Six held in West Virginia torture horror

**kingcap72** · October 23rd, 2009, 12:30 AM

Originally Posted by january

That was my first thought as well. From the accounts I read, there was overwhelming physical evidence. I'm actually curious if she's been threatened in some way, or if she's one of these dipshits who runs back to her abused boyfriend and then denies that it ever happened. I have a very hard time believing this was all a farce.

Same here. I have a hard time believing this was all fake, after all of the guilty pleas and physical evidence. And it wouldn't surprise me if she got threatened, either. It is the south, and West Virginia to boot.

**Kittylady** · October 23rd, 2009, 09:34 AM

I think she's been threatened to recant. These fucks may be in prison but they'll have plenty of friends, family and like minded morons left on the outside.

**greysfang** · October 23rd, 2009, 10:19 AM

This woman has obviously been threatened and coerced. This is much ado about nothing. I hope the police offer her some protection from whomever is scaring her.

**twitchy2.0** · October 23rd, 2009, 10:24 AM

Or perhaps denial is just a way of coping with something too overwhelming.

**MohandasKGanja** · October 23rd, 2009, 10:35 AM

Originally Posted by kingcap72

Seven people don't plead guilty to a crime they didn't commit. I wonder if she's trying to change her story because she wants to get her boyfriend out of jail? She looks simple, so it wouldn't shock me.

I've read that there's a phenomenon where people get religion or have some life-changing event where they want to settle all accounts, forgive people who did something to them, and leave it all behind them. So, they falsely recant something that actually happened.

There was a rape case about 15 years ago, where a woman completely recanted her testimony against her rapist, and they let him out of jail. The woman had just been born again or something, right before she recanted. Anyway, she and the guy actually appeared on a morning show together, and the host (I could have sworn it was Mariette Hartley or Diane Sawyer) tried to get them to hug each other. I think while the guy was willing to do it, the woman was reticent, almost like she was betraying how she really felt about the guy and what he really did.

**kingcap72** · October 23rd, 2009, 11:15 AM

Originally Posted by MohandasKGanja

I've read that there's a phenomenon where people get religion or have some life-changing event where they want to settle all accounts, forgive people who did something to them, and leave it all behind them. So, they falsely recant something that actually happened.

There was a rape case about 15 years ago, where a woman completely recanted her testimony against her rapist, and they let him out of jail. The woman had just been born again or something, right before she recanted. Anyway, she and the guy actually appeared on a morning show together, and the host (I could have sworn it was Mariette Hartley or Diane Sawyer) tried to get them to hug each other. I think while the guy was willing to do it, the woman was reticent, almost like she was betraying how she really felt about the guy and what he really did.

It's one thing to want to forgive people that wronged you. I can definitely understand that, because I've been there. It's not easy to do. But why recant your testimony against someone who committed a crime against you because of your religion?

I can see if she forgave the guy, but recanting her testimony to get him out of jail was just dumb on her part. I find it amazing that she was reticent to hug her attacker, but had no problem recanting her testimony so he could be back on the street. I wonder how she'll feel if he attacks someone else after she helped to get him out of jail, because it'll be on her head.

**Laxmobster** · October 23rd, 2009, 11:26 AM

Craziness, but I agree with you guys. There is someone in her ear telling her to recant this. There's no way they all would have plead guilty if it weren't true. Evidence usually doesn't lie!

**MohandasKGanja** · October 23rd, 2009, 11:41 AM

Originally Posted by kingcap72

It's one thing to want to forgive people that wronged you. I can definitely understand that, because I've been there. It's not easy to do. But why recant your testimony against someone who committed a crime against you because of your religion?

I can see if she forgave the guy, but recanting her testimony to get him out of jail was just dumb on her part. I find it amazing that she was reticent to hug her attacker, but had no problem recanting her testimony so he could be back on the street. I wonder how she'll feel if he attacks someone else after she helped to get him out of jail, because it'll be on her head.

I've been reading a little more about the story, and the victim sounds like she is a little off. I guess she has a low IQ and was a special-needs student. Her current landlord (if I remember correctly) says that Megan (the victim) goes back and forth all the time on whether it happened or not.

The prosecutor and judge are confident in the convictions. They say that none of the suspects ever denied the charges, and that they were put in separate rooms to get their statements, and that they never conflicted with each other.

However, the victim's statement, from the very beginning, varied widely enough that the prosecutor decided to rely on the suspect's statements and the forensic evidence and instead keep Megan off the stand.

**ManxMouse** · October 23rd, 2009, 11:54 AM

Originally Posted by kingcap72

Seven people don't plead guilty to a crime they didn't commit.

Sure it does...happens all the time. Google Tulia, Texas for one example. The nature of charges and possible sentences cause innocent people to plead out all the time. Her lawyer is saying that her boyfriend did hit her, but the rest of her injuries were self-inflicted. I'm not at all saying that she made the original story up. But we just don't know, and to say that someone is definitely coercing or threatening her to make her recant is total speculation at this point.

**MohandasKGanja** · October 23rd, 2009, 12:16 PM

Originally Posted by ManxMouse

Sure it does...happens all the time. Google Tulia, Texas for one example. The nature of charges and possible sentences cause innocent people to plead out all the time. Her lawyer is saying that her boyfriend did hit her, but the rest of her injuries were self-inflicted. I'm not at all saying that she made the original story up. But we just don't know, and to say that someone is definitely coercing or threatening her to make her recant is total speculation at this point.

Another example was the child sexual abuse case in Wenatchee Washington. 43 adults were charged and a number of them plead guilty to lesser charges. Then, on appeal, (if I remember correctly), almost all sentences were reversed and the city paid a multimillion negligence settlement.

**greysfang** · October 23rd, 2009, 12:19 PM

True, but a woman whose IQ is in the retarded range would have a really difficult time coming up with such an elaborate story and sticking to it for the year or two that prosecution took.

**ManxMouse** · October 23rd, 2009, 01:00 PM

Originally Posted by greysfang

True, but a woman whose IQ is in the retarded range would have a really difficult time coming up with such an elaborate story and sticking to it for the year or two that prosecution took.

But my understanding is that she didn't stick to it -- kept changing all the details, at the very least -- throughout that time. And that she wasn't very credible overall. Which is why they wouldn't put her on the stand.

**MohandasKGanja** · October 23rd, 2009, 01:09 PM

However, it is very damning for the defense that (apparently) none of the accused ever denied what happened, and that their stories of non-denial all were consistent and didn't contradict each other. I'm also not sure what the forensic evidence consists of, but there could have been a lot there that sealed the deal, too.

**kingcap72** · October 23rd, 2009, 02:55 PM

Originally Posted by ManxMouse

Sure it does...happens all the time. Google Tulia, Texas for one example. The nature of charges and possible sentences cause innocent people to plead out all the time. Her lawyer is saying that her boyfriend did hit her, but the rest of her injuries were self-inflicted. I'm not at all saying that she made the original story up. But we just don't know, and to say that someone is definitely coercing or threatening her to make her recant is total speculation at this point.

Seven people randomly plead guilty to the same crime? That happens all of the time? I don't think so. Especially if there's no hard evidence against them, which wasn't the case with this crime. The evidence, not her testimony, convicted these people.

Plus, there is no way in hell that seven white people in the south are going to plead guilty to a crime against a black person if they didn't do it. The history of the south doesn't play out like that.

**feliciakb** · October 23rd, 2009, 11:11 PM

Does anyone know what the damning physical evidence consists of? Although I'm not sure that I want to know. Ick!

Although I totally get what you're saying, Kingcap, I inwardly cringe every time (which is pretty frequently) I hear a stereotype about "the south". I just want to shout from my rooftop that I am NOT AN INBRED, BACKWARDS, ILLITERATE RACIST! Nor is anybody that I'm associated with. Again, this isn't directed toward you or anyone on GR. I just want the WORLD to know that most of us aren't like that! And then people like those in this case come along to reinforce the stereotype...