And sometimes evil wins

Post Reply New Topic

After a witness dies,charges dropped against Joshua Rezsnyak and Mary Mcforbes,accused of raping 2 year old girl outside of a Worcester walmart.

In a Nolle Prosequi the Worcester county district attorney's offfice wrote that further prosecution of this matter is not in the interest of justice,because of the death of the prosecutions sole eye witness in this matter.

Also extensive testing regarding DNA evidence has proven inconclusive as well.

Mcforbes was accused of making a video and taking pictures while Rezsnyak allegedly assaulted a child inside a maroon ford explorer parked outside a Worcester,Massachusetts Walmart in january of 2018.

A nurse specializing in sexual assault determined the child had injuries consistent with penetration.

So are they innocent or did they get away with a un speakable crime?

masslive.com

If documented physical evidence/proof of sexual assault exists, if parking lot video exists of them taking the child into the vehicle for a length of time, if DNA evidence exists which proves who raped her, then police actions SHOULD be already proceeding.
By the way, where/who are the parents?

DNA evidence was inconclusive,the article never said what the prosecution did with the video made by Mcforbes the female defendant.The article never said if the abused child was the accused's daughter, I would assume not because the term daughter was never said.

I posted most of the article word for word in my post,so what you read is what I know,you can also go to MassLive.com and read the article.

Definitely not good. But I cannot find enough details anywhere regarding the witness and the evidence to try figuring it out.

Evil did not triumph.

The prosecution simply failed to present a case that was based on real, valid evidence.

That is, if there was ever any real, valid evidence to begin with.

Accusation and suspicion are not evidence.

It would help if one could see the video.

Sometimes, “proving beyond a reasonable doubt” goes against common sense. But we must have that burden in order to ensure that innocent people are not found guilty and erroneously punished.

It is unknown what the DA's did with the video and why they aren't using that evidence at a trial,that issue was never addresed in the article,that is a mystery to me as well.

They charged the woman with making child porn but why not use that as evidence,64 million$ question,only the Worcester county DA knows.

They had an eye witness but the witness died.

i have faith that god is not mocked, and that the people who thought smirkingly that they "got over" will be caught by surprise and in dismay.

They had an ALLEGED eye-witness and no real, valid evidence to back up his claim. In other words, they had nothing, and were going to rely solely on the alleged witness’s testimony to win a conviction. Now they have practically less than nothing to prove any crime was committed.

Eye witness testimony is notoriously unreliable and many juries won't convict on that alone in today's world of advanced forensics,this is very true.