home

A Civil Suit in the Duke Case?

By TChris, Section Duke Lacrosse
Posted on Tue May 16, 2006 at 07:44:34 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

by TChris

People who are injured by the design or neglect of another are entitled to seek redress in civil court, but most crime victims wait for the criminal prosecution to resolve before they consider civil remedies. Eyebrows raise when an alleged crime victim is eager to pursue civil remedies. The prospect of a cash settlement can be a powerful incentive to embellish or fabricate a criminal accusation, and questions about the credibility and bias of a complainant who has a financial stake in her accusation are sure to arise.

The mother of the accuser in the Duke case says she is "very interested" in retaining a high profile civil litigator for her daughter. This story says the lawyer in question is playing the role of "family adviser" and hasn't spoken to the alleged victim.

Nicknamed "the Giant Killer," attorney Willie E. Gary is a litigator renowned for winning huge settlements. In 1995, for example, Gary won a $500 million verdict against the funeral home company Loewen Group on a contract claim that was worth less than $10 million; the award was almost 20 times the damages requested by plaintiffs.

Perhaps hoping for similar legal magic (according to media reports, all three defendants come from backgrounds of considerable wealth and privilege), the parents of the accuser met with Gary in April. ...

Clearly, her parents wish to explore a civil proceeding. Gary is conspicuously available. Mark Simeon -- the attorney for Kim Roberts -- the "2nd stripper" at the alleged rape scene -- also wants a civil suit.

< Tony Snow's First Press Conference | Verizon Denies Released Phone Records to Government >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? | 165 comments (165 topical)
    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#1)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Tue May 16, 2006 at 08:45:19 PM EST
    Gee, when I saw the headline I thought, What's the point of these guys suing the AV? Well, if a rape was committed, a civil suit is appropriate. I'm guessing that there's not going to be a payoff for the AV. Or Roberts, either. If this case falls apart, as it seems to be doing, the defense now has reason to go for blood. You thought it was rough so far, now it gets real ugly. And past criminal records, past assault claims. Whew! Now here's the answer to why the AV had a reason to lie about a rape.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 08:47:22 PM EST
    Gloria Allred the ambulance chaser?

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#3)
    by Lora on Tue May 16, 2006 at 08:52:34 PM EST
    OK, is Nifong bad? If he's incompetent and has utterly jeopardized the case as so many here have said, then how can you blame the AV if her mother seeks another avenue for justice?

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#4)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Tue May 16, 2006 at 09:10:49 PM EST
    Lora, In a civil case just about everything comes in. Then we can find out about her mental illness last year, we can find out all details about her past charges against other men. We can find out the details about how she was kicked out of the navy. We can expect to hear all about her one-on-ones. It'll be even more entertaining than the criminal trial.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#5)
    by chew2 on Tue May 16, 2006 at 09:11:32 PM EST
    TChris, Shame on you. You link to Wendy McElroy a conservative "feminist" on Fox, who is pushing her own conservative agenda. She is commenting on an old Essence magazine article, that was discussed by me and many others, including TL, a month ago. Jesse Jackson put the family in touch with Gary. There has been no news about Gary since that Essence article. There is no news that the AV has ever met with him. So weeks later, McElroy with no new evidence wants to spin the gold digging false accuser story. And you fall for it hook line and sinker. This is the same Wendy McElroy who mistated research by Scheck and Neufeld of the Innocense Project to come up with a bogus claim that up to 25% of rape claims are false and the rape never occurred. That claim was publicized by Fox News also. Show some integrity.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 09:18:58 PM EST
    Sharon,
    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.
    You were the one who made the argument that nobody should be allowed to publish the Duke boys names, am I right about that? Did you write her and ask whether she thought there was any harm in using her first name? Or did you just unilaterally decide "oh, what harm would it do. Let's humanize her." Will anyone here feel the slightest shame if it is ever proven that this woman in fact was raped at that party? Because I'll tell you right now, none of you seem like people who would.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 09:21:38 PM EST
    LOVE you Bob, but don't agree. Then realized I better read the article. Just did, and I feel sicker than I did ever before. The one element missing, the one element that I prayed would not come into play was the civil suit talked about before the criminal case has had a chance to move forward. Now, the public revelations about the appraised value of the players' families homes? Someone here, PLEASE, tell me the relevance of that.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 09:21:55 PM EST
    This might be a thread late Orinico I guess you didn't get my point. I know she's dead and that is a crime. As far as I know, Littlejohn hasn't been convicted. What strikes me, and apparently escapes you, is that the investigators and prosecutors threw his face and name to the press prior to any charges, there is some confusion about the late night circumstances surrounding the crime, some indication of witnesses supporting the prosecution's case who may be vulnerable to credibility challenges, and DNA (given, according to press reports, Littlejohn's DNA issues are more problematic than the Duke men. Striking differences are the race/class of the accused and that Littlejohn is represented by a public defender (and is unlikely to be able to mount the kind of close examination of physical evidence that people with substantial resources, e.g. Michael Jackson can.) Your position seems to be that there is no basis for comparison because one is a crime and the other isn't. While I can see your reasoning, it seems as premature as saying the three men charged are guilty. I do enjoy speculation or I wouldn't be here, but I'd like to keep my options open. If anyone has thoughts on the comparison between these cases or a reference to some speculation on Littlejohn, I'd be interested. Orinoco, thanks for your insight.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 09:29:36 PM EST
    PB: Sitting here, shaking my head. Ok, let me respond, point by point: Yes, I used the name Crystal. How did I learn this name? Public knowledge, the wonders of the internet. Did I use her last name? No. And, no, I did not say that the names of the accused should be hidden, not even their faces. Just not OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER, as the lead pic for every story about this case. I will leave it for the rest of the posters to sit in judgment of my use of her name. But I would love to hear you explain to me how I have harmed her. By repeating her first name, after it has been published online, and spoken on air? What problem do you have with giving her a name, a name that will do nothing to hurt her any more than she has already been hurt? Do you think, do you really think, that she is so fragile that the mere mention of her first name will hurt her? Do you really think that calling her by name will hurt her?

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#10)
    by james on Tue May 16, 2006 at 09:41:47 PM EST
    The AV's name is used both on national TV and on some local publications (mostly small ones). Photos with her face blurred have also been shown - I know Tucker put them on his show. Kim Roberts has said that she should be able to profit from her story to 'feed [her] kid' while saying 3 sentences earlier that she stole 25k for no apparent reason since '[I] had a good job'. (N&O) Umm, yah those two match up great. I doubt much is going to come out of the criminal case besides a dismissal or not guilty verdict but sure, she'd win a civil suit. All sorts of irrelevant stuff will come in. Which is stupid because the kids don't really have that much money. She's a gold digger, yes, but you're looking in the WRONG PLACE. She will sue Duke because the alleged rape happened on DUKE PROPERTY and concerns players whose conduct the university was aware of and failed to take adaquate action. Seriously, let's not overlook that the place is Duke property that was leased to 3 players. On a side note, the property was purchased by Duke as part of a kind of 'buffer' buying program to appease the locals who disliked the noise/proximity to campus.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 09:45:20 PM EST
    They always talk about how rape victims get raped twice. The first time by some assailant and the second time figuratively by the justice system. This website, for all its "liberal" themes, is pretty much a magnet for the people who have an interest in that second "figurative" rape. Gangs of prurient, intrusive, and malicious louts preying on the vulnerable anonymously with little fear of liability. It's a sport really. All that's missing is the broom. Was there a first rape? I don't know. And I've read pretty much everything all of you have read. Will you catch me joining in the second rape? No thanks. Sometimes the fact that there's no I in T-E-A-M is a good thing.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 09:51:19 PM EST
    Here is an article I read about Willie Gary's meeting with the accuser. PB, Of course bringing up issues of public concern to discuss does not make one fundamentalist. However, if someone told me that "as a woman, you should not doubt the AV," that would be suspicious. It is making argument based on personal identity. I'd be interested in knowing what part of racial history you would like to talk to the Panthers. Are you going to tell them that reverse racism is also a kind of racism? (btw, when you talk about "racial history," are you going to tell only the white over black, or are you going to tell about the relationship between other non-whites such as early Asian railway workers and current immigrant issues?) Don't you think that the Panthers are also exploiting the case to boost their own publicity? The AV's family declined their offer for protection, but they still took the opportunity to insert themselves into the show. Do you think that the way they rode on the opportunity is fair to the AV's family who do not want them to be there and get involved? I hope the AV will get a fair trial, too, and so will the players. It is exactly because there are so many Afro-American defendents wrongly jailed that we don't want to see more people wrongly jailed or falsely accused. Now we've seen how Nifong prosecutes his case. If he could treat the Duke players this way now, he could treat other Afro-American defendents in the same way in the future (since he now has had "precedence"). We all know what went wrong in the past; however, a better way to redress the past would be to ensure that the system could be fair for all. Jason Whitlock wrote an very wise and intelligent commentary on this case and I admire him a lot for having written it.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 09:55:28 PM EST
    Sharon wrote:
    What problem do you have with giving her a name, a name that will do nothing to hurt her any more than she has already been hurt? Do you think, do you really think, that she is so fragile that the mere mention of her first name will hurt her? Do you really think that calling her by name will hurt her?
    You know, I think of all those photographers snapping pictures of Princess Di as she lay dying in an automobile accident. And one of those photographers, the last of them to get there, late to the party, might well have been reluctant to start snapping. And he said "What harm am I doing. All the pictures are already taken. It's going to be all over the news anyway." And I think of Princess Di seeing that guy snapping away, and I ask myself, what did she think of him. I don't think she thought he was a good person. And that's how I feel about you.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 09:59:58 PM EST
    Sharon, I disagree to call the accuser by her first name. If you want to use a name, let's just make one up or use the first name in her dancer-pseudonym. I don't think it is right that because the names of accused is widely distributed, we should do the same to the accuser, too. Ideally, both sides should be kept secret. Somehow I think over the discussion of this case, seeing how the accused are hurt by their names being publicized before the trial, we should head for the better direction to ensure the names of both sides are concealed, rather than going backward to have a second though about protecting rape victim's identity.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 10:02:33 PM EST
    Let's imagine for a moment that there was no rape at the frat house that night. If so, who is being raped by the legal system?

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#16)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Tue May 16, 2006 at 10:54:19 PM EST
    Most of people posting [here: DUKEOBSRVR.COM] claim to be Duke students, I hope it's not true.
    Uhhhh, yeah. Duke students have no need for sympathy from the Durham community. We had, in my case, and continue to have no need of anything from the Durham community but a chance to get through 4 years without being assaulted or falsely accused of a crime. We'd all be very happy to have no interaction with a good deal of the Durham community. The University itself has quite enough for all its students, the vast majority of which will go on to endeavors and communities far superior to those that can be found in Durham.* As for the Lax players, they simple took to extremes what every other Duke student knows intuitively. ** Almost all Duke students are polite, considerate and generally plesant to everyone they encounter, but none of them have any reason to consider, even for a second, the sympathies of the Durham community, nor do they need them.
    **********
    Is there any reason to think that this woman is intelligent enough to have thought about the possible obstacles/implications of accusing, falsely or otherwise, and convicting a group of Duke students. Can someone defend NCCU as being anything more than a glorified trade school? ** Why are we to assume this woman, who strips/prostitutes herself for a living and has previously attempted to rundown a cop with a stolen taxi, is intelligent enough to fully comprehend this situation.
    **********
    Nigel, I don't know about the trade school thing, but Dukie is an idiot for asking if everyone at Duke must be smarter than everyone at NCCU. I'm sorry, but if you are an intelligent minority, schools are more than happy to make up for your financial shortcomings to get you there. NCCU is a low grade state school. They might not all be absolute idiots, but if you line up 20 people (even lets say black people)***, and ask someone to find the Duke students, I suspect you could. [by 20 people I mean 10 NCCU and 10 Duke students, sorry.]
    * Yikes! I thought 7duke4 already graduated. ** I don't know what the writer means, but it gives me a very bad feeling. ** To borrow a phrase from Or*n*c*, "WOW." *** ((Cringe)) In the interest of being sort of fair and somewhat balanced:
    Dukeobsrvr may be pleased to hear this, but a large cross-section of this country is reading blog comment threads like these. Use your intelligence to show people the character and sense of community that I have seen in the vast majority of Duke students - in fact, where is the high profile blog in support of the LAX players???
    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 11:05:19 PM EST
    mmyy, You wrote:
    I'd be interested in knowing what part of racial history you would like to talk to the Panthers.
    I'm mostly interested in what they have to say. Although I'm happy to talk about what you want to talk about as well, if you need an emissary. I have plenty to say as well, but it doesn't belong here. You wrote:
    Don't you think that the Panthers are also exploiting the case to boost their own publicity? The AV's family declined their offer for protection, but they still took the opportunity to insert themselves into the show. Do you think that the way they rode on the opportunity is fair to the AV's family who do not want them to be there and get involved?
    Sure, they're self-promoting. As far as their being fair to the family, it's sort of hard to compare them to Or*n*co* or Bean, though, isn't it? The New Black Panthers are the least of the family's problems.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 16, 2006 at 11:21:59 PM EST
    J. Pierpont Flathead,
    Let's imagine for a moment that there was no rape at the frat house that night. If so, who is being raped by the legal system?
    Guilty or innocent, the defendants will be figuratively raped by the justice system. No need to imagine there was no rape. Trials are non-consensual even for the guilty.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 17, 2006 at 12:15:39 AM EST
    PB said:
    This is the same Wendy McElroy who mistated research by Scheck and Neufeld of the Innocense Project to come up with a bogus claim that up to 25% of rape claims are false and the rape never occurred.
    Shame on you PB. You seem to have a problem reading. She never claimed that 25% of rape claims were false. She claimed that they were a combination of false claims and incorrect identifications.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#20)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 17, 2006 at 12:23:39 AM EST
    beenaround,
    Shame on you PB.
    My head is bowed, and I feel tremendous self-esteem problems coming on right now, except for one small detail. I didn't actually write that one. Not that I would have gotten it right had I read it.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#21)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Wed May 17, 2006 at 12:30:49 AM EST
    beenaround posted:
    Shame on you PB. You seem to have a problem reading. She never claimed that 25% of rape claims were false. She claimed that they were a combination of false claims and incorrect identifications.
    beenaround, Don't let Or*n*c* catch you "red handed" making an honest mistake, he'll brand you "A LIAR!"

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#22)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Wed May 17, 2006 at 01:05:41 AM EST
    *Charges that some of the players used false names and called each other by jersey numbers. *Charges some of the players used false team affilations (baseball team and track team). *Dancers ordered under a false name and false pretenses - why did Adam (Dan) pretend it was a bachelor party for five guys? Were they hoping a small party for guys a bit older would prevent the agency from sending a bouncer? A false mustache doesn't sound so preposterous when all things are considered. 'The Abrams Report' for May 15
    ABRAMS: Right. Larry, look, you're also a criminal justice expert.
    KOBILINSKY: Yes.
    ABRAMS: You're not just a forensic expert...
    KOBILINSKY: Yes.
    ABRAMS: She says the guy had a mustache.
    KOBILINSKY: Right. Well...
    ABRAMS: She said she was 90 percent sure. If they can show he did not have a mustache at that time, case over against him, right?
    KOBILINSKY: Well, Dan, actually, you know people can wear false mustaches...
    ABRAMS: OK. Fine.
    O.K. Fine. hahahahaha! I love it when Dan builds up his expert's credentials, leads him down the path and then BAM! The expert says the exact opposite of what Dan wants to hear. It also happened with the ex-FBI digital photo expert that said the time stamps and sequence of the photos could be changed and even an expect could not detect it. Both times, the look on Dan's face was priceless, his eyes narrowed and his jaw set, as he delivered his curt, "O.K. Fine."

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#23)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 17, 2006 at 02:10:44 AM EST
    IMHO: By the tone of your post above here, I guess you have answered my question. Given the kind of gloating cruelty you sometimes seem to revel in, perhaps it was too much of me to ask you in the name of common charity for a post about what you are faulting David Evans for at this point. Or perhaps relent and admit that maybe you might have been a little too harsh on him -- all things considered. But that's not how you chose to spend your time today. I am deeply saddened by it. I had hoped for something much more dignified than that coming from someone of your stature. But I guess it was not meant to be. Good night.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#24)
    by azbballfan on Wed May 17, 2006 at 02:23:14 AM EST
    SharonInJax You are the second female who went atomic on my using "gal". I happen to frequently use "guy" and "gal". When playing basketball I also frequently use "dude". I'm a staunch progressive and push harder for results to help those who have previously been oppressed. I grew up the only white kid in an all black neighborhood and could care less what you call someone as long as you treat them with respect. When in decision making positions, I've personally advocated promoting women in order to help them better represent their base. However, I draw the line at the whole PC crap that doesn't allow us to use popular colloquialisms. Personally I've found that most females who are offended by the term "gal" are just populist feminists (read: strawfeminists) or closet mysandrists. To both classes, I say - get a real life and a real life and an honest opinion.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#25)
    by azbballfan on Wed May 17, 2006 at 02:36:19 AM EST
    IMHO, Good post on the Duke website blog. Unfortunately, my own experience with Duke started with the three people from my class who went there. All three were good friends from the classes we shared. Two were open minded folk who later shyed away from admitting they went to Duke. The third was a clear closet racist. She always had some sly underhanded insult for the one black guy in our graduating class. (Just so people don't get confused by my posts, until I was 15, I was the only white kid in an all black classs. Then I moved to almost the opposite situation. We only had one black guy (dude)) Anyway, the third gal (sorry Sharon) who went to Duke clearly wanted to belong to some "special" club. The only problem was that the entire senior class knew she cheated more than anyone and her mom was on the PTA and sucked up to the teachers. Luckily the "gal" in question did not receive favorable grades from our teachers, but certainly got a letter or two. Just ran into her last year and got an eeirie feeling when she told me how proud she was for going to Duke. (Sorry, it was clearly because she didn't have to 'associate' with the other crowd.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#26)
    by azbballfan on Wed May 17, 2006 at 02:42:15 AM EST
    IMHO:
    Don't let Or*n*c* catch you "red handed" making an honest mistake, he'll brand you "A LIAR!"
    More importantly don't let them defray your questions about specifics by making spurrious claims about lying. I do beleive there are four or five specific claims which have not been substantiated. Ahh, tactics, tactics, tactics.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#27)
    by azbballfan on Wed May 17, 2006 at 03:22:12 AM EST
    Orinoco, Seriously, you openly called me a "liar" for stating that the defense has leaked information to the press. I clearly provided at least four instances of the defense team leaking information to the press. On Monday, the defense team openly discussed providing more leaks to the press. You proposed that the press had successfully unsealed a warrant. This is the third time I'm asking you to identify this warrant. You have not answered these requests. I'm not saying that the press did not unseal a warrant. I am saying you claim they did but cannot identity what warrant they unsealed. I've only seen references to "attempts" of the press to unseal warrants. I look forward to your response. (for the fourth time)

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#28)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 17, 2006 at 05:55:23 AM EST
    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/05/breathing_while_white.html /article in the Orlando paer regarding the whole sorry mess this is and will continue.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#29)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 17, 2006 at 06:16:51 AM EST
    I had a case against Willie Gary. He can be very effective, but he also can lose focus because he just sees the forest and not the trees. There are many things that could derail a case here, both civll and criminal. Gary flies in his own personal plane called "Wings of Justice." You get the picture. Here are a couple of thoughts in response to what's been asked re Nifong. If he had lost the PRIMARY, he would have stayed in office until November or maybe January when the Democratic candidate Freda Black presumably would have won. There's no good blood between them. He would have had plenty of time to get another position, probably on the defense side, maybe in the Attorney General's staff, etc. As I see it, if there is a trial, it will be very very difficult for the accuser ( Sharon, I'm with you on this) to withstand cross examination and I have predicted that she will not to go through with it. Actually, I also predict that one of the other men whose DNA was taken will turn out to have interesting evidence. The defense will also scorch the earth on the other rape charge from her past, find those men, discredit her twice. If there are 3 men recently whose identities she presumably gave to the DA because they might be sources of the male DNA found, any one of them, the boyfriend included, could turn on her, or at least paint her as someone who had numerous partners in a short period of time. this alone, presumably would not make the boyfriend happy. Maybe I'm wrong, though. Again, not trying to say that affects in any way whether she was raped. It is very very tough for her credibility. Combined with everything else, cross will be brutal. If she gets through it, I think it will be hard even to win a civil case. Nifong will shoulder on as long as he has to, and then his 15 minutes will be over. My two cents.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#30)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 17, 2006 at 06:38:09 AM EST
    Oops. Make that Nifong will "soldier" on.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#31)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Wed May 17, 2006 at 06:38:51 AM EST
    SLOphoto posted:
    IMHO:
    By the tone of your post above here, I guess you have answered my question.
    No, I haven't. I literally fell asleep a few hours ago while answering it - your post is quite good, but my reply is not - I'm still working on it. SLOphoto posted:
    Given the kind of gloating cruelty you sometimes seem to revel in, perhaps it was too much of me to ask you in the name of common charity for a post about what you are faulting David Evans for at this point. Or perhaps relent and admit that maybe you might have been a little too harsh on him -- all things considered. But that's not how you chose to spend your time today.
    I started answering you several times yesterday, but kept getting sidetracked by other half finished posts I had here on my desktop. I also did a fair amount of goofing off. "the gloating cruelty you sometimes seem to revel in" *ouch* That Dan Abrams post was not meant to be a gloat about the case, my target was very narrow - Dan Abrams. I didn't even mean it to be a gloat, but I did take delight in his dismay, so I guess it fits the definition. I don't know if you've seen any of his interviews on this case, but his performance is a sight to behold. I'm surprised colleagues have not pulled him aside to tell say, "Dan, your 'reporting' of this case is stunningly biased. Why are you are throwing your credibility down the crapper?" Though I'm thinking Abrams must know this, but is enjoying fighting the good fight for his alma mater and his insider status with the defense, almost as much as he is enjoying his good ratings. Credibility is so over-rated theses days, anyway. SLOphoto posted:
    I am deeply saddened by it. I had hoped for something much more dignified than that coming from someone of your stature. But I guess it was not meant to be.
    I wouldn't describe my postings here as dignified nor would it occur to me that they would result in my achieving any kind of stature. If you are serious about being disappointed that I haven't answered sooner, I do apologize. I have been thinking about your question while finishing up other posts and wasting time on frivolous posts. There is still plenty of mystery surrounding what all went on that night, but what keeps me interested in this case is the part the defense lawyers are playing - their influence on the players' decisions to not come forward. Maybe Dan Evans is an example of one that has finally disregarded his lawyers advice. I'm off now to think more about David Evans.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#32)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Wed May 17, 2006 at 06:43:04 AM EST
    SLOphoto: IMHO was making jokes about my charred stumps yesterday. A real delightful person, eh? I find all the Duke-bashing beside the point and pretty boring. +++ I do think that every time her mom or dad says something the AV looks worse. I would not doubt that the AV is looking for a civil suit. Can't imagine that Roberts has a basis for a civil suit. The problem I see with this whole mess is that it's ultimately going to be held up as an example of why rape shield laws, access to civil trials, etc., need to be made harder to file. We in Cali got "three strikes" in the wake of Polly Klaas and the Bundy murders. As some famous guy once said, "Great cases make bad laws."

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#33)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 17, 2006 at 07:10:59 AM EST
    I love the "fake mustache" argument. So classic. And I would put the chance of a civil suit at around 100%, regardless what happens in criminal court (which I think will be dismissed). The AV is probably hearing advice from all corners, and much of that advice is probably telling her she could be a millionaire many times over if she pursues this in civil court. Shameful.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#34)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Wed May 17, 2006 at 07:14:20 AM EST
    Bob in Pacifica posted:
    IMHO was making jokes about my charred stumps yesterday. A real delightful person, eh?
    SLOphoto, I told you my posts were not dignified, but if any post could enhance my credibilty and stature here, that would be the one:
    Bob, I've noticed your charred stumps are still enjoying the heat of the campfire.
    Bob, why don't you chase down your proof that the accuser's father says she filed a false rape report? Bob in Pacifica posted:
    That is, the AV's father said that his daughter filed a false rape charge back then.
    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#35)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 17, 2006 at 07:35:35 AM EST
    Gary flies in his own personal plane called "Wings of Justice."
    Localone, I thought you were spinning an elaborate metaphor at first, then realized you were stating the bald truth. "Wings of Justice." My, my. Thanks for the info about Nifong. I'm still working on my personal portrait of him as desperate fellow, obsessed with the unscrupulous Freda Black, worn down by 27 years in the DA's office, made more reckless by having faced and beaten cancer. I had hoped the potential loss of health ins. and subsequent bankruptcy of family could feed into all that, but I see it won't. There's that screenplay to consider, you see. Honey, this is going to make Crash look like Mrs. Washerberg's civics class Civil Rights Week presentation. At some point in the movie "Wings of Justice" will go down in flames, of course. Perhaps in the Duke quad.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#36)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Wed May 17, 2006 at 07:45:40 AM EST
    IMHO, Got the magical mystery witness that the AV's dad reported on April 3rd? We're up to what, 44 days now? Not even an ID. Oh, she'll be comin' around the mountain when she comes. Maybe the magical mystery witness will be in a big evidence package for release, along with the "good news DNA," eh? She'll be marched into the FOX studios with a New Black Panther Party military accompanyment. Yes, the father said that there was no rape back in 1993. You said that the mother and AV lied to him about that rape and that that was the basis for his knowledge (although you never explain how you know that the father could not have or did not have any other source of information over the intervening decade-plus of time that elapsed). So if I believe you that the AV lied to him about that rape, and as it becomes more apparent that the AV lied to him about the broomstick sodomy (unless he lied about his daughter telling him), I guess I'll have to reevaluate my position of the father to this: The father is honest but gullible. It's the people around him, like his daughter, who lie to him. Except that the jury is still out on whether the father is lying about the existence of the magical mystery witness. So in conclusion the father only said that the rape did not occur even though she filed a rape charge on a rape that did not occur (or, in other words, a false rape charge) because his daughter lied to him about whether or not a rape had occurred. Got it! Thanks for straightening it out, IMHO.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#37)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Wed May 17, 2006 at 07:47:49 AM EST
    IMHO, By the way, I guess when you made the comments about my "charred stumps" you didn't know I had to retire because of my hand injuries, right? Sometimes talking like an a**hole is being one.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#38)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Wed May 17, 2006 at 07:47:57 AM EST
    David Evans' Polygraph Test Results

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#39)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Wed May 17, 2006 at 07:49:42 AM EST
    IMHO,
    By the way, I guess when you made the comments about my "charred stumps" you didn't know I had to retire because of my hand injuries, right?
    Of course I did, that's what makes it so funny, Bob.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#40)
    by ding7777 on Wed May 17, 2006 at 08:11:08 AM EST
    to inmyhumbleopinion
    DURHAM - District Attorney Mike Nifong said today that a previous rape reported by the woman who accused three men of sexually assaulting her at a Duke University lacrosse team party will have little bearing on his case. Nifong said in a prepared statement that the decade-old allegation -- which the woman's father said was false -- likely would never arise in court
    the woman's father said was false

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#41)
    by chew2 on Wed May 17, 2006 at 08:13:05 AM EST
    Beenaround,
    Shame on you PB. You seem to have a problem reading. She never claimed that 25% of rape claims were false. She claimed that they were a combination of false claims and incorrect identifications.
    McEroy lied or misrepresented in her Fox article. She fails to mention that in the FBI data she was using the vast majority of that 25% false claim figure were incorrect identifications, not false claims. So let's say 10% of that 25% were false claims and not mis-identifications, you get 2.5% false claims from that FBI data. But she goes on the trumpet that 25% figure as a "false claim" figure. Look at the Fox headline
    False Rape Accusations May Be More Common Than Thought? Is it the new 1-in-4 statistic?
    Look at McElroy's conclusion.
    But even a skeptic like me must credit a DNA exclusion rate of 20 percent that remained constant over several years...False accusations are not rare. They are common.
    She lied or misrepresented. McElroy's figures came from a Barry Scheck comment which she purposely misrepresented, and which I quoted in an earlier post:
    Scheck makes clear that the FBI only performed DNA tests when the identity of the assailant was not otherwise known (no date rape cases) and when semen in the vagina or anus would almost certainly identify the assailant. So almost all of these were cases where a rape most probably occurred but the identity of the assailant was in doubt. Scheck
    It must be stressed that the sexual assault referrals made to the FBI ordinarily involve cases where (1) identity is at issue (there is no consent defense), (2) the non-DNA evidence linking the suspect to the crime is eyewitness identification, (3) the suspects have been arrested or indicted based on non-DNA evidence, and (4) the biological evidence (sperm) has been recovered from a place (vaginal/rectal/oral swabs or underwear) that makes DNA results on the issue of identity virtually dispositive.
    Scheck
    My earlier comment with cite to Scheck

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#42)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Wed May 17, 2006 at 08:44:35 AM EST
    Bob In Pacifica posted:
    Got the magical mystery witness that the AV's dad reported on April 3rd? We're up to what, 44 days now? Not even an ID. Oh, she'll be comin' around the mountain when she comes.
    This will be the third time I have posted that I was not offering the father's story about the neighbor for the truth of her story - I was teasing you about your posting "no evidence of crying" suggests the accuser made "yet another false report of fact by the AV in the morning of the 14th." But you knew that. Here's the claim you made, but still have not proven:
    We really need to know what the AV was saying and to whom. Yesterday there was the story that the AV said that both dancers were crying, but there seems to be no evidence, photos or what Roberts said or what Bissey observed, that either woman was crying while they were at Buchanan. This would suggest, like the "20 rapists"*[ALSO NOT PROVEN] yet another false report of fact by the AV in the morning of the 14th.
    Bob In Pacifica posted:
    I guess I'll have to reevaluate my position of the father to this:
    The father is honest but gullible. It's the people around him, like his daughter, who lie to him.
    I'm not sure there is proof the daughter lied to him. Now Kalidoggie's definition of a liar makes liars of a lot of us every time we talk to our parents, every time we tell someone, "No, those jeans don't make you look fat,' (when they do), everytime we say, "I hope that was as great for you as it was for me." Heh, heh. Even some of the lacrosse players lied to their parents under that definition. Bob In Pacifica posted:
    Except that the jury is still out on whether the father is lying about the existence of the magical mystery witness.
    I would have to agree with that. The jury is still out on whether Seligmann, Finnerty and Evans are rapists. Bob In Pacifica posted:
    So in conclusion the father only said that the rape did not occur even though she filed a rape charge on a rape that did not occur (or, in other words, a false rape charge) because his daughter lied to him about whether or not a rape had occurred.
    There you go again. You have not proven that the accuser made a false rape charge, nor have you proven that the accuser lied to her father about what happened that night (unless your definition of a lie is keeping things from your parents that you think might hurt them, or in this case, might get her father hurt). Bob In Pacifica posted:
    Got it! Thanks for straightening it out, IMHO.
    You're not quite there, but you are almost trying to get straightened out.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#44)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 17, 2006 at 08:56:58 AM EST
    Well, PB, it seems that I owe you an apology. It was chew2 who has a problem with reading.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#45)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 17, 2006 at 08:58:07 AM EST
    Please forgive my legal ignorance: Can the AV decide not to press charges? If so, would Nifong be likely to go ahead with the trial without her cooperation? If the criminal case didn't go to trial, could the AV still sue in civil court?

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#46)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Wed May 17, 2006 at 09:10:39 AM EST
    Hi ding777, I wouldn't expect everyone to know this, it wasn't widely reported, but when the prior rape report story broke, the father knew about the Creedmore incident but had not been told his daughter had been raped. He still didn't know when he was interviewed a few times. I saw a reporter standing ourside the father;s house. He had just spoken to the family. He said the father was not told until after the story broke. HERE
    To: Howlin The father didn't know about this until about a day ago. Father weights about 120 lbs and mother was afraid he would charge up there to go after the ex-boyfriend and his friends. 207 posted on 04/27/2006 7:03:02 PM PDT by maggief
    saw the same video I did.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#47)
    by chew2 on Wed May 17, 2006 at 09:13:25 AM EST
    beenaround,
    Well, PB, it seems that I owe you an apology. It was chew2 who has a problem with reading.
    You seem to have the problem with reading also. You should have noticed that it was my post not PB's. But that's only a small error. Perhaps you would like to read the Scheck article and respond to my arguments.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#48)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Wed May 17, 2006 at 09:21:12 AM EST
    Hi ding777, I wouldn't expect everyone to know this, it wasn't widely reported, but when the prior rape report story broke, the father knew about the Creedmore incident but had not been told his daughter had been raped. He still didn't know when he was interviewed a few times. I saw a reporter standing ourside the father;s house. He had just spoken to the family. He said the father was not told until after the story broke. This blogger saw the same video I did.
    To: Howlin The father didn't know about this until about a day ago. Father weights about 120 lbs and mother was afraid he would charge up there to go after the ex-boyfriend and his friends. 207 posted on 04/27/2006 7:03:02 PM PDT by maggief
    Bob knows about this report. I have posted it here at least twice: Posted by inmyhumbleopinion May 4, 2006 10:03 PM
    Bob in Pacifica posted:
    Do you believe that the father was right saying that the three men she accused of raping her in 1994 didn't do anything to her? Because that would seem to indicate that she made a false claim of rape in the past, according to her father.
    If someone does not tell their father they have been raped, then they haven't been raped? I know a woman that was raped at gunpoint in a parking garage. The guy whacked her on the head with his gun. She didn't tell her father, she was afraid it would break his heart. The accuser's mother said they did not tell the father because they were afraid he would drive to Creedmore, confront the 21 year-old boyfriend and get himself hurt. A reporter described the accuser's father as "120 lbs - dripping wet." **************** Posted by inmyhumbleopinion May 7, 2006 10:06 PM Bob in Pacifica posted:
    IMHO, You make a false rape accusation, you are blaming someone else for a serious problem that you have.
    We don't know it is a false accusation. What problem was she blaming on the people she says raped her? Bob in Pacifica posted:
    Her father said something to the effect that "those boys did nothing to her." So if you believe the dad, take your pick. She lied or she hallucinated.
    This discrepancy has been explained many times here. The mother said they didn't tell the father because they were afraid he would drive to Creedmore and confront the boyfriend and get himself hurt. The father is described as being "120 lbs, dripping wet."

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#49)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Wed May 17, 2006 at 09:22:32 AM EST
    OOPS! That first one was posted by mistake. I wasn't finished.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#50)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 17, 2006 at 09:34:11 AM EST
    Any other deal horse lying around that can be beat unmercifully?

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#51)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 17, 2006 at 09:35:09 AM EST
    deal = dead sheesh, typing skills of congressman's secretary.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#52)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 17, 2006 at 09:43:03 AM EST
    I submit the following pop quiz to gauge your bias as a news consumer. After reading the following characteristics, please select the college group that most likely fits the description: The group has a 100 percent college graduation rate. Sixty percent have a 3.0 grade point average or above. During the past four years, 80 percent have made a national honor roll. Members regularly volunteer at more than a dozen community agencies, building houses for the homeless and serving in soup kitchens, while raising more money than any other group for the Katrina Relief Fund. Answer: (a) Tri-Delta sorority at the University of North Carolina; (b) women's rowing team at Clemson University; (c) synchronized swim team at Harvard University; (d) men's lacrosse team at Duke University. OK, I know, you're smart. You're onto this trick. Obviously, it's (d), the infamous Duke men's lacrosse team, that rowdy drunken white-boy club that rapes black women forced to strip to put themselves through college and feed their fatherless children. The photo lineup included only team members!?!?!?!?! The father of the non-profit seeking female involved said in an interview that his daughter was not raped in the earlier event/accusation. The incident at Duke was a business deal that went sour. I wonder if she considered what her life will be like when the lawyers for the rich, deep pocket, now falsely accused team members ruin her in civil court for the next ten years. There are not enough bachelor parties in NC to pay her legal bills.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#53)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 17, 2006 at 09:43:57 AM EST
    From AV/FA's cousin:
    The cousin of the alleged victim, known as "Jakki" responded to Evans' news conference. She called it a well-rehearsed production, designed to make the accuser look bad. "I was angry and I was hurt that they were attacking her and that this young man was saying listen, we're the lacrosse team, we're unified and we're standing here and my cousin is basically not speaking up, not because seh's lying or because she's this gold digger, it's because she's frightened." Jakki said.
    I find it interesting that the cousin's reaction is to dispell "gold-digging" when there was no mention whatsoever of this in DE's press conference. This sounds like some projection by the cousin. Cheshire was asked what he thought the AV/FA's motive was and he politely refused to speculate. This little snippet has much more meaning given that the Gary discussions and civil suit news is out. With regard to Gary I believe it was stated that he has been a "family advisor" since April. Did he become an advisor before or after the photo line-up? Is it a coincidence that the three players ID'd happen to be 3 of the most wealthy families of all the players' families? The roster and names of all the players was plastered all over Durham and well before her lineup. This makes the Blue Wall of Silence conspiracy theory look like patty cake.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#54)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Wed May 17, 2006 at 09:51:13 AM EST
    LateModel posted:
    The father of the non-profit seeking female involved said in an interview that his daughter was not raped in the earlier event/accusation.
    gmax, This is why this dead horse must be beaten

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#55)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed May 17, 2006 at 09:55:29 AM EST
    These threads really get tedious on a non-news day...

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#56)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 17, 2006 at 09:57:33 AM EST
    So we know 1. The AV lied to her father about the age 14 alleged rape (ostensibly with good intent, we are now told) at the time, which explains why he didn't think it happened. The stated reason was the fear that the father would attack the boyfriend and get hurt. Is an unstated reason that the father would have gotten the police involved in this age 14 alleged rape if he had known about it? 2. So much time has gone by that we will never know what happened all those years ago unless the AV recants or one of the three men confess. 3. What does this have to do with there is enough evidence to subject the defendents to a trial which is a year long process and then set them up for a years long civil suit? 4. Lora says that witnesses should testify at trial for an acquittal. Maybe the AV should have testified and been cross-examined in front of the grand jury under oath before they indicted anyone. 5. Why do people root for the guys? People are afraid of things they can't control. They think, "I won't be raped because I won't work as a stripper." They can control that. They think "Gee, I've been in situations where someone could accuse me of rape and if they are uncritically believed without careful assessment of evidence I'll have a long trial even if acquitted". Why in heaven's name shouldn't Seligman's alleged alibi or Evans' "mustache" or boyfriend's DNA result been presented to the Grand Jury so they could have decided whether to indict in the first place. If they thought the alibis had holes then people would feel a lot better about the whole process. 6. Just like KOBE, I bet some of the defendents' rich families pay the AV to drop it all, and then we can debate whether they paid her for her pain or paid extortion money.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#57)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 17, 2006 at 10:02:21 AM EST
    gmax wrote:
    Any other dea[d] horse lying around that can be beat unmercifully?
    Only if it has a fake moustache!!!

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#58)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 17, 2006 at 10:06:53 AM EST
    sarcastic unnamed one wrote:
    These threads really get tedious on a non-news day...
    This will liven it up.... transpose the characters from the Duke case to the video and identify who is who.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#59)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 17, 2006 at 10:17:03 AM EST
    Taken from reports of the previous rape accusation: According to the Creedmoor police report in August 1996, when the woman was 18, she told officers she was raped and beaten by three men "for a continual time" in 1993, when she was 14. She told police she was attacked at an "unspecified location" on a street in Creedmoor, a town 15 miles northeast of Durham. The report lists the names of the three men, but no other details. Creedmoor police Chief Ted Pollard said Thursday he had no recollection of the report, and his staff has been unable to find any additional information about it. Durham police Officer Brian Bishop, who interviewed the accuser in 1996 while working on the Creedmoor force, said Thursday he had a vague recollection of the report but couldn't remember any details.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#60)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Wed May 17, 2006 at 10:21:59 AM EST
    rogan1313 posted:
    1. The AV lied to her father about the age 14 alleged rape (ostensibly with good intent, we are now told)* at the time, which explains why he didn't think it happened. The stated reason was the fear that the father would attack the boyfriend and get hurt. Is an unstated reason that the father would have gotten the police involved in this age 14 alleged rape if he had known about it?
    It could be. The accuser and/or her mother obviously did not want to report it. The mother and cousin or aunt claims the boys threatened the accuser's life. I read that the two men that are brothers now have an extensive arrest record. The link is dead now, but here is the cached page:
    In the 1996 case, the alleged Duke lacrosse victim told Creedmoor police that three years earlier, when she was 14, she had been raped and beaten by three men "for a continual time" at an unspecified location in the city. She named the three men and provided addresses for two of them, but authorities in Creedmoor, in Granville County, never brought criminal charges against any of them.
    Court records confirm that two of the men she named lived at the address she provided and have extensive criminal records.
    The accuser's mother told The Herald-Sun her daughter decided not to pursue the case, but didn't say why. Family members told Essence magazine, which was the first to report the 1996 incident, that the woman feared for her safety.
    *Thank you for including that, rogan1313. One dead horse spared another beating.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#61)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Wed May 17, 2006 at 10:27:58 AM EST
    Kalidoggie posted:
    Only if it has a fake moustache!!!
    What? You didn't like Dan Abrams' criminal justice expert Lawrence Kobilinsky agreeing with imho? Dan didn't either.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#62)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 17, 2006 at 10:29:25 AM EST
    If youre in it for the money there is no use in filing charges against someone with an extensive criminal history and a low rent address.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#63)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 17, 2006 at 10:29:47 AM EST
    4. Lora says that witnesses should testify at trial for an acquittal. Maybe the AV should have testified and been cross-examined in front of the grand jury under oath before they indicted anyone.
    There's no cross examination in front of a grand jury and the defense doesn't get to present evidence. It's not a trial.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#64)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Wed May 17, 2006 at 10:37:44 AM EST
    LateModel posted:
    If youre in it for the money there is no use in filing charges against someone with an extensive criminal history and a low rent address.
    I didn't catch the address, was it in a "low rent" district? I know she was only fourteen, but if she was in it for the money she could have picked better targets for her "false allegation."

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#65)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 17, 2006 at 10:39:50 AM EST
    If youre in it for the money there is no use in filing charges against someone with an extensive criminal history and a low rent address.
    The same can be said for the defendants. Their parents may have a lot of assets, but I doubt the players do unless it's in a trust(which could be hard for the AV to get at). If she gets a 5 million dollar verdict, all the players have to do is pay the 50K they might have in assets (which will barely cover her filing, travel, copying and other expenses for her lawyers) and declare bankruptcy before they ever earn a real paycheck.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#66)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Wed May 17, 2006 at 10:43:30 AM EST
    There's no cross examination in front of a grand jury and the defense doesn't get to present evidence. It's not a trial.
    In some states, if not all, grand jurors can ask questions.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#67)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 17, 2006 at 10:47:13 AM EST
    In some states, if not all, grand jurors can ask questions.
    Very true. I don't think of that as "cross examination" but arguably it is.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#68)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 17, 2006 at 10:52:29 AM EST
    "Low rent" is a conclusion I jumped to without considering the implications. Maybe that address had a moustache on it when I read it. If the Police failed to investigate a sexual assault against a minor, then the family should sue them. My conclusion is that the Police did not believe the veracity of the claim.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#69)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Wed May 17, 2006 at 11:06:20 AM EST
    Very true. I don't think of that as "cross examination" but arguably it is.
    I didn't mean it was. I'd guess it's more a fact finding procedure than a challenge of the witnesses.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#70)
    by chew2 on Wed May 17, 2006 at 11:09:05 AM EST
    localone
    The defense will also scorch the earth on the other rape charge from her past, find those men, discredit her twice.
    I'm betting they will find them currently in jail or with a long criminal history. In any case, even if they claim the prior rape complaint was false, this will not likely be enough to permit the defense to cross examine the AV on it. We've discussed here before some NC Ct. App cases which state that "some definitive evidence of falsity" must first be shown before such questioning can occur. I don't think conflicting testimony between the AV and the alleged rapist will be enough to carry that burden.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#71)
    by ding7777 on Wed May 17, 2006 at 11:12:36 AM EST
    to inmyhumbleopinion
    [They] didn't tell the father because he weights about 120 lbs and the mother was afraid he would charge up there to go after the ex-boyfriend and his friends
    That might sound plausible in 1993 but not in 1996 when she finally reported it to the authorities -- in 1996 she was engaged, so the burden of protecting her honor would not have been the father's alone

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#72)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Wed May 17, 2006 at 11:20:15 AM EST
    LateModel posted:
    My conclusion is that the Police did not believe the veracity of the claim.
    The Police Cheif said that it was the victim that did not pursue the charges after filing them. There is no indication that the police questioned her veracity.
    Ted Pollard, Creedmoor's chief of police, said earlier today that aside from this report, he had no other documents or recollection of the case. The district attorney and assistant district attorney in office at the time of the 1993 incident don't either, he said.
    Pollard said, "When [a rape case] comes to you four years later, you must have the alleged victim in order to pursue it. ... I have no idea why she did not."
    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#73)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Wed May 17, 2006 at 11:37:42 AM EST
    ding7777 posted:
    That might sound plausible in 1993 but not in 1996 when she finally reported it to the authorities -- in 1996 she was engaged, so the burden of protecting her honor would not have been the father's alone
    I agree. The 1996 reporting sounds like it was initiated by her fiancee. She went in, made the initial report, they asked her to bring in a detailed timeline, but she never came back. I don't know if she ever told her mother that it was reported in 1996, much less her father.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#74)
    by Lora on Wed May 17, 2006 at 11:40:41 AM EST
    Rogan, I entered into a good-faith discussion with you, and you are taking my words and twisting them to imply that I would like nothing better than to see the three indicted men (I will NOT call them boys) hung out to dry for as long as possible, innocent or guilty. You know that isn't true, so stop doing it.
    The AV was severely damaged and possibly raped at some time by someone
    If true, Rogan, do you care? I hope so. Sharon, I have no problem with using the AV's first name. It might cut down on some of the crap we've all seen posted here about her. She's a human being, not an object. Out of deference to our host, I think TL should approve/disapprove of it, as she had asked us to keep her name off the site. Bob, What were those three men doing at the time that the AV's own father said held her against her will in Creedmore? if not poker, tiddlywinks, perhaps? Kali, I too appreciated the chance for discussion with you. With regard to the gold-digging comment, that's what many people have accused the AV of doing since the beginning, isn't it? So I don't see how it necessarily relates to the possible civil suit, though it could.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#75)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Wed May 17, 2006 at 11:56:07 AM EST
    I find it interesting that the cousin's reaction is to dispell "gold-digging" when there was no mention whatsoever of this in DE's press conference. This sounds like some projection by the cousin.
    Evans called the accuser's version of events "fantastic lies." The accuser's cousin is well aware of one of the motives attributed to these "lies." I've heard her answer to that charge in an interview quite awhile back.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#76)
    by weezie on Wed May 17, 2006 at 12:25:41 PM EST
    I'm getting a little dizzy here, are we off the moustache now and on to what papa weighs in at, what 120lbs? Who cares what he ever weighed! Wouldn't the smart move to have been to pursue the previous rape allegations through the police and the courts? Aren't we supposed to laugh loudly at mama and little C being scared he was going get beaten up by them bad boys? Yeah, RIGHT! Can the indicted lax players file a civil case NOW against the FA for defamation? What would legally stop them from going after he right this very minute? Thanks to any lawyers with answers.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#77)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 17, 2006 at 12:31:15 PM EST
    Lora wrote:
    With regard to the gold-digging comment, that's what many people have accused the AV of doing since the beginning, isn't it? So I don't see how it necessarily relates to the possible civil suit, though it could.
    I think the gold-digging is more an after-the-fact motivation than the intial claim. I have always felt that the AV/FA was so wasted that she either: (1) said she was being raped to get out of trouble with PD 7 avoid a child service issue; or, (2) given her mental health problems, believed she was raped in a flashback type situation with her first encounter when she was young or even one she never told anyone about (her business past). I think the second scenario is entirely possible. I have had 2 girlfriends who were raped and they both have told me that certain situations spark overwelming "flashback" feelings, which get trigger and significantly magnified by excessive drinking. I found out about this firsthand at wedding I attended with one GF. She got stumbling wasted that when we got back to the hotel room she passed out in her clothes on the bed. I basically did the same right next to her while watching TV, drinking a beer and eating peanut MMs from the mini bar. In the middle of the night, she jumped up and began screaming that she was raped. She did not even recognize me and was asking where the others went and looked int the closet and bathroom. She finally calmed her down and came back to reality (and was annoyed that she was still in her clothes!). I have never experienced anything like it. It was surreal!! We talked about it the next day and she told me the "flashback" had happened a couople times before. She was a huge boozer and her therapist told her that alcohol was a significant trigger for these "flashbacks". The AV/FA's situation sounds very similar. I feel for her, if this is the case. But I think she is being used by people with alternative agenda (Nifong, NBP, Gary, Kim, etc.), and at some point she became an accomplice to their agendas for her benefit. This is further evidenced with the whole Gary, 3 players from 3 of the wealthiest lacrosse families, civil suits that is now coming to light.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#78)
    by ding7777 on Wed May 17, 2006 at 12:34:31 PM EST
    to inmyhumbleopinion
    I don't know if she ever told her mother that it was reported in 1996, much less her father.
    ESSENCE.COM
    The mother also told ESSENCE that when her daughter was 17 or 18, she was raped by several men, one of whom was someone she knew. The attack took place in the town of Creedmoor, about 15 miles northeast of Durham, and was a "set up," according to the accuser's mother. Although other family members confirmed that the alleged victim reported the incident to police in that jurisdiction, the young woman declined to pursue the case, relatives say out of fear for her safety.
    After this appeared, the mother said ESSENCE misrepresented what she said. My guess is the misrepresntaion is that the AV wasn't 17/18 years old when the 1st alleged raped happend but that is how old she was when she reported it Anyway, it just seems odd that the mother and other family members knew in 1996 of the 1993 incident but no one told the father

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#79)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 17, 2006 at 12:35:24 PM EST
    IMHO wrote: Evans called the accuser's version of events "fantastic lies."

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#80)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 17, 2006 at 12:35:39 PM EST
    I'm betting they will find them currently in jail or with a long criminal history. Why just because they are black? Your slip is showing, or it is finely pressed whilte linen sheet?

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#81)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 17, 2006 at 12:37:13 PM EST
    Lora, I am not saying that you "want" these boys to twist in the wind as long as possible. I simply want to know whether you see any way to prevent such a twisting short of a trial. Just because the AV was victimized by someone doesn't justify victimizing three other people if there is an insufficient basis to believe that they were the ones who did it. No one can help the AV's pain/rape right now, but if it is true that Nifong lacked sufficient evidence and has indicted ham sandwiches in the case of one, two or three of the arrested students, then that pain can be fixed right now. Correction: It only causes the AV more pain if a bumbling prosecution of innocents proceeds. Maybe she was dissociating and doesn't exactly know who did what that night. The Nifong method has sure held her up to needless scorn.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#82)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Wed May 17, 2006 at 12:37:42 PM EST
    Kalidoggie, Interesting story about your GF/FA.

    Re: A Civil Suit in the Duke Case? (none / 0) (#83)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 17, 2006 at 12:39:21 PM EST