home

Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turned Over

By Jeralyn, Section Duke Lacrosse
Posted on Mon May 22, 2006 at 06:44:23 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Durham County DA Mike Nifong has hinted for over a month that a toxicology report may show the accuser in the Duke Lacrosse players' case ingested a date-rape type drug.

When the case first broke in the press, Prosecutor Mike Nifong, a white
man who is running for election in a racially mixed county, hinted to
Newsweek that blood and urine tests of the woman would reveal the presence
of a date- rape drug.

Last week, the DA turned over more than 1,200 pages of discovery. Guess what? No toxicology report was included.

Seligmann's attorneys want a judge to order prosecutors to provide any reports "generated from blood, urine or other biological samples" collected from the accuser. In the motion, they cited a story published in Newsweek earlier this month that said District Attorney Mike Nifong "hinted" such tests would reveal the presence of a date-rape drug.

Authorities have said a doctor and specially trained nurse performed a physical exam on the accuser that found evidence of sexual assault. But the nurse who filled out a report on that exam indicated no toxicology tests were performed, according to the defense motion.

One would think the DA would be straight-forward and admit or deny the existence of a toxicology report. If tests weren't performed, he'd have nothing to send into a lab for examination. Not Nifong.

"If there was a toxicology report available, it would've been included in the discovery I handed over to the defense," Nifong told WRAL on Monday. Nifong told WRAL he had turned over all the evidence he has to-date and that when any new reports or documents come in, they too, would be handed over to the defense.

So, is there a report that is not back yet? Why won't he say?

The defense also says the discovery is not complete.

In a second motion filed Monday, the attorneys said information was missing, including "a substantial portion" of a report on the sexual-assault exam.

"It is clear from the discovery provided that discovery in this matter is nowhere near complete," the motion states.

Colin Finnerty's lawyer said today there is nothing in the discovery that causes him concern.

< U.S. Warplanes Bomb Afghan Religious School | Tuesday Open Thread >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turned Over | 258 comments (258 topical)
    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 07:18:38 PM EST
    Oh, okay. Sorry.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#2)
    by Teresa on Mon May 22, 2006 at 07:19:30 PM EST
    They weren't tested because she wasn't accusing them of rape. Just the "wealthy" Duke boys. And maybe she felt she owed it to the drivers for her share of the gas.
    weezie, the drivers aren't accused of rape either. Why would they be tested and not the clients that they drove her to?

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#3)
    by Teresa on Mon May 22, 2006 at 07:21:14 PM EST
    In light of the new information that came out on Fox, do people here think
    Orinco, I would never assume anything from Fox to be complete enough to judge anyone. Let's see if there are two sides like there was with the 20 versus 3 guys.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 07:23:00 PM EST
    Teresa, I thought we'd already established that her clients were important Durham bigwigs who were hard at work greasing wheels within wheels to get her off with a wrist tap after the Stolen Taxi Incident, and now to keep their DNA out of the limelight.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 07:23:08 PM EST
    Hannity replay at 2:00 a.m. on the East Coast, if you know how to set your DVR/VCR/Tivo. Ori, Everyone knows Wright plays for NY's "B" team, but I'll still respect you if you're not a Boston fan. But let's stay on topic, so I can have the last word.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 07:24:20 PM EST
    IMHO wrote:
    That's what I was thinking about Kali's friend who gets "freebies" from the prostitute that so impressed Kali.
    Whatever.....I have more respect for a high priced call girl with 4 clients who put herself through Columbia Law School, than someone like you, who as more and more of the truth comes out against your beloved AV/FA, feels the need to turn your self-hatred against me and others like a child who is not getting his way. Maybe if you got out of the house more, instead of searching the internet for hours to build you "library" of past comments, old photographs and snippets about commentators you would find pleasure in the beauty of the real world not a virtual one.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#7)
    by Teresa on Mon May 22, 2006 at 07:34:44 PM EST
    Orinoco, I will remain a little skeptical while we are only hearing one side of the story. Remember, Cong. Jefferson says he's innocent also and he's on tape and has the money in his freezer. Most defense lawyers say their client is innocent and spin the news their way. I do tend to believe that there isn't much left of this case though. Kali, what's happened to your sense of humor?

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#8)
    by spartan on Mon May 22, 2006 at 07:41:21 PM EST
    Toxicology is not always ordered by md's if they don't have any suspicion for any drugs. Blood should still have been collected for future tests but it doesn't look like they did by these reports.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 07:45:09 PM EST
    Teresa said:
    I will remain a little skeptical while we are only hearing one side of the story.
    In normal cases, I think this would be true. But in Nifong's 70+ interviews, he certainly was willing to give his side of the story in remarkably rich details. So it's not as if we haven't heard his side of the story. It's of course possible that there's a hidden bombshell in this evidence turned over to the defense, but Nifong proved so willing to leak at the start of the case (and none of what was turned over to the defense was evidence Nifong didn't possess at the time of his leaking), it's hard to imagine what positive items could be contained in this material that Nifong wouldn't already have leaked. That said, there's nothing that can force him to drop the charges, so I assume the process will lurch forward and he'll drag it out as long as he can.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#10)
    by Teresa on Mon May 22, 2006 at 07:55:02 PM EST
    khartoum, I sort of agree. But in all of Nifong's interviews he just said he believed a rape happened and then his office leaked a one-sided DNA result. I don't recall him leaking any other real evidence. It bothers me that the Meghan girl is the only one with this information. The local press doesn't have it (yet) and that reporter never appears on Greta (which is the only Fox show I watch sometimes). I guess I just expect anything on Hannity to be one-sided. If he has nothing else, I think he needs to say so and just drop it. He's digging an awfully deep hole for himself. Normally I wouldn't expect a DA to publicly explain himself but the issues in Durham deserve the whole truth be told.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#11)
    by weezie on Mon May 22, 2006 at 07:59:52 PM EST
    Is it too unrealistic to expect the judge (once the case has been assigned) to throw the whole thing out immediately or does the dog and pony show of a trial have to proceed? Lawyers, anybody care to take a guess?

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#12)
    by weezie on Mon May 22, 2006 at 08:04:45 PM EST
    Teresa, re-read your post, I guess that at the time she gave her many versions of the night in question, she "forgot" that her two extra beaus did in fact drive her to her five weekend appointments at those Durham hotels. So the confreres at the hotels simply slipped her mind! She was a busy gal, that's for sure.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 08:12:51 PM EST
    Geezus, this guy Nifong is positively Cheney-esque! Wonder if he knows about the yellow-cake uranium....

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#14)
    by Teresa on Mon May 22, 2006 at 08:15:58 PM EST
    Kali, I've been thinking about your post. A beautiful law student in New York would have some advantages over a not as beautiful and poor black girl in North Carolina. I don't see the difference in the two. Maybe a difference in volume but not in the nature of their job. I personally think prostitution should be legal so I don't judge one of them more than the other. I will judge her harshly if she made a false claim and can't find it in herself to admit it.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 08:17:00 PM EST
    5 in the previous 2 evenings, plus keeping the bf happy? Diffuse edema, indeed. But I agree Teresa, I'd rather wait to hear about it somewhere other than Fox.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#16)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 08:19:00 PM EST
    I don't think a motion to dismiss will be granted: in theory, all Nifong needs is the AV's story. It's up to the jury, the "trier of fact" to decide whether they believe her or not. It would be very difficult, or take a gutsy judge, to find that as a matter of law she could not have been raped by the three defendants. In other words, a jury could believe she lied about everything but "they did it."

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 08:22:31 PM EST
    The Van Susteren panel was unbelievably negative to Nifong. Still Fox, I know, but all they were focusing on was the lack of toxicology report, not even the other details that Kendall had.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#18)
    by weezie on Mon May 22, 2006 at 08:23:16 PM EST
    Spartan, can the person being examined for possible rape refuse the tox tests?

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 08:23:19 PM EST
    That's what worries me, Sharon. Given the atmosphere outside the courthouse, seems like you could put together a jury that would believe just that. Bob has already pointed out the Scottsboro parallel.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#20)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 08:27:56 PM EST
    Here's my current take: Nifong doesn't have much more than he's shown, but that's a lot more than people are giving him credit for. There's no smoking gun. But there is the AV. She's going to get up on the witness stand and testify that the three defendants raped her. There's a good chance that she'll be highly emotional and will tell a story that will have the courtroom rivited. The jury will have to decide whether she just made the whole thing up. But backing her story will be the SANE nurse, who can testify to her demeanor, and the admittedly imperfect Kim, who can testfy to symptoms consistent with drugging. If the jury finds the AV credible and believes a rape occured, a big part of Nifong's job is done. The "nothing happened" argument could very well backfire at that point (even with 40 duke students telling the same story), leaving the defense backpedaling as it switches to the stronger "it wasn't me" defense. Sure, the chances are excellent that the defense will be able to create reasonable doubt about the actual identity of the attackers. And that's going to get at least some of the defendants off. But if they lose the credibility battle on whether or not a rape took place to begin with, I think it could be bad news for the player with the worst alibi of the bunch. The jury might not be certain that the 3 defendants were the attackers, but if they're certain that the defense is lying to to them, there's still plenty of room for a conviction. Now I know there's a ton of evidence that supports the the players's story. But at the end of the day this is a he said / she said case. And if the jury believes the AV on the stand, that may be all that Nifong needs to come out of this thing with at least one and possibly more convictions under his belt. Absent the AV refusing to testify, Nifong has a strong enough case to go to trial and have a shot at winning. The defense can have a whole laundry list of police and prosector f*ck ups to point to, but at the end of the day the case is going to be about whether the jury believes the AVs story when they hear it from her own lips. Shoddy police work isn't going to change that impression.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#21)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 08:28:48 PM EST
    It should be clear to all what is going on here. There is nothing there. There is no evidence. The SANE exam turned out to be SWELLING only. She names 3 men that could've been responsible for the sperm INSIDE her, and then two of those men - say they drove her to a hotel 5 times (5 round trip) within 24-48 of the alleged attack. Regardless of where you came down on this case before. If you are for justice, if you wish to protect the innocent, if you are against abuse of power - you should condemn Nifong for this tawdry mockery of justice. If a District Attorney can do this in this case and get away with it, it can be done to your boyfriend, brother, Uncle, Father, or friends. Wrong is wrong. Further, many were misled on the evidence in this case.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#22)
    by Teresa on Mon May 22, 2006 at 08:39:34 PM EST
    Lefty, the misleading goes both ways. Remember that the defense told us there was no DNA evidence that she had had sex at all. And that all the tests were negative, not just inconclusive. I guess the truth is somewhere in the middle or leaning to the defense as of this point. Hues, I really don't think a jury would convict on her word only. I'm pretty objective about most things and I couldn't. Are we to conclude now that the SANE report was not incomplete after all or was it just the tox report that the original article this morning should have referred to?

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#23)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Mon May 22, 2006 at 08:43:22 PM EST
    Kalidoggie posted:
    Whatever.....I have more respect for a high priced call girl with 4 clients who put herself through Columbia Law School, than someone like you, who as more and more of the truth comes out against your beloved AV/FA, feels the need to turn your self-hatred against me and others like a child who is not getting his way.
    Even high priced call girls with 4 clients who put themselves through Columbia Law School can give their "boyfriends" some pretty nasty diseases. That's all I'm saying. No need for you to react like a child. Kalidoggie posted:
    Maybe if you got out of the house more, instead of searching the internet for hours to build you "library" of past comments, old photographs and snippets about commentators you would find pleasure in the beauty of the real world not a virtual one.
    Ah, the photograph. I should have known your tantrum wasn't over the honor of the impressive prostitute, but about your own honor. If you don't want me to point out the inconsistencies in your posts, just say so. You can post away, with no worry that I'll correct your comments. As a peace offering I'll pretend that the hair on Matt Zash's face isn't facial hair. I'll give up my crazed suposition that Coach Pressler's "no-facial hair" rule for the entirety of his time at Duke, including 2005 apparently wasn't very strictly enforced and Pressler even tolerated facial hair during the game where that photo was snapped. Whatever.....

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#24)
    by spartan on Mon May 22, 2006 at 08:44:23 PM EST
    I don't believe the patient can refuse the tox screen. If the md feels she is just drunk then he probably will not send it off for etoh levels. Extra blood for HIV, etc.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#26)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 08:55:24 PM EST
    sharon posted:
    I don't think a motion to dismiss will be granted: in theory, all Nifong needs is the AV's story.
    I agree it would take a courageous judge to dismiss, but there would be grounds. The photo ID array didn't follow the state's Actual Innocence Project guidelines. These are guidelines and not mandatory, but if a judge suppressed the photo ID, there would no longer be a case, since that's the sole linkage between the defendants and any "crime." The other alternative is the accuser, under subtle prompting from Nifong, deciding that she doesn't want to testify, which would allow Nifong to say he believed a rape occurred but just can't go forward.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#27)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 08:57:26 PM EST
    Spartan, In North Carolina, they have many laws protecting people with substance abuse problems. They set up an entire secret database for people in alchol programs, the inhaler/blowers (alchol dectection) on the ignition, etc. In North Carolina, someone claiming to be the victim of a Sexual Assault can decline the Toxicology test. This was done, like the Rape shield laws, to unencumber sexual assualt victims. The intent was to remove barriers that prevented women from reporting sexual assault. It is a fact, in North Carolina, a victim persons getting treatment for sexual assault have the option to decline the Toxicology test.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#28)
    by chew2 on Mon May 22, 2006 at 08:58:48 PM EST
    Huesofblues
    But at the end of the day this is a he said / she said case. And if the jury believes the AV on the stand, that may be all that Nifong needs to come out of this thing with at least one and possibly more convictions under his belt. Absent the AV refusing to testify, Nifong has a strong enough case to go to trial and have a shot at winning.
    Very good analysis for someone who isn't a trial attorney. I'm not one either, but I agree. I've previously posted a case, State v. Brinkley, where defendant was convicted based partly on a key witness who identified the defendant at trial as the shooter even though, 1) it was dark, 2) the witness was high on weed at the time, 3) he couldn't ID him at a photo lineup, and 4) he claimed the defendant had dreadlocks when there was police testimony that he never had dreads. I think because the lacrosse team members are felt to be so important and wealth many folks expect the DA to have manufactured a federal case against them. It's perhaps a sad fact that poorer defendants are convicted every day on similar evidence. I wonder if its possible that Nifong was the prosecuting attorney in the Brinkley case.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#29)
    by Teresa on Mon May 22, 2006 at 09:07:14 PM EST
    hues, I could go along with that as a juror if the verdict is that I believe she was raped but I don't see how anyone could believe that these 3 did it (based on what we know). So do you think then that Nifong is not totally wrong to continue with this case in spite of all the unfavorable press he's getting? Is a believable witness and an ID enough given what we know about her other activities?

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#30)
    by chew2 on Mon May 22, 2006 at 09:12:51 PM EST
    Teresa, So do you think then that Nifong is not totally wrong to continue with this case in spite of all the unfavorable press he's getting?
    Do you think a DA should be influenced by pressure from the press and the public, whether its a howling lynch mob or a howling defense mob. Its human nature that the DA might yield to such pressure, but I don't think he should.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#31)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 09:19:24 PM EST
    I hope there is what some of us in the South call a "Come to Jesus" meeting with Nifong, the AV, whatever trial judge is assigned the case, the Governor who appointed Nifong in the first place, ANYONE who at some point before trial can say, "Time to move on, for everyone's sakes." Maybe the Governor is the way to go: if this case stinks as badly as it seems now, I doubt he will want any blowback from the voters hitting him. There needs to be a voice of reason, or call it the voice of reasonable doubt to get Nifong or maybe Jesse Jackson can have a little chat with the AV and her family. (WOW, did I just imply that JJ is a "voice of reason"? Scary.)

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#32)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 09:22:57 PM EST
    Chew2, "It's perhaps a sad fact that poorer defendants are convicted every day on similar evidence." Two wrongs do not make a right. I think we should work to eliminate ALL unjust prosecutions. Having said that, it seems the vilification of these Lacrosse players was possible because they were Rich and White. They were grouped together in media coverage and all 47 were blamed for the actions of 1 or 2. They were treated as a GROUP with like features, personalities, affinities, beliefs, and FAILURES. Our Justice system is based on individuals. Individual rights and individual Guilt. "Personal guilt" is a basic standard of our criminal law. It means a person can't be held responsible for the criminal activity of another unless there is an active conspiracy between them. It means we don't subscribe to guilt by association. These players were treated as one by the media. Aspersions were conveniently cast by throwing them all together and treating them as one entity. I can't recall another case where a group accused was treated as one Guilty entity. Read the early coverage of this story in the media and you'll see a story of a monolithic group with shared guilt and shared lawlessness.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#33)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 09:23:42 PM EST
    Left out: . . . to get Nifong to see what the "right" thing to do is in this case.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#34)
    by Teresa on Mon May 22, 2006 at 09:24:05 PM EST
    Good point Chew. And no I don't think he should. He must have pretty tough skin to continue with this though. I'd be leaking everywhere if I were him (assuming I had something to leak).

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#35)
    by spartan on Mon May 22, 2006 at 09:24:21 PM EST
    LeftyLou, Thanks for the NC info. In SC if the care of the patient would benefit from a tox screen and the patient is incoherent then the mds have an obligation to do the tests for the patient's care. If the patient is coherent, she can refuse .( I just called one of my ED mds to confirm. I hope i didn't confuse anyone.) Still, reports have the accuser in an hysterical state. I am not sure she refused the tox screen or the nurse didn't feel it was needed. Any more info on the actual SANE report?

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#36)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 09:28:27 PM EST
    Teresa I think there's enough. If there's evidence that she's a prostitute, it certainly doesn't help her case but it might not sink it either. Seligman will be really tough. I don't think anything is going to stick to him. The mustache thing is probably enough to create reasonable doubt regarding Evans too. That said, I don't think that Finnerty has that solid an alibi. And the fact that he's distinctivly goofy looking decreases the likelihood of a false ID. If Nifong gets one out of the three I think it would be safe to call it a prosecution victory.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#37)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 09:34:23 PM EST
    Spartan, Fox reporter (Megyn Kendall) said that multiple defense sources told her the only observation in the SANE report (other than the alleged victim's behavior) was vaginal swelling. No abrasions or tears but edema or swelling. Some of the most common infections and STDs produce vaginal swelling. A risk factor in those common infections is multiple sexual partners and/or new sexual partners. She also reported that the AV told Nifong after the first round of DNA testing that 3 men could be the source of the DNA found inside her. The 3 men were her boyfriend and 2 Drivers. When these 2 drivers were contacted they reported they drove the woman to a local hotel and then picked her up FIVE different times (5 round trips). This was 24-36 hours before the party. They also reported the woman had many different stories. She was raped by many; she wasn't raped; and she said one time that the other dancer was with her in the bathroom during the attack. In the Discovery papers, the other dancer is quoted as saying "that is a crock."

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#38)
    by chew2 on Mon May 22, 2006 at 09:35:27 PM EST
    lefty
    I can't recall another case where a group accused was treated as one Guilty entity. Read the early coverage of this story in the media and you'll see a story of a monolithic group with shared guilt and shared lawlessness.
    Sounds like your paranoia. The press never castigated them as a group for all being guilty of rape. They were castigated for making racist comments and having a drunken stripper party. They were castigated as a group for not cooperating with the police and possibly shielding a criminal, because there was a strong suspicion that the alleged victim was sexually assaulted that night at their party.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#39)
    by spartan on Mon May 22, 2006 at 09:36:16 PM EST
    By the way, The SC SANE report(probaly similar to NC report) is a very comprehensive report. It includes descriptions of the assailants, the location of the crime, sexual history etc. It will be interesting to see if the report jives with the statement the accuser made to the police later.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#40)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 09:36:31 PM EST
    I wouldn't be so sure that Finnerty doesn't have some alibi-type evidence as well, though maybe not as solid as Seligman. Just like everyone keeps saying that Nifong must have something up his sleeve/ace in the hole/smoking gun, it's just as possible that Finnerty's attorney does, too. I'm sure I've read about rumors to that effect, that Finnerty was at a restaurant around the time in question. Or am I hallucinating? Does anyone else remember something like that being mentioned?

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#41)
    by Teresa on Mon May 22, 2006 at 09:37:45 PM EST
    Thanks hues. The thing that bugs me the worst, by far, in this case is if the DA is on some kind of evil trip to get these guys with absolutely no justification. That really bothers me. I feel better if I know that he has an obligation to follow through with this as long as the accuser insists she's telling the truth.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#42)
    by Teresa on Mon May 22, 2006 at 09:40:59 PM EST
    I've read that too Sharon but not anywhere official. Just comments in blogs.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#43)
    by spartan on Mon May 22, 2006 at 09:42:05 PM EST
    LeftyLou, Althou STD can cause vagi*al swelling, usually the sores, ulcers or growths are more obvious than the swelling. In this case the most likely source for swelling is repeated trauma--sex.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#44)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 09:42:45 PM EST
    Orinoco I don't think I'm being delusional. I just think Nifong has enough to get a conviction if the jury finds the AV credible. That's not a totally off the wall proposition. I think that the 3 defendants will probably go free, but I don't think it's a sure thing. Right or wrong, juries give a lot of weight to people they find genuine in person. They're a lot like voters that way.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#45)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 09:42:53 PM EST
    Teresa: Nifong has no such obligation. DA's decline to prosecute ALL THE TIME when they decide that there is insufficient evidence to secure a conviction. If he uses his prosecutorial discretion to take this case to trial (barring any substantive new evidence) then shame on him. Even Nifong has to have doubts by now, eminently reasonable ones. Even if he thinks something happened at that house to her, I do not see how he can have any degree of certainty that he's got the right guys.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#46)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 09:43:22 PM EST
    Chew2, You said "They were castigated for making racist comments and having a drunken stripper party. They were castigated as a group for not cooperating with the police and possibly shielding a criminal" You make my point. All 47 were blamed for the alleged racist statement by 1 or 2? "They were castigated as a group for not cooperating," when we know that isn't true. Some went to the station answered all questions and volunteered to take lie dectector tests, which Nifong declined. In our Justice system they can NOT be held responsible for the actions of a few. You even admit they were treated as one in regard to the racist statements and in not cooperating. They were assailed for covering up a crime, a crime that evidence suggests was not commited.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#47)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 09:44:18 PM EST
    Thanks Teresa. I'm not saying there is anything to the rumor, but the way this case has gone thus far, I wouldn't be surprised.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#48)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 09:47:50 PM EST
    Spartan, Common bacterial infections are responsible for vaginal swelling also. And in the absence of an infection or early stages of an STD, what sex caused the swelling? The sex with her boyfriend that dropped her off, the same boyfriend whose sperm was found in her. The sex from her numerous sexual liasons? .

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#49)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 09:48:23 PM EST
    h of B, that is almost word for word what my husband said earlier tonight. (He also said I need to quit obsessing about this case.) That it will end up he said/ she said and that she will win. He seems to think the lesson here for our "beautiful boys" is never hire a stripper, they wouldn't be stripping if they didn't have serious problems to start off with. I guess Howard Stern would back that one up.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#50)
    by spartan on Mon May 22, 2006 at 09:50:59 PM EST
    I am a little ignorant here. How many jurors will it take to reach a not guilty verdict. If only one has to have more the a reasonable doubt, then I don't see any of the accused being found guilty based on what we have so far. Just look at this site , some feel they are guilty and some feel they are innocent.(about half and half)

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#51)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 09:52:40 PM EST
    I think they need a unanimous verdict. One holdout is all.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#52)
    by spartan on Mon May 22, 2006 at 09:54:24 PM EST
    My point exactly. If the reports of the accuser's activities are correct then it if from repeated sexual encounters (her nitetime job)

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#53)
    by chew2 on Mon May 22, 2006 at 09:56:26 PM EST
    lefty, You made my point. They were not blamed for a rape. They deserved to be blamed for their other behavior. They were a band of brothers, a team. Did the team or anyone on the team appologize for the racist remarks or deny them? 43 of those team members decided not to cooperate with the police. They deserved the blame for that decision. Two weeks afterwards team members were seen at a bar drinking shots and shouting "Duke lacrosse" - showing a callous indifference to the allegation of rape. They acted like a team, so they were treated as a team.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#54)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 09:58:56 PM EST
    Maybe that's Nifong strategy now: get at least one member of the jury to hold out for conviction, get a hung jury, then decline to refile. I surely hope not. My one experience with jury duty gives me hope, though, that the jurors will do their duty.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#55)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 09:59:56 PM EST
    Is there anyone here that wants them prosecuted if there is a credible alibi for that player? If the neighbor that was at war with the team says as he did that the women entered the house at 11:55. Reade Seligman made 4-6 calls walked a short distance and got in a cab (all with a friend). The Cab drivers account and his records corroborate this. An ATM video has Seligman on Camera. He has a receipt from a Carry out and then he and his friend card into their dorms using personal ID cards according to Duke computer records. So, for that guy, if that stuff exists, do you agree a Jury in a racially charged atmosphere with people shouting "Dead Man Walking" and Black Panthers marching on the City and University, that the case should not go forward if that evidence exists?

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#56)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 10:04:25 PM EST
    Orinoco, Actually we don't know how many people were in those hotel rooms. It appears she had 8 events, but it is not known that it was only 8 men, or how many times she had sex with those men. There certainly is sufficient activity to account for the SWELLING.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#57)
    by Teresa on Mon May 22, 2006 at 10:04:42 PM EST
    Teresa: Nifong has no such obligation. DA's decline to prosecute ALL THE TIME when they decide that there is insufficient evidence to secure a conviction.
    Well Sharon, now I don't feel better. :) What does he think he knows? Can a man with a good reputation change that much just for elective office? Sad isn't it, if true.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#58)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 10:06:00 PM EST
    Spartan, We are on the same page. If the information is true. I would doubt it, but the case seems to have been on a downward spiral.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#59)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 10:14:51 PM EST
    Nifong told WRAL, that IF there WAS a toxicology report, it would've been handed over in the discovery documents. So why did Mr. Nifong tell Newsweek - "Suppose I have a toxicology report showing the victim had a date rape drug in her system?" Nifong as a DA is not allowed to make those statements. It is prohibited. Former Prosecutor, Jim Hammer, said on Greta Van Susteren tonight, that if there is no such toxicology report after he told that to Newsweek, then he should be removed from his position and disbarred.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#60)
    by Teresa on Mon May 22, 2006 at 10:16:03 PM EST
    I guess so Orinoco. I'm just not used to good people changing like that. Nifong's wife is some kind of victims advocate. Maybe she has influenced him. Did the police not interview this woman at all to find out about all those men? I have problems with the way they investigated this case from the beginning. Del - is your husband a lawyer? Why do I think all of the posters here are men except for Lora, Sharon, Weezie and me?

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#61)
    by chew2 on Mon May 22, 2006 at 10:17:06 PM EST
    lefty,
    do you agree a Jury in a racially charged atmosphere with people shouting "Dead Man Walking" and Black Panthers marching on the City and University, that the case should not go forward if that evidence exists?
    The white press has played up the black panthers because it appeals to white fear and resentment. They are a marginal extremist group with no following in Durham. I think some 60% of registered voters (the probable jury pool) in Durham are white. This will likely be a majority white jury, and any racial hotheads, white or black, will be weeded out.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#62)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 10:22:53 PM EST
    Chew2, I hope you are right. Nifong did say there is No Toxicology report; in so many words. He told WRAL it would've been included if there was one. http://www.heraldsun.com/durham/4-737491.html

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#63)
    by spartan on Mon May 22, 2006 at 10:23:31 PM EST
    the comments about the tox screen are similar to the condom statements. He should have known from the beginning that condoms were not used(as it has been reported-not verified) We need the SANE report!!!!

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#64)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon May 22, 2006 at 10:34:38 PM EST
    Spartan, Last week it was reported that the AV said explicitly that Condoms were NOT used. I think the Condom thing arose when the DNA results came back. How do Drunks at a Keg Party gang-rape someone in a small bathroom and leave no DNA? Orinoco, I'm sure there's some clients desperately hoping they aren't uncovered or revealed in this investigation. I think the Rape Shield law will keep out most of her customers. It may keep the Jury from getting a complete picture of what was going on though.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#65)
    by Teresa on Mon May 22, 2006 at 11:25:08 PM EST
    Hannity - Said what was posted by above poster. Meghan emphasized several times that her info comes from defense sources and that they wouldn't tell her anything not helpful but this seems to be a bombshell for the defense. She also said the the accuser was consistent with the doctors but not with the police. (wonder why?) Hannity says he has several defense sources himself.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#66)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 23, 2006 at 12:27:35 AM EST
    Generally speaking, a coherent patient in their right mind can refuse anything, including exam, tests, tox screen... whatever. I've had more than one rape victim decline to do the rape kit for various reasons... and they were all absolutely within their rights. Just FYI, a standard ER tox screen will not show many of the common date rape drugs. Short-acting benzos, GHB, Roofies, etc simply won't trip a standard ER tox screen. There are specific tests for GHB, Roofies, etc... but any such testing MUST be done promptly to detect these drugs. By way of example, GHB has roughly a 20 minute half-life in the body, and is completely metabolized (ie. there are no intermediate metabolites you could test for). If a patient waits before going to the hospital (or their blood draw is delayed for some reason), it's easy to miss the window. I'm actually not surprised they didn't do a tox screen... those screens are rarely helpful.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#67)
    by azbballfan on Tue May 23, 2006 at 01:37:27 AM EST
    Yes, it's true that two wrongs don't mean a right. However, one right and one wrong beg to question how the wrong happened. I don't mean to be called a liar, but: Nifong is doing his best to try the case by the book. Just with the AV's testimony and physical evidence, he has the duty to present this evidence to a jury. If the defense has exculpatory evidence they insist the prosecution should consider, MAIL IT. Certainly, the defense team has unspoken stipulations for providing this evidence outside of the court mandated disclosure rules. The Blue Wall of Shame continues. They tried to separate the cases and will prove unsuccessful. They have filed motions to delay the case and certainly will blame the DA for these delays. I'm not saying the boys are guilty of a crime before they have their day in court. I will say their lawyers are guilty of not considering their clients' best wishes. IF The boys are innocent, the actions of their lawyers are unrepentant.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#68)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 23, 2006 at 04:31:24 AM EST
    Okay, I'm having a devil's advocate thought. What if the Boys are indeed guilty of premeditated rape with industsrial-strength condoms in the unnaturally clean bathroom, and of giving her a date-rape cocktail. And Nifong has "flipped" one of their teammates. (Or---I'm thinking of the screenplay here---one of the teammates with a grudge has gone to Nifong and told him a pack of lies.) Could that explain the stark ravingness of Nifong and also the non-listing of the witness to defense (I would imagine such a fellow might fear for his personal safety or whatever the phrase was). Not that I believe this for a minute. But in the interest of speculation. Another random thought--I wonder if there has been some kind of custody battle for the kids. Not the dad necessarily, but perhaps his mother or other family member who doesn't think the AV is a fit mom. That might explain why she was so terrified of being sent to the substance abuse/psych unit.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#69)
    by weezie on Tue May 23, 2006 at 05:36:10 AM EST
    Orinoco- I'm concerned that it is because she IS a psychotic nutcase that she will clean up well and be able to win an Oscar for her upcoming performance in court. If the DA gets the FA's meds straight and buys her a nice outfit she could end up basking in the attention and pull Julia Roberts on the stand.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#70)
    by Jlvngstn on Tue May 23, 2006 at 05:48:34 AM EST
    Was there no tox test taken or was it taken and buried because she had crack or blow or heroin in her system. Just curious.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#71)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Tue May 23, 2006 at 06:41:39 AM EST
    Maybe the tox report is not completed:
    It should be noted that there were no positive toxicology tests in this case partly because sexual assault kits at that time did not include urine (they do now for all of Los Angeles County) and partly because of the time factor (victims reporting beyond the possible time limit of 12 hours for getting a GHB positive)
    **********
    But from the legal standpoint, GHB will disappear more rapidly from the body than alcohol does. You are literally looking at 12 hours in order to document--there is an unknown chemical in the person's blood or in the person's urine and, therefore, making it very difficult to preserve the chain of custody and to record evidence that a crime has been committed.
    **********
    A new, faster, easier urine test has been developed for detection of GHB. The test is also more precise. As it stands right now, to detect GHB in the urine in higher than naturally occurring levels, rape victims have to get to a hospital within 12 hours, as GHB does not stay in the system longer.Current testing for GHB is a painstaking effort. It requires several milliliters of urine and a whole day's work for a lab tech. The new test takes about three hours and only needs a few drops of urine.
    Effect of storage temperature on endogenous GHB levels in urine. According to this study from the FBI Laboratory, they can detect exogenous GHB in a urine sample even if it has been stored at room temerature for six months.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#72)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 23, 2006 at 06:46:05 AM EST
    Khartoum, You wrote:
    I agree it would take a courageous judge to dismiss, but there would be grounds. The photo ID array didn't follow the state's Actual Innocence Project guidelines. These are guidelines and not mandatory, but if a judge suppressed the photo ID, there would no longer be a case, since that's the sole linkage between the defendants and any "crime."
    We haven't seen the kind of courage you're talking about since the Ku Klux Klan. But maybe if the Judge screws his courage to the sticking post... Theresa wrote:
    I'm just not used to good people changing like that.
    to which Orinoco replied:
    Nifong is in politics. Everybody in politics has some kind of psychological disorder; this is from personal experience. Everybody in politics is "good" until they are not.
    Another thing that can change otherwise good people quickly into bad people is alcohol. That probably isn't relevant for Nifong's pop psychological profile, but its something the jurors will think about when trying to understand the players. That picture of Seligman they released from the party was amusingly cropped. Think there might be a beer on the other side of that wrist? Orinoco wrote:
    I am on record proud of being callous to this False Accuser. She committed a crime by falsely accusing three men and ruining their lives. She should and she will suffer. The more the better.
    I think it was Jenna Bush who said "I was kind of hoping you'd turn the other cheek" when the police caught her drinking while under-aged. Someone wrote:
    But there is the AV. ... If the jury finds the AV credible and believes a rape occured, a big part of Nifong's job is done.
    If her story IS true, (more surprising things have happened in the world than that) she could well make the people hoping to trip her up on the stand look like paid character assassins.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#73)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 23, 2006 at 06:48:19 AM EST
    azbball: You are wrong about a lot of things. First:
    Nifong is doing his best to try the case by the book. Just with the AV's testimony and physical evidence, he has the duty to present this evidence to a jury.
    A prosecutor who engages the media as early in a case as Nifong did is NOT trying a case "by the book." Read over the various posts, including the commentary and links posted by TL, about the canons of ethics for prosecutors. If not in direct violation of those canons, Nifong was at least playing fast and loose with them. It is not "by the book" to refuse to meet with defense counsel or suspects. It is not "by the book" to ignore even potentially exculpatory evidence. (More on that later.) A zealous victims rights advocate (for example, a guardian ad litem like Nifong's wife ) could argue that Nifong had an obligation based solely on the AV's testimony (which testimony of hers, by the way? which version of her story?) and the physical evidence to bring the case to a GRAND jury. And yes, he did that, and yes, indictments were returned. But he had an ethical responsibility, if he were truly interested in serving the interests of justice, to present a fair representation of the evidence to that panel, and that would have included any exculpatory evidence he had. Which leads me to:
    If the defense has exculpatory evidence they insist the prosecution should consider, MAIL IT. Certainly, the defense team has unspoken stipulations for providing this evidence outside of the court mandated disclosure rules.
    I posted on this before: simply mailing evidence to the opposing side is a poor way to protect your client's interests, and a practice that many attorneys would consider MALpractice. Had they done that, there is no way to prove that Nifong saw it, no way to gauge his reaction, no way to make the presentation of that evidence a dialogue, no way to ensure that the evidence was interpreted correctly. I suspect that one reason Nifong refused to meet was that he did not want there to be "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" that he had exculpatory evidence in hand but did not present it to the grand jury. (See above.) And just how, pray tell, would one mail Seligman, Evans, and Finnerty so that that they could provide further information? Third:
    The Blue Wall of Shame continues. They tried to separate the cases and will prove unsuccessful. They have filed motions to delay the case and certainly will blame the DA for these delays.
    Not sure if it was you who said this before, but I have not seen or heard anything to indicate that the defense even wants to seperate the cases. What is your authority for that part of your statement? There have been, to my knowledge, no motions to sever filed, nor should there be, because the time for that has not even arisen. It is up to the DA to make the first move: he decides whether to try them together or seperately, then the defense can move either to sever or to consolidate, as the case may be. Furthermore, your characterization that the defense has already filed motions to delay the case is either ignorant or deliberately obtuse. Granted, Finnerty's attorney did ask for their first hearing to be postponed until the time for the second hearing (or "sitting" as they call it in NC) but that was because Nifong was waiting until the last possible moment to turn over discovery that, by law and right, should have been given to the defense(s) even before that motion was filed. Even so, the net result of that motion will NOT be a delay in the trial of the case. The only shame in this case is radiating out of the offices of the District Attorney of Durham County.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#74)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 23, 2006 at 06:50:01 AM EST
    I could do an entire case study on azbballfan by your comments alone. Silence does not equal lying. I realize that this is a foundation of your worldview but step back from the ledge. There is and never was a blue wall of silence. Just a bunch of stupid dumb kids who listened to the parents and got their constitutional protected rights to counsel. that's doesn't make them rapist. Shouting nasty racist comments makes them boorish not rapists. Although really can anyone explain how drunken college guys came up with "cotton shirt" racist remark with historical conations my aren't they very bright boys. who says things like that? My take (for what little it's worth) it doesn't profile as a gang rape which has very specific and consistent aspects it reads more like a porn film.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#75)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 23, 2006 at 06:52:01 AM EST
    JLngstn, You wrote
    Was there no tox test taken or was it taken and buried because she had crack or blow or heroin in her system.
    That is so defammatory. NO WAY the Duke students would slip crack or blow or heroin in her drink. They had the second best grades of any sports team at Duke. Other than publicly urinating and violating an open container law here and there, most had no criminal record. Is gay-bating a crime? I DON'T THINK SO!!!!

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#76)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 23, 2006 at 06:54:26 AM EST
    Sorry to go on and on with such a long post, but azbball's comments and morning caffeine infustion got me going.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#77)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 23, 2006 at 07:01:00 AM EST
    Kitkat, You wrote
    I could do an entire case study on azbballfan by your comments alone. Silence does not equal lying.
    Silence does not equal telling the truth. That's why people who take the first are more respected than people who take the fifth. It's unfortunate but understandable. You wrote:
    I realize that this is a foundation of your worldview but step back from the ledge. There is and never was a blue wall of silence. Just a bunch of stupid dumb kids who listened to the parents and got their constitutional protected rights to counsel.
    Among college students, these kids might not actually qualify as "stupid dumb." Listening to their parents and taking the fifth is what constitutes the "Blue Wall of Silence." Sheesh, Kitkat. I could do a case study on you and still have time for a quick breakfast before work.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#78)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 23, 2006 at 07:04:12 AM EST
    Humor, PB? All speculation, of course, but is it outside the realm of possibility that while the AV had locked herself in the bathroom (if one is willing to consider the defense version of events) that some recreational drug use or abuse took place? Wonder if there will be a Red Light Wall of Silence from the AV's drivers regarding their knowledge of her.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#79)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 23, 2006 at 07:11:22 AM EST
    Good link, Ori: guess black on black crime doesn't push Nifong's buttons the way white on black does, especially with that little matter of an election looming for Nifong. And, PB: want to name one single time when any of the players have invoked their fifth amendment rights? Nifong hasn't even let them get to that because he is doing his unethical version of "see no good(evil), hear no good (evil), speak no good (evil)." Wish I were better with computer pictures, I would have Nifong playing the role of the monkey in that saying. Or maybe I could make it a donkey: seems more appropriate in his case.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#80)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Tue May 23, 2006 at 07:13:09 AM EST
    I have been saying that aside from the scientific tests, this case boils down to the AV's character. After the last round of DNA I was pretty sure there was no case. I was away from this site for most of yesterday, I was getting discouraged by the Greek chorus. And I understand those of you whose loved ones worry about your obsessiveness with this case. If Nifong is being honest, and there is no tox report, then the question is whether the AV specifically refused it. That would show her intent to conceal the source of any intoxication. If she knew enough about the SANE procedures, it may also give her a motive to claim a rape occurred when she was being taken to the drunk tank, so as to avoid drug testing. I have suspected that there may have been some kind of diversion program after the 2002 conviction. Would any public knowledge of that be blocked? Probably. So far the only thing that Nifong and the AV have demonstrated are reasons for dismantling all sorts of privacy laws, like rape shield laws. Those of you who rode this horse should have paid attention to the trail you were going down.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#81)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 23, 2006 at 07:14:42 AM EST
    Really PB? I would be interested in what theory you would use as the foundation for your study. I think it's a valid point that the most important piece of evidence to someone is that there was silence. I did not mean to imply that silence was equal to truth just in the context of this case it certainty doesn't equal guilt. As to the dumb remark it's obvious you haven't been at a university lately where higher education doesn't not preclude stupidity.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#82)
    by Jlvngstn on Tue May 23, 2006 at 07:15:37 AM EST
    Ori, I love this quote in the story:
    "We were asked to keep (the case at a low-profile) because it may hamper the investigation," Lennis Harris said. "But that's not going to happen anymore. This is going to stay in the public eye if I have to stand on a street corner myself with a sign."
    Keep it quiet, it will help the investigation? I wonder why the same stance was not taken in the Duke case?????? On average 45 people are murdered every day in this country and this case still takes precedent. For shame.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#83)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 23, 2006 at 07:19:52 AM EST
    Was there no tox test taken or was it taken and buried because she had crack or blow or heroin in her system.
    JL, it is my understanding that even if a blood test, taken to facilitate medical treatment, revealed such substances, it would never ever be admissible as evidence.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#84)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Tue May 23, 2006 at 07:23:33 AM EST
    If, as it's beginning to appear, the AV declined to take the tox test, she clearly didn't want what was in her system to be known. +++ I'm a little confused about some of the latest stories/rumors regarding the AV's sex partners during the weekend preceding the alleged rape. Is this just FOX stuff? Where is it supposed to come from? When did the AV tell the authorities about the three possible sperm donors? To the SANE nurse? To the DA when she made her initial statement? To the DA when the first round of DNA came back negative?

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#85)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 23, 2006 at 07:24:38 AM EST
    Red Light Wall of Silence
    Sharon, that's evil and wrong, but it's pretty darned funny :)

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#86)
    by Jlvngstn on Tue May 23, 2006 at 07:25:50 AM EST
    Del, not admissable as evidence but as long as the men are being tried in the media I think the court of public opinion should know how much crack or heroin or blow or booze was in her system. As long as the "drunken frat boys" prosecution is allowed in the court of public opinion, I like the balance of the crack head speculation.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#87)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Tue May 23, 2006 at 07:26:25 AM EST
    Another random thought--I wonder if there has been some kind of custody battle for the kids. Not the dad necessarily, but perhaps his mother or other family member who doesn't think the AV is a fit mom. That might explain why she was so terrified of being sent to the substance abuse/psych unit.
    We have not heard anything from her family, friends or the father of her children that would lead us to believe they thought she was an unfit mother or that the custody of her children was being questioned. Here's a random thought - maybe the reason Read was calling his girlfriend during the rape is because he was angry with her and wanted her to hear him getting oral sex from a stripper? We have not heard anything from his family, friends or teammates that would lead us to believe they thought that was his possible motive - but in the interest of explaining what may have happened that night I thought I'd just throw it out there.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#88)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 23, 2006 at 07:36:07 AM EST
    Sorry imho, guess I'm viewing things through the prism of my bourgeois middle-class worldview again. If my grandkids were living with a woman who'd had the Taxi Incident and was now employed with Bunny Hole Entertainment (that's if I knew about it--she seems to have been able to keep it a secret from her parents, who provided babysitting during work hours) I would sure be looking into taking her to court. Interesting idea about Seligmann's cell phone call. I wonder where you'd put the phone for best reception? Thwucking noises, or moaning and groaning? perhaps a mixture of the two. Let's hope the NSA has it on tape.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#89)
    by cpinva on Tue May 23, 2006 at 07:39:11 AM EST
    gosh, i'm stunned. this case has more holes in it than a collander. can a prosecutor be forced to pay, out of pocket, the costs incurred by a defendant, in a malicious prosecution?

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#90)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 23, 2006 at 07:40:02 AM EST
    Here's a random thought - maybe the reason Read was calling his girlfriend during the rape is because he was angry with her and wanted her to hear him getting oral sex from a stripper?
    If that was the case she'd have a hell of a way to get back at him now though, wouldn't she? I don't this senario is real likely. Though I'm sure stranger things have happened.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#91)
    by Jlvngstn on Tue May 23, 2006 at 07:42:47 AM EST
    Better yet, why don't we call his girlfriend and ask why she is dating a rapist? We shoudl call her parents as well, I mean we should be protecting these women.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#92)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 23, 2006 at 07:42:56 AM EST
    I have yet to find any confirmation of the reports on Fox last night. Even their website neglects to mention it.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#93)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Tue May 23, 2006 at 07:46:13 AM EST
    The defense attorneys have claimed that the during the AV's identification process, she ID'ed a member or members of the team doing various things who turned out to be out of town. Could that person, or one of those people have been the guy she claimed had mixed the drinks?

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#94)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 23, 2006 at 07:47:32 AM EST
    The quantity RS's phone calls is unusual. More likely than calling his gf while having oral sex is that he was calling to figure out what he should do -- having witnessed some disturbing stuff. In the end he chose to leave prior to the taxi arriving -- the taxi picking him 1.5 blocks down the road.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#95)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue May 23, 2006 at 07:48:49 AM EST
    Kitkat,
    As to the dumb remark it's obvious you haven't been at a university lately where higher education doesn't not preclude stupidity.
    Now that's just bad profiling. I spend my 50% of my days in the belly of a university where higher education doesn't preclude stupidity. JLvngstn,
    As long as the "drunken frat boys" prosecution is allowed in the court of public opinion, I like the balance of the crack head speculation.
    I agree with you. Evidence that these boys were drunk is totally inconclusive, and NO WAY these guys were "frat" boys. Coach Pressler's NO Wild Drunken Strip Party rule in was in place for the whole 2005-2006 season. Sharon, you wrote:
    And, PB: want to name one single time when any of the players have invoked their fifth amendment rights?
    Well, we do use the fifth amendment as a metaphor for remaining silent, just as I use the first as a metaphor or saying things. Until there's a setting for it, nobody has to invoke these as "rights." The police have requested publicly that these players (among others) come forward with any information, and the players have not volunteered to do that. Nobody but the advocates is falling for the PR campaign designed to claim that Nifong is what is stopping the players from coming forward. It's because THEY ARE NOT INTERESTED IN COMING FORWARD.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#96)