home

Duke Lacrosse Open Thread

By Jeralyn, Section Duke Lacrosse
Posted on Tue May 16, 2006 at 09:38:09 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

With 232 comments on yesterday's post with news of Dave Evan's indictment, it's time for a new one. Just remember to put urls in html format so they don't skew the site. Instructions are in the comment box. And please, keep the dicussion civil.

< Tribe: Bush Stomps on Fourth Amendment | Tuesday Open Thread >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Duke Lacrosse Open Thread | 143 comments (143 topical)
    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#1)
    by weezie on Tue May 16, 2006 at 09:50:27 AM EST
    Referencing a short comment in the previous thread, what would be the procedure for the players' reps going to the US Attorney to file against the FA and Nifong? Can they do that at this stage? Also, I'm still chuckling at the fake moustache theory. Was it originally announced as "Pimps and 'Hos" party? Is that how this silly misunderstanding began ;-). Snoop Dogg in the heezzy!

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 09:53:41 AM EST
    Again, what is the normal time line for a trial to begin for these types of charges? Almost a year sounds like a awfully long time to me, but I'm not a lawyer.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 10:03:52 AM EST
    Like I said in an earlier post, it's not an unusual delay for a case this complicated, with multiple defendants, etc. And the defense will probably try to move the case to another county anyway. Thought this may have gotten lost in new thread.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#4)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue May 16, 2006 at 10:05:41 AM EST
    No trial date has been set. I would guess Nifong is speaking from his experience with the delays that can befall less complicated trials.
    Either that, or it's a brilliant effort to 1)Get out in front of any criticism that that should this goes to trial after his election it's due to his political ambitions and 2) put any blame that might arise from criticism of trial dates on the defense.
    All I can say is, God help me if I'm still refreshing this page every couple of hours a year from now.
    Amen.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#5)
    by january on Tue May 16, 2006 at 10:16:48 AM EST
    Lora--
    Hicht's picture is relevant.
    Are you referring to the 2005 game picture of Evans? If so, why is it relevant to a 2006 event? If that's not what you meant, I apologize....must have missed a reference somewhere.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#6)
    by blcc on Tue May 16, 2006 at 10:17:10 AM EST
    Chew2 that thoughtless swipe was uncalled for. Perhaps your inner child needs a nap or a "timeout"? There are a lot of so-called "Duke defenders" - so many, in fact, that they're bound to show up across the political spectrum. Grow up.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#7)
    by chew2 on Tue May 16, 2006 at 10:17:19 AM EST
    Localone,
    And the defense will probably try to move the case to another county anyway.
    I have thought that the defense publicity leaks and statements were aimed at prejudicing the jury pool in Durham, in part to give them grounds for shifting the trial to a more favorable venue (fewer black folks?). But I have no idea how hard that will be. I've read it's usually pretty hard to get a change of venue. Any thoughts?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#8)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Tue May 16, 2006 at 10:24:30 AM EST
    SLOphoto posted:
    IMHO:
    Please... I'd like to know.
    Re: Posted by SLOphoto May 15, 2006 09:49 PM
    Sorry SLO. I started to answer you this morning. Went to look up a few things and got sidetracked. I have it half written here. I promise to get back to it.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#9)
    by chew2 on Tue May 16, 2006 at 10:24:35 AM EST
    blcc
    There are a lot of so-called "Duke defenders" - so many, in fact, that they're bound to show up across the political spectrum.
    Prove it. From my observations all the articles published by conservatives favor the Duke lacrosse team. Find me one political conservative who has favored the AV. I'm not saying there are none, but I haven't found one yet.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 10:24:58 AM EST
    From prior blog...Lora wrote:
    2. Nifong. As I've said and shown, he publicly stated early on that the DNA might not turn up anything. This comment by Nifong has been buried and ignored. It took considerable searching to find it.
    If you listen to the whole press conference, Cheshire reads a quote by Nifong from an article where Nifong stated that while the DNA may not come back attributable to a player, he did not expect the tests to be that way. It is this statement of confidence by Nifong in the DNA that controls, not his little out if he is wrong. You are focused on Nifong's out and most are focused on Nifong's statement of confidence that it will identify the players. So I don't think it is buried or ignored, I think you are mis-focused. Maybe you or someone can find that article. Cheshire also points out that Nifong made public appearances on national TV shows and gave press interviews for 8 days after the DNA subpoena before any defense discussed the case publicly. This isn't spin, this is fact. (go back and read all the posts about possible NC code of ethics violatiosn and prosecutorial misconduct from the third week of March). I must admit, I just don't get what your point is....that Nifong is a great guy doing his job properly. He didn't. That doesn't have anything to do with whether and rape was committe dor not. As I've maintained all along, he should have said nothing, not set himself up to be questions and completed his investigation. I don't understand why you can't agree with this. Lastly, I would add that you are apt to accuse the defense of spin, but it is improper to attack the defense for playing in a press game that Nifong started with his own spin! Seriously, no DA has ever gone on a television show before an indictment (or ever) and simulated an alleged physical act (how AV was strangled) of the case. This is just out of bounds and entirely unprofessional. We expect more from someone who holds the public trust.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 10:25:47 AM EST
    It is pretty difficult to change venue. Where there are active protests in the street and this kind of unprecedented press, it would not be that difficult with most judges. This will almost certainly be decided by Orlando Hudson, the Chief Resident. Orlanda does not shy away from publicity and in fact tends to seek it out. It would surprise me if he grants this motion, which means he wouldn't hear the case. I personally think if any case ought to be moved based on everyone's pretrial publicity, prosecution, defense, and the perfect storm of media attention from all over the world, this one should. When the New Black Panther party is in the streets, and most folks are employed by Duke in the county, it's the wrong place to get an impartial jury either way. IMHO it would be malpractice for the defense not to try. A lot of people think that OJ's case was lost when they decided to try it where they did.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#12)
    by blcc on Tue May 16, 2006 at 10:26:09 AM EST
    I thought that since Nifong 1) started the fracas by insulting the team, 2) began trying them in the press before even charging anyone, and 3) essentially dropped the first 70 interviews worth of poison into the jury pool that it was in fact he who ensured that the case couldn't be tried locally.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#13)
    by january on Tue May 16, 2006 at 10:33:25 AM EST
    Chew2,
    From my observations all the articles published by conservatives favor the Duke lacrosse team. Find me one political conservative who has favored the AV.
    off point. The point was that Duke defenders cover the political spectrum, not that AV defenders do. I'm not a public personality by any means, but I'm a social progressive (read Liberal if you want to) and I've got real problems with the AV. Plus, I've constantly defended the players against the "Wall of Silence" snarks.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#14)
    by blcc on Tue May 16, 2006 at 10:33:41 AM EST
    Chew2, I don't have to. What I said was:
    There are a lot of so-called "Duke defenders" - so many, in fact, that they're bound to show up across the political spectrum.
    Ergo, I don't need a conservative who is inclined to believe the AV. I just need anyone other than a conservative who is inclined to believe the accused players. Will TL do?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 10:35:59 AM EST
    Chew2 wrote:
    I have thought that the defense publicity leaks and statements were aimed at prejudicing the jury pool in Durham, in part to give them grounds for shifting the trial to a more favorable venue (fewer black folks?).
    The only "leaks" I am aware fo are about the secodn DNA tests. Please name any other leaks, let alone a defense leak. The grounds for the forum changes were guarenteed when Nifong professed guilt for 8 days after the DNA subpoena in the middle of an election. This ship set sail long before the defense said anything. It is just another foolish, self-serving mistake on Nifong's part that unnecessarily jeopardized his case for his own political ambitions.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#16)
    by blcc on Tue May 16, 2006 at 10:36:18 AM EST
    Sorry January, missed your post. Chew2, will January do?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 10:40:51 AM EST
    blcc I imagine when the defense tries to move the venue, the DA will say that they can't take advantage of the fact that they used the media more and therefore infect the jury pool they are complaining about. They will say "you started it" and he will say that he went silent a long time before they did, and if anything the jury pool has been tainted against him. Truth be told, though, without looking at the evidence for a minute Durham County is traditionally a tough place to try a case for a affluent conservative, white defendant if the accuser is black. It's also a tough place for a defendant in a civil case-----. I represent defendants in civil cases and I avoid having a case set in Durham County whenever I can.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 10:43:06 AM EST
    Maybe I'm naive, but I don't see how a change of venue would be warranted or desireable. I'm a resident of Wake County, right next door to Durham, and I don't think the atmosphere would be any better or worse here. In a case where the publicity has been not only local, but regional and national, I'm not sure the pretrial publicity argument would carry a lot of weight. I haven't read the Durham Herald, but the News and Observer, the area's newspaper of record, has been very careful snd--to my mind-- balanced in its coverage. I read the attitude of the community to be one of waiting to see what the evidence shows at trial. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't see the Panthers as reflecting a large segment of the African-American community, nor do I see them as particularly influential on public opinion.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 10:49:00 AM EST
    Yes, but people in Alamance County or Person County or even Wake haven't had people in the streets for days, protesting, a flood of national reporters, stirring up local interest, everu local paper and station about Duke lacrosse every day for months. The point is that people in Durham couldn't AVOID hearing about it or even seeing it----the same is not true even 25 miles away. I'm not saying Hudson will grant the motion---it would be politically stupid for him to do so, too---I'm just saying we here in the Triangle are a whole lot more involved. I've been involved with cases that were a lot less reported where venue was changed.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#20)
    by chew2 on Tue May 16, 2006 at 10:49:46 AM EST
    Localone, Thanks for you thoughful comments about the Durham court situation. One other question. Have the judges there ever issued gag orders, and have you heard of any pressure for them to do so now?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#21)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 10:51:52 AM EST
    Yes, I'm aware of gag orders being issued. Some one would have to make the motion first, and it's hard for either side to do that with a straight face.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#22)
    by blcc on Tue May 16, 2006 at 10:55:30 AM EST
    Localone, Thanks for the insight. And yes, you infer correctly what I was getting at:
    I imagine when the defense tries to move the venue, the DA will say that they can't take advantage of the fact that they used the media more and therefore infect the jury pool they are complaining about. They will say "you started it"
    I am curious as to how alternate venues are selected. Can you fill in any details on that process as well? A neighboring county like Wake for convenience? Or someplace further afield like New Hanover on the theory there would have been less media exposure? (Not that that seems likely anywhere.)

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#23)
    by Lora on Tue May 16, 2006 at 10:57:08 AM EST
    January, It's relevant that there is a picture of Evans with something on his upper lip that appears to be facial hair, under circumstances in which many people have been insisting are not possible (no facial hair allowed for the Lacrosse team). Even if it isn't, it looks that way. We again have people insisting it isn't possible that Evans had a mustache or any facial hair on his lip the night of the party. That's why it is relevant. What you think is true may not be true. Even if it just "looks" like it, it could have "looked" like it to the AV, or that's how she could have remembered him. I don't know how long she looked at his face that night. Kali, I don't deny that Nifong said he expected there would be results from the DNA tests. I'm just saying he was crucified for saying there would definitely be results, when he had given himself an out that nobody wanted to acknowledge. Again you misunderstand me. I have never said Nifong is a great guy and is doing his job properly. I have admitted to more instances where the defenders of the team might be right, especially about Nifong, than any other poster on this subject has admitted that the other side might be right. However, I think there is room for argument over some of his actions. Giving press conferences/TV appearances for 8 days (let's see that verified) still isn't the same as 70 (let's see THAT verified.) When I hunted and hunted for quotes from Nifong that I'd read at the time, there were scads of articles all quoting the same comments by him, scarcely any variety. And the ones I recalled I really had to dig hard to find. Again I say, if you were a DA, and you believed a violent crime had occurred, the perps were at large, and witnesses were not coming forward, don't you have a responsibility to the public and the victim to say something? Did he say too much? Was he grandstanding? Campaigning? I've already admitted these possibilities, Kali, why do you want me to keep revisiting them? He could also, in addition, have been informing the public and trying to get witnesses to come forward, so he could catch the perps. Why can't you see that as a possibility too?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#24)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 10:57:14 AM EST
    golux wrote:
    I haven't read the Durham Herald, but the News and Observer, the area's newspaper of record, has been very careful snd--to my mind-- balanced in its coverage.
    Well, we know the Durham Herald-Sun is not balanced, from today:
    Like his two co-defendants, he comes from a family of means. His home has a tax value of $818,883, according to the Anne Arundel County Web site.
    This has absolutely no relevance to this case. It serves no other purpose than to incite and prejudice the poor communities of Durham and create economic envy.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#25)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 10:59:00 AM EST
    Some matters to consider before you all make definite conclusions: 1. Where is the toxicology report. [I assume that the test, if performed, would have been leaked if favorable to the prosecution--but who knows]. 2. What does the Sane report show. What information was given to the nurse taking the report, especially about prior sexual activity. 3. Most importantly, is there a cooperating witness--ie Duke lacrosse player at the party. As others have indicated, it is not unreasonable to assume that the DA has been protecting the identity of such a player through at least this Sunday's graduation date. This point is by far the most important unknown in the case. Based on evidence available to date, if there is no witness this case will [and should] die and the DA will have some very hard questions to answer. If I were placing a bet, however, a cooperating witness is the DA's "Ace" in the hole.[BTW, as much as the evidence points toward the lax teams' version of events, the DA is a long time professional. I have a hard time believing he has placed himself in such a deep hole without some credible evidence substantiating his positon. I believe it is more likely than not that he has something hidden that subtantially improves the prosecution's position in the case.] 4. Was Kim and the AV in the bathroom together during the time of the alleged rape? Or was Kim doing something else that night? As I recall the lax team has stated they were both in the bathroom together. 5. What happened to the pubic hair. Is that gone?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#26)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 11:06:45 AM EST
    Lora wrote:
    I've already admitted these possibilities, Kali, why do you want me to keep revisiting them? He could also, in addition, have been informing the public and trying to get witnesses to come forward, so he could catch the perps. Why can't you see that as a possibility too?
    Fair enough. I do see that possibility. So, I'll rephrase my view...I don't agree with Nifong's method (national TV shows, prefessions of guilt, etc.) and the mixing of his political agenda with a legitimate flushing out of witnesses. I appreciate the dialogue with you.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#27)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 11:08:42 AM EST
    Who said Evans should go sit down with the New Black Panthers? Are you kidding? If not that might be a candidate for the most ridiculous post, and that would be an accomplishment in and of itself. Seriously, you are aware of numerous reports that NBP carry concealed weapons, correct? And their record for tolerance and rational thought is a little less than ideal? So besides putting his life at substantial risk for no conceivable gain, what suggestions more do you have that he should do to break the Blue Wall of Silence ( 7 minute speech presumably still aint good enough ).

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#28)
    by chew2 on Tue May 16, 2006 at 11:09:34 AM EST
    Lora,
    Again I say, if you were a DA, and you believed a violent crime had occurred, the perps were at large, and witnesses were not coming forward, don't you have a responsibility to the public and the victim to say something?
    The NC Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 3.6(b) permit an attorney to publicly state:
    7) in a criminal case, ......... (B) if the accused has not been apprehended, information necessary to aid in apprehension of that person;
    So it seems Nifong could ask the team members to come forward and tell what they know about the alleged crime.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#29)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 11:12:12 AM EST
    blcc Lots of factors in changing venue. Some of them are surprisingly pragmatic like the physical facilities of the courthouse. Usually it's not too far away, a county or so over, so that folks don't have to drive too long. Sometimes it's about where the trial calendar will permit it, which judges are available, what kind of equipment, parking, court reporters, etc are The basic rationale is that you want people who haven't already made up their mind as a result of what's gone on around them. You have to get affidavits from people saying why they think the venue is tainted. Interestingly, on appeal, I think the decision doesn't get reversed unless the judge "abuses his discretion" a very very high standard.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#30)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 11:13:17 AM EST
    Any psychologists out there? It seems to me that with each disclosure, the AV supporter(s) must go further out in their belief that there "must be something we dont know". Or must invent a scenario that is almost cartoonish in its character ( the fake mustache would be exhibit one here ). Is this a known psychological phenomenon?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#31)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 11:20:39 AM EST
    Who said Evans should go sit down with the New Black Panthers? Are you kidding?
    Yeah, that one was really out there.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#32)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 11:21:56 AM EST
    Hicht, Something i am sure you know nothing about. Many times in sports, during playoffs, ncaa tourneys; etc... players will not shave their face until the conclusion. That photo was from a 10/05 announcement. Since I see no fall ball games listed on the schedule. I would be willing bet that your stock photo, from 2005 season, was taken during the final game after a week or 2 of playing in the tournament. It is not a mustache. It is an unkept, unclean, facial growth...a sloppy beard. The picture was probably taken during the Hopkins game. Have no fear, if he did shave a mustache off, perhaps they were intelligent enough to have been looking for a dirty used razor? With something longer than stub growth on it? But judging by the fact that you failed to invest the time to reasearch the photo you saw, you won't take the time to realize the ignorance of your arguement presented here.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#33)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 11:23:02 AM EST
    chew2, I am a committed, bleeding heart liberal. I have worked on numerous Dem campaigns. I hate our current government, believe in global warming, and am embarrassed that Nixon went to Duke law. And I do think the LAX players are innocent, based on what I have come to believe is overwhelming evidence. Once again, my premise is being confirmed. Stereotypes do not suit you. Please stop.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#34)
    by january on Tue May 16, 2006 at 11:28:37 AM EST
    Lora,
    It's relevant that there is a picture of Evans with something on his upper lip that appears to be facial hair, under circumstances in which many people have been insisting are not possible (no facial hair allowed for the Lacrosse team).
    I still don't see how a months-old picture (which is apparently fuzzy enough to be questioned) is more relevant than a picture taken the day before the party that showing he had no facial hair. I really think you're reaching.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#35)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 11:31:24 AM EST
    gmax said:
    Any psychologists out there? It seems to me that with each disclosure, the AV supporter(s) must go further out in their belief that there "must be something we dont know". Or must invent a scenario that is almost cartoonish in its character ( the fake mustache would be exhibit one here ). Is this a known psychological phenomenon?
    The term is cognitive dissonance, when one's reality does not match up with strongly held or indoctrinated beliefs.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#36)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 11:45:16 AM EST
    Does anyone think it's a little odd that the defense attornies haven't said, "no one at the party had a mustache." If that was the case, wouldn't it be a helpful fact to broadcast? Mustaches aren't exactly common on college campuses. If the defense have a picture of someone at the party with a mustache, I think it kills the case against this latest defendant, but makes it much more likely that something did in fact happen.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#37)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 11:48:08 AM EST
    I sort of liked the idea of Evans approaching the NBP to tell his side of the story. It was so beautifully idealistic. Like a screenplay. They'd all be reaching for their concealed weapons, and then the big guy in charge says, "Wait a minute. Let's hear what he has to say."

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#38)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 12:03:10 PM EST
    Hues of Blue I cant find it right now, but I am pretty sure I read a story that said it was the coach's policy not to allow mustaches on the team. Since there are major league baseball teams with this very policy, its not far fetched.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#39)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 12:03:43 PM EST
    THIS IS NOW THE FORMER usa! (little letters) i am happy to report its now mexico and the drug dealer in the brown house has just told you that fact.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#41)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 12:04:45 PM EST
    and it will be at that moment that Evans will see the error of his white ways.. We could call it "duke em' suckka"

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#42)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Tue May 16, 2006 at 12:04:56 PM EST
    Del, and maybe he could become an honorary member.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#43)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 12:09:44 PM EST
    I've been pointing out that based on published articles politically conservative ideologues appear universally to support the Duke lacrosse team. Why? Because they favor the white male power structure over attacks from woman, blacks, Jesse Jackson etc? Or do they always favor the criminal defendant?
    I believe most politically conservative ideologues were on Kobe Bryant side, how does that fit in?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#44)
    by chew2 on Tue May 16, 2006 at 12:10:02 PM EST
    gmax,
    I cant find it right now, but I am pretty sure I read a story that said it was the coach's policy not to allow mustaches on the team.
    I've read that too. But I've also read the coach and University had a policy against under-age drinking too and that the team captains were supposed to give guidance about it.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#45)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 12:12:25 PM EST
    Gmax -
    It seems to me that with each disclosure, the AV supporter(s) must go further out in their belief that there "must be something we dont know".
    The DA and grand jury have come to the conclusion that there is probable cause that the indicted individuals committed the alleged crime. Does anyone here believe that the evidence available to the public thus far would be sufficient to indicate such probable cause? I don't. The DA and the grand jury have access to specific evidence not available to the public (the AV's testimony, the captains's testimony, the medical report, the possible testimony of a cooperative witness). It's not illogical to think that there must be something we don't know. Also, I can't help but think that some on this site are honestly supposing an alternative possibility - that the DA has indicted three individuals that he suspects are innocent in order to further his political career. Obviously, there are a goodly number of reasons to think that this is far-fetched. Do I need to go into them here?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#46)
    by chew2 on Tue May 16, 2006 at 12:14:27 PM EST
    GUNSHY,
    I believe most politically conservative ideologues were on Kobe Bryant side, how does that fit in?
    I wasn't aware of that. I didn't follow the case much. Any references for that claim?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#47)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Tue May 16, 2006 at 12:15:51 PM EST
    Regarding finding a "liberal" who don't think the AV is honest, whatever the question is... I first started discussing this case over at Gilliard's THE NEWS BLOG. If you questioned the host's belief that this case was a reenactment of the Civil War and slavery, you were targeted by many of the people posting. One guy said he suspected where I was "coming from." When I told him where I was coming from he said essentially, "I don't trust people who announce where they're coming from. They must be hiding their racism." Therefore, people with fixed beliefs about this case aren't going to be shaken by evidence. But if you're curious hit my name and go to my blog. I've had my blog up for about two years. Read my little bio, randomly pluck out what I've written. I'm probably more socialist than liberal, but I can't think of anybody accusing me of being a conservative. What does it prove? Hey, I'm still a white man so I still can't be trusted, because you know where all white men are coming from.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#48)
    by chew2 on Tue May 16, 2006 at 12:18:14 PM EST
    Bob,
    What does it prove? Hey, I'm still a white man so I still can't be trusted, because you know where all white men are coming from.
    You are on your own unique planet. -)

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#49)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 12:24:26 PM EST
    probable cause
    Does anyone here believe that the evidence available to the public thus far would be sufficient to indicate such probable cause? I don't.
    Probable cause is a really low standard. An AV's ID of a subject is more than enough. Exculpatory evidence doesn't come into the equation at all.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#50)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Tue May 16, 2006 at 12:26:23 PM EST
    This whole thing about Evans and his history of facial hair is funny, and it does show the desperation of some here clinging to the believability of the AV. The man is wearing a helmet. The helmet has a face mask with multiple horizontal and vertical bars, a chin strap, a mouth guard, so most of his face is obscured. It is presumably an action picture. We don't know the source of light. To me it looks like a shadow, it doesn't have the body that hair would and it doesn't look like how people trim their staches these days. It's ludicrous that anyone would put any weight behind whether or not Evans had a mustache on the night of the alleged rape from a picture with his face obscured. But let's say he did have a mustache a year earlier. Or someone saw the picture with the shadow and presumed it was a mustache. And knew that the man lived at the house. And that these pictures were available for her to look at before she made a photo ID to the police. Hmm. Maybe the AV looked at the same photo somewhere on the net, thought he had a mustache and tried to make cute when she was doing the ID. Or not. As long as we're throwing out mustache theories.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#51)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Tue May 16, 2006 at 12:29:46 PM EST
    chew2, I guess you're putting me down. I forgive you your need to strike out. Search over. Liberal found. Not that unique. Beautiful planet. Come visit sometime.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#52)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Tue May 16, 2006 at 12:36:40 PM EST
    Bob in Pacifica posted:
    The AV said the guy had a mustache. You show her pictures of guys with mustaches. Pretty simple. If she says none of them look like the guy, then you go back to lacrosse players, with fillers. You know, the correct way to do photo arrays.
    Talk Left posted:
    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.
    They would all have to have not been on the team. Talk Left seems to be assuming there are photos of team members who were photographed with mustaches. There apparently are not. Is she suggesting a photo array of all fillers? If so, that's what I missed. We don't know if the accuser told the police the strangler had a mustache before she picked out David Evans, or not, but let's assume she did: They run the photo array looking for the other two guys. She picks out David Evans as the strangler, "Looks like him without the mustache." I know in California, at least a few years ago, once she has said that, the police can DRAW a mustache on Evan's photo and run it by her again.
    The problem is not that she should be shown pictures of men with mustaches. She SAID the guy had a mustache. If she had then been shown a stack of pictures of guys with a mustache and said, you know, I still think it was this guy, then she would have made a reasoned ID.
    That's the part that I missed in Talk Left's post. And I'm still not sure that is what she meant.
    Could she have wrongly identified someone who wasn't there? Yes. And that would have meant to the cops that you couldn't rely on her ID, as opposed to the process used by the Durham cops in this case, which ensured that she'd make an ID of a lacrosse player.
    There you go again. Now you know that is misleading. Yes, she could only pick lacrosse players, but you know she could have picked at least five players that were not at the party at all. The defense is claiming she did pick out someone that wasn't in Durham that night.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#53)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 12:38:04 PM EST
    huesofblue - If probable cause is that low a standard, then I stand corrected. But let me ask this then. Nifong knew how the case was going when he decided to push for an indictment of the third person Monday. Would he have done so if he thought the case was not winnable? Perhaps as an accomodation to the AV? In an effort to be even-handed with respect to the two prior indictees? His actions indicate a confidence in his case that goes beyond the facts on the table, don't they? Since there are a number of facts he has that we don't have, I'm suggesting that the possibility that there's something else there is significantly more likely than the possibility that Nifong is an evil man (as has been posted here) or that Nifong decided to indict three innocent men for political advantage. Obviously I could be wrong on this, too.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#54)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 12:42:10 PM EST
    Actually Chew2 the only revealing thing in your biased and condenscending post is what it says about you. Go look up "projection". This case more than anything I have seen, cuts across political lines. I have had long discussions with conservatives who are sure that the AV is telling the truth. Your whole premise is false and the bit about the "man" ( or was white power structure? ) holding down the oppressed would have been appreciated by Lenin, but I doubt many here think it true regardless or where they fall on the true or false accusation continuum.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#55)
    by azbballfan on Tue May 16, 2006 at 12:50:25 PM EST
    kali
    The only "leaks" I am aware fo are about the secodn DNA tests. Please name any other leaks, let alone a defense leak.
    Much of the information the public has available came through defense leaks. The initial warrant was given to the press by the defense team. The later warrants served on McFayden, Seligmann, and Finnerty were all given to the press by the defense team. The supposed exculpatory evidence was leaked to the defense team. The defense team claims that they offered the evidence to the DA. Of course, the defense team also made an emphatic statement that Evans has never in his life had a moustache. Apparently he did. (Bob, sorry, but if you click on the image to enlarge it, that shadow suddenly turns clearly into facial hair with texture). The significance of the moustache indicates the defense teams' propensity to spin without merit. I have no way to believe that they offered evidence or testimony to the DA in a way the DA could have accepted it. A defense team trick is to offer evidence in such a way as to taint it or make it or other evidence inadmissable for the prosecution. For example: If the defense team offers the prosecution pictures from a digital camera which are exculpatory in a tainted manner, then the prosecution can't bring that evidence into the trial. But of course the defense still can. Further, the prosecution would not be able to ask for the other pictures from the camera. The prosecution needs to find their own evidence that they knew someone had a camera and knew who it was so they could subpeona the camera. The defense team is smart.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#56)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 12:55:20 PM EST
    1. If someone else at the party had a mustache, wouldn't the AV have pulled him out of the lineup? If no one else in the lineup had a mustache, then let these Duke boys go. Then if she were raped it was someone else, whether at the party or not. 2. I still want to hear from Lora whether there is any sort of evidence that would convince her of the innocence of the accused students, or whether she thinks that an accusation of rape (by these PARTICULAR men) is always to be believed. If there is no evidence that could convince her of the innocence of the indicted then the idea of their guilt is an unverifyable hypothesis and remains pseudoscience.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#57)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 01:00:38 PM EST
    Mea culpa Just re-read my posts from last night and have to admit late night, after a miserable day is not the first time to try your blog wings. I apologize for giving the impression that I believed that all commentators, especially those who support the defendants are bigoted, sexist hypocrites. One reason I like this site is because such commentators are the exception, not the norm. Most people are just exchanging information and asking questions as they speculate in a civil way. I shouldn't have breeched the civility of the discourse, nor brought out the heavy artillery against a few. While I am still disappointed with TL's bias in this case(spelled out last night), as someone rightly pointed out that's my problem. The whole is more valuable than some differences, in fact differences are what makes the site worth while. I'll break off now and re-post to try and clarify last night's ramblings. Want to make sure the apology doesn't get lost. Effete, ouch, but if the Manolo fits ; )(seriously kidding).

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#58)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 01:01:20 PM EST
    Bob in Pacifica wrote:
    It's ludicrous that anyone would put any weight behind whether or not Evans had a mustache on the night of the alleged rape from a picture with his face obscured.
    It is an even more crazed suposition given that Coach Pressler had the "no-facial hair" rule for the entirety of his time at Duke, including 2005; and Pressler definitely would not tolerate it for a game, which is where the photo was snapped! It is time to give up on the 2005 game photo and move on to asking what where Evan's and his roommates' Halloween costumes in October 2005.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#59)
    by azbballfan on Tue May 16, 2006 at 01:02:48 PM EST
    Orinoco, Actually, if you read the story, the second warrant the N&O sued to unseal was issued at the time the initial warrant was issued. I've never seen a second warrant that became unsealed that was issued on the same date as the first warrant have you? The defense team made public comments about the warrants which were served, indicating that they were the source of the warrants. In any jurisdiction, there is a waiting period between when a warrant is served and when it is made available to the public. Here it takes 7-10 business days. We've regularly had reports of the warrants the day following them being served. The reporters openly ask the defense team for the private reports before the DA makes them public. For example, yesterday Cheshire responded to such a request saying he'd consider giving redacted copies of the DNA tests to the reporters. The Kerry Sutton mistake was understandable. She's more manly than the rest of the defense team.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#60)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 01:04:06 PM EST
    Posted by azbballfan:
    "Of course, the defense team also made an emphatic statement that Evans has never in his life had a moustache.
    Apparently he did. (Bob, sorry, but if you click on the image to enlarge it, that shadow suddenly turns clearly into facial hair with texture)."
    azbballfan, sorry, but Evans has a beard in the photo, not a mustache. You can see hair coming through the chin strap vents, and on his cheeks. Nice try, though.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#61)
    by Lora on Tue May 16, 2006 at 01:08:31 PM EST
    January, I may be reaching here; Bob obviously thinks I'm reaching so far I've fallen out of the tree and landed on my head :-). I will say that if the ID of a mustachless man who the AV indicated had a mustache is the ONLY thing used to indict, that would be ludicrous (thanks, Bob, for that word...I love it). The only reason really that I've been going on about it: To say that the AV's use of the word "mustache" in the photo ID session completely invalidates the indictment is as much of a stretch as any speculations over shadows or facial hair. Either Nifong has 1) addressed the mustache issue to his satisfaction (which, let me hasten to add, may or may not be good enough); 2) is stupid enough to have missed what all of the clever folks here have spotted: the AV's mustache comment; or 3) Nifong really is evil enough to want to see an innocent man go down. Sorry if I take an unpopular stance here, but I'm going with 1) as the most likely, and my apparently fanciful speculations were on how that might have played out. Taking a consensus, I guess I'll have to go back to the drawing board. Is this day-before picture available yet? Any pictures of Evans at the party surface yet? I'm out of ammo on the subject until those come out. Peace.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#62)
    by azbballfan on Tue May 16, 2006 at 01:11:53 PM EST
    Yes he does have a beard in addition to his mustache. Article with photo. Click on the magnifying glass then click on the "larger" button.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#63)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 01:13:32 PM EST
    This quote from the abc news article cited above
    Three men -- none of them Duke lacrosse players and all of whose identities are known by ABC News -- were listed in the report as providing DNA swabs to be tested against the samples found on the alleged victim.
    One of the three men has told ABC News that he spoke to the alleged victim the night of the March 13 party. Another man is the alleged victim's boyfriend, and defense attorneys identified him in a news conference as the "single source" of DNA found to date in vaginal swabs of the accuser.It is unclear why the three non-lacrosse players were included in the sampling.
    Would this not indicate that the DA had already asked her who she had had sex with in the last few days and tested them just so as not to confuse the issue and were prepared for there to be other DNA? And if so does this indicate that they may have their ducks more in a row than it appears from what is going in in the Media at this time?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#64)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 01:17:28 PM EST
    But let me ask this then. Nifong knew how the case was going when he decided to push for an indictment of the third person Monday. Would he have done so if he thought the case was not winnable? Perhaps as an accomodation to the AV? In an effort to be even-handed with respect to the two prior indictees? His actions indicate a confidence in his case that goes beyond the facts on the table, don't they? Since there are a number of facts he has that we don't have, I'm suggesting that the possibility that there's something else there is significantly more likely than the possibility that Nifong is an evil man (as has been posted here) or that Nifong decided to indict three innocent men for political advantage. Obviously I could be wrong on this, too.
    There's a lot that a D.A. has to consider when deciding to bring a case and the ethical issues are a little murky. If the DA belives the victim, I think he has every right to bring the case and prosecute it zealously. And I think that's the case even if his his evidence might not be strong enought to make the case a slam dunk. The prosecutor's standard is pretty similar to the grand jury's - if a jury believes all the evidence that he has, could they find the defendant's guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. I think he can meet that standard - he has the victim saying rape occured and her ID of the defendants. He also has the SANE nurse saying the AV had injuries consistent with her story. Circumstancial evidence indicates the AV may have been drugged. And he has the DNA of one of the ID'd defendant's on the AV's fingernail. If a jury believes all of this, and doen't buy into the defense's exculpatory evidence, it's enough to convict. Accordingly, it's enough for a prosecutor to push ahead. But if it becomes clear that the defendants' are innocent, I think the prosecutor is obligated to drop the charges. But at this point I don't think anything is that clear. I think the DA believes in his case, but in private would conclude that it's going to be an uphill battle.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#65)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 01:17:30 PM EST
    How about he really really likes his job and to keep it, he has got to get elected in a town where 40% of the population is so stirred up that they might abandon him if he dared so any sign of doubt? Could that be a 4th possibility?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#66)
    by azbballfan on Tue May 16, 2006 at 01:19:09 PM EST
    Orinoco, You seem to be the one with a chip on their shoulder. Without making personal attacks for attempting to defray the discussion away from your mistakes:
    Orinoco, Actually, if you read the story, the second warrant the N&O sued to unseal was issued at the time the initial warrant was issued. I've never seen a second warrant that became unsealed that was issued on the same date as the first warrant have you? The defense team made public comments about the warrants which were served, indicating that they were the source of the warrants. In any jurisdiction, there is a waiting period between when a warrant is served and when it is made available to the public. Here it takes 7-10 business days. We've regularly had reports of the warrants the day following them being served. The reporters openly ask the defense team for the private reports before the DA makes them public. For example, yesterday Cheshire responded to such a request saying he'd consider giving redacted copies of the DNA tests to the reporters.
    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#67)
    by chew2 on Tue May 16, 2006 at 01:20:40 PM EST
    gmax,
    This case more than anything I have seen, cuts across political lines. I have had long discussions with conservatives who are sure that the AV is telling the truth.
    You claim to have met a "conservative" who believes the AV? Great. So if true there's at least one. Are you seriously disputing the claim that the vast majority of conservatives are supporting the team? If so, you'll have to provide more evidence than that. How about a conservative writer? BTW you sound like one of those white male conservatives who resent the unjust claims of those black folks to me: gmax said
    But right now I could only convict these boys of being white in Durham County. I see no other evidence to support a rape that passes a beyond reasonable doubt test.
    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#68)
    by JK on Tue May 16, 2006 at 01:21:33 PM EST
    A few questions about the photos. 1. It appears based on what is said that the camera was not subpoena-ed. If the defense uses the photos at trial, won't they have to produce the camera in discovery? There has been a lot of discussion concerning the ability to alter time stamps. I think I remember some early assertion by the defense that the camera had some device that prevented altering the metadata or the time stamp. (I may be wrong about that, but I thought I heard that somewhere.) I was pretty skeptical about that assertion. If this goes to trial, won't the prosecutor need to conduct some sort of forensic examination of the camera? 2. In terms of the photos showing no moustache, I thought I head on TV (again I may be mistaken) that the defense had photos from the day before and the day after the party. Is that correct? Any statement about photos from the day of the party itself? I found this very curious, especially given the time stamp issues discussed above.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#69)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue May 16, 2006 at 01:23:30 PM EST
    azbballfan, sorry, but Evans has a beard in the photo, not a mustache. You can see hair coming through the chin strap vents, and on his cheeks. Nice try, though.
    Exactly. You could split (facial) hairs and say something about how a couple days of beard stubble would include a mustache, but that would just sink your cred even more. otoh, while the AV said mustache, and while my picture of a mustache is what, say, Magnum PI had, I can see her using the term somewhat looser to mean a couple-days stubble. However I'm a little less inclined to believe she would say mustache if he had the couple days stubble was over his entire face. All this aside, let's see those pics of Evans on the 13th. Everything else is verbal masturbation.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#70)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Tue May 16, 2006 at 01:24:04 PM EST
    DO, I have played the "Nifong must have something" game for a couple of months now. Maybe it will be true. However, every piece of evidence revealed so far (albeit, through the filter of the defense) is pretty convincing that the rape didn't happen. The DNA is pretty strong evidence of a lack of crime. The AV's version of events, as little as we know, is not converging with facts of the case as they emerge. I'm willing to be proven wrong. I don't see any trends in that direction.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#71)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 01:27:21 PM EST
    Posted by chew2 Bob, What does it prove? Hey, I'm still a white man so I still can't be trusted, because you know where all white men are coming from. You are on your own unique planet. -)
    Posted by Bob In Pacifica.
    Not that unique. Beautiful planet. Come visit sometime.
    Actually Bob and I live along the California coast, so both of us are having to sort of play along with a lot this talk about racial strife and class struggle, because we just don't see much of it in our everyday lives. We are having some personal difficulties in understanding where a lot of people with these giant chips on their shoulders are coming from, because where we live we don't really think of ourselves as being "white" men. I can't speak for Bob, but as for myself of all the other places I have ever even visited, I've never seen a place more tolerant, open minded and easy going in matters of race, ethnicity, diversity and live-and-let-live attitudes than along the California coast where we live. For what it's worth.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#72)
    by Lora on Tue May 16, 2006 at 01:28:36 PM EST
    Rogan, Please, I have never ever assumed guilt of any of the players, or even assumed that the attack took place. I have said this numerous times. I believe her story but I have always allowed for doubt, and still do. Evidence to convince me that a crime as the AV described did not take place? Evidence that the AV did not suffer serious sexual and assault injuries. Or, evidence that indicates she would be able to physically dance and act and get around just fine at the beginning of the party if she'd suffered those injuries prior to arrival (Then I'd still think a crime was committed but would be looking elsewhere for the perp). As far as exonerating those who were indicted? Well, what would really help, is if everyone at the party would give a separate, fair, complete, and sequential account of what they were doing, who they were with, and what they saw, the sooner, the better. As time goes on it will be harder to recall, making everything worse for all involved.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#73)
    by azbballfan on Tue May 16, 2006 at 01:29:35 PM EST
    Yes he does have a beard in addition to his mustache. Article with photo. Click on the magnifying glass then click on the "larger" button.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#74)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 01:30:11 PM EST
    Or how about he's gotten in way over his head, can't figure out a way out but forward. This is someone who has prosecuted a number of serious cases early on but because of illness hadn't done a lot of big cases recently. Remember he was recently appointed by his predecessor. As a self professed liberal, I can think of some other folks in the headlights who get defensive and locked into a position. I agree that there may be something we haven't heard about that he's got. We know it's not DNA ("consistent with" or "doesn't exclude" is not enough) or a flawed photo id. My instinct is that the defense has sensed a great void in the case, after considering all the possibilities (like date rape drug, a very positive SANE test, a turned player etc). And yet they still took a fairly aggressive stand on innocence. Either the defense is extremely crazy and risk-happy on what they don't know, or they have weighed all the options and are betting their cards on the void.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#75)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Tue May 16, 2006 at 01:32:08 PM EST
    Sorry, every time someone says, no, really, it really is a mustache I go back and look at it and I can't say it's a mustache. However, I'm sure that someone can come up with a picture of Evans without the helmet, facemask, mouthpiece , etc. that clearly shows a mustache on his face. This will absolutely prove his guilt.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#76)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Tue May 16, 2006 at 01:37:40 PM EST
    SLO, You're right. It's not perfect, nowhere is, but it's better than New Jersey, where I grew up, or any place in the country I've visited.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#77)
    by chew2 on Tue May 16, 2006 at 01:37:59 PM EST
    localone
    My instinct is that the defense has sensed a great void in the case, after considering all the possibilities (like date rape drug, a very positive SANE test, a turned player etc).Either the defense is extremely crazy and risk-happy on what they don't know, or they have weighed all the options and are betting their cards on the void.
    I think that's very plausible. For example I get the same feeling regarding the possibility of a date rape drug. Nifong's comments have been very hedged about that. If he had a positive tox report I think he would have intimated more. That said, what if the players had assaulted (not sexually) the AV but come up with a "nothing happened" story and are sticking to it. Wouldn't the defense take a similarly strong position about the DNA results etc?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#78)
    by ding7777 on Tue May 16, 2006 at 01:38:42 PM EST
    What if the AV was raped but was raped in the Kroger parking lot, on the way to the detox center or at the detox center? The whole timeline seems to disappear after the Kroger 911 call and the AV's arrival at the hospital

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#79)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 01:42:03 PM EST
    huesofblue - Thanks for your response. At this point, I find it more likely that the evidence we don't have is fairly compelling than that the DA is convinced based solely on the evidence we know about or that the DA doesn't care whether the people he indicts are innocent or guilty. He was aware of all of the exculpatory evidence when he pushed for the third indictment yesterday, so that must mean something.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#80)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 01:59:40 PM EST
    AZ, Wrong, wrong and wrong again. None of your examples are "leaks", which by defintition is revealing something that is supposed to be secret or confidential. All the documents are public documents that do not maintain any level of confidentiality, unless sealed. Only one subpoea/warrant was sealed and not made public until after the judge lifted the seal pursuant to an action by the press. All other documents were public documents ripe and available to anyone who sought them properly. Further, most showed up on the The Smoking Gun before in the press.
    The supposed exculpatory evidence was leaked to the defense team.
    What?!?! So, who "leaked" the evidence to the defense? The press? The Durham PD? Nifong?
    I have no way to believe that they offered evidence or testimony to the DA in a way the DA could have accepted it.
    You cannot be serious!!! You are either seriously uniformed or purposefully trying to deceive the blog. Nifong has been quoted as saying that he didn't want to see the photos or meet with defense attorneys becasue he knows what they are going to say so why meet with them. If he couldn't look at them for evidentiary reasona, don't you think he would point this out to discredit the defense, much like retortign the DNA results with "I have more evidence" and "I'll do it the old fashioned way." I would say this indicates your propensity to spin without merit.
    A defense team trick is to offer evidence in such a way as to taint it or make it or other evidence inadmissable for the prosecution.
    This takes the cake....let me get this straight.... Defense: Mr. Nifong please look at this exculpatory evidence that we will be presenting at trial should you indite my client. We beleive it shows that our client is innocent. So, you might want to re-focus your investigation and check your facts. Nifong: Sorry, I can't look at that exculpatory evidence because if I do it may not be admissible at trial for you to use against my case. Even with your example, all Nifong has to do is say "OK, I'll look at the photos, if I think they might show something, then I want to verify their veracity and whether they were ligitimate with no tampering." Happens all the time....even on Law & Order. But Nifong had no interest whatsoever (see above). By the way the Cheshire family is one of the most respected families in North Carolina. A very close friend of mine is a former ADA in Raliegh and said Cheshire is one of the most well-respected attorneys of the NC bar and definitely the most respected defense attorney. Evidently, because you have no "way to believe" he offered evidence in an acceptable way, he must not have made the offer to Nifong. Ladies and Gentlemen....Common Sense, a fake Moustache and Elvis have left the building.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#81)
    by azbballfan on Tue May 16, 2006 at 02:01:12 PM EST
    Whether or not Evans had a mustached last year does not speak to his guilt or innocence. However, his defense attorney on Friday made the assertion that the "DNA reports do not provide any matching evidence to the lacrosse players." A claim which he seemed to back off of upon further questioning of the reporters. Then we have the same Cheshire making the claim that Evans has never had a mustache in his life. Well, if there is a picture of Evans with a mustache, then Cheshire's credibility is waning. Bob doesn't see a mustache. I do. Here's a link During yesterday's press conference, I thought Cheshire and Evans were pretty credible. Cheshire's handling of the gal who insisted on yelling about racism was very fair and restrained. Evans was visibly shaken during his speech. Unfortunately after seeing the picture in the news report which I think shows a mustache (Bob disagrees), the entire press conference lost a lot of credibility. Both sides seem to be unable to control their voracity/balanced reporting of the value of evidence and should shut up.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#82)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 02:15:37 PM EST
    a On the mustache, what matters to me is whether he had a mustache on the night in question. If they have a picture of him from the day before where he doesn't hae one, I'm going to find that far more relevant. As to the "he's never had a mustache" statements - I honestly don't think they'd go on national TV decaring it if it wasn't true. It's just too easy to disprove and would shoot their credibility all to hell. In the picture, it does look like a mustache, but that's only becasue the rest of his face is obscured. It was probably a beard.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#83)
    by azbballfan on Tue May 16, 2006 at 02:16:09 PM EST
    kali, We seem to define 'leak' differently. It is my uderstanding that lawyers in these cases are responsible for keeping the case out of the press and tainting future jury pools. In my book, if the defense provides information to the press, they are leaking it. We don't know the rules of how and what is made accessible to the public in these jurisdictions. So we don't know for certain that the evidence the defenese has provided the press would have ever been made public if they didn't. I doubt the police interview used for identification would have been made public if the defense team didn't provide a redacted version to the press. You keep on referring to a warrant that the press successfully had unsealed. I can only find reference to the fact that the press filed to have one unsealed but can't find out which one it would have been. Do you know which of the warrants this is? The Defense and Evans keep on referring to how the DA "refused a lie detector test". Unfortunately lie detectors used to be used by police but no longer are. They prosecution can't use them as evidence. Yet another reason to take defense team claims with a grain of salt. Regardless of Cheshire's reputation and that of his familiy. He's proven here he's willing to stick his foot in his mouth.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#84)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 02:28:10 PM EST
    orinico, I don't think it really matters. If he didn't have a mustache the day before, he wasn't goign to have one the night in question. That said, I wouldn't be surprised if he hadn't shaved and looked kind of scruffy. You'd think he'd turn up in al least one of the photos from that night.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#85)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue May 16, 2006 at 02:28:36 PM EST
    Then we have the same Cheshire making the claim that Evans has never had a mustache in his life. Well, if there is a picture of Evans with a mustache, then Cheshire's credibility is waning. Bob doesn't see a mustache. I do. Here's a link
    And of course hair above the lip, in the absense of other facial hair, and of some certain length, is generally known as a mustache. Hair all over the face, including above the lip, as is readily observable in the linked picture, is generally known as a beard. azbb, by stubbornly holding Cheshire's feet to the flames over a pic of Evans with a couple days scrubbly beard/5 o'clock shadow - which encompasses, as a subset of it, a mustache - is sinking axbb's cred deeper and deeper.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#86)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 02:33:35 PM EST
    Remember that the DA has an prohibition vis a vis sharing information to the public that the defense lawyers don't have. What's so unusual about this is Nifong's leaking, not the defense's. Sure the defense is proclaiming innocence loudly in the press, but that happens a fair amount. Defense lawyers don't have to "serve justice" like DA's do. Ethically, they have to defend their clients as vigorously as possible. We've all seen defendants and their lawyers grandstand in front of courthouses about their innocence. I have never seen a prosecutor do it---probably because it's against the rule for prosecutors. Expect Cheshire and Wade Smith, who most would say IS the preeminent NC criminal defense lawyer, first to Cheshire's second, to go after Nifong hard on the ethics, if not in court with the State Bar. The clear breach of the rule on looking at exculpatory evidence, which is arguably more egregious will also be pursued.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#87)
    by chew2 on Tue May 16, 2006 at 02:43:09 PM EST
    Orinoco You said
    Hey, Lying Clown,
    I doubt the police interview used for identification would have been made public if the defense team didn't provide a redacted version to the press.
    The transcript is in the 89 page motion filed on May 1st.
    What's your source? My understanding is only 1 or 2 pages of the transcript were attached to the motion. Not the whole transcript which was published by the press.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#88)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 02:45:05 PM EST
    Well if he didn't underestimate Smith and Cheshire---if you practice law in these parts and you aren't totally asleep at the wheel you don't underestimate either one, even if you don't practice criminal law. I suspect he just got out ahead of his lights, either because of tensions in the community or politics and now is trying to save his case best he can. If he showed some humility, I'd feel bad for the guy.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#89)
    by chew2 on Tue May 16, 2006 at 02:48:27 PM EST
    localone,
    The clear breach of the rule on looking at exculpatory evidence, which is arguably more egregious will also be pursued.
    The statement about not ignoring other evidence is in the explanatory comments to the rules and not specified in the rules themselves. That said, how common is it for a DA to refuse to meet with defendant's attorneys to receive a proffer of evidence. He knows these attorneys personally, and I assume there is some trust between them all. Can you think of a justification for why Nifong did this?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#90)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 02:50:13 PM EST
    False pride. Stubborn bullheadedness. Why would a good attorney EVER turn down the opportunity to see what the other side had?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#91)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 02:51:05 PM EST
    AZ wrote:
    The Defense and Evans keep on referring to how the DA "refused a lie detector test". Unfortunately lie detectors used to be used by police but no longer are. They prosecution can't use them as evidence. Yet another reason to take defense team claims with a grain of salt.
    Obviously, you are not a crimnal attorney or even an attorney, but you try to play one on the internet. that you may have seen. You know absolutely nothing about the interactions between defense attorneys and DAs. Defense attorneys and DAs have pre-indictment, pre-trial meetings all the time. Maybe you can gleen something from an episode or two of Law & Order, which is fairly accurate in its representation of a legal side of a criminal case. Everyone knows a polygraph test is inadmissible at trial, but it can be used, and is used, as a litmus test for investigative purposes and credibility. The test does not necessarily reveal a truth, but it does reveal blatant false statements. Either way, it is an investigative tool, among many. I would like Nifong to administer a confidential polygraph to the AV/FA just to give himself a litmus test of her story. Just the suggestion of a polygraph to many people gets them talking and clarifying.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#92)
    by azbballfan on Tue May 16, 2006 at 02:54:45 PM EST
    The transcript is in the 89 page motion filed on May 1st. It's public record and anyone, even you, can pay a small fee and have a copy at the Durham courthouse.
    First, could the moderator help with personal attacks here? Secondly, the motion would be available as public record, if the court decided to allow it. There would also be a delay as to when it would be available. There is an adminstration process which the motion would go through. Each court keeps it's own procedures for what is and is not public record and when it is made public. I have no idea what the procedure is in Durham, but here in Phoenix, filings in civil cases are made public unless a judge orders the case be held from public record until the case is over. Here in Phoenix, the cases where there is an open and ongoing investigation are withheld from public record until the investigation is complete or the case is decided.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#93)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 02:55:02 PM EST
    Lora You said that if everyone gave a separate, fair and sequential account of what they were doing, who they were with and what they saw, then that would be helpful in exonerating those who were involved. If the Duke guys got on the stand and all did this and said that the three indicted ones did not rape her, then are you saying that you would be convinced of their innocence? Or are you saying that too much time has gone by and that if they testify to this now it's just the "Blue Wall of Silence", so there's nothing now that could really be helpful in exonerating the defendents in your mind?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#94)
    by azbballfan on Tue May 16, 2006 at 02:55:55 PM EST
    Sorry, should read: Here in Phoenix, the CRIMINAL cases where there is an open and ongoing investigation are withheld from public record until the investigation is complete or the case is decided.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#95)
    by ding7777 on Tue May 16, 2006 at 03:01:57 PM EST
    to Orinoco
    Evans' hair is obviously black. But whatever is around his mouth in the picture is a kind of burnt orange. I don't think people with black hair can ever have a blonde beard
    . I knew a guy who had dark hair and a reddish beard... so, at least for me, it is possible

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#96)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 03:03:10 PM EST
    I screwed up the quotes on my last post. You can probably figure out where I quote Az and what is my comment. Sorry.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#97)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue May 16, 2006 at 03:09:05 PM EST
    Orin, re: the orange beard on a dark-haired guy. Yep, it's very possible, my brother is such. re: misidentification of Evan in the pic, also possible. Thing is, in the news conference, his "5 o'clock shadow" looked dark colored to me, not light/orange. Then again, the color representation of the pic and/or the conference may wacky.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#98)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 03:11:10 PM EST
    I've heard a lot about how persuasive the third indictee was in making his statement yesterday. Does anyone know if there is a transcript available anywhere? Thanks.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#99)
    by azbballfan on Tue May 16, 2006 at 03:15:31 PM EST
    DO Not sure where a transcript might be, but here's a link to the video wral.com video link His statement comes after a brief statement by Cheshire and is followed by a longer statement and answering of questions by Cheshire.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#100)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 03:16:49 PM EST
    Does it really matter about the beard? Black, red, missing or present in 2005, there is no way the defense would have hung its case on a boy's cleanshaven appearance on the day of the party if they couldn't back it up. With pictures, his coach's testimony, his girlfriend's testimony, the testimony of the guy he barely knows but sits next to in Sociology 305? This is not hard to prove. \At the time of trial, it won't matter whether he ever had a mustache and Cheshire misspoke on the day of his indictment (I can't see the facial hair in the picture either, though.) What the jury will hear is the testimony, the pictures.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#101)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 03:36:40 PM EST
    I don't think Nifong has to worry about any ethics proceedings against him. The attorneys are going to do everything an advocate should to win for their clients. But I don't think they're hell bent on starting any sort of personal war with the Durham DA's office or challenging Nifong's integrity. That strikes me as a great way to piss off a lot of people inside of a very small legal community. It's not smart for this case and it's not smart for cases to come. That said, if they have actual knowledge that Nifong has violated ethical rules, they have an ethical duty to report it to the bar.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#102)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 03:39:42 PM EST
    localone wrote:
    I suspect he just got out ahead of his lights, either because of tensions in the community or politics and now is trying to save his case best he can. If he showed some humility, I'd feel bad for the guy.
    Your comment sparked a possible explanation for Nifong's continued pursuit of the case and the indictment of Evans, to wit: Nifong realizes that his case is a stretch and more likely in the dumper, but he can't dismiss it himself because he knows he will lose all credibility with the community (caving into Duke pressure, not believing a black woman, etc.), so he must forge ahead. But he does so with the hope that one of three things happen: (1) the AV/FA recants or refuses to cooperate; (2) the judge dismisses the case; or, (3) he takes it to trial and loses. In all of these scenarios, it is someone else that ends the case, not Nifong. This allows Nifong to still say to the community I tried and in the future you know I will prosecute these racially charged crime and not bow to Duke/elite pressures...I am the man for the community....I am your advocate. In order to facilitate these possible outcomes, Nifong must indict 3 players to show the community a certain level of credibility to the AV/FA and his belief of her. Evans is the only one available at this point (DNA figner nal & 90% ID). He knows it will piss off Dukies, but not the community. He also knows that it is a long shot given the lack of Evan's moustache, etc. The risk of falsely imprisoning Evans and Seligman are slim to none. Perhaps CF worries him a little, since Nifong does not know CF's alibi (my guess is that it is a slew of eye witnesses from the mexican restaurant), but Nifong doesn't have to worry about that right now. What he needs is time to allow the press coverage to die down, then when one of the three events occurs, it will come and go in one news cycle and be gone from the collective memories of America. The local wounds with Duke will heal because the AV/FA will end up a victim of society (poor, black single mother with alcohol problems) and the white, rich people's guilt will make them forgive her becasue she couldn't help it. Broadhead will help bail out Nifong with a white-guilt ridden, ultra-liberal Yalie PC speech.* Everyone forget about the harm done to CF, RS & DE because they were rich and white, so to quote Kim, "Hey guys, sorry." * Note: I'm a moderate democrat and I have never liked Broadhead.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#103)
    by squeaky on Tue May 16, 2006 at 03:51:14 PM EST
    Here is something odd:
    Seventeen years after it was withdrawn from U.S. markets, a synthetic version of the active ingredient in marijuana is going back on sale as a prescription treatment for the vomiting and nausea that often accompanies chemotherapy, its manufacturer said Tuesday...... ......The FDA last month said it does not support the use of marijuana for medical purposes.
    But where there is a dollar to be made... link via HuffPo

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#104)
    by weezie on Tue May 16, 2006 at 04:02:06 PM EST
    Kali, "...white, rich people's guilt" for what? No way are these people going to feel guilty of or about anything. Duke can try to persuade them not to go after the FA but it won't work since Duke decided to hang the players out to dry. The players and parents are rightly feeling abandoned. Whatever Brodhead says or does will have little impact on anything further in the legal process. Just my humble opinion.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#105)
    by squeaky on Tue May 16, 2006 at 04:03:22 PM EST
    Orinoco-I brought this over to the open thread.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#106)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 04:11:43 PM EST
    weezie wrote:
    "...white, rich people's guilt" for what?
    Geeez Weezie....don't you know, they have guilt for being white and rich....or they are supposed to have this guilty. If not, they are racist and elitist. It is the price you pay for too much success in America.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#107)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 04:19:08 PM EST
    Does anyone else think that had this happened at any other school, like U of W.VA, or Ohio State, that this would have been un-publicized? Why is it that it is big news, because it is Duke? Duke recruits players from all around the country just like every other school.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#108)
    by weezie on Tue May 16, 2006 at 04:19:49 PM EST
    OK, I hear you now Kali. But this case might be the one that delivers all those nervous white folks from their safe rooms. Man the battlements!

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#109)
    by weezie on Tue May 16, 2006 at 04:24:57 PM EST
    Wow, my daughter was at the Jan 10 party! Seemed pretty run of the mill to her.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#110)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 04:25:01 PM EST
    Subject: Mustache on JPEG of David Evans. OK, the photo is very grainy and inconclusive at best, but here goes. I ran the JPEG of David Evans through Adobe Phototshop, superimposed another closely matching one of David Evans one top, put them at the same scale, reduced the opacity to variable between 20% and 80% on the superimposed layer and looked for a match. On the blue helmeted JPEG there are 4 individual pinkish colored pixels of caucasian flesh tone immediately below the right nostril and just above the white face guard bar that almost certainly cannot be accounted for if David Evans had a mustache. The edge of his upper lip is too far below to maintain a mustache at or below the lip line at that spot. He would also have to shave well above the lip line slightly off center, but let the mustache grow below the lip line both toward the edge and in the center in order to achieve that. Given the four vague vertical line patterns in the light brownish area above the mouth, it could not be accounted for by simply by combing from the center to the side. This is especially true since the pinkness of the four pixels in question increases in intensity as they go away from the center toward the edge of the mouth. Combing center mustache hair to the side would produce just the opposite effect, as the bow in the combed hairs would produce a slight sag -- or darkness -- in that area, not an increase in pinkness. Pixels of a very light burnt umber color above the mouth in the area of the alleged mustache -- the shaded area -- are not consistent with a transitional color between pinkish colored skin and a dark brown to black colored beard of David Evans. Close up photos of David Evans at the interview show stubble in the mustache area to be the same color as that of stubble in all other shaved areas of the face -- i.e. dark brown to black. The top edge of the stubble line above the mouth is lower than the top line of the shaded area above the mouth in the JPEG, meaning he could not grow mustache hair in that shaded area. Conclusion: Bob is right -- to a 90% degree of certainty. No mustache. Signed: SLOphoto -- Photo analysis and digital photo restorations.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#111)
    by ding7777 on Tue May 16, 2006 at 04:37:41 PM EST
    to SLOphoto I'm just wondering if the orange coloring could be iodine applied to a bloody lip?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#112)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 04:43:15 PM EST
    Posted by ding7777 to SLOphoto I'm just wondering if the orange coloring could be iodine applied to a bloody lip?
    It could be any number of things. That would be one of them, yes.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#113)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Tue May 16, 2006 at 04:51:44 PM EST
    Okay, folks, bring up the picture of Evans in full gear and bring up a picture of him yesterday. In the picture of the man in the lacrosse gear there is a round, reddish brown circle around his mouth. Now look at yesterday's picture of Evans. When did Evans start dyeing his hair black? After he shaved off the mustache? Or after he shaved off the beard but before he shaved off the mustache? You know, I have pictures of my dog where he has demonic red eyes. Artifacts occur. Like I said, get a picture of Evans from the same period without the helmet on.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#114)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 05:03:29 PM EST
    For God's sake give up the mustache thing-it is going to sink the AV even more and it makes you all sound ridiculous.
    Well fine. I haven't mentioned the mustache thing once all day long -- until now. I watched as everybody talked about it all day long -- pure speculation -- was it or wasn't it? But nobody ever did any Photoshop analysis on the JPEG itself. So I finally did. So there it is. So that's it. Now there is no more needed on the mustache -- until we get a photo of the night of the party. That's what counts anyway.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#115)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 05:04:20 PM EST
    Bergs said:
    Why is it that it is big news, because it is Duke? Duke recruits players from all around the country just like every other school.
    Because, up to now, Duke has been squeeky clean. And (I'll admit) arrogant about "making it known" to athletic opponents, who steal, cheat, and, um, other things, not us. Can we move on from facial hair? We'll see the pics soon and I don't see how you can interpret anything with those helmets on (excellent computer analysis, tho).

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#116)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Tue May 16, 2006 at 05:14:12 PM EST
    Orinoco, Men and their facial hair is like women and their shoes. Or woman and her shoe. I found Kali's little essay on Nifong's dilemma mostly pretty good. Nifong could speed the process up a little by having one of his underlings grill the AV regarding all the problems with her story. If she cracks and confesses that it wasn't true, then it's over. If she still maintains her truthfulness and isn't completely exposed and then complains about her treatment, Nifong can blame it on the underling. My guess, though, is that Nifong doesn't want to speed up the process at all. He wants as much time as possible to pass as until he has to throw in the towel. Re: "white guilt." I don't think it's guilt to forgive someone. That doesn't mean that if someone commits a crime that they don't serve the time. My guess is that before all this is over we'll find out a lot more about the AV's mental history. Most women who end up in the sex trade have a large dossier of problems.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#117)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 05:23:39 PM EST
    SLOphoto wrote:
    Now there is no more needed on the mustache -- until we get a photo of the night of the party. That's what counts anyway.
    Don't forget that we need a photo from the 2005 Halloween party so itcan be determined whether or not DE, his roommates or anyone at the party had a fake moustache as part of their costume. If so, obviously, it was in the medicine cabinet and DE put it on during the gang rape and claimed he was Magnum PI.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#118)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 05:32:22 PM EST
    Hi Bob in P. You wrote,
    The problem with injecting class interests to attack the players and defend the AV is that is quite easily is flipped.
    Can you explain what you're talking about? What class issues? mmyy, You wrote:
    Since when does the New Black Panther become a reliable source of neutrality, fair-mindedness and embodiment of justice?
    I didn't suggest that Evans reach out to the Black Panthers because they are fair-minded. I suggested that he speak to them because they are the group that understand his position the least. They consider him guilty, evil, and a symbol of what is wrong with white people. That's an important opinion to overcome. People respect courage. Look how much stronger Evans looked defending himself (briefly and in a controlled environment) than, say Finnerty, who looked like a deer in the headlights! 7Duke4 was impressed, she writes. Was she impressed by Finnerty? You wrote:
    What about you, PB? Or, even after the trial, IF the players are acquitted, you'll still join the crowd to say that they are acquitted not because of they are not proven guilty but because their ability to acquire better legal representation?
    I don't believe the defendants are guilty. That's not my position. My position is that the accuser deserves a fair trial as do we all. I don't believe that global warming is within ten years of the tipping point either, but I believe the proposal has enough merit that it should be a topic of intense public debate. Does that make me a fundamentalist? gmx wrote:
    Who said Evans should go sit down with the New Black Panthers? Are you kidding? If not that might be a candidate for the most ridiculous post, and that would be an accomplishment in and of itself.
    Seriously, you are aware of numerous reports that NBP carry concealed weapons, correct?
    Yes. I applied for a concealed weapon permit, but I couldn't get one. I was deemed mentally unsuitable to conceal my weapon. So I have to carry mine out in the open. I actually like the Black Panthers, although some of the things they were quoted as saying struck me as bad policy. I was hoping they would get to interview the players, but I guess the players weren't up to it. I'd much rather spend time talking racial history with them than with, say, you. Gunshy wrote:
    Yeah, that one was really out there.
    Thanks, Gunshy. I regard courage and kindness as two of the most cherished values. You may not exhibit much courage, but that's the kindest thing you've said all day.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#119)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 05:37:17 PM EST
    to Hues Several points. Not a very small legal community if you include Raleigh, where Cheshire and Smith practice. Triangle has close to a million people. On the substance, word is that some of the defense may have already filed bar complaints under the "duty to report." Bar could take it up on its own, given the case's notoriety. Even the Duke City manager is having to make statements regarding his possible interference in the case. The comments from counsel like" I've known Nifong 25 years and he won't take my call" signal a change in the way this game will be played to me. If it were going to be played in the old fashioned way, those kind of statements wouldn't be in the press. It's already very, very personal for the lawyers. On what Nifong will do, I agree with Kali...no way he can back down now, and he can only hope for a reprieve from an evidentiary ruling, the withdrawal of the accused, etc.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#120)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 05:54:10 PM EST
    Localone, what would be the fallout if Nifong had lost his bid for re-election, or rather election? Would he be out on the street with no job & no pension, or would he go back to being an asst DA? If the former, would he lose his health insurance?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#121)
    by azbballfan on Tue May 16, 2006 at 06:19:57 PM EST
    del
    Would he be out on the street with no job & no pension, or would he go back to being an asst DA? If the former, would he lose his health insurance?
    Excellent point, localone may have more info, but since Nifong did fire the gal who came in second, chances are he'd get fired.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#122)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 06:21:02 PM EST
    Bean said:
    Also, someone on the last thread actually said his wife couldnt' be a racist because she was Asian.
    That's not what I said. I said that she used that claim as a foil to the student's accusation. Both she and I know that people of any race can be racist.
    Soooo funny.
    Well, it was funny in a way, because so many people sling the racist epithet around as a way to privilege their claims and their POV. Of course, what is really interesting is that DoJ statistics demonstrate, for example, that Chinese, Japanese and Koreans (east Asians) have a lower propensity for crime than whites. I'm glad my daughters are half chinese. I counsel them all the time not to leave parties in the company of males who have consumed alcohol, not to leave bars in NY after closing time, and to be very careful of frat boys!

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#123)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Tue May 16, 2006 at 06:26:04 PM EST
    My father had black hair and a burnt orange/light auburn mustache. His mother had hair the same color as David Evan's mother. Evans family

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#124)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 07:15:52 PM EST
    IMHO Wrote:
    His mother had hair the same color as David Evan's mother.
    You are an inteligent person, you should know that this day in age a woman's true hair color is only known to her. Extreme example: raven haired Elvira is actually a blonde. Note: this is a lighthearted post, no need to banter about women's hair color ad naseum.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#125)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 07:15:57 PM EST
    I'd much rather spend time talking racial history with them than with, say, you. Dont let the door hit you in the ass on your way out of here. Better leave word with someone when you go so they can alert authorities if you dont show back soon.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#126)
    by weezie on Tue May 16, 2006 at 07:19:21 PM EST
    Kali, you beat me to the answer about Mrs. Evans hair. You are a smart one!

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#127)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 07:20:22 PM EST
    Isn't amazing the passions and purpose this topic has aroused in us all? From time to time, (usually about the time I hear myself SCREAMING at my television, at Nancy Grace, or Rita Cosby, or my most despised and so most frequent target, "former sex crimes prosecutor" Wendy Murphy) when I listen to discussions about this case on television, I know it is time for me to take a step back, take some time away from following this case. Maybe it is like this for some of you: I have, myself, crossed the line. I am no longer patiently waiting for the truth, I am actively looking for information that will support what I want the truth to be, and discounting anything to the contrary. As just about everyone noted when the news of this case first broke in the media, this story has all the ingredients for a perfect storm, and the winds and the rains, the thunder and the lightning, the sturm and drang is there. Race, class, education, power, vulnerability, privilege, guilt. I know that if I search my soul, as the saying goes, I can see that this case goes beyond my love for Duke and my time there, what it meant in my life. I've tried to be open about my prejudices in this case: Duke grad, mother of a son who very easily could have been one of those guys at a party like that, could be one of those guys charged, insofar as the profiles of the accused goes. (BTW, my son's claim of "privilege" comes from his father and his family, not from me or mine. My mother was so liberal, and my family so middle class, my side of my son's family tree does NOT fit the profile.) My abiding feeling, at this point, is wishing that the night in question had never happened, that the elements that would set off the perfect storm had never come together. But, "If only . . ." doesn't do much good, does it? I hope none of us who post here ever lose sight of the fact that what we are debating, what we are dissecting, what we are spending our time talking about are intellectual exercises, for the most part, for us. I know I was looking for a forum in which to vent my frustrations and to pose my questions about this case. But (and yes, I am going to use her first name for several reasons: one, first and foremost, calling her the "AV" or "the accuser" or the "FA" or the dancer or the stripper, or even the victim, depersonalizes her; two, my using of her first name in no way puts her identity at risk; and three, if we can all be told of all sorts of details of the accused/defendant's lives, and their parents' lives, I don't think a first name is too much to reveal) for Crystal and her family, for the Duke students and their families, this is beyond serious. No matter what the truth is, this is a hell of a nightmare, a nightmare of hell, for them. We can quibble over mustaches, about the terms of a military discharge, about a timeline, or about a statistical probablility. How nice, for us all, that we have that distance from the ugliness of this story, no matter what the truth of it all is. I am not saying that this case should not be discussed, far from that. But I am, after my hiatus from even reading the posts here, more securely back in my, "I don't want her to have lied, but I don't want them to have done what she said, either." And until I know more, all I can do is suppose, and speculate, and wonder if we will ever know the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#128)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 07:24:04 PM EST
    azbball: did I just see you say "Excellent point, localone may have more info, but since Nifong did fire the gal who came in second, chances are he'd get fired. The gal???????? THE GAL!?!?!? Jesus, az, I'm 51, and even I know that in this day and age, you do NOT use that term. Jeez.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#129)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 07:27:01 PM EST
    Orinoco: Great link on that story. At least that judge showed some sense. No time on the calendar to try the rape case because Nifong is going to violate all the other citation/misdemeanor violations on the team.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#131)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 07:36:51 PM EST
    I think Kali and LocalOne are on-point with regard to Nifong's actions. Note his "press release." He could have labeled it, "mission accomplished." Like most people on the board, I'm still in evidence-gathering mode, though it's interesting to note that all the parties involved, including the AV, Nifong, the players, and the defense have staked-out extreme positions. The AV claims rape (not out of control lap dancing, or whatever). Nifong claims a terrible crime has been committed (not a crime may have been committed and not any little crimes) The players say no-sex occurred (not consensual sex may have occurred). The defense attorneys say no plea bargain (and Nifong should be disbarred or whatever). I don't think Nifong has any hidden evidence or an "ace up his sleeve." The rape kit, toxicology, etc. are not things the defense can do anything about - thus, I think he would have disclosed any information about these items if they helped his case. With regard to "flipping" a player, that doesn't seem likely either - in part Nifong (or someone) was still trying to pressure the players to cut a deal with the DA's office as late as last week, by leaking the "good news from the DNA" through the father - when, in fact, it was anything but "good news" for the prosecution. Further, why would he have placed such importance (at least initially) on the DNA results if he had a corrobarating witness. And after the DNA came back negative or non-conclusive the first time, why would anyone flip then? While I'm trying to remain open minded, does anyone think that Seligmann, Finnerty and Evans form a good "rape team." It doesn't make much sense that those three guys would hook-up - Evans was embarrassed about even hiring the strippers (I believe he didn't give his real name). He knew THAT was wrong...and Seligmann couldn't get out the door fast enough once the initial dance scene got ugly....he left so fast that Evans couldn't even remember him (nor could Kim). Further, while polygraphs may not be admissible as evidence, would a guilty person volunteer to take one from the police! Would anyone on the board volunteer to take a polygraph?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#132)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 07:48:44 PM EST
    GMax, You wrote:
    Dont let the door hit you in the ass on your way out of here. Better leave word with someone when you go so they can alert authorities if you dont show back soon.
    You're really afraid of the Black Panthers? What a way to live! Sharon writes:
    I don't think a first name is too much to reveal
    Aren't you nice. As Lincoln usd to say, wit malice toward none.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#133)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 07:55:51 PM EST
    Orinoco, You will win more friends with honey than you do with vinegar. Cheers!

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#134)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 08:18:09 PM EST
    Is anyone else struck by the allegation similarities, prosecution behavior and press coverage between this case and the Darryl Littlejohn case? Iinnocent until proven guilty seemed to be tossed by the wayside there and I haven't seen anything similar to the flip from vilifying the defendant(s) to vivesecting the victim/AV in that case (let me be clear in light of my initial post: neither attack is appropriate in either case). If someone knows a place where this sort of inquiry is taking place re Littlejohn, a heads up would be much appreciated.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#135)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Tue May 16, 2006 at 08:30:41 PM EST
    Kalidoggie posted:
    You are an inteligent person, you should know that this day in age a woman's true hair color is only known to her.
    What if I________~ ~ were to tell______0 0 you I've seen____ ^ her in the________O buff?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#136)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 08:40:07 PM EST
    Or*n*c*, You wrote:
    You think a semi-Jewish person should meet an anti-semitic hate group (according to Southern Poverty Law Center and the ADL)
    Is David Evans "semi-Jewish" or are you a LIAR, sir!!!!! You wrote:
    You are a joke and have lost all credibility on this board.
    Glad you're back, Or*n*c*. I was worried that you had a life.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#137)
    by Lora on Tue May 16, 2006 at 08:45:06 PM EST
    Rogan, I don't understand your suspicions. I've always been up front with my posts. But, here goes: If the individual players give a credible account of the night's events that don't include anything that would support an attack and rape as the AV described, and it holds up under cross on trial, and there is no other significant evidence against the three indicted players, then there is reasonable doubt. Very reasonable doubt, and they should be found not guilty. I will rejoice for them in that case, and I will feel terrible for all that they endured, and hope they can somehow be recompensed for what they've been through. Rogan, I've said a shorter version of this before. I hope that you won't question my motives again. If all the medical, psychological, and eyewitness evidence supports a fresh, forcible, traumatic rape and assault on the AV, as I believe the available "snippets" do show, I want to know who did it and bring the perp or perps to justice. I argue strongly that the AV did not want, nor would any woman want (wait, wait, I know exceptions must exist -- somewhere there must be women who willingly consent to being brutalized) to be treated in that manner. Who did it then, and if it happened before, how do you explain her being able to dance and act normally at the beginning? If all the medical, psychological, and eyewitness evidence falls apart and do not support the AV's description of happened, then at that time I will agree that she somehow managed to put on a convincing act and invented an amazing story, so she could go into hiding and misery for months, looking for revenge or that big payoff, thinking up details like whose DNA might be found on her nails, making sure to scatter her fake nails around to make it look like there was a struggle, adding that "mustache" thing to throw everybody off, and even sitting in the bathroom for half an hour putting on pink nail polish, all while impaired out of her gourd.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#138)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 08:51:24 PM EST
    IMHO wrote:
    What if I________~ ~ were to tell______0 0 you I've seen____ ^ her in the________O buff?
    Your grandma or Evan's mom? "...if the cuffs match the collars..."

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#139)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Tue May 16, 2006 at 08:52:57 PM EST
    PB posted:
    Glad you're back, Or*n*c*. I was worried that you had a life.
    That never crossed my mind.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#140)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 08:57:10 PM EST
    Started out answering beenaround, now I see other responses, so I will try to answer all. Thanks, Orinoco, for the vouching, but I will try to answer them myself. Shaking my head, realizing some of you just don't get it. I have, as I said earlier, been away. Let me catch up with my messages.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#141)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Tue May 16, 2006 at 09:01:39 PM EST
    PB, please call them by the correct name. The New Black Panthers. The real Black Panthers actually used to reach out to other progressive groups back in the sixties before the FBI shot most of their leaders. These guys are in no danger from The Man. They're doing his work.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#142)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Tue May 16, 2006 at 09:05:21 PM EST
    Kalidoggie asked:
    Your grandma or Evan's mom?
    heh heh. You're pretty funny, Kali.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#143)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 09:05:58 PM EST
    Okay, tell me how using her fist name harms her. I guess you have discounted my honest explanation: and, please hear me. Let me say this again. Give the woman a name. Personalize her. She is not the "AV." She is not the Alleged Victim, she is a person. She is not the "FA." She is not the False Accuser. Please tell me how I am violating her by calling her by her first name? Yes, yes, yes, I DO believe the Duke students/lacrosse players/ take your pick or description, it doesn't matter to me, more than I do her. But give her a name, give her her first name. Personalize her, for goodness' sake. Tell me how my using her first name does her the slightest bit of damage.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#144)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 09:07:12 PM EST
    Thanks to all of you for continuing to share your thoughts on the case. A new Duke thread is here...Comments are closing here.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Open Thread (none / 0) (#145)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 09:10:09 PM EST
    The "old" Black Panthers, from what I read, have disavowed the youngsters. Said it before, saying it again, the family rejecting them is one of the few things from this case that give me hope for humanity.

    Duke Lacrosse Open Thread | 143 comments (143 topical)