Jackie it was the prosecution's witness, the detective on the case, that is making these damaging statements to her case. Not the defense. He's reporting on the initial interview. In that hearing if she was slandered it was the folks on *HER* side doing it. Is that possible? Maybe.
Until yesterday I had decided he was guilty. We haven't even heard the defense's case yet. All we have heard is the prosecution's case. And the prosecution's case makes her look to be not credible.
And yes, if he is innocent and didn't rape her then he has been wrong by the system. There is a vast gulf between rape and adultery as far as what his consequences should be in the legal system.
but the prosecution has also said numerous times that they have not presented all the evidence and didnt plan to do so at the prelim so without ALL the evidence how can you say hes being railroaded?
heres an example what happens if they get into the trial and you find out that that pair of panties had been lying on her floor for a month (shes a teenager it could happen) what if they get into it and his sperm is found on her skirt or inside her? what if there were traces of her skin under his nails that came from her pubic region?
not saying any of this is true but it also makes the case look alot diffrent doesnt it? the article you sent in said the yellow panties which had the caucasion sperm in it were not the ones she wore the night of the rape.
my point? you have to wait til all the evidense is in.
________________________________
Changes to your subscription (unsubs, nomail, digest) can be made by going to http://sandboxmail.net/mailman/listinfo/sndbox_sandboxmail.net
