Nothing could be further from the truth.
But "The defense says ..." or "According to defense sources ..." aren't news when what they say makes their clients look good but provides no concrete, provable information. If a source close to the defense leaked that one or more of the players admitted the charges are true, now THAT would be news. After feeding "news" to the media, the defense teams seem to want to use the slanted coverage, based on their own spin, as proof that impartial media has fully investigated the case and knows there is no evidence to support the charges.
But it is defense team spin fed to news media resulting in stories used by defense teams and bloggers hostile to this case to prove the case is without merit. It's nothing more than spin spun to look like objective news.
What strikes me about the argument related to the prosecutor's silence equalling no real case is the same people who say this are the ones who complained that the prosecutor stepped over the line by daring to make any public statements before anyone was charged and that he was grandstanding.
Of course no one is supposed to notice this little contradiction that whatever the prosecutor does is supposed proof that this case is baseless.
The core problem with the idea of winning or losing a PR war in a criminal case is they aren't and shouldn't be run like a political campaign or turned it into a reality show where the winner is based on personal popularity.
To me the harder and the faster the spin, the more I suspect that the case has true merit and the defense team knows they need to do everything in their power to get people to refuse to believe the prosecutor's evidence.
Technorati tags: rape crime politics sexual assault feminism Duke Rape