|
Hypocrisy at work? Duke rape case vs MJ Arvizo case? |
|
|
Written by Administrator
|
|
Friday, 23 June 2006 |
|
A few days ago, I watched Dan Abrams and Susan Filan talking about the Duke rape case.
And he was saying stuff like this:
ABRAMS: But the bottom line is these statements --the statements she gave to the authorities compared to the other statements that she gave to doctors, and the nurse, and the statement given by the second stripper -- they're all inconsistent.
And
ABRAMS: …But the bottom line is that considering what has been turned over, I will be surprised if this case makes it to trial.
If I'm not mistaken, before the Jackson trial, wasn't he the
one who talked about how -- despite the inconsistencies -- that the Jackson case should go to trial regardless?
Even Filan was talking about the case like it shouldn't be tried. This is the same bitch who was trying to convict Mike on the air regardless of how ridiculous and contradictory those allegations were.
Oh and don't forget when he said:
ABRAMS: Look, I‘m not willing to go that far. I‘m not willing to say she‘s lying. What I am willing to say is that there are so many contradictions in her story that this D.A. never should have brought this case...
Now, in Jackson's "case", look at all of the contradictions in the accuser's story, the brother's story, the sister's story and the mother's story. And each one contradicted the other, or changed from the original accusation, to the grand jury testimony, which varied from their trial testimony.
I mean, it was a freakin' train wreck. And this was all before Jackson's defense showed their lack of credibility or showed them to be outright lying about their testimony on the stand.
I don't ever ONCE during the trial remember these people coming to this same conclusion, or acting like there should not be a trial because of the contradictions.
And there were A LOT more contradictions in the Arvizo's allegations than with the Duke accuser.
Do you see any hypocrisy in the way some of the media are covering this case in comparison to their pre-trial coverage of the Jackson case?
Share you views here:
http://community.mjeol.com/showthread.php?t=7775
|
News 
