Another report documenting that the Duke accuser got herself out of an arrest by inventing the rape claim. Not mentioned in this story is a question recently asked in earnest (but that some like me have asked for some weeks): Why no "toxicology" test, as is (1) normal for a rape case (to check for "date rape" drugs"); and (2) mandatory for "public intoxication" arrests (which is what she was arrested for)? Answer: The accuser -- already in legal trouble for previously stealing a car and driving very dangerously while loaded -- was at the time on self-administered illegal drugs, which a "toxicology" test would have revealed.
By inventing a rape allegation, she transformed herself from drug criminal to rape victim, and thereby not only got herself released from custody, but transformed her impending toxicology test from mandatory to voluntary. Prediction: We will learn that that rape-examining medical personel attempted their usual rape toxicology test, but the accuser refused to consent.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Betty: A very troubling situation. On the one hand I do believe that lots of sexual assaults really do occur, and that the women who experiance them usually don't report them. But of women who report them, it certainly seems that some large fraction are fake. For one thing, the charge itself is a powerful weapon, and as such, an action available and attractive for abuse, both for the purposes of revenge, and in this case, to get out of trouble.
As we learn more about the reality of rape charges, I hope more people insist that if the accuser's name gets "sheilded", then so should the accused's. And we must discard the myth -- no so thoroughly exploded -- that "women never lie about sexual assault."
Post a Comment