[muawiyah]

The "facts" business has recently come into disrepute. Appears that the primary source Duke University used in this case was a policeman who overheard part of a cellphone call between another policeman in a different police force with an unknown party about unidentifiable events.

I'd suggest your reliance on what are, at best "factoids" of no significance, does not advance the position of the players.

Remember, there's a commonly used date rate drug out there that makes the victim believe she (or he) was raped even if no rape took place.

[saleman]

Do tell.... I've never heard of a "date rape" drug that makes anyone believe they've been raped even if they haven't. Does that then mean that someone can be charged with rape even if no rape occurred...but the "victim" believes she was raped?

[FreedomPoster]

So you choose to ignore the fact that the DNA evidence to date is extremely weak, and that there should have been a ton of DNA evidence give the AV's initial story? And the fact that the DA said, before the initial tests came back, that the DNA tests would tell the story?

Got it.