6_Time_Momma
<font color=blue>Still crazy after all these years
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2001
- Messages
- 3,969
No details other than the victim could "no longer participate". What on earth does that mean?
A civil case would be much easier to win and it is likely it will never go that far because he will probably settle to avoid the publicity and time involved. IMO, she is a liar who is seeking monetary gain. This turn of events does not surprise me.According to the reports, she no longer wants to testify against him. I think the reason being she felt the system no longer supported her from the beginning. Without her testimony it's all hearsay. She is going through with the civil case though.
Originally posted by poohandwendy
A civil case would be much easier to win and it is likely it will never go that far because he will probably settle to avoid the publicity and time involved. IMO, she is a liar who is seeking monetary gain. This turn of events does not surprise me.
Originally posted by poohandwendy
IMO, she is a liar who is seeking monetary gain. This turn of events does not surprise me.
I thought her case had more holes in it than a sieve does, until I heard he said that. I thought it a little strange that she was raped, then went out and had sex right afterwards with someone else. That made her look like a gold digger to me (kinda like the Boy who called wolf type). But for him to admit he can see how she thought it wasn't consensual, admitting to it AFTER the case was dropped, makes me wish he'd see jail time now.Originally posted by mt2
I just saw some of the statement that he made afterward. He apologized to her for this past year. He also said something like maybe she didn't see it (sex/rape) as consentual (sp) like he did.
Is that not rape then?