|
One of my pet peeves with Attorney Generals is that there DO NOT discipline DAs that step out of bound in Death Penalty cases. i.e. The DA goes on TV saying he or she is going for the Dearth Penalty even before their is an investigation. I have NEVER heard of an Attorney General stepping in and saying that the DA overstepped his duties, even where there is clear evidence of mental impairments on part of the murder.
About ten years ago a woman with a history of mental disorders started to shoot students at the Main Penn State Campus. The local DA went on TV, after she was captured, saying he was going for the Death Penalty. The DA kept up this line until his own psychological expert said he had severe mental problems (The case was settled in that she was found guilty of Third Degree murder and then sentence to a Psychiatric hospital where she should have been in the first place). Did the Pennsylvania Attorney General step in at any time? NO, the victim of the DA excess was only a mentally impaired working class person, not some suburbanite white kid.....
Now, that some Suburbanite white kid is the suspect, we have to handle them with kid gloves. So we have a stripper with mental problems, what else is new (Most strippers I have met have some sort of mental problem). Having a mental impairment does NOT mean she was NOT assaulted.
What really gulls me in that 60 minute interview was the Attorney General stating there was NO evidence. He had the testimony of the Stripper THAT IS EVIDENCE. HE may NOT believe that evidence, but it is still evidence.
As to the evidence that the Students did NOT commit a crime (I doubt if any penetration occurred, but something occurred) lets look at the list:
1. She had Sperm in her that was NOT of any of the students. So what? Even a whore can be raped. Thus the fact he had sex with OTHER MEN does NOT mean she was NOT assaulted.
2. The picture of the one student going to a ATM machine. Most Victims are known to be inaccurate as to the time of an assault, just ask yourself the question, if you are being beat up (as I think she might have been) would you look at your watch to see the time? Being off 2-3 hours is not unknown and up to a jury to decide based on the evidence presented to it.
3. The picture showing her entering her car, and smiling, people smile at each other instinctively, I have observed women smiling at me (I am male). This is NOT some statement of happiness, but an instinctive reaction when we come into contact with other people. The smile is to show other people we are friendly, NOT that we have NOT been attacked. Again something for a jury to decide.
Now, if I was the DA I would not have brought charges on these Students based on this evidence, but that is NOT the same as saying they is NO EVIDENCE. Notice the Attorney General is saying the same thing, he is NOT bringing charges against the Stripper, why? The Attorney General would actually have to PROVE the innocence of those Students to convict the stripper of lying to authorities. Thus NO charges against the Stripper for then the AG would have to PROVE his statement that the Students were Innocent as opposed to just not Guilty.
One last comment, if you go by what the AG said, you will basically abolish ALL of the improvements in Rape cases done over the last 30 years. Basically what the AG is saying it is OK to attack the victim, including her sexual activities to show she is an unreliable witness. Thus any woman who goes into any profession where sex is a part of the at job (What I mean by Sex, is the use of her body, which includes Models, sellers of makeup, and even store clerks in businesses where beauty is a factor). Since all of these professions involve showing off one's body to a degree, if they are raped the fact they are in a "Sex" business be reasons to say the rape did NOT Occur?
LEts be honest, these Students hired Stripper, was disappointed when a black stripper showed up instead of a White Stripper. Took out that disappointment against the Stripper (Through probably no sexual assault took place) but she was hit on her breasts, rear and even across her vagina. She took this as an sexual assault (Which I have to agree with her on). Now the AG is saying that unless actual sex occurred these students are "Innocent". Even the DA involved by the time he was removed from the case was moving away from Sexual Assault to simple assault (On the grounds it would be easier to prove some sort of improper contact took place as oppose to an improper sexual contact) but something happened and the Victim was some how attacked. No these students are NOT innocent, they may not be guilty except for having the bad taste in hiring a stripper, but that is NOT the same as being "Innocent".
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
