darksabre Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 This bit of news is going to make most people think that someone tampered with evidence to aid Pat Kane. Cambria pretty much has to say something to shoot that down. If the whole thing hadn't been in the public eye from day one, then he'd have no reason to speak up now. This thing has been and will continue to be tried in the public, so Cambria is going to speak. That doesn't mean anything for Kane though. If anything it takes attention away from Kane and puts it on BPD, the legal system, etc. He's inadvertently drawing attention back to Kane. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 I could have sworn that originally the story said that she was immediately driven, by her friend, to the hospital where they performed a rape kit on her. Way too many holes in this story................... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 I am pulling quotes from twitter so sorry if anything is off: Cambria: "The victim has not been determined yet. I think my client (Kane) is a victim in this case" More weird posturing. What is this even for? Things were getting quiet for Kane and the legal system was working through things as intended. Now there might be something wrong with the process and he feels the need to take it as an opportunity to paint Kane as a victim? What if both the accuser and Kane are victims now? That is distinctly possible isn't it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 Hamburg PD just posted this: Regarding Evidence September 23, 2015 at 2:43pm In regard to the information conveyed today by Mr. Thomas Eoannou, the Hamburg Police Department will cooperate with any authorized investigation regarding the handling of evidence and the procedure of such. That said, The Hamburg Police Department has documentation that unequivocally demonstrates that it's handling of the evidence and the integrity of it's chain of custody of evidence in this case is unassailable. As is policy with active investigations, there will be no further comment regarding this situation. I could have sworn that originally the story said that she was immediately driven, by her friend, to the hospital where they performed a rape kit on her. Way too many holes in this story................... As opposed to what? More weird posturing. What is this even for? Things were getting quiet for Kane and the legal system was working through things as intended. Now there might be something wrong with the process and he feels the need to take it as an opportunity to paint Kane as a victim?What if both the accuser and Kane are victims now? That is distinctly possible isn't it? Yes that is possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 That doesn't mean anything for Kane though. If anything it takes attention away from Kane and puts it on BPD, the legal system, etc. He's inadvertently drawing attention back to Kane. How does drawing attention away from Kane and towards the system inadvertently draw attention back to Kane? I'm not following your logic here. I could have sworn that originally the story said that she was immediately driven, by her friend, to the hospital where they performed a rape kit on her. Way too many holes in this story................... Remember that you're basing this off of the initial stories that slowly filtered out to the internet via word of mouth. Don't place much weight on things not sounding exactly like they did on day 1. The detail your questioning here can very easily be verified by hospital records/cameras. They know exactly who took her there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerme1 Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 Disgusting. The whole thing is disgusting. And now to lay it all at the door of the mother? This is just freaking sad for all. Somebody else now is in some serious trouble. Just a matter of when. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 I could have sworn that originally the story said that she was immediately driven, by her friend, to the hospital where they performed a rape kit on her. Way too many holes in this story................... How does today's developments have anything to do with that original story? This is all about how in the hell (and why in the hell) the rape kit ended up at the accuser's mother's house. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 How does drawing attention away from Kane and towards the system inadvertently draw attention back to Kane? I'm not following your logic here. The logic being that if he simply says "We have no comments at this time but support any investigation that helps to assure that this situation is handled appropriately", then Kane is pretty much not a story. By having any more to say than something simple and unassuming he's going to draw more eyes back to Kane. Now everyone is going to want to know why he feels the need to defend his client right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted September 23, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 I don't think Cambria was suggesting Kane was a victim of a sexual assault; he seemed to be saying Kane's been defamed. Not sure that was unclear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 I don't think Cambria was suggesting Kane was a victim of a sexual assault; he seemed to be saying Kane's been defamed. Not sure that was unclear. I'm not asserting that Kane was a victim in that respect. Sorry if I was confusing. Kane being defamed was an option from the start. Any time someone is accused of something there's a chance that it's not true and also harmful. This situation doesn't really change that does it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesportsbuff Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 forgive me if it sounds like i'm defending Kane because i'm not -- i hope the dude goes to jail and never plays hockey again if it's true. but i'm just trying to understand what exactly happened here today, since i'm pretty clueless when it comes to the legal system and all things related. wouldn't the rape kit being tampered with negatively impact Kane, given that it was reported that none of his DNA was found below the victim's waist? this was reported last week, presumably before the rape kit was taken from wherever it was supposed to be and torn open. surely both sides have been made aware of the results of the rape kit, and i would assume the results were documented elsewhere besides inside that bag. so if it is decided that the rape kit can't be used as evidence, wouldn't that hurt Kane's defense since he could no longer prove his DNA wasn't found? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 forgive me if it sounds like i'm defending Kane because i'm not -- i hope the dude goes to jail and never plays hockey again if it's true. but i'm just trying to understand what exactly happened here today, since i'm pretty clueless when it comes to the legal system and all things related. wouldn't the rape kit being tampered with negatively impact Kane, given that it was reported that none of his DNA was found below the victim's waist? this was reported last week, presumably before the rape kit was taken from wherever it was supposed to be and torn open. surely both sides have been made aware of the results of the rape kit, and i would assume the results were documented elsewhere besides inside that bag. so if it is decided that the rape kit can't be used as evidence, wouldn't that hurt Kane's defense since he could no longer prove his DNA wasn't found? It depends on the circumstances of the alleged tampering, which we don't know anything about yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted September 23, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 I'm not asserting that Kane was a victim in that respect. Sorry if I was confusing. Kane being defamed was an option from the start. Any time someone is accused of something there's a chance that it's not true and also harmful. This situation doesn't really change that does it? No, you weren't unclear. Stuff here is just a bit fast and furious. These two guys have gone all-in on trying this through the media and court of public opinion. Someone aligned with Kane leaked the upshot of the test results. Cambria denies his office did it. Maybe so. Probably so. But someone aligned with Kane did. That appeared to prompt the stealing and delivery of the evidence bag with the rape kit. My best guess: "Here, accuser's family, have the kit tested yourself." Anyway, and now Eoannou has held a press conference to address the leaks and the stolen evidence. And then Cambria returns the favour. I'd say a Judge has gotta get involved to put the kibosh on this stuff, but there's no Judge assigned because no charges have been laid. wouldn't the rape kit being tampered with negatively impact Kane, given that it was reported that none of his DNA was found below the victim's waist? per cambria: no one is claiming there was a breach in the chain of custody from accuser-->hospital-->authorities-->lab. if that's the case, then the test results are not impugned. it could give the accuser the ability to claim prejudice from being unable to conduct a test of her own. likewise for kane, as cambria noted. hamburg police just released a statement saying they were super careful with the evidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 As opposed to what? As opposed to not going to the hospital. Remember that you're basing this off of the initial stories that slowly filtered out to the internet via word of mouth. Don't place much weight on things not sounding exactly like they did on day 1. The detail your questioning here can very easily be verified by hospital records/cameras. They know exactly who took her there. Who took her to the hospital wasn't the focal point of my post. The focal point was whether she went at all. If she didn't go to the hospital then her story could be bogus. If she did go to the hospital, authorities would have been in possession of the evidence. How does today's developments have anything to do with that original story? This is all about how in the hell (and why in the hell) the rape kit ended up at the accuser's mother's house. If she actually went to the hospital, a rape kit would have been performed, law enforcement would have been notified and there would have been no tampering. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 As opposed to not going to the hospital. Who took her to the hospital wasn't the focal point of my post. The focal point was whether she went at all. If she didn't go to the hospital then her story could be bogus. If she did go to the hospital, authorities would have been in possession of the evidence. If she actually went to the hospital, a rape kit would have been performed, law enforcement would have been notified and there would have been no tampering. No idea what you're getting at here. That a rape kit was performed is not being questioned. What is being questioned is whether law enforcement tampered with the rape kit after it was performed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 As opposed to not going to the hospital. Who took her to the hospital wasn't the focal point of my post. The focal point was whether she went at all. If she didn't go to the hospital then her story could be bogus. If she did go to the hospital, authorities would have been in possession of the evidence. If she actually went to the hospital, a rape kit would have been performed, law enforcement would have been notified and there would have been no tampering. I am not following you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 The logic being that if he simply says "We have no comments at this time but support any investigation that helps to assure that this situation is handled appropriately", then Kane is pretty much not a story. By having any more to say than something simple and unassuming he's going to draw more eyes back to Kane. Now everyone is going to want to know why he feels the need to defend his client right now. He needs to defend his client exactly because he is his client. Who knows, maybe it would be better to stay quiet today, but I can't picture any attorney in this situation who wouldn't put out some sort of statement defending Pat Kane. There may be a lot of possibly explanations for why the kit was left there, but what this news today ultimately does wind up as a shot taken against Kane and his people (lawyer, friends, whoever...). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted September 23, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 No idea what you're getting at here. That a rape kit was performed is not being questioned. What is being questioned is whether law enforcement tampered with the rape kit after it was performed. I am not following you. All agree that a rape kit was created, and that forensic tests were performed on the samples in that kit. The question is how that kit's contents -- contained in what's known as an evidence bag -- came to be deposited between the front and storm door of the accuser's mother's home. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny DangerFace Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 what jj is saying is that if the rules were followed, then there wouldn't be tampering. or something like that. Obviously that should have been reported initially, now its a hole or something Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 If she actually went to the hospital, a rape kit would have been performed, law enforcement would have been notified and there would have been no tampering. You're way off the tracks here, but I'll entertain it for a second. Like I said in my earlier response to you, whether or not she went to the hospital can very easily be verified by hospital records and security cameras. If you really want to make this suggestion, you're going to look foolish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 You're way off the tracks here, but I'll entertain it for a second. Like I said in my earlier response to you, whether or not she went to the hospital can very easily be verified by hospital records and security cameras. If you really want to make this suggestion, you're going to look foolish. So he is suggesting that she didn't go to the hospital right after it allegedly took place and therefore there was not rape kit down? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted September 23, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 (edited) If she did go to the hospital, authorities would have been in possession of the evidence. Everyone agrees that all of those things happened. At some point after the evidence was entrusted to the authorities, it was ... misplaced. Or taken. Stolen. This is where the internet makes me insane: How did someone get off an a tangent of "hey, maybe she never event went to the hospital." Edited September 23, 2015 by That Aud Smell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 No, you weren't unclear. Stuff here is just a bit fast and furious. These two guys have gone all-in on trying this through the media and court of public opinion. Someone aligned with Kane leaked the upshot of the test results. Cambria denies his office did it. Maybe so. Probably so. But someone aligned with Kane did. That appeared to prompt the stealing and delivery of the evidence bag with the rape kit. My best guess: "Here, accuser's family, have the kit tested yourself." Anyway, and now Eoannou has held a press conference to address the leaks and the stolen evidence. And then Cambria returns the favour. I'd say a Judge has gotta get involved to put the kibosh on this stuff, but there's no Judge assigned because no charges have been laid. per cambria: no one is claiming there was a breach in the chain of custody from accuser-->hospital-->authorities-->lab. if that's the case, then the test results are not impugned. it could give the accuser the ability to claim prejudice from being unable to conduct a test of her own. likewise for kane, as cambria noted. hamburg police just released a statement saying they were super careful with the evidence. Wouldn't surprise me if each of them get a call from the administrative judge this afternoon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 You're way off the tracks here, but I'll entertain it for a second. Like I said in my earlier response to you, whether or not she went to the hospital can very easily be verified by hospital records and security cameras. If you really want to make this suggestion, you're going to look foolish. So he is suggesting that she didn't go to the hospital right after it allegedly took place and therefore there was not rape kit down? Did you guys happen to miss the word 'if'? Keep putting words in my mouth and then criticizing what you hoped I said. Yet, I'm the foolish one. Thanks for reminding me why I avoided this thread. Everyone agrees that all of those things happened. At some point after the evidence was entrusted to the authorities, it was ... misplaced. Or taken. Stolen. This is where the internet makes me insane: How did someone get off an a tangent of "hey, maybe she never event went to the hospital." I didn't say that. But thanks for playing. you people are quick to make assumptions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 So he is suggesting that she didn't go to the hospital right after it allegedly took place and therefore there was not rape kit down? That was my take on it, but I'm sure he'll try to clean that up. That view would certainly take the foil hat view of things to a whole new level. Let's not forget that Cambria's comments today acknowledge the existence of the kit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.