posted on May, 15 2015 @ 04:42 AM
Something really isn't adding up about the story, I think they are either being intentionally misleading or just confused themselves about the
When a crime is committed against you, you don't hire a lawyer to prosecute the case. The only people allowed to prosecute crimes are state attorneys,
and you don't hire them, they work for the state and they decide to press charges against an individual or not.
When the article says that no lawyer will take her domestic violence case that doesn't make any sense, that makes it seem as if the man isn't being
held accountable for his actions when that isn't true, he was arrested and the case is currently ongoing. In fact they are appointing a special
prosecutor from the governor's office for the case against the judge.
The article paints the picture of an abused woman being ignored by the legal system, which is completely inaccurate. The criminal case is proceeding.
Whatever difficulties she had with a lawyer it had nothing to do with her criminal case, she either must be involved in a civil lawsuit against the
husband or seeking a divorce lawyer.
Is the lawyer now representing her husband for his criminal trial? For the divorce proceedings? For some other civil case? Because if he is a divorce
lawyer I doubt he is representing the man for his criminal trial, and if he is a criminal lawyer it makes no sense the woman would have talked to him
about divorce or civil matters.
Hopefully people will look into this a bit more before casting judgement because this doesn't seem to be the story it's presented as- at
edit on 15-5-2015 by James1982 because: (no reason given)