Partrick Kane being investigated for r*pe - Update - No charges to be filed, case closed

[KennyBanyeah]

View attachment 32733

So, we have a Hustler mug, a bar of "money soap". Today, I learned that Paul Cambria is most famous for defending pron companies under the 1st amendment.

EDIT: also seen, a book entitled "One Nation Under Sex"

Wow!! what else can you say.

 

[dash]

Now I want this to go to trial just to hear Cambria say, "If the kit ain't legit, you must acquit"

 

[forty_three]

I also see a lot of people saying "the bag doesn't matter - the evidence was already tested". True, it was.

But the chain of custody of all evidence in the case is crucial. And the initial bag, once opened, becomes part of that evidence. So while the existence of the bag outside the evidence locker doesn't mean anything in regards to what was or was not found in testing. It speaks volumes for the handling of evidence by the law.

The bag winding up on a doorstep is no different than any other piece of evidence winding up there. The kit itself, photos, anything. The bag itself is now evidence and subject to the same chain of custody, and the Police lost control of it. Therefore, they cannot speak with any kind of authority on the results of the tests because the burden is on them to prove the evidence was not tampered with prior to testing. And anything short of 100% camera coverage of every second of the evidence's existence would be hard for me to believe at this point.

As an investigator myself, this makes me ill.

 

[dash]

hey pix, pron stars need lawyers just like the rest of us

/Presumably

 

[Comeds]

Not to be pro pron but some of the 1st amendment cases dealing with pron were very important cases. They did more for free speech in this country than almost anyone.

 

[pixburgher66]

HOLY SHIT. I HAVE NEVER WANTED TO NUT PUNCH SOMEONE MORE.

 

[pixburgher66]

Not to be pro pron but some of the 1st amendment cases dealing with pron were very important cases. They did more for free speech in this country than almost anyone.

hey pix, pron stars need lawyers just like the rest of us

/Presumably

I absolutely agree with both of you, it's really just the context of the case keeping this in mind. And his complete lack of understanding to keep those things right behind him. It's disgusting.

 

[dash]

On a side note, I'm a little concerned that I'm starting to think like comeds. A visit to my company's HR department is surely going to happen within days.

 

[forty_three]

Not to be pro pron but some of the 1st amendment cases dealing with pron were very important cases. They did more for free speech in this country than almost anyone.

Not to mention how it's driven technology like the Internet, DVD, and Mobile Phones. Yay Pron

On a side note, I'm a little concerned that I'm starting to think like comeds. A visit to my company's HR department is surely going to happen within days.

If you see a car that has a FLAMESIN7 tag, just go the other way.

 

[jstewismybastardson]

 

[jstewismybastardson]

Today, I learned that Paul Cambria is most famous for defending pron companies under the 1st amendment.

I learned it back on page 4 of this thread

 

[dash]

I was hoping to read that the Hamburg PD would be absolved of having done nothing wrong regarding the handling of evidence in this case.

 

[dash]

I learned it back on page 4 of this thread

I was waiting for this to be posted (lol)

 

[jstewismybastardson]

I was waiting for this to be posted (lol)

yah ... and in fact I have actually known about the Cambria List for years ... just not that the dude was Kanes lawyer


/ wait a sec

 

[jstewismybastardson]

I was hoping to read that the Hamburg PD would be absolved of having done nothing wrong regarding the handling of evidence in this case.

I was hoping that facebook already rolled out the "dislike" button

 

[forty_three]

"unequivocally"


"where's the bag?"

"Well, unequivocally except for that."

Good job also getting the "authorized" investigation out there. "I'm sorry, we refuse to acknowledge that your investigation is authorized".

"But we're the FBI"

 

[dash]

"Sir, the FBI are here"
"The FBI...Where"
"Right over there"
"Want a breath mint?"

Name the movie

 

[pixburgher66]

Okay, okay. So if all the evidence is accounted for, great. But then what the hell was put on the mother's doorstep? And how did this bag have all the victim's information, along with the nurse who took the sample, etc? I mean...there's an answer somewhere?

 

[KennyBanyeah]

"Sir, the FBI are here"
"The FBI...Where"
"Right over there"
"Want a breath mint?"

Name the movie

Die Hard

I'm agent Johnson, this is special agent Johnson... no relation.

 

[forty_three]

Okay, okay. So if all the evidence is accounted for, great. But then what the hell was put on the mother's doorstep? And how did this bag have all the victim's information, along with the nurse who took the sample, etc? I mean...there's an answer somewhere?

What wound up on the doorstep is the bag that the evidence was collected in, which would typically be sealed, signed by who collected it and the transported to the lab (signed by who transported it). The lab signs for it, opens it and proceeds with testing the contents. At which, the bag itself becomes evidence of the chain of custody and that the evidence contained was handled properly between collection and processing.

Two things about the bag; 1) It was ripped open (not typically opened like that, they usually get cut) and 2) there does not appear to be an intake signature from the processing lab. This infers that the bag was opened between collection and processing.

If the lab is in possession of another bag with all the proper signatures, one of them is fake. If the lab has no bag, but all the other "evidence", all of that evidence is essentially worthless because chain of custody can't be proven.