(no subject)

[novapsyche]

Some perspective on the Duke lacrosse rape case. (Thanks, ginmar.)

Comments

[mehinda.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure if it's really that much of a perspective. And the whole "If the D.A. says he has a case, he has one" is a little misleading in itself. There have certainly been times when District Attorneys have pursued cases when the evidence points away from there being a case.

I do honestly believe this woman was raped and I do believe that the defense attorneys are calling her character into question to garner public support for their clients and as a signal of what they'll be saying in court, but to make such sweeping supportive statements of DAs in general is just as naive as the people who only buy what the defense is selling.

[simianpower.livejournal.com]

All that article does is say that "Just because we don't have X piece of evidence doesn't mean that the guys didn't do it." The problem with that is that the men don't HAVE to prove themselves innocent; the DA has to prove them GUILTY and all I've seen so far is a lack of evidence. I haven't been following this that closely, but nowhere in the linked article does it refer to evidence that they DO have. One of the responders was correct in saying that clearly something bad happened to that girl, but that doesn't necessarily mean that she was raped BY THOSE GUYS. Could they have done it? Sure. But if there's no evidence pointing to them beyond a shadow of a doubt, they have to be acquitted. That's how the system works, like it or not.