home

Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Collapsed?

Newsweek has a new detailed analysis of the Duke lacrosse players' alleged rape case, asking whether it has collapsed. The facts revealed to date don't seem to support the charges. But DA Nifong is sticking to his guns:

Asked for an interview last week by NEWSWEEK, Nifong declined, but sent an angry e-mail accusing the national media of getting spun by defense lawyers and sticking to his earlier comments to the press. "None of the 'facts' I know at this time, indeed, none of the evidence I have seen from any source, has changed the opinion that I expressed initially," he wrote. He lashed out at "media speculation" (adding, "and it is even worse on the blogs"). He said that he was bound by ethics rules against commenting any more about the case or evidence.

Remember Nifong's prior statements:

After the alleged rape, Nifong estimated to the Raleigh News & Observer, he gave 50 to 70 interviews to local and national media. "I am convinced that there was a rape, yes sir," Nifong said on "The Abrams Report" on MSNBC on March 28. The next day he told a local TV station, WRAL, "My reading of the report of the emergency-room nurse would indicate that some type of sexual assault did in fact take place."

Newsweek recaps the facts from court documents and interviews and concludes:

It is conceivable that Nifong is holding back some kind of smoking gun, but, given the rules and the publicity about the case, that does not seem likely.

As to Dancer #2, Kim Roberts:

Another stripper had accompanied the woman to the lacrosse party that night. The alleged victim told the nurse that the other dancer, Kim Roberts, had stolen her money and "assisted the players in their alleged sexual assault," according to a defense lawyer's affidavit. Interviewed by police, Roberts initially said her partner's account of being raped was "a crock" and that the two women had been separated less than five minutes at the lacrosse players' house. Later, Roberts changed her story and said that a rape might possibly have taken place. But that was after Nifong had helped her get favorable bail treatment for violating probation (she had pleaded guilty to embezzlement charges in another case). Roberts later contacted rap star Lil' Kim's publicist "for any advice as to how to spin this to my advantage."

And about that medical report:

It appears that Nifong had not actually seen the medical reports when he talked to reporters on March 29 about "my reading of the report of the emergency-room nurse." The medical report was not turned over to the police for another week, on April 5. Rather, Nifong may have relied on what a police investigator had told him. The detective's notes claim that the sexual-assault nurse told him that "there were signs consistent with a sexual assault during her test."

I would note that in the March 27 search warrant the Affiant officer wrote:

Medical records and interviews that were obtained by a subpoena revealed the victim had signs, symptoms, and injuries consistent with being raped and sexually assaulted vaginally and anally. Furthermore, the SANE nurse stated the injuries and her behavior were consistent with a traumatic experience.

This raises a legitimate question of whether the investigator actually had obtained the subpoenaed records by March 27 as he claimed, or he was misstating information to the Court, which would seem to be the case if the defense is correct the report wasn't received until April 5.

Then there is the accuser herself. Newsweek reports:

It is not certain that the accuser will go forward with the case. Ten years ago she claimed she had been raped three years earlier by three men, but her father told reporters that the rape never happened, and she never followed through with the authorities. The father has been supportive of her this time around, but he told yet another version of what happened--that the Duke players used a broom handle. Recently, he has said that his daughter is struggling with her "nerves" and may not be up to testifying in a trial. According to their lawyer, Mark Simeon, the accuser's parents have not heard from their daughter for weeks and are very concerned.

Finally, there are the repurcussions to the players, whom appear more and more likely to me to have been falsely accused:

Meanwhile, the players and their families are lying low, trying to figure out how they can get their reputations back. Finnerty and Seligmann are underclassmen and may be able to transfer to another college and still play lacrosse if the charges are dropped. Evans has already started to pay a price in the real world. He was supposed to begin a good job after graduation, but the job offer was withdrawn.

< Whither Our Privacy Rights? | Observer: U.S. Hid Truth on Guantanamo Suicides >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#1)
    by cpinva on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 11:38:12 AM EST
    yes, it appears that is much more a case of "all sound & fury, in the end, signifying nothing". that said, can mr. evans sue DA nifong, for lost wages, etc., as it becomes clearer and clearer that he has operated in bad faith from the beginning? it gives off the distinctive odor of politics; mr. nifong was involved in what appeared to be a pretty close primary at the time this started. bear in mind, mr. nifong is not completely immune from civil suit. as well, ethics violations charges may also be a consideration.

    It is curious how Nifong's rhetoric is so similar to some who post here ...

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#3)
    by james on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 11:46:22 AM EST
    The March 27th probable cause affidavit is particularly troublesome as it implies that it was based on either a falsehood or information that the police should not have had at that time by their own admission (in terms of dates). I remember an individual nitpicking over the defence lawyers paraphrasing a recent filing due to supposed misrepresentations of those quotes in full context. I would say that this is a blatant misrepresentation to the court that cannot be denied by a reasonable individual assuming that one believes a full and fair discovering process occured (the dates that are important).

    jk, Here you go.
    In the summer of 2004, she landed a position at a rest home. But the job was short-lived, because part of her employee file was missing. When she didn't receive a paycheck after a few weeks of work, she filed a complaint with the Durham County Sheriff's Office. Her employer told her to submit a criminal record in order to get paid, the report said. No further action was taken by either party to resolve the issue, the report said.


    Alan posted:
    imho posted:
    He could be expecting to come into possession of more evidence this week, which he will in turn pass on to the defense.
    Are you suggesting the SANE report is not yet complete and will be given to the defence when it is? Perhaps the undisclosed earlier lineups are still being written up? Were these works-in-progress notified to the defence when Nifong handed over all sic the material?
    No, no comment and no comment.
    One reason that discovery is crucial to procedural fairness is that a document given to the other side cannot be altered later.
    That would go to the art of discovery compliance.

    Doing my weekend check-in after another week on the road. Over 1200 comments to read! Took a page from IMHO's book, referencing Bob's posts, when she posted: "Durga, I stopped reading his posts a long time ago." I have been doing the same with imho - it cut my time in half, and I did not miss anything of substance. I did catch some of the comments when referred to by others. I see from the reply to Newport that the moustache was regurgitated: "We don't know if Evans had a mustache that night or not." Some other notable comments - Somewhatchunky:" Back to check on the IMHO Board (46 posts in this thread so far)." My favorite rhetorical question was from Whatisthat: "Question for the group: Why do you get sucked into responding to IMHO's comments?" But imho already told me from my similar question that it is because this blog finds her more interesting. And blcc, not just the number of imho posts, but the volume of the content is incredible, if you went through 1200 posts, like I just did. Frankly, if you can avoid the nits being picked, this is an interesting site. Feeling the need to reply to some of the ridiculous comments is an exercise in self-IMMOlation. My favorite unanswered question was from Bob: "Is there any record of Nifong or police investigators ever questioning the AV for clarification of inconsistencies in her story?" If no discussion was had in the past 3 months, which I doubt, then it is gross incompetence or negligence. If it was discussed and not recorded, it is willful deceit and unlawful. There is no reason for this to not be in the discovery. Nifong is a lying scrumbag (an homage to Alan, the Aussie, where lacrosse is quite popular), who cares nothing for the institutions, communities, and lives of everyone trampled in this farce.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#7)
    by Alan on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 12:33:56 PM EST
    imho posted:
    That would go to the art of discovery compliance.
    By 'the art of discovery compliance' do you mean:
    • a medical practitioner
    • a doctor
    • a nurse
    • the art of preventing Nifong's circumvention of a duty imposed by law


    James posted,
    The March 27th probable cause affidavit is particularly troublesome as it implies that it was based on either a falsehood or information that the police should not have had at that time by their own admission (in terms of dates).
    Same with the March 23 probable cause affidavit which contains the exact same language.

    ding7777 posted:
    to inmyhumbleopinion
    Did Nifong take a cheap shot at Precious?
    "I would not be surprised if condoms were used. . . . Probably an exotic dancer would not be your first choice for unprotected sex."
    He wasn't singling out the accuser. Do I think it was an unfair criticism of exotic dancers? I do, but I can't imagine the commenters who have been insisting all exotic dancers are prostitutes would think it was an unfair criticism. Was it a gratuitous remark? No, he was making a good point. If the boys had hoped to procure sex from the strippers they would most likely have been prepared with condoms. If things went bad and they had sex with her without her consent, they could still have had the sense to use condoms.

    I actually thought the first paragraph of the Newsweek article was new (at least to me) and very important because it shows the players had a total lack of any consciousness of guilt from day one. I find this to be most important, as did the Newsweek authors.

    but I can't imagine the commenters who have been insisting all exotic dancers are prostitutes would think it was an unfair criticism
    I am unaware of any commenters saying any such thing. Source?

    Newport, re the newsweek first paragraph: Early on, when Nifong said the DNA would separate the guilty from the innocent, the entire team was ecstatic, as they naively thought their lacrosse season would be salvaged...because they all knew they were innocent.

    Newport posted:
    I find this to be most important, as did the Newsweek authors.
    Here is what one of those very reporters has said: May 1, 2006
    But results from a second round of DNA tests are expected back this week, and defense lawyer Bill Thomas told NEWSWEEK that in the first round some DNA showed up under the woman's fingernails, though tests were inconclusive about identity.
    Campus Crisis
    Susannah Meadows: The only information reporters have about DNA tests is what defense attorneys, who've looked at the results, have shared with us. (The prosecution has not spoken publicly about them.) When the attorneys spoke publicly about them they said there was no DNA found on the woman that matched any of the players' DNA. This was true. But that did not mean that no DNA was found on her. In fact, one of the attorneys told me on the record that DNA was found underneath her fingernails, but tests were unable to show whose it was. Finding a DNA match is a tricky science and often requires further testing, which is what is happening now.


    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#14)
    by ding7777 on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 01:26:29 PM EST
    re the DNA under her figernails Are they talking about her fake fingernails or her real fingernails? And wasn't the AV performing on the livingroom floor (palms down?). Its a wonder they didn't find more of the players DNA on her

    Actually IMHO, I don't think Mr. Meadows, the author of this piece as well as the earlier one, is too pleased with Nifong about the "date rape" drug remark. It was she that Nifong "hinted" about the presence of a date rape drug and Meadows went with it in her piece. Now, it turns out that Nifong was being irresponsible (and unethical) when he did his hinting because he had absolutely no evidence that his hint was true and he had lots of other evidence that suggested that his hint was untrue. Nifong's "hint" gave false hope to all the FA supporters as said "hint" was seized upon to explain the FA's erratic behavior and the lack of any tangible physical evidence against the boys. I believe that Nifong's "hint" was not only irresponsible and stupid but a violation of the ethics codes in NC and elsewhere. Where am I going wrong here?

    defense lawyer Bill Thomas told NEWSWEEK that in the first round some DNA showed up under the woman's fingernails, though tests were inconclusive about identity.
    Well, it turned out they were extremely conclusive, did it not. All but one of the 46 players who tested were conclusively ruled out as the source of the DNA under the fingernail. That it turned out that the 46th player happened to be the one player whom the accuser claimed to have scratched was unfortunate, but after all, the accuser is a known liar and Evans has a perfectly reasonable excuse for his DNA being there. He probably picked up the nail and gave it to the police when they were doing the search warrant, and if not, there are lots of other possibilities. And even if she scratched him, what does that have to do with rape?!!! I mean duh!

    If Nifong was upset about the media falling for the defense "spin" in their duly filed motions, why did he not "set the record straight" be filing an opposition? I think the answer to this question is one or more of the following: 1) he is just plain lazy; 2) he does not have any opposition to write about and just accepts that the motions will be granted; 3) he is just so amazingly stubborn and vain that he can't believe anyone in the media would doubt his view of the case and its evidence; or 4) he has been too busy posting on TL to find the time to file any oppositions.

    Furthermore, PB, an esteemed statistician on this board has mathematically demonstrated that, even in a random picking, the FA had a 1 out of 8 chance of picking Evans in the lineup. The odds were likely enhanced based on other factors, such as police coaching, Evan's was a captain and may have had contact with the FA, and the fact that she knew it was Evan's house.

    Newport, You wrote:
    Now, it turns out that Nifong was being irresponsible (and unethical) when he did his hinting because he had absolutely no evidence that his hint was true and he had lots of other evidence that suggested that his hint was untrue.
    I would think that the statements from Roberts and/or the accuser (among others) that she went from okay to wildly out of it within a very short time of drinking a concoction given to her by the players drink serving agent (who shall remain nameless for risk management reasons at this time) would constitute "evidence" of the sort you like to bank on. Especially if we're allowed to add "common sense" to the mix. No?

    PB posted,
    That it turned out that the 46th player happened to be the one player whom the accuser claimed to have scratched was unfortunate,
    What is your source for this statement? Where is there any statement by Precious that she scratched Evans? The medical report suggests otherwise.

    lightenup posted:
    But imho already told me from my similar question that it is because this blog finds her more interesting.
    I didn't say that. Here is what I did say:
    "It's a shame that you feel the commenters here are more interested in responding to me than to you."
    That was in response to you whinning that no one was answering the questions you were interested in. Why don't you answer them yourself? Or did you mean no one was responding to the interesting the questions you were asking? ;) Posted by inmyhumbleopinion June 10, 2006 10:18 PM
    lightenup posted:
    Imho, I an running off, but to sleep, and I trust you do not care, but I will no longer reply to you. In my humble opinion, you dominate this board, and add nothing in the process. Several interesting questions are raised on this site, yet everyone feels the need to respond to your voluminous posts, and discussions that interest me fall by the wayside.
    imho replied:
    It's a shame that you feel the commenters here are more interested in responding to me than to you. That is something you should take up with them. I can't control what they post.


    PB wrote,
    I would think that the statements from Roberts and/or the accuser (among others) that she went from okay to wildly out of it within a very short time of drinking a concoction given to her by the players drink serving agent (who shall remain nameless for risk management reasons at this time) would constitute "evidence" of the sort you like to bank on. Especially if we're allowed to add "common sense" to the mix. No
    ? Would you PB? Is that the sort of "evidence" a responsible DA should hang his hat on? Your type of common sense is quite different from mine. Also, didn't Roberts state just the opposite, that Precious only had a sip of the drink and then knocked it over in the sink? Read the Newsweek article for enlightenment.

    Newport writes:
    Furthermore, PB, an esteemed statistician on this board has mathematically demonstrated that, even in a random picking, the FA had a 1 out of 8 chance of picking Evans in the lineup.
    I think I can get the numbers down to 1/6th, but I'm only able to do that by assuming that the surface volume of Evans head is 8 times bigger than that of the average player, which I'm not sure is legitimate. We'll go with your 1/8. You know, if want him to win the civil trial, we should do better than 1/8th. Let's keep at it.

    Lightenup, Indeed, they were quite naive about Nifong and the thought that the justice system would work in an honest and fair fashion. Makes Sharon's comments re lawyering up even more important for all cases in the future, especially in Durham where the Nifong lurks.

    jk, IMHO cited the story. Of course, the article was early on, generally favorable to the AV. There are a couple of things missing from the article. For example, by law if you work you get paid. There's no wiggle room there. So I wonder how her claim would not be upheld if she honestly hadn't been paid. She apparently had concealed her criminal record when she applied for the job and that was the crux of the disagreement. My guess is that there is more to the story than what was referenced here. One also wonders what the reporter's sources were for the story. Relying on the AV is probably not a great idea if you intend to have an accurate account of events.

    To imho: happy father's day

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#27)
    by Alan on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 01:59:03 PM EST
    PB posted:
    I would think that the statements from Roberts and/or the accuser (among others) that she went from okay to wildly out of it within a very short time of drinking a concoction given to her by the players drink serving agent (who shall remain nameless for risk management reasons at this time) would constitute "evidence" of the sort you like to bank on. Especially if we're allowed to add "common sense" to the mix. No?
    We have no statement from the AV except one brief interview where being out of it is not mentioned. According to the medical report, as cited by the defence, the AV describes drinking various large amounts of beer and taking a muscle relaxant before arriving at the party. Alcohol takes time to process. She may have become drunk instaneously because of the drink given her at the party. But that would require that the large amount of beer and/or the muscle relaxant she had previously taken had somehow mysteriously evaporated from her system without any effect. The simplest explanation is that she arrived at the party drunk but under tight and conscious control, as inebriated people can sometimes do for a limited time, and that she lost control soon after arriving. Arguing a toxicological explanation without any toxicological evidence may not go very far in a courtroom. No?

    Newport wrote:
    What is your source for this statement? Where is there any statement by Precious that she scratched Evans? The medical report suggests otherwise.
    I haven't seen Evans medical report. I doubt he'd go to the doctor over a little scratch anyway.

    lightenup posted:
    To imho: happy father's day
    My father is dead. Thanks.

    PB posted:
    I would think that the statements from Roberts and/or the accuser (among others) that she went from okay to wildly out of it within a very short time of drinking a concoction given to her by the players drink serving agent (who shall remain nameless for risk management reasons at this time) would constitute "evidence" of the sort you like to bank on. Especially if we're allowed to add "common sense" to the mix. No?
    Newport responded:
    .....Also, didn't Roberts state just the opposite, that Precious only had a sip of the drink and then knocked it over in the sink? Read the Newsweek article for enlightenment.
    NEWSWEEK April 24, 2006 'Sex, Lies & Duke'
    The other woman who was hired to dance at the off-campus party on March 13, the night of the alleged attack, was Kim Roberts. Meadows spoke with her about what she remembers from the party. "She talked about how she remembered the alleged victim showing up sober," Meadows said. "And then Kim remembered that they had been given drinks. They had each been given a mixed drink. Kim did not drink hers. She said the alleged accuser spilled hers, actually after having had a little bit of it, and then she drank Kim's. And it was after that, shortly after that that Kim remembers the alleged accuser becoming out of it, stumbling, having a glassy look in her eye, unresponsive look in her eye."
    Meadows said that information has raised the possibility that some sort of date rape drug was slipped into the dancers' drinks. "It's likely that she got all those tests when she went to the hospital that night," said Meadows of the accuser. "When I spoke to the prosecutor two weeks ago, he hinted at this -- he hinted at the possibility that there might have been something put into her drink.


    James posted these thoughtful comments:
    The March 27th probable cause affidavit is particularly troublesome as it implies that it was based on either a falsehood or information that the police should not have had at that time by their own admission (in terms of dates). I remember an individual nitpicking over the defence lawyers paraphrasing a recent filing due to supposed misrepresentations of those quotes in full context. I would say that this is a blatant misrepresentation to the court that cannot be denied by a reasonable individual assuming that one believes a full and fair discovering process occured (the dates that are important).
    I couldn't agree more and ditto for the March 23 affidavit which started the whole process.

    IMHO misses the clues about condoms when she reflects on Nifong's comments about lack of DNA evidence being the result of the men wearing condoms, when she writes: Was it a gratuitous remark? No, he was making a good point. If the boys had hoped to procure sex from the strippers they would most likely have been prepared with condoms. If things went bad and they had sex with her without her consent, they could still have had the sense to use condoms. Of course, the AV had said that the rapists had not used condoms during the hospital examination. Nifong could not have honestly made that statement knowing what the AV had said. Nifong lied to the public to continue his farce and get his third indictment.

    PB posted:
    I haven't seen Evans medical report. I doubt he'd go to the doctor over a little scratch anyway.
    Maybe Nifong is withholding the Evans' medical report.

    Alan, You wrote:
    Arguing a toxicological explanation without any toxicological evidence may not go very far in a courtroom. No?
    They aren't charged with drugging her. Is the guy who served her the drink ready to testify? Or will he take the fifth, like Mark Fuhrman had to in the OJ trial. Warning. False dialogue ahead! Nifong: And did you slip a roofie in her drink? Student bartender: I refuse to answer on the grounds that it may incrimnate me.

    IMHO, try quoting the recent Newsweek article re the Precious having a sip of a drink. Isn't that the context of this discussion? Haven't more facts come to light since the time the original article was written. Why do you continue to be so intellectually dishonent? It is not becoming.

    PB posted:
    They aren't charged with drugging her. Is the guy who served her the drink ready to testify? Or will he take the fifth, like Mark Fuhrman had to in the OJ trial.
    Warning. False dialogue ahead! Nifong: And did you slip a roofie in her drink? Student bartender: I refuse to answer on the grounds that it may incrimnate me.
    What's in the drink? No one will fink!

    Imho posted
    That was in response to you whinning that no one was answering the questions you were interested in. Why don't you answer them yourself? Or did you mean no one was responding to the interesting the questions you were asking? ;) My lament (not whining) was not specific to me it was in general that
    Several interesting questions are raised on this site, yet everyone feels the need to respond to your voluminous posts, and discussions that interest me fall by the wayside. I think you assign your high self esteem incorrectly. It was not about me. Now I see how others get sucked in. I'll let you have the last word, I'm done, I swear.

    PB, you said, in part:
    That it turned out that the 46th player happened to be the one player whom the accuser claimed to have scratched was unfortunate,
    But the transcript of the lineup does not reflect that. The AV did not pick out anyone who had "scratched" her.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#39)
    by Alan on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 02:21:26 PM EST
    Pittman Police statement, 22 March
    We conversed about our plan for the dance. There was a knock on the door and we were handed two drinks of equal amounts. We did sip the drinks, but Precious cup fell into the sink. We finished getting dressed and proceeded to the living room, led by Dan, to do our show. There were about 20-25 young guys there, who were all sitting down. Precious and I began our show which, in my opinion, seemed to be going well. Precious began showing signs of intoxication at this point. We continued with the performance until one of the boys brought out a broomstick and after asking if we had any toys, said he would use the broomstick on us.
    A reasonably contemporaneous statement by Pittman is better evidence than a Newsweek report compiled on 23 April. Indeed it's interesting that on 22 March Kim has them both sipping (actually the AV sips and spills while Kim just sips) but by 24 April the AV's sipping and spilling has become drinking without spilling and Kim's sipping has become taking nary a drop. For that matter, if the players were premeditating rape (as any date rape scenario requires) why would they drug one dancer and not the other?

    Newport posted:
    IMHO,
    try quoting the recent Newsweek article re the Precious having a sip of a drink. Isn't that the context of this discussion? Haven't more facts come to light since the time the original article was written. Why do you continue to be so intellectually dishonent? It is not becoming.
    Is this new enough for you? NEWSWEEK June 29, 2006 issue
    Also interviewed by NEWSWEEK, Roberts seemed to support that suggestion. She said that the other dancer had been sober when she arrived at the lacrosse players' house, but then drank a mixed drink given her by the players and was soon staggering. In her first detailed statement to police, Roberts said the woman spilled her drink after a few sips but didn't mention, as she had to NEWSWEEK, that the accuser imbibed most of Roberts's.
    Newport posted:
    Haven't more facts come to light since the time the original article was written.
    That's funny coming from you. New facts came to light after the Essence article reported the accuser's father said "those boys didn't do nothing to her," you just don't want to hear them. hahaha

    PB, no matter how you slice, there were no matches for the DNA. If the DNA on the nail (I still haven't seen anything conclusive as to whether it was on the top of it or under it) were Evans', and it's a big if, so big it wouldn't mean anything in a court of law because it doesn't match him, it could very well be from Evans' discarded tissues, q-tips or other sources of DNA that turn up in someone's bathroom. It's one thing to find someone's DNA in his own bathroom three days after an alleged rape. It's another thing to have no DNA evidence from the AV in the hours after an alleged gang rape. PB, I hope it gives you faith in your hour of need, but your AV has nothing back up her final version. Heck, forget about the DNA, hope the AV shows up in court.

    But, imho, in Kim's handwritten statement she does not say that,
    They had each been given a mixed drink. Kim did not drink hers. She said the alleged accuser spilled hers, actually after having had a little bit of it, and then she drank Kim's.
    In her statement, Kim says that the AV spilled her drink in the sink, and that they both only had a few sips. Kim also seemed to think that the change in the AV's behavior and demeanor was more related to the show being over and no more money to be made than it was to chemical impairment.

    Thanks, IMHO. Those "facts" re the father and what the mother allegedly later told him when the mother was in the midst of conjuring up a civil case, I reject as not credible.

    Alan posted:
    For that matter, if the players were premeditating rape (as any date rape scenario requires) why would they drug one dancer and not the other?
    How did they know only one dancer would drink their brew? They may have seen the two empty cups and thought they each drank one. This could be a drug assisted rape plan gone wrong.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#45)
    by Alan on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 02:28:25 PM EST
    imho misrepresented:
    How did they know only one dancer would drink their brew? They may have seen the two empty cups and thought they each drank one. This could be a drug assisted rape plan gone wrong.
    According to Pittman's own police statement they both sipped and only the AV spilled.

    IMHO wrote,
    This could be a drug assisted rape plan gone wrong.
    WOW! That imhology strikes the final blow to any credibility IMHO may have left at this point.

    Based on the foregoing, I can no longer dismiss what previously was sarcasm re IMHO's identity. She is so filled with hate for the Duke boys, Duke the institution, the Duke boys parents and the truth that she must have some connection to the DA.

    This could be a drug assisted rape plan gone wrong.
    Really, now, imho. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: if, IF, a date rape drug were put in the drink(s) it certainly did not work as advertised, if the AV were "fighting for her life, fighting to breathe" as Nifong suggested. And you seem to have someone other than the defendant's being the administer of the drug. "hey, maybe I'll slip something in the strippers' drinks so my friends can rape them?" Do you really see that as a likely scenario?

    IHMO would say no, but it is "possible." But so is the "possibility" that hairless, flesh-eating aliens from Zeta Reticula used their zincon probes to rape the FA without leaving any evidence behind.

    PB the Faithful writes: I would think that the statements from Roberts and/or the accuser (among others) that she went from okay to wildly out of it within a very short time of drinking a concoction given to her by the players drink serving agent (who shall remain nameless for risk management reasons at this time) would constitute "evidence" of the sort you like to bank on. Especially if we're allowed to add "common sense" to the mix. No? Common sense would be that the investigators would have insisted on doing a tox test to find out what was in the AV's system. There either wasn't one done or it's been witheld by the DA. Absent common sense we have the AV admitting to having two 22-ounce beers, a 24-ounce beer, flexeril (and I would not doubt that in the AV's mind, two pills are better than one, three better than two) and one and a half mixed drinks. Sure, it could have been a date rape drug, and wouldn't it have been something if the DA had tested for it? In the absence of a test, Nifong speculating on the possibility is improper. If the AV refused to take the test, or if Nifong is concealing the evidence, then we're getting up near criminal. But if it gives PB hope that the players will be convicted, then let us not that thin thread of hope at which she clutches. PB, on what evidence to you base your characterization of the drink given to the AV as a "concoction"? Would you consider a few tall malt liquors and a handful of muscle relaxers a "concoction" for purposes of fall-downedness?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#51)
    by Alan on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 02:56:04 PM EST
    Now, now, Bob. It is an interesting concoction. Pittman and the AV have the same amount. Pittman is immune. The AV becomes inebriated solely because of the concoction, because she is immune only to the many ounces of beer she had already drunk, and not to the few sips of the concoction. Not only can the concoction distingush between the two dancers, the mysterious immunity can distinguish them as well. These palyers must have truly remarkable scores in biochemistry. In all truth, the only concocting is the contention of the date rape allegation.

    As an aside, I don't recall 22-ounces as being a standard size for a beer bottle or can. That's why I was wondering if it were malt liquor. Next time down at Safeway I'll have to check the bottle sizes. Also, I don't recall any mention of the AV being under the care of a physician for an injury prior to her dancing appearance at Buchanan, so the question arises why she'd taken a flexeril and was drinking beer before showing up at the party. My guess, informed by being here on earth for a number of years, was that the AV was taking that concoction specifically to get high. So before we expend too much worry about how these bad men had tried to get poor little Precious flat-faced drunk on the floor, it sure appears that that was what she was trying to do to herself beforehand. And, as I've intimated, if you're getting high, why not take a couple of pills instead of just one? After all, if you're abusing them, the damned things come by the bottle. The only source we seem to have, in the absence of a tox report, is the AV's own report of drug usage, which she would no doubt tend to downplay.

    Bob: I seem to remember an old adage from my misspent college days, that "one's good, two's better, and three's a charm."

    Newport, hate to break it to you but the flesh-eating aliens from Zeta Reticula were in the Delta Quadrant that night.

    Madison, consider the following that imho posited:
    He could be expecting to come into possession of more evidence this week, which he will in turn pass on to the defense.
    I missed this earlier. Where does this come from? Why would imho make this conjecture? What does she know that we don't and how does she know it if she is not somehow connected to the DA. I looked up "sock puppet" when someone used in before and there are two famous cases of sock puppet use. One involves a NY Times reporter who was discovered using a "sock puppet" on a board that was dicussing an article he wrote IIRC. The reporter used the sock puppet to either attack those opposed to the point of view of the article, or to agree with those in favor of the article's point of view. He was discovered and disgraced.

    Alan wrote,
    These palyers must have truly remarkable scores in biochemistry.
    Not to mention remarkable scores in computer science and electrical engineering to be able to doctor those camera phones without leaving any evidence behind and to syncronize their watch faces with the doctored phones. Ain't that right SloPhoto?

    I mean they are Duke students after all, so I guess it is possible.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#58)
    by Alan on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 03:22:22 PM EST
    Spilling the drink may actually have been the first sign of the AV's intoxication. The mysterious dancer-distinguishing concoction (hereinafter the MDDC) would, in that case, be acting close to instantaneously. Perhaps the flesh-eating aliens from Zeta Reticuli were the actual concocters.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#59)
    by Lora on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 03:24:59 PM EST
    re: the medical records: Is there any reason why Nifong couldn't have gone to the hospital and read what was there before they sent him the reports? (Assuming the AV had allowed it, which, as she was pressing charges, it is not a stretch to think that she had.) And, while I know there is disagreement about the meaning of Ms. Arico's statement, she does mention injuries. This is someone other than Nifong who had access to the medical files, who is essentially corroborating that there were injuries, and that those injuries could match up with the AV's story...you know, the one in which she was raped and assaulted. So...I believe Newport asked last thread if I thought the defense was lying. If there is nothing to contradict what they are saying, why not let us take a look at all those written medical reports. What about the doctor's report? What about the report from the other hospital? I think it is possible the defense is deliberately misinterpreting what they have. They've done it before. The previous alleged rape has been brought up again as an example of the AV's lack of credibility. It is an intensely difficult process to press charges of rape, at any time. re: the perps being in jail and unable to make good on threats: People charged with rape don't necessarily go to jail (I reference this case). Bail isn't necessarily set. If bail is set, it isn't necessarily at the time they are charged. Often you don't have to come up with the full amount to make bail...only a fraction in some cases. The perps could be free for months, and have plenty of opportunity to exact revenge if they so choose. The cops said there was no evidence after all those years, so how could the AV have pursued it anyway? Not filing or pressing charges of rape DOES NOT indicate a rape was never committed.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#60)
    by Alan on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 03:30:48 PM EST
    Lora posted:
    And, while I know there is disagreement about the meaning of Ms. Arico's statement, she does mention injuries. This is someone other than Nifong who had access to the medical files, who is essentially corroborating that there were injuries, and that those injuries could match up with the AV's story...you know, the one in which she was raped and assaulted.
    Not so. We have no way of knowing which story Arico was speaking about, or of knowing what sexual history the AV had given her. The defence motions say, as a matter of law, that if Nifong had such contact with the hospital he would have had to memorialise it and disclose it in discovery. I agree it is possible the defence is misinterpreting the reports. It is equally possible the prosecutor is interpreting the reports as loosely as he did other issues.

    Alan said: Spilling the drink may actually have been the first sign of the AV's intoxication. But wasn't she, according to JJ's statement, already spilling a drink on a cellphone and behaving oddly (going off down the street and refusing to get back in his car) earlier in the day? Spilling a drink on a cell in the bathroom would be the third "sign and symptom consistent with" being drunk/high we've heard of. Kim's original statement is largely credible. Her later revision (with Precious drinking half of her own drink and all of Kim's and suddenly changing) was made after her arrest and bail deal with Nifong, and nothing she says after that has the slightest credibility.

    Lora wrote,
    The cops said there was no evidence after all those years, so how could the AV have pursued it anyway?
    Could she not have pursued it at the time it was alleged to have happened? Presumably, evidence would be fresher then?

    Lora, you said,
    Is there any reason why Nifong couldn't have gone to the hospital and read what was there before they sent him the reports?
    Of course, he could have, but why would he have done that? The subpoena was being processed, and he would have had no reason to think that he wouldn't get the information in a week or so, just as he did. What would his hurry have been, why rush the process? I would also note that it would be highly unlikely that the District Attorney himself would be going to a hospital to read a report.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#64)
    by cpinva on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 03:47:21 PM EST
    IMHO stated, in part:
    That would go to the art of discovery compliance.
    there's no art involved. the DA is required to turn over all relevant documents to the defense. he/she doesn't get to pick and choose. the intentional failure to do so, if proven, can and should result in sanctions by the court. wherever do you get this nonsense from? Newport asked:
    Where am I going wrong here?
    by paying any attention whatever to the increasingly inane posts of IMHO. reading her posts is akin to reading "alice in wonderland", only more fanciful. where others rely on facts, she relies on speculation. why any reasonable person would take her posts seriously is a mystery to me. next question please.

    And I know I will be accused of being mean-spirited, but I can't help thinking that the AV has problems with holding her liquor.

    Alan posted:
    According to Pittman's own police statement they both sipped and only the AV spilled.
    Ms. Pittman's statement is now a complete and accurate accounting of everything that went on that night? She doesn't say what happened to the other drink in the police report, but she does later: the accuser drank it. SharonInJax posted:
    I've said it before, and I'll say it again: if, IF, a date rape drug were put in the drink(s) it certainly did not work as advertised, if the AV were "fighting for her life, fighting to breathe" as Nifong suggested.
    IF it was a drug assisted rape gone wrong: It went wrong because Kim did not get dosed, only the accuser did. The plan would have been to end up with two passed out women. Kim wanted to leave. The players couldn't wait for the accuser's drug to kick in. They had to take the accuser by force. If they could have waited a bit she would have been "compliant" AKA "passed out drunk." SharonInJax posted:
    And you seem to have someone other than the defendant's being the administer of the drug. "hey, maybe I'll slip something in the strippers' drinks so my friends can rape them?"
    We don't know who mixed the drinks that were given to the women. We don't know who handed them through the door. It could have been one of the defendants. We don't know. SharonInJax posted:
    Do you really see that as a likely scenario?
    A planned drug facilitated rape? Not likely. Some bozo thinking it would be funny to slip the strippers some roofies and it went bad from there? More likely. Alan posted:
    Spilling the drink may actually have been the first sign of the AV's intoxication. The mysterious dancer-distinguishing concoction (hereinafter the MDDC) would, in that case, be acting close to instantaneously. Perhaps the flesh-eating aliens from Zeta Reticuli were the actual concocters.
    From the police report version we don't know how the drink fell into the sink, but if you are going by the Newsweek version - the accuser spilled her own drink and then drank Kim's. Photios posted:
    But wasn't she, according to JJ's statement, already spilling a drink on a cellphone and behaving oddly (going off down the street and refusing to get back in his car) earlier in the day? Spilling a drink on a cell in the bathroom would be the third "sign and symptom consistent with" being drunk/high we've heard of.
    Both her father and her driver, Brian, saw her after those two incidents and neither seemed to think she was impaired.

    SharonInJax posted:
    And I know I will be accused of being mean-spirited, but I can't help thinking that the AV has problems with holding her liquor.
    I wonder if [fill in the blank] does, as well?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#68)
    by Lora on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 03:52:00 PM EST
    Alan, If Nifong screwed up with the medical records, I'm betting that perhaps he read (or had a conversation) but didn't document that he did, rather than say he read something he didn't. I disagree with you about Arico's meaning because she was making a public statement about a very public case. She knew what the AV alleged, and the story that was out at that time. She said the injuries could have matched with the AV having been assaulted and raped, as the search warrant described. She didn't mean any other story. Newport, The AV was a mess after the first alleged rape - suicidal, under psychiatric care. Plus she was a girl of 14. She may not have been in any condition to endure a legal battle.

    I'm going to take cpinva's advice on this one. Whew! Nifong has really lost it. When's that motion re Nifong's irrational personality disorder coming out? I heard it was in the process of being prepared last week?

    Posted by Bob In Pacifica June 18, 2006 04:09 PM Newport, hate to break it to you but the flesh-eating aliens from Zeta Reticula were in the Delta Quadrant that night.
    So Bob, are you now the ZR boys alibi? Could it perhaps have been those darn Befeelflips from Prosobadious Nine again?

    cpiva posted:
    there's no art involved. the DA is required to turn over all relevant documents to the defense. he/she doesn't get to pick and choose. the intentional failure to do so, if proven, can and should result in sanctions by the court.
    "DA is required to turn over all relevant documents to the defense." That are in their possesion. There is an art to it. Sharon knows what I am talking about. cpiva posted:
    wherever do you get this nonsense from?
    Real life.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#72)
    by Lora on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 03:58:54 PM EST
    ("just kidding" alert) BTW speaking of sock puppets, How do "we" know the lot of you aren't sock puppets for the defense ;-)

    Lora, I have to ask you this because you seem to be taking a class on the subject and your teacher is obviously very influental to you: How can a man ever defend himself from a false charge of rape if all it takes is the accuser's word? What does this hypothetical man have to do to avoid conviction? What would be a good way for this man to show that the story is false? BTW, Sharon, I would not have said "yes" in response to the question you were asked during voir dire in your jury duty. I really don't think that is right as a matter of law either. How could one ever find someone guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt" based on an accusation alone?

    Found this discussion of the Newsweek article:
    Indeed, Nifong's comment should fortify the case for sanctions by the North Carolina State Bar: these remarks are those of a man incapable of fulfilling the requirement that "a prosecutor has the responsibility of a minister of justice and not simply that of an advocate; the prosecutor's duty is to seek justice, not merely to convict . . . The prosecutor is not only an advocate, but he or she also may make decisions normally made by an individual client, and those affecting the public interest should be fair to all. In our system of criminal justice, the accused is to be given the benefit of all reasonable doubt . . . Further, a prosecutor should not intentionally avoid pursuit of evidence merely because he or she believes it will damage the prosecutor's case or aid the accused."


    Hey Alan, an Aussie just won the U.S. open. Were you watching?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#76)
    by Alan on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 04:13:55 PM EST
    imho concocted:
    From the police report version we don't know how the drink fell into the sink, but if you are going by the Newsweek version - the accuser spilled her own drink and then drank Kim's.
    We do. Both you and I know this because it is has already been posted in this thread.
    We did sip the drinks, but Precious cup fell into the sink.
    The cup fell from somewhere. Where would you suggest? Did it levitate itself or was it in the AV's hand? The 24 April Newsweek version varies significantly from Pittman's 22 March police statement. You would have the 24 April Newsweek carry greater weight than Pittman's contemporaneous statement. For some reason, however, you would not have the latest Newsweek article get any weight at all.
    In an interview with NEWSWEEK in March, Nifong had hinted that the victim had been slipped a date-rape drug. Also interviewed by NEWSWEEK, Roberts seemed to support that suggestion. She said that the other dancer had been sober when she arrived at the lacrosse players' house, but then drank a mixed drink given her by the players and was soon staggering. In her first detailed statement to police, Roberts said the woman spilled her drink after a few sips but didn't mention, as she had to NEWSWEEK, that the accuser imbibed most of Roberts's.
    You would also disregard Pittman's conversation with Investigator sic Himan on 20 March:
    3/20/06 1010HRS - CONTACTED KIM PITMAN REFERENCE THIS CASE. SHE STATED THAT SHE DID DANCE AT 610 NORTH BUCHANAN, I ASKED HER IF SHE KNEW ANYTHING ABOUT WHY I WAS CALLING. SHE STATED THAT SHE WAS TOLD THAT SHE WOULD BE GETTING A CALL FORM THE POLICE ABOUT AN INCIDENT THAT TOOK PLACE. SHE STATED THAT SHE HEARD THAT MS. MANGUM WAS SEXUALLY ASSAULTED, WHICH SHE STATED WAS A "CROCK" AND SHE STATED THAT SHE WAS WITH HER THE WHOLE TIME UNTIL SHE LEFT. AND THE ONLY TIME SHE WAS ALONE WAS WHEN SHE WOULD NOT LEAVE AND THAT TIME PERIOD WAS LESS THAN FIVE MINUTES. WE MADE AN APPOINTMENT FOR HER TO MEET ME AT STATION 2 AND HER TO GIVE ME A STATEMENT REGUARDING THE INCIDENT.
    The court have ways to work out evidentiary conflicts. They look at contemporaneity. Where there are prior inconsistent statements they look at the motive of the author. 'I didn't do it' is a lot less persuasive than 'I did it' because the second statement is not self-serving. Between the contemporaneous statement and the later versions Pittman decided there was money to be made and received an excellent bail deal from Nifong. Her later statements are self-serving statements that clash with prior inconsistent statements. they will get about as much weight as the non-existent toxicology report.

    lightenup posted;
    My lament (not whining) was not specific to me it was in general that
    Several interesting questions are raised on this site, yet everyone feels the need to respond to your voluminous posts, and discussions that interest me fall by the wayside.
    I think you assign your high self esteem incorrectly.* It was not about me. Now I see how others get sucked in. I'll let you have the last word, I'm done, I swear.
    Apparently, I wasn't the only one who preceived those "interesting questions" about "discussions that interest [you]" were YOUR OWN QUESTIONS: Posted by blcc June 10, 2006 11:46 PM
    lightenup,
    I think you're misinterpreting why posters are responding to IMHO instead of your questions. My guess is twofold.
    * You haven't read SLOphoto's "Tribute to IMHO?"

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#78)
    by Alan on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 04:23:32 PM EST
    Lora posted:
    She said the injuries could have matched with the AV having been assaulted and raped, as the search warrant described. She didn't mean any other story.
    Arico did not. She said:
    I can reasonably say these injuries are consistent with the story she told.
    That does not specify any version of the rape or any version of the assault. It also does not address (because Arico did not know it) the AV's recent sexual activity. I'm not saying Arico is dishonest or anything. I'm just saying that a statement made in ignorance of the AV's recent sexual activity does not go anywhere. I'd be interested to hear her answer to the same questions if they were put to her in the light of what she knows now. When the medical report finally goes into evidence, Arico's opinion will not override it. Until the medical report is tested in court we won't know what happened.

    I agree, Bob, it's a slim reed to hang a conviction on, especially since the jury may, and in many if not most cases, not hear the "he said" part of the story. BUT, I could see an alleged victim testifying, and her testimony being so compelling, so filled with details, so convincing that I could see my way clear to convict. It would have to be an incredibly strong story, though. Likely, too, as it was in the case I heard, there were small details to support her allegations. Not enough, not nearly enough in that case, but we did have more than the AV's testimony alone. Problem was she was NOT convincing at all. The defendant may have raped her, but we acuitted due to an abundance of reasonable doubt.

    Typed, "Bob" but meant Newport, sorry about that.

    Alan posted:
    We do. Both you and I know this because it is has already been posted in this thread.
    We did sip the drinks, but Precious cup fell into the sink.
    The cup fell from somewhere. Where would you suggest? Did it levitate itself or was it in the AV's hand?
    I would suggest her cup could have been placed on the edge of the sink and either one of the women could have knocked it into the sink. We don't know. The drink in the sink has not been determined to be "the first sign of the AV's intoxication."

    The drink in the sink has not been determined to be "the first sign of the AV's intoxication."
    That is true. As Photios pointed out, the drink spilled on Jariel's cell phone was the first, the incident on the side of the road was the second, the spilled drink in the bathroom at Buchanan was the third, and the "uncontrollable" behavior noted by Roberts after the 4 minute dance was the fourth.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#83)
    by Alan on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 04:33:11 PM EST
    imho concoted:
    The drink in the sink has not been determined to be "the first sign of the AV's intoxication."
    At this stage nothing has been determined to be anything, unless you give imhology considerably greater weight than does the legal system. However, as Photios pointed out above, you are dead right, the spillage is not the first sign of intoxication. Johnson has the AV acting strangely before the party. The player's concoction must be retrospective. Or the AV was doing what she could to hold it together for as long as she could after arriving at the party already intoxicated.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#85)
    by Alan on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 04:43:09 PM EST
    Posted by Newport
    Hey Alan, an Aussie just won the U.S. open. Were you watching?
    Too traumatised by the Socceroos losing to Brazil 2/0.

    Cib, J. Manly was the Duke doctor who performed the medical exam with Levicy. From the medical records as quoted by the defense, Dr. Manly noted three non-bleeding scratches on the victim's right knee and ankle. Powerful testimony for Nifong. Especially since the cuts were visible on the FA in the photo's taken by the boys when the FA was doing her dance.

    Alan posted:
    At this stage nothing has been determined to be anything,
    It's been determined, contrary to what you said earlier, that from the police report, we don't know how the accuser's cup fell into the sink.

    IMHO, please research standard jury instructions re inferences jurors are permitted to make from the evidence and the role of their common sense on that determination. I would find it interesting to see if this jibes with your views.

    Lora, I have to ask you this because you seem to be taking a class on the subject and your teacher is obviously very influental to you: How can a man ever defend himself from a false charge of rape if all it takes is the accuser's word? What does this hypothetical man have to do to avoid conviction? What would be a good way for this man to show that the story is false?
    I was wondering this, myself. Let's see if she answers. Because if the lack of physical evidence of a rape in this case (heck, lack of DNA even consistent with being touched unless you are generous and give the nail with the "can't be conclusively ruled out" DNA on it to NiFong)doesn't do the trick, quite frankly nothing will.
    BTW, Sharon, I would not have said "yes" in response to the question you were asked during voir dire in your jury duty. I really don't think that is right as a matter of law either. How could one ever find someone guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt" based on an accusation alone?
    The only way I could think of convicting -on an accusation alone- would be if there were some evidence behind it, even if the evidence only related to the defendent lying to me as a member of the jury concerning concerning the incident in question. In short, if I have two people who tell consistent stories and no evidence to prefer either story, I'm not going to convict.

    Especially on the sock-puppet hypothesis we need to take seriously imho's remarks about an "art" of discovery. Nifong may have Himan holding on to some things so that he can say he has turned over everything "in his possession". Of course, Himan has an obligation to turn over everything in HIS possession to Nifong, but you can see how delay can build upon delay in this process, especially since a certain time is allowed for "voluntary" discovery before discovery is compelled. The defense motions address all this, asking the judge to order the police &c. to turn over everything to the DA and the DA to the defense. (They also ask the judge to order Nifong to certify that he personally has read all the material. This is because there was a case a while back in NC where a corrupt prosecutor avoided disbarment by claiming he hadn't read the relevant evidence, though it was in his files. The defense doesn't want Nifong to be allowed that out.) The trouble is that, though the defense has a "right" to discovery materials, only the judge can enforce it by issue appropriate orders, and Stephens appears to be both a crony of Nifong and also perhaps in a position where he has to pander to the same elements in the community as Nifong. He has shown tremendous bias throughout, and did one really cruel favor for the Nifong campaign early on, in granting Nifong's request to seal the first, pre-primary indictments. That meant that Seligmann and Finnerty were not permitted to surrender voluntarily (as Evans was after the second, post-primary indictment), and Nifong had endless free campaign ads in the media in the form of footage, played over and over again, of the defendants in handcuffs being put through a humiliating perp walk. With his old pal on the bench, and his new pals from the New Black Panther Party sitting behind the defense table muttering death-threats, no wonder Nifong is smirking and giggling. I doubt Durham will be cleaned up until a federal prosecutor undertakes a thorough investigation of civil rights violations, and I'm not holding my breath until that happens.

    Newport wrote:
    Actually IMHO, I don't think Mr. Meadows, the author of this piece as well as the earlier one, is too pleased with Nifong about the "date rape" drug remark.
    Newport, I agree with you. My feeling reading the article was that Newsweek is very, very unhappy with Mr. Nifong. Based, in part, on the information Mike Nifong was spewing at the time, Newsweek put the mug shots of two players on its cover, and gave it the sleazy title Sex, Lies, & Duke. I could imagine that Newsweek is asking itself internally what went wrong with its coverage.

    Alan posted:
    I take it you now accept then, that the AV was intoxicated on arrival at the party?
    What was your proof of that? How about her father's and Brian's statements on her condition that evening?

    Photios said:
    He has shown tremendous bias throughout, and did one really cruel favor for the Nifong campaign early on, in granting Nifong's request to seal the first, pre-primary indictments. That meant that Seligmann and Finnerty were not permitted to surrender voluntarily (as Evans was after the second, post-primary indictment), and Nifong had endless free campaign ads in the media in the form of footage, played over and over again, of the defendants in handcuffs being put through a humiliating perp walk.
    Excellent point Photios. You forgot the "favor" Stephens did in setting bail at $400,000 for these boys while a man charged with murder around the same time had his bail set substantially lower, around $50,000 as I remember. I agree the whole Durham justice system appears corrupt and you point to past practices of DA's in NC that suggest the attorney general of NC is not doing his job in cleaning things up. This is why I suggested earlier that at some point the U.S. Attorney is going to have to get involved whether two black votes in Texas are compromised or not. I do cite Cash Michaels and other prominent members of the black community as being open to fairness, however.

    Interesting info on the Sane Nurse: Tara Levicy, RN, WEMT Chapel Hill, NC Tara is an RN and sexual assault forensic nurse in the emergency department at Duke University Hospital. She has been a WEMT since 1999. She spent many years living in Maine where she worked as a whitewater rafting guide and outdoor educator. Now that she is living in warmer climates, she enjoys cycling (off and on road), hiking, and running. More at this this link How do we know it is her? She, along with J. Manly are the ones that Nifong is calling from Duke Hospital that he listed on his motion of Thursday, May 18. I find it interesting that the Sane nurse-in-training is a women's studies graduate, but I'll leave any interpretations to others. Let's just say the information is now out there.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#89)
    by Alan on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 05:13:49 PM EST
    imho:
    It's been determined, contrary to what you said earlier, that from the police report, we don't know how the accuser's cup fell into the sink.
    Guilty as charged. I will remember to mention it at my next confession. I take it you now accept then, that the AV was intoxicated on arrival at the party?

    Lora wrote: The AV was a mess after the first alleged rape - suicidal, under psychiatric care. Plus she was a girl of 14. She may not have been in any condition to endure a legal battle. Do you have a source for this? I would find it curious that she were suicidal and under psychiatric care and her father didn't notice it. Must have been pretty hard keeping that a secret from the dad. And if she were under psychiatric care for trauma from being raped, why wasn't this reported to authorities? This is another story about the AV which seems to be missing huge chunks. I don't doubt that when the AV was fourteen that she was under psychiatric care and suicidal. If she lied to her father about being raped, then maybe she lied to conceal the rape from the psychiatrist. Or maybe she was seriously mentally ill and there was no rape.

    How about her father's and Brian's statements on her condition that evening?
    The stories of these witnesses are woefully inconsistent and can not be reconciled on important points. These are simply two more pieces of evidence that, once subject to cross-examination, will have to be considered in the totality of the circumstance to determine the FA's condition on the night in question. The UNC hospital report where the FA herself states that she got real drunk the night before is devastating in the totality of the circumstances, as are other admissions of the FA.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#97)
    by james on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 05:21:03 PM EST
    I do not believe Nifong would risk his case by withholding information from the defence. That is, while it is possible to legally not disclose information, it is not in Nifong's best interest. If the investigators/Nifong did deliberately pull such a stunt with regard to the medical reports it has only backfired - this is a very public case. The N&O is becoming essentially sympathetic to the accused at this point. My main point is that Nifong had nothing to gain by witholding a hypothetical posession of the medical documents prior to the date of subpoena. It just makes him look bad. He is also going to face an ethical complaint in the future and he was aware of that - part of the reason he likely stopped speaking publicly. The only reason to not disclose the reading of the AV's medical report is if it was turned over WITHOUT the consent of the AV. That could occur if the SANE woman released it without consent or some other hospital employee. That would be misconduct for both the employee and the investigators involved. As an aside, it really is irrelevant what the SANE's first degree is in (women's studies, outdoor ed). SANE nurses are there to help their patients through psychological issues and are trained for that - in this case undergoing training. the only odd thing about the SANE woman is that she was an EMT after graduating college (sort of makes college pointless in that EMT's (Level IIIs) do not need a college degree) and then becoming an RN.

    Newport posted:
    Actually IMHO, I don't think Mr. Meadows,
    Newport, It's Susannah Meadows. I agree she's not as nice this time around.

    cib comments: So Bob, are you now the ZR boys alibi? Could it perhaps have been those darn Befeelflips from Prosobadious Nine again? Well, the Prosobadiousi having been drinking and publicly urinating all over the galaxy. You p*ss in public, you could be guilty. Where were they on the night in question?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#100)
    by james on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 05:28:53 PM EST
    The AV was a mess after the first alleged rape - suicidal, under psychiatric care. Plus she was a girl of 14. She may not have been in any condition to endure a legal battle.
    That's alleged by the defence and it is why they want her records. There's no indication that she every sought help at that point in time... As for the more recent hospitalization - it's not actually clear whether it was for psychiatric reasons. Specifically, drug rehab remains a possibility and is often present in individuals with psychiatric disorders. As for her use of muscle relaxants I really have no reason to speculate on whether or not they were prescribed to her. What is important is that she took at least one in a manner that is contraindicated - 'DO NOT TAKE WITH ALCOHOL' is on all bottles of flexeril. If you had taken it before you would be aware of it's effects (slightly similar to taking xanax with alcohol). I would imagine that the alcohol use might be admitted if it can be shown she really did take the amount she is alleged to have taken along with flexeril (not pattern behavior but this specific instance) as it could have implications as to her recollections. The psychological stuff will never be presented to a jury but given that it is apparently an ongoing issue it is relevant as to whether she proceeds with the case (the father's statement). As for the question about a 22oz beer in NC -- they are available at any store but can be corona, corona light, sapporo, budweiser, etc. I'd guess Colt 45 though - it's quite popular around here (Raleigh/Durham area) and is the cheapest.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#101)
    by james on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 05:30:29 PM EST
    sorry, I meant to say that 'drug rehab can often go hand in hand with treatment of a psychological disorder in an inpatient setting'. Of course, the disorder and the need for rehab are often related.

    I'd guess Colt 45 though - it's quite popular around here (Raleigh/Durham area) and is the cheapest.
    Yes, "the bull."

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#103)
    by weezie on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 05:35:35 PM EST
    Susannah Meadows, Duke '95.

    Alan posted: I take it you now accept then, that the AV was intoxicated on arrival at the party? IMHO responded: What was your proof of that? She can't even answer a question.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#105)
    by james on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 05:39:58 PM EST
    How did they know only one dancer would drink their brew? They may have seen the two empty cups and thought they each drank one. This could be a drug assisted rape plan gone wrong.
    This would only be relevant if a toxicology analysis had been performed. I do find it odd that none was. At this point in time any such report would have come back from a lab so the 'in progress' theory is reaching, at best. A more likely explanation is that the AV declined to give a urine sample for whatever reasons she had. I am not insensitive to the date rape drug issue - my sister was slipped one in a beer up at RPI. Luckily she had friends with her - sadly she chose not to co-operate with the university to investigate the fraternity. Hey she likes to party (has nothing to do with shame).

    Newport posted:
    J. Manly was the Duke doctor who performed the medical exam with Levicy. From the medical records as quoted by the defense, Dr. Manly noted three non-bleeding scratches on the victim's right knee and ankle.
    Powerful testimony for Nifong. Especially since the cuts were visible on the FA in the photo's taken by the boys when the FA was doing her dance.
    Speaking of those photos, did both Nurse Levicy and Dr. Manly failed to document the cuts on the accusers legs and buttocks?
    Eyewitness News Looks at Party Photos WTVD By Steve Daniels
    (04/18/06 -- DURHAM) - Eyewitness News and the ABC News law-and-justice unit are getting a chance to examine time-stamped photos taken inside the home on the night of the controversial Duke lacrosse party.
    12:00:40 a.m.: Another picture taken 40 seconds later shows bruises on the accuser's knees. Her right knee appears to have an open cut.
    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.
    I wonder what else is not in their written report, but could show up in photos that may have been taken at the hospital?

    Are they still selling Olde English? That packs a punch too.

    James posted:
    This would only be relevant if a toxicology analysis had been performed. I do find it odd that none was. At this point in time any such report would have come back from a lab so the 'in progress' theory is reaching, at best.
    I heard that they took a blood sample and ran a standard tox screen that does not test for "date rape drugs." I think I heard it from Yale Galanter, so...hm...better find another source. If they have blood, it is not too late to test it.

    imho posted:
    How about her father's and Brian's statements on her condition that evening?
    Newport posted:
    The stories of these witnesses are woefully inconsistent and can not be reconciled on important points. These are simply two more pieces of evidence that, once subject to cross-examination, will have to be considered in the totality of the circumstance to determine the FA's condition on the night in question.
    And how do they compare to Photios' source that she was impaired earlier in the day [the accuser spilled a drink and had some kind of disagreement with her driver on the street]? Isn't Jarriel the same guy that some here suspected lied in his statement?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#110)
    by wumhenry on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 05:57:50 PM EST
    Between the contemporaneous statement and the later versions Pittman decided there was money to be made and received an excellent bail deal from Nifong
    and it became obvious that her being a defense witness in this case would play about as well in Durham's black community as betraying Joan of Arc would have in 15th-century France.

    If they have blood, it is not too late to test it.
    Test it for what? Doesn't blood, like any other biological tissue degrade over time? Since this issue was so important to Nifong's theories why wouldn't he have tested the blood if it was available and why wouldn't it have been done a long time ago? Is this the secret evidence that you suggested could be coming out this week? What about the white pubic hair? Whatever happened to that hair IMHO? Please tell based on your connections to Nifong. BTW, I think it likely that someone or perhaps several people from the Durham PD and/or DA's office is/are monitoring this site whether on official time or not. I also think a man with Nifong's obvious vanity and hubris would be monitoring this and similar sites.

    Photios posted:
    The trouble is that, though the defense has a "right" to discovery materials, only the judge can enforce it by issue appropriate orders, and Stephens appears to be both a crony of Nifong and also perhaps in a position where he has to pander to the same elements in the community as Nifong.
    Stephens is an ex DA. During the Seligmann hearing, it seemed to me after almost everything Osborn said, Stephens looked to Nifong to ask, in effect, what do you want to do? According to Woody Vann, Stephens rotates out of Durham county in July. What if they got a change of venue and ended up with Stephens?

    Isn't Jarriel the same guy that some here suspected lied in his statement?
    who ever said that EVERYTHING a witness must be believed if he or she is believed on anything. Jurors and others are free to use there common sense to try and make sense out of statements, reconcile them with other statements, and determine which parts of a statement are to be believed or not believed. You must know this Nifong.

    Bob, you and cib are killing me here. cib comments: So Bob, are you now the ZR boys alibi? Could it perhaps have been those darn Befeelflips from Prosobadious Nine again? Well, the Prosobadiousi having been drinking and publicly urinating all over the galaxy. You p*ss in public, you could be guilty. Where were they on the night in question?

    Excellent post, photios, I especially liked this:
    He has shown tremendous bias throughout, and did one really cruel favor for the Nifong campaign early on, in granting Nifong's request to seal the first, pre-primary indictments. That meant that Seligmann and Finnerty were not permitted to surrender voluntarily (as Evans was after the second, post-primary indictment), and Nifong had endless free campaign ads in the media in the form of footage, played over and over again, of the defendants in handcuffs being put through a humiliating perp walk.


    IMHO, I respectfully request you put together your best case for the conviction of these white boys in view of the available evidence and share it with TL. As a Nifong supporter, this would be the greatest contribution you could make. You like what you've read about him, and you like how he makes the fancy pants defense lawyers look silly, remember? So, let us have the case.

    imho posted:
    If they have blood, it is not too late to test it.
    Newport posted:
    Test it for what? Doesn't blood, like any other biological tissue degrade over time?
    I read a study where they left blood samples at room temperature for 6 months and were still able to detect exogenous GHB. Newport posted:
    Since this issue was so important to Nifong's theories why wouldn't he have tested the blood if it was available and why wouldn't it have been done a long time ago?
    Can't turn over the results if you don't have them yet, can you? Newport posted:
    Is this the secret evidence that you suggested could be coming out this week?
    Secret? I didn't say anything about secret evidence. Newport posted:
    What about the white pubic hair?
    Whatever happened to that hair IMHO?
    I don't recall you [NEWPORT *wink* *wink*] being around these parts way back when we were discussing the reporting of the pubic hair: msnbc
    The sources also told the Herald Sun that a male pubic hair was also found and possible linked to the case, but because no identifiable DNA was found because the hair lacked a root. But the sources also said the pubic hair was found to have come from a white male.
    Newport posted:
    Please tell based on your connections to Nifong.
    That's your claim, not mine. Newport posted:
    BTW, I think it likely that someone or perhaps several people from the Durham PD and/or DA's office is/are monitoring this site whether on official time or not. I also think a man with Nifong's obvious vanity and hubris would be monitoring this and similar sites.
    No comment.

    Newport posted:
    IMHO, I respectfully request you put together your best case for the conviction of these white boys in view of the available evidence and share it with TL.
    As a Nifong supporter, this would be the greatest contribution you could make. You like what you've read about him, and you like how he makes the fancy pants defense lawyers look silly, remember? So, let us have the case.
    Why would I want to do that? How would my sharing anything like that with you benefit Mike?

    SharonInJax posted:
    Lora, you said,
    Is there any reason why Nifong couldn't have gone to the hospital and read what was there before they sent him the reports?
    Of course, he could have, but why would he have done that? The subpoena was being processed, and he would have had no reason to think that he wouldn't get the information in a week or so, just as he did. What would his hurry have been, why rush the process?
    I would also note that it would be highly unlikely that the District Attorney himself would be going to a hospital to read a report.
    A week or so? What was his hurry? Scratches heal. He was hoping to get an order that would enable him to photograph the players shirtless. He did.

    And he goes himself? He doesn't send an assistant DA, or the cops?

    I asked this before, in the last thread. From Newsweek, from the AV's parents: According to their lawyer, Mark Simeon, the accuser's parents have not heard from their daughter for weeks and are very concerned. Is she not answering her door? Her phone? Have they filed a missing persons report? Where are the children? Does Nifong know where she is? I recall predicting that the AV would conveniently have a nervous breakdown and the case would fold. I would be curious as to why the parents can't seem to locate their daughter, though.

    SharonInJax posted:
    And he goes himself? He doesn't send an assistant DA, or the cops?
    I don't know if anyone went to the hospital. In response to your questions: "What would his hurry have been, why rush the process?" I'm pointing out he had a very good reason to not wait "a week or so."

    How did they know only one dancer would drink their brew? They may have seen the two empty cups and thought they each drank one. This could be a drug assisted rape plan gone wrong.
    Well, assume for a moment this was a premeditated attack of this nature. Then, as a reasonably intelligent perpetrator, you have to resolve some issues. First, what date rape drug to use? Might seem simple, but Rohypnol, because it's gotten such a bad rap recently, is now made to turn blue (I think) if dropped into an alcoholic beverage. Possible that someone from the team went down to Tijuana and had some street stuff handy, but since it was before/during spring break, that's awfully premeditated. Ok, so maybe GHB. It's harder to detect, more readily available, but at this point, where is there any evidence to show that anyone on the team obtained any? So maybe they have it, fine, first issue resolved. But then, you have to worry about dosage. GHB especially is unpredictable, and I don't think that dealing with a couple of dead dancers was part of anyone's game plan. So maybe that's not an issue, you assume drinks are doctored. BUT, generally speaking, date rape drugs are extreme sedatives. The user becomes compliant, sleepy, and passes out. So, yeah, maybe that jives with her condition on the back porch and in Kim's car, but it certainly doesn't jive with Kim's assessment that she (paraphrasing) was uncontrollable in the bathroom prior to their exit, or accounts of her trotting back and forth from Kim's car to the house. It also doesn't jive with the idea that she wasn't actually passed out (per the Kroger officer's description of the use of smelling salts) in Kim's car later. It also doesn't jive with her being hysterical and shouting at the hospital later. Know what does seem to jive with her behaviors? The combination of flexeril (the only chemical substance other than alcohol that has been named definitively to have been in her system--theoretically by the AV herself--and alcohol. Someone a few threads back had an excellent transcription of known side effects of Flexeril (whether taken recreationally or for a prescribed condition), and it's nothing to mess with without alcohol. Add a couple of cold ones, and it's a time-bomb of possible erratic behaviors. But if that isn't convincing, answer this: What would the boys have done with the two women after this planned rape? These drugs take a long time to work themselves out of the system. At least one of the dancers was driven to the engagement, and it could reasonably be expected that someone would return later to pick her up/be alarmed if she didn't call/check in/etc. I mean, if you're going to go to the effort of hiring a dancer or two, for the express purpose of drug-induced rape, why go through an agency? Why leave any kind of phone records or paper trail, and why allow yourself to be seen by the dancer's driver? Also, why do it in your own home, and not a more anonymous location? Bob, Yeah, they still sell Olde English, but only as a 40. I think the defense motion mentiond her beers being Icehouse. And IMHO, from the last thread, to clarify what I meant about the $100 comment: "Share" was merely a quick way of saying "whatever portion that particular unnamed speaker had ponied up for the event. If I had meant share equal to that paid by everyone else, I would have said so. If he was a host/upperclassman he could have paid more for the beer and dancers than an invitee/underclassman. Conversely, since I don't know that it couldn't have happened, he could have been an underclassman who threw in extra cash to cover friends who were short on it.

    Posted by thinkandtype June 18, 2006 09:07 PM How did they know only one dancer would drink their brew? They may have seen the two empty cups and thought they each drank one. This could be a drug assisted rape plan gone wrong. Well, assume for a moment this was a premeditated attack of this nature. Then, as a reasonably intelligent perpetrator, you have to resolve some issues. First, what date rape drug to use? Might seem simple, but...
    Expect IMHO to ignore this entire post, or at least the part I cut off for brevity - the part that deals with effects of known date rape drugs. She'll need to posit an unknown date rape drug (presumably discovered by the evil genius Duke boys and which will be such an obvious reach) or admit that some of the accusers and Kim's testimony is false. Pigs will fly first.

    Lora, I have a question for you, after re-reading the Arico comments on the NCCU page (quoted below):
    Theresa Arico is a sexual assault nurse examiner and coordinator of that program at Duke. She described the process as a comprehensive combination of interviews and physical examinations of the person making the sexual assault complaint. "You can say with a high degree of certainty that there was a certain amount of blunt force trauma present to create injury" by the physical examination, which uses a device called a colposcope to magnify a woman's internal parts where injuries consistent with a sexual assault would occur, Arico said. But sexual assault nurse examiners do not render an opinion on whether a rape has occurred. That is for the State Bureau of Investigation to determine through its forensic lab work. "I can reasonably say these injuries are consistent with the story she told," Arico said. If DNA evidence is present where the assault was said to have occurred, that can further corroborate the victim's account, Arico said.
    Why are you so sure that she's talking about injuries to this particular victim? That is, it seemed to me that she was speaking in more general terms about what an exam did, and what it looked for, and how it went about looking for evidence of note. Specifically, her quote about "you can say with . . .blunt force trauma. ." Read one way, it could mean "you can say in this case, but it seems more probable that she was saying in a broader sense that "you, as a nurse, can say. . " Since, in English "you" is often used interchangably with "one" as a subject, it's difficult to pull her exact meaning from this quote. Thus, she could just be speaking in generalities, saying that a patient told a particular version of events, and that, at best, upon examination of the injuries, a SANE nurse can say that they are consistent with the story told by the patient. I didn't really see where she was directly saying that the specific injuries recorded by this exam supported the story told by this patient. Am I missing something?

    * GHB takes effect within 10-20 minutes and lasts 1-3 hours.. In small amounts it produces effects similar to alcohol, however, in larger doses in can have a hallucinatory effect and cause headaches, shaking, spasms, seizures, drowsiness, nausea, irregular heartbeat, and vomiting. It is promoted as a drug that will increase one's sexual awareness and lead to more intense sexual activity. Low doses result in a general feeling of euphoria, (similar to being moderately under the effect of alcohol) which include: decreased inhibitions, increased sociability, followed by drowsiness then sleep. Higher doses result in an immediate onset of intoxication leading to a deep unresponsive sleep, shallow breathing, decreased blood pressure and invariably anterograde amnesia.

    * Ketamine causes the person to feel as if her mind is "separated" from her body. The drug causes a combination of amnesia and hallucinations. Also, it stops the feeling of pain and lowers the heart rate leading to oxygen starvation to the brain and muscles. Temporary paralysis, though rare, has been reported in some users. Ketamine is a fast acting general anesthetic which can be used in both humans and animals. It is often used at clubs and raves for its euphoric effects. Ketamine can distort the sense of balance, time judgement and ability to communicate, cause blurred vision, numbness, disorientation, trembling, hallucinations, amnesia, convulsions, respiratory depression and loss of consciousness. The effects typically last for an hour although it is not uncommon for them to last for 4 - 6 hours. Users generally don't fully recover from the drug for 48 hours.

    * Rohypnol effects begin within 30 minutes, peak within 2 hours, and may persist for up to 8 hours or more, depending upon the dosage. Adverse effects include memory impairment, amnesia, drowsiness, visual disturbances, dizziness, impaired motor skills and judgment, slurred speech, confusion, gastrointestinal disturbances, and urinary retention. The effects of this drug are enhanced when mixed with alcohol -- causing sedation, loss of a inhibitions, relaxation, blackouts, amnesia, quick intoxication, bloodshot eyes, drowsiness, dizziness, disorientation, impaired judgment, memory loss, simultaneous hot and cold flashes, nausea, and difficulty in speaking and moving.

    To further clarify the above post:
    "I can reasonably say these injuries are consistent with the story she told," Arico said.
    What's the indication, based on the context, that the "she" in this statement is the AV, and not a more generic patient/victim? And is Arico expressly saying that she can corroborate the story of the AV, via the injuries, or is she saying that (in light of the paragraph that precedes the quotation), she, as a SANE nurse, can't say a rape did or did not occur, but "I [as a medical provider trained in this sort of thing] can reasonably say these [aforementioned blunt force trauma] injuries are consistent with the story she [the generic patient/victim] told," (brackets mine)?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#130)
    by Lora on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 09:37:49 PM EST
    Newport, I don't have any info from class on your false rape question. I could ask if you want. I doubt that it happens very often, and I think once is too often. I couldn't convict without corroborating evidence on just an alleged victim's word alone. Reasonable doubt. But, turn it around a moment, if a rape actually occurred, and for whatever reason there was no corroborating evidence, then the perp would get off scott free. I think this scenario probably happens far more frequently than the other. Bob, I found 4 articles the other day on the AV's past alleged rape, one of which included the comments about the AV's psych history after the alleged rape. I believe the comments came from a family member, possibly her parents. I will try to find it and post the link. imho and thinkandtype, I don't think the AV could have been too impaired to do all that running around either (especially with only one high-heeled shoe on). She only appeared majorly impaired after the alleged rape, which could have been due to being raped.

    IMHO, So which of these do you figure they used? And your evidence would be? And that answers my other questions how? Since the whole premise behind the questions was your supposition that maybe this was a drug-assisted rape gone wrong, I don't really see the point in splitting hairs over which one would be used. I even conceded, that sure, ok, assume for a moment one was used. What's a likely construct in which the lax players actually used any of these drugs (premeditated, of course)? And what's the evidence that said construct is believable, given the totality of the evidence currently available? (Take your pick as to what you find believable).

    Lora, For you is "impaired" hysterical/out of it/uncontrollable/etc. . (active, but not "normal") or is "impaired" unconscious/passed out/non-responsive (passive)?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#133)
    by Lora on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 10:16:10 PM EST
    thinkandtype, I'm putting in the two quotes from Arico:
    "You can say with a high degree of certainty that there was a certain amount of blunt force trauma present to create injury" by the physical examination, which uses a device called a colposcope to magnify a woman's internal parts where injuries consistent with a sexual assault would occur, Arico said.
    "I can reasonably say these injuries are consistent with the story she told," Arico said.
    To my way of thinking they both refer to the AV, but the first one is more doubtful, I suppose. If she were speaking in general terms, I would think she'd use the present tense, as in: You can say...that there is a certain amount of blunt force trauma... This particular quote is cobbled together, half quote in the past tense, and half paraphrase in the present tense. I don't like it. When you speak generally about something, you use the present tense. I don't think it's overly picky. You do. Arico didn't, but the reporter cobbled the past tense quote on to a present tense description of the exam. Bad form. So...that quote is in doubt, but I bet that Arico was referring to the AV's case, in the part containing the quote, anyway. For the second quote, if Arico was speaking generically, I would expect her to say something like, You can reasonably say that these types of injuries are consistent with the story a victim tells. But even that doesn't make sense. She'd have to say something like, "If the tests reveal [blunt force trauma, etc], then you can reasonably say that these types of injuries are consistent with the story the victim tells. But she is quoted as saying: "I [specifically, Arico] can reasonably say these injuries [these, as in specifically identified injuries] are consistent with the story she told [past tense = someone actually told the story. Who? Gotta be the AV]" Only way I can make sense out of her second quote is for it to refer specifically to the AV. And I think for the first quote too. "impaired" to me means more out of it, unresponsive. Bob, I didn't forget you, I just had the Arico article saved and, duh, forgot to save the other ones about the previous alleged rape.

    Lora wrote,
    I couldn't convict without corroborating evidence on just an alleged victim's word alone. Reasonable doubt.
    Thank you for responding and being reasonable Lora.
    But, turn it around a moment, if a rape actually occurred, and for whatever reason there was no corroborating evidence, then the perp would get off scott free. I think this scenario probably happens far more frequently than the other.
    You may be right on this Lora and I think that is tragic. I have no reason to doubt what you say.

    thinkandtype posted:
    IMHO,
    So which of these do you figure they used? And your evidence would be? And that answers my other questions how? I listed some of the date rape drugs effects in response to cib's post. I said IF this was a date rape drug plan gone wrong I thought it would more likely not be premeditated. Could have been just one bozo who thought it might be funny to spike the strippers' drinks with a small dose. People take these drugs for fun -
    GHB: It is promoted as a drug that will increase one's sexual awareness and lead to more intense sexual activity. Low doses result in a general feeling of euphoria, (similar to being moderately under the effect of alcohol) which include: decreased inhibitions, increased sociability, followed by drowsiness then sleep.
    - but reactions vary - maybe added to the accuser's flexeril, or any alcohol she may have had earlier, even a small dosage could have been enough to push her over the edge.

    And why, again, would Duke LAX players want to slip one or two of the dancers a date rape drug? What would be the point of this? Just to get funny?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#137)
    by Lora on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 10:34:31 PM EST
    Bob, Ok, found it... NBC 17: Accuser in Duke Lacrosse Case Reported Previous Rape
    Her parents said she was so frightened at the time that she decided not to press charges. She lost a tremendous amount of weight the following week and became suicidal, blaming herself over what happened, so they took her to see a psychiatrist, they said.
    Newport, Thanks. All, Is it time to start a 12-step program yet? "My name is Lora and I'm a Dukaholic..." ;-)

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#138)
    by Alan on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 10:36:40 PM EST
    "I can reasonably say these injuries [what is the refent for 'these'] are consistent with the story she [tells] [present tense = One finds oneself unable to tell Arico from the object of the sentence.. Who? Gotta be Arico]"
    The basic question is not the universal sense v particular sense of a statement in a newspaper report. The basic question is what would Arico tell a court about this AV if she knew about the recent sexual history. For that matter, what moved the AV to deceive the SANE nurse about the recent sexual activity? Lora argues the Arico statement somehow proves a rape. I don't see how a statement which is unclear as to referent and level of particularity can prove anything.

    Newport posted:
    And why, again, would Duke LAX players want to slip one or two of the dancers a date rape drug? What would be the point of this? Just to get funny?
    Maybe he thought it would enhance the show. The strippers, reportedly, performed sexual acts on each other while buck naked.
    GHB: It is promoted as a drug that will increase one's sexual awareness and lead to more intense sexual activity. Low doses result in a general feeling of euphoria, (similar to being moderately under the effect of alcohol) which include: decreased inhibitions, increased sociability, followed by drowsiness then sleep.


    IMHO, so I guess the father did know all along after all.
    Her parents said she was so frightened at the time that she decided not to press charges. She lost a tremendous amount of weight the following week and became suicidal, blaming herself over what happened, so they took her to see a psychiatrist, they said.


    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#141)
    by Alan on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 10:46:40 PM EST
    * imhopharmacology Posting unsourced descriptions of 3 separate date rape drugs without relating any of them to the reported conduct of the AV and disregardingL
    • the intake of beer described in the prosecution's own evidence
    • the mysterious immunity of a second person consuming the same amount of the same concoction at the same time
    • the reported behaviour of the AV before arriving at the party.
    Huge garbage input is still huge garbage output.

    So the nonexistent date rape drug was to enhance the show. Good, I'm glad we cleared this up once and for all.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#143)
    by Lora on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 10:56:50 PM EST
    Alan, No, I am not arguing that Arico's statement proves a rape. I do argue that Arico specifically meant the AV, at least in her second quote. I fault the reporter for not being clear about what exactly the quotes are referring to. Piss-poor reporting, I'd say. I do wonder if it was maybe done on purpose to lessen the impact of Arico's comments. Given my last encounter with a news group over this case, I wouldn't put it past them. As far as the recent sexual history, except for one sperm sample indicating sexual intercourse, we really have no idea what other encounters consisted of (we don't know exactly how the famous small sex toy was used). We can't draw any conclusions about whether any injuries could have resulted from other sexual encounters without knowing more about them, and without getting expert witnesses to weigh in on the subject. Plus you still have three people who said she was fine before the dance (Kim, Brian, her father).

    IMHO, so I guess the father did know all along after all.
    Her parents said she was so frightened at the time that she decided not to press charges. She lost a tremendous amount of weight the following week and became suicidal, blaming herself over what happened, so they took her to see a psychiatrist, they said.
    I told you he knew something happened. He was the one that picked her up in Creedmoor. They didn't give him the "particulars." He was not told she claimed she was raped. N & O Apr 28, 2006:
    The woman's father said Thursday his daughter was not raped in the 1996 incident.
    "They didn't do anything to her," he said.
    The father said his daughter was held against her will by a group of men who had picked her up from school in Durham and drove her to Creedmoor. She was not sexually assaulted or injured in the encounter, he said, and she was returned home safely the same day.
    The Herald Sun
    In the 1996 case, the alleged Duke lacrosse victim told Creedmoor police that three years earlier, when she was 14, she had been raped and beaten by three men "for a continual time" at an unspecified location in the city. She named the three men and provided addresses for two of them, but authorities in Creedmoor, in Granville County, never brought criminal charges against any of them.
    Court records confirm that two of the men she named lived at the address she provided and have extensive criminal records.


    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#145)
    by Lora on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 11:06:52 PM EST
    Yeah I picked up the "her parents" too. It's "her parents" saying it now. Her dad may not have known why she was in such a state at the time. He said he knew she was held by the men, just that he didn't think/know that they raped her. He might have thought that was enough to trouble her so much. Would a dad be that oblivious? Possible. Sometimes it's easier to ignore the obvious when the obvious is too painful to contemplate. Happens all the time. But here's another story that is just ambiguous enough that it's hard to be sure. Dam' case is full of them!

    Lora wrote,
    As far as the recent sexual history, except for one sperm sample indicating sexual intercourse, we really have no idea what other encounters consisted of (we don't know exactly how the famous small sex toy was used). We can't draw any conclusions about whether any injuries could have resulted from other sexual encounters without knowing more about them, and without getting expert witnesses to weigh in on the subject.
    Darn, Lora, just when I thought we were making progress. It would be interesting to see who the expert witness would be on this issue. Maybe a porn star?

    [disregarding]* the intake of beer described in the prosecution's own evidence
    I said "any alcohol she may have had earlier"
    [disregarding]* the mysterious immunity of a second person consuming the same amount of the same concoction at the same time
    Which account are you going by? The one where Kim says the accuser drank her drink or the one where she doesn't say what happened to her drink? Either case if Kim had no alcohol before the party or had not taken flexeril, the same dosage may not have effected her in the same way.
    [disregarding]* the reported behaviour of the AV before arriving at the party.
    You have been corrected several times. Here's another from Lora:
    Plus you still have three people who said she was fine before the dance (Kim, Brian, her father).


    Lora, Thanks for posting the info on Theresa Arico's statement. I had always assumed she was talking about the AV specifically. But thinkandtype's take and your response got me thinking. I think thinkandtype is correct that Arico is speaking generically. On further review, the article reads to me like Arico is describing a process. You do the exam -- later you testify. I think her use of the past tense is because she is actually talking about giving testimony about a "generic" exam which always happens prior to the "generic" testimony. Arico describes the process of performing an exam. Arico could then say something to the effect of "I'm called to testify. At that point I can reasonably say these injuries are consistent with the story she told." Only the bold part was quoted in the article. Why else would she add the comment "If DNA evidence is present where the assault was said to have occurred, that can further corroborate the victim's account."? I think the reporter left out or paraphrased much of what was said which is typical when writing such a short article. This would be far bigger news if Arico actually meant these comments to apply to this case. It's not big news. This is probably just a "we don't know", not one of those issues where the truthfulness of the witness is in question. I'm sure Arico could tell us what she meant. I guess we will eventually find out if it pertains to this case specifically.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#149)
    by Lora on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 11:15:45 PM EST
    Newport, Heehee now that would be interesting. I was thinking more along the lines of the medical profession. Maybe combine the two to save money? The Daringly Dirty Doctor Dora....ok it's really late. g'night!

    Lora posted:
    As far as the recent sexual history, except for one sperm sample indicating sexual intercourse, we really have no idea what other encounters consisted of (we don't know exactly how the famous small sex toy was used). We can't draw any conclusions about whether any injuries could have resulted from other sexual encounters without knowing more about them, and without getting expert witnesses to weigh in on the subject.
    Exactly right, Lora. That's all we know, despite Newport's expert witness (his common sense) claiming that the accuser had "sex with at least 5 men and maybe as many as 7 in the several days prior to the night in question."

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#151)
    by Lora on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 11:22:14 PM EST
    SomewhatChunky, Had to make one last response (12-step, here I come!) because actually you supported my point. You posted Arico's last statement:
    "If DNA evidence is present where the assault was said to have occurred, that can further corroborate the victim's account."?
    See? Present tense. Uses "the victim." Generic statement. Unlike the others. Ok really now, I'm done. Have fun y'all. Later.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#152)
    by Alan on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 11:47:09 PM EST
    imho concocted:
    You have been corrected several times. Here's another from Lora:
    Plus you still have three people who said she was fine before the dance (Kim, Brian, her father).
    The times Brian and her father say she was with them contradict the times Johnson says she was with them. Kim observed her for minutes before the dance and that is inconsistent with the theory of someone intoxicated holding themself together for as long as they can. Pittman's contemporaneous and disinterested account has them sipping. Her much later and self-serving accounts have a different story, and one which cures the mysterious immunity issue only by making her contemporaneous statement a prior inconsistent statement. You do not, I notice, explain how posting 3 unsourced descriptions of date rape drugs and not relating them to the AV's reported symptoms advances your case. Concoction is not correction.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#153)
    by Alan on Sun Jun 18, 2006 at 11:49:59 PM EST
    Alan bungled:
    Kim observed her for minutes before the dance and that is inconsistent with the theory of someone intoxicated holding themself together for as long as they can.
    I meant of course to say: 'Kim observed her for minutes before the dance and that is consistent with the theory of someone intoxicated holding themself together for as long as they can.'

    Alan posted:
    I meant of course to say: 'Kim observed her for minutes before the dance and that is consistent with the theory of someone intoxicated holding themself together for as long as they can.
    And for how long before then was she with Brian " holding herself together?" And she "held herself together" when she went to the store with her father? Photios' evidence she drunk/high:
    But wasn't she, according to JJ's statement, already spilling a drink on a cellphone and behaving oddly (going off down the street and refusing to get back in his car) earlier in the day? Spilling a drink on a cell in the bathroom would be the third "sign and symptom consistent with" being drunk/high we've heard of.


    Bob in Pacifica wrote:
    PB, on what evidence to you base your characterization of the drink given to the AV as a "concoction"?
    Well, we're told it was a "mixed" drink. I use the word concoction in the colloquial sense... it is, after all, a mystery drink. I don't know what the intent of the drink was nor do I know its potency. I don't know whether to regard it as being in the AVs interest to get smashed or to stay sober that night, and I don't know whether to regard it as being in the players' interest to get her smashed or to keep her sober that night. Bob in P, You wrote:
    PB, no matter how you slice, there were no matches for the DNA. If the DNA on the nail (I still haven't seen anything conclusive as to whether it was on the top of it or under it) were Evans', and it's a big if, so big it wouldn't mean anything in a court of law because it doesn't match him,
    I don't think you know what a "Big If" is. If we start with the assumption that the DNA came from one of the many human beings who have lived on the earth, and we rank all those human beings accoding to the likelihood that that DNA belongs to them, it is a "Big IF" that that DNA came from anybody other than Evans. If you put Evans in column A and everybody else who ever lived in column B, and you totaled the probabilities of the DNA coming from someone other than Evans in column B, you would wind up with a probability very much smaller than the probability that that DNA came from Evans. Now you can still call that a "BIG IF", if you like. It's not like I'll treat your ideas less seriously if you do. You continued:
    it could very well be from Evans' discarded tissues, q-tips or other sources of DNA that turn up in someone's bathroom.
    Yes, I'm not sure about it, but he could have sneezed and had a skin cell from his nostril land on the nail, I would think. Obviously the suggestion that we all are sliming the universe with our dna every time we shake hands is the kind of scientific theory that would benefit Evans defense. The problem with such theories is that there appears to have been so little dna retrieved from the bathroom except for the dna on the nail. If Evans dna was all over that bathroom, why did they only find it on (or underneath, as Thomas puts it) the fingernail. In defense of the defense, it is true that regardless of where a drunk loses his car keys, he will search for them only under a lamppost, because that's where the light is good. Obviously the fingernails would be scrutinized more severely than any other object in the bathroom, and it will take more than one cell to turn the AV into Rosa Parks II.

    I posted the effects of some date rape drugs in response to this post by cib:
    Expect IMHO to ignore this entire post, or at least the part I cut off for brevity - the part that deals with effects of known date rape drugs. She'll need to posit an unknown date rape drug (presumably discovered by the evil genius Duke boys and which will be such an obvious reach) or admit that some of the accusers and Kim's testimony is false. Pigs will fly first.


    PB, you are about to walk off the ledge on this one:
    I don't think you know what a "Big If" is. If we start with the assumption that the DNA came from one of the many human beings who have lived on the earth, and we rank all those human beings accoding to the likelihood that that DNA belongs to them, it is a "Big IF" that that DNA came from anybody other than Evans. If you put Evans in column A and everybody else who ever lived in column B, and you totaled the probabilities of the DNA coming from someone other than Evans in column B, you would wind up with a probability very much smaller than the probability that that DNA came from Evans.
    All the DNA report re the fingernail said was that Evan's DNA couldn't be excluded as the source for the DNA in question (I assume because very few alleles could be isolated), nor could many people in the very limited database maintained by the private lab. I suggest to you that a tremendous number of people in the universe of people, past and present, who have ever lived, could not be excluded either. IMHO, can provide you the actual numbers if you like.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#158)
    by JK on Mon Jun 19, 2006 at 12:38:48 AM EST
    Someone posted within the last several days a renewed discussion of the statistical analysis, and, I believe, came to the conclusion that the chances of randomly picking Evans was 1 in 8. However, that person made the assumption that the DNA evidence failed to rule out 2 of the lacrosse players, not 1. I think I vaguely recall something about one of the DNA samples being a "mixed" sample, but I do not recall whether the DNA tests were able to exclude all but one or all but two of the players. Does anyone have a link for this point?

    Alan posted:
    The times Brian and her father say she was with them contradict the times Johnson says she was with them.
    When does Johnson say the accuser was with her father? When does he say she was with Brian? Johnson said he last saw her between 4:00 p.m. - 4:30 p.m. when he dropped her off at her parents' house. "Later on that night" he talked to her on the phone twice. Once to say he could drive her to the "bachelor party" and again to say he couldn't. He got a call from Tammy at 1:00-1:30 a.m. asking if he was her driver that night. The next time he heard from the accuser was Thursday (three days after the party).

    jk, Here you go:
    Experts at DNA Security in Burlington tested genetic material taken from one of the woman's fake fingernails found in a trash can in the house. The testing eliminated 45 of 46 lacrosse players but could not eliminate Evans. But the DNA tests could not specifically identify Evans as the source of the DNA, either, defense lawyers said.


    I think there's more info on the DNA lab results than that, IMHO. I too recall the "mixture of DNA" and that two players could not be excluded. I am not positive on this though. Maybe someone else has this info. The news account I read also said a number of people in the DNA database maintained by the lab could not be exluded either.

    Newport, You wrote:
    I suggest to you that a tremendous number of people in the universe of people, past and present, who have ever lived, could not be excluded either.
    Yes, you're right about that... I was having a bad math day. Since the 14 people in the database each had exactly the same likelihood of being the perpetrator as Evans did, when you add them together in column B, it is 14 times more likely that one of them were responsible for the crime against the accuser than Evans. If we count ALL the people in the world who could not be excluded, the chance that it is Evans dna approaches zero.

    I know many reports said all 45 others had been excluded, though I recall at least one defense statement that there were at least two who couldn't be excluded. It doesn't make a huge difference. If you assume only 1 player could not be excluded, the chance that if the accuser picks at random three players, he will be one of them is 1-(43/46), somewhat more than 1 in 15. If the choice is from a smaller pool, say only players she thinks she remembers seeing at the party, the number goes up. Remember, though, that there is DNA from two or three other sources on the nail, and the DNA from these other sources certainly didn't get there by their being scratched by Precious --- unless you want to add them to the crowd including Reade, Collin, Dave, and Precious (and by one of the accuser's many accounts, Kim). Contamination from material in the trash is the most obvious alternative source. I do not recall it being said that any material from the trash other than fingernails was tested.

    "the crowd including Reade, Collin, Dave, and Precious (and by one of the accuser's many accounts, Kim)" I of course mean "the crowd IN THAT BATHROOM during the alleged rape"

    Newport, Here you go:
    The DNA Security report said Dave Evans, one of three senior co-captains living in the rental house on Buchanan Boulevard, could not be excluded as the source of the DNA found on an artificial fingernail taken from a wastebasket in a bathroom at the house. But the report also noted that 14 of the 3,561 profiles in the company's DNA data bank could not be excluded as sources.


    Thank you IMHO, I couldn't find that. Your information gathering skill is formidible, now if only . . .

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#167)
    by january on Mon Jun 19, 2006 at 01:23:31 AM EST
    I posted the effects of some date rape drugs in response to this post by cib:
    I dunno, IMHO, I think you pretty much proved cib's point.

    january posted:
    I dunno, IMHO, I think you pretty much proved cib's point.
    Which was?

    PB, with all due respect, I do not understand your logic or your point here,
    Since the 14 people in the database each had exactly the same likelihood of being the perpetrator as Evans did, when you add them together in column B, it is 14 times more likely that one of them were responsible for the crime against the accuser than Evans. If we count ALL the people in the world who could not be excluded, the chance that it is Evans dna approaches zero.


    Newport posted:
    Thank you IMHO, I couldn't find that. Your information gathering skill is formidible, now if only . . .
    Thanks, but I'm spoken for.

    Photios, Maybe the nail in question was just a spare, so to speak, and never even applied to the hand of the FA. This is what the defense has been intimating. One more thing about the nails is that I understand these are 4 inch long stick on nails. It will be important to see from exactly where on the nail the DNA sample was recovered. For example, if the DNA sample was recovered from the middle of the nail or from the trailing edge of the nail it wouldn't seem possible for that sample to have been deposited there during a struggle. I know this whole nail thing doesn't amount to much, but it is the prosecutor's best evidence that anyone knows about. How pathetic is that!

    Thanks, but I'm spoken for.
    Damn! Married to Nifong are ye? Nifong's wife is reportedly a victims advocate. Is that the role you are playing here? Maybe not, I'm betting you're a West Coast girl. San Fran?

    Maybe a long distance marriage?

    Newport posted:
    Maybe a long distance marriage?
    Youy persistence is flattering, but I really am spoken for.

    "same characteristics" - a link to some of the players
    Cheshire said the testing did find some genetic material from several people on a plastic fingernail found in a bathroom trash can of the house where the team held the March 13 party. He said some of that material had the "same characteristics" -- a link short of a conclusive match -- to some of the players, but not the two who have been charged with rape, kidnapping and sexual assault.


    The News & Observer, which early on was leading the charge against the players, has now called in an editorial for Nifong to remove himself from the case.

    Actually, it is not an editorial-board editorial but a column by Sheehan, which is even more significant, since she was the author of the notorious "we know you know" column.

    About time she got with the program. Even the rats know when to jump off when the ship is sinking. I sent her an email thanking her for taking a stand. I would like to see the "we know you" piece for comparison. I wonder how that "rumor" got started? I was about to predict that he would drop the case before the hearing this week, citing the mental health issues of the FA, but decided against such a prediction when I read the Newsweek article. He's sticking to his guns. LOL.

    I now feel bad for thanking Sheehan for writing her piece. It was long overdue and her previous writing on the case exposed her as an idiot.

    The Herald Sun has been much more fair in its news stories on the case. The N&O must appeal to a different audience, like Duke haters. Is the N&O a Carolina paper? Maybe a local can explain this.

    Here is the original Sheehan column "Team's Silence is Sickening"

    Oops, should have said, "like Duke haters and race baiters." Sorry for the omission.

    Thanks Photios. BTW are you local?

    Darn it, the link is dead.

    Sorry, bad link. HERE is the original Sheehan column.

    Wow, that piece is pure hate! She is one hateful woman. Talk about leaping to conclusions based on your inherent bias against Duke white boys. I like the part at the end, thrown in almost as an afterthought,
    I don't know what happened in that house, and in that bathroom, over in Durham. Ultimately, that will be a matter for the court system to decide.
    Oh really, never know it from reading your article.

    There is a parody by a team parent HERE You may have to scroll down to find it. It begins like this: Nifong's silence is sickening. Members of the Durham Police Dept. and D.A.'s office: you know. We know you know. Whatever happened in Nifong's re-election campaign went bad. Terribly bad. He rammed a bogus case against three young men into court to win a tough campaign. You know who was involved. Everyone one of you does. It is best read in conjunction with the original Sheehan column.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#188)
    by ding7777 on Mon Jun 19, 2006 at 04:21:50 AM EST
    to inmyhumbleopinion
    Maybe [the Duke LAX player(s)] thought it would enhance the show. The strippers, reportedly, performed sexual acts on each other while buck naked.
    Or maybe the AV uses a small amount of a date-rape drug on herself to lose her inhibitions to perform buck naked on another women

    Looks like Sheehan's had to backtrack quickly. I've noticed this case has all but disappeared from the feminist blogs now that their poster girl is so tarnished.

    Lora, Re: Arico's statements. I still see them as generic, but can see where your point about tense change would muddy the waters. I think you hit the nail on the head when you called out the sloppy reporting job on this one :). I think the only thing that would really clear up her meaning is to know if the remarks were part of a continuous narrative, or in response to questions asked by the reporter. If the latter, knowing those questions would go pretty far in clearing this up. I tend to think it's a more generic statement though, just because Arico could be in violation of HIPAA laws if she were to speak in such a forum (as either the blog or the newspaper article) about the specifics of the AV's case.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#191)
    by blcc on Mon Jun 19, 2006 at 05:45:53 AM EST
    Good morning everyone. I swear I don't know you all can keep up... On the subject of newspaper columns, I only just saw this follow-up item in the N&O regarding Nifong's potential challenger. It ran Friday so that made it easier to miss. According to the article, Nifong's campaign manager Jackie Brown will be jumping ship to run the opposition's campaign should the petition drive be successful. "We need to restore confidence to Durham," Brown said. "We need leadership. We need someone the people of Durham can talk to." Very interesting food for thought. And apparently a former sheriff - according to the article, also a Nifong supporter - has agreed to help Cheek. Newport, re/ your question above about the N&O. It's the Raleigh paper, which given's Raleigh's proximity is local. I believe I recall reading that the N&O was originally pro-AV, but as a result of their own reporting had begun to turn from that side. Perhaps fact-checking the father's statements in their own articles played a role because (IIRC) they were thinking of removing anonymity with regard to the father's name & quote. Supposedly they were tiring of giving him an anonymous forum from which to announce his crazy theories, and the "they used a broomstick on her" claim was pushing them towards the edge. I don't know if they followed-up on that threat, but I'm under the impression the tide turned for them long before it did for the NYT and Newsweek.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#192)
    by blcc on Mon Jun 19, 2006 at 05:48:03 AM EST
    That was meant to say, "I swear I don't know how you all can keep up..." Clearly I'm going to need some more coffee.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#193)
    by blcc on Mon Jun 19, 2006 at 05:56:43 AM EST
    banco55, you are not alone in that observation. Want to make odds on whether or not an apology will be forthcoming?

    I'd be rather surprised if more than a couple of them offer a mea culpa. I suspect the posts will be something like one line noting the FA was lying and than a 1000 words along the lines of: "but this still raises troubling issues or race class and gender" etc.

    banco 55 said:
    Looks like Sheehan's had to backtrack quickly. I've noticed this case has all but disappeared from the feminist blogs now that their poster girl is so tarnished.
    Yeah, you see how she tried to justify her sickening article?
    Say all you want about the media's rush to judgment. But the truth is we report on allegations and charges out of district attorneys' offices every single day. And when a DA, especially one with Nifong's reputation for being a quiet, behind-the-scenes guy, comes out not only saying that a rape occurred, but that it was a brutal gang rape, in which the woman was strangled and beaten, you had to figure he had incontrovertible evidence.


    Can a opinion article that harsh and so slanted be grounds for a suit, given the fact that no one had bee eye witnessed at that time?

    The funny thing is her crappy column will end up being a case study (along with some of the other crappy reporting) for J-schools for years to come. Not exactly how she'd like to be remembered as a journalist I wouldn't think.

    Interesting stuff in that article about the "first gang rape" linked by Lora in her 11:34p.m. post: But relatives told Essence magazine in an online story this week that the woman declined to pursue the case out of fear for her safety... The woman's parents told NBC17 that their daughter was attacked by the boy she was dating at the time and two of his friends. The three allegedly held her against her will in a house, raped her and threatened to kill her. So we have that father, in this article, knowing about the rape. It's not clear when he knew about it, but from the context he appears to have known about it at the time. There are also two references that it was the girl herself who refused to pursue charges against the the three men who allegedly raped and threatened to kill her, not the story that the mother and AV lied to the father in order to prevent the father from getting beat up. Also note that the "threatened to kill" story, later used against her estranged husband in making charges against him, were raised in the earlier "gang rape." Seems to me that if a child is sexually molested that medical personnel are obligated to report this to authorities. Wouldn't any psychiatrist told by a 14 year-old that she had been gang raped by three men be obligated to report this to the police? Something skanky about that story, and it doesn't seem to match the other story in circulation that the father didn't know about the rape until his appearance on TV where she said she hadn't been raped. I think that that was advanced by IMHO, though.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#199)
    by blcc on Mon Jun 19, 2006 at 07:09:25 AM EST
    Does a story about the N&O possibly lifting anonymity for the AV's father ring a bell with anyone else? I don't recall where I read it, nor do I know if they followed through.

    Newport wrote:
    Madison, consider the following that imho posited: [He could be expecting to come into possession of more evidence this week, which he will in turn pass on to the defense.] I missed this earlier. Where does this come from? Why would imho make this conjecture? What does she know that we don't and how does she know it if she is not somehow connected to the DA.
    I didn't miss it. Is it a conjecture? We shall see.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#201)
    by blcc on Mon Jun 19, 2006 at 07:22:03 AM EST
    GUNSHY, I have no idea if such slant is grounds for a suit, but I suspect one of the ripple effects in this case will be a change in how rape is reported by news organizations. I don't know if anyone besides me is interested in this, but here's a mention of anonymity for the AV herself in the Editorial Page Editor's blog. Interestingly, it's from back on April 8th, before the DNA results came in, I believe.

    banco55, Your comment about this topic disappearing from feminist blogs reminds me of how Steve Gilliard's THE NEWS BLOG dropped it. He initially wanted to paint the case in grand strokes, a reenactment of the Antebellum South, but soon stepped away from it when details of the case became uncomfortable. Don't know if he's mentioned it at all lately. In a sense it's an intelligent thing to do. If you are looking for things to provide iconic "proof" to your beliefs, it's wise to dump icons that don't work. One can argue about racial realities in this country. One can argue about gender politics, one can argue about how various things like privacy laws, rape shield laws, etc. help or hurt the pursuit of justice. Nevertheless, this is a case about one accuser, three accused, a handful of witnesses, the police and the DA, and the defense attorneys. Human beings. Not icons.

    Does anyone know whether Norman Brooks was ever re-indicted for the rape of Booby Parker's young daughter? There is no coverage I can find of this case after this story: wral story

    Madison, Re: the Brooks/Parker case: Isn't the primary job of the DA supposed to be the administrative details of prosecution--i.e. knowing which ADA is assigned to which case? If this is how cases were handled by his office prior to Nifong's stepping into the active prosecutor role, I wonder how much his other workload is suffering now that he's taken it upon himself to move even farther away from an administrative role.

    ding7777 posted:
    Or maybe the AV uses a small amount of a date-rape drug on herself to lose her inhibitions to perform buck naked on another women
    I've thought about that. That may explain the flexeril and beer. The mixed drink [the players were reportedly drinking Jack Daniels and Coke] alone, in combination with her own medication/alcohol "cocktail" could have pushed her over the edge or she could have been slipped something else or taken something else on her own.

    Your comment about this topic disappearing from feminist blogs reminds me of how Steve Gilliard's THE NEWS BLOG dropped it. He initially wanted to paint the case in grand strokes, a reenactment of the Antebellum South, but soon stepped away from it when details of the case became uncomfortable. Don't know if he's mentioned it at all lately.
    That's real funny Bob, because the thing is that this case IS a reenactment of the Antebellum South, just the races are reversed. Thanks blcc, for answering my question.

    prior to Nifong's stepping into the active prosecutor role,
    that's not the only thing Nifong has been "stepping into" lately, and the later things don't smell too good.

    quoted from another site, may not be true:
    MSNBC Bombshell MSNBC has the entire discovery file! Dan Abrams, Susan Filan, and other hosts have the almost 1300 page file. Abrams and Filan said this morning that it doesn't look good for the prosecution. They hightlighted how the medical report directly contradicts the AV offical statement to Police. Her statement doesn't match Kim Roberts' either. The AV said, in her official statement that Roberts and her were embraced, holding on to each other as the 3 players physically carrying the AV away as Roberts was taken in the opposite direction. Later, the AV says Roberts stole all her stuff and pushed her out of her car into the street. MSNBC verifies all the different stories and versions told to diffferent Police/medical personnel.
    if so what will IMHO have argue with now?

    What's the fuss about? ding7777 asked a question, and I gave what, I thought, is an obvious answer: Posted by inmyhumbleopinion June 18, 2006 11:57 AM

    GUNSHY posted:
    if so what will IMHO have argue with now?
    Here's a starter:
    The AV said, in her official statement that Roberts and her were embraced, holding on to each other as the 3 players physically carrying the AV away as Roberts was taken in the opposite direction.
    Is this how Kim assisted in the sexual assault? Kim was taken in the opposite direction? It's a pretty small bathroom, how far in the opposite direction could Kim have been taken? GUNSHY, can you give us the link?

    All I have is a link to another board I'm not saying it's 100% legit here

    Is this how Kim assisted in the sexual assault? Kim was taken in the opposite direction? It's a pretty small bathroom, how far in the opposite direction could Kim have been taken?
    And the fact that this goes against what kim stated happened, this doesn't bother you? IMHO there is a line between fighting the good fight and arguing for someone that might be treated unfairly and being totally biased

    Ding7777bWrote:
    Or maybe the AV uses a small amount of a date-rape drug on herself to lose her inhibitions to perform buck naked on another women
    WHy ignore the Flexeril? Flexeril (cyclobenzaprine) is commonly used to treat muscle spasms, usually in the back. Common side effects include trouble urinating, exacerbation of glaucoma, sleepiness, dry mouth, dizziness and vertigo. It should not be used with alcohol since it increases the effects of both.

    ....that is the admitted use of Flexeril!

    Here's a link to S. Meadow's e-mail and Nifong's response cited in the Newsweek article. http://www.newsobserver.com/content/news/crime_safety/duke_lacrosse/story_graphics/20060619_nifong.pdf I think the characterization of Nifong's e-mail as angry is accurate. The writing style and content sound very familiar.

    Kalidoggie posted:
    Why ignore the Flexeril?
    I didn't ignore the Flexeril.

    PatsyMac posted:
    I think the characterization of Nifong's e-mail as angry is accurate. The writing style and content sound very familiar.
    I didn't think he sounded angry. I thought it was an excellent e-mail. Newsweek should have printed the whole thing. Does anyone disagree with anything he said?

    go here and click on • Exclusive: Duke rape case docs revealed about half the way down....

    Does anyone disagree with anything he said?
    About eighty percent of the last paragraph.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#222)
    by JK on Mon Jun 19, 2006 at 11:11:16 AM EST
    I disagree with at least one substantive point in Nifong's email. He stated:
    Once specific defendants were identified, I considered myself ethically bound to avoid any further comments on the case or the evidence.
    He also stated:
    [M]y initial comments on the situation before there was a case against any identified defendant which would trigger the ethical rules resulted in my being accused of unethical behavior . . . .
    Nifong is saying that his duty not to speak or make prejudicial comments only arose after "specific defendants were identified . . . ." I would think that his duty not to make comments that would heighten the condemnation of the accused would arise even before the indictment of the particular players. The accusations were already made against a rather small, narrowly defined group of individuals (the Duke LAX team). It makes no sense to me that Nifong had carte blanche to make as many prejudicial comments as he wanted to before he indicted any of the particular players. In terms of the tone of the email, I think the following comment is quite telling:
    If, in the meantime, you and other "journalists" want to continue your speculations in the competition to come up with the most sellable story - and that seems to be everyone's bottom line - then please spare me the recriminations when you get things wrong, as you inevitably will.
    Why does he put "journalists" in quotation marks?

    Nifong says "Once specific defendants were identified, I consider myself ethically bound to avoid any further comment on the case of the evidence." Nice try Mike. Gee, who gets to decide when specific defendents are identified? I must have missed those clauses in the NC laws referring to the fact that prosecutorial ethics rules do not apply before specific defendents are identified. Does he actually think he gets a free pass right up until he indicts someone? Unbelievable. Let's not forget some of what he didn't explain.... - Calling the players "hooligans" - Asking why innocent people would need lawyers - Appearing at that NCCU Forum to talk about the case. Just happened to be in the midst of the campaign. - All of his baloney about the players not talking. The cops had whatever shots they wanted at the three captains. Just because they didn't like what they had to say... - The witness payoff (Kim) and the attempted witness intimidation (the cabbie). Not to mention the BS charges he keeps bringing the players in for (and the judges keep tossing). Nifong shouldn't compare himself to the defense attorneys. They have different jobs and responsibilities. Prosecutors are held to a higher standard..... Which he does not meet.

    I thought Nifong might go this route: since, at the time he made his comments, there was no specific accused, he felt no ethical constraints against speaking out. Talk about following the letter but not the spirit of the law.

    Anyone else find it interesting that Nifong is defending himself rather than the AV? He finally goes public, and it isn't to answer one of the defense' motions, but rather to refute an article which could be personally damaging to him.

    Also - Is anyone watching MSNBC? I can't right now, but hear they are discussing the released documents at length.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#227)
    by january on Mon Jun 19, 2006 at 11:30:02 AM EST
    Re: Nifong Rather than angry, I'd say defensive and self-serving. I love the part about "my ..... belief that such cooperation would help effectuate a more accurate public discourse on an issue with great societal resonance..." What BS!

    Also - Is anyone watching MSNBC? I can't right now, but hear they are discussing the released documents at length
    Am I invisable? Go here for the msnbc report She said that "nicky" carried her back into the party.

    noname, you said:
    Anyone else find it interesting that Nifong is defending himself rather than the AV? He finally goes public, and it isn't to answer one of the defense' motions, but rather to refute an article which could be personally damaging to him.
    I could not agree more.

    and click on • Exclusive: Duke rape case docs revealed about half the way down....

    The Duke Lacrosse Scandal has taken on a life of its own. There is blind hate out there and a group of people that want to latch onto this case as a venue for venting that hate. The burden of fighting ignorance, and in some cases ideological radicalism, should not fall on the shoulders of the members of the Duke Lacrosse team! That is why we need people to support and fund the defense. It's not just the 3, but the entire team that is still under investigation - way beyond anything relevant to this case. They have all worked hard both at school and at lacrosse. For some, Lacrosse was the vehicle to have an opportunity that they wouldn't normally have had - to attend Duke. Support the Duke Men's Lacrosse Team. Duke Lacrosse Wristbands are now available. All donations go to "The Association for Truth and Fairness". Further information on the wristbands can be found at http://dukelacrossewristbands.blogspot.com/

    GUNSHY - Your post was where I first heard about this (thanks). I was just asking if anything more had come out, as I don't have access to a TV and had read on other blogs that updates were coming out periodically.

    Was someone here looking for this article about the NCCU student reporter who didn't want to publish damaging information about the AV? I am pretty sure it was someone from this thread who asked for the link, so here it is.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#234)
    by ding7777 on Mon Jun 19, 2006 at 01:54:33 PM EST
    to Kalidoggie
    WHy ignore the Flexeril?
    I wasn't. I was just saying, if a tox report showed a date-rape drug, why the drug could have been self-administered.

    GUNSHY, After viewing the link you provided to the MSNBC new piece and viewing today's Abram's report, I don't know what else to say. It is simply devastating for a whole host of reasons. Now the whole discovery package has been reviewed by at least one respected member of the media and it is even worse than the defense attorneys have said. Far worse. The FA's official statement after the alleged rape (something heretofore unknown to anyone but defense and Nifong) contains dramatic inconsistencies with the doctor and nurse's reports, the medical evidence, the second stripper's statements and the FA's own statements to examining medical personel. For example, the FA, in her official statement given after having time to sober up, alleges that Robert's carried her to the car; that Robert's and she were "embraced" in the house trying to hold on to each other as the boys viciously pulled them apart and dragged her into the bathroom to be raped and beaten severly. That is just a little flavor of what is in the FA's official statement. I'll let members of the forum make their own judgment on this. Re Nifong's ethics: jk is absolutely right. Where does he come off thinking that it is ok to lambast an easily identifiable group of people when everyone knows that the potential defendants are members of this class. How does this not violate the proscription against "heighting public condemnation of the accused." Nifong is a real dirt bag for saying something as stupid as that. Nifong stinks. Period.

    Apparently Nifong has more time to read blogs than to review the evidence in his own case. He has time to rebut Newsweek's characterization of his email mood but chooses not to address the substance of his claims. I called the DA office to vent but the lady who answered the phone was quite nice and you can leave the man a message (919-564-7100). This case sucks. I hate Nifong because he's destroyed lives and shamed the legal system; Durham will need at least 5 Kevin Costner movies to recover its image, such as it was. I give the false accuser a free pass for lying due to her irrelevant-but-sympathy-inducing personal circumstances but I don't feel good about it. The players should take the proven MLK/Gandhi and turn the other cheek rather than countersuing. They'll find jobs on Wall Street, as many folks up here are sympathetic to their position.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#237)
    by weezie on Mon Jun 19, 2006 at 01:58:01 PM EST
    Thank you, noname! I appreciate your digging it out. I hope the private detectives that the defense hired have verified the sources.

    Lora says:
    I couldn't convict without corroborating evidence on just an alleged victim's word alone. Reasonable doubt. But, turn it around a moment, if a rape actually occurred, and for whatever reason there was no corroborating evidence, then the perp would get off scott free. I think this scenario probably happens far more frequently than the other.
    "Better that 100 guilty people go free than that one innocent person be convicted," or words to that effect. Now where did I hear that before? With respect to this case, though, are you saying that because rapists in the past got off with no consequences that these guys get to be strung up for gang rape, regardless of their innocence (or guilt, which looks highly doubtful to me at this point)?

    BTW, after viewing today's Abram's report, the thought that Georgia Goslee was ever a federal prosecutor, let alone a law school graduate, is becoming harder and harder to believe. She does herself no favors in taking ridiculous positions and then clinging to them like a barnical. Even Susan Filan, who had been a staunch AV supporter, has now come around to the realization that this case should never have been brought. Goslee's only argument now is that the case should go forward because Nifong say so. The arguments about defense "spin" are gone (but may be resurrected I am sure). Sorry, but Nifong has forfeited any benefit of doubt that may normally be provided to prosecutors in criminal investigations based on their prosecutorial discretion.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#240)
    by weezie on Mon Jun 19, 2006 at 02:05:55 PM EST
    Respectfully beg to differ atl52. If one of those indicted players was my son I would not be giving FA any free passes. She had choices and she made bad ones. Why should she be allowed to destroy those defendants' lives? I don't agree that they will survive to skip through future daisy fields.

    Atl52, I agree with everything you said except:
    I give the false accuser a free pass for lying due to her irrelevant-but-sympathy-inducing personal circumstances but I don't feel good about it.
    Many people have sympathy inducing circumstances in life but don't make false claims that can ruin the lives of the innocent. There is more to her misdeeds than just crying rape when there was none. As I have posted before:
    To those that are willing to give the FA some slack because she is obviously "messed up" what about this: she sat in a police station and knowing full well that no one raped her, and knowing full well that she was about to destroy the lives of three innocent young men who had everything going for them, proceded to randomly pick three men out of a lineup and then even cry when she picked one of them. That is pure evil.


    I also watched all but the first five minutes (will catch it later) of the Abrams report. ...arrogant...a political animal...where is prosecutorial discretion? Nifong has really dug himself in deep, and now with a Republican challenger entering the election (I have NO doubt this will really happen--he has made himself a huge target), I don't see the case going much past November. I must sadly agree with Abrams that Nifong will not drop the case or hand it over before then. Such is this man's contempt for justice.

    Weezie, I struggle with that one and agree that a "free pass" is not a good thing. I just don't know the alternative -- it's not going to be easy to move on and I'm an "eye for an eye" guy unfortunately. Perhaps it's my naive hope that these guys will be ok. They'll never be able to run for office but they can go into private equity or trading. The Duke trustees are all over the Street and this is the least they can do for the handling of the matter.

    Reflecting on my comments, let me say this another way. I don't know what good can come out of suing the false accuser -- there's no restitution or ability to recover damages and I suspect that the societal benefits of punishing false accusers will be outweighed by the impact on muting true victims...and I don't consider myself a liberal per se

    I think if the accuser voluntarily committed herself to some valid diagnosis/treatment program, that be enough. That said, wouldn't the state be compelled to bring charges against her? Were I a player, though, I'd be lining up a big ol legal action against Nifong. Merely losing the election is not nearly enough...

    beenaround:
    "Better that 100 guilty people go free than that one innocent person be convicted," or words to that effect. Now where did I hear that before?
    I think the actual quote is: "It is better that ten guilty escape than one innocent suffer." - William Blackstone But I also like this one: "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly." - Martin Luther King, Jr.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#247)
    by weezie on Mon Jun 19, 2006 at 02:25:03 PM EST
    OK, atl52, I understand what you are getting at but still think she should be put in front of the media to get a taste of what she has done to others. I appreciate your thoughfulness.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#248)
    by ding7777 on Mon Jun 19, 2006 at 02:28:59 PM EST
    to weezie Also, Lacrosse Coach Mike Pressler had to resign

    So if the case is dropped, or dismissed, or whatever, will we be allowed to finally say her name?

    Sorry, folks but she needs to do some time, 5 years minimum. She is a recidivist false accuser, is on probation for a very serious crime involving assault on law enforcement, and a known alcohol abuser. She gets no free passes here, and voluntary commitment will not get it done either. She is a danger to every innocent person in Durham and her children and society in general. Her children should be given a chance to grow up to be productive, law-abiding citizens. They have no such chance under the current circumstances. If society can sanction putting someone in jail for stealing a pack of cigarettes from 7-11, or driving a motor vehicle while drunk or for any one of any number of other minor crimes, then society should sanction a stern jail sentence for this woman whose crimes are exponentially worse than those cited above.

    atl52 wrote:
    They'll never be able to run for office but they can go into private equity or trading.
    Not DE, who had his offer from JP Morgan Chase withdrawn.

    Newport: I have to agree with you on Goslee. I think Abrams was being nice by refraining from calling the accuser a liar. His alternative it to call her delusional or otherwise mentally ill (dissociative fugue state?). Goslee took this to mean that Abrams thought the accuser could still be thought of as credible.

    Newport: Is she on parole still? I am pretty sure her parole has been over for quite some time. Am I wrong? Other than that, though, I agree with you.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#254)
    by wumhenry on Mon Jun 19, 2006 at 02:38:51 PM EST
    Convicting the AV of perjury and malicious prosecution might be difficult if she doesn't confess, in which case the prosecutor would have the burden of proving a negative -- that she wasn't raped at that party --beyond reasonable doubt. But if the players are acquitted or the charges against them are dismissed, giving the AV a free pass would be a very bad object lesson for others who might be tempted in future to raise a false hew and cry about rape.

    Her only mitigation is that she probably never counted on being taken seriously, and who would? Her conduct in proceeding at the lineup, however, severly undercuts any mitigation, when it became clear that she was being taken seriously.

    You might be right noname, I might be wrong on that.

    Noname:
    So if the case is dropped, or dismissed, or whatever, will we be allowed to finally say her name?
    Probably. We all know about Tawana Brawley, don't we?

    Wumhenry, I suspect she would confess to cut a deal, but you are right, it would be difficult to prove "beyond a reasonable" doubt. But, "difficulty of proof" did not seem to phase Nifong in this case, and I would expect him to pursue the charges against the FA with the same zeal and forthrightness as he has against the LAX players.

    I'd find it hard to forgive the FA if I was one of the three accused and even harder to forgive if I was the parents of the accused. I think the meme about if we put false accusers in jail it'll scare off genuine victims is for the most part specious. Having said that looking at this from the three accused point of view perhaps they'd be better off giving a very magnanimous press conference when this is all said and done. Might be the quickest way and most effective way to get back what's left of their reputations.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#260)
    by Alan on Mon Jun 19, 2006 at 02:53:02 PM EST
    Punishing individuals is not going to achieve anything unless the law changes to impose a duty of procedural fairness on prosecutors. I'm not arguing against punishment, just saying this thing has deeper roots than just just Nifong's exploitation of the AV's folly. I'd also think that Pittman's role in this mess need some attention. She called it a crock. Then she changed her story to keep Nifong's prosecution alive.

    Suing Nifong is a great idea. Can we start a collection to hire people to bang pots and pans outside of his house on Sunday mornings? Kali, JPMC is a scrub bank anyway. Let's wait until the matter is properly resolved and see how they behave. You should give me props on predicting reinstatement and pursuing Danowski as coach...hopefully I'll be right on this one too! I think Ms. Fogarty is correct that the interest of the lacrosse players was subordinated to other groups. I don't think there's the basis for a lawsuit but I can see the basis for being pissed off. Brodhead's response was nuanced but failed.

    Newport wrote to wumhenry:
    I suspect she would confess to cut a deal, but you are right, it would be difficult to prove "beyond a reasonable" doubt. But, "difficulty of proof" did not seem to phase Nifong in this case, and I would expect him to pursue the charges against the FA with the same zeal and forthrightness as he has against the LAX players.
    Don't you think that Nifong's statements provide her a pretty good defense against that?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#263)
    by Lora on Mon Jun 19, 2006 at 02:58:10 PM EST
    No, of course not. re: "Journalists:" First of all, do you really think Dan Abrams has carefully studied all 1300 or so pages of the file? Yeah, sure. Was he directed to the particular pages that the defense wanted him to see? You betcha. "Journalists" in quotes seems appropriate to me, especially given my experience with trying to correct mistakes in an abc11 article which slanted the article toward the defense (I was ignored after emailing twice to two different people there). Also take the article with Ms. Arico which cobbles together a quote and a paraphrase in the same sentence, and puts quotes in without appropriate context, which leaves doubt as to who she is referring to, and slants the article toward the defense. How about the tone of Dan Abrams in the video that was linked earlier? If he's neutral, then Nifong's email is warm and fuzzy.

    banco55, I'm with you on how they should handle this. Dave Evans has proven to be a real man. Take on the accusation head-on and speak from the heart. I suspect he'll take that path once this thing reaches its appropriate conclusion. Anyone who saw that press conference had to be impressed. Any firm that purports to hire leaders should give him a look.

    Outside of the accused players and their families, and the unindicted players and their families, the ones I feel the most pity for are the accuser's children. If it is true that the accuser made up her story so that she could avoid an involuntary committment and thereby avoid intervention by child protective services, then she deserves no sympathy. Doesn't she know she leads a VERY messed up life? Doesn't she know her children would be better off in a more stable environment (heck, even with her parents)? Doesn't she realize the harm she is causing them (no father, no stable homelife, a mother who is chemically addicted and psychologically damaged)? Doesn't she understand that she is causing the downward cycle of victimhood to be perpetuated on her kids? Doesn't she get it that money (she earns stripping, escorting, etc.) doesn't buy love or happiness? I know it's hard, but doesn't she want a better life for her kids, even if that means it's away from her? Sorry. Stepping down off my soapbox now.

    Dan Abrams is sensational! Gloria Goslee sounds like some folks who post here. Face it, this ship is sinking.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#267)
    by Lora on Mon Jun 19, 2006 at 03:01:48 PM EST
    sorry, my "no of course not" was in reference to beenaround's post:
    With respect to this case, though, are you saying that because rapists in the past got off with no consequences that these guys get to be strung up for gang rape, regardless of their innocence (or guilt, which looks highly doubtful to me at this point)?


    If a lawsuit is winnable, great. I think that will be more difficult than some others here, however, and a lawsuit lost would not help regain their reputations at all. If there is money available, I think a public campaign on the part of the families of the accused to change how the law deals with accusations like this would best help re-build their reputations. This would both assume their innocence and set them up as the good guys trying to help the next person falsely accused of a crime while not exposing them to another court room where they very well could lose.

    Good point Alan. This case demonstrates that captive Grand Juries should be eliminated. They serve no useful purpose whatsoever and give the public unwarranted solice in the substance of criminal charges. At a bare minimum, GJ reform needs to take place that provides some measure of protection to the rights of the accused. It seems to me that the better system is simply to charge on information and then follow with a preliminary hearing if the defendant so desires. This is a much fairer system. My comments do not refer to the feds "investigating grand juries" which serve a valuable purpose with their wide-ranging investigative powers. I am only refering to the "indicting" kind of grand juries that NC uses. In Durham county, for example, I understand that the GJ's issue something like 100 indictments before noon on the Monday's they meet. What possibile function does this serve?

    Lora wrote:
    "Journalists" in quotes seems appropriate to me, especially given my experience with trying to correct mistakes in an abc11 article which slanted the article toward the defense (I was ignored after emailing twice to two different people there).
    So why exactly were you doing that? What is your job?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#271)
    by ding7777 on Mon Jun 19, 2006 at 03:22:21 PM EST
    to Lora
    "Journalists" in quotes seems appropriate to me, especially given my experience with trying to correct mistakes in an abc11 article which slanted the article toward the defense (I was ignored after emailing twice to two different people there).
    If you're refering to this story(Police Report: Alleged Victim Changed Story) , I'm not sure the use of the word "bedroom" instead of the correct word "bathroom" slanted the article in toward the defense. ButI agree that something that was factually incorrect should have been corrected (I also emailed the reporter!)

    Newport - Grand jury reform would be a great campaign for the families of the accused. They are already in the public eye, the best thing they can do is take on something like this. Hopefully they can leave at least some people remembering them as crusading for justice (as opposed to beating a rape indictment).

    This is all assuming they do beat the rape charges, of course.

    mik said: We all know about Tawana Brawley, don't we? Did everyone know this? She is now a member of the NOI, going by the name of Maryam Muhhamad, and living in --- GUESS WHICH STATE.

    If we can not count on public prosecutors to exercise their awesome discretionary powers wisely then there must be some mechanism for the accused to challenge the prosecution's case prior to the ruination that comes from being faced with the inevitable uncertainties of a jury trial. This is even more important in a state like NC that does not provide defendant's with a statutory right to a speedy trial. It is an abomination of justice and civil rights to allow defendants, who have legitimate challenges to the sufficieny of the charging information, to wait for a year to mount a challenge to the prosecution. The people of NC need to stand up and demand reform at all levels of their criminal justice system. The present system does not work, it is unfair and it must be changed. Not bad coming from a conservative, huh? Although a conservative that is no longer a republican.

    Make that Maryam Muhammad.

    My daughter goes to Duke and is very active in women's issues. She and her friends do not beleive the charges at all, a recent development since they were rallying in support fo the accuser at the beginning of this travesty. If the DA indeed filed a phony affidavit just to help move things along, he should be sanctioned, penalized and sued in every way allowed by law. This case will die faster than the Kobe Bryant case, except it will die for the right reasons.

    Why not just Muhammad Muhammed Muhanned Muhammed. Tawana Brawley was never charged with filing a false claim so there is strong precedent for the FA getting away with this. In NY, however, the system at least worked to some extent, to weed out the case before any indictments were issued. Durham PD, are you listening?

    Re: Steve Monks the new Republican candidate who stepped forward to challenge Nifong today. Monks have experience going against Nifong in traffic ticket cases. Unbelievable, what is going on in Durham? Durham is reduced to having DA candidates who are traffic ticket lawyers? Who ever heard of such a thing. Are there no legitimate candidates for DA in Durham? Why doesn't some legitimate NC lawyer (or non-lawyer for that matter as it is probably not a requirement of the job) step up and apply for the job? Move to Durham if necessary, the job is there for the taking.

    Anticipating comments re "nonlawyers can apply" for the DA job, many do not know that there is no requirement for Supreme Court justices to be lawyers and I am pretty sure several have not been lawyers. I am unaware of any requirements for state judges to be lawyers either, so why would the Durham DA be any different? Who thinks that a smart nonlawyer could not do a better job in the largely administrative job that is the Durham DA. So what if they might not be able to appear in court, who cares?

    Now that MSNBC have got the new documents is anyone else surprised about how blatant her lies were? I mean there were so many points at which her bs story would inevitably fall apart. Lucky for the accused she's not a good liar.

    http://www.uscourts.gov/faq.html, for those who are interested.

    Jumping back to Nifong's email to Newsweek - did it strike anyone else that in his complaining about the press taking the defense's spin that the DNA completely exhonerated all of the lacrosse players, he never refuted that it should have? He just takes umbrage that the press listened to it without actually having seen the reports. IMHO - I am sorry if you felt that I was being critical of you in my post last week. That was not my intent. I was asking, and still really want to know why, why, why do you believe the AV and find it so easy to disbelieve the accused? Surely you must agree that in any scenario that supports the AV charges, you must contort your imagination to reconcile what we have heard about the facts thus far. Also, no such twisting is necessary in the accuseds' consistent version. So why?

    Did anyone watch Catherine Crier on CourtTV? She had Susannah Meadows on, and one comment from Meadows was to the effect that: in speaking with Durham defense attorneys, she was told that there were times when they would be trying to work out a deal with Nifong, both sides looking at the same evidence, but Nifong seeing it one way and refusing even to consider there were alternate interpretations. (My paraphrasing.) Meadows was, clearly, not happy with Nifong putting the quotation marks around journalists in his email.

    As has been said before, I find it extremely telling that it took knowledge of a potentially unflattering portrayal of himself that prompted Nifong to respond. There is NO defense of his victim (and I do see her as one of his victims), only a disingenuous interpretation of the ethical canons he is supposed to obey which he sees as allowing him to say anything he wants about a case before there is a specific "accused." Shameful.

    Sharon - perhaps he thought it would get him good press in the future.

    Well, how did MSNBC get the documents and will they make them public?

    Can the defense share the court documents with anybody they so desire? What about the medical report?

    Yes, the defense is allowed to publicly share the discovery provided by the DA, but they are probably not allowed to share the entire medical report. The defense attached them to a recent motion, but put them under seal with the court. They are likely concerned about getting in trouble with the judge about releasing a person's private medical file. There is no telling what all is in there about the accuser's medical history, not just her psychiatric history or details of this episode. They might release details (such as the narratives) with out releasing the entire report. In fact, they were discussing some of this on the Abrams Report this afternoon. Things like Kim helped carry the accuser back into the house so the men could rape her. Anyway, it's not likely (at this point, anyway) that the defense will wholesale publish the discovery. Two reasons: 1) much of it is boring (the DNA reports will be particularly tedious to redact all of the players names), 2) the defense is not likely to release anything that may appear to add credibility to the accuser. Some of her statement to the police or some of her medical hx might engender sympathy from some segment the general public. That is not what the defense is looking to do right now. That's my take, anyway.

    thanks

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#291)
    by january on Mon Jun 19, 2006 at 05:37:25 PM EST
    Journalists" in quotes seems appropriate to me, especially given my experience with trying to correct mistakes in an abc11 article which slanted the article toward the defense (I was ignored after emailing twice to two different people there)
    Lora, ABC is never going to correct errors that really don't change the substance of their soundbites and which have absolutely no influence on the case. It's just not worth the air time to fix stuff like that. Please pick your battles a little more carefully and please, please, please, let this one go!

    This from Wikipedia, discussing HUBRIS:
    Hubris or hybris (Greek ‛′Υβρις), according to its modern usage, is exaggerated pride or self-confidence, often resulting in fatal retribution. In Ancient Greek, however, hubris referred to a reckless disregard for the rights of another person resulting in social degradation for the victim
    I was searching for one word to describe Nifong, and so far this one fits in both the modern and ancient meanings. I especially hope that the "fatal retribution" part works on Nifong. Not literally, but I hope this case is the death knell for his prosecutorial distortion.

    Lora, I agree with January. No offense to the news-readers at the Raleigh-Durham ABC affiliate, but they are not in the same league with a Newsweek reporter like Meadows. And I hope you will agree that Nifong's use of the quotation marks was a deliberate, spiteful slap in the face to Meadows, who was, out of courtesy, giving him an opportunity to be heard, to respond to the article before he was caught unawares by its publication.

    If I remember correctly, Lora had three points of contention with the ABC article: 1. It reported the accuser claimed she was pulled into the bedroom, rather than the bedroom. Legitimate point. 2. It claimed the accuser changed her story. I think recent revelations have proven that she did, in fact, recant and tell several versions of her narrative to different people that night. 3. The accuser and Kim never told Sgt. Shelton that Kim danced at the party that night. I think that no one did that night, and it came out later. I think Shelton contacted the agencies trying to locate "Nikki" and it led to Kim.

    That said, I don't think they'll issue a correction for using "bedroom" instead of "bathroom." Sharon, I like the definition of hubris. You're right. It perfectly describes Nifong.

    MSNBC did not get the documents from what I could tell. Abrams went down to Durham and went through them in a conference room, I suppose, taking copious notes. He referred to his notebook during the TV program. I doubt the defense lawyers would ever release the whole discovery file to the public, especially since the medical report is arguably protected by federal privacy rights. As a side note, I just got back from shopping at the local Pavilions (Vons) and looked in the beer section. I couldn't find anything in the 22 ounce variety so I asked some random guy I he ever heard of a 22 oz beer. He said something like "Oh yeah, that's ICE HOUSE, but dude, that's some nasty p*ss water, you don't want that, get the Pacifico. I cracked up and bought the Pacifico. Drinking it right now as I type. It's pretty good but I still think Tecate is better.

    Where's imho today?

    Scarborough has the case as his lead story.

    mik said:
    1. It reported the accuser claimed she was pulled into the bedroom, rather than the bedroom.
    You might want to issue a correction.

    Newport - I've had Ice House. Your acquaintance's description is accurate. Sharon - you really detest Nifong. From an earlier poster who knew him at UNC and described his rather abysmal early career, from local lawyers' testimonials (I tend to somewhat discount these due to future case risk in alienating him) prior to the primary and the breaking news in this case, he did not sound like much of an insolent tyrant. Do you think he always suffered a Napoleonic complex, or did he get a taste of power and was determined not to let go?

    Sharon, that is why I posted this,
    You have to understand that obviously the defense attorneys would probably prefer to try the case against somebody who is less experienced than I am, or get somebody who is less committed to the case than I am, and you can certainly understand that. I mean, if I were one of those attorneys, I wouldn't really want to try a case against me either. Mike Nifong
    and this,
    I posted earlier a quote of Nifong that says it all about the unbelievable hubris of this man. Yeah, I guess Cheshire and Osborn are quaking in their boots about the thought of going up against a legal giant like Nifong. Isn't this the same Nifong that has only tried traffic tickets since 1999?


    That's where imho is, Newport: imho is Wendy Murphy, clearly. Never see them in the same place at the same time, do you?

    Right with you on both posts, Newport. A first year law student could try this case and beat him.

    Sundance, A tiger doesn't change his stripes and a race horse doesn't become an ass, now does it.

    BTW Newport: in Florida you do have to be a lawyer to become a judge. There might still be some old codgers who were "grandfathered" in, but that's it. Wendy Murphy was unreal. Went after Dan Abrams, went after Susan Filen, went after Susannah Meadows, went after Newsweek. I've never seen her so shrill, and that's saying something.

    Posted by Newport June 19, 2006 06:58 PM Where's imho today?
    I'm here. I thought my cat got eaten by coyotes last night. He finally showed up, but is in bad shape. He has an ugly neck wound. I'll post later tonight.

    Sharon, I'm more inclined to think imho might be Nifong's wife to be honest with you.

    Is Ice House a second-rate brand manufactured by Coors?

    OMG, imho, I'm so sorry to hear that. I have three cats, and a dog and I love animals, especially cats. I will cut you some serious slack. Sorry, I truly hope your cat recovers. I would be devastated if I lost a cat or my dog.

    Correction: In my earlier post, I wrote: It reported the accuser claimed she was pulled into the bedroom, rather than the bedroom. It should have read: It reported the accuser claimed she was pulled into the bedroom, rather than the bathroom. Thanks, beenaround.

    Good point. I can see why the AV might have leveled a false accusation - besides the various scenarios of avoiding a lock-up, etc., no repurcussions from the prior time, (probably) little downside risk. I am having difficulty understanding what Nifong might have been thinking. How did he possibly think he was going to get around all of the gaping holes and contradictions, especially since he must have suspected that any eventual indictees would be represented by pretty good counsel?

    Sundance: I think he, before this case, was something of an anomaly. I think he was an extremely liberal prosecutor. I think he might have a bad case of "white guilt," for whatever reason. I think that, giving him the greatest benefit of the doubt, he saw being The District Attorney of Durham County as a vehicle to "do good" or "right wrongs" or advance some sort of personal, political agenda. THE District Attorney/State's Attorney, whatever you call him/her, has a frightening amount of power. Obviously. And I think Nifong, at best, thinks he would be a benevolent despot, that he could use his power for the greater good, or a higher purpose. My sense is that it goes beyond a hunger for political power, for that power's sake. I also believe that he wants, for some reason, to believe the AV's most horrific and horrendous story: I think for some reason he wants the Duke players to be guilty.

    Sharon, where can one find this Wendy Murphy, that I hear so much about. Who is she, and where can she be seen. You have me curious. I didn't think anyone could be worse than Ms. Georgia Goslee or that fool, Nancy Grace, but I am prepared for anything when it comes to these commenters.

    Nope, there you go Newport: Wendy had a moment to send a message on her laptop before boarding her train/plane/broomstick. (Sorry, I couldn't help myself for that one.)

    thanks, Sharon, that does help.

    OMG, Newport, you've never watched Wendy Murphy?!?!?!?! She makes Nancy Grace seems even-handed and open-minded. She's been on all the cable shows: Abrams, Grace, Greta, Scarborough. Let's see, what were some of her finer points: She blasted Abrams et al, saying the only reason that the defense let him see all of the discovery because he is a Duke grad. She blasted Newsweek and Meadows for not warning the readers that it is an "editorial" piece. She thinks Mike Nifong should be promoted to the highest level a prosecutor can attain, for his strenth and courage. Need I say more? Oh, and she had no problem with Newsweek when they had the mug shots of Finnerty and Seligman on the cover.

    Wow, Hannity just went OFF on Lis Weil, who was spouting off about the Colmbs bit about let a jury decide. Weil failed to get true bills in grand juries so she thinks Nifong must have something? LOL She ain't been to Durham.

    Hannity just pulverized her. She (Weil) should be ashamed of herself for taking such foolish positions. Puts her in the same category as Georgia Goslee.

    Weil's position is light on substance, so she's focusing on adherence to the system.

    Sharon wrote,
    Sundance: I think he, before this case, was something of an anomaly. I think he was an extremely liberal prosecutor. I think he might have a bad case of "white guilt," for whatever reason. I think that, giving him the greatest benefit of the doubt, he saw being The District Attorney of Durham County as a vehicle to "do good" or "right wrongs" or advance some sort of personal, political agenda. THE District Attorney/State's Attorney, whatever you call him/her, has a frightening amount of power. Obviously. And I think Nifong, at best, thinks he would be a benevolent despot, that he could use his power for the greater good, or a higher purpose. My sense is that it goes beyond a hunger for political power, for that power's sake. I also believe that he wants, for some reason, to believe the AV's most horrific and horrendous story: I think for some reason he wants the Duke players to be guilty.
    If doesn't hit the nail on the head, I don't know what does.

    Sundance, Yeah, a system that has demonstrated that it is not entitled to a presumption of regularity. Just like the FA is no longer entitled to the presumption that she is an AV. Weil, of course, doesn't address that because she doesn't know any facts of the case. She's just put on the show because she's attractive.

    Sharon, you still haven't told me where I can find this Wendy Murphy and who she is. What is her claim to fame? BTW, she's probably right about Abrams. Not that that's bad or anything. And, Meadows is Duke 95 as well.

    IMHO - sorry to hear about your cat, glad that he/she is okay. East coasters don't have to worry about coyotes, just cars.

    Isn't Wendy Murphy the "recovered memories" advocate?

    Thanks, Newport. My cat looks like something the cat dragged in, but should recover. When you spoke of marriage you didn't share your love of animals. Now back to business: Does Hannity consider himself a talk show host or a "journalist?" He just said this about Ms. Pittman and the accuser.
    Hannity: The woman she's with could say she was with her all the time.
    I have never seen a version of Ms. Pittman's story where says she was with the accuser all the time.

    Thanks, Sundance.

    Sorry Sharon, you did tell me about her guest appearances. Funny, I have never seen her on Greta or Abrams, don't watch the others you mentioned. Does she have a regular gig or does she just pop up when someone needs a shrill?

    One and the same, Madison. Here's a blurb from the New England School of Law, where she's a prof. She's the one who, upon hearing that Seligman had numerous "testimonials" from various upstanding people, said something along the lines of, "well, Hitler didn't beat his wife but he was still a bad guy." She's the worst.

    Sharon, you wrote:
    Sundance: I think he, before this case, was something of an anomaly. I think he was an extremely liberal prosecutor. I think he might have a bad case of "white guilt," for whatever reason. I think that, giving him the greatest benefit of the doubt, he saw being The District Attorney of Durham County as a vehicle to "do good" or "right wrongs" or advance some sort of personal, political agenda
    . I think there is an additional factor in Nifong's motivation. He was a career civil servant, never working in private practice. He was up for election against Freda Black, who had much better name recognition. His first order of business when he was appointed DA was to fire Ms Black, and if he lost the election, her first order of business would be to fire him. If your job security was ever threatened, you could understand his motivation to take advantage of free publicity. It is deplorable in the extreme that he stepped on so many people in the process. Selfish self preservation.

    A little off on my Wendy M. comment. It was in response to the Duke report that, by and large, and as a whole, the Duke lax team was "well behaved."
    MURPHY: To suggest they were well behaved. Hitler never beat his wife either. So what?
    This is from Tucker Carlson show, about halfway down the page.

    SharonInJax wrote:
    Wendy Murphy was unreal. Went after Dan Abrams, went after Susan Filen, went after Susannah Meadows, went after Newsweek. I've never seen her so shrill, and that's saying something.
    What is amazing is that at least Abrams et al. in the beginning were open to the idea that the rape could have occurred. Some bought into The Nifong's hype, but no longer do in light of the facts. Interestingly, to some extent they still are open tot he possibility of a rape but question what evidence the Nifong could have to make it possible in relation to everything that has been disclosed. Everyone keeps saying I can't imagine what The Nifong has, which suggests a certain openness to the possibility that The Nifong has something. Wendy Murphy and her ilk have never considered and cannot consider it possible that the rape did not occur. It is amazing that Wendy (and others on this blog) have absolutely no objectivity whatsoever, even if just for analytical purposes, and cannot even acknowledge the discrepancies and inconsistencies of Precious, Nikki and The Nifong (sounds like a bad hair band of the 80s). Lastly, what underlies Wendy's (and others on this blog) position is that they want a rape to have occurred!! regardless of the blatant inconsistencies. In my opinion it is similar personal bad experiences in the past that is the motivation for these blinders. Otherwise, to be objective creates subconscious doubt in their own unfortunate experiences.

    Good point, lightenup. Add my well-wishes to the others, imho, on your cat's recovery. I have 4 cats and 2 dogs, so I know the feeling. At least I don't have the galapagos tortoise to worry about anymore.

    Add to that, Kali, that the Wendy Murphy's of this world do not believe there has ever been a false accustion of rape. Something along the lines of, "well, maybe he didn't rape her, but he wanted to/he'll rape someone sooner or later/he's an abuser of women in some other way, etc."

    Wendy Murphy:
    Hitler never beat his wife either.
    Source?

    Wendy is a paid CBS legal analyst. She has been commenting on legal cases for the past ten years. We were MSNBC analysts together from 1997 to 1999. Yes, she always takes the prosecution side. Yes, she is particularly emphatic in rape cases. She is a victim's rights advocate. I didn't see the shows tonight so I can't comment on whether she was particularly over the top or just being Wendy.

    Posted by inmyhumbleopinion June 19, 2006 08:29 PM Wendy Murphy: Hitler never beat his wife either. Source?
    Somehow, I don't think Wendy Murphy is reading this blog, so I don't think she'll answer you ;)

    See my post after that one, imho, the Tucker Carlson link.

    Yes, she always takes the prosecution side. Yes, she is particularly emphatic in rape cases. She is a victim's rights advocate.
    And so, of course, she is not objective. It's not where her bread and butter is. Thanks, TL. I had no idea you had been a TH yourself :)

    Greta teaser:
    Is Finnerty in hot water? What did he do to anger a D.C. judge?


    IMHO asks for a source for the Wendy Murphy Hitler remark. It at the link provided by SharonInJax: The Situation with Tucker Carlson.
    CARLSON: James Coleman, a left wing law professor at Duke had this to say. None of the misconduct involved fightings, sexual assault or harassment or racist slurs. It turns out that their behavior on trips was exemplary. They're respectful of people who serve the team, including bus drivers, the airline personal trainers, a quick--et cetera. Actually, it turns out that the team is really well behaved except some of them got loaded under age and urinated outside. I'm serious. MURPHY: Yes, they were really well behaved. Are you kidding? CARLSON: I'm not kidding. MURPHY: I'm not even going to, you know, indulge that debate, Tucker. CARLSON: Why, because it's... MURPHY: To suggest they were well behaved. Hitler never beat his wife either. So what?
    Hmmm, those certainly were choice words. Comparing late teen and early 20s American males with Hitler. But then, I have observed that the US has an obsession with the Nazis. They are often chosen as the bad guys in movies and TV series. I wonder whether she would compare, say, Tookie Williams with Hitler. Somehow I doubt it. (He pissed me off for what he said of that poor chinese couple and their daughter that he wasted.)

    Sarcastic,
    Were I a player, though, I'd be lining up a big ol legal action against Nifong. Merely losing the election is not nearly enough...
    TH on Greta, Jeff Figer(sp??) says the prosecutors are ABSOLUTELY immune from civil liability. He says prosecutors do this sort of stuff all the time and now America is getting a real taste of it. Only remedy against Nifong is voting him out of office. Don't know if Figer's right w/o a ton of legal research, but I have no reason to doubt that it would be very, very, tought to get any civil relief. I guess public shame might be the best punishment against a man with his hubris.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Case: Newsweek Asks, Has it Coll (none / 0) (#342)
    by JK on Mon Jun 19, 2006 at 08:05:28 PM EST
    Newport, While there is no requirement that a US Supreme Court justice be a lawyer, I don't think any President has ever nominated a non-lawyer. However, I believe that several justices have had no prior experience as a judge (including Rehnquist).

    So the FA changed her story several times. She accused several players but needed multiple lineups to make a "positive" ID. Yet Kim stole her stuff, and assisted in the rape. Why wasn't Kim indicted on the same flimsy allegations as the players?? No miraculous moustaches to worry about, was there?

    342 comments, time to close up here. I just made a new thread here on Nifong's released e-mail.