More Evidence That Suggests We’re Witnessing Tawana Brawley Part Deux At Duke
The other stripper in the Duke Lacrosse case, the one who accompanied the accuser to the party, has opened her big yap to the press and completely destroyed any and all credibility she might have had:
At first, a stripper who performed at a Duke University lacrosse team party doubted the story of a colleague who told police she was dragged into a bathroom and raped. Now, Kim Roberts isn’t so sure.
“I was not in the bathroom when it happened, so I can’t say a rape occurred and I never will,” Roberts told The Associated Press on Thursday in her first on-the-record interview. But after watching defense attorneys release photos of the accuser, and upset by the leaking of both dancers’ criminal pasts, she said she has to “wonder about their character.”
“In all honesty, I think they’re guilty,” she said. “And I can’t say which ones are guilty … but somebody did something besides underage drinking. That’s my honest-to-God impression.”
…The attorneys claim Roberts at first told a member of the defense team that she did not believe the accuser’s allegations. They say she has changed her story to gain favorable treatment in a criminal case against her. They note she also e-mailed a New York public relations firm, asking in her letter for advice on “how to spin this to my advantage.”
…Roberts, 31, was arrested on March 22 eight days after the party on a probation violation from a 2001 conviction for embezzling $25,000 from a photofinishing company in Durham where she was a payroll specialist, according to documents obtained by the AP.
…On Monday, the same day a grand jury indicted lacrosse players Reade Seligmann and Collin Finnerty, a judge agreed to a change so that Roberts would no longer have to pay a 15 percent fee to a bonding agent. District Attorney Mike Nifong signed a document saying he would not oppose the change.
“It seems she is receiving very favorable financial treatment for what she is now saying,” Thomas said.
Mark Simeon, Roberts’ attorney, said the bond conditions were changed because Roberts is not considered a flight risk. Nifong, who hasn’t spoken with reporters about the case in weeks, didn’t return a call seeking comment.
…Although she would not talk extensively about the party, she confirmed some of what the other dancer told police including that the women initially left the party after one of the players threatened to sodomize the women with a broomstick.
The players’ attorneys have said their clients were angry and demanded a refund when the women stopped dancing, but Roberts disputed that.
“They ripped themselves off when they started hollering about a broomstick,” she said.
…Later, police received a 911 call from a woman complaining that she had been called racial slurs by white men gathered outside the home where the party took place. Roberts acknowledged that she made the call because she was angry.
…Roberts, like the accuser a divorced single mother who is black, took umbrage at the notion that she should not try to make something out of her experience. She’s worried that once her name and criminal record are public, no one will want to hire her.
“Why shouldn’t I profit from it?” she asked. “I didn’t ask to be in this position … I would like to feed my daughter.
…Don’t forget that they called me a d*mn n*gger,” she said. “She (the accuser) was passed out in the car. She doesn’t know what she was called. I was called that. I can never forget that.”
So we have an angry embezzler/stripper who has already lied to the police, changed her mind about whether she thinks the victim was raped, and is trying to figure out how she can make money off being involved in a rape case. She’s not a very charming lady, nor the sort of witness anyone is going to believe.
Add that to the cuts and bruises the accuser had when she arrived (which could suggest that any injuries she sustained suggestive of rape may have occurred before she showed up at the party), the strike-out on DNA, and the fact that the accused 100% positively identified a player as a rapist who was on his cell phone and off the premises in a cab during the time period in which the rape would have had to be occurring, and it looks more likely than ever that this case is a sham.
It’s easy to imagine what could have happened. The Duke Lacrosse team calls in some strippers. The strippers arrive, go in, and some of these college jocks, who’ve never been noted for their grace and sensitivity, make some extremely obnoxious cracks. The strippers get offended, they don’t actually end up getting naked, there’s a dispute over whether they’re getting paid, and next thing you know, the accuser, who’s drunk or high, decides to pay them back by filing a rape charge.
Even after she sobers up and realizes she has done something incredibly dumb, she feels like she has to go forward because she has a record and doesn’t want to get charged herself for making a false accusation. So, she picks out 3 random guys as her “rapists,” and here we are today.
Is that what happened? We don’t know, but it’s becoming increasingly clear from the evidence that has already come to light that the story the “victim” is telling simply isn’t true. You’re not supposed to come right out and say that because we don’t want women who have been raped to be reluctant to report the crime, but in this case, the damage being done to the reputations of these kids at Duke is so egregious and the chances that the “victim” is telling the truth is so remote that it’s time for people to start calling it like they see it.