text: "Damien Peterson implicated them both, but appellate courts have ruled a co-defendant's statements after a crime can't be used as evidence against others unless he agrees to testify against them, he wrote.
  
  "So, bottom line is that Devin Peterson and Austin Barrett were not prosecutable," said Kalytiak."
  
  I have a really hard time believing that.  Perps were pimping out a friend, assaulted someone with a knife...
  Is it possible that the police just failed to collect enough evidence?  There had to be more to go on that the word of one of the perps.  
  
  And even though he was convicted of assault, he was set free on probation.  Aren't the courts supposed to hold him, threaten him with 20 years until he testifies?  It really seems like the police and courts didn't try very hard.
  
  And now...Erick is the one who implicated all the others.  If he won't testify against the others, they all walk?
  
  There must be plenty of other evidence to convict right?