As I said before, I agree with you that the wheels of justice move too slowly, but I think the only solution is to pour a lot more money into the judiciary, so that the system isn't overtaxed and can work expeditiously to resolve matters both for the victims and for the accused: it's no good if we have a system that moves quickly but punishes the innocent. Almost everyone here seems to agree about Hopkins, but from time to time, there are people wrongly accused of sexual assault, and the last thing we should want is for them to wrongly go to jail.
But as an example of how slowly cases move, I was reminded of your post today when I read something about the Bernie Madoff investment scandal, the famous fraud case involving roughly a billion dollars that came to light in 2008. One of Madoff's alleged co-conspirators, Frank Avellino, is still fighting the case against him, 12 years later.
Or consider a big decision announced recently by the Supreme Court: Aimee Stephens, a funeral director in Detroit, was fired in 2014, for reasons that Ms. Stephens claimed were discriminatory under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. Two years later, the District court ruled against her. She appealed. Two years after that, the Appeals court ruled in her favor. Her employer appealed. And just three weeks ago, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in her favor. It took six years just to resolve an employment case, but at least it's a victory for Ms. Stephens, right?
Well no. She died of cancer in May.
Edit: And another Supreme Court decision, announced just today, actually pertains to a crime related in kind (if not degree) to that for which Hopkins has been charged. A man named Jimcy McGirt was convicted in 1996 by an Oklahoma court of having raped a four-year-old girl. He is serving a life sentence. In 2017, based on an Appeals court ruling on a different case, McGirt appealed his conviction on the grounds that because he is an enrolled member of an Indian tribe, and because his crime happened on land ceded to an Indian tribe in the 1830s and never subsequently ceded to the state of Oklahoma (although much of it was since purchased by others), he should have been tried in a federal court not a state court. And the Supreme Court today agreed, in a 5-4 decision that split along non-partisan but not unexpected lines.
What has people talking about the case today is the fact that this may put a large chunk of Oklahoma, including most of Tulsa, under federal law as pertains to crimes committed by Native Americans. A number of other convictions may have to be set aside and retried. But what occurs to me pertinent to this discussion is that McGirt's victim may now have to go through a new trial for something that he did to her more than 24 years ago.