Quote:
|
Originally Posted by guccilvr
Since they are blasting away at the DNA evidence, they have killed the consent avenue which makes me believe they are pretty confident in their clients and what evidence they do have/know.
|
Again, what they say in the media doesn't have to conform to what they say in court. They can blast away at the DNA evidence all they want and then say that any sex was consentual in court. There are no rules against that. They'll look pretty stupid if they do, but that doesn't mean that there might be a valid strategic reason to do it. Again, it is entirely possible that the DA has DNA evidence linking one of these guys to the rape and the defense is setting up a smoke screen. The defense attorneys will look pretty foolish and unreliable if that does prove to be the case, but they may have a strategy here that involves misinformation.
There is no law that says that a defense attorney has to tell the media the truth about his client and their actions and plenty of laws that say that a defense attorney cannot disclose harmful things about his client.
All we have are the defense's interpretation of the DNA results. Its entirely possible that they are only giving us a portion of the facts or that there were inconsistent results in some of the tests. Again, consider the source of information, especially when the DA has basically put a gag order on his entire office with instructions that leaks = pink slips, at least according to what I've read. The DA is treating this very seriously, and the discovery is going to be very interesting. It's also entirely possible that all the charges are going to get dismissed in a month.