Does this make sense to anyone?
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/5034202.html
Quote:
POPE AIR FORCE BASE, N.C. — A court-martial is scheduled next month for a female airman who said she was charged after refusing to testify against three male airmen she accused of rape.
The woman is charged with one count of committing indecent acts and one count of consuming alcohol as a minor, said base spokesman Ed Drohan. The men received nonjudicial punishments and were granted immunity for their testimony in the woman's trial, according to documents provided by the woman's military defense attorneys.
(snip)
In her letter, she also said the three male airmen were charged with rape but the charges were dropped after she refused to testify. The woman said she was questioned by the men's defense lawyer without her victim's advocate present, which her lawyers said was a violation of military justice policy.
"The pressure of the judicial process was too much for me, and I felt like no one was looking out for my interests," the woman wrote.
|
One can speculate that the military has more information than is presented here -- like, say, she accused the men of rape to avoid getting into trouble for a consensual act. But then I'd expect her to be charged with making a false accusation, and she wasn't.
I can understand not prosecuting the men after she refused to testify; but granting them immunity so she can be prosecuted? Huh?