It could be political on the prosecutor, it
could be ineptness (remember the prosecutor in OJ's case?), it could be they
hoped it wouldn't come out...I dunno.
But at the same time I sure can't see why
the detective would want to sabotage his own case by lying on the
stand.
Charles Mims
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 11:39 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Sndbox] Breaking...
Not really. The detective said that the victim stated that he stopped when
she made her intentions clear. That's not speculation, it's part of the
court record. If he stopped, then he didn't rape her.
my question is if this is all there is too it why do they think they had more then enough evidence to take this to trial. there has to be more then this
________________________________
Changes to your subscription (unsubs, nomail, digest) can be made by going to http://sandboxmail.net/mailman/listinfo/sndbox_sandboxmail.net
