Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Viewing Single Post From: Blog and Media Roundup - Saturday, July 4, 2009
Quasimodo Jul 4 2009, 08:30 AM

Quote:
 
But Judge Hill was unmoved. He began the hearing by saying that in his 27-year career, "I've not seen a rape case with so much incriminating, credible and powerful evidence," and ended it by dismissing the motion


Ridiculous.

(I guess he's not seen too many rape cases...)

Thanks for posting this. I think it deserves our attention.

ETA:

http://ericfrimpong.wordpress.com/motion-for-new-trial/
daniel danso adu said
March 12, 2008 at 6:52 pm

At the bedrock of our criminal justice system is the presumption of innocence. Every person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until proven guilty “beyond a reasonable doubt.” The rules of procedure in our criminal justice system flow from these basic principles, recognizing that “it is better to set ten guilty men free than to convict one innocent man.”

These safeguards failed to protect former UCSB soccer star Eric Frimpong from being convicted of rape, even though none of his DNA was found on the accuser; only semen from her boyfriend. The young woman, a 19-year-old freshman with a history of alcohol-induced blackouts, had a blood alcohol level between .29 and .34. At .35 you are at an anesthesia level where surgery can be performed.

(snip)

Detectives Kies and Michael Scherbarth did nothing to investigate what other males the accuser had contact with that night or when she last had sex with her boyfriend. The detectives found Eric the next morning, playing ping pong with friends. They requested he go with them without explaining the allegations or his rights. Eric’s friends asked if he needed representation, explaining he was from a foreign country and would not understand what was going on. Detective Kies lied, stating he would explain everything, then took Eric away and grilled him without explaining why. He didn’t explain his rights until Eric, obviously confused, asked what was going on.

Unlike his accuser, none of Eric’s friends were allowed into his interview. Eric politely answered all questions, allowed a search of his home and clothes. When they finally told him he was a rape suspect, he denied having sex with the accuser and volunteered a DNA sample. There was no presumption of innocence. They accepted the impaired accuser’s word. Eric was the only suspect, even after only the boyfriend’s DNA was found on the accuser that night.

(snip)

Edited by Quasimodo, Jul 4 2009, 08:39 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post
Blog and Media Roundup - Saturday, July 4, 2009 · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers