DA Mike Nifong confirmed he had not turned over a toxicology report to the defense -- but he refused to say whether toxicology tests had been performed. Other items not turned over.

Did he sound angry or annoyed to you Sharon?

For the love of Mike (NOT Nifong,) reading that ridiculous line, "Sweetheart, you aren't going anywhere..." over and over again is making me feel like kicking somebody in the butt, too.

So why did Nifong put out the date rape drug theory?

Stevens interrupted Nifong to stop him.

Point to the defense, followed up by more than one point for the bond reduction.

Your thoughts on that?

OSBORN: And then, your honor, I understand that it is custom at least in this county that we would be permitted to actually go over to the law enforcement officer's agency and actually go through their files, all their files, all their notes and so forth, personally.

STEPHENS: Well I'm not aware of that custom. I believe perhaps maybe that's your take on the custom. I'm not aware of that custom. I mean you surely have the discovery process and you have what you're allowed by statute and then, frankly, whatever else the D.A. allows is his call.

OSBORN: Yes, sir.

Now, of course, he could mean "I have tox screenings in the works that I am delaying, in violation of discovery laws and rules and intentions."

Do you think he meant that, imho?

Stephens clearly favored Nifong in both hearings. He ridiculed Osborn about the "complicated" military records. I actually felt bad for Osborn about that. Stephens runs a tight ship, but he wasn't the least bit sharp with Nifong's about the snarky rape kit comment. It was a "now, now, we don't need to get into any of that". You can bet Osborn is glad he won't be before Stephens next time.

A cousin of the accuser in the Duke University rape case says she believes the young woman was drugged at the party in Durham, N.C., where she said she was attacked.

The cousin, who wanted to be identified only as Jackie, suggested in an interview with "Inside Edition" that drugging might account for any inconsistencies in what the alleged victim has said happened.

"I can't specifically say what my cousin says," Jackie said. "But what I believe is that she was drugged, and if you've been drugged and had alcohol mixed with some kind of cocktail of course you're going to be delusional."

The alleged victim, a student at a historically black college in Durham, says three members of the Duke lacrosse team raped her in a bathroom during a party where she was working as an exotic dancer.

Perhaps when the AV talked about the two 22-ouncers and the flexeril, someone decided NOT to run the test because of what it WOULD find.

He [Bissey] heard the b!tch word. He may have heard more.

imho: are we to infer that the same level of credibility should be given to the "Duke alum payoff" report as to this latest, the "date rape drug"?

Read that latest link: does the cousin ever say that the AV said she thought/believed/suspected she was "slipped" a date rape drug?

No.

So you have a family member trying to . . . what?

Nifong is approaching this case like a civil litigator, just win baby, on whatever set of facts works.

By the way, thanking someone's grandfather for his cotton shirt is perhaps the lamest racial epithet I have ever heard.

If he had heard players yelling the n-word, why would he have omitted that from his account? If he did not hear it, that gives the lie to Kim Pitman's testimony that they were shouting "N*,n*,n*" outdoors while she and the AV were in the car.

"There were no kind words of the things I heard that were directed at the girls," said neighbor Jason Bissey.

I've never heard that one. It sounds to me like someone wanted to hurl a racial epithet but didn't know how.

Some jurors in Durham may be like Durga, PB and imho and vote to convict based on the calling of names alone and the broomstick comment.

Stephens runs a tight ship, but he wasn't the least bit sharp with Nifong's about the snarky rape kit comment. It was a "now, now, we don't need to get into any of that".

Bissey supposedly saw the short skirt when he was watching the AV appear sober. If no one has an answer I'll just presume that Bissey just can't tell the difference between a skirt and lingerie.

If, as Kim has stated, the players thought Kim was the Hispanic one, they would have hollered something else.

Maybe the real answer is that some people are so afraid to say the N word that this is what they came up with for a substitution. To me it almost shows a PC mindset on racially insulting someone. Do you think that is crazy?

They couldn't tell a mixed Asian woman from a Latina ... they may just be that thick.

There's no real evidence of that. Kim Pitman didn't say that any of them said anything that indicated he thought she was hispanic. It was merely a conjecture on her part.

that just about every and any judge will err on the side of the prosecution. As they should.

Test question for everyone here: do you understand why a judge will, by and large, rule in favor of the prosecution? Here's a hint: the prosecution cannot appeal a not guilty verdict.

Not everyone is as obsessed with race as you are

Call the boys what you want, but one thing they are not is thick. I suspect that they would run circles around you in any sort of objective intelligence measurement.

Since you brought it up, I'm a skeptic and actually doubt there is an "objective intelligence measurement" considering it is biased to its time and the person who decides what qualifies as intelligence.

old blood is, well...............old. no toxicology report worth a damn will be performed on it, too many chemical changes can occur, to make it valid.

if they did, as much media coverage as this thing has gotten, someone (in deference to IMHO) would have leaked it by now.

I've read studies on the storage of blood that was tested for GHB.

DURHAM, N.C., June 22 -- A lawyer for one of the three Duke University lacrosse players charged with raping a woman said a police report released to the defense on Thursday showed that the woman initially claimed five men had sexually assaulted her. That assertion was immediately challenged by an investigator for the prosecutor.

The lawyer, Joseph B. Cheshire, spoke to reporters after Michael B. Nifong, the Durham County district attorney, delivered 536 pages of documents to defense lawyers. Mr. Cheshire said a quick review indicated that the woman had given other versions of events. Mr. Cheshire described the woman as "the false accuser" and said she had claimed rape by 3, 5 and 20 men.

Mr. Cheshire's news conference was briefly interrupted by Linwood Wilson, an investigator for the district attorney, who challenged him to show where in the documents the woman had changed her story. In an interview later, Mr. Wilson said he had seen all the evidence and that the woman, a 27-year-old student and stripper, had not changed her story.

The case stems from a lacrosse team party on March 13, where the woman and another stripper were hired to perform. In a 50-minute court proceeding on Thursday, Mr. Nifong addressed defense lawyers' requests for more information, saying the requests had been mostly fulfilled in the material delivered, added to 1,278 pages released May 18.

Judge Ronald L. Stephens of Durham County Superior Court reduced the bail for one of the three defendants to $100,000 from $400,000.

They couldn't tell a mixed Asian woman from a Latina (at the very least they could have thought she was Filipino); they may just be that thick.

DURHAM -- Heavy media coverage of an alleged rape by three Duke lacrosse players has not eroded Durham's image and actually may have provided a positive bump, according to a Durham Convention & Visitors Bureau survey conducted two months into the case.

The new study said Durham's self-image remained unchanged during the lacrosse coverage for 76.4 percent of residents ...

Of course you are. Objectivity in measuring intelligent

wouldn't fit with your view of a proper world order.

Statements like this do not help your cause,

they merely demonstrate your capacity to interpret facts selectively to suit your argument. Where is your evidence that people who cannot reliably distinguish racial characteristics have below average intelligence?

imho, PB, Durga, and Lora, please tell me: other than the AV's identification of the three accused, other than her depiction of what transpired that night in that house (I will even let you pick which one of her stories you want to use), what evidence do you think is there?

2. I was at the lacrosse party at 61 0 N. Buchanan Blvd. in Durham, NC on March 13 running over to March 14, 2006. After the two women danced for a few minutes in the main livingroom, they then left the main living room. 3. Shortly thereafter, I then left the residence through the back door and talked to Reade. As, I went out the back door, I did not see or hear anything unusual. Once outside, I saw Reade, who appeared normal in all respects. We were both tired fiom playing golf that afternoon, and we had practice the next day. In addition the dancers had stopped dancing and were obviously impaired when they left the main living room. Reade said he had just called a cab and asked if I wanted to leave with him.

Does it not bother you that you retreat to condemning the alleged racist comments, even when the only independent witness can only confirm a tasteless, childish (but, and I am willing to admit, it was a Cameron Crazy kind of racial comment) taunt aimed at, perhaps, the stripper who just told them that she had called the cops on them?

Do you care about what the accused's families are going through, if their boys are indeed innocent, not simply not guilty?

Before Kim Roberts found herself being used by disingenuous defense attorneys to further their agenda and resisted that she would have been considered an independent witness

She is characterized now as a company shill ONLY because of that resistance. It's a Machiavellian game

What is my "cause"?

I said - They couldn't tell a mixed Asian woman from a Latina (at the very least they could have thought she was Filipino); they may just be that thick.

I didn't say people who cannot reliably distinguish racial characteristics have below average intelligence.

More importantly, as Bob has repeated many times, none of these statistics has any bearing on whether this case involves a false accusation.

Yes, I do think that Stevens is a "pro-prosecution" judge, and most of his decisions will relect this. Not to mention (an odd idiomatic experssion because I am about to mention) that just about every and any judge will err on the side of the prosecution. As they should.

Test question for everyone here: do you understand why a judge will, by and large, rule in favor of the prosecution?

Why do you consider me an "AV supporter?"

Don't think so, PB. She's characterized as a company shill because she got a deal from the prosecution and changed her story.

Newport, I don't know if you're right on the inability to get a unanimous jury vote. It's all so easy to hide behind the cloak of anonymity on a blog. Things are different in person.

I don't know if you're right on the inability to get a unanimous jury vote. It's all so easy to hide behind the cloak of anonymity on a blog. Things are different in person.

Because the pertinent gaps in Wellington's testimony are where they are, Seligman has not successfully exonerated himself, even if we accept Welligton's statements unchallenged.

On the other hand, any observations are subject to all sorts of human imperfections. Seeing a short skirt when the woman wasn't wearing a skirt is a pretty big error in observation, especially when he was watching her walk a long time.

When Cheshire told reporters that the woman claimed five people attacked her, investigator Linwood Wilson asked Cheshire to show him that page in the evidence. "You're welcome to come get it," Cheshire said. "Yeah, I'd love to see it," Wilson said. Wilson walked away, and Cheshire continued talking with reporters.

I consider you a AV supporter for the same reason I consider Bob in Pacifica an AV detractor, you both consistently slant your posts albeit in opposite directions. You are smarter than Bob in Pacifica, it is too bad you can't find a better use for your brains.

In that vein, I'd respectfuly like to ask inmyhumbleopinion, Durga, PB, and Lora--if you ladies/gentlemen lived in Durham, would you be disappointed in Nifong, City Manager Baker, and especially in the line-up procedure? Would you be disappointed that the police/Nifong diverted resources from a quadruple homicide to pursue DNA evidence in this case? (I know, Lora, rapes are horrible crimes, but I don't think the families of the four murdered young (black) men would think a rape should take precedent over their sons/brothers case.)