|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyone notice that on the TV talkshows, like Ricki (F)Lake, Jenny (Joke) Jones, Etc. That they are always showing DNA evidence being used to bust "Cheatin' men" or "prove the dog is the daddy"? It is like they are trying to depict DNA as yet another weapon for women to use against men.
Fact of the matter is..., DNA evidence is exhonerateing men left and right! Proveing them INNOCENT! So, if anything, it is a weapon for MEN to use against lying WOMEN.
Interesting, ain't it, the way our media twists things?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The problem for me, in this case, is that there is other evidence (the details of which I can't cite just now) that places these five boys at the scene, so I'm pretty-well convinced that, even though the DNA evidence exonerates them from participating in the rape, it would appear that they DID participate in the crime. I only bring this up because I think that we need to be careful of when to get behind the accused and when to recognize the guilty. The victim, in this case, suffered a lot of different kinds of assaults. Rape was just one. Now, is thirteen years excessive for the other things that were done to her? I think not; she beaten and left for dead.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Monday December 09, @01:33PM EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Frank, could you tell us what some of this other evidence is? We'd be interested to hear about it, it's not flamebait. In the case of rape, it would seem that DNA evidence can be pretty conclusive of whether this crime occurred.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unfortunately, I can't be specific with citations. I live near New York City (well, within the broadcast area of the major TV stations) and I listen to the news and commentary on WABC (right-wing talk radio). This case has been all over the place. But apparently, the woman was definitely raped, beaten, and left for dead. I remember hearing reports of the original event, and they were pretty sensational because it seemed pretty astounding that she even survived the attack at all. And as I understand it, she is permanently blind as a result of the attack. The only question was who did it. Well, the five teenagers were implicated by a fair amount of physical evidence on the scene. From what's been reported, these kids were definitely on the scene and participated in the attack. But DNA evidence was not used in the original trial. There was a guy already in prison on another conviction who admitted to the rape and the DNA evidence that was used more recently corroborated his admission.
There was definitely a crime committed, and it seems that these kids were a part of the attack, but the DNA proves that the crime of rape was not theirs. The prosecutors apparently only went for rape, probably because they wanted the longest sentence. They COULD re-try them on lesser charges, and it seems they could probably get a conviction on them, but the teenagers have already served thirteen years, so the prosecutors have stated they will not seek a re-trial.
If I come across a good article with more traceable testimony, I'll post it.
To those of who (justifiably) demand better references, I apologize for not being able to provide them. My only point is that men DO commit brutal crimes, as do women, and we'd be well-advised to be careful of what cases we select as examples of courtroom misandry. This case is probably not a very good choice because even though DNA vindicated them of rape, these boys were still involved in a brutal crime.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Flamebait?
Not at all, frank. Your points are well made, and true.
My earlier comment was more off-handed, then anything, and just slightly off topic.
But yeah, I agree those other guys may not have commited the actual rape of that woman, but odds are real good they were involved in one way or another.
Thundercloud.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I do not think it will be easy to defend them now after they completed prison-mandated sex offender treatment programs where they had to confess their guilt again and again.
PUNISHMENT AND CRIME
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
