Comments on: The Truth is a slippery thing…

By: rhoefer@hbbh.net

rhoefer@hbbh.net — Sat, 10 May 2008 04:32:00 +0000

A friend just sent me this link to read. I represented Kenneth Hinson. It has been over a year since the trial took place and I will tell you that your post is perhaps the most reasonably balanced I’ve read to date. Most that I’ve seen accept the unfortunate pre-trial press releases as being the irrefutable facts of the case and accordingly, express absolute outrage at the result. According to most, the blame lies with me, the prosecutor, the jury or the system itself. The problem was that the state was so confident in its case (as was the media) no one bothered to look at the girls’ version of events with a critical eye. I am grateful that someone recognizes that in an imperfect world, truth is sometimes an elusive commodity. In this case the jury was told that they had to believe those facts, beyond a reasonable doubt. When they could not, I think the jurors accepted their only remaining option.

At any rate, thanks for being objective. I’ll look forward to reading your book. RHoefer

By: CJ Lyons

CJ Lyons — Wed, 25 Apr 2007 14:50:00 +0000

Thanks for the comments, Sara and Laurie.

The defense was that this man had consensual sex with both girls--they did have his semen on one of their shirts.

Of course, in any woman past adolescence it can be impossible to "prove" rape simply via a physical exam, hence the he said/she said defense.

I think the jury felt like no one was telling the truth and how could they incarcerate a man for life based on what they felt like was evidence that didn't prove him guilty.

Hoping the feds keep him off the street and that these girls are getting the help they need!

By: Laurie

Laurie — Wed, 25 Apr 2007 14:42:00 +0000

Being in Canada, this trial hasn’t had any media play that I’ve heard/noticed. In my experience with criminal trials (not that I’m an expert), the jury made a few errors: 1) the sock – showing wear but not pine needles sounds perfectly normal to me if you were running through the forest. For the other girl not to have cuts or abrasions, I’ve walked barefoot lots of times in “the woods” and nothing’s happened to my feet.
2) knowing about the bunker – how would they be expected to know about that? Just because Hinson’s girlfriend and her son knew about it…or did you mean that one of the girls and her boyfriend already knew about it?
3) Sleeping and not knowing the other was being kidnapped – perfectly possible. I’m going to blog about one of my rape investigations that deals with a similar situation. A knife at your throat is a wonderful subduer.
4) Buying crack? Did the prosecutor not dig into whether or not she was an addict and still using? He/she dropped the ball there…
5) The 911 call – people can say all kinds of things when they’re freaked out. If she knew he was on a sex offender registry, then in saying that maybe she was trying to get help there quicker. 911 people can feel to be “slow” in asking their questions and sending help, when someone’s in a crisis and terrified…think back to the 911 call Nicole Simpson made the night she was killed. The 911 operator sounded like a complete idiot.

Nowhere has the jury foreman mentioned their proof of rape. That seemed strange to me! If that’s there, the state of their socks or feet doesn’t really matter. Sounds like it’s a good thing Hinson’s up on weapons charges – which right there “proves” he’s a violent man – so the justice system can have another go at him.

I hope those girls are getting some kind of counselling, even if they lied about parts of it, they’ll still need it. If I’d been on the jury (which I never will be, having been a cop), I doubt I’d vote to acquit him!

By: Sara Thacker

Sara Thacker — Tue, 24 Apr 2007 19:31:00 +0000

Some of the things I’ve heard about the case made me wonder about the girls and their statements. It’s a very sad situation because someone is lying.