Is it true that the victim wouldn't testify?
At least they reported the not guilty verdict. There are a lot of cases that get dismissed or get a lower sentence or get a not guilty verdict that are never reported.camra said:
Not Guilty! Two years after being tarred and feathered on Kbtx - no one can wait for the case to be heard and presume anyone innocent until proven guilty! That's just too inconvenient with social media and instant reporting- not that there is real reporting anymore
Thanks for posting that. Glad to see the acquittal but this explanation really puts it into perspective.lethalninja said:
"And for anyone who is interested in what happened at trial, testimony showed that while at a party the Complainant was highly intoxicated and violating the personal space of Mr. Rawls' wife. Mr. Rawls saw the look on his wife's face and went to see what was wrong. As he approached, the Complainant stuck his hand in Rawls' face and Rawls shoved him back. At some point the Complainant's hand got tangled in the inside pocket of Rawls' jacket, tearing it as they both fell into the bushes. Rawls then struck him multiple times while trying to free himself before another person intervened and the altercation was stopped.
The complainant refused to cooperate with the police that night, gave multiple conflicting stories about how the event started, and was caught in a significant lie about tearing the jacket while testifying in trial. The witnesses who gave the original version of events were all shown to be close friends of the Complainant and none of their stories were consistent with each other or the Complainant."
His lawyer's explanation for why he was acquitted
lethalninja said:
I wasn't really digging for information, since I only asked once and I thought someone here would know, since several people on TexAgs know him.