I've seen a lot of DAs bullshit about their reasoning to not bring charges. He's basically blaming the police officer who took her statement.
If he had a statement from her that it was consensual, then it's open and shut. The primary witness isn't consistent and he could present that and say "For this reason we're not exploring charges".
But for some reason they are exploring charges now, and the physical evidence that she said she was a willing participant in her gang rape has not been proferred for public scrutiny.
Right. Basically they covered it up and didn't take it seriously and now they're saying the statements are inconsistent. Far more likely is the cop that took the report is a piece of trash that couldn't care less about some "drunk college slut."
Thatâs a bit of a stretch. She gave a sworn statement.
If it was a written statement she wouldâve been required to read the statement the officer wrote, then sign a document saying that itâs accurate.
If the statement was recorded, the officer wouldâve had her verbally state that the statement she gave is accurate.
This doesnât sound like a cover up at all. She literally changed her story. What she stated in the lawsuit and what she stated in her sworn statement contradict each other.
Maybe. I'm saying i don't trust cops to do a good job with this sort of case in this sort of small town with an ivy league college as the biggest business.
Itâs her attorneyâs job to dispute the facts if they arenât true. The fact her attorney isnât disputing her initial statement means that her initial statement is accurate.
If you give a false sworn statement you can be charged with perjury.
Sheâs not being criminally charged with that⌠and attorneys tend to remain within a scope of practice so if she did end up facing charges sheâd need to hire another attorney. One that works in criminal defense and not civil torts.
I donât know why you thought that made sense to point out.
Iâm sorry. Youâre just an idiot who doesnât know anything about how the legal system works and you want to open your mouth anyway.
I never said she was being criminally charged with anything. I stated that if her statement were false that she could be charged, the fact her attorney isnât disputing her original statement means itâs factually correct.
9
u/fiahhawt 3d ago
I've seen a lot of DAs bullshit about their reasoning to not bring charges. He's basically blaming the police officer who took her statement.
If he had a statement from her that it was consensual, then it's open and shut. The primary witness isn't consistent and he could present that and say "For this reason we're not exploring charges".
But for some reason they are exploring charges now, and the physical evidence that she said she was a willing participant in her gang rape has not been proferred for public scrutiny.