20
   

I'm not sure what to make of this

 
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Reply Fri 6 Apr, 2012 03:19 pm
@firefly,
DAVID wrote:
The rationale is more likely to avoid creating a precedent of disincentive
of other liars from ending the predatory effects of their deceptions.
firefly wrote:
I think that is what the proscutor did give as the reason--they didn't want to discourage other children who might have lied about sexual abuse from later coming forward and telling the truth.
No. According to the information in this thread's opening post,
it was to encourage other girls to report rape.





firefly wrote:
That's a valid reason because the primary concern should be correcting the miscarriage of justice, clearing someone's name, and freeing someone who has been unjustly imprisoned. Whether you want to punish someone, who was only 11 or 12 years old, for giving the false testimony that led to that conviction is really secondary. We don't normally punish children that age for perjury or obstruction of justice.
DAVID wrote:
I wonder whether he will AVENGE himself upon her.

We don't know how he feels toward her--she is his child and he might still care about her
despite what he has been through.
Those 2 facts r both true.

How is your MOOD, now Firefly ???





David
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Apr, 2012 03:53 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
According to the information in this thread's opening post,
it was to encourage other girls to report rape.

I read other news articles about this case where the prosecutor said she didn't want to discourage children from recanting false testimony because they feared punishment. And that really makes more sense than the explanation cited in the opening post.

My mood's tip-top, David. Smile
OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Reply Fri 6 Apr, 2012 04:16 pm
@firefly,
DAVID wrote:
According to the information in this thread's opening post,
it was to encourage other girls to report rape.
firefly wrote:
I read other news articles about this case where the prosecutor said she didn't want to discourage children from recanting false testimony because they feared punishment. And that really makes more sense than the explanation cited in the opening post.
It does.




firefly wrote:
My mood's tip-top, David. Smile
In that case, have u now viewn the 2 videos that I repeatedly posted
qua the wisdom of giving statements to the police??

The ones that u said u were not in the mood to see ?





David
0 Replies
 
IRFRANK
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Apr, 2012 07:47 am
@PUNKEY,
Quote:
There MUST have been some collaborating evidence


Not necessarily. Over zealous prosecutors and misled juries. It's not perfect.
0 Replies
 
legalbillingsoftware
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Jun, 2012 06:38 pm
if the girl's first statement isn't true, they why did they jail him?
there should have been enough evidence..
wonderin' why the girl let her dad in prison for a very long time of 9 years for just a lie..

this case needs further investigation..
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 08/23/2019 at 09:23:37