Looks like it. I don't know what happened, but the prosecutors say the maid admitted lying to a grand jury. That's a big no-no. Oddly, this official reason bears little relationship to the Times story of her fading credibility.
I only know the verdict in the U.S. court of public opinion will be that, once again, there seem to be two sets of rules. There are, indeed, but that may not apply here, where the entire case rests on witness credibility. Why, oh why, didn't she just tell the story as it happened?
I think the only testimony we'll get will be on some newsy talky interview, with the woman giving an exclusive framed by dim lighting. Let the network bidding begin.
No comments:
Post a Comment
You can use bold, italics, and some other vanishing html tags.