Capt. Tuttle
Living Legend
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2011
- Messages
- 26,463
- Like
- 38,097
In fact, in one instance, (a family court matter where my client was accused by the mother of abusing the daughter, and they video taped her allegedly saying so) I was not only able to get my client custody and the mother only ever had supervised visits after that, but I was able to have the appellate court find that her action was frivolous and my client was awarded attorney's fees and the maximum sanctions under law.
I was tangentially involved in another case (google the NYT artcile on Baba Ali) where a man did 2.5 years in Sing Sing for molesting his daughter, only to have it proven later that she had never been molested, by anyone. A doctor who worked for NYC lied about the abuse to corroberate the mother's allegations. The prsecuting ADA withheld evidence that the girl was not abused.) That is now with the NY Court of appeals on several issues, including that the $3million damages award was insufficient.
I have also defended too many actual molesters and have represented victims.
You are now going to see all types of experts come on tv and explain how the actions, or inactions, of the accusers mean that they were abused.
Telling a story means its true
Recanting a story means it was true
Physical evidence means its true
Lack of physical evidence doesn't mean its not true
Waiting a long time means its true
Coming forward right away means its true
The experts always try to fit the theory to proof.
The motives in this case are not clear, unless there is a smoking gun of a demand for money for silence, or someone comes forward that heard these guys talk about making money from this. That is what concerns me. Until that happens, all of the holes in the story will be used by experts to "prove" the accusers are telling the truth.
BTW - just my opinion, but from all I have read and listened to, I am inclined to believe that Mark Schwatrz was abused as a child. That is why he ran with such a flimsy story. Just a gut reaction.
I was tangentially involved in another case (google the NYT artcile on Baba Ali) where a man did 2.5 years in Sing Sing for molesting his daughter, only to have it proven later that she had never been molested, by anyone. A doctor who worked for NYC lied about the abuse to corroberate the mother's allegations. The prsecuting ADA withheld evidence that the girl was not abused.) That is now with the NY Court of appeals on several issues, including that the $3million damages award was insufficient.
I have also defended too many actual molesters and have represented victims.
You are now going to see all types of experts come on tv and explain how the actions, or inactions, of the accusers mean that they were abused.
Telling a story means its true
Recanting a story means it was true
Physical evidence means its true
Lack of physical evidence doesn't mean its not true
Waiting a long time means its true
Coming forward right away means its true
The experts always try to fit the theory to proof.
The motives in this case are not clear, unless there is a smoking gun of a demand for money for silence, or someone comes forward that heard these guys talk about making money from this. That is what concerns me. Until that happens, all of the holes in the story will be used by experts to "prove" the accusers are telling the truth.
BTW - just my opinion, but from all I have read and listened to, I am inclined to believe that Mark Schwatrz was abused as a child. That is why he ran with such a flimsy story. Just a gut reaction.