More on the fight over a refund. Here the accussed claim that they paid upfront, then received less than they thought they had paid for, resulting in a shouting argument. Also, the accuser submitted to the test hours after making the accusation, and was driven to the hospital by her boyfriend. That provides more time, an extra means, and an extra accomplice by which she could have inflicted the rape wounds upon herself. Does this mean that she is lying? No; but it adds to mounting information that should influence the rest of us to withhold judgement.
If any of you ever get accused of a crime, I assume that you would want the DA to refrain from declaring at news conferences that a crime has been committed prior to completing the investigation. If the girl is lying, what is she to do? What is the DA to do? Both are now on hyped-up media record making bold declarations. Even if she's telling the truth, the DA is behaving unethically. She herself has been accused in the past of a serious crime: stealing a car and evading police. She denied the charges; prior to completing the investigation, should the DA have declared that she had committed a crime?
2006-04-07
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
When a DA announces that a crime has occured prior to completing an investigation, he now has a vested interest in the outcome of the investigation. If evidence appears that casts doubt on the accuser, the DA now has an incentive to suppress the evidence; he has now become an advocate of one side.
More info about conflict over money: the accused claim they paid the girls $800 up front for two hours of dancing. The girls left after 3 minutes. Probably soon after getting there, the girls and the guys came to realize that they had different understandings about what the guys would get for $800.
Post a Comment