As a very close friend of Eric Frimpong for 2 years, and having spent a lot of time with him during his trial and after the verdict, I maintain that his story is an example of a weakness in the US judicial system. All the evidence screams that Eric is innocent, and I mean all the evidence including the testimony of the victims boyfriend at the time of the incident. Eric is black and is from Ghana. He was tried by an all white jury with a judge who was a DA for 15 years. During the case there were several valid claims for a mistrial, but were all denied. I have to stop myself from going into the details of the case, but I encourage you to check out an article currently featured in ESPN, written by Sam Alipour who had no affiliation with any party in the trial. When I do try to tell people about the trial, they tend to think I am making things up, well read the article and tell me what you think.Read the full story at ESPN.
1 comment:
I read the article in ESPN the magazine earlier today and was very disturbed. Unless there is a LOT more to this trial that was not presented in the article written on ESPN, I don't see how a jury could, without a reasonable doubt, conclude that Eric was guilty of raping Jane Doe. Jane Doe doesn't even know what happened that night, she had a 0.20 breathalyzer reading the NEXT DAY!!! She blacked out!!! None of his DNA was anywhere on her!!! Yet the ex's semen was on her underwear and he is not even a suspect? But oh, I forgot that's because she doesn't wash her underwear because that semen was there from a week ago. AND, totally in line with his initial testimony that she grabbed his junk (crotch) after he tried to get her away because of her nasty cigarette breath, epithelial cells from the alleged victim were found on his junk!!! And somehow no scratch marks, bruises, or any other signs of a fight (or skin cells for that matter) were found anywhere else on Eric. That seems odd since, at least as far as I would expect, rape victims usually put up some sort of resistance in the form of scratching, clawing, punching, etc. It pisses me off just thinking about it. Unfortunately it becomes a "he said, she said" argument and the (racist) Santa Barbara judicial system decided that a young black man with high aspirations didn't deserve a fair trial because the judge needed to go on vacation for the holidays. Obviously I don't know all the facts of the case, but to me it seems like judge Hill just wanted to get this case over with (at the expense of a young man's life) and didn't really mind that many aspects of this case constituted grounds for a mistrial. I truly hope some form of justice prevails here whether it be the judge losing his judgeship (is that even a word?) for complete and utter negligence, if not racism; the DA being punished for not providing the first expert dentist and also for the Griffin error; or the alleged victim realizing that she has put an innocent man in jail and coming out and telling the truth to set Eric free.
Post a Comment