please email comments

The police , categorically refused to attend a
scheduled meeting convened by the prosecutor for
the sole purpose of reviewing the exculpatory evidence
. The grand jury and the prosecutor in contrast, are
required by law to carefully consider both sides. The
prosecutor as legal and ethical " gatekeeper", and the
grand jury comprised
of twenty six citizens as ultimate decision
maker..Each in their capacity considered the totality
of the evidence and eventually
decided on only a single charge of solicitation.
1.They
recognized the signifigance of the fact that Mr
Epstein passed an extensive lie detector test , given
by one the
states most reknowned and toughest practioners, 2
.THe prosecutor and jury members reviewed all the
police reports, , comprising the detectives version
of unsubstantiated allegations,in addition to third
party relevant documentary evidence , including
federal criminal records,prior misrepresentations of
age, law enforcecment reports,and both taped
confessions and e-mails .It is apparent that all the
exculpatory evidence was deliberately withheld from
the public release, by the police in order to simply
embarass Mr. Epstein. Some poignant examples 1. The
missing piece of the broken "device",salaciously
described in the report as a sex toy, found during a
search of Mr Epsteins garbage and then officially
referred to in the report as "commonly used for
vaginal or anal stimulation" was the only relevant
item found during a thorough search of his house .The
purported "device" turned out to be nothing
more than an ordinary salad spoon. The police chose
however,not to
amend their report ... The video cameras they
refer to in their report, were actually set up with
the
help of their own swat team in order to
apprehend a serial burglar they deemed potentially
dangerous. The burglar was eventually caught, . As
the videos were grainy, Mr Epstein , in appreciation,
donated $36,000., to enable, the police department
to purchase for their future use, advanced digital
video enhancement
equiptment ,They did so. They , however, fail to
mention
that the burglar in question ,was one of their
interviewed
witnesses. They more importantly fail to report
the fact that the woman fabricating virtually all the
more
serious allegations,when required to repeat those same
fabrications under oath ,and threat of perjury ,
refused to do so. In addition they
withheld from the report , and the prosecutors
themselves , that
this very same witness had both been recently
arrested in palm beach for drug possession and only
shortly therafter terminated by her employer for
theft. Her taped confession, and her employers
statement that she was virtually incapable of telling
the truth, coupled with her boasting that she and her
friends would become really really rich, were facts
carefully considered by the prosecutor and grand jury
in their decision to only charge one count of
solicitation but apparently purposefully ignored by
the police.

__

Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com