Former Montana Grizzlies quarterback Jordan Johnson was acquitted of rape charges in March.
I like Missoula very much. After living here a few years, though, I have also concocted a theory of Other Missoula, home to the approximately 40,000 people who wear sweatpants to the mall. Those of you familiar with the Problem of Others are likely beginning to suspect that all my theories are products of wounded solipsism, and you are probably right. I would like to point out that Other Missoula is a real and terrifying thing, however, as demonstrated in this year’s Missoula Independent Best of Missoula poll. Best Athlete? Jordan Johnson, the indicted, suspended and now reinstated Griz quarterback who did not play this year because he was busy being acquitted of rape.
Oh, democracy. It’s hard to argue that Johnson won Best Athlete on the strength of his great performance on the field, since he was kicked off the team before the 2012 season began. It also seems unlikely that Indy readers voted Johnson Best Athlete for his performance the previous season, since last year’s Best Athlete was UM point guard Will Cherry. Cherry came in second to Jordan this year. Not much changed in their relative performances, except the guy who won stopped playing sports entirely and was acquitted of rape.
Apparently that is a more impressive athletic achievement to Indy readers than, you know, participating in athletics. Either that or democracy is weird. I’m inclined to go with the second explanation, because the first makes me want to stand in the grocery store and whip lemons at people.
Say what you will about Jordan Johnson; he got a lot of publicity this year. When the good people of Missoula filled out their Best Of ballots, he leapt easily to mind. In this way, he resembles a Herman Cain or a Rick Santorum—candidates who enjoyed success in certain votes not because of who they were, but because of how widely they were known. That advantage is especially powerful in a multi-person race, where the winner is likely to win by plurality rather than majority. When no one candidate is likely to get more than 20% of the vote, being the guy whom the 10% of uninformed voters have heard of is a huge strength.
That’s a depressing way to look at democracy. When we reverse-engineer Johnson’s victory in the Best of Missoula poll, we are forced to consider whether people voted for him because A) they sympathize with his being wrongly accused of rape, B) they are thrilled that he got away with rape, or C) go Griz! Option (A) is perhaps the most anodyne, but it’s still unsettling given the facts of the case, last year’s NCAA investigation of the UM athletics program, and the Department of Justice’s ongoing investigation of UM, the Missoula police department, and county prosecutors. And that’s the best-case explanation; options (B) and (C) remain too awful to contemplate.
When you look at it that way, democracy seems to be—in the words of one prominent Combat! blog commenter—the science of fools. A system that declares the Best Athlete to be a guy who didn’t even play this year because he was defending himself against felony charges is a flawed system. It might even seem to reflect a flawed electorate. I reject that conclusion, though, because it appeals to my cynicism more than to my sense.
Who knows why Johnson got more votes than any other athlete in town? Maybe his friends organized a skillful get-out-the-vote effort. Maybe his name was better known than that of any player on the 2012 Pioneer League champion Missoula Osprey. Maybe there are 20 times as many Osprey, and they split the vote. My point is that an election tells you who got the most votes, but it doesn’t tell you why. I am tempted to think that Johnson won because of the massive, stupid force of Other Missoula, but I live here and I don’t think that’s true.
The people of Missoula are neither mean-spirited nor stupid. They are terrible drivers and may love the Griz a little too much, but they are essentially good. I think it’s bullshit that a guy who didn’t even play sports this year won Best Athlete over a graduating senior athlete who was not acquitted of rape because he was not accused. I think it’s bullshit that a woman can say she did not consent to sex and a jury will believe the guy who said she did. I briefly wondered if democracy was bullshit when I saw the Indy poll. But there are plenty of possible explanations for that result. I refuse to believe that people are bullshit, because what other choice do we have?
Ugh.
Ugh.
If you had read the comments on the Missoulian articles regarding Jordan Johnson (and I hope you didn’t, for the sake of your mental health), you might be closer to going to the grocery store to throw lemons at people.
Also, Red Robin got third place for “Best Burger.” So, basically, we are in trouble.
I was also surprised, but the more I think about it, I’m not. I think it’s clearly a vote of solidarity from Griz Nation for a kid who was proven innocent and, more notably, is the quarterback and best playmaker on the most popular team in town.
Also, unfortunate but worth mentioning: Cherry got arrested around the time ballots went out. That no doubt lost him votes that went to … obscure Osprey players and wicked awesome local disc golfers.
You pose an interesting point. Clearly this was an orchestrated effort to put Johnson in a positive light….I think the real issue here should be how all of the Best of Missoula and Missoula’s Best awards are complete bullshit. They’re rigged and easy to forge. Not to say that some people and places are not the best, I am just saying it is a stupid thing to begin with.
Skylar: JJ was not proven innocent. Courts don’t prove anyone innocent. He was found “not guilty” which could mean the jury thought he was innocent OR it could mean the jury felt there was not enough evidence for a conviction.
It is difficult to convict anyone of sexual assault, much less a star quarterback who is described as a “nice guy”. Let’s not draw unfounded conclusions from a “not guilty” finding.
Kelly, you’re right. Poor wording on my part as I was attempting to articulate why perhaps others voted for Jordan. (And to be clear, I did not. I think I voted for one of the disc golfers.)
I think Dan is putting a little too much meaning into a weekly independent newspaper’s “Best of” poll. This isn’t exactly an exhaustive, Missoula-wide survey. I don’t know what the poll’s methodology is, but I’m guessing the type of people who vote in a Best Athlete poll are more likely to forgive an athlete after a rape acquittal.
The fact Jordan was named “best athlete” is based more on the familiarity of his name as an athlete, as a result of the accusation and subsequent trial, rather than the fact he played or didn’t play or was acquitted of the accusation. The fact he was named in the Indy poll is not some sort of statement by the city of Missoula that sexual assault is ok.
However, the Constitution of the United States has stated clearly for over 200 years that the criminal accused is innocent until proven guilty. If the accused goes to trial and is found not guilty, under the Constitution, that person is innocent. Period.
So Kelly, whether the jury thought he was innocent or whether the jury thought there was not enough evidence to convict is irrelevant. He, like any criminal defendant, was presumed innocent from the start and was never found guilty. Thus, his innocent status under the law never changed.
Interesting and provocative piece of political apophasis.
Gwen Florio is that you? Maybe this is why we don’t read the independent usually. JJ won because he is an amazing athlete who as a first year player took us to the semi finals. He has only gotten better. Sadly he hhad to sit a year and deal with a trail on a item he was not found guilty of. This writer obviously believes anyone who says “rape” is telling the truth. He was acquitted by the system which we based of people of their peers who had no idea about the persons involved . They found her stories changing, misleading, confusing, the supposed evidence was not found. So no you cannot put someone in jail for just what she said. You want to call Missoula people stupid because we see things differently than you? Okay you think we all suck? Okay but nobody forces you to be here. This biased writing is a joke and ageda based. Let it go and let the guy live his life.
“Gwen Florio is that you? Maybe this is why we don’t read the independent usually.”
Gwen Florio writes for the Missoulian, not the Independent. I’m betting that you don’t usually read in general.
“JJ won because he is an amazing athlete who as a first year player took us to the semi finals.”
A first year that happened to *not* be 2012.
“He has only gotten better. Sadly he hhad to sit a year and deal with a trail on a item he was not found guilty of.”
If he’s had to sit for a year, how the hell do you know? Also, nice typo. U MAD BRO?
“He was acquitted by the system which we based of people of their peers who had no idea about the persons involved .”
This sentence makes no grammatical sense and might give the casual reader the idea you may have no idea what you’re talking about. Please revise.
“You want to call Missoula people stupid because we see things differently than you? Okay you think we all suck?”
Don’t posit yourself as every Missoulian. I’m a Missoulian, can string together a coherent sentence and don’t equivocate beating a rape charge with athletic prowess. I believe that the author thinks people like you suck because objectively speaking, you do.
Hey, guys. I’m glad this post has attracted such active commentary, but I’d like to remind everybody that every blog has a culture, and our commenting culture is friendly. Please try not to attack one another.
Those who believe I dislike Missoulians are referred to the first sentence of the post.
I think we’re missing the larger point here. Knowing that a person can win “best athlete” during a calendar year where he/she did not participate athletically really opens up the field.
Spoiler alert: Next year I’m voting for Jiggs Dahlberg.