GBI Withdraws Request For Roethlisberger DNA. UPDATE.

Nick SignorelliSenior Writer IMarch 24, 2010

PITTSBURGH - DECEMBER 20:  Ben Roethlisberger #7 of the Pittsburgh Steelers warms up prior to the game against the Green Bay Packers on December 20, 2009 at Heinz Field in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.  (Photo by Jared Wickerham/Getty Images)
Jared Wickerham/Getty Images

According to the Pittsburgh TribuneReview, the Georgia Bureau of Investigations has told Edward Garland, the attorney for Ben Roethlisberger, that a DNA sample from the Steelers quarterback would not be necessary.

This is apparently the case, because they found no evidence of male DNA anywhere on the accuser.

In his comments to the Tribune, Garland said, "Based on everything that I know and our own investigation, I believe that no charges should be filed in this case".

Even though the Georgia Bureau of Investigation may still pursue charges, with no DNA evidence to support the claim of the accuser, convincing a jury to convict simply on the testimony of a 20—year—old woman, who was drunk at a bar, would be nearly impossible.

Georgia Bureau of Investigations inspector Sherry Lang said the Roethlisberger investigation is an "active case" and they're not trying to convict Roethlisberger or exonerate him.

"We're fact finders," she said. "The truth is that facts lead us to some things and other facts lead us to another thing. But we're in the business of fact finding."

Nationally renowned forensic pathologist and Squirrel Hill resident, Dr. Cyril Wecht, claims that the case would be hard to prove if it were to go to trial.

"We can infer, with some certainty, that they have nothing at all that would be male ejaculate, semen, that would be a stain on clothing or any swabs taken from the lady,"

He then added, "Now, medically and legally, this doesn't mean that rape or another form of assault didn't take place. But in the absence of DNA, if they did the proper work—up, it markedly could weaken what was a case."

Laurie Levinson, a Loyola Marymount law professor and former federal prosecutor stated, "Look, these cases often come down to "he said" and "she said." It's often difficult for jurors in those kinds of cases to know what to believe," said Levenson, who teaches legal ethics.

"That doesn't mean that a crime didn't take place. It just means that sorting through the evidence can be difficult for people, and this is complicated when there's the presence of a celebrity."

The fact that the case is already in its third week and charges have not been filed, leads to even more speculation that charges are not coming.

Garland was even quoted in the Tribune article saying, "Pittsburgh's citizens should know that I fully intend to watch Ben continue to play football this season, hopefully with him in the Super Bowl".

All comments in this article are courtesy of the Pittsburgh Tribune—Review. You can read the article by clicking on this link.

UPDATE: Accuser declines second interview with police. Read my story on new information HERE.


The latest in the sports world, emailed daily.