friend got 10 yrs prbation, but they never did a test at hopital or any thing on the girl (was supposted to be his 12 yr old niece ) he did not do it
2007-02-11 15:12:02 · 15 answers · asked by SUZY Q 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
the girl that said it came in to court and said she made it up, and the mother of the girl asked him for 25000and she would take the girl out of state ,the girls own brother said she was lying, but he was a cop at the time and was not on the scade good side because he spoke up when he was soposed to shut up.
2007-02-11 19:58:41 · update #1
WELCOME TO THE WORLD OF OUR CORRUPT JUDICIAL SYSTEM AND THE ANTI-MALE (MAN) MEDIA THAT HATE AMERICAN MEN! MANY A MAN HAS BEEN FALSELY ACCUSED AND IS DOING TIME IN THE PEN DO TO FALSE ACCUSATIONS AND UNDOCUMENTED AND UNPROVEN CHARGES BY AND FROM WOMEN AND GIRLS. FEMALES ARE BLAMELESS IN OUR SOCIETY THANKS TO FEMINISM AND THE FAR LEFT AND RIGHT SOCIAL FREAKS. SINCE YOU'VE BEEN DIRECTLY AFFECTED BY OUR "GREAT" SYSTEM OF JUSTICE, YOU CAN BE A MODEL SPOKESPERSON AND ADVOCATE FOR MENS RIGHTS AND BEGIN A PROCESS (WITH YOUR FELLOW SISTERS) FOR CHANGE. GOD BLESS YOU GIRL!
2007-02-11 15:20:07 · answer #1 · answered by cpinkfloyd 2 · 0⤊ 9⤋
I haven't been a criminal lawyer for more than a few years, but I've been doing felony cases for that time. In all that time, I have yet to come across a case (that I've worked on) where DNA was used. I personally know of two cases where DNA was used (neither is my own case). The vast majority of cases never see DNA get used. That includes sex cases. In fact, most cases still rely on the old fashioned methods of witness testimony and confession. I'm guessing that your 12 year old niece told quite a story and the case is based on that. Not only is it not unusual, but I'd say DNA is used in the more unusual cases.
2007-02-11 19:46:22 · answer #2 · answered by Erik B 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Since the beginning of time not 1 single guilty person as ever been convicted of anything ever. It's always been "innocent wrongfully accused" people. Sorry for the sarcasm I couldn't help it.
In all seriousness how can you be SO SURE this person "did not" do it. People always claim they didn't do it. Do you know for 110% sure that no tests of any kind were done? I guarantee you that if they were and they in fact proved this person guilty then he would not admit it to you.
2007-02-11 15:37:26 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
People can be convicted of crimes, even with no physical evidence, if the Prosecutor convinces a jury "beyond a reasonable doubt" that the suspect committed the crime.
Physical evidence like DNA is great to have, but sometimes it's one person's word against another. Prosecutors usually aren't too gutsy in going to trial on cases without evidence, so he must have been pretty confident.
2007-02-11 15:20:14 · answer #4 · answered by The Avatar 3 · 5⤊ 0⤋
Was this for rape or molestation? Either way, if he was convicted, I would also assume he's got his own place on the National Sex Offender's Registry. He would have to register because the child was under legal age. Ten years is a long time, there must have been some kind of evidence. One thing's for certain .. if I had a kid, he wouldn't get within 10 feet of her.
2007-02-11 15:28:47 · answer #5 · answered by Rebel-X 2 · 4⤊ 1⤋
there had to be some form of edvidence for him to be convicted. They didn't just walk in the room and say "gee we don't like him, he's guilty" So consider that even if it is your friend he might be lieing about something and theres probably more to the story then y ou know. look it up on public records, you can get all the court information.
2007-02-11 15:16:46 · answer #6 · answered by Jenna24 2 · 4⤊ 1⤋
There can be other forms of evidence that are just as convincing as DNA. For example: a witness, motive, opportunity... take your pick. DNA is not the ba all, end all of guilt or innocence.
2007-02-11 15:20:21 · answer #7 · answered by Lisa 5 · 6⤊ 0⤋
Fingerprints, witnesses, lack of alibi, no other suspect, etc. still count for something. There are a lot of cases where they don't find DNA.
Just be happy, since you believe your friend didn't do it, that he only got probation--and not cold, hard prison time.
2007-02-11 15:21:41 · answer #8 · answered by Holiday Magic 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
um what? what are you talking about? well either way dont be so convinced this person is so Innocent cause usually they arent and almost always they lie...now that being said for 1 if he did do the crime 10 years probation aint sh!t for doing the time and just to let you know this person will do it again guaranteed
2007-02-11 15:19:15 · answer #9 · answered by ELIZY 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
DNA testing is not needed but makes conviction easier. They were convicting people long before DNA testing was ever used .
.
2007-02-11 15:18:51 · answer #10 · answered by J T 6 · 6⤊ 0⤋
He did not do it? They never do. I think it's especially sickening when spineless women like you take up for creeps like this. No man's d1ck is that big honey! He should of got 10 years in the slammer. Not 10 years probation, and you ought to be right there beside his azz. I hope, and pray you don't have any children of your own to hand over to this pervert.
2007-02-11 15:18:35 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋