I say you put her in jail at least 20 times as long as he was. Or you could just kill her, that could be the way to justice.
Well, given that something like 90 percent of REPORTED domestic abuse cases and 80 percent of REPORTED rapes are committed by men against women, I understand the needs for those protections. Things like these incidents make up the tiniest percentage of real crimes which is why they are so shocking when they happen. The police SHOULD have investigated MUCH further. That was completely inexcusible, period. But, there is a reason there are so many laws on the books to protect women - violence by men against women exceeds by 30 or 40 times that of women towards men. And that is only the reported cases. Most reports place the ACTUAL number of domestic violence and rape incidents at around double what are reported.
That'll be really light since neither of the men were convicted. I doubt this will be any burden on the taxpayer; they may win a lawsuit against the crazy chick, but I doubt they could win a suit against the police. It sounds to me like the police and prosecutor did an adequate job. They just misjudged the credibility of their witness -- and only for a little while.
Man, that'll be so messed up if you break up wit a girl ... and next thing you know COPS are banging on your door days later, and she's all bruised up. PYCHOOOOO A$$ girl
They kept the guy locked up for over three months. Hardly a "little while" when you are surrounded by murderers; and hardly and adequate job done by police.
Quick aside=I'm not for violence against women, if that needed to even be said. My problem is that in a "he said/she said" situation, if there are any, and I mean any, markings on the woman the man is arrested. And realize that these woman's lies were only caught because she took it too far. If she'd stopped with the initial guy, he'd still be in jail. And don't think that scorned women don't take advantage of these "Salem Witch Trial" abilities to accuse anyone. My ex-wife pulled this on me to keep me away from my son. Took the court four years to see she was full of ****.
New law: when someone tries to frame someone else for a crime, they should receive the same penalty as the false crime.
For the dude in jail, 3 months is a very long time. For the wheels of justice, 3 months is not a long time. That's not even enough time to make it to trial. As for the job the police had done, what specifically are we expecting from them? A woman comes in and tells them she was attacked by an ex-boyfriend (a common enough crime) and has the injuries to show for it. Every time a battered woman comes into the station, should their first reaction be, "Maybe's she lying, maybe she gave herself all these bruises." I'm sure there will be no public outrage over a policy like that. So, then what should they do? Question the suspect, he says he didn't do it -- but of course he says that. Well, the woman is instable. Ok, but if a crazy chick is battered by an ex-boyfriend, should the police ignore them? Check out his alibis. OK, but friends can lie for him (one of his alibis was a friend of his). Do you take the chance that the guy is telling the truth when, if he's guilty, could very well kill the victim if left free? And, in a related issue, it is not the job of the police to determine innocence or guilt. They find suspects; prosecutors press charges; the courts determine innocence and guilt. He was pretty lucky that the prosecutor did a double-take on this one and he didn't have to go to trial. In finding suspects, the police acted in good faith. That's as much as we can really ask and still expect to catch actual criminals. In terms of failures of the System, I'd say this one was pretty mild. Much better than the poor sap in prison on a 3-strikes law that the prosecutor, the judge and even the Supreme Court admits should not apply to him.
The thing the police ignored was her previous mental history. If the dude had Kobe's lawyers, he would've gotten off. So him being thrown in that max security prison during those 3 months between arrest and trial without any priors is really messed up. Law enforcement threw him in there even with the presumption of innocence. That's what went too far.
forget money. There's no way that whitebread country club member didn't get dooked in the dook chute in maximum security.
What would her mental history have told police? She lied to the guy about aborting his baby and once had a suicide attempt. Does that indicate she's likely to inflict damage on herself and accuse someone of trying to kill her? There's really not a lot of material there. And this case differs from the Kobe case in that the nature of the crime he was accused of made him a possible threat to repeat attacks, and so bail was denied. It was unlikely that Kobe was going to try to rape the chick again. I'd love to see this world where all the men who are indicted for attempted murder are let go under their own recognizance until the courts can decide whether they are, in fact, a danger. None of this stuff is new. How many people are arrested and later acquitted? People go through this stuff every day. The only thing that makes this case different is that, because of the nature of the crime, he was denied bail (which incidentally, was a decision of the court).
This whole thing might not have happened had he not said "I love you" in the first place. (See JV's post in the "love." thread.)
Policemen not beleiving someone because they already made up their mind you are guilt based off nothing but a feeling or some circumstantial evidence???? happens everyday . ..nothing to see here Rocket River
All of these problems could be solved if we just implanted everyone with a tracking device at birth and maintained constant video suveillance everywhere.
