Bet a Bloggy

For the hater nation, put aside your bias of Big Dumb, Big Jen, Ben Raplisberger, Ben "the rapist" GHBen, Ben Diddlerberger, you know who you are.

The facts are pretty clear, this is just another case of media sensationalism and new age of information overload.

The fine folks over at Stillers.com once again do a marvelous job of breaking down the story and presenting the facts, something TMZ, PFT.com, and our own, TMZ Tranny fail to do on a daily basis.

----------------------------

"The Case Against Ben Roethlisberger's Accuser" by PalmerSucks, Esquire

A "'Sucks Says" Special Report

Well they're out, some 500 pages worth of court documents on "Roethlisbergate" and I've just got done reading a good part of the transcripts. What hasn't helped Ben's case is that the bulk of the alleged victim's and her friend's statements appear first -- all the easier for the media to pick up and feast on. Upon reading, though, I've found that some of these stories – in particular the victim’s and her friend’s -- have more holes than a barn full of Swiss Cheese.

For example, there’s this sad-sounding little song:

Ms. Biancofiore, the accuser's friend, says the woman "was dragged by a bodyguard to the back room in Capital.” http://www.scrippsnews.com/content/witness-says-roethlisberger-bodyguard-dragged-accusor

Elsewhere, though, Ms. Biancofiore sings a slightly different tune:

Student Nicole Biancofiore told Milledgeville officers that Barravecchio "placed his hand" on the young accuser's "shoulder and (applied) a little bit of pressure to guide her" to the staff restroom. http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/sports/steelers/s_676653.html?source=rss&feed=3

Well, which is it, Ms. Biancofiore? Was it a case of your friend practically being kidnapped by Ben's goons, or was it, as you suggest later, just a poor drunk girl being "guided" to the bathroom?

Read on and you'll find all kinds of inconsistencies. I've read page after page of them, and based on the large amount of court testimony and commentary out there now, have been able to reconstruct a little "trial" based on the information available. All quotes are attributed to actual sources as linked. And now, without further delay:

I call to the stand Mr. Roethlisberger's accuser, whom out of respect to anonymity granted the alleged victims of sexual assault, shall be referred to as "Miss X."

Miss X, let us establish your initial contact and statement with the police on the night of March 4, 2010:

When she first approached a police officer outside the nightclub immediately after the incident, Mr. Bright said, "The police officer asked 'Did he rape you?' And her response was 'No.' Then he asked, 'Did you have sex?' And she said, 'Well, I'm not sure.' http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10103/1049925-66.stm

So Miss X, not only do you initially deny that Mr. Roethlisberger sexually assaulted you -- you don't even claim you two even had sexual contact to begin with. A short time later, down at the police station, you change your story, and claim you did in fact have sex with Mr. Roethlisberger, and that he in fact forced himself upon you. Thank you, Miss X, that will be all.

To repeat, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, Miss X at first wonders whether she or Mr. Roethlisberger had sexual relations at all, let alone that she was "raped" -- and perhaps with good reason. I call to the stand Dr. Cyril Wecht, well-known forensic expert:

Forensic pathologist Dr. Cyril H. Wecht, however, said he was "puzzled" that authorities knew the DNA came from a human male but could not profile the sample and compare it to genetic material from Mr. Roethlisberger. "You don't need a lot of material," Dr. Wecht said. "If you have enough to identify material and have enough to identify it as male and you're not able to do a DNA profile -- I'm puzzled. I really am puzzled." http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10103/1049925-66.stm

Well then, if a renowned expert such as Dr. Wecht finds this whole matter a bit hard to figure – shouldn’t we take note?

I call to the stand another expert on the subject:

A scientist at Orchid Cellmark Inc., a company that does genetic testing, agreed with Dr. Wecht. "If a lab is good with their technology, even from very small amounts of DNA, they can get a decent result," said Dr. Rick W. Staub, Orchid Cellmark's forensics laboratory director, scientific operations. http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10103/1049925-66.stm

So now, we have established not one, but two experts who find the lack of DNA evidence available – given the victim’s claim of sexual assault – rather odd.

For the record, it should now be noted, the accuser has identified the type of sexual contact to have occurred -- "unprotected sex." http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2010/0415101roethlisberger1.html

Well no wonder you are "puzzled," Dr. Wecht -- for if Miss X and Mr. Roethlisberger did have sexual intercourse -- unprotected let's remember -- would not then the alleged victim be a veritable fountain of DNA? And yet, the doctors who examined her after the alleged attack could not find the smallest speck of genetic material from which to base a sample match. How odd - how very, very odd. One would think after contact so alleged a woman would be -- pardon my graphic nature here -- flowing with DNA, a veritable Niagara Falls of the stuff. And yet she turns up bone dry, a Gobi Desert. How on God's green earth is this even possible?

And to make matters clear, Dr. Wecht, you come out and specify the only types of sexual contact that could possibly not leave DNA residue:

Dr. Wecht pointed out that some kinds of sexual assault -- such as a "superficial altercation" -- and some types of sexual contact -- such as oral sex -- could leave no biological calling cards. http://postgazette.com/pg/10083/1045168-66.stm

Did you get that? That's superficial contact, or perhaps oral contact -- as opposed to the full-on intercourse alleged by the victim. And to put things in perspective, Doctor, just what size of specimen would be needed to initiate a DNA test?

...a nanogram of DNA, which is a billionth of a gram. A raisin weighs about a gram, so if you could cut a raisin into a billion pieces, we need one of those. So this particular result was far less than even a nanogram. http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10108/1051441-66.stm

Again, Miss X tells us in no uncertain terms that she and Mr. Roethlisberger had unprotected sexual intercourse -- the home-run, all-the-way kind -- certainly not any sort of "superficial altercation" to which Dr. Wecht refers. And yet -- the medical examiners couldn't even obtain a "nanogram" of material needed. How strange -- how very, very strange.

Much has been made of the alleged victim's injuries, particularly bleeding, which the anti-Roethlisberger crowd has pointed to as "sure evidence" of some kind of forced sex. In fact, far from incriminating Mr. Roethlisberger, it may just achieve the opposite.

I call to the stand DA Bright himself, to shed some light on the matter:

Mr. Bright said that after speaking with police, the woman was taken to Oconee Regional Medical Center in Milledgeville, where she was examined by an emergency room doctor and two nurses. Their medical evaluation of her reported superficial laceration, bruising and slight bleeding in the genital area, but the doctor could not say whether the injuries were from any kind of trauma or sexual assault. http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10103/1049925-66.stm

So you see, not even the medical examiners could find evidence of forced contact. Again, that's rather strange, don’t you think, given the alleged victim’s claims?

Now then, let's look at the alleged victim's charge in light of two other facts known that night. First, as witnesses have informed us, Mr. Roethlisberger was quite careful not to be photographed with any sort of alcoholic beverage in his hand. Secondly, we know he was conscious of trouble he might get into with young women.

"At The Brick restaurant, Roethlisberger was asked whether he wanted to take the party back to the accuser's sorority house, but he said, "Hell no. That's a lawsuit waiting to happen," student Katie Cromie told investigators." http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/sports/steelers/s_676653.html?source=rss&feed=3

So it's clear Mr. Roethlisberger did in fact have the avoiding of trouble on his mind -- so much so that the mere idea of going near a sorority house scared him. And yet Miss X, you wish us to believe that he'd think nothing of whipping out his genitals in a nightclub -- as you claim -- and sexually assaulting you on a toilet seat. Does this not seem rather inconsistent with his previously noted attitude?

You are expecting us to believe, Miss X, that Mr. Roethlisberger, who've we've established as being aware of the trouble he could get into with women -- conscious of the consequences of his actions as a high-profile professional athlete -- would risk his entire career and fortune by having forced and unprotected sex with a stranger in the bathroom of a nightclub? A man afraid of "lawsuits" would turn around and care nothing about, say, an unwanted pregnancy? Really, truly and seriously?

You are expecting us to believe, Miss X, that a man some six-feet-five, two hundred fifty pounds had sex with you -- on a toilet seat -- in a closet of a bathroom some 5-feet wide? I find it hard to believe the both of you could fit in the thing to begin with -- well, whatever.

I submit to you, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, that Miss X's first statement to police, on the night of March 4th was in fact the truthful one: that not only did Ben Roethlisberger not rape her, but in fact, most likely never even had sexual intercourse with her, consensual or otherwise. Whatever contact between the two may have occurred, didn’t quite go down the way she said. And thus her claim, and the claims of all her friends, are nothing but fabrications and embellishments, the inconsistencies of which bear out this fact.

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury -- the defense rests.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now then, if some yahoo on the 'net like me can pick apart the accuser’s story like this, imagine what a real attorney would do to her during discovery. Maybe that's the real reason she and her family didn't want this to proceed any further?

In his post-investigation news conference, District Attorney Fred Bright declined to prosecute Roethlisberger because he could not prove a rape happened "beyond a reasonable doubt." I believe he knew the likely falsehood of the alleged victim's claim the whole time -- but rather than scold HER for slinging a false accusation, he chose to go after Mr. Roethlisberger's character instead -- a much safer and more politically correct move. That is perhaps what's most disappointing of all. Far from being "Milledgeville CSI," what we had here was "Milledgeville, BS." Sorry, Mr. Bright, but looks to me like you went after the wrong "victim" here.

You can say a lot of things about Ben Roethlisberger -- that he's dumb, foolish, reckless and may not be the world's number-one gentleman. But what you CAN'T talk about, it's clear, are things you "know" happened, nonsense like Ben having his goons drag (again, Ms. Biancofiore, which is it?) some helpless young drunk girl down a dark hallway, where Ben was waiting to pounce with his junk already out of his pants. How ANYONE is taking this stuff seriously is beyond me. Unfortunately, though, this kind of juicy story is what sells, compounded by the fact that Roethlisberger and the team have decided to clam up in the hopes of having the thing blow over sooner. Which only adds to the "credibility" of the accuser's story.

A question for the "dump Ben" crowd: would you still feel the same way if you found out this latest incident was based on a lie? And so Pittsburgh, and so Stillers Nation, despise your quarterback if you must. Just make sure you're doing it for the right reasons.

(The views of PalmerSucks are not those of Stillers.com -- but should be.)

----------------------------------