gitana1
Verified Attorney
- Joined
- May 31, 2005
- Messages
- 29,385
- Reaction score
- 229,962
I read the article and seriously had two vastly opposite trains of thought:
First -- I automatically thought, "Figures, an elected official won't cop to lack of a case, erroneously prosecuting a case, etc... instead, let him rot in jail and be featured on '48 Hours' for the next decade and eventually he'll get out and taxpayers will have paid for it all and the sadness of another innocent man behind bars is just too much."
But then.... I read and re-read the article and remembered the time I was a crime victim and didn't follow "common sense" immediately afterwards and was actually accused by the police of making it up until a similar crime nearby by the same perpetrators made LE realize differently -- the only real difference was my reaction vs the other victims reaction. I was afraid and took time to figure out what to do -- and yes, called 2 people, ended up talking to my mother on the phone while the other person I had called contacted 911; the other victim immediately went for help. Let's just say that all worked against me.
I can't put my finger on it -- something made me think of that.
I can understand the victim being afraid of police -- there are plenty who are--and after my experience I'm sure I will always feel the need to over-explain myself if ever again questioned by LE for any reason. We all bring baggage into every experience of our lives, and it's always easy to blame and question the victim if she/he doesn't react JUST the way we would....
As far as whether or not a 52 year old would "talk like that" -- it entirely depends on the 52 year old.... It's not as though "IMMA" is unknown to people of that generation.... baby imma want you... baby imma need you
So... I guess my point is that I'm reserving my judgment & not getting on the bandwagon just yet.
Look at this! What happened to me? I'm usually the first to play devil's advocate and explain why a suspect should NOT be....
Uh oh, does this "mean" something? :scared:
I don't think it's hard to judge what happened here. Facts:
1. There is no physical evidence tying the defendant to the kidnapping to this woman or to her sexual assault.
2. At one point, the "victim" admitted she made it all up.
3. Chloroform does not knock a person out in seconds as Steiniger claimed happened to her. It takes about 5 minutes. (Which should make everyone who followed the casey anthony case, very sad for Caylee, "the victim would have the ability to struggle and to recall the events").
4. Steiniger had reason to make up a story - she had been kicked out of her boyfriend's home and told she could not stay the night there. She kept trying to find excuses to be able to stay the night, as she walked home, including asking him if she could come back if she fought with her mother once she got home. He refused.
5. Steiniger was able to text her boyfriend repeatedly, during the supposed assault and kidnapping, giving a sort of play by play.
6. Steinginger failed to call 911 to report the abduction as it was occurring, even though she had the opportunity, as her texting showed.
7. The perp supposedly risked that the police would be immediately called and their location tracked, BEFORE he began raping Steiniger, by immediately texting repeated insults and descriptions about what he was going to do, seconds after he supposedly kidnapped and chloroformed Steiniger, which continued for a full 10 minutes. So we are supposed to believe that a rapist wants to take ten minutes to allow cops to find him, before he begins his assault.
8. Inexplicably, in one minute, Weiner was able to chloroform Steiniger, subdue her, take control of her phone while driving a vehicle.
9. 10 minutes after the last tex from the supposed perp, the victim again has control of her phone and texts that she is hiding in the building with the perp and "I cant Answer hell find me,” which makes no sense, and then that she is going out the window. Again, texting her boyfriend instead of calling the police.
10. Steiniger said she escaped by leaping off a second-floor balcony, but she had no injuries.
11. After escaping, Steiniger failed to call 911 or anyone else but her boyfriend, to report the crime or beg to be saved.
12. Steiniger failed to answer the phone when ECC tried to contact her after she claims she escaped the house.
13. Steiniger was examined by a nurse that night and no evidence of sexual assault was found.
14. Steiniger claimed she stopped responding to texts after she escaped because her phone battery died after the 12:52am message. But phone records show she talked to her boyfriend and listened to the ECC message on her voicemail during the time she said the battery was dead.
15. Steiniger's cell phone pinged several times, during the time of the alleged incident, off two towers by her mom's home, but never off any tower near the house she claimed she was assaulted in by Weiner. Police experts who analyzed the cell tower evidence stated that the calls came from Steiniger's mother's home - not the abandoned house she supposedly escaped from. (Their testimony never came in).
16. Steiniger accessed her voicemail during the time she stated she was unconscious.
17. Weiner's cell phone records show his phone was 17 miles away from where the assault supposedly occurred, when it was occurring.
I see nothing that could lead anyone to reasonably conclude, after reviewing all the evidence, that there is any way the guy is guilty or that there exists an iota of doubt as to his credibility.