PDA

View Full Version : Ben's DNA no longer required by police



SnakeEyes43
03-23-2010, 09:08 PM
According to: http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8171c46d&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true

The Georgia police no longer are requesting Ben's DNA for their investigation. This is good news for Steeler fans. I say it's good because it tells us that they have little to no physical evidence against Ben. Ben isn't in the clear yet, obviously, and he still needs to make better decisions in the future, but this is good news as far as the current case against him goes. We'll see what happens, but this gave me a sigh of relief for now.

75Steeler
03-23-2010, 09:26 PM
Maybe they don't need the DNA evidence and they have a strong enough case without it. I'm still not convinced he is out of the woods just because they don't need the DNA.

JensK
03-23-2010, 09:46 PM
It does not mean a thing. They dont really need dna to bust him if there are other evidence... That being said, it does mean that he didnt rape her.

Big T
03-23-2010, 10:53 PM
It does not mean a thing. They dont really need dna to bust him if there are other evidence... That being said, it does mean that he didnt rape her.

Rape isn't the allegation....it's sexual assault....I know rape is the most severe type of sexual assault but she isn't saying he raped her...

Forged in Steel
03-23-2010, 11:01 PM
This case is taking too long, I want legitimate answers!

SnakeEyes43
03-23-2010, 11:09 PM
Maybe they don't need the DNA evidence and they have a strong enough case without it. I'm still not convinced he is out of the woods just because they don't need the DNA.

For sure, I never said he was out of the woods....lol, not by a long shot. I don't know about their case either, but I very seriously doubt they have a strong enough case to say "awww f*ck the DNA evidence, who needs that?" I mean, DNA sampling is the most concrete evidence in a sexual assault case, as you get the perps DNA from the victim. It can be blood, semen, skin sample, hair, etc, etc....but DNA is what will make a case rock solid. So yes, it does mean something that they no longer are requesting the DNA sample from Ben. We don't know what case they have against him, but it seems as though they are dropping any pursuit of physical evidence, the most incriminating evidence in a sexual assault case.

Real Deal Steel
03-23-2010, 11:10 PM
It does not mean a thing. They dont really need dna to bust him if there are other evidence... That being said, it does mean that he didnt rape her.


Exactly. As this thing progresses, we will see that the only thing he is guilty of is poor judgement in where he goes.

JensK
03-24-2010, 12:02 AM
Rape isn't the allegation....it's sexual assault....I know rape is the most severe type of sexual assault but she isn't saying he raped her...

nah i know. Just saying that at least thats out of the question... Guess rape was the wrong word to use... What i ment to say is that they did not have any kind of sexual stuff going... So what could he possible have done to **** her off? Try to kiss her or something? Even though dna evidence or lack of same is not enough to close the case, she is really running out of things he could be charged for..

SteelCityKid5
03-24-2010, 12:03 AM
Yeah this thing aint over till andrea mcnulty sings.

Big T
03-24-2010, 01:28 AM
nah i know. Just saying that at least thats out of the question... Guess rape was the wrong word to use... What i ment to say is that they did not have any kind of sexual stuff going... So what could he possible have done to **** her off? Try to kiss her or something? Even though dna evidence or lack of same is not enough to close the case, she is really running out of things he could be charged for..

I see what you are saying and I actually misread your first post so thats my bad...

A Pac
03-24-2010, 07:25 AM
ben already admitted that there was sexual contact, why would they need dna evidence to prove that? it looks better for ben in the public's view, but it means nothing legally.

steelersgal86
03-24-2010, 08:24 AM
:deadhorse:

BlitzburghRockCity
03-24-2010, 08:31 AM
Since nobody has told us anything yet on how the investigation is going; you can't really read into this very much. It sounds nice to say that they don't need DNA evidence but considering sexual assault isn't rape, and that Ben said there was "contact" between them, needing DNA most likely wasn't necessary anyways.

Perhaps it does mean that there won't be anything filed legally against him, or perhaps it's just more useless information on a case we know nothing about. Either way we're still just hanging out and waiting.

Captcoolhand
03-24-2010, 08:40 AM
Since nobody has told us anything yet on how the investigation is going; you can't really read into this very much. It sounds nice to say that they don't need DNA evidence but considering sexual assault isn't rape, and that Ben said there was "contact" between them, needing DNA most likely wasn't necessary anyways.

Perhaps it does mean that there won't be anything filed legally against him, or perhaps it's just more useless information on a case we know nothing about. Either way we're still just hanging out and waiting.That pretty much sums that all up! We still know nothing more now than what we did 24 hours ago.

SnakeEyes43
03-24-2010, 10:57 AM
ben already admitted that there was sexual contact, why would they need dna evidence to prove that? it looks better for ben in the public's view, but it means nothing legally.

He never admitted "sexual" contact....he said they made "contact". And of course they did, she was in his VIP area. Contact could be anything from a handshake, a picture with him, a hug, or just a brush by.

LatrobePA
03-24-2010, 02:24 PM
According to: http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8171c46d&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true

The Georgia police no longer are requesting Ben's DNA for their investigation. This is good news for Steeler fans. I say it's good because it tells us that they have little to no physical evidence against Ben. Ben isn't in the clear yet, obviously, and he still needs to make better decisions in the future, but this is good news as far as the current case against him goes. We'll see what happens, but this gave me a sigh of relief for now.



Even better news for Bruce Arians, he can keep the beard (they were close to shaving it off and turning it in to the GBI for DNA)!!

TampaSteelGirl
03-24-2010, 02:47 PM
Even better news for Bruce Arians, he can keep the beard (they were close to shaving it off and turning it in to the GBI for DNA)!!

:reddevil:

Steelerlyn
03-24-2010, 03:06 PM
Get married son and leave the horny college kids alone.

LatrobePA
03-24-2010, 03:09 PM
:reddevil:

:banana:

TampaSteelGirl
03-24-2010, 03:14 PM
:banana:

:beerbanana:

LatrobePA
03-24-2010, 03:16 PM
Get married son and leave the horny college kids alone.

Or leave the NON-HORNY college kids alone...:tt02:

yinzer
03-25-2010, 07:57 AM
Maybe they don't need the DNA evidence and they have a strong enough case without it. I'm still not convinced he is out of the woods just because they don't need the DNA.

they don't need the DNA because this case has no legs to stand on.

steelers4life66
03-25-2010, 10:12 AM
According to: http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8171c46d&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true

The Georgia police no longer are requesting Ben's DNA for their investigation. This is good news for Steeler fans. I say it's good because it tells us that they have little to no physical evidence against Ben. Ben isn't in the clear yet, obviously, and he still needs to make better decisions in the future, but this is good news as far as the current case against him goes. We'll see what happens, but this gave me a sigh of relief for now.

Just saw on NFL channel that police want to speak with her again and she refused. This could B another good sign.

coldrolled
03-25-2010, 10:21 AM
Just saw on NFL channel that police want to speak with her again and she refused. This could B another good sign.

It was reported on KDKA.com that the accuser has refused to be interviewed by the police again.

There are many reasons as to why the prosecutors would interview any accuser more than one time. It may be to see if there is any additional information that they remember and to make sure that their story is the same one from the initial interview.

For the accuser to refuse to be re-interviewed, the case against Roethlisberger could be over soon.

Sources say that the accuser failed to show up for an interview last Tuesday, and as of last Friday, still did not come in to be interviewed.

As Pittsburgh area defense attorney, Robert Del Greco stated, "Well they would have hit a brick wall."

75Steeler
03-25-2010, 11:00 AM
It was reported on KDKA.com that the accuser has refused to be interviewed by the police again.

There are many reasons as to why the prosecutors would interview any accuser more than one time. It may be to see if there is any additional information that they remember and to make sure that their story is the same one from the initial interview.

For the accuser to refuse to be re-interviewed, the case against Roethlisberger could be over soon.

Sources say that the accuser failed to show up for an interview last Tuesday, and as of last Friday, still did not come in to be interviewed.

As Pittsburgh area defense attorney, Robert Del Greco stated, "Well they would have hit a brick wall."


Her willful refusal to meet with investigators is huge. Once the DA's Office sees that they have a victim who refuses to show to be interviewed the case is pretty much finished. An unreliable witness is not what a DA wants in the courtroom. I'd like to know what her excuse is though. This is as good if not better than them not needing Ben's DNA.

coldrolled
03-25-2010, 11:20 AM
And this one today...

Cansino shared with investigators copies of the driver's license Capital City's bouncers seized from Roethlisberger's accuser weeks before she was seen with him. The date on the license was scratched and reworked to indicate she was born in June 1987 — two years before her actual birth.

The Tribune-Review does not name alleged victims of sexual abuse. The woman's Atlanta attorney, Lee Parks, did not return messages seeking comment.

"She presented the ID, but the security saw that it clearly was a fake birth date," said Cansino, a former county prosecutor. "Because she never got the chance to drink, security confiscated it and didn't turn her over for other charges."

According to Cansino, authorities told him the woman's blood alcohol level was above 0.20 percent — more than 10 times the legal limit for drivers younger than 21 in Georgia and more than twice the limit for older motorists.

"We believe that she obtained the alcohol from patrons, not from employees," said Cansino, who said bouncers removed one member of the woman's group from the VIP room that evening.

Roethlisberger's attorney, Edward T.M. Garland, declined to comment for this story. He insists authorities will file no charges in the case

StlersGuy
03-25-2010, 11:26 AM
when will this be a dead issue after all she was and is all about money and that is all this will ever be. Ben did nothing wrong but put himself in this by just being there.

Real Deal Steel
03-27-2010, 11:19 AM
when will this be a dead issue after all she was and is all about money and that is all this will ever be. Ben did nothing wrong but put himself in this by just being there.


Exactly. We need to talk about real things like getting the O-line up to par. And getting Ben into camps to get things in place.