Because he wants to be re-elected or seek higher office?Seems pretty slam dunk to me as well! I do not pretend to understand why the DA would not pursue charges.
Because he wants to be re-elected or seek higher office?Seems pretty slam dunk to me as well! I do not pretend to understand why the DA would not pursue charges.
Because DAs are elected officials. They tend to not want to do things based on how their actions will affect their political careers.
'Eff their political careers, this could have ruined a kid's life. Ain't no resume' worth that. God I hate politicians more every second.
I didn't mean to come across as terse towards you. I can see that it could be taken that way now.I didn't say it was right, just that it is so. And yeah, I'm not real impressed with them either.
I didn't mean to come across as terse towards you. I can see that it could be taken that way now.
You could never piss me off. I want some of that smoked Canadian bacon!
Because it's strictly he-said/she-said. There's not enough evidence to prove anything either way, at least not to criminal ("beyond a reasonable doubt") standards. Not proving the truth of an allegation is not the same as proving its falsity.Just reading the D.A's press release it seemed pretty much a woman scorned type thing. Maybe one of our forum lawyers can explain why they could not prove she lied.
I didn't know you were from Canada.....
So...criminal charges against her for filing a false report are up to the DA; we'll see if he has any balls (my money is on "no;" I've encountered him before, and he seems to be the type who is setting himself up for higher office).
And you have my opinion on the likelihood of that.That's what I was referring to earlier.
Enter your email address to join: