What pisses me off is the women is willing to lie on the stand about how she was in no danger and she was just asking for a ride to get a paper from the agent and not the fact that she is seeking aid. I can not stand it when people like her plead and beg for help and when it comes to court she tosses the agent under the buss. I hate liers like her and hope she burns for it.
I don't think anyone lied. She was likely relating events as she remembers them through the prism of her hopes and fears. Some witnesses claim to have seen Sukow hit the agents car with his flashlight. Others claim that Sukow's hands were at his side the whole time. Someone has to be lying! Not really. Again, the testimony is likely the truth to the best of their recollections.
That is why eyewitness testimony is not as compelling as physical evidence. It is not nearly as reliable. The defense would've no doubt entered into evidence the dent in Clark's car to establish that Sukow did strike the car. A simple analysis of the dents in Duncan's car should establish that they were caused by the flashlight, casting doubt on Duncan's denials and lending credibility to Clark.
This story does not make my blood boil at all. There was a shooting. It was investigated and brought to trial. Either way the prosecutors went, they'd be seen as being unjust. So, they dropped the matter in the courts,
where the case belonged!
It would have been more accepted if it had been settled by the jury (a likely acquittal, IMO), however the judge had no choice. If the cops/medical examiners/DAs were unable to establish that the body was of the person Clark was accused of killing, the autopsy report of some random unidentified body becomes irrelevant.
How incompetent must the cops/medical examiners/DAs be to not be able to prove the identity of the body on their hands??? I smell a Law & Order episode, ripped from the headlines.
