Comments on: Colorado DA Invokes “Prostitots” Legal Theory To Explain Unfavorable DNA Test Results

By: The 2011 Worst Prosecutor of the Year Award | The Agitator

The 2011 Worst Prosecutor of the Year Award | The Agitator — Mon, 02 Jan 2012 06:54:53 +0000

[...] in an eight-year-old victim of sexual assault didn’t match the guy Chambers wanted to charge. Chambers dismissed the tests on the interesting theory that young girls dress really slutty these days, so anyone’s DNA [...]

By: Mike Mermel, DNA Fabulist | The Agitator

Mike Mermel, DNA Fabulist | The Agitator — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 17:15:31 +0000

[...] alternate explanations for the presence of DNA. (Don’t forget Colorado DA Carrol Chambers, who attempted to explain away the DNA found in an 8-year-old victim’s underwear by pointing out how slutty children tend to [...]

By: Sometimes Things Aren’t Always As They Seem

Sometimes Things Aren’t Always As They Seem — Thu, 06 Oct 2011 02:04:10 +0000

[...] A former jury foreman who served during one of Chamberstrials has said of her and her office “In the DA’s office’s agenda to prosecuteso overzealously, it seems that the facts of a case aren’t really anobjective.” Other Colorado attorney’s have called Chambers “bloodthirsty” andaccused her of abusing the state’s habitual offender statute. Colorado defenseattorney David Lane says, “I think she’s more interested in serving politicalends than in the ends of justice.” (Source) Perhaps this explains Chambers’ decision to charge a 10year old boy with felony arson because he and a friend accidentally started afire. (Source) Allegations of prosecutorial misconduct on Chambers partare equally well known. She has been accused of illegally funding herprosecution of a high-profile murder case; she withheld evidence that may haveacquitted a convicted killer (Source); and in perhaps the most egregious exampleconcerns a rape case where Chambers ignored DNA evidence that did not match theDNA of the mentally disabled man she was charging. Chambers insisted thatregardless of evidence all but proving the man’s innocence, he was guilty. Shewas convinced of the man’s guilt because the presence of another man’s DNA inthe panties of an eight year old little girl could not possibly absolve thedefendant because eight year old girls are basically little sluts, and the DNAcould have come from anywhere. (Source) [...]

By: Sometimes Things Aren’t Always As They Seem « The Constitution Club

Sometimes Things Aren’t Always As They Seem « The Constitution Club — Wed, 05 Oct 2011 23:23:10 +0000

[...] Allegations of prosecutorial misconduct on Chambers part are equally well known. She has been accused of illegally funding her prosecution of a high-profile murder case; she withheld evidence that may have acquitted a convicted killer (Source); and in perhaps the most egregious example concerns a rape case where Chambers ignored DNA evidence that did not match the DNA of the mentally disabled man she was charging. Chambers insisted that regardless of evidence all but proving the man’s innocence, he was guilty. She was convinced of the man’s guilt because the presence of another man’s DNA in the panties of an eight year old little girl could not possibly absolve the defendant because eight year old girls are basically little sluts, and the DNA could have come from anywhere. (Source) [...]

By: Vote for the Worst Prosecutor of 2010 | The Agitator

Vote for the Worst Prosecutor of 2010 | The Agitator — Mon, 03 Jan 2011 06:44:10 +0000

[...] Bill of misdeeds: Probably not the most outrageous misdeed on this list, but Chambers deserves strong consideration for at least giving us one of the most entertaining. When DNA testing showed that the evidence taken from a 9-year-old’s underwear didn’t match the mentally disabled man police had arrested for breaking into her room and groping her, Colorado DA Chambers insisted she still had the right guy. She based her opinion on the rather awesome legal argument that . . . little girls tend to dress kinda’ slutty these days. [...]

By: Steve Verdon

Steve Verdon — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 23:02:48 +0000

Got it from the toilet seat?

Yes, I routinely use my underwear to wipe down public toilet seats.

What…why are you all looking at me like that…???

By: Duncan

Duncan — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 15:39:47 +0000

Got it from the toilet seat?

By: Griffin3

Griffin3 — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 13:23:24 +0000

Wouldn’t the DA’s statements to the press about how random DNA can show up on anyone’s panties … allow Ms Chambers to be called in to support her statements in any future case involving such evidence? Including cross examination?

By: Aresen

Aresen — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 04:37:36 +0000

jppatter | February 23rd, 2010 at 6:25 pm Yep, it still looks like someone is being railroaded to further a prosecutor’s ambitions. I can’t wait to hear her theory if it turns out the real culprit is still on the loose and hurts someone else. Oh I know, that would just be a copycat.

Which is a point that never seems to get brought up in election campaigns: If the prosecutor boosts the conviction stats by convicting the wrong person, that means she is leaving the real criminal on the loose.

By: qwints

qwints — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 04:34:01 +0000

To be fair, using DNA to implicate someone has a very different impact than using DNA to exclude. There are certainly situations where one person’s DNA being at a scene shouldn’t exclude another person from the crime. This, however, is not one of those situations.

By: InMD

InMD — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 02:27:53 +0000

All we can do is hope that for Sanchez’s sake it sounds as preposterous to a jury as it does to everyone else. As long as the defense attorney can get the DNA test in and has a minimal level of competence reasonable doubt shouldn’t be too hard to create.

By: MacGregory

MacGregory — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 00:23:19 +0000

My theory stands. Arrest somebody. Guilt or innocence notwithstanding. TV cameras in focus. Evidence, blah,blah, blah. Rhetoric a jury, thats what matters.

By: MM

MM — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 00:21:16 +0000

DA Chambers is pretty much the prototypical crooked local politician. She has used her position as DA to threaten political opponents and she has attempted to tie up the courtrooms of what she sees as unfriendly judges.

I think Sheriff Weaver unintentionally made the point loud and clear. The peole in that neighborhood will feel safer (whether they are or not), the police and DA get a boost in their solve/conviction rates going into the November election (whether accurate or not), and the thought of knowing whether this kid is the perpetrator or not will get pushed aside for the sake of “Doing Something”.

By: Steve Verdon

Steve Verdon — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 23:28:24 +0000

I like how blaming the rape victim for wearing a short skirt is beyond the pale, but blaming the molested 8 year old for making the prosecutor’s job harder by wearing low cut jeans (and as a parent, I realize if something is in style it’s harder than you’d think to even find other options to buy) is fine?

My son is 12, and goes to school that goes from kindergarten through 8th grade and believe it or not, the girls in grade 6 and below, their parents manage to find jeans and pants that aren’t low cut.

Which makes me wonder…does this 8 year old hussy actually have said pants or is the DA just making shit up out of thin air? I’m inclined to go with the latter until I see evidence to the contrary.

By: Marty

Marty — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 23:16:56 +0000

MikeL-

does your wife’s interest in horticulture include a vine tattoo across her lower back? does your gardener know what kind of vine is tattooed on her back?

I would photograph the mouth-shaped rugburns and send them to Steven Hayne for forensic evaluation… I’m sure he can tell you what’s happening!

By: Steve Verdon

Steve Verdon — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 23:08:00 +0000

So the DA is calling an 8 year old child a whore.

Stay classy Colorado. Stay classy.

By: MikeL

MikeL — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 22:59:04 +0000

Marty,

I have no idea what you’re talking about … neither does my wife … or my gardener. On an unrelated topic, is it true that you can get mouth shaped rug-burns on your neck from wearing a snug fitting turtleneck?

By: TC

TC — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 22:56:28 +0000

Crooked DA……???

Tell me it aint so Radley!

We all know that Nifong was the ONLY ONE!!!!!

Such can be verified with Boyo pattie!

By: Marty

Marty — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 22:52:39 +0000

I wanted to give you 20 more thumbs up, MikeL. niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiice!

By: Marty

Marty — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 22:50:52 +0000

‘”I hate those low-cut pants,” Chambers said…’ sounds amazingly similar to ‘He hates those cans!’ which Steve Martin yelled while he was getting shot at in the Jerk. Both are equally logical.