Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

click the link to read the full story
1 posted on 05/16/2006 12:38:42 PM PDT by freepatriot32
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: traviskicks

ping


2 posted on 05/16/2006 12:38:57 PM PDT by freepatriot32 (Holding you head high & voting Libertarian is better then holding your nose and voting republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: freepatriot32

something is not right with this


3 posted on 05/16/2006 12:45:14 PM PDT by kinoxi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: freepatriot32

Some time in the clink may do her some good. yawn.


4 posted on 05/16/2006 12:46:05 PM PDT by conservativewasp (Liberals lie for sport and hate our country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: freepatriot32
Defense attorneys . . . say the state has "effectively kidnapped" the girl"When you take a child and put her in jail and deny her access to counsel because she refuses to be labeled a material witness, essentially it's an abuse of power," attorney Alex Folk said. "I don't think the state has the right to put a 14-year-old in jail without due process.

This would all be true if the CHILD's parents were objecting or unaware, but apparently there's not a peep of protest from them. The girl is right where her parents want her, so I don't see a problem. She also hasn't been charged with a crime, so has no need for an attorney. No doubt she'll be dealt with after the perp's trial, and dispatched to some juvenile facility where she'll receive "treatment", also without any objection from her parents, who have apparently grasped that she's more than they can handle.

7 posted on 05/16/2006 12:47:43 PM PDT by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: freepatriot32

I'm guessing the sex was consensual and she doesn't want to testify against her "boyfriend".


9 posted on 05/16/2006 12:51:57 PM PDT by Still Thinking (Disregard the law of unintended consequences at your own risk.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: freepatriot32

Typical police stupidity.

Police do try and delay delay delay a lawyer seeing their client because they know a lawyer inhibits the polices' ability to intimidate.

This is a witness too.

If police continue this, then any testimony they offer at trial will always be considered deceptive FIRST until proven valid.


12 posted on 05/16/2006 1:02:12 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: freepatriot32

Well she has denied that they had sex, so unless they can force her to change her story what kind of testimony does the prosecution expect to compel her to give?

It also seems to me that there could be a breach of the 5th Amendment here since she already gave the police one story. If she says what they want her to say will she be testifying against herself for a "lying to the police" type of crime?

I'm not a lawyer, but I don't see the sense in forcing someone to testify when they are the alleged victim. Tricky terrain with her being a minor, but I'm not sure it's a precedent worth persuing.


16 posted on 05/16/2006 1:15:54 PM PDT by American_Centurion (No, I don't trust the government to automatically do the right thing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: freepatriot32

The victim of Debra LaFave's rape refused to testify against her. He wasn't hauled off to jail. The chargers against LaFave were dropped, instead.

Justice isn't blind, it knows only too well what's popular and what isn't. Except for the drug war, of course. But that isn't really justice, is it?


17 posted on 05/16/2006 1:16:08 PM PDT by gcruse (http://gcruse.typepad.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson