home

Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued

By Jeralyn, Section Duke Lacrosse
Posted on Sun May 21, 2006 at 12:19:41 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

With over 300 comments on Friday's thread, it's time for a new one. This is for all topics related to the rape accusation against the three Duke Lacrosse players or the legal proceedings . What's in the news? I like Joanna Spilbor's take at Findlaw on the D.A. refusing the defense's attempt to provide evidence.

I can't help but believe that, were any of these defendants to assert that they had proof that a crime was indeed committed, this district attorney would be all ears. Suppose, for instance, that Seligmann or Evans were to turn on Finnerty, to try to save themselves - surely Nifong would happily hear them out. So how can the prosecutor justify, then, turning a blind eye to evidence of any of the accused's innocence?

< Sunday Funnies | Truthout vs. Team Rove: Round Two >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued | 207 comments (207 topical)
    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun May 21, 2006 at 12:53:07 PM EST
    Thanks for the link to that site, TL: well written summary of what a lot of us on this board have been saying, albeit perhaps not so comprehensively.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#2)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sun May 21, 2006 at 12:56:02 PM EST
    Another good quote from Spilbor's article: The discovery statutes in North Carolina - as in most states - do not allow prosecutors to play "hide the ball." This is a judicial proceeding, not a magic show. So D.A. Nifong will have to reveal this evidence sometime before trial. He ought to opt to reveal it right now - to give the defense a chance to counter it. When evidence suggesting innocence is as strong as it is in this case, it's wrong to just let the case go to trial and "see what the jury says." These three young men's live will be forever affected, even if they are acquitted. Even an arrest leaves a scar; the scar of trial is far deeper. D.A. Nifong should listen to the defense, and should drop the case unless he has strong evidence supporting the accuser. Moreover, if he does have such evidence, he should show it to us now. The defendants have been forthcoming - especially Evans, who volunteered to, and then did, take a lie detector test. The prosecution should follow their example.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#3)
    by scribe on Sun May 21, 2006 at 12:57:24 PM EST
    I agree that Joanna Spilbor's article is worthwhile. However it is, IMHO, not nearly harsh enough on Nifong. I've held back on comenting on this case for a while, if only because the volume of comments makes it hard to keep up with the discussion. That said, Nifong has mishandled this "case" since the beginning. From the looks of the way the case is developing I cannot escape the conclusion that Nifong has taken a meritless case (i.e., one which a proper initial investigation would have resolved into "meritless" or "unprovable") and is seeking to make his reputation on it. He'll succeed in making a reputation, all right, but not the one he thought he'd get. If he hasn't already. The three defendants are, from all appearances, clearly innocent. If I were representing them, I'd be filing (or drafting, in anticipation of filing) whatever notices are necessary for pursuing civil tort claims against Nifong. Even though the civil cases against Nifong might fail, due to immunity defenses, they might not. If ever there were a case where there should not be prosecutorial immunity, this is one of them. The problem is, the blogosphere has worried this case like my dog worries a bone - grinding every bit of it out between her teeth and devoting all her attention to it for hours and days on end. "There's some flavor still left there, I'm sure, if I just keep gnawing", she would say if she talked. In the meantime, Abu Gonzo wants to put reporters in jail for reporting, Congress still wants to sell the internet to the Telcos (no doubt in return for your phone, email and internet data), war crimes continue in Iraq, there's going to be a new war in Iran, Osama's still on the loose, judges are finding new and ingenious ways of applying to State Secrets privilege to eliminate judicial review (coincidentally making less work for themselves at the same pay), The Unitary Decider just raised taxes in violation of his solemn oath to never do that, and Halliburton's setting up to build a couple hundred miles of what looks like the old border fortifications along the East German border to separate the US from Mexico. There are more important issues, these youths have excellent representation, and the blogosphere needs to devote its considerable time and energy to more than decrypting whether a part-time dancer and escort was or was not mistreated by a bunch of college jocks (who, we hope, should have learned their lesson about strippers and escorts). OK?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun May 21, 2006 at 12:58:23 PM EST
    imho: is this more of the refusal to cooperate, to keep talking that you think Evans displayed? Again from the News & Observer: "Cheshire said he contacted Nifong's office March 29 and volunteered to bring his client, team captain Dave Evans, to be interviewed by the district attorney but got no response. Nifong declined to comment on whether he met with the players' attorneys. "Lawyers are always saying that people are innocent," he said. Between Evans and Nifong, which one has been the most uncooperative?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun May 21, 2006 at 01:01:04 PM EST
    Before the grammar police call me on it: Self-correction: ". . . which one has been more uncooperative?"

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun May 21, 2006 at 01:05:00 PM EST
    Why the focus on this one case? There are rapes all over the country, many by privilidged against the poor. I am amazed at how we regularly obsess over one case or another, and then forget the thousands of others. Sad.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#7)
    by azbballfan on Sun May 21, 2006 at 01:11:38 PM EST
    This morning I felt the need to take a step back and try to put all the behavior of varying parties into perspective. First, it sounds like the players were boorish and mean at the party. I wouldn't be surprised if the dancers misbehaved as well, but strippers know who the customers are and usually don't instigate things. Then after the incident, the AV seemed to be in pretty bad shape and Kim didn't know what happened. The police took statements from the two prior to the strippers being able to discuss the events amongst themselves so I expect there to be a lot of contradictions between their original statements. Remember, the AV was banged up and recovering from being under the influence of something strong. Emotions were high, they were very embarrassed. As Bob pointed out, humans naturally revise the truth in their minds to make themselves look better. Then we have the Duke Administration being brought into this. They did a great service to the boys and a great disservice to the community's right to justice when they tipped off the team about the charges and police investigation. Then two days later we have the three boys who cooperated with police. It seems to me they were prepared for a search, having the cell phone and bad in the bathroom. If you are told that there is a police investigation, you can't possibly resist the urge to be prepared for a search. I'm not saying they did anything I would condemn them for at all, it's just human nature. Their previous encounters with the police seemed to indicate that the police were willing to cooperate and listen. Their prior charges had all been waived, reduced, or suspended. They hadn't been privy to a real tough police investigation. Then they get asked questions for 8 hours or so. This sounds like a grilling which would be frustrating and make me get nervous. Then we have the entire team agreeing to provide DNA but refusing to answer any questions. They have a lawyer carefully watching over them to make sure no-one talks. Then we have Nifong responding by calling them 'hooligans' and calling them out for hiding behind a 'blue wall of silence'. Nifong knows that he has an election coming up and voters are very sensitive to town vs. gown issues. Then we have defense lawyers turning up the pressure calling out Nifong for using the case for political gain. Repeated stories of his giving 60-70 interviews point out Nifong did get his name in the press, but despite defense team claims, no substantive information was leaked by Nifong. Then we have Nifong saying he expects charges will be made. I think this is a strategic move to try to get control of the investigation. The defense team has had sufficient time to check the stories of all the boys and now they desperately want to know what Nifong has. They offer to cooperate in exchange for information. Nifong realizes that if a rape occurred, the case would be doomed by allowing the defense team to "uncover" the story. Ever since Nifong made this statement, he's clammed up and proved he's dedicated to use only the procedures allowed by the book. He became highly sensitized to the immense defense team against him and their ability to block his need to interview the boys. He needs indictments in order to subpoena testimony from all the boys. Last week, he finally got them. The boys claim they want to tell their story to the police. Why don't they provide a comprehensive story to the press? They have leaked bits and pieces in order to establish "reasonable doubt" with incomplete evidence in an open and ongoing investigation. The "reasonable doubt" at this time does not preclude the right of the community to have the police continue their investigation. Nifong is doing a good job of serving his constituents' by continuing the investigation. To me, the most telling tactic used by the defense team was to try to separate the trials of Seligmann and Finnerty. If they know the DA's case for Finnerty is stronger, they would want to establish "facts" and "timelines" in Seligmann's case prior to figuring out how to defend Finnerty. Nifong said in court last week he planned to try all three cases at once. The defense team continues to leak information to the press as quickly as they can in an attempt to move the trial to a different court. I would be surprised if one of the motions Nifong gave to the judge wasn't a request for a gag order.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun May 21, 2006 at 01:30:41 PM EST
    azbball: the defense did give a fairly comprehensive account in the Newsweek article. And what is the basis for your claim that the defense is trying to seperate the cases?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#9)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun May 21, 2006 at 01:53:37 PM EST
    SharoninJax posted:
    And how does their covering their faces help or hurt Evans' chance of being indicted? You keep including that as part of their "don't say a word" mantra, but I do not see it as dispositive of anything.
    I think it is dispositive of the caliber of the advice they were taking:
    A woman who works in Ekstrand's office intercepted more lacrosse players as they arrived, instructing them to cover their faces, wear hats and pull their jackets up to conceal their identities.
    What do you think the Duke University administrators thought of that photo?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun May 21, 2006 at 02:10:33 PM EST
    Better than having at least 42 innocent faces shown on television in the Durham area: how many like-minded persons who agree with the heckler in the courtroom might there be who might take matters into their own hands? And, as a parent, I would rather see my son covering his face so that only I could tell it was him, than giving any nut out there a video of him in this case.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#11)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun May 21, 2006 at 02:20:13 PM EST
    Hi azbballfan, pretty good summary - a few things:
    Then two days later we have the three boys who cooperated with police. It seems to me they were prepared for a search, having the cell phone and bad [bag] in the bathroom.
    I don't know if the phone and bag where found in the bathroom or not, have you read this anywhere?
    Then we have Nifong responding by calling them 'hooligans' and calling them out for hiding behind a 'blue wall of silence'
    I don't know if he referred to them as "hooligans" more than once, this is the only reference I've come up with so far:
    "I would like to think," Nifong said, "that somebody has the human decency to call up and say, 'What am I doing covering up for a bunch of hooligans?'"
    I took that to mean the innocent players should not protect the attackers. I thought he was calling the attackers "hooligans." Lastly, what SharoninJax asked about keeping the trials separate. I haven't heard that, but I haven't looked around for mention of it.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#12)
    by Lora on Sun May 21, 2006 at 02:46:23 PM EST
    Bob, From the previous thread,
    The AV's affirmation of no recent sex with her boyfriend
    Where did that come from? I don't recall seeing that anywhere. Other things: You have stated or implied that there is something wrong with the AV if she "filed charges" in the past and didn't follow up on them; that she should have realized the mental fortitude required, and was somehow deficient by not following through. Are you kidding? Do you have ANY idea what victims go through when they report a rape or domestic violence or threat of domestic violence? Do you know the danger they put themselves in? Whether or not you believe her, can anyone say it's been a picnic for the AV so far? Unless you think she or her family's been lying about her current condition, it would seem she's been miserable. And...with all your speculation on impairment of the AV, let's talk for a minute about impairment of the AP's. Let's speculate for a moment on how impaired they were at this party. We have a photo of one party member apparently passed out with a wet stain on his pants. Perhaps the rest all behaved with restraint and only consumed a beer or two. How likely is that? It is not unreasonable to speculate that many of them were very drunk. I have spoken recently to college students who, either themselves or friends of theirs, drink to the point of blacking out. Not passing out, but blacking out. Therefore, they were functioning as awake individuals, but they have no memory of what they did. Alcohol could have been a big factor in this alleged crime, and who knows whether or not other drugs were involved as well? The impairment issue here has been largely one-sided. Let's balance it out. And bean, your recent posts were totally inappropriate. I felt outraged, not annoyed. I thank Teresa for attempting to reason with you.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#13)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun May 21, 2006 at 02:51:36 PM EST
    SharonInJax posted:
    Regarding the possiblity of a date rape drug being used: if one were administered to her, it surely didn't work as advertised, did it? She supposedly fought like a tiger, and has a clear recollection of what was done to her, by whom, and where. Does anyone know if that is consistent with a GBH or whatever effect? Then again, maybe that's why it took her 30 hours, according to the City Manager, to give enough details for the search warrant to be issued.
    Maybe they didn't have time to let the drug take effect?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun May 21, 2006 at 03:02:31 PM EST
    Av:
    Why don't they provide a comprehensive story to the press?
    Shades of Roxie Hart. If they did this instead of talking to Nifong, wouldn't he be furious?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#15)
    by Teresa on Sun May 21, 2006 at 03:06:31 PM EST
    Orinoco, for the most part I find the discussions here civil if a bit snarky at times. The only troll I've noticed lately is the one calling the accuser a Pig and liberals the source of all evil. As for what evidence the DA has? The only thing I know for sure is the medical exam which may show evidence of rape. That exam is now complicated by the sex with the boyfriend. He also has cameras and at first I thought he must surely have something from them. Now that we know the guys had two days notice before the search I would think they would have gotten rid of the cameras if they had anything incriminating on them. In the article Sharon referenced above Nifong says he has medical evidence and eyewitness testimony that will prove it. I haven't heard before about any eyewitness testimony (Kim says she didn't see a rape) before. That confuses me because the only witnesses Abrams listed from discovery were the experts and SANE nurse and doctor. To summarize my rambling, I don't know what he has. If all he has is the medical exam, I think he (or the police) had a duty to investigate this charge but I don't see why it has gone as far as indictments. To any lawyers out there - if the defense asks for dismissal of charges and there really is no other evidence, is the judge likely to rule in their favor? Here is the link for the article Sharon quoted from: www.newsobserver.com

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#16)
    by Teresa on Sun May 21, 2006 at 03:16:22 PM EST
    Orinoco, she said he threatened to kill her, not that he attempted to. I had the misfortune to hang out at the courthouse one day on "order of protection day". You wouldn't believe all the stories these people told when asking for an order of protection. I doubt many of the people involved would have followed through on their threats. There were probably 50 people in line and the attorney I was there with told me that is an every Thursday happening at the courthouse. I was only there about 30 minutes so who knows how many people actually came that day.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun May 21, 2006 at 03:24:50 PM EST
    I have been keeping quite and just reading the posts on this board for the last week ot two. I read everything written, spent many hours doing it. I am retired and have the luxury of spending my time as I wish. My conclusion after all this reading: the case against these young men is faaling apart. Some people on this board would hate to admit this. However; the writing is on the wall. The accuser was lying; Nifong was playing politics; the accused are innocent; and all this is going to come out very fast very soon. There is no stopping it. Any suprises? No, truth always wins in the end. Just imagine the cost of this case to the country? Thousands of hours spent on the blogs, God knows how much spent on legal fees? I think, the tottal cost must be in the millions. For what, for a bunch of lies. Was it worth it. No, it was not. This is just a newer verison of the "Run away bride" who was abducted and almost killed by aliens. That was only a few months ago. How could America fall for another one of these? Sad, sad, very sad. A small African country's economic probelems could have been resolved with the millions wasted on this case.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#18)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun May 21, 2006 at 03:25:42 PM EST
    Lora posted:
    Bob,
    From the previous thread,
    [Bob posted:]The AV's affirmation of no recent sex with her boyfriend
    Where did that come from? I don't recall seeing that anywhere.
    Lora, Welcome to Bob's world. It's what he does. We keep calling him on it and he keeps doing it.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun May 21, 2006 at 03:26:59 PM EST
    Bob said:
    The evidence [on Seligmann] has been offered but remains untested. I don't consider it overwhelming yet, because the timestamps don't line up with Bisseys independent observations. He apparently witnessed the two women being lured back into the house before 12:00. That would have occurred after the dance.
    The indictment of Seligmann lists the "date of offense" as March 14, 2006, not March 13, or March 13 and March 14. So, at the time he brought the indictment against Seligmann, Nifong was claiming (based, I assume, on Bissey's testimony, which has the women returning to the house just before midnight) that the "offense" committed by Seligmann occurred after midnight, March 14. I've no doubt that Nifong will now offer a different timeline. But given that he didn't offer that timeline to the grand jury (which didn't have access to the photos), and instead gave them a 3-14 "date of offense," it's hard for me to see how Seligmann's evidence wouldn't have persuaded the grand jury not to indict (unless the grand jury wanted to believe that Seligmann was raping someone while he text messaged his girlfriend, rode in a cab, and was at an ATM a mile away). No doubt we'll soon hear Nifong say he didn't mean "March 14" when the grand jury was given that date, just as he didn't mean what he said to the court when he requested the mandatory DNA samples. I'd like to think that at some point a judge will hold Nifong to his previous statements, but justice in Durham seems to work differently from other parts of the country.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#20)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun May 21, 2006 at 03:39:57 PM EST
    Posted by Kalidoggie May 16, 2006 02:01 PM
    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.
    That sure looks like Matt Zash to me. That sure looks like the 2005 Championship game just ended. That sure looks like a beard and mustache to me. Come back, Hecht. I think you were on to something.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#21)
    by Lora on Sun May 21, 2006 at 03:44:20 PM EST
    Teresa, Perhaps he means eyewitnesses who can testify as to the extent of her injuries and when they were present. Orinoco, I'm not surprised by your post. I was not expecting you to feel any empathy toward the AV or to entertain any possibility of her story having any truth in it whatsoever. I am sorry you think she deserves to suffer. She certainly appears to have suffered, which to me makes it all the more unlikely for her to have deliberately made this whole thing up. Why should it matter whether the "boys" - let's call them men - were impaired? Well first of all, it calls their credibility into question. If you are very impaired, how can you get the facts straight as to what happened? This has been brought up many times in terms of the AV. Second of all, it opens up the possibility that they could have done things they do not remember, committed crimes, possibly. Third of all, while not intended to be any sort of proof, here's a reminder that 90% of sexual assaults involve alcohol. I have not "badgered," I am merely responding to Bob's plentiful and forceful comments. I am not proposing "medals," nor am I trying to wiggle. Nor do I take anything at face value. What exactly are you responding to, by making all these accusations? I don't understand. While orders of protection may be handed out like candy, many are all too real and often disregarded. People, mostly women, get threatened, hurt, and killed. Their abusers often punish them for going to the police. From my very limited experience, it seems to me that an order of protection offers little or no real protection; what it does is make it a little more likely that the police will actually do their job and arrest an abuser if a 911 call is made. imho, Yeah, I know.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#22)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sun May 21, 2006 at 03:49:19 PM EST
    Lora quoted me, I think, from something I wrote in the last thread: This is what I am supposed to have said: The AV's affirmation of no recent sex with her boyfriend I don't even remember saying it. I think I'm running out of steam. Since I don't remember where it was or to what it was in reference, I have no idea. I think it's because the AV is hiding behind a blue wall of silence.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#23)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun May 21, 2006 at 03:56:59 PM EST
    Hi Sharon, You wrote:
    I thought Bissey saw them going around to the back of the house, talking with (getting paid?) around 11:50 pm. In other words, that was when they arrived to start the show, not when they were "lured" back in.
    and you later wrote:
    Seems to me that Bissey saw them arriving, BEFORE the dance.
    When I postulated that what Bissey witnessed was the women returning to the house AFTER the dance was interrupted, it was in response to Khartoum's claim that there was overwhelming evidence that Seligman wasn't even at the house for the full period of the alleged incident. The only claim the prosecution has made as to the time that the rape occurred is that it was after the dance ended. The time stamp interpretations the defense has offered have yet to be subjected to scrutiny. And there is a twenty minute discrepancy between when the accuser says she arrived at the party and when Bissey says the accuser arrived. The evidence is not yet whelming, (much less overwhelming) that Seligman wasn't there at precisely the time the dancer claims she was raped. We're all just being subjected to a good shill-acking.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#24)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sun May 21, 2006 at 03:57:15 PM EST
    Lora, Which recent posts were inappropriate? Sorry, I didn't read all of your post the first time.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#25)
    by Lora on Sun May 21, 2006 at 04:00:22 PM EST
    Ori, I don't know that Nifong lied. The only thing I can think of that comes close is hedging about the phone. Besides possibly the poor dead horse phone, what lies did he make? The AV's injuries came from somewhere. Where? My comment about abusers was slightly off-topic, in ref to Teresa's post about PFA orders. No link to the AV.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#26)
    by Lora on Sun May 21, 2006 at 04:02:12 PM EST
    Bob, that last was to bean, not you. His posts were very inappropriate, mostly in terms of how he referred to the AV.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#27)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun May 21, 2006 at 04:02:52 PM EST
    Orinoco posted:
    You keep bagering Bob on the impaired state of the false accuser. You know why people don't care how drunk the boys are?
    Because it doesn't matter. Nothing rests on the cogency of the boys' minds because they didn't make a rape charge; they didn't identify "attackers"; they didn't have to describe in detail the facts of the "attack"
    Cheshire says he has witnesses that can account for David Evans' whereabouts throughout the evening. Lets hope this guy isn't one of them: Lora noted:
    We have a photo of one party member apparently passed out with a wet stain on his pants.


    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#28)
    by Teresa on Sun May 21, 2006 at 04:06:55 PM EST
    khartoum, I don't think Bob is arguing that the DA will say the alleged rape happened before 12:00. In the search warrant the accuser states that she and Kim left and were coaxed back in and that she and Kim were then separated. Many people think the second time she entered the house was after the 12:30 picture. Bob and I have discussed many times in the past that what Bissey saw just prior to midnight may have been the second entrance, not the first. The accuser arrived at 11:30 according to the search warrant and other sources. At $400 per hour, I can't see the guys wasting one half hour on small talk and cocktails. If the women danced shortly after 11:30 and then left because of the broomstick remark, the 11:50 to 12:00 entrance that Bissey saw would be when the dancers returned with the guy who apologized. This is the only timeline that the DA could have that could leave Seligmann as a suspect (assuming the time stamps are accurate). Personally, I don't think Seligmann did anything but he would have had time to participate under the DA's theory (my opinion of his theory).

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#29)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun May 21, 2006 at 04:08:57 PM EST
    Sharon in Jax posted:
    Cheshire said he contacted Nifong's office March 29 and volunteered to bring his client, team captain Dave Evans, to be interviewed by the district attorney but got no response.
    But got no response? So Nifong did not refuse to see him? When did Cheshire make this statement? I read it in an article dated April 22, 2006. Three weeks later and he hadn't made a second attempt? Does Cheshire even know if Nifong received his message? I would have dusted off my ego and kept trying to contact Nifong.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#30)
    by Lora on Sun May 21, 2006 at 04:10:00 PM EST
    Ori, he gave himself that out that was buried and ignored...that the DNA might not show up anything conclusive. He really did say it. He really did. I found it.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#31)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun May 21, 2006 at 04:25:36 PM EST
    Why hasn't the defense released the photos of David Evans without a mustache?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#33)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun May 21, 2006 at 04:28:41 PM EST
    Hey Orinoco, In response to:
    I don't know that Nifong lied.
    You wrote:
    "DNA is going to exonerate the innocent and point to the guilty", for one.
    You think of that as a lie? Sheesh. Saying that David Evans is half-Jewish is twice as big a lie as that. Are you trying to get the Black Panthers after him? I'm told their almost as anti-Semitic as the LPGA!

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#34)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun May 21, 2006 at 04:34:07 PM EST
    bean meets his hero.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#35)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sun May 21, 2006 at 04:35:59 PM EST
    Lora, Why do you get upset if someone impugns the integrity of the AV? What does it matter to you? This is a discussion group. We have some history of the AV. She's got a criminal record for a robbery during which she acted bizarrely, she's had a hospitalization for mental illness, which may have something to do with her behavior when she stole the taxicab. She's filed criminal charges against four men and then failed to pursue the cases. That shows a tendency. Maybe you didn't like me calling Roberts a liar. But she is. She's also a convicted thief. If someone's been convicted of stealing money from her boss, has lied to the police and the security guard on the night of the alleged rape, you should take what she says with a grain of salt. +++ There are people who think we should be discussing Rove's impending indictment, or the NSA scandal or a whole bunch of other things instead of this case. When and if I discuss those things, I'll go to those threads. Maybe the minders of public discourse will take away my Madden 2006. In the meantime, I am still confused as to why you would be offended about discussing the AV's background and speculating her character. Right now her word is just about all Nifong seems to have. How good is it?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#36)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sun May 21, 2006 at 04:38:54 PM EST
    PB, I believe it's Seligmann who is half-Jewish.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#37)
    by azbballfan on Sun May 21, 2006 at 04:39:16 PM EST
    Back from a long hike, there's been some good posts. To respond to some: SharoninJax:
    the defense did give a fairly comprehensive account in the Newsweek article. And what is the basis for your claim that the defense is trying to seperate the cases?
    I thought the Newsweek article provided a good account of them presenting an alibi with a little extra information, but I was looking for more. Certainly there are different critiques. IMHO Thanks for catching my spelling error. I can't remember if it was Seligmann's lawyer on Thursday or Cheshire the prior Friday who said the boys found the bag and phone outside and the police found them in the bathroom. Regardless, the boys were tipped off about a potential search and had plenty of time to tamper with evidence. Some might be surprised that the boys didn't throw out the nails. But you never know, it sounds like the AV had extra press on nails in her bag, so if the boys knew she left the house missing some nails, they might have taken some from her bag and placed them in the trash. There could have been broken nails with flesh on them which the boys threw away. Still, I'm disappointed that the Administration didn't consider how they could have tainted the investigation by tipping off the team. I'm more surprised that the report critiquing the Administration's handling of the matter didn't discuss the appropriateness of this. Sharon/IMHO Originally Finnerty and Seligmann were scheduled to be on the same court docket. Finnerty's lawyers filed a continuance motion which pushed his arraignment out until June or July. This allowed the defense team to get access to Nifong's 1200 page files prior to Finnerty's arraignment and may alter the way his case is tried. Towards the end of Seligmann's arraignment, Nifong told the judge he expected to file a motion to put the cases together and try them as one. Procedural nuances lawyers can use to complicate the DA's job and pull pieces of the prosecution's cases apart. Orinoco It's my understanding from criminal cases I've provided information for, that the DA is granted extra powers of subpoena after charges are made and a suspect is arraigned. The DA does not need to prove his case until he gets to trial. It is not uncommon for a DA to drop charges during an ongoing investigation after a suspect is arraigned. This may be why Nifong didn't accept the evidence from the defense team. He wanted to get an arraignment in order to proceed with the investigation. Of course, the claim that the DA refused evidence sounds a bit sketchy to me, because all the defense team has to do is to mail it to the DA by registered mail and the DA can't refuse it. This is one of the reasons why I ignore the defense team's claim that the DA is refusing evidence. They can't refuse mailed evidence. Del
    shades of Roxy Hart
    Excellent point. I should have said that if the boys are dismayed by not being able to talk to Nifong, they could always just mail testimony to him or give it to the press. Nifong would be upset, but they could mail a letter to Nifong and release it to the press. Of course, no attorney would do this. But again, I think Nifong is wrestling to get control of the investigation by getting arraignments. I'm interested in finding out what motions he filed on Thursday. It looked like a stack of them.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#38)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun May 21, 2006 at 04:43:48 PM EST
    I was looking for a Nifong quote when I noticed this "inconsistency." Form the one and only interview the AV gave: "My father came to see me in the hospital," she said. "I knew if I didn't report it that he would have that hurt forever, knowing that someone hurt his baby and got away with it." Then, again in the N&O: The man said he did not know his daughter was working as an escort that night. She didn't return until late the morning of March 14, the father said. So, did the father see the AV in the hospital or when she came home?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#39)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun May 21, 2006 at 04:44:53 PM EST
    Bob in Paciiica: You wrote: I believe it's Seligmann who is half-Jewish. Not according to Orinoco.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#40)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun May 21, 2006 at 04:51:27 PM EST
    SharoninJax posted:
    So, did the father see the AV in the hospital or when she came home?
    Very early the morning of March 14, the accuser's father and brother went to the hospital to see her. The doctors would not tell them why she was there. After waiting an hour or so they went home without ever seeing her. Her boyfriend brought her to the parents house around 8:00 a.m.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#41)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun May 21, 2006 at 04:54:02 PM EST
    Orinoco, You wrote:
    You keep bagering Bob on the impaired state of the false accuser.
    b-a-d-g-e-r-i-n-g

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#42)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun May 21, 2006 at 05:11:42 PM EST
    imho: never read/heard that. If so, then why would the father not have included that in his latest interview? The story jumps from her calling him at 11:30 to say she had arrived, then he sees her the next day. Maybe just N&O sloppiness.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#43)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun May 21, 2006 at 05:17:21 PM EST
    Posted by Orinoco May 21, 2006 05:43 PM
    These are moronic lies you are telling here, PB.
    I never said David Evans was half-Jewish. Seliegeman was.
    Posted by Orinoco May 16, 2006 08:52 PM
    PB,
    You are a joke and have lost all credibility on this board.
    You think a semi-Jewish person should meet an anti-semitic hate group (according to Southern Poverty Law Center and the ADL)
    Shut up already.
    If you use the link and scroll up, you'll see Orinoco's comment was in response to this post of PB's: Posted by PB May 16, 2006 06:32 PM
    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?
    Here is PB's reply: Posted by PB May 16, 2006 09:40 PM 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!!!!!

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#44)
    by Teresa on Sun May 21, 2006 at 05:24:20 PM EST
    Orinoco, I think the Time article is wrong. It says she left at 11:00 after being there five or six hours. We now know she was there before 3:00 so five or six hours would be around eight or nine.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#45)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sun May 21, 2006 at 05:25:11 PM EST
    I took the time to reread the weekend's post to see where Lora's quote of mine came from. This quote: The AV's affirmation of no recent sex with her boyfriend If you'll notice, it is not a complete sentence. It was in the last thread, here: May 21, 2006 09:30 AM, if anyone cares to read it. It was in response to another post in the ongoing thread. It was regarding the believability of the SANE report. It was also in the context of several people here saying that the degraded condition of the boyfriend's semen indicated that she hadn't had sex with anyone recently. This is the short paragraph I wrote: The AV's affirmation of no recent sex with her boyfriend in a SANE exam is no more or less believable than her testimony. If the jury doesn't believe her testimony, they won't believe her statements to the nurse. In the context of my post I was saying that what the AV may have said in the SANE report has no more believability than her testimony. I was not making any affirmative comment about her saying anything. So why would Lora go back and quote half a sentence out of context? I'll let you supply a motive, but it looks to me because she doesn't like my posts and felt the need to attack me. I invite anyone interested to actually go back and reread what was being written, to include all the posts to which I was responding. Lora seems to be dishonest here, or at least very good at taking things out of context. Beware the next time she quotes someone.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#46)
    by weezie on Sun May 21, 2006 at 05:30:43 PM EST
    Wait a minute IMHO, the doctors at the hospital (although I think it would have been the ward nurses) would not let the father of the FA see her? Next of kin does not get to see patient or learn why she is there? Who said this? Maybe Papa Bear looking for some more sympathy/attention ? At my hospital, next of kin rules all. BTW, Pistons took it to LeBron and sent him packing.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#47)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun May 21, 2006 at 05:35:25 PM EST
    weezie posted:
    Wait a minute IMHO, the doctors at the hospital (although I think it would have been the ward nurses) would not let the father of the FA see her? Next of kin does not get to see patient or learn why she is there? Who said this? Maybe Papa Bear looking for some more sympathy/attention ? At my hospital, next of kin rules all. BTW, Pistons took it to LeBron and sent him packing.
    Father of woman in Duke controversy speaks out
    The father said Tuesday that early on the morning of March 14, he went to Duke Hospital with his son and waited more than two hours to see his daughter. Doctors wouldn't say why she was there, he said.
    The father went home and waited for word from his daughter. Later that morning, she came to her parents' house with her boyfriend.
    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#48)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sun May 21, 2006 at 05:36:07 PM EST
    PB, since it was Seligmann who was being threatened by the man who was either a member of an anti-Semitic hate group, let's just presume that Orinoco misspoke when identifying him. The point is that the defendant who got the "dead man walking" chat is partly of Jewish ancestry and white. So let's clarify. Which defendant do you want to reach out to the NBPP? I can see it all now: "Wait, wait a second, let this guy have his say. You know, maybe he's right!"

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#49)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun May 21, 2006 at 05:39:16 PM EST
    Teresa posted:
    Orinoco, I think the Time article is wrong. It says she left at 11:00 after being there five or six hours. We now know she was there before 3:00 so five or six hours would be around eight or nine.
    Thank you, Teresa. I wasn't going to bother, the semi-Jewish post was mortifying enough. Poor Orinoco.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#51)
    by weezie on Sun May 21, 2006 at 05:55:51 PM EST
    Ok, IMHO, I'm not saying you are quoting incorrectly, I'm saying the father is lying. No...where, no...how a next of kin is not going to get access to an in-patient unless, SHE, has refused access. So, you're an accomplished poster, what possible reason for refusing papa's visit? Unless, again, papa is lying for the camera/reporter to make it all sound more dramatic? Frankly, I'm sinking yet again into a whirlpool of confusion. Thank goodness "The Sopranos" is about to start. Some good family entertainment.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#50)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun May 21, 2006 at 05:55:57 PM EST
    Interesting article and viewpoint, and an incredible historical coincidence: http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/14749.html"> link

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#52)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun May 21, 2006 at 05:56:56 PM EST
    Not sure I would base anything on what her father has said, imho. His statements on a lot of things are questionable, and hurt his daughter's cause more than help, I think.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#53)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun May 21, 2006 at 06:08:04 PM EST
    weezie posted:
    Ok, IMHO, I'm not saying you are quoting incorrectly,
    Oh, I didn't think you were. weezie posted:
    I'm saying the father is lying. No...where, no...how a next of kin is not going to get access to an in-patient unless, SHE, has refused access.
    He didn't say he was refused access. weezie posted:
    So, you're an accomplished poster, what possible reason for refusing papa's visit?
    We don't know that she did. weezie posted:
    Unless, again, papa is lying for the camera/reporter to make it all sound more dramatic?
    Could be neither.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#54)
    by Teresa on Sun May 21, 2006 at 06:13:14 PM EST
    That man has got to be extremely gullible
    That's my take on the father Orinoco. He is as clear as mud to me. He says "I think so" to whatever the interviewer says to him. I hope he has a witness at the store where he went with his daughter because I think he's ruined his credibility. I feel really bad for him and I wish his wife would be more successful when she tries to yank him in the house and away from the media.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#55)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun May 21, 2006 at 06:16:40 PM EST
    Bob, We are not teasing Orinoco for making mistakes. We all make mistakes. We are teasing him about the way he treats other commenters (especially the ones he is ignoring) when they make mistakes. His "Liar!" posts are hilarious.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#56)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun May 21, 2006 at 06:18:53 PM EST
    I think the accuser's father is as guileless as they come.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#57)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sun May 21, 2006 at 06:19:11 PM EST
    IMHO, If you like Orinoco's "liar" posts, then you'll love the post above where Lora's caught up in a lie of her own.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#58)
    by Teresa on Sun May 21, 2006 at 06:19:14 PM EST
    Weezie, she was in the hospital having a rape exam. That takes 4 or 5 hours from what I've read. When my mother had a mild stroke and ended up in the emergency room, the nurses/doctors wouldn't tell me any details about her stroke or let me in the room where her tests were being done. I don't doubt they wouldn't let him in the exam room if he really went there. After my mother was in her room, they let me in then but would only discuss her condition with me when I was in the room with her.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#59)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun May 21, 2006 at 06:21:16 PM EST
    Wait, wait a second, let him have his say...
    Bob, I am so touched that you remembered the screenplay scenario.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#60)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sun May 21, 2006 at 06:25:17 PM EST
    Del, I knew it was someone here. But then they break into a dance!

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#61)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun May 21, 2006 at 06:32:49 PM EST
    Here's another interesting link, probably the most comprehensive (and well designed) timelines I've seen. Not enough sources given, but it seems like I've heard it all, somewhere before. Maybe not 100% accurate, but seems close to me. http://johnsville.blogspot.com/2006/04/duke-lacrosse-rape-timeline.html

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#62)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun May 21, 2006 at 06:42:50 PM EST
    SharonInJax posted:
    AND, imho, would you not agree that an alleged victim's confusion or misidentification of the color of a rug which, by inference, one might think she had seen up close in the course of a rape, is a bit more important than the cabbie's confusion or misidentification of the color of a car?
    I don't think either are important, but in the interest of avoiding some other stuff I should be doing right now, I'll play along.
    The police would not have specified the color of the bathmat if she had not added that as a detail of her story. The relevant evidence in the form of testimony of the cabbie boils down to (1) the time of Seligman's call to the cab company; (2) the time the cabbie picked up Seligman; and (3) the place where he picked Seligman up. The cabbie's statement about the color of the car has no relevance to his other testimony, goes to credibility. But the time of the call and the pickup, as well as the address where he was to make the pickup, are more in the form of written or electronic records of the cab company, not just his recollection. The importance of the AV's recollection compared to that of the cabbie is in the mountain v. molehill realm.
    I think the most important thing the cabbie has to contribute is the demeanor of Seligmann and the other passenger. What if the color blind cabbie got Seligmann's demeanor confused with the worried and agitated boys he picked up 40 minutes later? The color of the bathmat might have some import if she was trying to prove she had been in the bathroom and the players were saying she had not. Hmmmm? AH HA! Maybe the boys switched the bathroom carpets? What color is the bathmat in the second bathroom? Is it laden with semen and body fluids?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#63)
    by Teresa on Sun May 21, 2006 at 06:56:06 PM EST
    Orinoco, how old are you? You seem really intelligent sometimes and worse than my young daughter at others. Please just discuss the case. You do fine with that and I don't want any of us to be banned.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#64)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun May 21, 2006 at 06:56:32 PM EST
    Orinoco posted:
    TL, could you check the IP's of imho and PB?
    Orinoco, If you knew how hard you make me laugh.... TL knows PB and I are not the same person and she is not going to appreciate your using the link (again) to tattle on me (again). She asked me to remove it and I promptly did so. For your sake, I hope there is such a thing as "triple secret probation," if there isn't, you're a goner.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#65)
    by Teresa on Sun May 21, 2006 at 06:59:07 PM EST
    Sharon, the accuser said the rug was her version of blue, but it's the police officer who listed it as his version of green. They also took a small bath mat but didn't list the color on it.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#66)
    by azbballfan on Sun May 21, 2006 at 07:11:01 PM EST
    Orinoco wrote:
    That man has got to be extremely gullible, stupid to comatose levels or a bad liar.
    The times I've seen the father interviewed, he seemed very confused, upset, and a little scared. He didn't look to be of particularly good health. There is evidence that his daughter had kept information from him so as not to upset him. It seems to me that since the defense team has become so media friendly and Nifong has clammed up that the media is looking for ways to keep the story in the headlines by providing reports from the other side. The story was a local story which ESPN made a national one. ESPN had been focused on Duke basketball for the entire season and after they lost, they wanted to find a hook to keep those who followed Duke. Some of these would be fans and some would be haters. After ESPN dedicated a special section on thier website to the Duke scandal, all the other national media picked it up. The news media needs a banter from both sides to keep a story in the headlines. One-sided stories get religated to the bottom of the page or page two. Look at all the current scandals where we are only hearing one side. They don't get as much attention because there's no argument to report. So, the media keeps on going to this confused man who seems to like attention and wants to appear to be a good/concerned father. I know I'd be ashamed if my daughter was involved in a case like this and didn't feel comfortable talking to me. Regarding the patient's right to privace. All hospitals maintain a patient's right to privacy. They need approval of the patient to release any medical information to anyone. The only exception is if the person is completely incapacitated or dead. Clearly the daughter did not feel comfortable talking to her dad during her physical examination or police interview. So the father went home to wait for her. Orinoco: While I'm not suprised that you are demonizing anyone, complaining about what posters here happen to post on other forums is boorish. Signed, the original Liar

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#67)
    by azbballfan on Sun May 21, 2006 at 07:12:46 PM EST
    Slophoto, oops, The only exceptions are

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#68)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sun May 21, 2006 at 07:17:27 PM EST
    Where is Lora? I just called her dishonest for her quote of a half sentence of mine out of context and she seems to have disappeared. Orinoco, maybe Lora is IMHO is PB. Whose left?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#69)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sun May 21, 2006 at 07:19:36 PM EST
    Whoops, who's left?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#70)
    by Teresa on Sun May 21, 2006 at 07:26:56 PM EST
    Bob, you are one of the posters here who I think are really trying to come to grips with this story in your own mind. I enjoy reading you argue with yourself and I think you try to see all sides. I think Lora took your post out of context because it's hard to remember what every post is being made in response to. I find myself confused a lot and I also took your post out of context until you explained yourself. It didn't bother me though because I thought it was just your statement about an article I had missed.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#71)
    by Teresa on Sun May 21, 2006 at 07:29:12 PM EST
    one of the posters here who is? I think I flubbed that sentence really well.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#72)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun May 21, 2006 at 07:32:41 PM EST
    imho posted:
    I think the most important thing the cabbie has to contribute is the demeanor of Seligmann and the other passenger. What if the color blind cabbie got Seligmann's demeanor confused with the worried and agitated boys he picked up 40 minutes later?
    There is another witness who was with Seligmann for the entire cabride; we've already been told that both have given affidavits. Of all Seligmann's evidence, the cab driver seems like the least significant--he can confirm that he received the call, showing that Seligmann was in possession of his cellphone, but everything else from Seligmann is confirmed by receipts, electronic records, or the ATM video. So it might be that the cab driver, having driven Seligmann for nearly 30 minutes and given an affidavit about the cabride that's been confirmed by a variety of unimpeachable sources, "got Seligmann's demeanor confused with the worried and agitated boys he picked up 40 minutes later." But that strikes me as about as likely as the scenario that has Seligmann text-messaging his girlfriend while raping the accuser--leaving no DNA in the process--and then wildly fleeing the scene, counting on 40 teammates to participate in a criminal conspiracy to prevent evidence of his fleeing the scene from coming to light.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#73)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun May 21, 2006 at 07:35:29 PM EST
    Bob in Pacifica: You wrote:
    PB, since it was Seligmann who was being threatened by the man who was either a member of an anti-Semitic hate group, let's just presume that Orinoco misspoke when identifying him.
    Orinoco posted his "semi-Jewish" quote two days before Seligman's hearing. Beyond that, can you finish your thought? The man was "either a member of" a hate group or what?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#74)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun May 21, 2006 at 07:42:47 PM EST
    khartoum, I don't think the color of the carpet or the color of the car impeached either person's credibility. I don't think the cabbie confused two jovial guys w/ four agitated guys. Like I said, I was just avoiding a more onerous task.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#75)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun May 21, 2006 at 07:46:07 PM EST
    Answer the question, Camp Skakel sockpuppet!
    Orinoco, I can't imagine you want me to be this happy. I'm guffawing at your posts. I don't think Talk Left will be as amused.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#76)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sun May 21, 2006 at 07:49:26 PM EST
    Teresa, If someone goes back to a post on the last thread and posts half of a sentence of mine, it's clear her point wasn't to explicate anything. Her point was to attack me. This was the paragraph, again: The AV's affirmation of no recent sex with her boyfriend in a SANE exam is no more or less believable than her testimony. If the jury doesn't believe her testimony, they won't believe her statements to the nurse. I am referring to the SANE exam, the AV's testimony and jury. There is also an "if" in the paragraph. We don't know the contents of the SANE exam so I could not have referred to the actual SANE exam, only in the hypothetical. The AV hasn't testified at the trial because the trial hasn't happened so I couldn't have been referring to an actual trial that hasn't yet occurred. Only the hypothetical. There is no jury because there is no trial. There is only a hypothetical jury. If Lora were honest, she would have referred me to the post and asked me what I meant. Lora has proven to me that she's dishonest. Would I like to just talk about the case? You bet. When someone takes the time to quote a half sentence out of context in an attempt to discredit me, then she deserves to be exposed. No one should trust her as an honest commentator from now on. Time for Lora to get a new name and come back as someone else.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#77)
    by Teresa on Sun May 21, 2006 at 07:52:04 PM EST
    I think what draws many of us to this blog as opposed to some others is that there is a real discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of this case from both sides. If everyone here agreed with only the defense position we wouldn't have a good debate. When I throw out an idea from the prosecution side there is usually someone here to show me the defense side. Kind of like a discussion from a jury. Can't we continue to have both points of view here without this constant attacking Orinoco? I don't want you gone and I don't want imho to leave either. You both make me think.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#78)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun May 21, 2006 at 07:52:29 PM EST
    Posted by bkabka 5/21, 4:24 PM: "Just imagine the cost of this case to the country? Thousands of hours spent on the blogs, God knows how much spent on legal fees?" ++ I would like to add my thoughts, hear others, on who will be the winners and losers in this case. (BTW, I believe this case is in the crapper for the scores of reasons already cited. It is only a matter of when and on whose terms.) Winners: 1. The defense attorneys - great publicity, great fees, will be in high demand for cases, speaking engagements, book(s). 2. Nifong - Yes indeed. If he gets even a slap on wrist for his unethical behavior I'd be surprised. Not wise for defense attorneys to make the big dog mad unless you are guaranteed to never have to oppose him again. His pandering has given him a permanent bloc of voters that will be enough of an edge in all future elections. 3. Ham sandwiches. Tossup: 1. The AV - In a world of worry she caused herself right now, but Jesse's got her tuition, she's got community support, perhaps several job offers so she is not forced to be in the stripper business to support her family. When ALMOST everyone knows this is bogus via a dropped case / acquittal, but never an admission of lying, (ergo, no criminal charges against her) there will be discussions of how this case brought to the forefront all the really important issues of race and class that still exist in America today. (Look on the bright side, and "she's suffered enough" crowd, yadda, yadda bullspit, the hell with supposedly innocent people.) Losers: 1. Lacrosse players - too easy. 2. Duke - Revenue and image- There are a lot of pi$$ed off wealthy alumni, many of whom see Brodhead as bungling the PR, and throwing the players under the bus. For years to come, you mention Duke, there will be many who say: "Isn't that the elitist school where 'they' raped a stripper," or "Maybe not a rape, but SOMETHING happened." 3. Brodhead - see above. 4. Kim - I don't think this embezzler has a bright future, even in the escort business. (Imagine calling for a stripper, the doorbell rings, and she is standing on your doorstep? That's like Freddie Krueger showing up to babysit.) 5. Durham - Revenue and image - Nifong is not footing this huge bill, and I don't see Durham as high on the list for conventions, corporate relocations, etc. P.S. I can't resist. Don't think about the Kim nightmare when you go to bed tonight. Good night.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#79)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun May 21, 2006 at 08:08:09 PM EST
    Bob, I see your quote was taken out of context. Nothing about Lora's prior posts leads me to believe she was intentionally trying to mislead anyone or dog you. I was dogging you when I said, "Welcome to Bob's World." Sorry. *drum roll* I WAS WRONG.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#80)
    by Lora on Sun May 21, 2006 at 08:38:36 PM EST
    Bob, I'm back, after doing something a great deal more enjoyable than wrangling with you. I'm not leaving the board, although, as TL has specifically requested that posters not attack each other, I don't know if I can say the same for you. I hope you stay, however, but I just wish you'd chill out some. I'm too lazy to count, but it seems that you've made about 5 posts attacking me after I questioned one of your statements. As for the partial quote I took from your post, about the AV's affirmation of no sex with her boyfriend, I very politely asked, "Where did that come from? I don't remember seeing it anywhere." Bob, whether I quote the whole paragraph or not, you stated it as a fact. That's how I read it. I was wondering where you got it from. That's all. Not lying, not trying to take out of context, not doing any of that stuff. Now if you'd simply explained it to me, I could simply say "thanks." I must say I'm pissed at your impugning my motives and essentially calling me a liar. I have never lied on this site. I've occasionally been mistaken, and when my mistakes have been pointed out to me, I actually acknowledge them. I only quoted the part I had trouble with, the part about the AV's affirmation of no sex with her boyfriend. The context of the rest of the paragraph didn't change its meaning for me, so I didn't include it. You said further on in the paragraph that if a jury doesn't believe her testimony, they won't believe her statements to the SANE nurse. Which statements were you referring to? Why, from the same paragraph, must be at least the one about not having sex with her boyfriend. I thought you must have read it somewhere. As far as my concern over the integrity of the AV: the arguments you've been putting forward, about her previous police reports, about her hospitalization and hypothetical mental illness and hypothetical medication, really don't affect her credibility at all unless you can prove her past police reports to be false (which you can't) or unless you can prove that she's on a particular medication and you can correlate it with a significant likelihood of memory impairment or lying (which you can't). So, that's why it matters to me. You go on about how her credibility is highly suspect, but your arguments don't hold up.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#81)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sun May 21, 2006 at 08:39:40 PM EST
    So was that an apology, Lora?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#82)
    by weezie on Sun May 21, 2006 at 08:40:53 PM EST
    Teresa, I'm sorry you were treated that way by the doctors dealing with your mother. When I have family members anxiously awaiting word, I try to get out to them as soon as possible. It helps not to have an anxious, enraged family waiting to tear my throat out so it is the least I can do. I wonder if there was a police officer present who could have kept papa company or acted as a liason. But, I admit to a small community hospital, the bigs have more layers of bureaucracy to contend with. I still don't buy pops not being able to see the FA or at the very least his not being given any information as to her status. It simply doesn't wash and smells of embellishment for the tv reporters.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#83)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun May 21, 2006 at 08:44:18 PM EST
    Ironic thing is, if you had heeded her warning, your internet Sockpuppetry wouldn't be so easy to uncover.
    She asked me to "please delete the url," I promptly did so. You reposted it and just proved you knew she did not want it posted here. Dead Man Walking? I can't believe you want to make my evening this enjoyable.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#84)
    by Lora on Sun May 21, 2006 at 08:44:59 PM EST
    Bob, what is it that I'm supposed to apologize for? For asking if you read that the AV told a SANE nurse that she didn't have sex with her boyfriend?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#85)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sun May 21, 2006 at 08:48:12 PM EST
    I still don't buy pops not being able to see the FA or at the very least his not being given any information as to her status. It simply doesn't wash and smells of embellishment for the tv reporters.
    She may have been in the middle of a four hour S.A.N.E. exam. The doctors can't tell, even her father, "she's just been raped." She's 27 years old.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case Open Thread: Continued (none / 0) (#86)
    by azbballfan on Sun May 21, 2006 at 08:51:49 PM EST
    lightenup: Excellent post, thank you. I especially liked the gratuitous ham sandwich winner and laughed at your rationale for Kim. I agree with most of your list. You asked for opinions, here's my changes and some rationale: Duke - Tossup. If the players are convicted then they definitely lose. If the case is dropped or the players are found not guilty, then it's a tossup or possibly even a win. True, some big supporters who are offended by boys drinking and hiring strippers or are upset with Broadhead may use their financial pressure to change Broadhead. But the school will use the unfair treatment of the players to play of the sympathy of all other donors and potential donors and this will certainly accelerate the replacement of Broadhead. This could bring a rallying cry behind the s