|
REPLIES
|
By
herky-all-over
Replied on 8/16/2006 - 9:08:07 PM
........how can you be NOt guilty,when your laying naked,in the living room of one of your wrestlers' girlfriends apartment???
Reply |
By
Illini Hawk
Replied on 8/16/2006 - 9:57:07 PM
I think it came down to 'he said, she said', and her arguments were not compelling enough. Especially after she waited 2 years after the incident to file charges. That hurt her case a lot. Reply |
By
cornfed_ia_boy
Replied on 8/16/2006 - 10:17:43 PM
I have no problem with "reasonable doubt" in this one. Wouldn't matter if he was a goofy or a clop. Reply |
By
Keosahawkeye
Replied on 8/16/2006 - 11:37:06 PM
I'm impressed if you have read the transcript of a multiple day trial already. I'm even more impressed the court reporter managed to get it all done - must not have had any sleep the last couple days.
There is A LOT that goes on in any trial that NEVER makes the paper.
Reply |
By
LOKI
Replied on 8/17/2006 - 7:27:55 AM
I think Illini summed it up pretty well. I wonder if this case would even have gone to a jury if the participants had just been students or teachers, and not "prominent" athletes. My understanding is (without physical evidence) these are notoriously difficult cases to prosecute. Reply |
