Maybe the sheer relief of having the charges dropped made him come off as sounding a little bit more conciliatory than his lawyer might have thought prudent, but who knows?

I'm glad it's over too. Just so fucking sick of hearing about it.

My advice to women? Stay the hell away from professional athletes. Period.

comment by spazmo at 10:12 PM on 09.01.04 [ link ]

I think it makes sense, in the context of everything. I think he probably has felt bad this entire time, and if you read his entire statement, it seems like he has been communicating with her in some form (whether through lawyers or what, I don't know).

Anyway, the statement actually made me like him more (which might be the point), although it surprised me, too. Couldn't they retry him using that statement, even though she has said she won't use the statement in the civil trial?

comment by DeAnn at 10:12 PM on 09.01.04 [ link ]

I believe the dismissal was with prejudice, meaning he can't be re-tried. I'm also willing to wager the statement was an aspect of an already negotiated settlement of the civil suit. Perhaps not, but that's my guess-- I highly doubt he'd make that statement if there was any uncertainty about the status of the civil suit.

I too am glad to see this coming to an end.

comment by PoolBoy at 10:12 PM on 09.01.04 [ link ]

I thought the same thing, PB, after I posted this -- that he never would have said that if he didn't already know the outcome of the civil suit, because whether they can retry him or not, that comment would create major problems in the civil suit.

I agree with everyone that one way or another, it's good to have it over. My only concern is that I'm kind of creeped out about her deciding not to participate after the court kept fucking up and releasing her name and address over and over again. I don't mind if she dropped it because she chose to on her own terms, either because she was wrong or because she chose to just get on with her life (I mean, you could debate that all day, but there you go), but if she dropped it because crazy threatening assholes were ruining her life, that's very bothersome. It's hard to know how to react.

comment by Linda at 10:12 PM on 09.01.04 [ link ]

I think PoolBoy nailed it. They reached a monetary settlement. He wasn't going to pay unless the charges were dropped, so she refused to testify. But she wanted some level of public vindication, so they agreed to that weak, mealy-mouthed apology which basically says, "I thought it was consensual, but understand that you may feel that it wasn't." Which makes no sense. Consenual sex is or it isn't.

The civil case is apparently "going forward" but I guarantee you terms have been reached. No one is going to be deposed, etc. The final agreement will contain the mother of all confidentiality terms. The only reason they don't announce the settlement terms of the civil case is that they don't want to make it look obvious that she is being bought.

From my perspective, it makes her story less believable, not more. If she was right, she could have gotten the conviction, money, and true public vindication. Instead, she took the money, her alleged rapist won't see the inside of a jail cell, and she'll never be able to tell her side of the story.

comment by BassetHound at 10:12 PM on 09.01.04 [ link ]

That Pool Boy, he's a smart one.

comment by Linda at 10:12 PM on 09.01.04 [ link ]

I think what especially throws me is the tense he used: "I truly believe" it was consensual. Seems to me that "believed" is the only word that even remotely makes sense in that sentence, and the past tense would cover his ass just as well legally. If she didn't think she was consenting, dude, it wasn't consensual. The legal issue, of course, is whether he believed at the time that she was consenting. His use of the present tense just makes it: I understand she didn't think she was consenting, but I know she totally did.

comment by Sheila at 10:12 PM on 09.01.04 [ link ]