The mother of convicted rapist Antonio McAllister thinks so and tells a reporter that she believes the 3 hairs found in a sock -- which are the only pieces of physical evidence linking him to the crime -- were placed there.
So where are all those who obsess over rape charges leveled against athletes and who combed through every shred of prosecution evidence in those cases to ensure that those men weren't railroaded by prosecutors so eager to appease a public hungry for justice that they leave ethics far behind?
Most of these people claimed that their interest was to see that justice was served for all those accused and was not a selective interest based on the identity of the defendants or the alleged victims. Now we have a mother who absolutely believes that her son is innocent and needs to be exonerated.
So where are all those who said that they've had their eyes opened to the potential for injustice to be done against those less privileged?
Are they failing to research this man's possible innocence and failing to talk about the weaknesses in this case because they can't accuse the 78 year old alleged rape victim of being a slut or a lying 'ho or someone suffering from morning-after regret?