Re: The Price of Fear

[CeltsSteve@xxxxxxx]

In a message dated 9/24/02 7:37:37 AM Pacific Daylight Time, 
jahill@leasingservice.com writes:


> Unless you have had your own life, and your family members life, threatened
> by someone you know *WILL* kill you/them and testified anyway, I wouldn't 
> be
> so hasty to condemn her.  She came forward before when others
> didn't/wouldn't.  Now it appears the defense attorney has made the threat 
> of
> retribution very clear.



Granted she came forward when others didn't/wouldn't but what doesn't make 
sense is why come forward at all if you aren't prepared to see it all the way 
through. Why even get involved? Why the detailed testimony that allowed the 
DA to build their case on only to pull out at the last second?

Yes, the defense attorney is probably scum but then again he's doing what 
he's paid to do; i.e. try to get his clients off. However, I still don't have 
sympathy for someone who recants their original testimony because of real or 
veiled threats. She knew what she was getting herself into and should have 
never come forward in the first place if she wasn't willing to go the 
distance. Shame on the DA's office if they didn't make that abundantly clear 
to her that she would be one of the cornerstones of their case and she also 
had to have been made aware that when dealing with street vermin, threats and 
retribution are part of the game.  Is the DA that negligent or is she just 
plain naive? 

As it stands now, the prosecution actually would have been better off if she 
just kept her mouth shut and told the police and the Grand Jury she didn't 
see anything. As it stands now even if Paul can positively ID them in his 
testimony, a jury likely will let them walk because of "reasonable doubt".

Then again, maybe she isn't naive at all. Maybe that was the game plan in the 
first place as the article made reference to one of the punks trying to hook 
up with her outside the club immediately after the stabbing took place; i.e. 
have her come forward and let the DA build their case based upon what she had 
to say only to cop out at the last second to destroy the prosecutor's case 
and credibility. Maybe she was trying to help the accused all along.

And if that's how it went down, that's exactly why the DA's office needs to 
come down hard on her with perjury charges.

Steve