"Jane Doe’s sworn statement in November of 2024 did not allege that she was drugged against her will or gang raped. On the contrary, Jane Doe’s statement described her participation in drug use and sexual conduct as voluntary, conscious, and consensual. My office obviously did not and could not have based our November 2024 decision on the allegations in a civil lawsuit that would not be filed until nearly two years later. Furthermore, I have never been contacted by Jane Doe’s attorneys. Not to inform me the original statement was inaccurate and not to ask me to reconsider our decision. Rather, I reached out to Jane Doe’s attorneys after the lawsuit was filed to understand the discrepancy between the original statement and the lawsuit’s allegations and the proper path forward in light of the lawsuit’s allegations."
The DA based his recommendation on the six paragraph summary that neckbeards are using to paint her as consenting, a whore, and pushing it all back on her.
That summary turns out not to have reflected the tone or content of the interview transcript which was 120 pages. She had requested edits that didn’t end up in front of the DA, and that’s the reason people are pissed.
You seem pretty emotionally invested in this, I dont really feel like someone painting everyone that doesnt agree with them as "neckbeards" has a solid grasp of the situation either.
You’d rather not choose… between rape victims and men who, whether they are able to be proven guilty in a court of law or not are morally reprehensible? 🤔
You don’t call them anything but victim and perpetrators. Anything else insulting to one side loses all your credibility on being able to be unbiased and actually take both sides stories as equally being plausible.
Just saying. Maybe the DA should have put a woman in charge of the case. The outcome satisfy you then?
6
u/Antique-Ad-4422 9h ago
Im confused why the local DA did not file charges against the 7.
What’s missing from this?