"We believe … her [2nd dancer] story has been motivated by her own self-interest," said attorney Bill Thomas, who represents one of the uncharged players.And that makes her inferior to Bill Thomas how? Mr. Thomas is clearly motivated by self-interest and that is to do everything possible to see that his client isn't implicated in this case. To keep his business going strong he must be seen as an effective representative.
The public is just supposed to see the alleged victim and all the witnesses in this case through Mr. Thomas's and other defense team members' filters without question? I don't think so.
The fact that the two dancers were separated has been public knowledge for a long time. So the fact that the second woman didn't see the other one get raped is not news.
The second dancer isn't claiming that she knows for certain that the other dancer was raped during the time they were separated so for defense attorneys to discredit her thought processes feels malicious. Apparently, anyone involved in this case who thinks back on that night and doesn't see the entire lacrosse team as undeniably innocent must be discredited.
Will the taxi driver be the next target for repeating what he heard the second time he went to that house the night in question?
I wouldn't be surprised if that happens or if the defense teams try to convince the public that the men the taxi driver overheard were considering calling the cops themselves to report a crime against them, but decided not to because she's just a stripper.
Yeah, that's the ticket.
Technorati tags: duke+lacrosse duke+rape rape sexual+assault feminism politics crime