Quote:
Originally Posted by Benched
In our system, innocent until proven guilty.
So if the evidence of the case is not admissible due to tampering, then the case comes down to he said, she said, which = no charges.
I think that helps the defendant more, so in this case Kane.
|
Seems to be redundant though, no. Weren't the results of the rape kit that there was no evidence of Kane? Why would they want that to be no admissible?
Not presuming anything, I'm just trying to figure out why either party would try to make it look like it had been tampered with.