Cox can thank Thomas for his freedom

AP

In January’s wild-card playoff game against the Steelers, receiver Demaryius Thomas helped the Broncos seize victory from the jaws of defeat.  Last week, Thomas did the same thing for former teammate Perrish Cox.

Josh Alper dropped the link in today’s one-liners, but since I can only write so many bounty stories in one weekend I decided to elaborate.  With Cox acquitted of rape despite:  (1) denying having sex with the alleged victim; and (2) providing DNA evidence that matched the DNA of the fetus that was growing in the woman’s body, it looked like he was heading up the river.  Or down the river.  Or whichever direction on the river the prison is.

So what happened?  Mike Klis of the Denver Post explains that testimony from Thomas gave Cox’s lawyer the opening for the one thing that allows the factually guilty to go free in the name of protecting the innocent from being wrongfully convicted:  reasonable doubt.

After blurting out a comment from Cox that prompted a failed request from Cox’s lawyer for a mistrial, Thomas offered up something that hurt the prosecutions case, perhaps fatally.  Questioned by prosecutors regarding his decision to send multiple text messages to the alleged victim on the day following the alleged incident, Thomas explained that he texted the alleged victim because teammate Cassius Vaughn had told Thomas at practice that he there was some “great ‘girl on girl action'” after Thomas left Cox’s apartment.

Thomas had told police that he left Cox’s apartment after the alleged victim supposedly passed out.

Klis explains that the judge had prohibited any reference to supposed “girl on girl” action under Colorado’s rape shield laws, which are aimed at ensuring that the sexual habits and histories of rape victims won’t become an issue at trial.  But the prosecution opened the door, foolishly.  (The notion that a lawyer should never ask a question to which the lawyer doesn’t already know the answer became a cliche for a reason.)

And so the testimony from Thomas paved the way for evidence that the alleged victim had erased text messages from Thomas regarding Vaughn’s claim.  The prosecution then chose not to call Vaughn to testify, which Cox’s lawyer wisely pointed out during closing arguments.  Throw in a concession from Thomas that, on second thought, the alleged victim may not have been passed out but merely asleep, and that’s enough reasonable doubt to prevent Cox from being convicted.

Since, as Klis explains, none of the jurors will talk about the verdict, there’s no way to know why they disregarded a fairly clear line of logic.  But Klis likely is right — whether Thomas intended to save Cox or not, Thomas said just enough to keep Cox out of prison.

19 responses to “Cox can thank Thomas for his freedom

  1. Didn’t Cox still lie? He told police he never had sex with her. Unless this girl on girl action included some semen in a turkey baster, Cox still lied to police/investigators and impeded the investigation. I’m not following the case close enough but if he stuck to his story while on the stand, he likely purjured (sp?) himself as well.

  2. It’s not DT’s fault that the prosecutor failed to do his job. There has been no indication that DT was anything less than 100% truthful, you know, like being under oath requires. Should he have lied about why he texted the alleged victim? Furthermore, if he was trying to help Cox get off (no pun intended) he wouldn’t have testified that Cox tossed the alleged victim in bed and said “she’s about ready.” Also, you should mention that Cox told Klis that DT cut all ties with Cox after his arrest.

  3. That sounds like reasonable doubt to me. After hearing that she was awake after Thomas left it sounds like she was just crying wolf.

  4. So….the moral to the story??? Our system of justice does a disservice to the public trust and allows a rapist to go free.

  5. I think you have over-valued Cox’ denial of sex.

    also, having been to these type of parties before, I find it difficult to believe anyone could be raped at this type of event. Where people are openly having sex with multiple partners it is a “swinger” type environment that would be appropriate in Caligula’s court.

    A person willing to go into that environment may very well be implying consent in the same manner a person going into a bar and drinking is implying they are of legal age to drink.

  6. Wow, that defense lawyer is GOOD… he found a way to get a jury to disregard physical DNA evidence and a bold faced lie by his client. Not too many Einsteins on that jury, that’s for sure =/

  7. I have a hard time with these sort of cases, how can a victims predispositions not play into a trial where the accused does? While I understand the sensitivity of the situation, doesnt this “shield law” not give the prosecution the advantage over the defense? Without all the facts, does that not unfairly create a one-sided predjudice against the accused? I know it is a slippery slope, but such a disadvantage seems to tip the scales in this predictament. If the laws of this country are based around the conclusions drawn by the “reasonable man(person),” then the reasonable man needs all facts to come to a reasonable conclusion.

  8. Cox and Thomas are dirtbags. Thats been established. It pains me to say the “victim” isnt much better than those 2. In the end jail time for them was the least of her actual concerns. This was all about the civil suit in the first place so lets get to it.

  9. Personally, I have not done enough research on the subject to formulate an unbiased opinion.

    The timeless quotation by Mark Twain about a lie traveling halfway around the world before a truth can tie its shoelaces has only become exponentially more pronounced in this age of social media and instant news.

    Of all the comments on this subject, I can only speculate on how many are formulating opinions based on less than half the facts and influenced by columns written by “journalists” whose primary goal is to generate response (positive or negative).

    The mere accusation of sexual assault involving Roethlisberger resulted in exponentially more media coverage without being charged compared to Cox who not only was charged but went to trial.

    The reason of course, is obvious. Cox is not a 2 time Super Bowl winner at QB for one of the flagship franchises in the NFL. Same goes for the Packers Brandon Underwood and Colts Eric Foster (who were both accused of sexual assault in the 2010 off-season – same as Big Ben – but you’ll be hard pressed to find coverage of a reserve Defensive Tackle and reserve Safety. )

    A lot of strong opinions — just wonder how many really have an informed idea of what happened.

  10. Any man that cannot defend his Family or himself without the Law is a Fool or a Coward. The Law is and has been a JOKE for a long time.

    If it was my daughter they would have found both Cox and the PUNK receiver burred face down in a shallow grave. Prison?, who gives a ^T%R.;

    If you look at the players Denver has had over the years it looks to be a PERVERT FACTORY. Just shows you what many of these dumb dudes are, not being able to get laid without raping a women with their position these guys must be some real PUNKS.

  11. Mike, give it up. Like I said when you posted on this before that he took her into the room “passed out,” how do we know she was passed out?

    Its just a case of a party girl/groupie who had second thoughts when she realized what she did the night before. Moreover, that his baby’s inside of her proves absolutely nothing since these kinds of women are well known for the turkey baster trick with condoms, which probably were used at some point by this guy during the course of that night, but not necessarily with her.

    You and the other Captain save a hoes on this site need to go to Groupies 101 because the rest of us don’t care. We’ll save our outrage for the real rape and sexual assault victims out there.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!