Feb 6, 2017; Springfield, MO, USA; Missouri Gov. Eric Greitens takes questions from the media after signing legislation to make Missouri the 28th "right-to-work" state

Credit: Nathan Papes/Springfield News-Leader via USA TODAY NETWORK

REARDON: Greitens Case Has So Many Questions, Very Few Answers

The criminal case is a sham, and there’s no doubt it’s completely politically motivated.

Mark Reardon
April 13, 2018 - 5:41 pm

I don’t know what to believe anymore. I’m tremendously disappointed in the behavior exhibited by Gov. Eric Greitens, and I understand the outrage and the calls for his resignation, but I still think there are a lot of things about this case that don’t sit very well. The criminal case is a sham, and there’s no doubt it’s completely politically motivated. Methinks even the judge in this case, Rex Burlison, is starting to grow impatient with the incompetency coming from Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner’s office, and in the end, he might toss out the entire case because the prosecutor has been so sloppy throughout this entire circus.
So we have:
- An overly-aggressive, politically-motived prosecutor who has admitted that she doesn’t even have what has to be the key piece of evidence in the case—THE PICTURE!
- A witness who may or may not be credible - we can’t be sure because she hasn’t been cross-examined.
- A verdict of guilty before any actual due process.
State Rep. Jay Barnes, who led the Missouri House investigation into the matter, apparently felt compelled to release the testimony from the woman in question before the trial was completed. Barnes, it’s been noted, was an early supporter of Greitens when he ran for Governor, but why was it so vital to release a 129 page report full of salacious, one-sided testimony before the Governor gets his day in court? There’s plenty of time for impeachment if that’s where this is headed, but there was no reason to put this out there a month before the trial.
There’s certainly a chance that every single word that the woman told the House panel is the truth. But isn’t there a chance that she’s lying? At the very least about some aspects of this story? I actually feel badly for her because she’s going to get destroyed during cross-examination if this goes to trial. But what about this whole episode makes it relevant to the job that the Governor was elected to perform for the taxpayers of Missouri? If the answer is “moral turpitude,” then perhaps we should start holding hearings for members of the legislature who are currently cheating on their spouses. I can give you some names if you’d like.
If the answer is because this is about “sexual assault,” then why has the Governor not been charged with sexual assault? Kim Gardner had to know all the sordid details of this case when she brought it before the Grand Jury right? Why, given the testimony released this week by the legislature, was her choice to prosecute on a weak statute without the key piece of evidence—the PHOTO? We learned this week that the testimony of “Witness 1” during the committee hearing was potentially different than the testimony before Gardner’s office? Which testimony is the truth?
So many questions….very few answers…and I wonder who got the most pleasure out of all of this? The Governor during the affair? Or the collective media in Missouri when this report was issued?
That’s a rhetorical question by the way.