On Tuesday 21 August 2007, Mister E wrote: > I think this comes down to evidence and building the case and they > didn't feel like they had a lot to go off of, since they arrived at the > scene after you had followed the vehicle and had come to a complete > stop. At that point it becomes a he said she said ordeal, which is not > much to go off in such a situation. Had they taken her in pursuit, > and/or there were witnesses, that might have been a different legal > outcome.
How is 'he said she said' all there would be to go off of, when there is the obvious, matching, physical evidence that the one car impacted the other? /* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
