He was identified. The police refused to collect DNA from him or interview his roommate. I believe they have yet to collect DNA from Winston.
He was identified 1 month after the attack.
That's not how I read it. They said they waited for the DNA results until April. Sounds like they are more concerned with the timing of the DNA test. The police didn't get his DNA right away because they say they didn't want to tip him off that he was being investigated yet.
So, it sounds like they got his DNA results in April, or else what DNA results are they talking about? There is no information that the results from her test can give without something to compare it to. They are clearly talking about the DNA results from some other person, and Winston is the only person that they are talking about.
You know what a roofie is? If you are trying to describe a person who is attacking you, how well would be able to tell if a person is 5'10" vs 6'1"? Seriously.? Unless you have a ruler on a door or stand directly next to the person, I doubt anyone could accurately describe a person's height, much less when they've been raped and are in trauma.
Did you not read the same report that you posted? It says that the blood work determined that she was not intoxicated and they seem to take offense to the fact that it is being reported that she may have been. Clearly, if there was something in her bloodwork that showed that she had been roofied, don't you think they would be talking about that or that we would have heard something about that by now? Nobody is reporting that she was roofed. So, that is all assumption on your part.
You can't tell the difference between a 6'4" person and a 5'9" person, especially when you are sober? That is the difference in what the police report says and the actual height of Winston. You can't accurately tell the difference between those two? Seriously?
If they alerted a person they are being investigated before interviewing him, it gives him time to get his story straight and talk to his friends to make sure their stories line up. Further, people's memory are of an event are much better the closer to the event they are interviewed. The way people remember events and details may change over time, even without meaning for it, simply because more time has passed.
That was their whole reasoning for not taking DNA from Winston right away. I don't know if that's proper detective work in this kind of situation or not, and neither should you unless you are a detective or familiar with how they conduct rape investigations. It stands to reason that they would do some preliminary questioning and try to get as much information as possible before they take a DNA sample from someone and then precede to watch them lawyer up and shut their mouth. I know that if I were asked to submit a DNA test in the investigation of a woman's rape, I would immediately get a lawyer after I gave my DNA. I'd be on the phone with one as I left the police station.
Do you know how long a DNA test done for this type of investigation takes the police to process? I don't.
Winston's lawyer has already stated that witness interviews were conducted back before February, when he thought the case was closed. So, witnesses have already given their statements. There is no worry about the details changing in their mind, their account has already been recorded.
Right, they are investigating nearly a year later and the alleged perpatrator has had time to get rid of any evidence, talk to the witnesses (who happen to be his friends) and make sure they support his version of events. This doesn't seem wrong to you??
I don't know if it's wrong. I don't know how well the original investigation was conducted. Neither do you. We don't have information on that, all we have is the victim's family saying they weren't given information quickly enough.
That's what they did!! Why do you think they went to the attorney and kept pushing the police for results and an investigation? It took the media getting wind of this before any action was done. And how many idiots on that campus and in town would make her life hell if she publicly accused the star QB of rape?
Probably not very many. People are not barbarians. If a woman is raped and has a legitimate case against someone, the community is going to support her.
They got the results in April is what I am getting at. Why didn't they push for charges right then and there? If they were unable to get anything done in the face of overwhelming evidence, they should have gone to a higher agency to investigate the matter. It points to that the results that they got in April weren't what they thought they'd be and now they want to go after TPD in regards to the slow progress of the investigation.
You are a fan and you WANT to believe him. I get it. But if the victim was someone you knew or the alleged perp was just another guy instead of the star QB, do you think you'd feel differently about things?
No. The statement released by her family is weird. Read it again and look at the facts as we have them. It's not well constructed in the very least. I'd be surprised if a lawyer even read over it.
All the family is doing is questioning the timing of specific aspects of the investigation. If the police don't have anything to go by, they don't press charges. The family isn't even saying that there is clear cut evidence that he should be charged.
We can talk about this again when we have more actual information. Like the DNA results that the family got back in April. What did that say? That's actual evidence. Until we get more information, it's all assumptions. Both you and I are simply assuming basically everything we are saying here.
