Letters to the Editor
-
THEY'RE GUILTY
They must be.
They're rich white guys.
Throw the book at them.
-
The day has long past
I used to get really caught up in the outcomes of high profile rape trials.
But that's something I'm trying to get over.
I refuse to form any judgments about this case.
Strippers can be raped by privileged young jerks, and racist asshole jocks can be falsely accused by mentally unstable women.
Each of these things is possible, and I'm not going to get all wound up in which of the alternatives is true in this case.
I hope the jurors don't have too unpleasant a time while they're trying to decide, when it get to that stage.
-
proof of innocence, for sure
"Evans told reporters that he had already taken and passed a polygraph test administered by his attorneys..."
He passed a polygraph that was performed by his own attorneys? This is supposed to be evidence of his innocence?
Maybe he did it and maybe he didn't, but this piece of "exculpatory evidence" is basically the same as just believing his lawyers when they say he didn't do it. I hope for his sake that they have something better up their sleeves when this thing goes to trial.
-
what evidence
What evidence?
1. How about _no_ DNA on/out/around her person for any of the defendants despite hundreds of analyses in two different labs. After a claim of 30 minutes of oral, anal and vaginal rape by 3 (or maybe 20) different men.
2. How about 46 people in a tiny house, including the 1st dancer (who hates the players for her calling her a ni**a), none of whom saw or heard a gang rape.
3. How about iron-clad alabi for at least one of the defendants (who the accuser identified with "100% certainty"), making it incapable of him to have committed the rape. Gotta loves today's GPS society.
4. How about that today's defendent helped the police collect evidence from his own house (including picking fingernails out of the trash can for them), went to the police station, gave his email/IM accounts to the police (stupidly). And then offered to take a lie detector test that they administered (his attorney have given the actual test to the prosecution).
5. How about the fact that the DA has never allowed excullatory evidence for any of the defendants to be submitted to his office. And that neither the PD or the DA ever interviewed two of the defendants (and hide the accuser from the grand jury).
6. How about the fact that accuser claimed that today's defendant had a mustache (which he didn't/doesn't have)
It goes on and on for pages like this, and you don't even need to bring the accuser's sordid past in. Her statements and action themselves will end this case.
Disgraceful that the posters here, out of pure agenda-driven blindness, are make this accuser out to a victum. Or a heroine.
As the unfolding of the case will prove, there is no question that this is a false accusation.
-
the press conference
I don't know whether this guy is guilty or innocent. But I saw the press conference on the news tonight, and it definitely didn't help him in my eyes.
He held a press conference (that's bizarre in itself) listing lots of things that he claims are evidence of his innocence. But the more he talked, the more I thought, "this guy is a narcissist and he thinks he can get away with this." He says he helped the police gather evidence. That seems a little odd, since I've never heard of police allowing a potential suspect to "help" them gather evidence before. He provided a long list of ways in which he claims to have been helpful to them, even though everything else I've heard has suggested that the entire team has been stonewalling the police since the beginning. One of his complaints is that the DA wouldn't talk to him - as if he's entitled to a meeting with the DA to argue with him. One thing after another smacked of a guy who thinks he can talk his way out of this and con the police into thinking he's innocent because he's being so very "helpful." He bestows himself with a cloak of importance and indignation that I find very suspect.
The defense is trying this case in the press, and it's repulsive. It's important to keep in mind that the DA is not providing his case to the press, and he didn't comment on the accused's remarks, so we're seeing only one side of the story with this bizarre press conference and all the leaks of information from the defense. The news did report that this arrest is based partially on DNA evidence from the woman's fingernail and a trash can in the bathroom, but beyond that we don't know very much. The defense has chosen the disgusting strategy of trying the VICTIM in the press. And I say "victim" because I read the warrant which contained the report from the forensic nurses, which was posted earlier on Broadsheet. It sounds like there's little doubt that the woman was raped - the question is, by whom?
At the press conference there was a local woman who protested the defense's tactics, and pointed out that she suspects they're trying to sully the jury pool with all this press, in order to get the case moved to another venue. I suspect she's right. Defense attorneys can be really slimy - I've seen them make arguments and character assassinations against victims in court that I could not believe. It seems like this is what is happening here.
-
Polygraph was NOT administered by his attorneys - It was administered by an expert.
I have sent a separate letter to Salon that this should be corrected.
If you watch the video of his press conference on CNN, or read the CNN article, he clearly stated that the test was administered by an expert, who was a former member of the FBI and had a great deal of experience. http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/05/15/duke.rapecase/index.html
This is an important distinction, because obviously most people would not consider a polygraph test administered by an attorney - or anyone without experience - to be valid.