The main bit of evidence, the surveillance tape, was thrown out because they seized it without warrant (out of concern it'd be destroyed while waiting for one). That's why the felonies went away.
> The main bit of evidence, the surveillance tape, was thrown out because they seized it without warrant (out of concern it'd be destroyed while waiting for one).
I also think that is the main point in this story, along with the sentence in the article that follows shortly after:
"It is also reported that Kakish declined to press charges."
A quote from the article in the first link states:
> "But perhaps the biggest blow came when Judge Brendan Conroy ruled that surveillance video from Chahal's bedroom - which reportedly captured the 1 1/2-hour attack - had been seized unlawfully by police. The cops claim they took the video without waiting for a warrant because they feared it might get erased, but the judge didn't buy it."
The linked article also suggests that Julia Kakish might have been paid off, neither Chahal's or Kakish's lawyers are saying anything regarding this issue.
The video evidence was thrown out because the judge said it was obtained unlawfully, but does this question the video's authenticity? I don't think it does.
Furthermore, it's not like it's particularly ambiguous: it's _117_ strikes over a half hour period.
This is like disbelieving Australia exists because you've never physically set foot on it.