In an exclusive interview with NBC17, a second woman who also danced at the March 13 party refuted claims made in recent days by defense attorneys that the accuser was intoxicated and injured when she arrived at the party.
"She looked absolutely fine," the second dancer said, noting that the accuser's demeanor changed dramatically after they left the party.
"She was definitely a totally different woman than when I first met her. She definitely was under some sort of substance," the woman said.
A source close to the official investigation of the case has told NBC17 that the accuser might have been drugged at the party.
The second dancer declined to discuss specifics of what happened at the party.
"If I could see the future and would have known what that night would've brought, I would have paid more attention. I wish I had paid more attention to everything that happened around me," she said.
The woman admitted calling 911 to report racial epithets yelled at her and the accuser as they left the party. But she said the details of the incident became jumbled in her call because she was trying to hide the fact that she had been performing at the party.
The woman said her parents don't know she makes a living as an exotic dancer, and she was afraid the information would be made public if she had been upfront with the 911 dispatcher.
But she said she decided to speak out because defense attorneys have been implying the accuser is lying ever since last week, when DNA tests failed to link any of the lacrosse team members to the accuser.
"I have every confidence in the (district attorney) and the police," the woman said. "I honestly feel like they wouldn't be investigating a crime if they didn't feel a crime had occurred."
It looks like stripper #2 has finally stepped into the light of day. Well, not day so much as a heavily pixelated pseudo-day, but we get some more questions answered. First and foremost it seems that there's no direct testimony that will be of use as far as it concerns the assault itself or if there is, she's obviously refusing to reveal it. By this I mean that the second stripper isn't claiming to have actually seen the assult or what lead up to it. The closest we seem to get in this is that she claims the accuser was not intoxicated before the event, yet was impaired afterwards. No cooboration of the accuser's statements that the lacrosse players were getting grabby or anything along those lines at this time. Who knows. Maybe there will be more information released with time but that little closing statement of hers dosen't exactly inspire confidence that she has much more to reveal. If she had seen the accuser dragged kicking and screaming into a bathroom and then gang-raped, it's very unlikely she would be so wishy-washy about whether a crime occured and deferring that fact to what the police or DA believe.
The real problem with her statement as far as I can see is that the timing is tight. There's not a lot of time for them to have slipper her a mickey and have it take effect if this is what the new story is. That certainly seems to be the new angle that Pro-rape pundits are leaning toward at this point. The difficulty is that these various drugs have 15-20 minute onset times. It would mean that the substance would have had to be administered almost the minute they got in there in order to be timed right for the 30-minutes of raping.