I knew this clown was guilty as soon as the story broke. Ravnsborg’s story made no since. One would think an attorney could come up with a more plausable story. Pretty dumb.
2 Likes
Not all attorneys are smart. @Txlawyer probably has a few stories.
3 Likes
This is SD’s version of an elaborate Kabuki dance. There is no way a serious prosecutor could not find a way to charge the AG with some kind of felony- his lies and obstruction could have caused the man’s death, interfered with the investigation, etc. The fix is clearly in. There was never any intention on the Republicon’s part to impeach (no doubt that between the AG and the crooked sheriff, they have dirt on everyone from the fool governor on down). It’s all a show. He’ll get a slap on the wrist from the jury of his white, Republicon “peers” and he will continue as AG (I suspect there will be some way that conviction of a misdemeanor does not disqualify one from being AG in SD.). I feel bad for the family and hope to be proved wrong, but the writing is on the wall.
1 Like
Yeah but if it was distracted driving…
2 Likes
South Dakota, a big state with small town politics, and small town population too. But they get two US senators, just like California and Texas.
1 Like
Then you don’t need to wait to sober up before “finding” the victim.
Yes there a two reasons why the AG could have hit the victim, and then there’s the combo platter. I think that there’s no getting out of the sheriff having to testify, even if he gets charged as an accessory.
2 Likes
… but there are no guarantees.
1 Like
It is much, much more damning than that.
The victim was carrying a flashlight, it was found next to his body, and it was still on (one of the revelations of those videos).
When Ravnsborg looked back down that flat, side, mowed grass strip (look at the pictures) there was a body lying not far from the road a short distance back in pitch blackness, with a flashlight blazing away next to it.
When the sheriff got there to help his friend out, they had a real conundrum about how to extricate Ravnsborg from his little felony drunk driving hit and run dilemma.
The flashlight was there, blazing away for all to see, and they had to come up with a cover story.
I will bet the sheriff checked the body out to see if the guy was dead (but did only a cursory layman’s quick look).
So the best they could come up with was - go home and sober up, then come back and “discover” body and pretend that the flashlight was never visible, and hope that investigators did not notice it was on.
Not smart enough to remove the flashlight or notice the guy’s glasses inside the car.
(This does assume that the detectives were not just lying to Ravnsborg in the interviews, but these are points that Ravnsborg could have called out as lies, if they were.)
1 Like
I don’t think I read about the flashlight. So then there’s two things that should have alerted a non soused AG and a sheriff of questionable backbone.
I hope Ravnsborg and for Chauvin get fair trials. The criminal justice system on trial.
The possibility of a genuinely fair trial for Ravnsborg is off the table if he is only charged with those three minor misdemeanors.
2 Likes
Police could claim to Ravnsborg “the glasses of the dead man were found in your car” as a lie to elicit a confession. In that situation, nobody can be positive the cops are lying; they may have planted them there!
Reminder: don’t talk to cops without a lawyer. Unless you’re really certain the cop will be competent at covering for you.
Good point
I think the investigators, even though they were from North Dakota (to avoid appearance of bias), had every intention of letting him slide, if possible. The evidence made it not possible so they had to burn him. Even if they ignored the evidence, the inevitable civil suit would have turned it up. They could have “lost” the glasses, but not the phone logs.