Frustrating lack of detail,
by
rammyh
11/06/2009, 10:51 AM #
But there must be a rational reason why the cops and prosecution went after Sullivan and why the jury thought him guilty.
I think many of us are distracted by Sullivan's age and the many existant problems w/ the justice system, BUT if we take the the really cynical and anti-prosecution side of this case, I still find it points towards Sulliavn's guilt.
Because as the article points out, ther were 2 other burglars, older boys of 17 and one of them had a prior for a sexual offense. So if we are to assume that the cops and prosecution were lazy, corrupt and racist and just wanted to clear the case fast and lock up some dumb, poor Black boy, regardless of whether said boy was guilty - WHY THE HELL WOULD THEY PICK THE 13YO?
If the cops and prosecution just want to pin it on someone, then charge the older boy w/ the sex offense, no?
Also, no one seems to have any problem w/ Sullivan and his partners being actually guilty of the burglary, so that implies that it was a righteous bust. The lack of detail in the article doesn't tell us how the cops nailed the 3 for the burglary, but they did, and no one has issue with that part of the case.
SO, the cops know the 3 broke into the house, the cops know that later on a 72yo woman is brutally raped, the cops know that one of the 3 boys has a prior for a sex crime, BUT THEY CHARGE THE 13YO.
There must have been a good enough reason, but we just don't know. (I tried a half-ass interenet serach on the case and got nothing). Because if you're going to railroad someone, why railroad the youngest person involved, the one most likely to get off? When there's a better candidate for railroading right in front of you?
It just doesn't add up, if the cops just wanted the case put to bed, they could've framed the 17yo, but they went w/ the one who was a 100x more likely to be found innocent and get a lot more scrutiny from the press and liberals and appellate courts, etc.
