[quote=temeculaguy]Flu, you need to be a little more skeptical. First, the link you provided goes to some world press blog and I didn’t see an author’s name. I did a little search and read a few versions of the article but it’s all pretty much the same, it’s from the lawyer of the father and a serbian consulate advocate. So you are hearing one side of the story and making assumptions, which is exactly what the lawyer wants you to do. I’m not saying the lawyer is lying or wrong but break down his press release. The lawyer said that cps produced a videotape of the five year claiming the father innapropriately touched her, the lawyer said the contact was routine “such as drying off the child with a towel.” He also said the questions were ambiguous. Look at the accusation he chose to give you and the media, a harmless act that all parents do. But he doesn’t tell you what the other allegations were yet he throws out an attack of the ambiguous nature of the questions (“such as” means that is but one example). He’s prepping the defense for what those other allegations are. The authorities can’t tell the media anything, they are prohibited. I’m sure there is more to the story. This is a spin tactic to get the agency to give up, to try the case in the court of public opinion where only one side gets to talk. Maybe they are right, but don’t be so quick to judge because you and I only know hat the defense wants us to know. Maybe the questions weren’t ambiguous, why doesn’t the lawyer tell us the questions? Lawyers aren;t evil, they have a job to do. They don’t usually lie, but they do omit things that are damaging to their client, especially in the media.
Why not wait to hear both sides of the story before deciding? More often than not, cps would love to show you everything but they are prohibited from doing so.
Imagine you have a friend that is going through a divorce, or got arrested, or lost a bet, or lost an argument. Now imagine he tells you his side of the story, but you cant ask questions and you cant talk to the other party. You will probably certainly side with him, just from what he tells you, he certainly got screwed somehow. But we dont live like this, we ask our friend questions, sometimes we know the other person and we almost certainly dont see it how he wants us to see it once we delve a little deeper into it. The truth usually lies somewhere in the middle. What you have just done is taken everything your friend said as fact and made a decision on how the world operates. Take a step back, doubt both sides and always doubt the side that is talking.
Believe none of what you read and only half of what you see.[/quote]
Yes, TG be very skeptical. Just as an investment banker will make massive bets to get a bigger commission, everyone in the justice system is faced with reward system that does not always align with social good. Every single day in this country a prosecutor may withhold evidence from courts to bolster their conviction rate and run for higher office. What is the chance of getting caught – practically nil. [Defense lawyers do not have same responsibilty to society so never trust them] If you examine the death penalty appeals conducted by Northwestern Law students there were several cases of prima facia prosecutorial misconduct that went unpunished. The “system was so deeply flawed” that the the former Gov commuted all the death penalty cases to life in prison.
The McMartin preschool case from mid 80’s was another travesty that was Akiki story on steroids. With absolutely no physical evidence -“After six years of criminal trials, no convictions were obtained, and all charges were dropped in 1990. When the trial ended in 1990 it had been the longest and most expensive criminal trial in American history $15M”.
