[Husker] Christensen Reinstated

[David Strong]

> The evidence was not zero.  The woman testified she was molested.  That
> is evidence of a crime.  She turned around and saw Christensen.  That
> is evidence that he did it.  His subsequent reaction is more
> evidentiary of his intoxicated state, lack of self-control, and pattern
> of criminal behavior, which also is evidence --- and is more likely
> than outrage at a "false accusation", as you suggest.  This may not be
> evidence beyond reasonable doubt --- as you say, it is possible that
> someone else did it.  You can believe what you want, but the evidence
> was much more than zero, which is why the case was prosecuted.
> Methinks, based on the evidence, that Christensen was lucky that no one
> was looking at the woman's behind when he allegedly molested her (or no
> one is willing to testity to what they saw), allowing him to get away
> with reasonable doubt.
> 
> > I wasn't at the bar that night, nor was I at the trial, BUT all the
> > evidence presented both by the media and via the internet togetherwas
> > basically zero.
> 

Gotta side with Steve here (which is hard for me).  I think (my opinion only) that it is *far* more likely that he did it than he didn't.

Dave

_________________________________________________________________
Want to do more with Windows Live? Learn “10 hidden secrets” from Jamie.
http://windowslive.com/connect/post/jamiethomson.spaces.live.com-Blog-cns!550F681DAD532637!5295.entry?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_domore_092008