Just as I'm about to land in Denver, the Colorado Independent
runs an interview
with a woman who met with Buck in 2005 and failed to convince the Weld County district attorney that her rape case was worth prosecuting. Read the whole thing, including the transcript provided by the Independent, based on the woman's tape:
[W]hen you describe yourself as "bedfellows" and you did indicate that you were "bedfellows" and it’s hard to convince a Weld County jury that this wasn’t consensual, when that is your label. So there are those kinds of factors. This office doesn’t believe in (blaming the victim?) for the conduct of the case but, we do have to take into account what a Weld County jury sees in the relationship. You had consumed a lot of alcohol. You had a prior relationship. According to him, you were naked from the top up when he came into the bedroom. So, there are enough indicators or (indications?) that in my opinion make this impossible to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.
How does this play with voters, exactly? The threshold for stories like this -- whether they're seen as unfair or whether they hit home -- is incredibly difficult to spot right away. Buck's pushback involves discrediting the organization pushing the story and calling the incident 1) defensible and 2) isolated.
"Reputablenews organizations should not be an echo chamber for Progress Now. Weobviously can't trust them," said Buck spokesman Owen Loftus.
Loftus said Buck's view was backed up by the Boulder County districtattorney. "They all came to the same conclusion that this was not acase they could move forward," he said.
Buck's campaign also notes that as a prosecutor, he started amulti-agency sexual assault review team and sexual assault nurseexaminer program to provide care to victims and collect evidence incriminal cases.
The Independent's context is useful -- if this plays, it might be because of a few other statements and positions that Democrats have used to wedge female voters against Buck.