when your knuckles are bleeding, bandages work best, not more posts to lbo.
At 03:57 PM 10/1/2009, SA wrote:
>Sorry to prolong the agony, but I claim right of reply:
>
>Dennis Claxton wrote:
>
>>>everyone thought and wanted it to be this way (family, prosecutor, defense),
>>
>>
>>People keep saying the family was in favor of the deal. But this leaves
>>out that RP's defense attorneys told reporters they were going to drag
>>her through classic blame the victim tactics if it went to trial.
>
>That's not at all how it happened. The victim's attorney wrote this to the
>judge:
>
>>Long before I had met any other attorney in this case, my clients
>>informed me that their goal in pressing the charges did not include
>>seeking the incarceration of the defendant, but rather the admission by
>>him of wrongdoing, and commencement by him, under the supervision of the
>>court, of a program to ensure complete rehabilitation. The plea of guilty
>>by the defendant [to the reduced charge] is contrition sufficient for my
>>clients to believe that goal may be achievable.
>
>By the way, everyone is quoting the victim's grand jury testimony as if it
>were the final judgment of a commission of inquiry, but there were also
>statements taken from witnesses, the defendant, the arresting officer,
>etc., which no one has seen, except in brief excerpts in the probation
>report, which for some reason nobody seems to have bothered to read.
>
>The girl's grand jury testimony was a text created - quite rightly and
>properly - with only one purpose in mind: to provide the evidence
>necessary to win an indictment. You would neither want nor expect that
>document to contain "the whole truth" about the circumstances; it was not
>meant to provide that and it almost certainly didn't. That's why we have
>trials in this country, except where there's a plea bargain, or a judge
>whose flagrant misconduct induces the defendant to abscond.
>
>SA
>
>
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk