Jk, didn't the Supreme Court enjoin the Florida Supreme Court from ordering further recounts in the 2000 election litigation? I can't remember.

According to this post , TL says IMHO was on the Skakel threads.

You are talking about something different - starting a collateral action in federal court and asking that court to enjoin proceedings in a state court criminal proceeding that is still ongoing.

IMHO - You are correct. The phone records only show connection times, not who was actually using the phone or how. I would note, however, that we can reasonably rule out text messaging as a possibility simply based on the connection times. No text message takes 30+ seconds to send.

I just can't believe this "case" is still alive. ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRGH! Why doesn't the judge consider the motions?

I was not sure if in the first sentence you meant (a) the prosecution should present rigorous statistical studies about the relationship of vaginal swelling with rape, consensual intercourse, and other conditions (i.e., evidence to actually allow you as a juror to make these calculations), or simply (b) testimony from other sexual partners and medical testimony about other causes of VS, so that one could make a sort of crude approximation of how likely these injuries were in the absence of rape. Based on the second two sentences of the paragraph, I assumed you meant (b).

However, if you meant (a), I think there would be serious problems with the admissibility of this type of evidence. You would need to show the evidence would be more probative than prejudicial, and any expert testimony on this issue would need to meet the reliability requirements of Daubert and Kumho Tire.

I think a judge would be loathe to admit testimony that there is an x% chance that a person was raped based on VS.

I don't think some posters have any idea how devastating a rape can be, and how devastating enduring the medical/legal procedure following a rape can be. Fortunately I don't have personal experience, but from my class I am getting an inkling. Imagine letting anyone touch your body anywhere, following a rape. Now imagine a thorough, lengthy, sometimes rough or painful (speculums are supposed to used without lubricant) exam in the most tender parts of you which have been recently violated. For hours you are not allowed to eat, drink, defecate, urinate. You are not allowed to remove the stink of the attacker from your body. There are often few or no accomodations made to the emotional state of the victim: there is often no privacy, the doctor may simply touch the victim without getting permission etc.

I don't consider Bob in Pacifica an AV detractor because he makes legitimate arguments that point out the weaknesses in the prosecution's case or corrects misstatements than impugn the defense's case. I consider Bob in Pacifica an AV detractor because, back when I read his comments, he continually lied about the accuser and her family.

I do have a better use for my brains, it just doesn't require much of my time.

You don't have to lie to demonstrate a bias for or against the AV.

You continue to make assumptions about what the defense is "representing." You did the same thing about the supplemental motion, where you assumed the motion said, "JJ said the AV had sex with four men." The motion did not say that.

I did not say that.

I did not say you said it. I said you assumed it.

where you assumed the motion said, "JJ said the AV had sex with four men."

About this new info, from the motion:

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

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

Talk Left posted:

I certainly think it's a fair statement to say that she was "involved in some sexual manner" with four other men.

What four men? There is the male/female couple and the "older gentleman." The other appointments could be performances for lesbians. The supporting document, Jarriel's statement, does not mention any men other than the"older gentleman." The "involved in some sexual manner with four other men" claim is not supported by any of the attached documents.

mik posted:

The motion the defense filed does not say that ___ had sex with men. It states that she "was involved in some sexual manner" with her clients. Removing one's clothing in a sexually provocative manner is "some sexual manner." Only ___ and her "clients" or "dates" will know what occurred behind closed doors.

Actually it says:

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

Jarriel's statement mentions one man. The "older gentleman" the accuser said "wants to see her perform." Investigator Hinman could not possibly discover the accuser did anything with "at least four different men during the weekend from March 10 through 12, 2006" from Jarriel's statement. The defense lied about the content of Jarriel's statement.

I think Wilson called him on the 20 attacker story being in the new discovery and Cheshire tried to weasle out of it.

That's one way of putting it, there are others.

Looks to me like the local press supports Cheshire's version, not Wilson's.

"We've got none, we've got three, we've got five, we've got 20. I mean, pick a number -- any number you want to pick,"

You don't have to lie to demonstrate a bias for or against the AV.

re the $2 million offer

If this is true, can't the person(s) who offered the money be charged with obstruction of justice?

IMHO,

Yes, I do think you are primarly responsible for dragging down the quality of the discouse on the board. I think that's too bad - there aren't many places where you can have a good discussion about this case. I think this was the best.

Newport: I like the "Fong" choice. Of course, that is a small step away from "Dong" which has all sorts of possibilities, too

How about Liethong? Lie because he's a liar and thong because he's got hisself stuck up his you know what.

BTW, you never answered my question about the blood test. You kept repeating the blood can still be tested. My question was (slightly paraphrased here): can you think of any good reason (consistent with Nifong being an ethical and competent attorney) why the blood has not already been tested?

OSBORNE: I take it from Mr. Nifong's representations here, there are no toxicology reports.

JUDGE STEPHENS: At this point in time I assume there are none.

NIFONG: That's correct.

I can think of a few.

I would be very interested in you sharing those reasons, if you would be willing to share.

"Here I come to save the daaaaaay."

That theme song from the old Mighty Mouse cartoon series could be the campaign theme songs for Lewis Cheek and now Steve Monks, two men contemplating a run for Durham County District Attorney.

Are these two gentlemen donning crime-fighting capes and sallying forth to become the county's top cop because they want to make the streets safe for little old ladies?

Nope. As far as I can tell, their main motivation is to make the streets safe for the three Duke lacrosse players accused of sexually assaulting an exotic dancer.

ABRAMS: All right. Look, I should also -- I mean I think that there may have been a blood sample taken. Yale, you were saying there was no blood, I think they may have taken a blood sample. BONDI: OK, Dan, then they can still analyze it... ABRAMS: ... but there is no result. GALANTER: No, no, no. ABRAMS: Go ahead, Yale. GALANTER: They took an initial screen to determine whether or not there were any illicit drugs in her or alcohol. They did not do a toxicology report for the date rape drug. ABRAMS: But Pam is saying... GALANTER: That's what occurred. ABRAMS: ... that if they've got a blood sample, they could still take it. They could still do a test at a later time. BONDI: Dan, it happens all the time... ABRAMS: Yes.

If he said 5 attackers in a sentence without the 20 attackers, none of the reports I have seen quoted him. If the above is the quote to which Wilson objected, Wilson was correct in wanting to "see that page."

The best thing that they have going for them against this is having Seligmann as one of the accused. The combination of the phone records, his well documented leaving time and the very clear exposition of Roberts leaves virtually no time for him to be involved.

While driving Seligmann home, Mostafa received a call at 12:29 a.m. from the cell phone of lacrosse player Tony McDevitt, requesting another ride from the party, the records show.

Mostafa told MSNBC that he returned to the house later to pick up another customer. He told FOX News that when he arrived at the house the second time, some players were on the front lawn and a light-skinned black woman was walking away from the house. She was arguing with the players, then Mostafa said the woman said, "I am going to call the police."

Four of the lacrosse players then got into the cab; Mostafa described them as agitated. He then heard one player say to another, "don't worry, she's just a stripper." He also said, "it look to me like somebody get hurt. But what kind of harm ... I have no idea."

"I heard her talking back to the guys" in what was apparently not a friendly conversation, he said.

The woman began to drive away in her car, but suddenly stopped and backed up, almost hitting his taxi, Mostafa said.

Four men got into his cab, and they appeared to be drunk, Mostafa said.

One of them said, "She's just a stripper," Mostafa said

After dropping off Seligmann, Mostafa said, he returned to the house to pick up four more passengers. When he arrived, it looked like a party was breaking up, with people crowded on both sides of the street.

While waiting for the men whom he would later drive to a nearby gas station, the Sudan-born driver saw a woman walking through a crowd of men toward a car, and heard someone say, "She just a stripper. She's going to call the police."

Mostafa said the woman, wearing jeans and a sweater, appeared to exchange words with some people in the crowd before getting into the driver's side of a car.

"She looked, like, mad," he said. "In her face, the way she walked, the way she talked, she looked like mad."

When asked by a reporter with CBS News if he had a feeling that something had gone wrong or someone had been hurt at the party that night, Mostafa said, "Yeah, I got the feeling something had gone wrong."

Thanks for that. My provoking the AV detractors to overstate their case makes me an AV supporter? I would say I have a bias against AV detractors, not because I believe the accuser to be telling the truth, but because I believe many of them do not.

Now the Defense has Wilson (the LE?) declaring he was aware of the AV changing her story from 0, 3, and 5.

Looks to me like the local press supports Cheshire's version, not Wilson's.

After the exchange, Wilson told Eyewitness News that he personally read all 1814 pages of discovery documents and has not read that the alleged victim changed her version of the story.

He claims to have read that page of discovery

"We only do toxicology if the victim's story is highly suspicious," said Emilia Frederick, a sexual assault nurse examiner at UNC Hospitals. Frederick said toxicology tests are typically done when a rape victim cannot remember certain events.

IMHO:

I agree that McDevitt and Seligmann look similar, but twins?

Me? Not so much.

Carter from Court TV: Reade Seligmann bears a striking resemblance to more than one other Duke lacrosse team member. Here is a comparison with #44.

bertrand wrote @ Mon, 24 Apr 2006, 11:42 am EDT: Tony McDevitt who was present at the party after Seligman left looks eerily like Seligman.

Chris Lawrence What's weird is that Tony McDevitt, a junior Duke lacrosse player who has a striking resemblance to the indicted Reade Seligmann, lives smack dab in that area code according to this site. McDevitt, along with four teammates, was on the season watchlist for the nation's top collegiate player before the incident.

V a n c e H o l m e s . c o m They All Look Alike We've seen number 45 -- Reade Seligmann. Now meet number 44 -- Tony McDevitt. He was at the infamous March 13 party, and he's a dead ringer for 45.

I patent on court tv She said #4 "looked like" ____, but she wasn't sure. That is not an ID. Futhermore we know at last two players on the team look very similar to Seligmann, including Tony McDevitt. If #4 was one of those two kids, her hesitation can easily be explained away.

Junior goalie Dan Loftus and his brother, Chris, a sophomore attackman, grew up in Syosset, Long Island, sons of Barbara and Brian, a retired New York City fireman who worked 36 straight hours at the World Trade Center immediately after the attacks on Sept. 11. "I thought that was the worst day of my life," Brian says. "You want to know something? This is the worst thing." Like most of the parents, the Loftuses had grilled their sons. "How many times did I say to him on the phone? 'Danny, did anything happen?'" Brian Loftus says to Barbara one weekend in May. "I asked him 10 times. He goes, 'No, no, no, no.'" "This is not a time to lie and cover up for your friends!" Barbara remembers chiming in. "Did anything happen?" .... Ken Sauer, another retired New York City fireman, whose son, K.J., was a senior midfielder, spent Sunday at home in East Rockaway, N.Y., trying to figure out how to scrape up the money if his son needed to make bond. He looked into flights to Durham. In a suitcase he packed clothes, toiletries, the deed to his house. He watched the news and waited for the phone to ring. Players' parents, usually dependent on each other for news and support, didn't call each other much that weekend, but word had been passed that the wealthier families would ensure that no player would stay locked up .... "Without a scholarship I couldn't blink an eye at this place," says Carroll, another retired fireman's son from Long Island, who's the first in his family to go to college. .... "They are ruined for life," says Nina Zash of the three defendants, and that's the reason her son feels no relief. "It was a lottery drawing," Matt Zash says. "We know it could be any one of us."

And as to the toxicology tests, I think I know why they weren't done.

Her story IS highly suspicious. She certainly couldn't remember certain events with any clarity. They didn't do a tox screen because someone at DUMC examined the accuser, listened to her story, reviewed the evidence thus far, and decided it wasn't worth the money because there wasn't any rape.

It's hard to get a true representation of what someone looks like from pictures versus "in real life."

what about mcdevitt?

When responding to a request from Evans' lawyers, Nifong said that the legal team had asked for something that didn't exist. "People who don't do a lot of rape cases probably don't know that," Nifong said.

It is pretty clear that you have spent much time reading about this case and seem to have a good memory of the 'surrounding chatter'. For the sake of discussion do you have a theory of the event which could be presented to a jury that would put Seligmann in play, even if it meant throwing out certain parts of the record?

12:00:12 a.m. The first picture of the dancers. The accuser, wearing pink and white lace lingerie, is lying face down on the floor.

As for rank speculation on what a video might show of the entire evenings events, I really don't know. If pressed I would say that the worst thing that probably occured would have been something more suited to a civil tort involving breach of contract.

What if they took the money back? The first search warrant lists robbery as one of the offenses.

As to whether someone went through her purse and took back some or all of the $400, could be, but we will never know. Actually, if that occured it would jive more with what the lax players said occured and could be the root of the argument which ended in name calling outside the house. Four hundred bucks for a dancer that passes out on your floor after four minutes is a bit irksome.

Like most of the parents, the Loftuses had grilled their sons. "How many times did I say to him on the phone? 'Danny, did anything happen?'" Brian Loftus says to Barbara one weekend in May. "I asked him 10 times. He goes, 'No, no, no, no.'"

"This is not a time to lie and cover up for your friends!" Barbara remembers chiming in. "Did anything happen?"

If you want to push the stealing angle, I'd disagree about who truly stole from who here. Not that this is really germane to the case, but if a contractor takes my money for a service, then fails to provide the service, in most cases they have to give it back.

As I posted earlier, the N&O reporter ( who was there -- IMHO was NOT!)

Nobody disputes the women did not complete what they were hired to do.

Patsy Ramsey, whose 6-year-old daughter JonBenet's 1996 slaying has never been solved, died Saturday of cancer, her lawyer said. She was 49.

Is it technically a crime? I'm not certain one way or the other. Let's say I'm a ticket scalper outside a stadium and I offer you two tickets for $400. You give me the money and then I give you two fake tickets. You then reach into my pocket and liberate the $400. Are you guilty of robbery?

But can you take it out of his wallet when he isn't looking?

There are legal avenues for recourse.

No, but could you collect it from the floor if it had been scattered about and no longer inside the purse?

That's funny, IMHO. Legal recourse for getting your money back from a couple of escorts/prostitutes!

As to why he would lie.... Though I have opinions, in general, why the DA's office is behaving in the manner that it has is a mystery to me. Why his outburst in the first place?

I agree. That may be the problem with photo line ups.

You don't think the accuser could have mistaken Seligmann for McDevitt?

I think his outburst was a result of the frustration over the fact that the defense can have a spin-o-rama with the discovery and the prosecution can not.

If you want to push the stealing angle, I'd disagree about who truly stole from who here. Not that this is really germane to the case, but if a contractor takes my money for a service, then fails to provide the service, in most cases they have to give it back. Nobody disputes the women did not complete what they were hired to do. Walking of the job because you don't like what someone said doesn't absolve you of this responsibility.

Naturally this additional evidence would not be of the form "VS means x% chance of rape" since you cannot compute such a probability based on VS alone.

1. As a concrete example of the reasoning involved suppose you estimate prior to examining the AV that there is a 50% chance a rape occurred. Suppose further you estimate that there was a 50% chance VS was already present before the alleged rape occurred (independent of whether or not the rape occurred) and a 80% chance that a rape will produce VS if not already present. Then VS will be found 70% of time (90%,50% for the rape, no-rape cases which we are assuming are equally likely). If VS is found then you should raise your estimate that rape occurred to 64% (9/14). Conversely if VS is not found you should lower your estimate that a rape occurred to 17% (1/6).

The women did not show them fake ....oh, maybe they did, nevermind.... There are legal avenues for recourse.

Wilson's outburst is that of an errant sycophant. I suspect if you're working in the Durham DA's office these days, you're either espousing the party line or you're keeping your mouth shut.