IMHO wrote: I know Kali hates to hear this, but the hook of this story is "The Blue Wall of Silence."

Well, I disagree. I think it has much more to do with standard human psychology.

Is there ANY evidence the D.A. could be legally witholding that could make this the slam-dunk the D.A. is acting like it is?

Of course, if I have learned one thing on this board in recent days, it is that others might see it differently. Does this make any of you who seem to think the players are guilty think maybe they are the credible ones and Nifong and the AV are the less than honest ones?

I'd imagine Nifong is upset about the lawyers' saying that he had leaked the DNA results early (falsely too).

I'm tired of this case being tried in the press. I really think this case should go to trial. It's going to be hard on all the parties, especially the AV who will be trashed, but I think justice will be served one way or the other. It's time for all those team members who have been hiding behind the wall of silence to come forward and testify, and maybe they now will.

IMHO: From the press conference: Cheshire (paraphrased): He [Nifong] is within his rights to not give us the discovery until it is statutorily due.

No question Chew2 and Deevy, and if Nifong had not taken it public in the first place, had not expressed his belief in the guilt of three players barely two weeks into the investigation, perhaps it would not have turned into the media circus that it is now

Cheshire (paraphrased): He [Nifong] is within his rights to not give us the discovery until it is statutorily due.

As for the defense, they've twisted the facts constantly. They've taken Nifong's statements out of context. They've said their pictures prove things that they don't prove. They gave a roster that was missing one of the indicted players, who WAS THERE. They've said, "Nothing happened." What a crock. Let's see you admit that.

They are supposed to tell what happened, to the best of their knowledge, in sequence, without leaving anything out.

Nifong's "Wall of Silence" = OK. LAX tam's "Wall of Silence" = bad.

It's time for all those team members who have been hiding behind the wall of silence to come forward and testify, and maybe they now will.

Posted by Kalidoggie:

Lora posted: They [the defense] gave a roster that was missing one of the indicted players, who WAS THERE.

As for the list of party attendees, you have to be kidding?

Punchy: Or is a grand jury indictment more-or-less a rubber stamp??

A smoking gun? I don't see it.

The photo cannot show impairment, only what the person in the photo was doing at the time the picture was taken.

Can anyone explain why Nifong refuses to look at exculpatory evidence offered by the defense attorneys? I've asked this before and haven't heard an answer, and Cheshire mentioned it today. If this is a search for truth, or if Nifong can get an edge by knowing what the defense will claim, what not accept evidence?

a. He's evil. b. He's incompetent. c. combination of a. and b.

Posted by TalkLeft May 15, 2006 02:27 PM A smoking gun? I don't see it. It would have to be something like wood slivers found in her a*us. But, according to the search warrant return, they didn't take the broom handle during the search to match it. Even then, it wouldn't prove such slivers got there during the encounter at the house.

IMHO wrote:

I think what grabbed the media attention was the "Blue Wall" angle.

I sort of agree with you, but think the "blue wall" is a secondary issue to the media's interest. The main interest was twofold: the novelty of a whole team being DNA tested and a monster black-eye for Duke. Duke has been the pride of college athletics for years (until Elton Brand, they were the only successful basketball program that had a 100% graduation rate). Historically they have been held out as the model of the successful mix of academics and athletics (some would say this is why their football team sucks). The goody goody of the college athletics. No scandles, no nothing. They have been untarnished forever. At some point, our society loves to see someone who has been extremely successful fail, all the while relishing in the failure. Along comes a Duke falling. Not only a fall from grace, but a socially charged one at that (white v. black).

The blue wall was Nifong created and the media was an accomplice. The media thinks they are entitled to all information so anyone refusing to speak is a natural enemy of the media. Ironically, silence often perpetuates the news cycle.

I sort of agree with you, but think the "blue wall" is a secondary issue to the media's interest. The main interest was twofold: the novelty of a whole team being DNA tested and a monster black-eye for Duke.

Duke has been the pride of college athletics for years .... Historically they have been held out as the model of the successful mix of academics and athletics ... The goody goody of the college athletics. No scandles, no nothing. They have been untarnished forever.

They have been untarnished forever. At some point, our society loves to see someone who has been extremely successful fail, all the while relishing in the failure.

Also, why didn't FA testify at grand jury as Nifong had stated she would?

Nice to know when it comes down to the bottom line it's not evidence with you, it's personality.

If the AV appeared in front of the grand jury and perjured herself, there could be jail time.

If the DA shared all his evidence up front, it would be very easy for the defense to produce selective exclupatory evidence.

a. He's evil.

b. He's incompetent.

c. combination of a. and b.

Duke's reputation as the pride of college athletics is what made 40+ people "refusing to cooperate" with a reported violent rape newsworthy.

The blue wall was Nifong created and the media was an accomplice. The media thinks they are entitled to all information so anyone refusing to speak is a natural enemy of the media. Ironically, silence often perpetuates the news cycle.

The person he reminds me most of is Ken Starr--someone who was so convinced that his target was guilty, and that his target was just morally bad, that he became out of control.

very interesting, I have been looking to this photo for half an hour, I have found on internet belongs to this guy during a game either 2005 or 2006 and it looks like he has mustache.

This guy is someone can grow a mustache in one day, I can tell ity just looking at his shaved face in the press conference.

This guy is someone can grow a mustache in one day, I can tell ity just looking at his shaved face in the press conference.

Angry over the team members' silence and the university's handling of the case, Durham residents have demonstrated on and off campus in the past few days. They rallied outside the house where the alleged attack occurred, and gathered outside of Duke Provost Peter Lange's home, where they banged on pots and pans until he emerged to answer questions.

Lange said Monday that he believes "the students would be well-advised to come forward. They have chosen not to."

Durham police echoed his sentiments. "We do know that some of the players inside the house on that evening knew what transpired, and we need them to come forward," David Addison, with the Durham Police Department, said.

That being said, I think you have too much time on your hands *to pull up a post of mine from 3 weeks ago, but you are thorough and that is appreciated... at least by me. (Though I know you did it to irk me at some level).

"The indictment came following a hallway confrontation today at the Durham County courthouse, in which District Attorney Mike Nifong laced into defense lawyer Kerry Sutton in an expletive-laden tirade where he complained angrily about last Friday's defense team news conference."

Again, the public have the ability to hold their own opinion. After what I saw of his personal behavior, he is absolutely positively guilty.

why did he wait until he was indicted to make that statement?

Of course, the next argument from the "I'll support the AV no matter what" crowd will be: Evans put a fake mustache on before he gang raped her to hide his identity.

I thought it was a good post. I thought you did a great job of explaining why some people are loving hating Duke right now.

Why does the US retain the grand jury?

although it's unlikely a princess would be stripping for homeless men

One team member gave defense lawyers a sworn statement that lacrosse players were not allowed to have mustaches.

The quote you just posted detailing Evan's cooperation - why did he wait until he was indicted to make that statement? Evans was very impressive. Nifong won't see him? Well, f*uck Nifong, Evans should have held a press conference a long time ago. Want to guess why he didn't? Good job, Cheshire.

considering Evans organized the whole freaking party, there almost certainly will be a picture of him that night.

Working just from memory, nobody possibly could with an absolute certainty.

Evans might or might not have had a mustache on one day in 2005, but bluffing that he didn't have one at the party and hoping that none of the 40 lacrosse players rat him out about the mustache (and thus brand him as a liar on the date of the incident) would be a supremely stupid act on the part of someone with a good lawyer.

You can see the difference clearly with the ones on his cheeks. Plus anyone who knows about sports know that you put marker under your eyes not on your lips.

Evans' lawyer at the press conference (Joe Cheshire) said that they pictures of him the day before the event sans mustache. That should convince everyone but Hicht.

let me remind you that Nifong was similarly convinced by the AV.

I am sure in the mind of the homeless man any stripper is a princess

This is an attack by a poor black female "stripper" against privileged white male athletes who come from the "best" homes and middle class backgrounds.

IMHO posted:

Evans should have held a press conference a long time ago.

No way is that a moustache in that pic, either, hicht: he's got his moutpiece in, it is pushing his upper lip up, the way I see it. And was pointed out before, not really relevant to whether he had one that night.

In particular, it seems that that the AV lost too many nails - I seem to remember posts that indicated that there were 5 or 7 nails found in the trash. Even in a struggle, it would be hard to lose that many nails (especially 7). And, if she did lose all of these nails in a struggle, wouldn't there be something (skin, cloth fiber, blood) under more than one nail?

idabw posted: I've been following this case and in particular this site for sometime now and while I've been tempted to comment before [... blah, blah, blah...] Frankly, while I am a lawyer [... more of the same...] ... [rambling on through various topics in vague generalities] ... the posts and comments I have seen here disturb me .... in their sloppy People's Court/CSI (crappy, sophmoric, deceptive show by the way)based facile speculations, as well as... [... still more of the same and so on and so on...] ... the update...[by TL]...demonstrates absolute idiocy and naivete on the part of someone who should know better. ... I'm nauseated ... You infuriate me... I think the jury's in on your hypocrisy.

I ask all of you: if it were YOUR son, would you want him sacrificed and scarred this way, if he is in fact innocent, before he has been found guilty of anything other than of being in the wrong place at the wrong time?

there is only one action Evans can do that would satisfy some people. Namely, to confess to the crime, and confess it in a way that exactly conform to the accuser's story.

The meeting was cancelled on March 22. As of that date, according to the Raleigh News and Observer, Nifong had given "frequent interviews in the local and national media".

Which of the accuser's stories would he confess to? The one where she was beaten, strangled, raped and sodomized for thirty minutes?

The one that would conform to the neighbor's description where she was in the house for only a few minutes?

The one she testified to in the photo line-up about being assaulted with players' body parts?

The one put forward by her father involving a broomstick?

The one where he had a moustache when he attacked her?

The one where she left the house after dancing a few minutes and then returned to get her shoe?

The one put forward by the DA where her attacker must have been wearing long sleeves?

You see the difficulty.

The third problem is that she says one of the assaulters had a mustache. She says one of the photos looks like the guy except he doesn't have a mustache. This is another improper ID technique. Once they knew one of the guys she described as her assailants had a mustache, they should have shown her photos only of guys with mustaches, including of course, many who were not on the team.

What? The police don't know if some of the players had mustaches that night or not.

If there is a smoking gun in the Duke University rape case, it is not about the stripper who made the charges or the lacrosse players who have been accused. The smoking gun is the decision of District Attorney Michael Nifong to postpone a trial until the spring of 2007. That makes no sense from either a legal or a social standpoint, whether the players are guilty or innocent. But it tells us something about District Attorney Nifong. (snipped) After a fraud has been perpetrated and it is only a matter of time before the victim finds out, it can still make a big difference whether the victim finds out suddenly or slowly over an extended period of time. This is called "cooling out the mark." If the mark (the victim) finds out suddenly and immediately, instant outrage may lead to a call to the police, who can then get hot on the trail of the con man. However, if the realization of having been taken begins to emerge at first as a sense of puzzlement, then as a sneaking suspicion, and ultimately -- after a passage of some time -- as a clear conclusion that a fraud has taken place, then the emotional impact is not nearly as strong. The victim of the fraud may even be reluctant to go to the police, having had time to think about what a fool he may look like and how little chance there is now to do anything about it. If the truth about Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky had come out the very next day after he made that dramatic declaration -- "I did not have sex with that woman" -- it would have been far more of a shock than it was months later, after more and more bits and dabs of information came out, leading many to suspect the truth long before it all came out. One of Clinton's press secretaries called these delaying tactics "telling the truth slowly." (snipped)

Taxi driver Moez Mostafa, a strong potential witness for Duke University lacrosse player Reade Seligmann, has been arrested on a 2003 warrant. The charge stemmed form his having driven a shoplifter home after she stole 5 purses worth about $250 from a Durham, North Dakota department store. He denied any involvement at the time and in fact helped police find the woman (who subsequently pleaded guilty)

We will all be tired of hearing about it [a year from now]. We are the marks who will be cooled out.

TL, can you make a separate thread for those here who want to speculate on the speed of the growth of human facial hair

I'd suggest he start by going to the Black Panther's office, if he hasn't already, and lay out his case.

IMHO,

I note that your tone has changed.

Regarding photo IDs, yes, if she says it's a white man with a mustache (common acceptable spelling) then she should see pictures of white men who have mustaches who weren't at the party. Why? So it can be determined whether or not she could really make an ID. If she picks a guy who's in Seattle, it shows the police she can't make the photo IDs and to proceed with caution regarding her ability to identify her alleged attackers.

You still don't understand that?

The purpose of a photo ID is not to make sure you have a defendant, it's to make sure the accuser can identify a possible defendant.

Once they knew one of the guys she described as her assailants had a mustache, they should have shown her photos only of guys with mustaches, including of course, many who were not on the team.

The smoking gun is the decision of District Attorney Michael Nifong to postpone a trial until the spring of 2007.

That makes no sense from either a legal or a social standpoint, whether the players are guilty or innocent. But it tells us something about District Attorney Nifong.

I honestly don't know who sets trial dates, I assume that because the DA made the announcement that he is the one that decided. Can any lawyers tell me if it unusual to postpone this type of trial so long.

4) Since you are such a smart, smart, smart lawyer-person yourself, then you've probably already got a lawyer's intuitive suspicion that we are not about to change our approach to suit your insulting complaints you used to describe us in your rather dreary, rambling, vague, condescending and effete post

Regarding the possibility that some of the nails had not been attached to explain why there were so many nails laying around: Doesn't that go towards the story that the AV was in the bathroom "doing her nails"?

Re: Posted by SLOphoto May 15, 2006 09:49 PM

Advice to potential alleged rape victims: If you're going to accuse somebody and describe them as having a mustache, you had better have seen a mustache.

The smoking gun is the decision of District Attorney Michael Nifong to postpone a trial until the spring of 2007.

The Constitution of the United States includes a right to a speedy trial, to keep people from being jerked around by unscrupulous or vindictive prosecutors who cannot prove that they have committed any crime. Prosecutors have to put up or shut up. This is not a federal case, however, and the laws of North Carolina do not require a speedy trial.

deleted --please read the commenting rules. This commenter is warned. Name calling and personal attacks are not allowed here.

Setting of Trial Dates. The calendaring statute requires that an administrative setting be held for each felony case within sixty days of indictment. One of the purposes of the administrative setting is to set a trial date. Unless the state and defendant agree, the trial date may not be sooner than 30 days after the final administrative setting. See G.S. 7A-49.4(b). The statute also gives a defendant whose case has not been scheduled for trial within 120 days of indictment the right to ask the senior resident superior court judge, or that judge's designee, to set a trial date. See G.S. 7A-49.4(c). Thus defendants whose cases are delayed should not only demand a speedy trial, but should also seek the additional statutory remedy of asking a judge to set a trial date.