On Jameis Winston and This Alleged Sexual Battery (And Shouldn’t-Be-Public-Since-It-Is-An-Ongoing-Investigation) Incident…
Note: Information continues to be leaked to news outlets — which is in its own right a major violation — that DNA evidence collected from Florida State University quarterback Jameis Winston matches that of the alleged complainant in the ongoing case.
All of the conjecture and platitudes that I’ve read and even entertained myself aside — the BOTTOM LINE here is that this whole thing does not seem congruent for two reasons:
— As such, if her initial allegation was indeed on record in the criminal complaint, and the rape kit was not ordered, that is a botch job on the part of the Tallahassee Police Department, as well as those in charge of handling the physical evidence of the alleged incident.
— If the rape kit was ordered and came back negative for any definitive bruising consistent with forcible sexual contact — which appears to be the case, and why this was in an inactive state on record — then it effectively becomes he said/she said, pending the corroboration of each party’s accounts on the part of witnesses via verbal or video evidence. Once again, had such occurred, and this evidence was present at the time, and knowing how they do NOT “cover up” for the antics of FSU players in Tallahassee, there is no way this would have sat unchecked if a positive rape kit AND corroborated evidence/eyewitness accounts were on record.
— Consequently, since both the timing of the reemergence of this situation, and the time frame since the status of the case was changed to inactive are both dubious — and dismissing any ulterior motives on the alleged victim’s part, or on the part of the team and the university, which now has a zero tolerance, anyway — you have to wonder how they can ever prove anything other than consensual sex occurred. If that. Unless someone has video evidence, or can swear under oath that they indeed witnessed the alleged incident, they appear to have not have taken a rape kit, or the kit was inconclusive; meaning they can’t even charge him without being able to dismiss that she didn’t have sex with other men, which is also allegedly the case.
I just find that based upon the actual research that I have done, that they may keep this open pending the investigation yielding (or not) other perpetrators and the ACTUAL man who she described (which is what leads you to believe that this was an old fashioned “train”). If the man she described is yet another man she had sex with, GOOD LUCK proving that any bruising evident at the time of the complaint being filed or after the fact, came from Winston’s contact with her. That’s why this whole thing just seems off, not congruent, and reeks of someone working an angle. We should not be hearing all of this about an ongoing investigation, which should be enough to make anyone with a level head wonder who is at work here and what the angle is that they are working. Particularly when the woman did even want to press charges initially? It’s just very fishy to me. In these he said/she said situations, which this appears to be the case, the truth usually does not come completely to the light, but two reputations can end up ruined because of bad decisions on the part of each involved.