domestic abuser. But two people saying things on the internet with zero evidence at an opportune time for them to get some clout isnt evidence. Charges arent evidence. The person who was assaulted saying she wasnt assaulted isnt evidence either way. Just.. wait for evidence. It isnt that hard.

andel posted...

i mean he was arrested and charged with assault and his victim was hospitalized from said assault.

Sensational language.

She was not "hospitalized for the assault". She was "hospitalized by police advice due to present injuries".

Whether or not an assault happened is whats in question, as of course you can be hospitalized without assault.

Another thing of note... look closely at the wording used and things mentioned. If she were truly trying to appease him, she could have easily been more explicit about what he did not do, and if majors had any actual contact with her he and his lawyers would have known what to include in such a text anyway.

The vagueness of this statement actually is from a certain perspective helpful to majors because it indicates it is more genuine and not as rehearsed. Notice how she doesn't simply say "you didn't strangle me" but brings up that she was served a paper mentioning strangulation. That leans toward the notion that it is the police who are introducing the factor of strangulation and not her.

Looking into the initial statement she made, she nor the police ever used the word "strangulation". What they said was that he out his hands on her neck, a way less definite description. This is a guess but is it possible during initial questioning she was asked if he out his hands on her neck in any way, affirmed this, and the police then sent her what constitutes as strangulation to confirm if she'd agree with those parameters?

Another thing getting lost in the noise is his lawyer claims not only that the unseen evidence exonerates him but explicitly states that it proves Majors is the "victim". Introducing a possible case of self defense.

Factoring that in while analyzing these texts introduces another possibility that this woman is trying to prevent HERSELF from being charged or countersued, which changes the entire dynamic of the text.

I dont really "do" half measures. Thats why.

Thats not really an answer tbh. The question was why do you care so much about what people on a dying message board think. Even if you are right - whats the point and whats motivating you?

SHRlKE posted...

Thats not really an answer tbh. The question was why do you care so much about what people on a dying message board think. Even if you are right - whats the point and whats motivating you?

I care about thoroughness, and if I'm making a statement here I still consider myself accountable for it.

Why would I allow others to spin it and not defend myself? Just because its a "dead" board?

Toonstrack posted...

Sensational language.

She was not "hospitalized for the assault". She was "hospitalized by police advice due to present injuries".

Whether or not an assault happened is whats in question, as of course you can be hospitalized without assault.

Another thing of note... look closely at the wording used and things mentioned. If she were truly trying to appease him, she could have easily been more explicit about what he did not do, and if majors had any actual contact with her he and his lawyers would have known what to include in such a text anyway.

The vagueness of this statement actually is from a certain perspective helpful to majors because it indicates it is more genuine and not as rehearsed. Notice how she doesn't simply say "you didn't strangle me" but brings up that she was served a paper mentioning strangulation. That leans toward the notion that it is the police who are introducing the factor of strangulation and not her.

Looking into the initial statement she made, she nor the police ever used the word "strangulation". What they said was that he out his hands on her neck, a way less definite description. This is a guess but is it possible during initial questioning she was asked if he out his hands on her neck in any way, affirmed this, and the police then sent her what constitutes as strangulation to confirm if she'd agree with those parameters?

Another thing getting lost in the noise is his lawyer claims not only that the unseen evidence exonerates him but explicitly states that it proves Majors is the "victim". Introducing a possible case of self defense.

Factoring that in while analyzing these texts introduces another possibility that this woman is trying to prevent HERSELF from being charged or countersued, which changes the entire dynamic of the text.

holy shit at the mental gymnastics attempting to shill for a violent domestic abuser.

accusing impartial witnesses of clout chasing when one of the directors alluded to majors being a violent abuser before this shit came out is super weird. attempting to handwaive this would be similar to someone shilling for weinstein when his allegations came out. multiple people at multiple different times have affirmed majors is a violent abuser, this is a very good indicator that he is in fact a violent abuser.

Zonbei posted...

If by multiple you mean literally two people, both literally no one, one who vagueposted ages ago and the other who deleted their account once people pointed out they didnt have an ounce of evidence.

again, Im not denying its possible. He could very well be a domestic abuser. But two people saying things on the internet with zero evidence at an opportune time for them to get some clout isnt evidence. Charges arent evidence. The person who was assaulted saying she wasnt assaulted isnt evidence either way. Just.. wait for evidence. It isnt that hard.

if by opportune time you mean months ago before this shit came out and has consistently maintained the same story?

andel posted...

if by opportune time you mean months ago before this shit came out and has consistently maintained the same story?

One of them was not until this happened. The other was the previously mentioned vagueposting.

Zonbei posted...

One of them was not until this happened. The other was the previously mentioned vagueposting.

both independently confirmed what the police allege and the one that was before this incident is very clearly referencing majors

andel posted...

both independently confirmed what the police allege and the one that was before this incident is very clearly referencing majors

I what? How are the two Twitter posters talking about working with him at Yale and.. who even knows where because it was super vague, confirming what the police allege? Were they standing next to the fucking car?

Zonbei posted...

I what? How are the two Twitter posters talking about working with him at Yale and.. who even knows where because it was super vague, confirming what the police allege? Were they standing next to the fucking car?

they confirmed that he was abusive and apparently others have also known this for years. there will be more and more allegations that come out, weinstein style, it is just a bad look to carry water for a guy that is obviously a damn predator.

as an actor majors is very talented and likable but it turns out he is a terrible person irl

andel posted...

they confirmed that he was abusive and apparently others have also known this for years. there will be more and more allegations that come out, weinstein style, it is just a bad look to carry water for a guy that is obviously a damn predator.

as an actor majors is very talented and likable but it turns out he is a terrible person irl

Im not carrying water for him. Im literally only saying that you should wait for evidence. It could go either way. Ill reconsider my stance once more and more allegations actually come out, not based on the fact they may. Youre the only one who can turn out to be wrong here, because youre taking a clear stance that hes obviously a predator.

Toonstrack posted...

I care about thoroughness, and if I'm making a statement here I still consider myself accountable for it.

Why would I allow others to spin it and not defend myself? Just because its a "dead" board?

Because many of the people you are arguing against aren't bothered about the truth. It's wasted energy you'd be better off investing elsewhere.

If you just enjoy the arguments in themselves then fair enough. But you aren't going to be changing the opinions of people who aren't interested in having their opinions changed x./

Bro needs a new lawyer

Honestly, why do we care about a domestic dispute between two toxic people?

andel posted...

they confirmed that he was abusive and apparently others have also known this for years. there will be more and more allegations that come out, weinstein style, it is just a bad look to carry water for a guy that is obviously a damn predator.

as an actor majors is very talented and likable but it turns out he is a terrible person irl

Fyi, they made those twitter posts recently and according to you everyone who uses twitter overtly support the alt-right. I wouldn't trust alt right chuds.

Zonbei posted...

Putting words in my mouth again. Doesnt feel like youre arguing in good faith here.

Hey, did you ever find me a source for it saying bitch under the blacked out text, or were you just going to keep ignoring when you pulled that out of your ass. @ArchNemo

I wasn't aware I had to source something I paraphrased for effect. Likely it's her name and they blacked it out to protect her identity. I figured I wouldn't need to explain that to someone as smart as you.

You also seem really fucking desparate to spend days arguing that this guy didn't do it despite the fact that you keep amending your posts with "that's probably not to case, but" to your own arguments.

So tell us how you really feel.

Its hilarious how the people wildly jumping to conclusions are acting like everyone else has some ulterior motive to <insert bullshit> over Majors.

Zonbei posted...

Im not carrying water for him. Im literally only saying that you should wait for evidence. It could go either way. Ill reconsider my stance once more and more allegations actually come out, not based on the fact they may. Youre the only one who can turn out to be wrong here, because youre taking a clear stance that hes obviously a predator.

i mean you can say whatever but it seems p clear you are choosing to believe majors isn't good for this despite the obvious evidence to the contrary. i think it is a major problem that a lot of people automatically doubt domestic violence issues

WBC_Injury posted...

Fyi, they made those twitter posts recently and according to you everyone who uses twitter overtly support the alt-right. I wouldn't trust alt right chuds.

they made the posts before all this came out. and i never once claimed everyone using twitter is a chud, i just acknowledge the fact the platform is itself a chud hellscape

ArchNemo posted...

I wasn't aware I had to source something I paraphrased for effect. Likely it's her name and they blacked it out to protect her identity. I figured I wouldn't need to explain that to someone as smart as you.

You also seem really fucking desparate to spend days arguing that this guy didn't do it despite the fact that you keep amending your posts with "that's probably not to case, but" to your own arguments.

So tell us how you really feel.

Arguing that we dont know if he did it, which is a distinction you seem to be incapable of understanding.

So wait, you paraphrased goodbye, name as goodbye bitch for effect, even though you were using that as evidence of abuse? So youre the one who inserted the sexist term for no reason?

Do you know what the word paraphrasing means? What actually happened is you made it up and now youre trying to wriggle out of it. We also call this lying.

andel posted...

i mean you can say whatever but it seems p clear you are choosing to believe majors isn't good for this despite the obvious evidence to the contrary. i think it is a major problem that a lot of people automatically doubt domestic violence issues

they made the posts before all this came out. and i never once claimed everyone using twitter is a chud, i just acknowledge the fact the platform is itself a chud hellscape

It can seem clear to you, but that doesnt make it the case. I dont automatically doubt domestic violence issues. In basically all cases my first instinct is to believe its happening. The fact here Im not certain of that is reflective of how very, very unclear it is. there is no obvious evidence to the contrary.

You can believe I actually mean the opposite of what Im telling you I mean, but thats a you problem. My stance is that we dont know enough to make a determination either way. He could be a piece of shit who abuses his girlfriend. He could not. Statistically the former is more likely. That doesnt mean its an absolute yes because thats not how that works.

andel posted...

i mean you can say whatever but it seems p clear you are choosing to believe majors isn't good for this despite the obvious evidence to the contrary. i think it is a major problem that a lot of people automatically doubt domestic violence issues

they made the posts before all this came out. and i never once claimed everyone using twitter is a chud, i just acknowledge the fact the platform is itself a chud hellscape

https://i.imgur.com/Nyt7Oeq.jpeg

They still use twitter if you look them up. Why would you believe these people when you think they support the alt right?

divot1338 posted...

Its hilarious how the people wildly jumping to conclusions are acting like everyone else has some ulterior motive to <insert bullshit> over Majors.

Anti capeshitters

andel posted...

accusing impartial witnesses of clout chasing when one of the directors alluded to majors being a violent abuser

This never happened

Topic's not great