Samira wrote:
Quote:
Can we make it any clearer? Would you like a pie chart? Do pretty pictures help?
I understand what you're saying. I just feel that your allegations are unproven.
Yeah. About as unproven as the prosecutors allegations. Moreso in fact. I've been following this story and kinda sitting on the sidelines. However, unless there's a heck of a lot more evidence then what's been presented, this case will not go anywhere. As a few people have mentioned, if it wasn't for the fact that this was a black stipper and a group of wealthy white kids, this case would have been dropped weeks ago.
Makes you wonder where the racism is in this case?
In any case, I think alot of people are really running ahead of the facts. She claims she was raped. However, there's little to no evidence of rape. And there's certainly no evidence of who might have raped her if she was. The only facts we really have is that she was "hurt" (had bruising on her body). We do know that she was involved in some sexual activity. I've yet to hear any absolute confirmation of rape though (which they *can* tell very reliably by looking at vaginal tearing patterns). We know that she and another stripper went to the party. We know that they both went there without any bodyguards to watch out for them. We also know that the other stripper has not claimed any sort of rape or assault. We know that several witnesses have stated that she had bruises on her body prior to arriving at the party.
The real problem here is the amazing lack of corroboration of her claim. She was raped, but the other girl who worked with her didn't know about it? Even *after* they left? She just ran out of the house by herself, calls someone for a ride, then shows up some time later at another location and calls police? It's just such a bizaare set of circumstances. And it's virtually impossible to prove. She's essentially arguing a word-against-word case, and most of the "word" is in opposition to her story.
In order to believe her story, you have to disbelieve the security guard who saw her after the event. You have to disbelieve the witnesses who saw her before the event. You have to disbelieve the testimony of everyone at the party. You have to ignore the lack of corroboration by her partner at the party. You have to ignore the largish gap of time between the alleged rape and her call to police.
Basically, you have to ignore everything except her claim and some *very* broad physical evidence that can't prove the key things that physical evidence needs to prove (who, what, where, and when). More importantly, you can't prove a "why" in this case either. We can assume that she was an innocent stripper, place no weight in the facts that she's prostituted herself before, and no weight in the fact that she didn't have a bodyguard, and conclude that any sex that may have occured in that house was non-consentual. Or, we can conclude that those facts mean that likely any sex *was* consentual (and the result of payment).
While it's not impossible for a prostitute to be raped. It's pretty much impossible to prove that a stripper who has performed sex for money in the past, and who shows up at a party to strip without a guard, has been raped. Ultimately, that's the problem with this case. Without hard physical evidence and eye-witness corroboration of rape, I just can't see how it's possible to get a conviction in this case.