Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot
She, the "supposed victim", just made it up? A justice with no history of anger or problems? Known for being nice? Against a justice with a defined history of anger and problems? And some of the other justices who witnessed that it did not factually occur took her side and lied for her? In front of other judges that also witnessed that it didn't happen? I don't buy that in the least.
Prosser isn't exonerated from anything. He's just not charged with battery. The Chief Justice is talking about making court deliberations public to force good behaviour. That's absurd (I think they must remain private). But that clearly shows there is a problem.
The investigation information is supposed to be released Friday. We'll all get to see what that says.
|
too murky a case at this point to know who is lying, who is telling the truth. typically there are three sides to a story, his, hers, the truth. did she rush him? did he choke her? or was it more of what he said, that she went after him first? did he try to ward her off? did he call her a bitch and she went after him?
who knows? we won't ever know now. there's no way to know what happened without having been there.
one interesting point is that she claims she never wanted charges filed. it can't have been as serious as it's been made out to be if she didn't want to press charges to begin with.
also, you're amazed that anyone assumes innocence, but i'm just as amazed you were so sure of the mans guilt.