Himan, they say, also left out statements from the nurse that the woman told her she wasn't choked and that no "condoms, fingers or foreign objects were used the during the alleged sexual attack."

Until we see the actual complete reports of the hospital exams and police interviews, and not just choice pieces taken out of context that bolster the defense's stance, there is plenty of room for huge amounts of spin.

I would not expect the players to push for charges to be pressed against her. It's not in their interest to swap seats with her.

Durham Police Investigator Benjamin Himan failed to note that exotic dancer Kim Roberts Pittman submitted a handwritten statement in which she said the rape accusations by her dance partner were "a crock."

to all of you wondering why this case has gone on, in spite of the clear lack of any substantiating evidence, i offer a simple answer: DA nifong is using other people's money, to prosecute this case.

The accuser told the nurse that Roberts assisted players in the alleged sexual assault and that the second dancer stole her money and property, the motion said.

5. Attached hereto ... While the Defendant believes the complainant has waived any privacy rights she may have under any state or federal law, in an excess of caution the Defendant tenders them to Court under seal and requests that the Court issue an order unsealing them.

It must have been post-traumatic stress disorder.

Of course in the same statement, Roberts describes the AV as "uncontrollable at this point" while they are in the bathroom. The AV was again talking about trying to "get more money" (how did she plan on making more money, BTW?). Of course, she was also yelling at the players on the other side of the door. It sounds like the AV was losing it (a non-technical term, I know) even before the alleged rape could possibly have occurred.

Why isn't Roberts up on charges for assisting with the rape? If the da believes the av's story about being raped by the players wouldn't he believe the av's story about Roberts?

PTSD which does not reflect past psychological states.

According to Roberts (in her handwritten statement), the only time the AV was alone in the house was when Robert's first went out to the car.

noname posted:

According to Roberts (in her handwritten statement), the only time the AV was alone in the house was when Robert's first went out to the car.

Actually, in the handwritten statement, Kim states that AV came back to the car a first time, then left the car "because she felt there was more money to be made," then came back to the car a second time - this second time she was helped by one or two boys.

Alan, I have trouble imagining that any attorney voluntarily would take on a civil case against a prostitute with a mental condition who obviously has few assets

Alan, I have trouble imagining that any attorney voluntarily would take on a civil case against a prostitute with a mental condition who obviously has few assets

I'm not thinking about the AV as sole or even principal defendant.

However, as has already been said, Roberts/Pittman has the AV saying that she wanted to go back in and make money after the times she was alone in the house.

beenaround:

However, as has already been said, Roberts/Pittman has the AV saying that she wanted to go back in and make money after the times she was alone in the house.

There is no need to assume the AV was actually in the house when she went back. Wasn't there a defense story about her returning and knocking on the door to get in only to be turned away? She then could have been helped back to the car (at which point she tries to convince Roberts to come with her and try again).

And she told one medical staffer she drank at least 44 ounces of beer, and told another she took a powerful muscle relaxant and drank beer before going to the party at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd. on March 13

On the point of the trips in and out, what about those pictures of the AV, standing alone on the porch, and allegedly smiling. Was that the second entrance?

However, as has already been said, Roberts/Pittman has the AV saying that she wanted to go back in and make money after the times she was alone in the house.

Besides, it seems incredulous to me that the AV would say she wanted to go back in again after being carried to the car. I think she was too far gone at that point.

She was being helped out of the back yard and into my car. At this point, she did not have the bag that I saw her come with and I asked her if she had the most important thing, her money. She told me yes but she did not seem coherent. She then told me that we should go back to the house because there was money to be made there.

Forgot to mention that the first time Precious came back to the car, she left because she felt there was money to be made. It was after then, that the boys helped her to the car. They carried her by throwing her arms over their shoulder and assisting her walking to the car.

Would the state take her kids if that [i.e., involuntary commitment for apparently dangerous state of mind due to substance abuse or mental illness] happened? That is a good motive to invent a story.

To TL, Sharon, LocalOne, and others: As I am not an attorney, could you briefly discuss what happens with the motions that have been filed by the defense. For example, I assume there is some sort of meeting within the judge's chambers with the DA and the defense attorneys to discuss the merits of the motions. Also, in your experience, have you seen a situation that resembles what now seems to have happened (and is happening) with this case? Thank you.

In no way am I disputing the (lack of) evidence here nor Precious' motives to fabricate such a story.

These aspects of the motion have been discussed to an extent. Personally, I was drawn to Kim's written statement instead of these equally important subjects only because it was the only part of the motion involving a first-hand description of that night. I would be more willing to discuss the medical report, for instance, if I could see the original as opposed to the defense attorney's or police' second hand account of what it says.

The flow of paper from the defense continued Friday, as Finnerty's attorneys filed three discovery motions seeking reports from two police officers who were with the accuser in the hours following the party before she arrived at an area hospital. They also sought original notes and documents from investigators, and more detailed reports on all photo lineups conducted by investigators.

The last motion suggested that police may have conducted six or more photo lineups, in which the accuser was shown photos of Duke lacrosse players and asked if she could identify her attackers.

Are we going to hear from IMHO or PB? Ya'll fought a good fight trying to defend the av's story, even you have to tired of this up hill fight. Assuming that all of this new info ends up being true, do you concede that she's lied?

I suppose there's a difference between that which is prosecutable and that which is justiciable, but it can't be a very serious difference.

Not attacking at all, just curious about the logic path you're taking, since it isn't the prevalent one on the board.

If we were serving on a jury together today, and the world, for some perverse reason, had been turned upside down in such away that we were were supposed to rule not on whether the defendants were guilty, but on whether they were innocent, and in order to find them innocent we were instructed that we had to find them innocent beyond a reasonable doubt, and we had the information we now have before us, there is no way I could join you in your verdict based on what we now know.

Nifong knows a lot more about the case than I do, to be sure, and he considers it prosecutable!

wum: haven't even read all of it, but don't go off on PB. PB, as I said before, and the others who are still speaking for the AV, keep the rest of us honest.

He may be able to avoid legal responsibility by saying "I believed the accuser."

Wow, I wouldna believed it if I hadn't read it with my own eyes: somebody is STILL trotting out the lame old argument that "Nifong prosecuted, ergo there must be a good case"!

And I don't have proof beyond a reasonable doubt that you, PB, do not sexually molest prepubescent children and nosh on dead babies.

Lora and IMHO will probably go to their grave wanting this rich white boys convicted of just about anything.

Virtually all the other skeptics have left the scene as its obvious what happened here now.

Are we going to hear from IMHO or PB? Ya'll fought a good fight trying to defend the av's story, even you have to tired of this up hill fight. I have never posted that I want anyone in this case convicted of anything.

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?

Assuming that all of this new info ends up being true, do you concede that she's lied?

Had investigator Hinman bothered to interview Jarriel Johnson at the time ( a task the Durham Police Department did not accomplish until April 6, 2006), he would have discovered sooner that [redacted] was involved in some sexual manner with at least four different men during the weekend from March 10 through 12, 2006.

Didn't Mr. Johnson stay in the car when he took the accuser to the hotels?

Maybe he just really likes crossword puzzles? The only time I've ever had the patience to finish one has been on long car trips.

from sitting in a car nearby, can determine another person in a hotel room is "involved in some sexual manner" with a man.

you would try and genuinely ascertain whether the charges against me had any merit before dismissing them as the ravings of a spontaneously over-zealous prosecutor hell-bent on finding a white feminist to take down.

It's as I tried to convey when I told of my experience as a juror in a rape case: every potential juror was asked, "if there is no evidence other than the victim's statement that she was raped by the defendant, and you find her credible, can you convict on her word alone?"

possible confirmation of the AV's story is Kim's comment about the AV at Kroger's: "They tried to talk to her and ask questions but the only thing she would mutter was no. ... If she'd been raped, "no" would have been an appropriate thing to say.

As far as I can remember, no one claims that Nifong wants to take down the defendants because they are privileged white males. The claims are that Nifong is ambitious and wanted to win the election, and the case was a convenient way to ensure he did that by pandering to obvious community interest in Durham. I invite you to find a more appropriate reverse situation.

And to bring up a sore topic, after seeing the sloppy police work and investigative reports I don't blame any of the players for not coming forward to answer questions without a lawyer present.

There is nothing here that discounts the essentials of the AV's story.

Just because the woman who go to Duke don't consider themselves feminists

That Kim didn't find the purse inside tends to confirm the AV's account to Shelton of her money being taken when she was pulled out of the car and groped.

Do wha. .? How did you come to that conclusion? I'd be interested, as IMHO likes to say, in your source for that statement. 'Cause if being a feminist precludes one from attending Duke, I sure wish someone had told me that during the admissions process.

And how is it, again, that being a feminist means that one is obliged to support one particular viewpoint in this case? Blind solidarity doesn't have a whole heck of a lot to do with feminism in my book.

When did I say he had a good case? I just said he considered it prosecutable. Do you doubt that?

I don't doubt that Nifong thought he could persuade a grand jury to indict the ham sandwiches in this case, but I do doubt that he was ever convinced that the AV was telling the truth. So sue me.

Clute said his son told him that he had not witnessed anything at the party, and was so concerned about the allegations that he had gone to the captains to ask whether anything had happened. "The captain looked him the eye and said nothing happened," said Clute, a government contractor.

Over the months, tensions erupted over legal strategies and fears of which son might be handcuffed next. The less-affluent parents have worried about how to pay legal bills. The wealthy ones swore they would spend every last penny clearing the names of the indicted.

Do we even know if the DA actually reviews all the evidence himself or does he depend on those below him to do that for him? I could then make a case for an over eager investigator ultimately sinking the DA's ship.

There is nothing here that discounts the essentials of the AV's story.

The defense did spin. And nearly everybody bought it.

That Kim didn't find the purse inside tends to confirm the AV's account to Shelton of her money being taken when she was pulled out of the car and groped.

The defense did spin. And nearly everybody bought it.

Just because the woman who go to Duke don't consider themselves feminists

AV's story is Kim's comment about the AV at Kroger's: "They tried to talk to her and ask questions but the only thing she would mutter was no." "No?" Why "no?" If she'd been raped, "no" would have been an appropriate thing to say.

IMHO says:

from sitting in a car nearby, can determine another person in a hotel room is "involved in some sexual manner" with a man.

Please tell us truthfully what you think she was doing?

Please tell us truthfully what you think she was doing?

Giving people tuition in how to respect a hardworking mother of two?

One of the problems, to my mind, about this case is that Nifong was too involved, too soon, in the investigation.

You think the medical finding of no evidence of injury to the AV's throat or neck doesn't belie her story that she was strangled?

12:37:58 a.m.: A series of photos are taken, all showing the woman lying on her left side on the back porch, seemingly passed out or asleep. She had visible cuts on her legs and buttocks that did not appear in the previous photos.

Maybe the same thing she was hired to do at 610 N. Buchanan. Perhaps that is what the defense motion is calling "involved in some sexual manner" with men?

If the AV has had Flexeril, beer, and some strong mixed drinks, I would not put any weight on just her mumbling, "no". I would be interested to know, did she scream or pull away when touched while sitting in the car at Kroger's, or did she only try to prevent herself from being removed from the car?

Does Mrs. Evans have two children? I've heard those LPGA ladies can be brutal to each other, but I'm sure, if David stops hiring strippers, that reportedly, performed sex acts on each other while buck-naked, the hardworking Rae will regain the respect of the LPGA ladies' someday.