I heard on Fox news that the prosecutors didn’t believe her beyond a reasonable doubt. WTF is that standard? A grand jury operates LN a lesser standard. IMHO a rape either happened or it didn’t. Shouldn’t they let the legal process test the question whether it was consensual sex or not?
I’ve suspected that both are guilty. Him of the alleged assualt, and her of trying to make cash out of a bad situation.
There is no principal of legal ethics as solemn as the duty of a prosecutor to dismiss charges he doesn’t believe to be provable beyond a reasonable doubt.
Maybe if the objective was implementing rules, as if it was all some sort of parlor game, rather than seeking justice. The prosecutor doubts the case. End of story. Freedom reigns.