home

Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turned Over

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

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • 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.

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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."

    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?

    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.

    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.

    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?

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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.)

    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.

    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?

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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? .

    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)

    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.

    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.

    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?

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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!!!!

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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!!!!

    Sorry to go on and on with such a long post, but azbball's comments and morning caffeine infustion got me going.

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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?

    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.

    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.

    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?

    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.

    I have yet to find any confirmation of the reports on Fox last night. Even their website neglects to mention it.

    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?

    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.

    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)
    by cpinva on Tue May 23, 2006 at 07:56:57 AM 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.
    chew2, you are joking, aren't you? either that, or you're a walking, talking conviction, just looking for a court to happen in, for anything, guilty or not. they had absolutely no obligation to "cooperate" with the police, the DA or anyone else out to get them. and believe me, the police and the DA are not your friends. the truth shall not set you free. that anyone would, with a straight face, castigate them for hewing to their constitutional rights, shows how much of an idiot they are. shame on those members of the media who automatically assumed guilt, absent any evidence, other than the word of a person who was admittedly grossly inebriated at the time. of course, they are why good defense attorneys are necessary: the criminal justice system isn't designed to get at the truth, it is designed to convict. a couple of years ago, my underage son was questioned by a city detective, regarding an event. i insisted on being there with him, advised him that the detective was not his friend, and at any time i told him, he should stop talking, until our lawyer was contacted and arrived. guess what? the detective didn't like me. guess what else? i didn't give a rat's ass how the detective felt. her feelings were not my concern, my son's welfare was. any parent who does any less is a piss poor parent.

    PB I throw my hands up your 50% is of much more value than mine... I just attend it not teach it. My roommate's boyfriend who is working on his doctorate on some kind of higher physics mensa and all that is in trouble with his landlord for cherry bombing his toilet after finals. I think he is going to state that it was an experiment of sorts but I think he'll have to suck it up and pay. You do remember what it was like to be a kid right (32 isn't that old)

    I don't watch FOX News not just because I find them unreliable, but because they tend to distort the facts they do report, so as juicy as some of the gossip is around here, I'll wait until someone else confirms this stuff.

    IMHO said:
    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?
    and you think his girlfriend would not get angry and decide to retaliate by telling the police about this?

    Where is Jesse and the Rev. Al? You probably think this is a stupid question, but I believe their lack of presence is very telling. Both of these guys are experts at using the media to further their agenda's. Especially those situations where race is a key component. Yes, Jeese has offered to pay her tuition, but has since insulated himself from this situation. The Rev. Al has just been absent for quite some time. National Media Attention + Racially Charged Situations = Daily comments from both Rev. Al and Jesse. Yet in this situation.....nothing! Could it be that after a little due diligence into the facts of the case they both realized something just didnt add up.

    cpinva, Any time I've been involved in discussions like this, there are core true believers whose ability to weigh evidence is undermined by their belief systems. They make human beings icons or demonic figures. Some posters, like bean, are so wedded to their beliefs that they are unable to discuss the case, much less carry on a civil conversation. For some people here to admit that the AV is an unreliable, mentally unstable woman with a criminal past and that the evidence indicates no rape occurred would be to admit that all women are false rape accusers. Of course, that's not true. Feminists who cling to their icons in the face of evidence do damage to the cause of feminism.

    fillintheblanks posted:
    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.
    In all likelihood, given their length and frequency, these were text messages sent from his cellphone.

    I've seen my daughter knock off a half-dozen phone calls in a few minutes. No problem, as long as there's unlimited calling.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#104)
    by chew2 on Tue May 23, 2006 at 08:54:46 AM EST
    Cpinva
    shame on those members of the media who automatically assumed guilt,
    There is no media news report I have seen that "assumed guilt" for rape. Your male paranoia is showing again. Show me one news report that assumed guilt. All the news reports I've seen have been very careful not to assume guilt by anybody for the alleged rape.

    Orinoco, I think that chew2 actually believes what she's saying.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#106)
    by january on Tue May 23, 2006 at 09:56:28 AM EST
    PB posted
    It's because THEY ARE NOT INTERESTED IN COMING FORWARD
    PB, come on, be fair. You have no way of knowing that. Just keep blaming their attorneys. Del posted
    Let's hope the NSA has it on tape.
    Del - awesome! LOL

    Ok went away for a few days. Instead of beating dead horses, I could watch live ones race in Pimlico, spend time with my daughter etc etc. I return to find for the most part the three or four trolls continue in their delusional belief that a massive conspiracy exists to hide the truth from authorities. We now know that the three men tested in the second round all came from the accuser having to tell the Prosecutor about where the sperm came from. They in turn point out they drove her to motels at night for whatever it was she was doing there ( come on have an imagination ! Aint gonna be a tox report since Nifong says he turned over everything so he misled Newsweek and their readership and porbably committed a severe ethics violation right there. And the moron who says she is going to be convincing on the stand, what to say about that. She will be read her conflicting reports and asked in front of the jury "which time were you lying?", the drivers testimony will be put in front of her and asked if its true, and then her mental instability and confinement will be discussed with her. She will be torn to shreds and shown to be a person of low moral character that cares nothing for the truth. And women that are legitimately raped subsequently will be the only ones who suffer from her mendaciousness. That is even a bigger tragedy than the the smearing of innocent young men.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#108)
    by Lora on Tue May 23, 2006 at 10:35:04 AM EST
    If there really were solid evidence - solid credible eyewitness reports that could confirm that the accused were definitely out of the bathroom at the same time the AV was in the bathroom for example, or any other solid evidence, do you really think they would say, "Oh, Nifong just doesn't want to talk to us?" If it were me, I'd make a notarized statement asap, mail a copy registered mail, return receipt requested, to my attorney, one to myself and put it in a safe-deposit box, and one to Nifong. I'd then call his office and ask for confirmation that he got it, and try to find out if he'd read it. THEN I'd say, "Nifong just doesn't want to look at any evidence." From the same article that leftylou (May 22 11:22 PM) referred to above:
    Lawyers said the private lab also found tissue "consistent" with Evans' bodily makeup under one of the dancer's fake acrylic fingernails, which was retrieved from a trashcan. However, attorneys insisted the fingernail evidence was inconclusive and did not constitute proof of a rape anyway.
    Please note, "UNDER" one of the fingernails. Please note, tissue "consistent" with Evan's bodily makeup. (Left the second pro-defense statement in so as not to exclude anything anyone here might consider important.) Defense has been known to spin. Opera ain't over.

    Opera ain't over. Nope. But,fat lady who in her recent past was an "escort" who liked to drink on occasion to multiples beyond legal intoxication limits is singing third verse in slurred Italian.

    More likely . . .is that he was calling to figure out what he should do -- having witnessed some disturbing stuff.
    But more likely than that he was trying to figure out what he should do - after the house party. He was calling his friends to figure out what they were up too. If there were a lot of calls it's because his friends weren't picking up the phone (college parties are loud as hell). On a Friday or Saturday night it's not uncommon to call 5 or 6 people trying to get through to 1 of them to see what your other friends are up to. It sounds like he was ready to leave the party but wasn't ready to go home. I've been in the same situation more times than I can count. He couldn't get through to people (or the only person he could reach was the gf) so he hit the Mickey D's. This is very normal behavior for a 20 year old.

    Teresa wrote:
    Kali, what's happened to your sense of humor?
    I still have a great sense of humor and enjoy yours as well. We were having fun in an general sense at the situation with the BF/drivers. IMHO's comments were not general humor but a purposeful, antagonistic and unwarranted attempt to insult me. It was uncalled for in the context of our bantering fun. He easily could have just said he thought the same thing about the girl who put her self through law school turning tricks, instead specifically referencing me. He likes to stir it up for no apparent reason and claim innocence. Don't buy his BS statement that he meant nothing by it, IMHO is very, very calculated in all his posts. As Dean Wormer said, "He is a sneaky little sh*t just like Niedermeyer."

    From Fox:
    The drivers say in police statements that they brought the accuser to at least five separate gigs the weekend before the alleged attack, defense sources said. According to the sources, the papers handed over by Nifong also reveal that the forensic nurse who did a gynecological exam on the accuser did not find abrasions, tears or bleeding in the vaginal area, which is often present in forcible rapes. They say she did find swelling in the vaginal area along with tenderness in the accuser's breasts and lower right quadrant
    Tenderness in the breasts? Any moms out there that might have a possible explanation for that?

    Nifong says "I gave you everything" and he is following the "book" of which I am certain, (I just dont know the author or title or printing). Here is what Defense is telling the Judge about what they believe is missing from the discovery produced so far, and they cant know what the universe should be, so I would guess he has "forgotten" other things too. The list in two attorneys own words: 1 A substantial portion of the Sexual Assault Exam Report 2 A substantial portion of all handwritten notes and interview summaries of the Durham Police Dept of several witness interviews ( but referenced in other reports) 3. access to cell phones seized 4. Complaintant and Kim Roberts telephone records ( I think we have a good suspicion about why these are being withheld ). 5. Access to physical evidence ( what the hell is there? Maybe trying to make Nifong tell the judge he has zip.) How to account for this? The book has some pages, no make that whole chapters missing? why would the Defense not be right to question in front of the Judge any further representation of completeness by Nifong?

    This is probably not an important point but Reade's girl friend is a student in Duke not in Boston University. I don't know where this is coming from. Perhaps, she was in Boston for the spring break but she is definitely a Duke student.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#115)
    by Teresa on Tue May 23, 2006 at 11:33:48 AM EST
    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.
    Sharon, the only problem I have with your post is that the defense attorneys were shocked that Reade S. was one of the players indicted. They said he wasn't even on their radar. It wasn't until after the indictment that they made all of the alibi evidence known. Nifong couldn't have known about the alibi before going to the grand jury because no one had told him. I would guess the same goes for Finnerty. Due to the DNA, the attorneys knew Evans was on the radar so I guess they tried hard to get to Nifong with any exculpatory evidence. We don't know what that evidence is yet since they haven't shown us the pictures with no mustache or any of the witnesses that can account for him during every minute of the party. gmax, why would you call people who enjoy a spirited debate trolls? I think we've had a few here but they were from the accused side and have been either banned or warned.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#116)
    by Teresa on Tue May 23, 2006 at 11:36:47 AM EST
    hues, it was a Monday night. (spring break though so that probably qualifies as a weekend night from a party perspective.)

    Nifong couldn't have known about the alibi before going to the grand jury because no one had told him. Teresa you are quite rational in your posts and I definitely dont count you among the trolls, but you are just wrong on this. You say "couldn't" have known. BS Could have, and should have known. If he had spoken to the attorneys to get their side before rsuhing to show the Black community a few scalps, he could certainly have known. And should have done so, as any prosecutor can confirm for you. In the vernacular you tell a suspect " you like him" and see what he says. Based on his response maybe you pause and maybe you plow forward. But dont give Nifong a pass, he aint earned it.

    gmax In fairness to Nifong, I'd be shocked if it was unusual for some discovery materials to be missing from a 1300 page doscovery response. We have no idea what's missing though. It could be that the SANE report is a 20 page form, and the last five of those pages are for tests that didn't apply here. Maybe those pages were blank and the prosecution only turned over pages 1-15? But if you're doing document review for the defense and you notice missing pages, you have to request those pages. It's your job not to take the prosecutor's word for it. Or maybe Nifong had a paralegal photocopying things and a handful of the documents were double-sided. That sort of thing happen all the time. This case isn't going to trial for at least a year. Rest assured that the prosecution will turn over everything material to the case long before then.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#119)
    by Teresa on Tue May 23, 2006 at 11:43:13 AM EST
    A substantial portion of the Sexual Assault Exam Report
    gmax, I think Fox News has the complete report. :) If the attorneys will just call Hannity, I'm sure he'll give it to them.

    Maybe they wore condoms... Maybe the tox report will show GHB... Maybe they used a broom... Maybe those pages were blank... Sure are a lot of maybes in this case, especially if the facts dont fit your world view.

    I know I am on a lefty site and its taken as a sign of good upbringing to degrade Fox, but Megan Kendall has been all over this story and nothing she has put out so far has been shown as anything other than accurate. Take that a counterpoint. And someone else was throwing feces at G.VanSustern. Hate to inform you but Great is a Democrats' Democrat. And her sister just got beat in a Democratic primary in Maryland, btw.

    Kalidoggie posted:
    He easily could have just said he thought the same thing about the girl who put her self through law school turning tricks, instead specifically referencing me.
    You are the one that brought her accomplishments to our attention. Del got my point: Del posted:
    Orinoco, imho is talking abt the high-priced call girl whose glam lifestyle was described several threads ago. Putting herself through Columbia law, or something. She had a very limited number of steady clients whom she saw on a regular, scheduled basis. Kali's friend got "freebies." I believe he said his hat was off to her. Not quite the same thing as going on one-on-one "dates" for Bunny Hole Entertainment, but I guess it's like Churchill said, we're all whores, just with different prices. Or something like that. I think it was Churchill.
    Kalidoggie posted:
    He likes to stir it up for no apparent reason and claim innocence. Don't buy his BS statement that he meant nothing by it, IMHO is very, very calculated in all his posts. As Dean Wormer said, "He is a sneaky little sh*t just like Niedermeyer."
    When I said, "That's all I meant," I was not proclaiming innocence, I was being snarky. btw, has the impressive prostitute told her parents about her "chosen occupation?" If not, according to your definition, she is "a LIAR!" And an accomplished one, at that!

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#123)
    by Teresa on Tue May 23, 2006 at 11:53:28 AM EST
    gmax, why do you think that they had tried to contact Nifong about Reade's alibi? His indictment was a shock to them. I know they did after the indictment but before? If the defense tried after the indictment to show Nifong all of the evidence and not just selected portions of it, I think he was wrong to not look at it. I don't think he should have accepted just some of it though. (Like just the pictures they want him to see.) This is where I get confused about the right thing to do. Once it was clear that Nifong was going to press ahead, why didn't they just show it all and demand to speak to him. I think Evans' attorney tried hard to do that but in Nifong's mind I guess it was too late. I'm not sure it would have changed Nifong's mind even then though since Evans is the only one with any physical evidence linking him to the accuser, however small it is.

    I was being snarky Since you are snark on, 24/7 365 how is this any revelation?

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#125)
    by Teresa on Tue May 23, 2006 at 11:55:34 AM EST
    gmac, I read your post again. Are you saying that Nifong should have given the attorneys a heads up on who he planned to indict and then given them the chance to show their evidence?

    Orinoco
    If you had followed the details of this case, maybe you wouldn't have believed such ludicrous things like "the jury would find her credible".
    Chill out a little. I never said I "believed" the jury would find her credible. My point was that "if" the jury found her credible, Nifong's weak case would seem a lot stronger. Think about that - If the jury finds the AV to be a credible witness, then Nifong is going to have an easier job and the defense is going to have a harder job. Do you really think that's a "ludicrous" assertion? There's a lot of evidence out there that the defense can use to tarnish the AVs credibility. But at trial the most important factor is going to be whether the jury believes her as she's testifying. It's fine if you disagree, but don't act like it's a totally wacky idea. I'd be very surprised if the players' lawyers' feel that way. No matter how good you think your evidence is, there's always a chance that a jury might see things differently. Do you think I'm making that up?

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#127)
    by chew2 on Tue May 23, 2006 at 12:02:31 PM EST
    State v. Cheatam, another rape conviction case. No DNA evidence left behind despite rape and problems with eyewitness identification. The victim was a 16 year old white female who was on her way to a bus stop when she was raped by a black male who threatened her with a knife. No evidence of sex left behind.
    In an effort to discourage the man, she told him she was having her period, but the man told her to remove her tampon, which she did. The man then let go of her neck, and she saw the knife as he switched it from one hand to the other. He grabbed her neck again and put her legs over his shoulders...He raped her, and told her she was a 'good girl.'
    After she was calm enough, she told them what happened. They called the police, and later her stepmother took her to a hospital. An examination disclosed no trace evidence. Later that day, M.M. met with a sheriff's sketch artist and gave her a detailed description.
    Eyewitness problems:
    Here, the jury could assess whether it was likely that M.M. could see her attacker's face at 6:45 a.m. in January, given defense evidence that the sun did not rise until nearly 8:00 a.m. that morning.
    Cheatam also points out that M.M. described her assailant as having no facial hair. He relies on evidence that he had a goatee at the time of the rape. ..While Cheatam argues that this evidence [videotape] establishes that he had facial hair at the time of the rape, it instead shows that if he had a goatee there was a question about how noticeable it was.
    There was however evidence that the defendant's shoes matched a shoe print at the scene. The defendant was convicted at trial and the conviction was upheld after multiple appeals. Interestingly the Supreme Court upheld the exclusion of expert testimony by Elizabeth Loftus, a noted expert, as to the problems with the eyewitness ID. I think that was an incorrect decision.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#128)
    by chew2 on Tue May 23, 2006 at 12:03:42 PM EST
    Forgot to link to the case. State v. Cheatam

    why do you think that they had tried to contact Nifong about Reade's alibi? Where did I say that. I said Nifong should have asked the suspect to come with his counsel for a preindictment meeting. Listen and contemplate. No statue of limitation was about to run what was the hurry? Oh yeah the election.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#130)
    by Teresa on Tue May 23, 2006 at 12:05:01 PM EST
    Orinoco, Tucker waved a copy of the Duke report in front of the camera while proclaiming that this is an actual police report. Several times. And he was wrong and never admitted it. You are really nuts if you believe everything Hannity says about anything. Maybe not nuts, but not objective. Abrams is different. I think he's usually very fair but he went along with the DNA is negative when he had actually seen the report and knew it was inconclusive. That's not good reporting.

    gmax posted:
    Since you are snark on, 24/7 365 how is this any revelation?
    It is a revelation to Kalidoggie: Kalidoggie posted:
    He likes to stir it up for no apparent reason and claim innocence. Don't buy his BS statement that he meant nothing by it, IMHO is very, very calculated in all his posts. As Dean Wormer said, "He is a sneaky little sh*t just like Niedermeyer."
    He confused snark for BS.

    Two points: a. This case is never going to trial. b. To entertain even the possibility of the jury believing this nutcase is ludicrous.
    Except, it is going to trial. The only person who can stop it is Nifong. The judge isn't going to throw the case out, because it's not the Judge's job to evaluate the evidence regarding questions of fact. That's the job of the jury. And given the intense scrutiny this case is under, there's no question a judge will want a jury to decide it. As far as Nifong is concerned, have you seen any sign at all that he's ready to back away from this thing? As to the AVs credibility - the prosecutor and the SANE nurse both found her credible after talking to her in person. If she convinced them, she at least has the potential to convince a jury. When you get a jury involved, there are no sure things - even if you have an airtight case on paper. If all that mattered was the case you could present on paper, top tier trial attorneys wouldn't command multi-million dollar salaries.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#133)
    by Teresa on Tue May 23, 2006 at 12:14:20 PM EST
    Where did I say that. I said Nifong should have asked the suspect to come with his counsel for a preindictment meeting. Listen and contemplate. No statue of limitation was about to run what was the hurry? Oh yeah the election.
    I didn't get that from your post when I answered you. Is that normal practice? Do DA's normally notify an attorney or suspect before indictment and let them show him evidence?

    Here is a link to the FOX story: Fox story Facinating, isn't it?

    Completely unrelated and irrelevant Dead Horse trotting!
    The issue he's arguing is whether a jury can convict in the face of overwhelming defense evidence. Your argument is that it's ludicrous to even entertain the possibility. The case chew2 offered is strong evidence that anything is possible. It's far from irrelevant. This has nothing to do with whether or not the players are guilty and everything to do with whether or not there's a *chance* Nifong can get a conviction. To pretend like that chance doesn't exist is wishful thinking.

    Orinoco
    That's what a Motion to Dismiss is for.
    I don't know about NC law, but that's not usually what a motion to dismiss is for.

    To entertain even the possibility of the jury believing this nutcase is ludicrous.
    Orinoco, after hearing about the community rallies, banging on pots & pans, etc. I am certainly willing to entertain the possibility. There are many, many people eligible for jury duty in Durham who would believe these guys are guilty even if their attorneys presented videotapes of them assisting Pope Benedict at a Vatican mass on the night in question. I do agree that getting twelve of them on the same jury is a pretty long shot. I think one of my foolish, speculative posts earlier was that this gal has got to have pretty remarkable charisma, and I don't mean her Bunny Hole skills. Ex-hubby has nothing but good to say about her after she cuckolded him. Let off with light sentence in taxi deal. (W/o doing massive google research to back my claim) family seems to fully back her as wonderful mom & student even though she's working for an escort service (I can hear my own mom declaring, "I have no daughter" on national TV if I was similarly employed). Pair that with community's tendency to flay the accused, shield laws that may well shut out lots of evidence like her previous episode of mental illness...if I were one of these guys I'd be doing more than entertaining the possibility, I'd be having screaming nightmares.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#138)
    by chew2 on Tue May 23, 2006 at 12:31:25 PM EST
    Hues
    The case chew2 offered is strong evidence that anything is possible. It's far from irrelevant.
    I thought Cheatam was interesting because there was no residue found in the victim's vagina despite the rape in that case. Much has been made about the absence of DNA residue in this case. Here's one case where no residue was left behind despite a rape. I'm sure we'll have expert testimony as to how likely this could be if sexual penetration occurred. I question whether any of that expert testimony will be based on any actual scientific studies. I suspect the experts will be blowing mostly hot air, but who knows?

    Chew, if the Cheatham girl were menstruating, might menstrual fluid wash away material? Someone upthread mentioned breast tenderness in the AV, which (I was going to point out, since the poster seemed to refer to pregnancy) is pretty common with The Curse. Oh Lordy, we're down in her crotch again. Must...leave...thread...

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#140)
    by Jo on Tue May 23, 2006 at 12:36:20 PM EST
    Nifong said, "If there was a toxicology report available, it would've been included...". What would make the tox report unavailable?

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#141)
    by Teresa on Tue May 23, 2006 at 12:37:20 PM EST
    CARLSON: Wait. There's no footnote in the police report. This is the sum total of this officer's--and this is not an officer a week after the fact or three months after the fact. This is a guy, night of, one of the very first people to speak to the alleged victim after the alleged attack occurred. And here's take away from that, where she said 20 men raped her.
    Orinoco, this is what Tucker said. He thought he was reading from a report by the officer who spoke with the accuser that night. The next day, when everyone else cleared this up, he didn't. I agree with you on Nancy Grace by the way.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#142)
    by chew2 on Tue May 23, 2006 at 12:40:21 PM EST
    Del
    Chew, if the Cheatham girl were menstruating, might menstrual fluid wash away material?
    Good point. I don't know. You know as much as I do about that.

    One thing I don't get about this whole situation- can't the defense just waive their right to a jury trial? The only way their clients have any chance of going down is for Nifong to assemble a racist, bitter, jury out for settling scores rather than metting out justice. No judge would ever convict these kis. So even if your attempts at dismisal fail, don't they have an almost fulproof out in requesting a bench trial? Am I wrong about this? Practacing attorneys please advise.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#144)
    by Teresa on Tue May 23, 2006 at 12:45:11 PM EST
    Chew, if the Cheatham girl were menstruating, might menstrual fluid wash away material?
    It would have to be a gully washer as we say down here I would think. Maybe he just didn't finish? Interesting case. Was that before common DNA testing? The case started in 1996 I believe.

    Hello. I am a practicing attorney in Maryland. I was an appellate attorney in the MD AG's offince in criminal appeals. Mike Nifong was in my law school class at UNC CH although I have no recollection of the guy. I am appalled by his actions, many of which clearly violate the Code of Professional Responsibility. A defendant may waive a jury trial but the usual theory is that the defendant has a better chance to convince at least one juror who could hang the jury. I don't know the judges in Durham but there are many crazy, biased judges in this world. I expect the option of judge trial will be seriously conidered by the defense if the change of venue motion is denied.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#146)
    by Teresa on Tue May 23, 2006 at 12:53:39 PM EST
    bogan, I saw a NC attorney on tv state that you can't waive that right in NC. You have to have a jury trial.

    One thing I don't get about this whole situation- can't the defense just waive their right to a jury trial? The only way their clients have any chance of going down is for Nifong to assemble a racist, bitter, jury out for settling scores rather than metting out justice. No judge would ever convict these kis.
    There are reasons. Getting a jury to convict means that the prosecutor has to convince 12 people beyond a reasonable doubt. In a judge trial the prosecutor only has to convince one person. The odds of one person believing the AV are higher than 12 people unanimously believing her.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#148)
    by january on Tue May 23, 2006 at 01:09:00 PM EST
    Seems to me that the i.d. in the Cheatam case was actually stronger than the ones in this one, procedurally at least, despite the facial hair discrepancy. Plus, only one defendant, in winter, in Washington, vs. three defendants in March in North Carolina. I don't think the Cheatam case is really very comparable.

    mmyy posted:
    IMHO said:
    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?
    mmyy posted:
    and you think his girlfriend would not get angry and decide to retaliate by telling the police about this?
    mmyy, Although, according to gmax, this shouldn't be a revelation to anyone that reads here: That scenario was snark. Here is the context for my random thought. My point was, there have been many, many instances of commenter's taking something we know the accuser did that night and suggesting a possible motive. The example I happened to used was from Del, who is not prone to speculation of this brand. Del's example was quite mild, not nasty, even reasonable, though lacking in support. In other created scenarios, commenters have assigned the worst possible motives to the accuser at every turn. Some very ugly things have been said.

    According to Lexis-Nexis's little summary of NC criminal law you can waive the right to a jury trial. But maybe that's wrong. In any event, I agree that whether or not that would be a good stratedgy would depend, but you would know once the judge is assigned to some extent. It's not like this case is debateable, or ify. If the judge is in any sense fair or ethical, it's an automatic not guilty. If the judge is politically wedded to the black commnutiy, corrupt, or insane, then you have something to think about. But I imagine the decision would be obvious either way once they know who the judge is going to be.

    Nifong said, "If there was a toxicology report available, it would've been included...". What would make the tox report unavailable?
    It would not be available if it has not been completed.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#152)
    by azbballfan on Tue May 23, 2006 at 01:32:02 PM EST
    Sharon, Thank you for the long response to my previous post. I think if you look at my long winded attempt to look at the turn of events I posted on Sunday's thread, I think you'll find that we seem to agree on most points. My earlier post on this thread did not repeat my assertion that at the beginning of this case, Nifong saw an opportunity to use this case to exploit a long standing heated town vs. gown debate for his own political survival. Then, he simply decided to make good on his veiled promise to bring charges. As for mailing evidence. My own experience in lawsuits stems from my days in banking constantly suing and being sued. I also had to participate in a couple of white collar criminal cases. It has been my experience that if one party has overwhelming and convincing evidence that proves their side of the case, it is in their best interest, and in the best interest of the courts, to mail that evidence to opposing counsel. The courts do not look kindly on lawyers who are clearly wasting the time of the courts by keeping frivolous suits on the dockets. The defense team gave Nifong the evidence when they released it to the press. In my opinion, their client's cases would have been better served by mailing a copy to Nifong before or concurrent with releasing them to the press. That being said, now the defense has Nifong's evidentiary files on the case and will respond to his discovery motions to provide what they previously insisted they hand over in person. Nifong previously resisted meeting with the defense to ask for evidence outside what is offered under the rules of the court in order to avoid any perceived inappropriate quid pro quo in order to make the case go away. The community has some very loud advocates asking for an aggressive investigation. Regarding the separation of the cases. Finnerty's lawyers filed a motion to delay his arraignment. I don't see any feasible reason Finnerty would need to delay his arraignment. Seligmann's lawyers can and will argue his right to a speedy trial in order to keep these cases on separate schedules. Nifong will win out by filing a motion to try these together. I've worked a lot with both outside counsel and in-house counsel. Our in-house counsel would have scolded any lawyer for wasting the court's time and their client's money.

    If the judge is in any sense fair or ethical, it's an automatic not guilty
    Not really. A judge that has sent 100 people to jail without DNA evidence isn't going to be as phased by its absence. And a judge who has dealt with thousands of destitute crime victims (and probably a fair number of abused strippers) is probably going to be less likely to discount the AVs story just because of her job. And a judge who has seen similar "swelling" in 20 other rape convictions might be less likley to ask why there isn't any evidence of blood or tearing. In short, a lot of the defense's best evidence might have less impact on a seasoned criminal law judge. An aquital is still more likely, but it's not a sure thing. Reading the judge on this case could be hard too. Do you want a law and order republican judge who is normally hard on defendants or a more liberal judge who is better for defendants but may be more prone to believe the AV?

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#154)
    by weezie on Tue May 23, 2006 at 01:41:56 PM EST
    Hues, I'll be pleased of the judge is not a Tar Heel fan! OK, just kidding, don't be mad..,

    A tox report takes two months? ha!
    If a urine sample was taken, it is not too late to test it.

    Abrams Report: Susan Chasson - International Association of Forensic Nurses Chasson: It is not unusual to have no physical findings in a sexual assault case. That is not unusual. Injuries are not always present in a sexual assault. Redness could be a nonspecific or specific sign of sexual assault. Abrams: How conclusive it is? Chasson: It is not conclusive, because sexual assault is a legal term, it is not a medical term, is the problem. In an adult case it is very difficult to come up with conclusive medical evidence.

    IMHO:
    If a urine sample was taken, it is not too late to test it.
    Yes, it is now. Tests must be perfomed within 12 hours or the sample will degrade and be useless.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#158)
    by chew2 on Tue May 23, 2006 at 02:01:39 PM EST
    § 15A‑1201. Right to trial by jury. In all criminal cases the defendant has the right to be tried by a jury of 12 whose verdict must be unanimous. In the district court the judge is the finder of fact in criminal cases, but the defendant has the right to appeal for trial de novo in superior court as provided in G.S. 15A‑1431. In superior court all criminal trials in which the defendant enters a plea of not guilty must be tried before a jury. (1977, c. 711, s. 1.)

    Re: the question about breast tenderness - not sure if that was sarc or a real question (new here, obviously - still getting to used to everyone's "personality"). If you were serious, try PMS for all symptoms listed - of couse, multiple sexual encounters in 3 days would certainly account for swelling, as well. Re: RS calls to gf "out of state" - # may have been out of state, gf wasn't necessarily (not saying she wasn't ; just saying she didn't have to be). Students have cell phones from home - out of state area code may be her home area code. With free long distance, kids don't need to get local phone service. I know my daughter who goes to school out of state doesn't. Her cell phone bill has calls from all various area codes as her friends come from various states.

    imho posted:
    If a urine sample was taken, it is not too late to test it.
    mik posted:
    Yes, it is now. Tests must be perfomed within 12 hours or the sample will degrade and be useless.
    Not according to this FBI Laboratory study. The urine has to be collected from the patient within 12 hours, but testing on the sample need not take place within 12 hours. In this study they tested samples that had been stored at room temperature for 6 months.

    Good point bogan. az: Thanks for the reasoned response. You said "Finnerty's lawyers filed a motion to delay his arraignment." Do you not give any credence to the reasons for said motion, i.e., Nifong was already a week late on discovery? And I repeat that requesting to hold over the arraignment until the second "sitting" does nothing to delay the case. I don't practice criminal law (nor do I practice law criminally), so maybe both of us, or neither of us, is all that familiar with the ins and outs (perhaps an unfortunate wording, in this case) of criminal practice. I did, for a little while, work with a criminal defense firm, though. And there would have been NO WAY we would ever have sent anything simply by mail to the prosecution. By the way, the reason I didn't last long in that firm was that I could not get over my need to know if our client was guilty or not, and that, if he or she was, I couldn't get over my wish that they be put away. Point being: I am, by and large, pro-prosecution in my attitudes. And I think that even if the various attorneys had mailed Nifong information, he would have found a way not to see it, to preserve his cover of "no exculpatory evidence" to present to the grand jury.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#162)
    by chew2 on Tue May 23, 2006 at 02:36:46 PM EST
    IMHO, The urine test article you cite is for testing for endogenous (naturally occurring) GHB. I don't think it claims that exogenous GHB stays in the system that long. However, I found this report of an experimental method using hair. Testing for GHB in hair by GC/MS/MS after a single exposure. Application to document sexual assault.
    It appears that the window of detection of GHB is very short in both blood and urine, and therefore its presence is very difficult to prove after a rape case. In order to document single exposure, we investigated the use of hair. Hair was collected one month after the allegated event in order to sample the corresponding period after regular growing.
    This study demonstrates that a single exposure to GHB in a case of sexual assault can be documented by hair analysis when collected about one month after the crime.
    I've said that I doubt a tox study was done at the time. Maybe its not too late. From a brief reading the abstracts it appears that alcohol is the most common drug appearing in subjects claiming that they were slipped a micky.

    The urine test article you cite is for testing for endogenous (naturally occurring) GHB. I don't think it claims that exogenous GHB stays in the system that long. It doesn't remain in the patient's system that long. If collected in time it does remain in the test tube and can be tested months later.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#164)
    by azbballfan on Tue May 23, 2006 at 02:48:13 PM EST
    Sharon,
    I don't practice criminal law (nor do I practice law criminally), so maybe both of us, or neither of us, is all that familiar with the ins and outs (perhaps an unfortunate wording, in this case) of criminal practice.
    I worked my way through college in a twelve attorney law office. My post-graduate experience has been primarily with civil cases in jurisdictions throughout the continental U.S. Through this experience, I've learned that each state, region, and court have thier own set of norms. Regarding mailing information to Nifong. If they used registered mail, then they could claim Nifong needed to consider the evidence before the arraignment and would have placed added pressure for him to drop the charges or face a civil case based upon prosecutorial misconduct. I don't know what reason your law firm never did this, but it could be for a host of reasons the least of which is billing management. It's not as if they don't want him to have the evidence, they said they do and leaked it to the press. I suspect that Cheshire would not want to paint himself as so inflammatory as to professionaly affront the DA. The current attacks in the national press won't mean much after this all settles down. I understand your natural prosecutorial bent and empathize with your disdain for the ethical conflicts criminal lawyers face. I have similar feelings about banking, but that's a subject for another thread.

    Orinico, Nifong maybe has a sample for tox screening, but since the cop thought she was drunk so did Nifong, so he is not doing a test. He wouldn't want to know the blood alcohol level; nor would she (custody issues, perhaps). Defense lawyers should ask for all existing medical specimens to be produced for independent testing rather than asking for reports.

    I Have to say the more facts I find out about this case the more I am disturbed. I am as liberal minded as they get but this is getting to hard to swollow. So far the Victim was reported passed out drunk on the night of the alleged attack by the officers (Not a problem). But the other Dancer initially said nothing happened then changed her mind and called a PR firm in the process to her spin her story. The Victim first claimed that 20 students did this to her then changed it to three. One of three had only 7 minutes to be there and the times don't match up to even allow him to do this. A cab driver can say on the record that the boy was in his Cab. What did the cops do when they heard this?? They arrested the Cab Driver. The other person she identified with 90% accuracy never had a mustache and she said if he had one the she would have been 100% sure it was him. The DNA tests came back negative and suggested she had sex with her boyfriend but none of the accused. Add to this to the fact that she already made this charge about being raped by three people some 10 years ago and you have a full fledged circus. How many people have been unfortunate enough to be raped by 3 men two different times in life? what are the odds?. I am all for a fair trial and I am as open minded as anyone I know but I can not in good conscience believe this Victim. How many pieces of information am I suppose to disregard. I think the District Attourney is forcing her to stand by this misguided charge so he does't embarrass himself. My prayers are with every party involved in this disgrace. In a country where we are supposed to be free we send people off to war, put citzens in danger, and thanks to a disturbed legal system allow DA's like this one to run a campaign for office on the coat tails of a Racial hot button topic instead of looking at all the facts. I say lets get the charges right before we make them and Al Gore in 2008!!!!

    Del wrote:
    Oh Lordy, we're down in her crotch again.
    Don't worry it appears to be a popular place to be.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#168)
    by wumhenry on Tue May 23, 2006 at 04:06:22 PM EST
    Teresa wrote:
    no I don't think he should. He must have pretty tough skin to continue with this though.
    Standing one's ground in the face of criticism is noble only if you've got justice and reason on your side. I don't think that's what we've got here with Nifong. Rather, methinks his obstinance is an example of the sort of "foolish consistency" that Ralph Waldo Emerson called "the hobgoblin of little minds." Small-minded people typically prefer to repeat mistakes, or persist in them, than admit they were wrong.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#169)
    by Teresa on Tue May 23, 2006 at 04:13:34 PM EST
    I think you guys are right and you can waive a jury trial in NC. I just read the constitution for the state and it say so. I swear that attorney from NC answered that you couldn't when someone suggested this to him. I guess I shouldn't believe everything I see on TV. billyjack, I love Al too. My state (TN) really let him down.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#170)
    by wumhenry on Tue May 23, 2006 at 04:15:48 PM EST
    Do you want a law and order republican judge who is normally hard on defendants or a more liberal judge who is better for defendants but may be more prone to believe the AV?
    Or more prone to *pretend* to believe her to avoid PC demerits.

    IMHO wrote:
    The urine has to be collected from the patient within 12 hours, but testing on the sample need not take place within 12 hours. In this study they tested samples that had been stored at room temperature for 6 months.
    I believe they can even freeze a urine sample somehow to maintain its testability. My basis is a couple articles I read about Lance Armstrong's urine being tested more than two years after suspected doping in the Tour de France three years ago. In any event, the reports will indicate how many vials/samples were taken, if any. And if the hospital filled a vial or utilized any medical supplies they put is in the report to justify reimbursement from either Medicaid or Medicare for it. Even if, Bunny Hole Entertainment or NCCU provided her health insurance, anything used and any service performed will be noted and billed with substantiation. For those that may doubt this, I have seen hospitals bill $25 for 10 Tylenol 200mg pills. Everything in a hospital is a profit generating events. Especially if it involves government reimbursement.

    Teresa, just back from travel and catching up on the thread. I am also a woman but am a Duke grad, parent of a daughter who plays lacrosse, and friend of LAX players when I was in school. I started out believing the accuser, but have long since abandoned that position. I noticed some posts wondering about prosecutors who would pursue a case when they knew it was false. I previously posted the story of my brother-in-law. In that case, the prosecutor had totally exculpatory evidence and tried to keep it hidden. My brother-in-law's lawyer found out about it through a leak(!) from the prosecutor's office, thankfully, and introduced it in a Perry Mason moment, causing an uproar in the courtroom. Case dismissed. You can read about it in the Detroit papers circa 1988 - my brother-in-law's reputation was trashed, BTW. So I really have trouble believing prosecutors when they have iffy cases, like Nifong has, since I saw one go to desperate measures.

    This situation is a truly sad tragedy for the three indicted boys, a formerly great lacrosse team, Duke University, and the AV with her troubled life. But a part of me is enjoying being able to watch Mike Nifong drag the U.S. legal system through the mud in front of the entire world. I have always been aware of what the criminal justice system in this country can do to a person financially, emotionally, and physically. But I suspect that many Americans are witnessing for the first time how terrifying the legal structure can be in the United States. Perhaps prosecutorial discretion will be rolled back as a result of this case. Mr. Nifong certainly is putting on quite a show. Seventy interviews???

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#174)
    by chew2 on Tue May 23, 2006 at 04:45:10 PM EST
    Theresa
    I think you guys are right and you can waive a jury trial in NC. I just read the constitution for the state and it say so.
    I'll bet that you read this constitutional language: Sec. 14. Waiver of jury trial.
    the parties in any civil case may waive the right to have the issues determined by a jury
    North Carolina seems to be a little unique in providing by statute that you can't waive a jury trial in a serious criminal case. I cited the statute above. Maybe you missed it. § 15A‑1201. Right to trial by jury.
    In superior court all criminal trials in which the defendant enters a plea of not guilty must be tried before a jury.
    I read this to require a jury trial in this case, but I haven't researched the NC case law to see how they interpret the word "must".
    I guess I shouldn't believe everything I see on TV.
    When it comes to the talking heads you can never be sure.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#175)
    by Lora on Tue May 23, 2006 at 04:51:09 PM EST
    Back when the defense was saying "No DNA evidence," many posters here were saying that she couldn't have had sex at the party because there would have been a ton of DNA. Then her boyfriend's DNA showed up. Now it appears she may have had sex with at least two other partners prior to the party. Some have said eight. But. The only DNA to turn up from the swabs was her boyfriend's DNA. So, what does this mean? Either she CAN have sex and have no DNA evidence, or ONLY had sex close to the time of the party with her boyfriend. If, as I believe many posters here think, she DID have sex with more partners close to the party, then either DNA leaves the body very quickly, or she could have had sex at the party and not have any DNA evidence to show for it. Which is it? A paradox, I think.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#176)
    by Teresa on Tue May 23, 2006 at 04:57:55 PM EST
    Thanks Chew. So does this mean the guy was right and they can't waive this right and have only a judge?

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#177)
    by Lora on Tue May 23, 2006 at 04:58:37 PM EST
    When I get back to a faster computer, maybe tomorrow or Thursday (I'm stuck with dial-up now) I'm going to search Newsbank again for Nifong. I really question the 70 interview number. I'd really like to see back-up for it. I'll share what I find. In my past efforts in searching for actual early interviews and direct quotes from Nifong, I had trouble finding anything more than a few small sets of identical quotes.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#178)
    by chew2 on Tue May 23, 2006 at 05:11:23 PM EST
    Teresa
    Thanks Chew. So does this mean the guy was right and they can't waive this right and have only a judge?
    Yes.

    Someone asks how the AV could have sex with numerous men and only the boyfriend's DNA showed up. Perhaps the two drivers and any others wore condoms. We know from the AV that the lacrosse players didn't wear condoms. We just don't know if it's three or twenty players.

    Did the AV refuse to take a tox report? From news reports it says a tox test wasn't part of the SANE exam. It wasn't checked. If the AV had been admitted to the drunk tank I'm sure the first thing done there would have been a test to see what's in her system. You wouldn't want to just lock someone up if they're loaded up with a dangerous combination of booze and drugs. This would explain her claiming rape to get out of the drunk tank, then initially denying she was raped when she arrived at the hospital, and then refusing the toxicology test, if she did.

    Bob wrote:
    If the AV had been admitted to the drunk tank I'm sure the first thing done there would have been a test to see what's in her system. You wouldn't want to just lock someone up if they're loaded up with a dangerous combination of booze and drugs.
    The last thing they would do is test someone. Drunk tanks serve one purpose....to let the person sober up/sleep it off. They never test anyone for drugs or combinations of anything because they have already determined that you are under the influence of something. Their only requirement is to monitor you for a medical emergency. The only exception is if they want to prove something more serious than public intoxication.

    I thought the 50-70 interview number came from Nifong himself. Maybe he was exaggerating his case there, too.

    Kali, I stand corrected. How about in an intoxicated person's crisis center?

    Lora:
    In my past efforts in searching for actual early interviews and direct quotes from Nifong, I had trouble finding anything more than a few small sets of identical quotes.
    If many/most of the interviews were for local TV and radio stations, the NCCU newspaper, etc, would there be any online record of them? I agree that the number 70 seems irrationally high. But there are many lower numbers that would also strike me as Nifong using the case for his own political purposes (say, 30 or 40).

    Bob wrote:
    How about in an intoxicated person's crisis center?
    Assuming you are referring to a rehab center, believe it or not, the majority of peolpe who check into rehab (willing or unwilling) check in under the influence. The standard protocal is the same...sleep it off and start the sobriety the next day after the bodies natural recovery process of sleep. If it is a crisis, i.e. overdose, etc., they take the person to the hospital emergency room. Depending ont he circumstances, the person is either sedated or revived. Immediate toxology is not standard protocol. Once admitted in Rehab, many tests are conducted to determine damage to the liver and other vital organs from the abuse, but it is not immediate.

    Kalidoggie posted:
    I believe they can even freeze a urine sample somehow to maintain its testability.
    Yes, the room temperature storage was the extreme case of mishandling of the samples, they also tested refrigerated samples, frozen samples, and "freeze-thaw" samples. Kalidoggie posted:
    In any event, the reports will indicate how many vials/samples were taken, if any. And if the hospital filled a vial or utilized any medical supplies they put is in the report to justify reimbursement from either Medicaid or Medicare for it. Even if, Bunny Hole Entertainment or NCCU provided her health insurance, anything used and any service performed will be noted and billed with substantiation.
    The S.A.N.E. exam is paid by the state. The state can apply to be reimbursed by various goverment agencies. Some states require the patient to apply for their insurance carrier to cover some of the costs. Other states do not - citing privacy issues - victims may not want their spouse to know they have had a S.A.N.E. I don't know about N.C.
    Prosecutors have found SANEs to be credible witnesses in court as a result oftheir extensive experience and expertise in conducting evidentiary exams. The Director of a Wisconsin SANE program reported that during a 31/2-year period, they had a 100-percent conviction rate in cases where a SANE testified at trial.
    ***
    They document assault details, perform medical exams and testing, and collect time-sensitive evidence. Since 1998, state [MA] public health officials say, nurse examiners have testified in 45 sexual assault trials, 98 percent of which ended in convictions.


    Great references, quotes, wum. Going to try to limit myself to reading tonight. We'll see if I can restrain myself from responding.

    Orinoco (who is ignoring me) posted:
    So you don't think the test took two months.
    No, I don't think the test takes two months. I never said it did. Orinoco (who is ignoring me) posted:
    Are you saying the Nifong waited 2 months before even starting the test?
    No. Orinoco (who is ignoring me) posted:
    How dumb do you think we are?
    I haven't called anyone dumb. It is you who said to Lora, "I think it's you either being dense or intentionally obtuse." Orinoco (who is ignoring me) posted:
    oh, btw, if the Nifong is indeed examing the urine now, the SANE exam would have "pending" on it. And it doesn't.
    I didn't say he was testing it now.

    Bob in Pacifica posted:
    We know from the AV that the lacrosse players didn't wear condoms. We just don't know if it's three or twenty players.
    Other than Dan Abrams today, I haven't seen the Talking Heads since the defense has had time to read through the discovery. Have the defense team's information disseminators said anything thing about the 20 rapist version?

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#190)
    by Teresa on Tue May 23, 2006 at 06:57:06 PM EST
    Meghan referred to it last night but it was phrased like "this new information taken with the 20 men". I couldn't tell if she was saying it was repeated in discovery. None of the others mentioned it that I saw.

    Nope, I can't. Lora: my recollection was that it was Nifong who said "40 hours" of interviews. Sorry, just saw that Bob already noted this. WTG Bob. I'm in the midst of a deep depression about all of this. I keep wanting to ask irrelevant questions of all of you here, like this one: if it were you, or a loved one of yours, who was being prosecuted on the basis of what we "know" now, how would that sit with you? If it were you, or a loved one, who was trying to take a rape case forward, based on what has happened thus far, how would that sit with you? If the AV had arrived at the hospital (how ironic that it was the Duke Medical Center, with money from Duke going toward funding the SANE program), and had said that she was an exotic dancer hired to perform at a private party, and she was raped by some black guys, would the Durham PD have pursued it? Or would this have been like the Creedmore (sp?) report, or the death threats from her husband report? Initial information taken, then "get back to us with the details," and it goes away for her, no matter what really happened, if she lets it go. In this case, the police and the prosecutor would NOT let it go. She could not make the report and then ignore it. Pressure, once the story went public, from media, family, boyfriend, DA, police, community, school (in no particular order) . . . the only way to keep them happy is to keep going. I wouldn't be surprised if she is hiding more from her supporters than from her detractors.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#192)
    by Lora on Tue May 23, 2006 at 07:07:57 PM EST
    About DNA...Now, we don't to my knowledge have a direct quote that details what she told the SANE nurse and under what circumstances. For all we know, she was confused, or her attacker did not ejaculate inside her. I'm just clarifying then that sperm would have to be the only source of any positive DNA from the swabs. If not, I don't see how you can reconcile only "boyfriend" DNA. Consensual sex could leave as much DNA inside as non-consensual sex.

    Orinoco (who can't ignore me) posted:
    I ignored you when I thought you were a real person.
    I like sockpuppets.
    But you advised Kalidoggie to ignore me after you decided I was a sockpuppet. Hmmm? I know the real reason that you can't ignore me. I think you do too.

    I have read tons comments on this site and have squandered many hours in the process. In the spirit of the winners/losers posts that I enjoyed, here are my thoughts: 1. Mike Nifong has compromised the integrity of our justice system for personal gain. He is an enemy of civil rights. Shame on him for ignoring the truth and misleading through the media. 2. Don't beat up the accuser. She needs help. While I do not condone her lies, I think Nifong and his enablers (the Bakers, both the Durham city manager and the Duke prof leaving for Vanderbilt to avoid clearning up his own mess) fanned the flames of hate. It would help, young lady, if you apologized to the community. We'll forgive you. 3. The lacrosse team is innocent of rape and deserves a public apology for the rush to judgment. That said, you should apologize for yelling racial epithets -- never ok, even if women question your manhood. 4. Chan Hall of NC Central: learn from the great leaders of the past (King, Ghandi) that love is a more powerful agent for change than hate. 5. Duke should fire the athletic director (who is by all accounts an idiot). They made the right move firing the coach; his team hiring strippers and passing out, in the middle of the season, is a reflection on him. That said, the team should play on. Hire the kid's dad from Hofstra to do things the right way. 6. azbball fan: I think UCLA is a great school and I'm happy the Suns advanced, but stereotyping Duke based on a high school classmate of yours is absurd. I would even go so far as to suspect that there are some decent human beings at USC.

    Thanks atl52. You expressed many of my thoughts better than I could, especially tonight. I do enjoy a voice of reason.

    atl52 wrote:
    That said, the team should play on. Hire the kid's dad from Hofstra to do things the right way.
    Please make it happen!!! Hiring the coach from Hosfstra would be an incredibly intelligent move by Duke to do to make amends to alumni, preserve the remaining careers of the current team and protect the future success of the team. Moreover, this will also prevent any lawsuits by the players against the school. I may even completely forgive Broadhead if this happens....at least until his next screw up.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#197)
    by weezie on Tue May 23, 2006 at 08:09:55 PM EST
    Whaddya say Dukies on the board? Do you all stand ready to forgive and forget if the FA says she's sorry?

    Posted by Billyjack:
    I Have to say the more facts I find out about this case the more I am disturbed. I am as liberal minded as they get but this is getting to hard to swollow. So far the Victim was reported passed out drunk on the night of the alleged attack by the officers [one officer](Not a problem). But the other Dancer initially said [she thought] nothing happened then changed her mind [opinion] and called a PR firm in the process to her spin her story. The Victim first claimed that 20 students did this to her [has this been confirmed?]then changed it to three. One of three had only 7 minutes to be there and the times don't match up to even allow him to do this [using the defense's timeline] A cab driver can say on the record that the boy was in his Cab. What did the cops do when they heard this?? They arrested the Cab Driver. The other person she identified with 90% accuracy never had a mustache [that is yet to be determined] and she said if he had one the she would have been 100% sure it was him. The DNA tests came back negative [inconclusive for David Evans] and suggested she had sex with her boyfriend but none of the accused. Add to this to the fact that she already made this charge about being raped by three people some 10 years ago and you have a full fledged circus. How many people have been unfortunate enough to be raped by 3 men two different times in life? what are the odds? [what are the odds the player she says, with 90% certainty, strangled her, happened to be the only player who can not be eliminated as the source of DNA on her fingernail?]. I am all for a fair trial and I am as open minded as anyone I know but I can not in good conscience believe this Victim. How many pieces of information am I suppose to disregard [how about as many as you have blindly accepted?]. I think the District Attourney is forcing her to stand by this misguided charge so he does't embarrass himself. My prayers are with every party involved in this disgrace. In a country where we are supposed to be free we send people off to war, put citzens in danger, and thanks to a disturbed legal system allow DA's like this one to run a campaign for office on the coat tails of a Racial hot button topic instead of looking at all the facts. I say lets get the charges right before we make them and Al Gore in 2008!!!!


    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#199)
    by Teresa on Tue May 23, 2006 at 08:17:24 PM EST
    imho, does that mean you agree with the go Al part? :)

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#200)
    by Lora on Tue May 23, 2006 at 08:34:10 PM EST
    That's one thing I can agree on! GO AL!

    Teresa posted:
    imho, does that mean you agree with the go Al part? :)
    Well, I do agree, that is, unless a more suitable candidate comes along. I'm going to wait and see if Orinoco throws his hat into the ring. He seems to be hinting he will - Orinoco posted:
    Everybody in politics has some kind of psychological disorder; this is from personal experience.


    huesofblue May 22, 2006 You posted "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." Finnerty has the best alibi of all. He did not go to the party at all. Between 11/30 and 12/30, the time of the alleged rape he was at a Mexican restaurant several miles away. He has 6 witnesses including the waiter who remember him at the restaurant. He has a time stamped food order the restaurant uses. He paid with an American Express card and the receipt is time stamped. His attorney is well known for never giving information out until the trial. Furthermore, after he was arrested the 2nd dancer claimed that she saw him at the party. She called him the "little skinny one". He has a small head, fine boned features and a slender neck. But he is hardly a "little skinny one." He is 6ft 3 weighs about 225 pounds and although slender, he has very broad shoulders. So it is obvious that 2nd dancer identified him from the the headshots that emphasis his slender neck and fine features. But no one who saw him in person, even sitting down would call him the "little skinny one."

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#203)
    by Teresa on Tue May 23, 2006 at 09:25:34 PM EST
    LOL. I choked on my stawberry shortcake! That's funny. (Sorry Orinoco)

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#204)
    by Teresa on Tue May 23, 2006 at 09:30:54 PM EST
    Hi Margaret. Do you know this for sure? I'm not doubting you, I just read that he ate and then went to the party after the dancing started. I don't remember where I read that though.

    Orinocco keeps talking about rapes committed by the rich and privileged against the poor. Not True. I was a Probation Officer for 15 years. For 6 of those years I had the rape caseload for a large California city. I can tell you that it is entirely false that rich and privileged men commit rapes agains the poor. All, and I do mean all the rapes committed in the city in which I was a Probation officer for 15 years were underclass criminal poor minority men against either underclass minority women or middle class white women. FBI Department of Justice statistics bear me out. Rape of underclass women by upper class men generally does not take place in western, advanced democratic nations. It is basically an African, Asian, middle eastern thing. But in America the class/race aspect of rape is pretty much black or hispanic habitual criminal thug with an IQ of 75 who grew up in the ghetto raping either the nearest ghetto neighbor avaliable or going out of his neighborhood to rape middle class white women.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#206)
    by Lora on Tue May 23, 2006 at 09:43:41 PM EST
    From msnbc.com, DA in the limelight:
    After spending what he estimates were more than 40 hours speaking with reporters about the Duke case, Nifong stopped granting interviews on April 3. He has said very little about the case since then.
    So...yeah. Nifong estimated he spent more than 40 hours. Don't know how many actual interviews this translates into. A lot, granted. Probably not 70. I agree with the 30 or 40 estimate. Thanks Del, Sharon, and Bob.

    Abrams Report:
    FILAN: And before you answer that, let me just jump to Larry for one second. Larry, we know that blood was drawn at the hospital. We also believe right or wrong, but we believe based on what Yale is telling us that there aren't going to be toxicology results. Can we still get them now from that blood that was drawn that night?
    KOBILINSKY: I don't think so. First all, these drugs once they enter the body, they're metabolized and you don't see that same chemical in the blood and all we have are tubes of blood that have been collected for DNA and for serological testing. What we should have looked at--what they should have looked at is urine because up to 72 hours you can do tests to look for the breakdown products of these drugs. That would have worked.
    From what I have been reading, if the blood sample was collected within 72 hours of ingestion and has been frozen, exogenous GHB can be detected 16 months later. I wonder if a urine sample was was taken, as well?

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#208)
    by Teresa on Tue May 23, 2006 at 10:02:03 PM EST
    Among people 12 and older, about 83.5% of the US population is white, and 82.5% of rape victims are white; 13.3% of victims are black, compared to 12.3% of the population; and 4.2% of both victims and the population are of other races. [2000 NCVS.] Blacks are about 10% more likely to be attacked than whites. In 2000, there were 1.1 victimizations per 1,000 white people, and 1.2 victimizations per 1,000 black people. [2000 NCVS.]
    study published by Harvard: harvard.edu Margaret, maybe minorities get convicted more in your former city. Most rapes are committed by someone of the same race but I doubt convictions prove who the most likely rapist are, especially if 82% of victims are white.
    Factoring in unreported rapes, about 5%--one out of twenty-- of rapists will ever spend a day in jail. 19 out of 20 will walk free


    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#209)
    by Teresa on Tue May 23, 2006 at 10:07:42 PM EST
    I prefer the foam but I especially like his brain.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#210)
    by Lora on Tue May 23, 2006 at 10:18:36 PM EST
    Ori, sorry, is your first name Al?

    Orinoco posted:
    *******************,
    thanks for the endorsement.
    but i'm well aware that sockpuppets don't vote.
    I get to vote twice. ;)

    margaret posted;
    But he is hardly a "little skinny one." He is 6ft 3 weighs about 225 pounds and although slender, he has very broad shoulders.
    The Duke Lacosse roster lists him as 175 lbs.
    13 Collin Finnerty ATTACK 6-3 175 So. Garden City, N.Y. (Chaminade)
    margaret posted:
    Finnerty has the best alibi of all. He did not go to the party at all. Between 11/30 and 12/30, the time of the alleged rape he was at a Mexican restaurant several miles away.
    He has 6 witnesses including the waiter who remember him at the restaurant. He has a time stamped food order the restaurant uses. He paid with an American Express card and the receipt is time stamped.
    Do you have a source for that info? This is all I've turned up: twincities.com
    Finnerty's lawyer said his client was at a restaurant several blocks away when the women were dancing.
    www.herald-sun.com/durham/4-726709.html (this link doesn't work anymore)
    Finnerty contends he was at a Mexican restaurant near Ninth Street, several blocks from 610 N. Buchanan Blvd., where the party and alleged rape occurred.
    USA Today April 19, 2006
    Bill Thomas, a lawyer for a player who has not been charged, said one of the two men under indictment did not even attend the party, though he did not specify which one, saying only that "multiple witnesses and a commercial transaction" would provide an alibi.
    Another attorney, Robert Ekstrand, who represents dozens of players, though not Seligmann or Finnerty, told the AP neither was at the party "at the relevant time."


    Judge throws the book at Spartans' DB
    Has the backlash begun? Is Animal House undergoing its final demolition?
    It's risky to read too much into the prison sentence handed down to Michigan State Spartans defensive back Cole Corey after he was convicted on a sexual assault charge last week, but one can sense the tide turning. Athletes who run amok aren't being winked at any more.
    All of this may have been on the mind of Lewanee County (MI) Circuit Court Judge Harvey Koselka when he sentenced Corey, a 5-11, 209-pound third-year sophomore listed as a possible starter at the "bandit" position in MSU's defensive backfield, to 2-10 years in prison -- a punishment that actually far exceeded the state's sentencing guidelines.
    Corey's crime actually dated back to high school, when he and a classmate at Tecumseh High in Adrian (not far from Ann Arbor) plied a 17-year-old female classmate with tequila and Ecstasy and then had sex with her repeatedly over several hours. Koselka called this act "horrific," and threw the book at Corey, even though he had cooperated with authorities in building a case against his track coach, Matthew Peterson, who was later convicted of holding "anything-goes" parties for his favored team members
    .

    Sharon, You wrote:
    I keep wanting to ask irrelevant questions of all of you here, like this one: if it were you, or a loved one of yours, who was being prosecuted on the basis of what we "know" now, how would that sit with you?
    People are prosecuted all the time. Compared to 99% of the people charged with serious crimes, these people have nothing to worry about, even if guilty. So if I were a defendant or a parent of a defendant, I wouldn't spend much time wallowing in self-pity. You wrote: If it were you, or a loved one, who was trying to take a rape case forward, based on what has happened thus far, how would that sit with you? Guilty or innocent, I think I would be taken aback at the sheer size of the controversy. Your average stinkbomb doesn't require a Superfund for the cleanup. I would also be leary of the age-old consequences of messing with white people. While their influence may be on the wane, they've demonstrated themselves for generations to be among the nastiest of species. Orinico may not be speaking for all white people when he expresses his desire to see the accuser "suffer as much as possible," but you worry that there might come a day when he would speak for more than himself.

    PB: I'm finding it hard to believe that you are being serious.
    People are prosecuted all the time. Compared to 99% of the people charged with serious crimes, these people have nothing to worry about, even if guilty. So if I were a defendant or a parent of a defendant, I wouldn't spend much time wallowing in self-pity.
    "These people"? "Nothing to worry about, even if guilty"? How about the threat of being found guilty, even if innocent, and spending 40+ years enjoying the hospitality of the North Carolina prison system? How about having to spend tens of thousands of dollars on attorneys' fees? How about being out $400,000 for the duration of the case? How about having your and your family's personal information, pictures, home addresses available for every and any crackpot racist out there to target? If you are open to the possibility that the accused are innocent, how can you be so callous? I hereby nominate you to be the poster child for the "Don't Got Milk (of Human Kindness)" ad campaign. Picturing you with your middle finger raised at the world, espcially we "nasty" white folks. Speaking of which, O Biologically Challenged One: "white" people are not a species any more than "black" or "yellow" or "red" or any variation or combination thereof are. Does the term "homo sapiens" mean anything to you?

    weezie: as a "Dukie," I for one would and could forgive the AV. I don't think she is being purposefully malicious. I think she is a troubled woman who was caught up in a maelstrom of public scrutiny and private pressure that she was unprepared for and from which she is unable to extricate herself. But the longer she allows this travesty to continue, the less forgiving I will be.

    This was in today's Washington Post - and is the second article of this type. Like the first one, the presumption is of guilt. You may need to subscribe to read: The Duke Case's Cruel Truth Hateful Stereotypes of Black Women Resurface Stereotypes/prejudice from the writer. That will be my mantra from now on when I see this.

    I think Al Gore fresh off of his new film and realxed after 8 years out of office would be a Great candidate. As for the Duke Lacrosse scandal. I am alarmed at the latest reports that the alleged victim had sex with three different people around the same time as the alleged attack occured. Is this normal behavior for a working mother of two? I think there is a good chance this is going to turn out to be a hoax and we on the Left are going to be made to look foolish!! I am for fairness and truth. All for the rights of any victims out there but if we create new victims by filing charges where the evidence is lacking or at best inconclusive what are we really accomplishing. And in itself the truth can not be a bad thing. That said what ever the outcome is I will support it. My gut feeling is that this story just gets worse for the District Attourney's office. In fact other than the victim saying the attack occured what real evidence do we have to support her. The Da turned over everything he has and it only raises more questions??

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#219)
    by weezie on Wed May 24, 2006 at 05:38:52 AM EST
    FWIW, there is a thread on the Durham ABC 11 forum stating that a Duke Hospital employee did a search of the hospital records and found no tox report was ordered at all. The search could never be used by the defense, of course, but it would seem that it uncovered something that has been much discussed here. And that Wash Post article simply ignores all of the facts that have come to light in the past two weeks. Lynne Duke, the writer is a desperate bleeding heart so carve off a large chunk of salt before you start reading. 7Duke4, are you ready to forgive and forget if the FA says she's lying? No Dukies have said anything yet, just wondering

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#220)
    by weezie on Wed May 24, 2006 at 05:46:25 AM EST
    Sharon, I realized it isn't fair of me to ask a question without giving my own answer so, as another DUKIE married to a DUKIE and as the parent of a Dukie I am furious at the way our school has been maligned and the way the lives of the accused players have been darkened. I also think that nothing much will happen to the "star" of the show and it makes me feel sick.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#221)
    by weezie on Wed May 24, 2006 at 05:47:24 AM EST
    Whoops, I hit the bold key in repeat without meaning to. I'm not foaming at the mouth!

    Now, if asked whether I could forgive Mike Nifong, the answer is a resounding NO, NEVER. He is much more despicable to me, much more of a monster to me, than the woman is because I can make no excuses for him and what he has done to the players, the school(s), the community, and the integrity of the judicial process. HIM? I want his head on a platter.

    I am intrigued by margaret's post. If true, and I have thought all along that the lack of alibi evidence for Finnerty might simply be a matter of his attorney's trial strategy, then this case makes even more of a mockery of "justice." Sadly, though, even if it is proven to be true, and Finnerty has an even more "airtight" alibi than Seligman, there will be some (are your ears burning, PB?) who will persist in their belief in the righteousness of the AV's cause and the wickedness of the lacrosse players.

    I'm still reserving *some* judgment. It seems pretty clear that there's reasonable doubt here. So I expect the 3 defendants to be acquitted and think they should be. I also suspect that at least 2 and possibly all of the defendants are totally innocent. But I just can't rule out that the AV was raped at the party. I know the defense can present a strong case to cast doubt on that, but that's their job. I'm under no illusions that "the truth" and what "the evidence will show" are one in the same. It's possible that she's making it all up. But if she is, it's flat out bizarre behavior.

    Weezie said:
    7Duke4, are you ready to forgive and forget if the FA says she's lying? No Dukies have said anything yet, just wondering
    Yes I will - I feel sorry for her - just stay away from my school and my sport. But Nifong...he WILL burn in hell for what he's done. On so many levels, it's irreparable. Not the least of which will be how the courts and juries will treat rape victims - we're seeing sympathy ebb away as we speak. That is truly frighening to me. And the race relations, and class, and, and... Prejudice, stereotypes coming back strong. It's his fault.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#226)
    by spartan on Wed May 24, 2006 at 06:29:52 AM EST
    This Dukie would find it very hard to forgive the accuser, unless she is found to be mentally ill. As for the DA------NO!!!!

    BillyJack, You wrote this: I think there is a good chance this is going to turn out to be a hoax and we on the Left are going to be made to look foolish! I don't think it's so much the Left generall7. But as I seem to say every day here, people who hold this case up as a reenactment of the antebellum South, or people who find the AV the symbol incarnate of oppressed womanhood, are going to be sorely disappointed.

    margaret posted:
    Finnerty has the best alibi of all. He did not go to the party at all. Between 11/30 and 12/30, the time of the alleged rape he was at a Mexican restaurant several miles away.
    He has 6 witnesses including the waiter who remember him at the restaurant. He has a time stamped food order the restaurant uses. He paid with an American Express card and the receipt is time stamped.
    Sharon posted:
    I am intrigued by margaret's post. If true, and I have thought all along that the lack of alibi evidence for Finnerty might simply be a matter of his attorney's trial strategy, then this case makes even more of a mockery of "justice."
    I wonder what her source is? She's wrong about his weight by 50 lbs. Not even all the defense attorneys are claiming "he did not go to the party at all."

    Al Gore? OT I know but it keeps coming up. My god even Goldwater, Dukakis and McGovern managed to cary their own State. I would strongly suggest you look for a new standard bearer, but hey Richard Nixon pulled it off so I guess you have that for hope. Look how the movie ended however.

    7duke4, Just read that WaPo article. There was a quote by a 94 year-old woman saying, basically, whatever that woman did she wasn't a prostitute. Except that, if she was doing what she was apparently doing the weekend before she danced at the party, she was a prostitute. Which is exactly the problem of making someone the symbol of anything when she's just a person. Like this: It is that the Duke case is in some ways reminiscent of a black woman's vulnerability to a white man during the days of slavery, reconstruction and Jim Crow, when sex was used as a tool of racial domination. This is the problem with high-octane rhetoric. When it ignites, it may burn the person with the torch.

    Bob In Pacifica
    Which is exactly the problem of making someone the symbol of anything when she's just a person.
    Agreed. I think this is a really dangerous temptation that can only cause more damage for everyone.

    Now Bob, let's not misquote. The 94-year-old said the AV wasn't there as a prostitute. She was only there to strip. I don't see why you can't respect that. Taking your clothes off and dancing provocatively is not an invitation to be sexually assaulted.

    It may be a little premature about forgiving the AV. We haven't seen the end of the case and there are still a lot of unknowns. I'm not sure of all that happened at the Buchanan house that night. We need to know before we forgive or not. However, it's appearing more unlikely that any rape occurred. If that's so, I hope that there is a criminal proceeding that will look at the AV's consciousness of thought when perpetuating this, whether or not she had anyone who encouraged her to go through with a fraud, and how much any mental illness may have played a part in this. That is, I can see forgiving her, but if she were consciously bringing false rape charges against three innocent men, I think that she should be put on trial for it. There should be a review of Nifong's prosecution. From here on the West Coast I don't see much hope for an honest review from within the Durham city government, but maybe by a state agency, and certainly a thorough investigative report. And then I would like reasonable leaders of all communities getting together to begin sorting out the deep divisions among them all.

    Taking your clothes off and dancing provocatively is not an invitation to be sexually assaulted.
    It really isn't.

    7duke4 posted:
    just stay away from my school and my sport.
    Do you feel the same about the party-goer who told the women he was going to shove the broom "up your asses?" Do you feel the same about the gentleman that said "Hey b*tch, thank your grandpa for my nice cotton shirt?" I think PB made a point some people don't want to face: PB posted:
    Lacrosse seems like a pretty good game, actually. It's funny how you drive by a little kid with a lacrosse stick these days and what immediately comes to mind is public urination. It's involuntary. You just have to shake it off and move on. Amazing if a false accusation did all that.


    Meanwhile... in a trial far away... FongNi: If he was behind you, and you couldn't see him, can you be certain that he didn't wear a condom? AVee: I can't be certain.

    Margaret posted:
    Finnerty has the best alibi of all. He did not go to the party at all. Between 11/30 and 12/30, the time of the alleged rape he was at a Mexican restaurant several miles away. He has 6 witnesses including the waiter who remember him at the restaurant. He has a time stamped food order the restaurant uses. He paid with an American Express card and the receipt is time stamped. His attorney is well known for never giving information out until the trial.
    I have a source that may be able to confirm this information. I believe I spoke with the source about this some time ago, which is why I made the earlier post that the times when Seligmann and Finnerty were at the party do not overlap - but, I'd like to wait until I can confirm this with the source. Further, IMHO, in your response, you purposely capitalized Finnerty's position as ATTACK - I for one have grown tired of you constant distortions - get a grip. Would you have capitalized his position if he played defense?

    Taking your clothes off and dancing provocatively is not an invitation to be sexually assaulted.
    It really isn't.
    Well, it sort of is. Not strangled certainly, but---let me think of a word that will pass the censors---penetrated. Which is why strippers doing "outcalls" bring along a bodyguard. I still haven't heard a reason for why neither agency saw fit to send protection for their exotic dancers. There's the "they said there would only be five guys at the party" explanation, but after all, it allegedly only took three to rape the AV. My cynical husband suggested that the girls passed on the bodyguards because it would mean giving up part of the fee to them.

    Del, Here's the quote: "Whatever she did, she was not there as a prostitute," Height says in her defense. Actually, the AV may have been there as a prostitute, that is, may have intended to turn tricks if she hadn't been so intoxicated. As we've learned here about the adult entertainment business, sex is often an enhancement to outcall strip shows like this. I have wondered if some resentment of the AV against the attendees was because they weren't buying her act. It's one thing to be a whore making money, another thing to be a drunken whore whose audience finds her unattractive. The context of the article was this: It is that the Duke case is in some ways reminiscent of a black woman's vulnerability to a white man during the days of slavery, reconstruction and Jim Crow, when sex was used as a tool of racial domination. The presumption of the article seems to be that because the attendees were mostly white men and the two dancers were black women, the psycho-sexual-economic history of the South was visited upon those two women who just wanted to perform at their recital and be respected by the ugly, bestial, sex-crazed mob of white men there. I'll cut a 94 year-old woman some slack about the sex industry. Small point anyway. If her point were merely to delineate between what the AV's occupation was at the Buchanan house and at other outcalls, it adds no understanding as to what actually happened there. My bigger point here is the inflation of whatever happened there into a symbology when the point should have been whether or not a crime had been committed.

    It may be a little premature about forgiving the AV. We haven't seen the end of the case and there are still a lot of unknowns. I'm not sure of all that happened at the Buchanan house that night. We need to know before we forgive or not.
    Bob, This case is over. So many people keep saying they have not seen all of the evidence, and while part of that is true, most of it isnt. Yes you are hearing it from the defense, but anyone who can use common sense, will realize that most of the holes of this case have been filled. There is but so much that you can find here. Rape cases are not that difficult and intriguing. Most of the truth is out there, and even if you are just getting the side of the defense, you cannot fill in any holes that a rape could of taken place...

    Regarding the post by PB, and mentioned above by imho:
    Lacrosse seems like a pretty good game, actually. It's funny how you drive by a little kid with a lacrosse stick these days and what immediately comes to mind is public urination. It's involuntary. You just have to shake it off and move on. Amazing if a false accusation did all that.
    I have to agree with PB on this. This also backs up the argument that the innocent players on the team will suffer from the actions of a few. Not only are the players that night being condemned, but so is the entire team (some were not there), and now even players on other teams. Surely this is not the type of justice system we support, is it?

    Well, it sort of is. Not strangled certainly, but---let me think of a word that will pass the censors---penetrated.
    If it's against the woman's will, I think the word your looking for is --raped. There's no question that her line of work is dangerous, but if what she's alleging actually happened (which at this point is a substantial if), I don't think that excuses it in any way.

    Slightly OT. Compare the treatment of the Jeepster Jihadi by the media, the college admin, and the college community in general with this case. In the first case, the guy's defense was, "I did it and I'm glad". Plus talk about killing infidels for Allah and so forth. And he gets the good treatment. Figures.

    Pat posted:
    Further, IMHO, in your response, you purposely capitalized Finnerty's position as ATTACK - I for one have grown tired of you constant distortions - get a grip. Would you have capitalized his position if he played defense?
    Pat, I cut and pasted it from this roster. Before I read your accusation, if someone had asked me what postion Finnerty played I would not have been able to tell them. I didn't even know "attack" was a lacrosse postion. I was posting it for his weight. Any more of my "constant distortions" you'd like point out?

    fillintheblanks, I saw that, er, coming. She will have more difficulty in explaining why she didn't taste the latex in her mouth. I can imagine the defense attorney: Now, in your SANE examination, you said the men who assaulted you did not wear condoms. Now you're saying you don't know whether or not they wore condoms? You said Mister Seligmann, forced you to perform oral sex on him for a half-hour, but he was gone from the house by the time you claim a rape occurred? So was it a half-hour, or thirty seconds, Ms. AV? Did he wear a condom or not? Are you changing your testimony to conform to the lack of DNA evidence, Ms. AV? Was it twenty men, as you told officer X, was there no rape, as you told officer Y, or was it three men, as you told officer Z? Why did you refuse to take a toxicology report? Why didn't you tell the SANE nurse that you had recently had sex with your boyfriend and two other men? How many other men did you have sex with that weekend during the course of your work? Granted, it may serve the defense's purposes to be a little less confrontational, but all those problems and more will be on the AV's lap when she testifies.

    Bob in Pacifica posted:
    I can imagine the defense attorney:
    Now, in your SANE examination, you said the men who assaulted you did not wear condoms. Now you're saying you don't know whether or not they wore condoms? You said Mister Seligmann, forced you to perform oral sex on him for a half-hour,[have we read/heard she said the forced oral sex lasted for 30 minutes?] but he was gone from the house by the time you claim a rape occurred?[Do we have a time for when she said the rape occured?] So was it a half-hour, or thirty seconds,[I think most jurors will settle for somewhere in between] Ms. AV? Did he wear a condom or not? Are you changing your testimony to conform to the lack of DNA evidence,[A S.A.N.E. nurse will testify that it is common for a victim to be confused and give contradictory statments after a tramatic rape] Ms. AV? Was it twenty men, as you told officer X,[Do we know that she ever told that to an officer? Have the Talking Heads leaked that part yet?] was there no rape, as you told officer Y, or was it three men, as you told officer Z? Why did you refuse to take a toxicology report?[Do we know if she refused?] Why didn't you tell the SANE nurse that you had recently had sex with your boyfriend and two other men? How many other men did you have sex with that weekend during the course of your work?
    Granted, it may serve the defense's purposes to be a little less confrontational, [It would serve them even more to confront her with facts] but all those problems and more will be on the AV's lap when she testifies.


    supamike, We pretty much agree. While I guess it's still in the realm of possibility (if not probability) that Nifong could throw a hail mary, we are agreed that this case is pretty much over but counting up the casualties. I am thinking about the next trial, the trial of the AV for filing false charges. Part of knowing all we don't yet know is to figure out how competent the AV was in perpetrating a fraud like this. I'm serious that this should be investigated. There is some intentionality there in her initial claims which showed a lack of concern about the consequences that would be visited upon the three men. A false charge would include all the official forms she signed, which would be violations of law, all the sworn statements, etc. A person can be suffering from some level of mental illness and still formulate criminal activity. Death row is, unfortunately, filled with people who are mentally ill by almost any definition except what the state demands for diminished capacity. Knowing more about this case will help us to know how strong the next prosecution, presumably not conducted by Nifong, will be.

    huesofblue, No excuses for rape. No excuses for filing false charges.

    Del posted:
    Well, it sort of is. Not strangled certainly, but---let me think of a word that will pass the censors---penetrated.
    Del, You are confusing penetration with sexual assault. Sometimes it is and sometimes it isn't - consent being the deciding factor.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#250)
    by chew2 on Wed May 24, 2006 at 08:24:31 AM EST
    Bob Bob says:
    It's one thing to be a whore making money, another thing to be a drunken whore whose audience finds her unattractive.
    Calling the victim a Ho, whore or prostitute is symbolic villification. It's meant to label her, to degrade her, and to shame her. You ignore her other humanity, struggling mother and honor student trying to better her life.
    My bigger point here is the inflation of whatever happened there into a symbology when the point should have been whether or not a crime had been committed.
    You're being a hypocrite in two ways. First, your use of labels like "whore" show you use that same symbology yourself. Second if it wasn't for the symbology no one would care about this case, not even you. The Duke defenders wouldn't be out here if this was an alleged gang rape by a bunch of homeless bums, and neither would you. No one would care if the defendants weren't privileged white athletes. Why do you think the conservative press is so solidly on the side of the lacrosse team? It's not surprising that black female opinion makers feel similarly protective of the AV. Del says:
    Now Bob, let's not misquote. The 94-year-old said the AV wasn't there as a prostitute. She was only there to strip. I don't see why you can't respect that. Taking your clothes off and dancing provocatively is not an invitation to be sexually assaulted.
    True. There is no claim here by the defense of consensual sex or any claim that sexual services were offered. From all the talk here, stripper parties are the new innocent rage among the college set. You know since we are throwing labels and symbols around, why don't we call those Duke lacrosse men, "drunken sex hungry louts who were expecting sex" from now on. Ryan McFayden will be their poster boy.

    I know the difference between penetration and sexual assault. It's just that an ugly little part of me, no doubt put there by some white ancestor, thinks that taking off your clothes and shaking your parts for a roomful of drunken frat boys is somewhere well past center on the consent continuum.

    Orinoco, you are correct that it easy for me to forgive the accuser. I am not Duke lacrosse. What I'm trying to understand is the "end game" once the truth comes out -- how should this be resolved so everyone can move forward? While I always find an "eye for an eye" seductive, I recognize that leaders focus on preventing this from happening again. What's done is done. That's why forgiveness is important. The question is who to forgive. I concur with the Duke grads who forgive the accuser. I forgive the other dancer who switched stories to make money -- that was naive and pathetic. Nifong should know better and he will pay for what he has wrought. I think the hero in this is the taxi driver. He told the truth, suffered for doing it, but is doing his part to uphold justice. He makes me proud to be an american. To "inmyhumbleopinion": we all agree that the racist comments and treatment of the women is reprehensible. It should be punished and is truly an embarrassment. That does not mean they are guilty of rape.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#253)
    by chew2 on Wed May 24, 2006 at 08:49:51 AM EST
    Lynn Duke's, Washington Post article gives us some of the black professional middle class reaction which we haven't heard much about in the white press:
    Racial history still resonates, still touches a deep and tender nerve. You can hear it, can hear the bitterness, in the way even a prim older woman discusses the Duke case. "I think there's a tendency to downgrade black women and to discount the fact that, no matter what they are there to do, they are not just animals to be used," says Dorothy Height, 94, president emeritus of the National Council of Negro Women. "Whatever she did, she was not there as a prostitute," Height says in her defense. And yet, that is how she has been portrayed. On his radio show, Rush Limbaugh called the exotic dancers in the Duke case two "hos." And on his TV show, Tucker Carlson called the alleged rape victim a "crypto-hooker."
    -----------------------
    Julianne Malveaux, an economist, author and commentator, says she was outraged to the point of distraction by all the ugly characterizations being made about the woman.
    Just as the Duke alum have been outraged here at how the lacrosse team has been portrayed. --------------------- But the reporter notes the villification of the team also:
    Not spared in the game of image-battering, the lacrosse players have been portrayed by some as privileged, racist brutes prone to binge drinking, who preyed upon a troubled and struggling young woman.


    Del posted:
    I know the difference between penetration and sexual assault. It's just that an ugly little part of me, no doubt put there by some white ancestor, thinks that taking off your clothes and shaking your parts for a roomful of drunken frat boys is somewhere well past center on the consent continuum.
    To borrow a phrase from Orinoco (again): "WOW." Fortunately, the laws in North Carolina must not have been written by you or those ugly ancestors of yours.

    BIP
    No excuses for rape. No excuses for filing false charges.
    No argument here.

    atl52 posted:
    To "inmyhumbleopinion": we all agree that the racist comments and treatment of the women is reprehensible. It should be punished and is truly an embarrassment. That does not mean they are guilty of rape.
    My comment was in response to 7duke4 imploring the woman that Duke lacrosse players hired to strip for them to "just stay away from my school and my sport." I took her comment to mean the stripper's accusation brought shame to 7duke4's school and her sport. As pointed out by PB, the accusation shone a light on the disturbing attitudes and disgraceful behavior of students from her school and participants in her sport. She can thank the "boys" for that.

    Re: Duke LaCrosse Case: No Toxicology Report Turne (none / 0) (#257)
    by chew2 on Wed May 24, 2006 at 09:46:18 AM EST
    IMHO, Duke's response to these rape allegations are much stronger than MSU's to the rape case you cited. MSU kept him on the team until he was sentenced.
    The school kicked Corey off the team Thursday. But it was too late to stop a public relations hit .... Common sense said Smith should have sidelined Corey when the player was charged with 13 felonies (including rape) last fall. And, MSU's Student-Athlete Code of Conduct says the school should have suspended Corey when the player pleaded guilty to the reduced felony charge
    The Corey story is part of a much larger tale of sex, alcohol, drugs and rape by his HS track team and buddies. The track coach was putting on alcohol sex parties for the team. Sex, booze & silence But it points up how difficult it is to come forward and allege rape:
    Their daughter was a member of the National Honor Society and the head of many school clubs.... She stood alone to tell police her ordeal despite the fact that there may have been dozens of other victims. At first, some of the other female victims said they too would come forward and tell police that they had also been sexually assaulted. "At the time they were very supportive. They were at our house in her room and they were crying and they were sticking together. Now that this hasn't happened, she's devastated, hurt and very angry," said the victim's mother.
    Parents of Tecumseh Sex Club Victim Speak As in the current case, the victim filed a rape complaint but didn't pursue it.
    John Clark, deputy police chief at the Tecumseh Police Department, said a woman reported Corey and a friend from high school raped her after they took Ecstasy and consumed alcohol in the spring of 2002. "Basically, we did the collection of evidence and it was preserved," he said. "Both suspects as well as the victim had been interviewed. Unfortunately, due to the victim's age, she came under a lot of peer pressure and thought it would be easier to walk away from everything."
    The State News Football player sentenced

    Thanks chew2, that case was interesting.
    In 1996, Congress unanimously passed the Drug Induced Rape Prevention and Punishment Act, which provides severe sentences of up to 20 years for anyone convicted for possession of a controlled substance with the intent to commit a crime of violence, including sexual assault.


    Comments here are closing, a new thread on the latest defense allegations is here.