Patrick Kane Accusers Attorney: Rape Kit Evidence Tampered with (Up: Faked)

Status
Not open for further replies.
No it isn't. Playing neutral is withholding judgement from being guilty or innocent.

All I've seen from you in this thread is rushing to defend him so yes, you are one of them. He doesn't need to be defended because he already has plenty of Chicago fans rushing to do it.

I think It's a lot better to be supportive of the victim than him. They're the ones getting harassed and treated like shit by Chicago fans.

Right. So I'm playing neutral. Gotcha.

Also, it's "alleged" victim, because we're being neutral and not making up our own minds. And yes, I support her too. I have the utmost sympathy for her, if her story is true.
 
do you honestly believe being found not guilty means they didn't do it? what?
It means they're legally found as not doing it, and seen as innocent in the eyes of the law. That may not mean that they didn't do it, but if someone does get proven not guilty of something in a court of law, they're seen as having not done the crime.

The law does imply innocence when they say someone isn't guilty of doing something. I think what people mean to say is that sometimes the law gets their decision wrong. But if you get a not guilty conviction, you are in fact seen as innocent of the crime.
 
Then why is the definition of innocent "Not guilty of a crime or other act"?

I think people are referring to innocent meaning whether the person did in fact commit the act, not that the person has not been found guilty. Surely you recognize someone can be found not guilty (or never even charged) even if, in reality, they did commit the alleged crime.
 
Also, police statement about the evidence:
Regarding Evidence
September 23, 2015 at 11:43am

In regard to the information conveyed today by Mr. Thomas Eoannou, the Hamburg Police Department will cooperate with any authorized investigation regarding the handling of evidence and the procedure of such. That said, The Hamburg Police Department has documentation that unequivocally demonstrates that its handling of the evidence and the integrity of its chain of custody of evidence in this case is unassailable. As is policy with active investigations, there will be no further comment regarding this situation.
How the hell can the "the integrity of its chain of custody of evidence in this case" be "unassailable" with a fucking evidence bag anonymously deposited on the victim's mother's doorstep?

I only know about evidence handling procedures from TV shows, so I'm trying to square the PD's statement with what happened to the bag. Could it be that the evidence was collected, sealed, and stored, then taken out of storage and opened to be tested, and then re-sealed in a new evidence bag? If that's the case, could the bag that was left on the victim's mother's doorstep just be the original bag and the actual evidence still be safe in a new evidence bag in the PD's possession with an unbroken chain of custody?
 
The police are saying not only do they still have the evidence, it's still in the bag they put it in when they collected it. Which, if it were true, means where the hell did this other bag come from?

If it was tampered with before the county got it, Glascott wouldn't know. It is still very, very possible that tampering occurred and for that statement to be true.
 
How the hell can the "the integrity of its chain of custody of evidence in this case" be "unassailable" with a fucking evidence bag anonymously deposited on the victim's mother's doorstep?

Slow your roll there bud, that wasn't the evidence bag as per the latest reports. All evidence is accounted for in its original packaging.
 
Yeah no doubt something fishy is going on. But they would have the initial results of the kit documented right? So aside from the broken chain of command now I'm not sure how it has any bearing on the initial results when it was processed.

It's no longer possible for the initial findings to be corroborated by any outside lab.
 
Didn't the Bears sign that Ray McDonald guy? And release him after he was charged?

Yeah but I don't count him because they got rid of him before he played a meaningful down on the field.

That was a dumb as hell pickup though.

They got him because the new coordinator coached him.

Currently, the only guy on the squad that created crimes against humanity is of course Cutler.
 
The police are saying not only do they still have the evidence, it's still in the bag they put it in when they collected it. Which, if it were true, means where the hell did this other bag come from?

This new development would seemingly swing the case back in Kane's favor, wouldn't it?
 
How the hell can the "the integrity of its chain of custody of evidence in this case" be "unassailable" with a fucking evidence bag anonymously deposited on the victim's mother's doorstep?

I only know about evidence handling procedures from TV shows, so I'm trying to square the PD's statement with what happened to the bag. Could it be that the evidence was collected, sealed, and stored, then taken out of storage and opened to be tested, and then re-sealed in a new evidence bag? If that's the case, could the bag that was left on the victim's mother's doorstep just be the original bag and the actual evidence still be safe in a new evidence bag in the PD's possession with an unbroken chain of custody?

If what the police are saying is true, then yeah, that kind of sounds like the most reasonable scenario. But even so, that's pretty fucked up that they just throw out a bag with her name and info on it without destroying it first.
 
The police are saying not only do they still have the evidence, it's still in the bag they put it in when they collected it. Which, if it were true, means where the hell did this other bag come from?

Could be a bag that was tossed after evidence was tested/transferred to another container? I have no idea if they keep the old containers with the rest of the evidence or if they toss them out right away though.

If what the police are saying is true, then yeah, that kind of sounds like the most reasonable scenario. But even so, that's pretty fucked up that they just throw out a bag with her name and info on it without destroying it first.
I was just thinking the same thing.
 
Tons and tons and tons of rapists are not charged or not found guilty of the crimes they commit. False rape accusations are rare, and cases where there isn't enough evidence to take it to court are counted with them as "false accusations." Let's just say I'm far more comfortable presuming that Kane is guilty than not.

This is honestly one of the most senseless, thoughtless things I've ever read. It's people like you who are responsible for false convictions without evidence. Jumping to conclusions based on opinions and not of facts. I can't count how many people have lost their lives or had their lives ruined because people jumped to conclusions without facts. Until there is enough evidence to prove that someone is guilty, they are presumed innocent.
 
If it was tampered with before the county got it, Glascott wouldn't know. It is still very, very possible that tampering occurred and for that statement to be true.

I see. I didn't notice that it said Erie County. So basically, the city (or whomever was first on the scene) could have done something to/with it before they handed it off to the county.
 
The article in the OP states the kit is "authentic" but that could mean it's just an authentic police rape kit, not necessarily Patrick Kane's rape kit. But why would anyone do that? Fucking weird.
 
Because you don't know the difference between a standard dictionary definition and a legal term.
Is there an actual legal difference though? Like, can someone get proven innocent instead of not guilty and have the result be different because of it?

If there is then I'm mistaken and I've just never heard of it.
 
The article in the OP states the kit is "authentic" but that could mean it's just an authentic police rape kit, not necessarily Patrick Kane's rape kit. But why would anyone do that? Fucking weird.

It has the victim's ID, date of birth and initials of the hospital nurse who performed the exam.
 
It has the victim's ID, date of birth and initials of the hospital nurse who performed the exam.

Local PD:

That said, The Hamburg Police Department has documentation that unequivocally demonstrates that its handling of the evidence and the integrity of its chain of custody of evidence in this case is unassailable. As is policy with active investigations, there will be no further comment regarding this situation.

I don't know how they can say that with confidence, given the above.

What the commissioner said isn't terribly relevant, because he is just reiterating that what was received from the local PD is accounted for. So it is entirely possible that tampering occurred before the evidence was ever sent to the county.
 
Is there an actual legal difference though? Like, can someone get proven innocent instead of not guilty and have the result be different because of it?

If there is then I'm mistaken and I've just never heard of it.

There is a reason that juries dont say innocent. Take a logic or epistemology or legal course before talking out of your ass.
 
There is a reason that juries dont say innocent. Take a logic or epistemology or legal course before talking out of your ass.
Or you could try to not be rude to someone who was mistaken about something and willingly admitted it.

There is no reason to be a dick about it. Is this the way you speak to everyone around you who says something that's incorrect?
 
Disgraceful. Hopefully her testimony and other evidence will help solve the case.

We need to have an enquiry ast o what happened. There must be CCTV footage of the evidence room where the bag was taken from.
 
Or you could try to not be rude to someone who was mistaken about something and willingly admitted it.

There is no reason to be a dick about it. Is this the way you speak to everyone around you who says something that's incorrect?

My apologies.
I was annoyed by your initial reply that amounted to. Nuh uh

I am always happy to discuss but i find it irritating when people simply assert things without really being properly informed, being authorities on a topic, or having thoroughly thought it through.
 
If the police department does, in fact, have the original rape kit and packaging then this is a really bad look for the accuser and her attorney. The fact that he immediately went to a public press conference instead of corroborating with the police department/FBI/etc first makes him like he's just trying to drum up some public support.

Could be a bag that was tossed after evidence was tested/transferred to another container? I have no idea if they keep the old containers with the rest of the evidence or if they toss them out right away though.


I was just thinking the same thing.

Who knows, could just be a typo/misprint on the packaging and it was thrown away and a new one was created.
 
The article in the OP states the kit is "authentic" but that could mean it's just an authentic police rape kit, not necessarily Patrick Kane's rape kit. But why would anyone do that? Fucking weird.
It has the victim's ID, date of birth and initials of the hospital nurse who performed the exam.
I would imagine all three of those details would be readily available to someone close enough to the case to want to intimidate a witness.
Or, as much as I hate to think about this scenario, push the authorities to move more quickly on the case.
 
If the police department does, in fact, have the original rape kit and packaging then this is a really bad look for the accuser and her attorney. The fact that he immediately went to a public press conference instead of corroborating with the police department/FBI/etc first makes him like he's just trying to drum up some public support.

Nope, he didn't do that.

First thing Kane did was announce that he was co-operating fully with the authorities. The press conference was his first public appearance for a while, the accusation came way before that.

But voynov is forced to leave the country what a joke

Voynov is a convicted wife beater.
 
If the police department does, in fact, have the original rape kit and packaging then this is a really bad look for the accuser and her attorney. The fact that he immediately went to a public press conference instead of corroborating with the police department/FBI/etc first makes him like he's just trying to drum up some public support.

No attorney in their right mind would make this up out of whole cloth or use this as a publicity stunt. He would be disbarred.
 
Nope, he didn't do that.

First thing Kane did was announce that he was co-operating fully with the authorities. The press conference was his first public appearance for a while, the accusation came way before that.



Voynov is a convicted wife beater.

No, I'm talking about why the accuser's attorney held a press conference about the bag rather than bringing it to the attention of the police first. The attorney is clearly making a case that the evidence was tampered, and the police department is saying they have the rape kit intact. The fact that those two statements contradict each other is a sign that the attorney is bringing this information to light in a press conference and did not consult with the police department or other law enforcement.
 
A policeman is just as likely to be close to her as to him. Why would it be easier for the people close to Kane to get access? The whole case is crazy, if it turned out she had a cop as accomplice in a frame up it would not surprise me in the least. It also would not surprise me if Kane raped her and someone thought they where helping him did it. Right now this hurts him though, if that rape kit would have shown there was no evidence linking him he is fucked now. If it did show evidence it still comes down to consent and public opinion.
On mobile, but Patrick's driver is a cop.
http://mobile.buffalonews.com/?arti...anes-driver-on-night-of-alleged-rape-20150815
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom