|
LafayetteLady -> RE: Woman held captive as sex slave in NYC Update (12/26/2011 10:06:41 AM)
|
There is "blame the victim," and then there is also "the victim is to blame." This woman is now not wanting to testify. Does anyone really question why? Yes the argument can be made that she is afraid of her life being dragged through the mud, but the reality is she walked through the mud and is probably reluctant to have that pointed out.
If there is indeed evidence that they knew each other for two years, including *several* (2 or 3 or more?) meetings where they played, her story falls to pieces about the whole idea of her thinking she was just going to NYC to be this guy's live in maid.
If she did indeed stay with a "friend," as the defendant claims, that "friend" will be found and would have to testify. Her story falls apart again.
If there is more than one set of DNA found in that rape kit/examination, the defense's claim that she was attacked in the park gains credibility, and again, her story falls apart.
No means no, but that does not absolve this woman from being responsible for her actions. I don't believe she suffered from Stockholm Syndrome at all, and think that 8 days was far too short a time for that to even happen. She was able to leave to go to work, she was therefore not held captive.
There is discrepency as to whether SHE "escaped" and called her mother, or he called her mother to tell her that things were not working and she needed to come home, and then put her on the phone. Another easy thing to check. If he indeed did speak with her mother, and the mother simply was not happy about the relationship (27 year old girl/47 year old man), I could see her calling the cops.
There are far too many holes in this. This woman now being "reluctant" to testify after all of the defendants statements really doesn't look good for her. The whole concept that this guy should have *known* about her drinking problem or mental instability is bullshit. As others have said, in a couple of face to face "play dates" it is entirely possible for it not to be evident. In that amount of time, he could have thought she was "quirky" and "cute." After a few days of living in the same house, her true colors showed, and that "quirky, cute" thing is now obviously a problem. I could see her not wanting all of that coming out in testimony.
I'm sorry, but I don't see her as a victim here, and I am one who will more often than not, when these types of cases come up believe that the "dom" acted inappropriately and should be held accountable. What I see is a woman who apparently didn't like being "dumped" by someone so much older (and therefore *lucky* to have her at all) and lashing out.
So a man spent several months in prison due to an angry, unstable woman's accusations. He will never get that time back, and his reputation is forever ruined.
|
|
|
|
