Prosecutor Says Liz Not Drugged?

One of Liz Seccuro's key claims about her sexual assault in 1984 is that she consumed a mysterious green drink provided to her by a UVA fraternity member at Phi Kappa Psi. Allegedly, he called it the "house special" and it was in addition to the two beers she had consumed earlier in the evening. Soon after consuming the beverage, she claims she felt as if her body was immobile. Today, she still claims she was drugged.

This added an ominous tone to the case. I wondered if it was possible that a hypnotic drug had been mixed into the drink even though such drugs were not in common use in 1984. It really troubled me for some time. I knew that some fraternity members were taking advantage of women who were under the influence of alcohol, but this charge was far more serious. It indicated a concerted effort to sexually abuse women.

But after reading several articles about the assault, I discovered a surprising bit of information buried in one of the courtroom testimonies. An attorney for the prosecution admitted in open court that the mysterious concoction Seccuro drank was not drugged. It appears it was a mixture of Everclear (grain alcohol) and some flavorings. Hardly a sinister combination. It did start me on the path toward doubting Liz Seccuro's version of events. And today, I still struggle with this question:

Why does Liz Securro continue to claim she was drugged when the prosecutor contradicted her in open court?

The article in question is below:

"[Deputy Commonwealth’s Attorney Claude] Worrell said in court today that the ongoing investigation has revealed the punch contained not a date rape drug, but grain alcohol, and that Seccuro, then an inexperienced, underage drinker, was unaware of the effects the punch would have on her."
http://www.readthehook.com/blog/index.php/2006/11/14/bombshell-dropped-as-beebe-pleads/

Why I am interested in the Liz Seccuro / William Beebe Case

Since 2001, 21 individuals wrongfully convicted in Dallas County of serious felonies were exonerated based on DNA evidence. Some sat on death row. Others languished in maximum security facilities for over 20 years. Most if not all were convicted based on eyewitness testimony which is now known to be notoriously unreliable.

I am interested in this case because Liz has taken a set of facts which are not in dispute (i.e., Beebe sexually assaulted her) and morphed them into a menagerie of allegations of conspiracy, gang rape, voyeurism, and the use of date rape drugs.

Notice that she doesn't even mention that no one has ever proven that gang rape occurred or that date rape drugs were in play. She speaks about those allegations as if they are facts.
When pressed, the shadowy figures suddenly become obscured by grand jury protections. As far as I know, no other felony indictments were handed down other than for Beebe. It even appears to me Beebe's attorneys used the allegations of conspiracy to get a lighter sentence knowing that there was nothing there.

After sentencing, Beebe's attorney denied that Beebe had participated in a gang rape. (http://www.readthehook.com/blog/index.php/2007/03/15/beebe-gets-18-months-in-1984-battery/)

There is nothing in Beebe's letters which indicates anyone else is to blame but Beebe. Liz's testimony is she had attempted to get into a room where she believed a friend was passed out and get her purse to leave the party, but she was returned to Beebe's room forcibly by two men.

After several years of looking for evidence of a gang rape, the police have been unsuccessful, yet Liz refers to the rape as a gang rape. She also states that she was drugged.

So, at the core, the reason Liz's case intrigues and concerns me is that she's created a situation where she can't be questioned because some portion of her version of the facts is correct.

We have seen how society can get swept up in irrational furvor -- for example, the rash of child sex abuse and Satanic cult abuse cases in the 1980s. Most have ended up to be utterly false.

Liz, who appears to be from the same political persuasion as I am, could probably appreciate how the Bush Administration issued lots of false and misleading claims to get us into the Iraq War and then to subsequently terrorize Muslims both in the US and abroad. We know our frailty as humans is when we go beyond what can be proven and allow ourselves to fall back into irrational behavior.

I don't mind if people hate me for questioning some aspects of the Beebe-Seccuro case, but at least understand why I hold my beliefs. It is not out of a desire to see Liz revictimized, but out of a desire to ensure innocent people are not ensnared when the facts of the case are blown in a more salacious direction.

That's why I am curious to understand what facts have been established because gang rape and date rape drugs are, from a careful reading of the facts, merely suppositions which have not been substantiated. They may have happened, but they seem to be in the realm of faith and not reason.