Has it been confirmed she had his number or are we going by his statement? As mentioned, that would have been the place to start that night.

 

Both stories have holes in them, both sides have a lot of "whys". I hope and have to believe that the judge, with everything in front of him/her from the police, the university and both sides, will make a proper ruling. At that point I hope all can put it behind them one way or the other.

 

The question I have is how can the university say he raped her when the prosecuting attorney already said he didn't have enough evidence to prosecute? Seems weird to me.

Yes. They stated through the attorney's that their previous statements remain unchanged and they exercised their right to refuse to testify in case it goes to civil court. I believe it was in the ESPN story when they reported they refused to testify.

 

So he and both teammates have issued statements but refused to answer any questions. I understand the legalities and would do the same in their situation. However, that just fuels more questions. It's not right but it's the way things are.

So he and both teammates have issued statements but refused to answer any questions. I understand the legalities and would do the same in their situation. However, that just fuels more questions. It's not right but it's the way things are.

 

I don't blame them. One inconsistency in their previous statements and current statements could make all the difference in the world. Also, they answered questions about it already. By refusing to testify at this 'trial' their answers to those questions are the answers on record for everyone to go by. That's the smart thing to do legally.

I don't blame them. One inconsistency in their previous statements and current statements could make all the difference in the world. Also, they answered questions about it already. By refusing to testify at this 'trial' their answers to those questions are the answers on record for everyone to go by. That's the smart thing to do legally.

 

Exactly.

Man, I don't know...but I know this. I read his account, and I think back to my younger days when I was young kid in the military chasing after all I could get when I had the chance. There's more than once where I can recall very similar circumstances that he describes that I myself was involved in. It's very hard to defend yourself in a "he said she said" scenario, and luckily nothing like that every happened to me. Then again, I never DID anything for anyone to accuse me either, which definitely helps. Did he? I just really don't know. But his stupid actions SINCE these allegations don't help his reputation and call into account his judgment, I can tell you that.

The question I have is how can the university say he raped her when the prosecuting attorney already said he didn't have enough evidence to prosecute? Seems weird to me.

 

It does, I can only imagine they have their own threshold as it would have no legal effect, would it? Kind of like the colleges that say both parties must express "yes" to avoid these messes.

I don't blame them. One inconsistency in their previous statements and current statements could make all the difference in the world. Also, they answered questions about it already. By refusing to testify at this 'trial' their answers to those questions are the answers on record for everyone to go by. That's the smart thing to do legally.

 

But did their statements answer all questions? I would doubt it as statements are often very vague and leave much room for follow up.

 

As someone said, it's headed for civil trial where all these questions will be brought up again and again.

But did their statements answer all questions? I would doubt it as statements are often very vague and leave much room for follow up.

 

As someone said, it's headed for civil trial where all these questions will be brought up again and again.

 

This is Chris Casher's: http://larrybrownsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/chris-casher-affidavit.jpg

 

This is Ronald Darby's: http://larrybrownsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/ronald-darby-affidavit.jpg

Again, statements allow for no follow up questions. There are claims of inconsistencies among all the statements. Would be nice to clear it up but I get the legal reason to avoid them at this point. As I said, I would do the same thing, just isn't helping to clear things up at this point.

 

We all know it's headed for civil where the questions will have to be answered.

This is Chris Casher's: http://larrybrownsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/chris-casher-affidavit.jpg

 

This is Ronald Darby's: http://larrybrownsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/ronald-darby-affidavit.jpg

 

This certainly doesn't fit the "she doesn't know who he is" idea...

This certainly doesn't fit the "she doesn't know who he is" idea...

 

No it doesn't.

 

They also stated she was not intoxicated which contradicts other statements and alcohol tests.

 

That's why statements need to have a cross examination.

What were the other statements concerning how intoxicated she was?

Her statement that she had 5 drinks and didn't remember anything after the 5th shot. Alcohol test put her at an estimated .10.

No it doesn't.

 

They also stated she was not intoxicated which contradicts other statements and alcohol tests.

 

That's why statements need to have a cross examination.

 

I'd say that is the fault of the rules of the FSU Code of Conduct hearings.

Her statement that she had 5 drinks and didn't remember anything after the 5th shot. Alcohol test put her at an estimated .10.

 

Now I am really confused. She said she doesn't remember anything after her 5th shot? But she remembers that she had sex with Winston and it was not consensual?? Where did you read that? Is it posted on this thread or another thread? Her story just does not add up and Winston has two witnesses backing him up. Whether she is lying or they are, it is pretty easy to see why the authorities did not think they had enough to make a case.