The woman sent Roy to jail and disappeared. She didn’t resist Roy’s early release. Were you bothered by her attitude?

The woman sent Roy to jail and disappeared. She didn’t resist Roy’s early release. Were you bother by her
attitude?

I think she wanted to move on. I believe she felt justice had been served when Roy was convicted. She probably didn't fight the early release because it would only dredged up her pain. We also don't know why he was released early so what was it she would have been fighting? We don't know her true attitude. She was raped and went through an awful ordeal. Unless there was DNA evidence on her, I'm sure she never realized the wrong man was convicted.

I mentioned in an earlier question that I would have liked to know more about the accuser. I think she didn't fight the early release because she realized she made a mistake and that must have haunted her for multiple reasons - she helped convict and innocent man and her rapist was still roaming free - that is some nightmare. I like that Ms. Jones did not make her more of a centerpiece of the story but that doesn't mean I didn't want to know more.

The woman who falsely accused Roy of raping her had gone through a terribly traumatic attack. She likely always believed that Roy was the rapist and was confident with his conviction. I don't recall any mention being made of the woman not fighting his early release. (Did I miss something???)

There wasn't much information on Roy's accuser. I was definitely wondering what evidence was used to convict him - other than her testimony. Given the police arrived very soon after she was raped, you would think they would have had a rape kit done, DNA evidence. Even though this proved Roy was innocent later on, I'm surprised they convicted him without anything other than her testimony.

This is a part of the novel that addresses the justice issues that are in question in our country today - and I liked that the author created the issue as she did. By leaving it as nebulous at the time of the attack and again at the time of Roy's release as she does, she asks her reader to think about the situation - what happened, why, how, was it fair, is it fair the way the justice system work in the real world today? Those issues rest in the background of a reader's mind and in the background of the novel's action, but the real issue here is marriage in America today. Jones needed a situation to call Celestial and Roy's into question; a wisely she used one that needs, demands attention - but that situation we might hope she will address in a fictional work on another day. She wants us here and now to look at marriage in America today - and she is very successful in doing that.

Jones wisely let her disappear. If she had resisted Roy's early release, it would have interrupted our focus on the triangle of Roy, Celestial and Andre. Victims of rape deserve our sympathy, but that is not the issue in this novel; instead it is injustice against the innocent that affect not only their spouses, but their parents, families and friends.

No. It made the injustice of Roy's incarceration that much more effective. Putting her back into the story at that point would have changed the focus.

I don't think that the accuser really believed that Roy raped her and I'm really not so sure that she was raped at all, because there wasn't much evidence that a rape occurred. However, I don't thin the rape was the issue of the novel - it was the effect that the incarceration had on the marriage and how it changed the lives of the characters