Quote
AlbaNY_Ram
Rath's defense wasn't "I did it and here's why". It was "I don't remember the events described and here's why."
More from that phone call I mentioned. Remember, the accuser called Rath several days after reporting the incident to see if he would confess and this is what he said: "... he doesn’t remember doing what she’s accusing him of. In the call, he says he remembers being “hammered” and going home but apologizes if he did touch her." [
www.vcstar.com]
And just to be clear I'm not suggesting that the accuser filed a false claim. In fact, I am quite confident that she described the incident exactly as she believes it occurred.
Which is the same as not denying them AND therefore not doing the common sexual assualt trial routine where the woman is put on trial as a false accuser.
The phone call caught him by surprise and is not the same as making a case in court that nothing happened, thereby in effect putting the woman on trial for false accusations.
Rath did not make that mistake in the trial. In the trial he simply asserts he has no memory of it. This feeds into his defense, which is that he could not (because of his condition) have intended his actions.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/15/2019 11:28AM by zn.
