Replies

Here's a blast from the past worth re-reading.

To: Mrs.Liberty;RnMomof7; FresnoDA; Mini_teacup; rolling_stone; LauraTealeaf; demsux; skipjackcity...

Good morning all. Here's today's theory. It was posted on the UT Forum by Friar Tom. It's just a theory and not all of the peices are required for it to work. Also, how many people does it really take for a conspiracy? Two? Twenty? How many does it take to obstruct justice? Anyway I thought it an interesting peice, hope you do too. And it's longish. The good Friar has made additional comments which can be found on the UT Forum addressing issues other posters have brought up for those of you with Enquiring minds.

FriarTom

It couldn't have happened this way...could it? Why is this case so full of holes?

Why is every piece of evidence open to speculation?

Why are there so many conflicting timelines, inaccurate media leaks, and strange coincidences surrounding this story?

Why did the accused, a highly intelligent man, a man who had no criminal record, other than a D.U.I., suddenly become a violent predator?

I have a theory that may not be true, but it would explain everything if it is. WHAT IF...Let’s take a purely hypothetical case almost identical to this one, where a 7-year old girl is abducted in the middle of the night from her bed, and the eye of the media is suddenly on the police department and DA…

The investigators in this case are thoroughly stumped as to what happened to this poor little 7-year-old girl. They have their suspicions about one or two individuals, but their investigation has not yielded a good suspect.

We know that the pressure on a Police Dept and a District Attorney is immense in a case like this. I think we all will stipulate.

The DA, keenly interested in being re-elected, and trying to overcome increasingly negative publicity, MUST make an arrest quickly in this case.

A television interview with one of the victim’s neighbors gives the DA an idea. He can take advantage of a very tenuous connection between the neighbor, and the mother of the victim.

Police publicly begin to focus in on the neighbor as the primary suspect, but the evidence they have really does *not* point to him. They find some porn images on his computer, and "accidentally" leak to the press that they are of under-aged girls, so as to prejudice the general population. The man is a pedophile, they intimate, one of the most despised of all criminals. The neighbor is already as good as guilty in the eyes of many. Subsequently, several other inaccurate leaks begin to surface to further implicate the neighbor, such as the "overpowering" smell of bleach in the neighbor’s RV, etc.

Just to add spice to the soup, the media begins circulating rumors of a “swinger” lifestyle predominant in this particular community. The victim’s parents are part of this lifestyle, the rumors whisper. Gossip begins to spread. The police, under orders from on-high, are told to “grill” the neighbor.

One of the detectives, who’s privy to the game and knows the neighbor is not really guilty, recommends a really good attorney to the neighbor, one of the best in the region.

Why?

Because the neighbor is NOT guilty.

And they don't really intend to convict him.

They will forge a little evidence, evidence that can easily be refuted or overcome by the highly competent defense attorney they themselves have just recommended.

They don't really want to convict him. They just want to look like they are trying.

Looks good to the electorate, and makes the “people” feel safe.

Police actually find the body days prior to making an arrest, but are unable to extract any valuable evidence from it. They are able to extract some DNA from the body, for future use. They leave the body where they found it, because they want to set this thing up correctly. First, they will arrest the neighbor, even though they have no body, in order to convince the people that he is so guilty they need no body, and to rivet the peoples’ attention to the case once again.

Then, the day after arresting neighbor, (now The Accused), the private investigator working with the search teams, who has a working relationship with the police department, receives his instructions to direct searchers back out to the area where the body still lies. This wraps the whole thing up nice and neat, you see.

The only *real* evidence to be found anywhere is the blood / DNA evidence planted by investigators, again, to firmly implicate The Accused in the public's perception.

But they don't really intend to convict The Accused, and they know the highly competent trial lawyer they themselves recommended, the trial lawyer who perhaps owes the DA a favor or two, will get The Accused acquitted. The DA is confident of this.

The DA knows that people, in general, don't really understand the judiciary process. He knows that half the evidence he will present will be deemed inadmissible. He knows it will be impossible to win a conviction with an inadmissible motive, an extremely shaky timeline, a murky window of opportunity, and no cause of death. Still, just to be certain, he asks for the death penalty. He knows for a certainty that the jury will not find The Accused guilty with shaky evidence if it also means sentencing him to die. It is a "slam-dunk."

The Accused will be freed by a hung jury, or else will be acquitted by that jury.

The Trial Lawyer will be perceived by the masses as a brilliant, if slimy attorney, contemptible, certainly, but very desirable to those who find themselves in trouble with the law. Able to command top-dollar on the open-market, he becomes famous, highly sought-after--a CNN interview.

The DA gets to play the martyr. After all, he HAD his man, but that slime-ball attorney, that SNAKE, got the killer off using smoke-and-mirrors in the courtroom. The DA is re-elected and accrues great political capital. Strangely, despite complaining vehemently about what a grave injustice it is that The Accused "got off," the DA will not pursue a retrial.

The police will take a minor public relations hit for screwing up the investigative process. In order to fix the problem, of course, the police department lobbies the City Council and the state for millions more taxpayer dollars.

The Accused, freed but not exonerated, leaves his home city and moves far away. Acquitted, yet knowing he will always be The Accused, he is doomed to live out the remainder of his days as a marked man, a social leper, an outcast.

The DA and all those involved are better able to sleep at night, knowing they did not *really* convict an innocent man. In fact, they laugh privately at their own cleverness, and how easy it is to pull the wool over peoples' eyes.

This, of course, is a completely fictional account, and should not in any way be perceived as an accusation of any individual or individual(s), public or private.

163 posted on 4/29/02 9:09 AM Central by Jaded
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]