tOfficial "Jameis Winston" Superthread

[The Authority]

If there was no trial, then it's because the DA didn't believe there was enough evidence to even charge him.

There was DNA and an accusation. There have been r*pe trials with less evidence then that.

 

[The Authority]

There wasn't much evidence that he raped her. There was only evidence that they had sex.

So If I watch a guy steal my car and he ditches my car somewhere and they find him later on without my car there should never be a trial?

 

[The Authority]

OK think about what you think should have happened. FSU player goes in front of a grand jury in TALLAHASSEE with regular citizens. What do you think would happen? 99% sure the exact same thing as the SAO came up with. No charges. THe key difference being that Meggs has absolutely no problem charging and hammering FSU players. The same cannot be said for a grand jury of citizens.



Actually the bold is incorrect. There is evidence, but it is called circumstantial evidence and not a "smoking gun" or a confession from the accused.


Same thing is going to happen with a civil suit. It will take place in TALLAHASSEE after the one person named just won NC. What do you think is going to happen? Most likely damages from the TPD if they believe they violated the accuser's civil rights and no damages from Winston because he won the NC and Heisman.

Regardless she should have her day in court if she is telling the truth.

 

[nolehusker]

There was DNA and an accusation. There have been r*pe trials with less evidence then that.

Just because there were trials with less evidence does mean there should've been. Honestly, it's just messed up to think that these things happened. That's the said part about r*pe is that most people assume you are guilty until proven innocent. That seems to be changing though.

 

[nolehusker]

Regardless she should have her day in court if she is telling the truth.

She will have it, in a civil suit. However, the DA didn't think there was enough evidence for him to even have a chance of being found guilty. Not every r*pe accusation deserves to go to court. Not every accusation of crime deserves to go to court. The system would be over ran will hearings and it would be so backed logged.

 

[nolehusker]

So If I watch a guy steal my car and he ditches my car somewhere and they find him later on without my car there should never be a trial?

Well, you're leaving out a whole bunch of info. Was his finger prints or DNA found on the car? Was there any evidence that he was in the car? If there is no evidence that he was even in the car, then no. You have to prove he did it. Otherwise it's just an accusation with no evidence.

 

[The Authority]

For me, the fact that she said she was really drunk and messed up but her tox screen came back that she wasn't and that she was probably around a .10 when this supposedly happened.

Here is what I think happened based on what I know. She has a boyfriend. She cheated on her boyfriend with an fairly unknown FSU football player at the time. She realized she would probably get caught or did get caught and instead of fessing up to being raped, she decided to report it as a r*pe to save her relationship with her boyfriend.

Is that what happened? We don't know, but that's how I interpret things. Also, we don't know if the TPD actually handled this as bad as we think they did. People are taking the accuser's attorney's words as facts, when we don't know. Yes, they did mess up some, but we don't know if they actually tried to talk her out of pressing charges. We don't know if the accuser actually kept contact with the TPD and TPD just ignored them.

It doesn't matter what made up story you want to believe in your head. A trial should have occured.

Things shouldn't get decided based on coming up with some make believe scenario that would make a person innocent.

I could just as easily say that I think He raped her.

 

[The Authority]

Just because there were trials with less evidence does mean there should've been. Honestly, it's just messed up to think that these things happened. That's the said part about r*pe is that most people assume you are guilty until proven innocent. That seems to be changing though.

Then have trial

 

[The Authority]

She will have it, in a civil suit. However, the DA didn't think there was enough evidence for him to even have a chance of being found guilty.

And thats the problem I have. There was DNA and an accusation immediately after the inncodent.

 

[The Authority]

Not every r*pe accusation deserves to go to court. Not every accusation of crime deserves to go to court.

But many do and this one did.

 

[The Authority]

Well, you're leaving out a whole bunch of info. Was his finger prints or DNA found on the car? Was there any evidence that he was in the car? If there is no evidence that he was even in the car, then no. You have to prove he did it. Otherwise it's just an accusation with no evidence.

Okay, His DNA was on the car but no evidence of him stealing it other than me watching him.


Trial ?

 

[FSUmanager]

Regardless she should have her day in court if she is telling the truth.

Bold word is the operative one. I also agree with your statement, but the SAO did not see enough to move forward and he believed a grand jury would have come to the same conclusion. So why are you so concerned? The SAO did a thorough investigation and even the accuser's lawyer said as much. She did not like the outcome of their investigation. That is why she asked the AG to investigate it, but since she implicated elected officials she cannot ask the AG to investigate it without first requesting he GOVERNOR's office to do so. She did not do that. I wonder why? After the lawyer's outburst to the AG Rick Scott the Governor stated that they never heard from the accuser's attorney and would not have the AG investigate UNTIL the lawyer goes through the proper channels. That has yet to happen. Instead they are going the civil route. Why? If you want an investigation by the AG why not petition it through the proper channels instead of saying fuck it and going for the civil suit?

 

[nolehusker]

It doesn't matter what made up story you want to believe in your head. A trial should have occured.

Things shouldn't get decided based on coming up with some make believe scenario that would make a person innocent.

I could just as easily say that I think He raped her.

And that was my point. We don't know what happened and the evidence shows that there wasn't enough to even get him sent to trial. Why waste the resources?

 

[nolehusker]

Okay, His DNA was on the car but no evidence of him stealing it other than me watching him.


Trial ?

Did you know him from before hand? Had you hung out with him before? Where was his DNA found? Does he have an alibi? Does he have witnesses to corroborate his alibi? Did you give a wrong description to the police about this man? Did you name him a month later after it happened?

 

[nolehusker]

But many do and this one did.

That is your opinion. I disagree with it. But using the fact that many other's have gone to court when they shouldn't have in the first place to say this one should have gone is just wrong.

 

[nolehusker]

And thats the problem I have. There was DNA and an accusation immediately after the inncodent.

Wrong. There was a report of a r*pe immediately after. She did accuse Winston until a month after this happened. She also gave a wrong descreption of Winston. She also said she was wasted but when the tox screen came back it said otherwise.

 

[The Authority]

Bold word is the operative one. I also agree with your statement, but the SAO did not see enough to move forward and he believed a grand jury would have come to the same conclusion. So why are you so concerned? The SAO did a thorough investigation and even the accuser's lawyer said as much. She did not like the outcome of their investigation. That is why she asked the AG to investigate it, but since she implicated elected officials she cannot ask the AG to investigate it without first requesting he GOVERNOR's office to do so. She did not do that. I wonder why? After the lawyer's outburst to the AG Rick Scott the Governor stated that they never heard from the accuser's attorney and would not have the AG investigate UNTIL the lawyer goes through the proper channels. That has yet to happen. Instead they are going the civil route. Why? If you want an investigation by the AG why not petition it through the proper channels instead of saying fuck it and going for the civil suit?

sounds like here lawyer is an idiot.

doesn't mean he didn't r*pe her.

Why am I concerned ? Because I have experience with a r*pe victim and the rapists getting away with it and its very disturbing to me.

 

[The Authority]

And that was my point. We don't know what happened and the evidence shows that there wasn't enough to even get him sent to trial. Why waste the resources?

DNA and an accusation.

thats enough for a trial as far as I am concerned.

 

[The Authority]

Wrong. There was a report of a r*pe immediately after. She did accuse Winston until a month after this happened. She also gave a wrong descreption of Winston. She also said she was wasted but when the tox screen came back it said otherwise.

What it matter when she named him? She reported r*pe right after it happened and they found his DNA so obviously he was the one.

 

[BucksFanInGA]

DNA and an accusation.

thats enough for a trial as far as I am concerned.

That's a really weak burden of proof...

You do realize that the man accused of this will be considered a rapist for the year(s) the trial is ongoing right?