home

Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums

By Jeralyn, Section Duke Lacrosse
Posted on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 11:42:05 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Okay, here's something new. TalkLeft's Duke Discussion Boards.

I will make new threads on TalkLeft when there is news in the case. TalkLeft is a blog, not a message board. But the number of comments the Duke case has generated even when there is no news has prompted me to seek a solution other than posting a Duke open thread every day or so.

So let's try discussion boards where you can all comment to your heart's delight on any topic related to the case. I've made ten or so general topics and you can make more IF they are not covered by existing topics.

You do have to register, but your registration is self-approving, meaning you, not I, will approve yourself as a member. You can choose to not have your e-mail address posted for anonymity if you'd like. You also don't have to use your real name, but you do have to use the same name once you register.

I will only delete offensive and mean-spirited attacks on other commenters.

This is an experiment. If it doesn't work, or if enough of you aren't interested in participating, we can go back to the current way. Let me know what you think.

< Journalism Training and Open Thread | Who is Cyrus Kar and Why is he Suing Rumsfeld? >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums | 145 comments (145 topical)
    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jul 07, 2006 at 11:00:27 PM EST
    TL, I can't register. I keep getting an error which says "An error ocurred. You are not allowed access to this section."

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jul 07, 2006 at 11:05:36 PM EST
    That's because I posted the link to the administrator. Try This this link. I'll activate those who have accessed so far. Let me know if you still have problems.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Jul 07, 2006 at 11:17:57 PM EST
    Thanks. As Jack Bauer would say... "I'm in."

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 01:19:51 AM EST
    I prefer the old way.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 02:27:33 AM EST
    Me too.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 02:56:30 AM EST
    I prefer the old way as well. The BB structure is too fragmented - we lose (and I hesitate to say this) the sense of "community" and flow we had developed.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 05:16:41 AM EST
    Angelfire, are you out there? I would like to hear about your problems with some of what the defense has done?

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 05:19:43 AM EST
    We are all TalkLeft's guests, and have to abide by her rules. Nonetheless, I am puzzled by some of her comments, which I rightly or wrongly take personally. "The Free Republic board linked above may be a better site for those who do not agree with TalkLeft's mission, which is to protect the rights of those accused of crime." I posted a link for information on a specific topic, the arrests of persons close to Precious, on which posters on that board seemed to have more factual information than anyone here did. I know nothing about the general ideological orientation of the the board, which I don't regularly follow. I don;t see how this goes against the mission "to protect the rights of those accused of crime". I was certainly not suggesting that because these people were arrested they must be guilty of some crime. On the contrary, if there is a crime it is probably subborning perjury, and the person guilty of it is one Michael Nifong. I expect him to be leaning on these people, as he did (unsuccessfully, I take it) on Mr al-Mostafa and (successfully) Ms Pittman aka Roberts to change their stories from true to false. He even seems to want the ex-husband, who otherwise has been amazing supportive of the woman who cuckolded him, to retract his statement to the defense that he did NOT threaten to kill her. (And by the way, how can he be responsible for support payments for children who are the fruit of adultery?) Also, though it was a slow week, it is not quite true there has been no news. Besides the matter of the above-mentioned arrests, which may have occurred earlier but were not widely reported, the rescheduling of the hearings is potentially significant, as is the sudden reappearance of the police chief. His statement that the matters that have been discussed publicly (presumably Precious's inconsistent statements &c.) have been investigated "interntally" (to the DPD) and will be addressed in court, where he expects a conviction, stongly suggest that he has joined the city manager in leaning on Shelton, Sutton, and other first responders to "testilie" and deny in court what is in their written reports. If the old format is ever restored, I may post again as there are further developments. Meanwhile, good-bye to those of you whose posts I have found informative and thought-provoking.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 05:27:57 AM EST
    Photios - I didn't take it that TL was singling you out personally. And thank you for the link. I'd heard that there were tangentially-involved people getting arrested, but that was the first concrete news I'd seen. Very, very odd the way this case is proceeding. Almost seems like something out of Mississippi Burning.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#10)
    by cpinva on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 06:05:50 AM EST
    hmmm, not sure i'd call it a community, more like a fight club. lol photios, i wouldn't worry too much about any "testilying", because this case will never see a jury. ok, going to check out the forum now.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 06:50:11 AM EST
    This case has been described as a "Perfect Storm" for good reason. It is about a lot of things - all of which interplay with the others. The discussion board format may appeal to some, but I think it fragments the case and will limit discussion. I prefer the original format. Putting my money where my mouth is, I just now made a donation to TalkLeft through PayPal.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 07:02:52 AM EST
    As I said it's an experiment. If you prefer it the way it is, we can go back.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#13)
    by MikeDitto on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 07:35:59 AM EST
    Works in FireFox now. :-)

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#14)
    by weezie on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 07:40:52 AM EST
    Well, it's nice and all, works fine and I appreciate the work that went into the new board but it does fragment discussions. Not as cozy. You loose the sense that we are all trapped in a mountain cabin at the height of a winter snow storm and eyeing each other to see who might be the next entree. But, thanks TL, for the gracious welcome.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#15)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 07:43:07 AM EST
    Photios, I was a little puzzled by TalkLeft's comment about her mission. I am concerned about justice and the rights of the accused and I want to know about why so many peripheral actors in this case are being hauled into court. I don't see a conflict. After all, they're supposed to have rights too. This isn't just a mechanism for Nifong's continued employment in Durham.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#16)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 07:44:21 AM EST
    weezie, there's a bear outside trying to get in!

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#17)
    by weezie on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 07:50:42 AM EST
    I just hope we have enough alcohol to weather the storm. Bear steaks in red wine reduction sound good to me.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 08:11:52 AM EST
    Bob in P, Photios, et al, Yeah, what's the deal with the peripheral actors being hauled into court/jail? Photios' link mentioned AV's best friend, boyfriend, and ex-husband. There was also mention of a general round-up of all prostitutes in Durham. ???

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 08:30:04 AM EST
    I will speculate as to the answer: AV has been out of contact with her parents. Surely she must have talked to someone. The rounded-up are the likely suspects, so to speak. Could Nifong be looking for statements from them contradicting AV's story? That would solve a host of problems for Nifong, not mention for others.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#20)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 08:46:40 AM EST
    Wow, fill, that is some speculation! It would represent a dramatic departure from The Nifong's prior full-speed-ahead past. My first impression was, as others in the link stated, that he was seeking to lean on the margin players to obtain a slant in their stories more favorable to a prosecution. How do you think him now getting contradicting testimony from those people would help him?

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#21)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 08:52:14 AM EST
    fillintheblanks, do you mean he's trying to impeach his own "victim" before he gets to trial and see this as a way out of his predicament? As for the general round up of prostitutes in Durham, I think that's the DPD doing its job. I agree with Bob that these individuals have rights, too. I think it's a sorry state of affairs in Durham if Nifong is directing the police to round up several year old warrants for worthless checks. Not quite as bad as hauling the cabbie in for accessory to a theft two years later, but close.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#22)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 08:55:03 AM EST
    Sundance, I think busting the peripherals helps him either way. If, as I speculated above, he were to obtain statements contradicting AV, then he could spin them to drop the case... and potentially win the election. If he's squeezing the peripherals to slant their testimony in AV's direction, then his case for her is stronger, if only marginally. But his main motive may be simply to get them off the street and unavailable to the press or the defense.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#23)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 09:02:34 AM EST
    Would you like it better if I deleted all the topics (except the one for case documents, which is good for quick research) and let you just pick your own?

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#24)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 09:03:29 AM EST
    Thanks for giving it a try. I think you will have more freedom over there once you get used to it.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#25)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 09:30:23 AM EST
    fill - thanks. I keep forgetting that his one true goal is to win the election.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#26)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 10:05:52 AM EST
    I haven't completed registration for the boards yet, but in the meantime, in case anyone has forgotten, here is the link for all the defense motions filed on behalf of Reede Seligmann. I will add it to the "case documents" link list on the other board if I manage to get logged on. www.kirkosborn.com/DukeLacrosseCase.html

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#27)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 10:08:14 AM EST
    TL, thanks for all of your hard work getting the boards set up. To make the transition easier, maybe we could just make a daily thread, like here, instead of breaking the posts out into different catagories. It might help us get our feet wet over there until we figure out how to best utilize it.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#28)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 10:33:10 AM EST
    Good idea, I'll create a topic for today.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#29)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 01:39:12 PM EST
    Photios, not that TL needs any defense, and I'm sure that at least one poster will criticise me for this, but I think TL was just responding to your use of the word "better" in your post. Photios wrote,
    A better board with more factual detail on the arrests
    I could see how this could be taken the wrong way.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#30)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 02:03:39 PM EST
    I thought Photios meant the board corresponding to the second link he provided was better than the board corresponding to first link he provided, in terms of coverage of the particular topic being discussed - the arrest records of the boyfriend, etc. I didn't think his comment had anything to do with the Talk Left blog.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#31)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 02:07:08 PM EST
    Newport said:
    Photios, not that TL needs any defense, and I'm sure that at least one poster will criticise me for this, but I think TL was just responding to your use of the word "better" in your post.
    Photios wrote, A better board with more factual detail on the arrests
    I could see how this could be taken the wrong way.
    Oh! Thanks, Newport. That didn't even occur to me. What I meant, of course, was better than the courttv board I had linked in my immediately preceeding post.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#32)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 02:56:40 PM EST
    Photios, Nifong has endured bombshell after bombshell with regard to the accuser's credibility and the facts of the case. He has filed no response to motions challenging his credibility, the accuser's credibility, and the contrary medical evidence in the more than one month time period since the defense motions were filed revealing the aforementioned flaws in his case. This is very revealing that he has no case. Nifong may have endured the media bombshells alluded to above, but the one "bombshell" even he could not ignore would be that Precious had recanted her "story" to a confidant after the night in question. That was what happened in the Tawana Brawley hoax and that was what put Mr. Brawley's rape allegations to bed. Nifong must know the potential value of Murchison to the defense, not only as to the timing of the sex that produced the only semen recovered from the FA, but as a likely person to which a recantation may have been delivered. Remember, Murchison was in the dark about Precious's sordid alter ego, i.e., student and mother of two by day, Durham prostitute by night. Murchison is a likely person to turn on Precious and deliver to the defense any recantation provided when he undoubtedly confronted Precious upon learning her true identity. Hence, Murchison gets locked up to play keep away and to impress upon Murchison the power of the Great Nifong, and what can happen if he strays away from the prosecution "fold." This shows the tremendous evil of Nifong, if true. All that being said, I have not yet seen anything definative on Murchison's state of incarceration.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#33)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 03:23:42 PM EST
    This link demonstrates how message board formats can start out really, really good, and then quickly degenerate into foolishness without moderation. The blog system we have in place here is a much better method for intelligent discussion, even if said intelligent discussion is occasionally permited to be hijacked by Trolls or the like.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#34)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 05:24:56 PM EST
    Newport, I thought your 3:56 p.m. post was brilliant. Absolutely stunning. Hopefully the national media will start to investigate the theory you posit.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#35)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 06:00:39 PM EST
    Newport, it's not going to be completely unmoderated. I'll be checking it. I can even make one of you moderator should that become desirable. I think that you just don't want to share your email address. If you email me privately, I'll set you up with an account. If you'd like an account but don't want even me to have your email address I'll try to think of another way to register you.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#36)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 06:12:25 PM EST
    No Talk Left, I have no problem with giving you my email address at all. You have been fair with me and with the allegations in this case. While I think the message board you and your talented designer have put together is quite amazing, I just have no desire to participate because of the fragmentation of topics and the likely diversionary tactics that will and already have been employed. I have enjoyed Talk Left greatly because it has hosted, by far, the most intellegent commentary on this case. The other message boards I have viewed do not compare in analysis or content. I feel that the message board system is too conducive to off-topic discussion where Troll-like commentators may feel they have more freedom to appear and hijack otherwise useful discourse. I will post on your blog when new threads appear. Thank you.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#37)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 06:39:43 PM EST
    TL, Since you asked "let me know what you think," I agree mostly with Newport,Shearer, SWchunky. I am an infrequent poster (due to travel), but an addicted reader. My two cents - a dedicated central posting, with maybe one or two threads for links only, and court filings only. Mik said it well.... Thanks to you and this community of posters. Best regards.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#38)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 07:42:45 PM EST
    Ok, keep your comments coming, I'll be making changes consistent with them.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#39)
    by Sunny on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 08:10:31 PM EST
    TL, Lightenup's suggestions pretty much sum it up for me, too. Thanks

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#40)
    by weezie on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 08:48:23 PM EST
    Bravo Newport, the 3:56pm post is a stunner. By Jove, I think you might just have something there!

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#41)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 09:07:05 PM EST
    Thanks, Marcus and Dr. Weezie. I appreciate your kind words. When I am not too busy making personal attacks, and fighting off irrelevant commentary, I can occasionally come up with something useful.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#42)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Jul 08, 2006 at 09:46:55 PM EST
    As only a frequent reader only, I prefer the "old" format. It takes considerable time to stay abreast with comments in the old format, but it's doable. I fear it would be much harder to keep up in the new format. I also agree with comments that the sense of community would be better in this format. While we could all do without a few people from time to time, this site has a very nice group of contributors, very good information and excellent analysis. It would be unfortunate if some of the contributors drifted away.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#43)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jul 09, 2006 at 05:20:11 AM EST
    Newport, your 3:56 post is quite insightful and, seeing his heavy handed (and ham handed) methods with the cab driver, this seems most likely. Especially if he plans to continue with the "due process". But if he was looking for a way out, as Photios suggests, would this be a viable way to accomplish that while still being electable? Or has he put all his election eggs into this one basket?

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#44)
    by ding7777 on Sun Jul 09, 2006 at 06:07:31 AM EST
    Seligmann's attorneys specifically asked for access to the accuser's computer, which they said is believed to be in the possession of the Durham Police Department,
    I wonder who she emailed and what she said

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#45)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jul 09, 2006 at 06:14:31 AM EST
    Sorry if this appears twice. Something didn't seem to work the first time I tried to post it. imho: Thank you for your 3:03 post yesterday afternoon. It was not on my screen when I made by 3:07 post, which is why I did not acknowledge it there. You have correctly understood the relationship between my two earlier posts with links (which were a belated reply to a legitimate query of yours earlier in the day), and what I meant by "better" newport: Let me join the others in saying how intriguing your speculation is. As I take it you acknowledge in your last line, this is one instance where we really "just don't know". Wouldn't it be nice if Durham had a newspaper that had investigative reporters?

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#46)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jul 09, 2006 at 06:42:42 AM EST
    Newport, interesting posts. Do you happen to have a link to the news stories about the boyfriend's arrest? thanks.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#47)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Sun Jul 09, 2006 at 08:00:45 AM EST
    Newport, yes, a good 3:56 post. +++ I too wonder what the DA's IT guy has found on the AV's computer. Dates? Amounts paid? Might be great info to turn over to the IRS as yet another means to continue the farce. A simple confession about making up the story would be something that Nifong couldn't abide. That would be something he might want to sit on. However, it's hard to believe that even he could sit on that kind of evidence, though. If there's any possibility of it coming out and it's discovered that he was hiding it, Nifong would be in deep, deep trouble. Also, has anyone seen anything else in court regarding the AV's phone records for that evening? The last time I recall it being discussed in open court Nifong was saying there was a question of ownership. Maybe I missed some hearing or motion on it. I can't imagine that ownership hasn't been resolved by now. Records of her phone calls must be in the defense's hands anyway. Maybe there's nothing there. Maybe Precious called up someone that night during the period of time she was supposed to have been raped, and that person's knowledge of what was going on would be most illuminating. She may have said something like, "Hey, I can't find the effing money, I think the other stripper ripped me off." Or, "I am so high! Can you get me some more pills?" Or, "I am in the bathroom with three racist white men hurling insults and beating me and raping me after slipping me a mickey." WE JUST DON'T KNOW. +++ I'm not ready to write off the board, but everything right now seems way too diffused there. Random rants by imho on this subject or that. Perhaps if there's a semi-daily general thread where everyone goes, but other places where the side issues can be broken down.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#48)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jul 09, 2006 at 09:27:16 AM EST
    Fahrenam wrote:
    Newport, interesting posts. Do you happen to have a link to the news stories about the boyfriend's arrest? thanks.
    There is quite a bit of information on this web page. Many of the writings at that site appear to be from people who live in North Carolina, and who seem to be aware of what is happening down there. As far as I know, none of this, if it is true, has made it into the mainstream media yet.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#49)
    by weezie on Sun Jul 09, 2006 at 10:30:10 AM EST
    I'm with you Bob. The board discussions take too long to sift through. Why doesn't imho start her own blog site if she feels everyone else is entitled to her opinion?

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#50)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jul 09, 2006 at 02:16:39 PM EST
    You can all post here or at the boards. On days when there is no new post here, it will probably be easier to start a discussion there. Don't forget, you can add your own topics or discussions there. I reduced the number of topics so it is less fragmented. You can post links there without using html and they show up as links. You can also communicate with each other there, even without sharing your e-mail address.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#51)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jul 09, 2006 at 03:08:54 PM EST
    To cib: I came upon this article re the "one in four" rule for rape allegations. I number of "bad" rape cases posited by the author is 25 percent, exactly the number you and I previously discussed. The article is noteworthy because it uses actual data from the innocence project to arrive at the "1 in 4" rule. It appears that more innocent people are sitting in jail based on bad eyewitness ID's than for any other reason. Makes me laugh when I hear people criticise a case because it's "just circumstantial." I'll take a circumstantial case any day over a case that relies solely on eyewitness or earwitness testimony. To Talk Left: Thank you for allowing us to continue to use the blog format. I am very concerned with the travesty of justice that is the "lineup" in this case. I have very briefly reviewed the Federal Constitutional law in this area and found that while the current Constitutional pronouncements in Neil v. Biggers and Manson sound protective of due process, the reality seems to be that due process has no teeth in this area. I have not looked hard but I have not seen a single case that threw out a flawed eyewitness id on due process grounds. My question for you as a criminal defense attorney and expert in eyewitness ID through your work on the DOJ project is have you ever seen a case where only suspects were shown to a witness in a lineup? I know that due to exigent circumstances, that only suspects are shown to a witness in a "show-up," but here I am taking about a lineup, and specifically a photo array lineup. Another way to ask this is have you ever seen a photo array without any fillers at all, where all the photo's presented were of potential suspects. Is the instant lineup so outrageous that it has literally never happened before?

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#52)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jul 09, 2006 at 03:11:33 PM EST
    To cib, here is the article that I forgot to link. Makes Nancy Grace's reliance on the nonexistant 2 percent as laughable as Nancy Grace herself.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#53)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jul 09, 2006 at 03:26:11 PM EST
    To Photios, MarcusCA and others: I reviewed that other board that you posted and there are some very interesting bits of information. Not only has the ex-husband been arrested for domestic violence and failure to pay child support (must be from some other marriage as it would be especially cruel to make him pay child support for children he did not father, although I don't think it is impossible either) but a Durham prostitute having the ex-husband's last name of McNeil has also been picked up. My impression is that every single witness that might have had intimate conversations with the accuser and hence might be a potential source for a accuser recantation is being systematically rounded up. This to me is outrageous on its face and violative of equal protection. There are 35,000 outstanding warrants in Durham county but only those having connections to the accused are being rounded up. Where are the investigative reporters in Durham? Are they waiting to be spoon fed stories by the defense? I can't believe that there exists not a single adventuresome reporter in Durham to sniff out political corruption. Where is Lois Lane when you need her?

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#54)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jul 09, 2006 at 03:43:34 PM EST
    Talk Left: Another problem with the lineup that no one has discussed is that the pool of potential suspects were readily available for viewing by the accuser before she was called in to make the famous 4/4 ID. This 4/4 ID session occured over three weeks after the alleged rape. The accuser could have viewed the Duke Athletic Department web site numerous times after the incident, but before her ID session to provide recollective "memory" to later pick out her alleged attackers. I believe this is just another example of Duke's failure to protect its own students -- the web site photo's should have been taken down immediately to protect the rights of the students. Moreover, the picking of Finnerty is no surprise. His picture was plastered all over the papers in the days after the March 13-14 incident because of his unrelated DC problem.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#55)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jul 09, 2006 at 03:53:09 PM EST
    Errata sheet for my 4:26 post:
    There are 35,000 outstanding warrants in Durham county but only those having connections to the [accused] accuser are being rounded up.
    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#56)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jul 09, 2006 at 03:56:37 PM EST
    newport said:
    Is the instant lineup so outrageous that it has literally never happened before?
    I'd be interested in hearing from TL on this as well. It's also worth remembering that the Durham Police Department does have a formal procedure (adopted in February) requiring use of "filler" photos. To what extent are police departments required to follow their own procedures?

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#57)
    by ding7777 on Sun Jul 09, 2006 at 04:57:31 PM EST
    TalkLeft has a new post, N.C. Senate Comm. Approves Innocence Commission. If a defense lawyer thought the jury was going to convict, would s/he withhold evidence from trial just to get the case heard by a 3 judge panel?

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#59)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jul 09, 2006 at 05:36:39 PM EST
    Now, she described Brett as a white male and chubby. The accuser said Matt was a white male, heavy-set, with short hair. And finally, she described an individual named Adam as a short, white man with rosy cheeks and fluffy, brown hair.
    I wonder how this description fits with the physical description of the three captains she may have talked to at the party, i.e., Matt, Dan/Adam and Bret? How in the world did we go from this to Collin Finnerty, Dave Evans, and Reade Selligman. Why isn't the press all over this?

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#58)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jul 09, 2006 at 07:34:28 PM EST
    imho posted on the forums from
    Hannity & Colmes (Fox News Network) [text deleted, please don't reprint transcripts here] Thanks, imho, I had not seen this before and it hasn't been discussed here. This is SHOCKING news. And, it is directly relevant to the preceeding posts re the flawed eyewitness ID's. This "new information" must have come from the recent 500 page discovery dump that was turned over in response to defense attorney motions for any descriptions of alleged attackers the accused may have given to police in the days after the incident but before the lineups.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#60)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jul 09, 2006 at 07:44:12 PM EST
    Newport, I know you don't want to register for the forums, and I don't mind you posting here, but please don't repeat the discussions going on there over here. It will discourage people from using them. Also, I'm not going to do a new post here until there's news. The forums are far easier for me to moderate and they provide more options for you commenters. Newport, I really wish you'd give them a try. If you start a new topic there on lineups, I'll answer your questions.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#61)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jul 09, 2006 at 07:56:55 PM EST
    Thanks Talk Left, but I'll pass on the forums. I will monitor the discussion from time to time. Thanks to you and this community, best regards.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#62)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jul 09, 2006 at 08:38:39 PM EST
    cpinva posted:
    photios, i wouldn't worry too much about any "testilying", because this case will never see a jury.
    It will go to trial. Barring full release of the evidence (and maybe even with that), there would likely be riots in Durham if it didn't go to trial because too many people have made their mind up WITHOUT seeing ALL of the evidence. A trial is in the best interest of the Defendants if they can show that they couldn't have committed the rapes.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#63)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jul 09, 2006 at 08:56:55 PM EST
    Newport wrote:
    Thanks Talk Left, but I'll pass on the forums. I will monitor the discussion from time to time. Thanks to you and this community, best regards.
    Sorry to see you go Newport. As this TalkLeft discussion developed, you became one of the main reasons I checked this board on such a regular basis. But, believe me, I do understand that there are reasons not to transfer to the new format. Hopefully you will find another forum dedicated to the Duke lacrosse case where you can express your views and demonstrate your keen analytical abilities. People who are following this fiasco would benefit from your presence.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#64)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jul 09, 2006 at 09:14:15 PM EST
    Bob in Pacifica posted:
    I am concerned about justice and the rights of the accused and I want to know about why so many peripheral actors in this case are being hauled into court. I don't see a conflict. After all, they're supposed to have rights too.
    There were arrest warrants out on them. They don't just disappear if they're never served.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#65)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jul 09, 2006 at 09:38:24 PM EST
    Bob In Pacifica posted:
    I too wonder what the DA's IT guy has found on the AV's computer. Dates? Amounts paid? Might be great info to turn over to the IRS as yet another means to continue the farce.
    If she'd only been dancing for 2 months, she wouldn't have been required to claim it on any tax returns as of yet.
    Also, has anyone seen anything else in court regarding the AV's phone records for that evening? The last time I recall it being discussed in open court Nifong was saying there was a question of ownership. Maybe I missed some hearing or motion on it. I can't imagine that ownership hasn't been resolved by now. Records of her phone calls must be in the defense's hands anyway. Maybe there's nothing there.
    Maybe there's something that doesn't help the Defense's case - like a 30-minute period when she was unable to make calls. If the Defense has information about her phone calls, there's no guarantee that they would have turned over the information.
    Maybe Precious called up someone that night during the period of time she was supposed to have been raped, and that person's knowledge of what was going on would be most illuminating.
    Indeed. Maybe she successfully made a call that recorded or relayed a 30-minute assault.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#66)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jul 09, 2006 at 09:58:21 PM EST
    Newport posted:
    This to me is outrageous on its face and violative of equal protection. There are 35,000 outstanding warrants in Durham county but only those having connections to the accused are being rounded up.
    It's not unusual for people to be served with outstanding warrants when they are witnesses to or suspects in other crimes. Chances are, the outstanding warrant is why Kim initially tried to AVOID creating any ties to the alleged crime by claiming that the Accuser was a stranger, seeking help from a grocery store's security guard instead of a police station, and giving a different last name.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#67)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Jul 09, 2006 at 10:17:29 PM EST
    Newport posted:
    Another problem with the lineup that no one has discussed is that the pool of potential suspects were readily available for viewing by the accuser before she was called in to make the famous 4/4 ID. This 4/4 ID session occured over three weeks after the alleged rape.
    AD Joe Alleva had the team roster removed from the Duke lacross website by 3/26/06. That was a week before the 4/4 photo presentation, in which she was shown DIFFERENT photos.
    The accuser could have viewed the Duke Athletic Department web site numerous times after the incident, but before her ID session to provide recollective "memory" to later pick out her alleged attackers.
    HOW, if the DPD had seized her computer? If she looked at the Duke lacrosse website BEFORE that, they will be able to tell.
    I believe this is just another example of Duke's failure to protect its own students -- the web site photo's should have been taken down immediately to protect the rights of the students.
    Duke officials learned of the seriousness of the case on 3/24. Alleva stated that the roster was being removed from the website on 3/25.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#68)
    by wumhenry on Sun Jul 09, 2006 at 10:42:33 PM EST
    A trial is in the best interest of the Defendants if they can show that they couldn't have committed the rapes.
    A split-decision acquittal is the best they can hope for from a local jury. Not a very satisfactory outcome if they're innocent. A far better outcome for them would be for the AV to recant. If she's been lying, that's the least she owes the defendants.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#69)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jul 10, 2006 at 12:29:04 AM EST
    angelfire44 posted:
    I do have many things to add to this discussion that haven't been previously addressed, as well as questions that can possibly be answered by some posters in the Durham area. They are legitimate questions, and the answers may or may not change the opinion I now hold, which is that a rape did indeed occur at that party, and that a trial is indeed needed to sort out the truth. I know that admission of these views will make me extremely unpopular coming right out of the gate, but that's OK. Popularity contests are not my thing.
    I don't think adopting a definite view (a rape did occur or a rape didn't occur) is the best way of evaluating the evidence in cases like this. The problem is, it is too easy to start with a definite view and then force the evidence to fit. I think it is better to take a probabilistic approach, there is a x% chance a rape occured. Then it is possible to adjust x as new evidence appears without having to drastically alter your interpretation of the existing evidence. In my opinion the main pieces of evidence that the AV's accusation is substantially correct are 1. The statement by the AV 2. Nifong's willingness to prosecute The main pieces of evidence that the accusation is not substantially correct are: 1. The extravagent nature (orally, *n*lly and v*g*n*lly) of the accusation. 2. The inherent unlikelihood that three rich white kids would forcibly rape (in such a way) a black woman in the vicinity of many uninvolved witnesses. 3. The inherent unlikelihood that such a forcible rape would not be noticed. 4. The claim by all the potential suspects that no sex occured. 5. The failure of a timely rape exam of the AV to find substantial evidence of forcible rape or even sex. 6. The initial skeptical reaction by Roberts. 7. The evidence that the AV is not a reliable person. 8. The narrow time window in which a rape could have occured. 9. The apparent lack of possibilities for still secret evidence that Nifong could have supporting the allegation. Looking at all of the above I feel there is a less than 1% chance that the allegation is substantially correct. As far as I recall angelfire44 is the only person posting who has expressed a belief that it is more likely than not that the allegation is substantially correct. I am curious as to what angelfire44 believes are the main pieces of evidence bearing on whether the allegation is substantially correct and what probability she would assign to the allegation being substantially correct.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#70)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jul 10, 2006 at 12:48:01 AM EST
    angelfire44 asked:
    My first question, though, is to all... Why the animosity toward imho and the others who disagree with the majority on this board, up to and including actively trying to get at least some of these posters removed? This IS a "discussion" board, is it not? So, is discussion of the Duke case the purpose here, or is this meant to be a choir, with the members preaching the same sermon to each other and singing the same songs? If that's the case, then it serves no purpose.
    Some of the hostility is normal internet flaming. As you may be aware the internet does not seem to be conducive to civil discussion. Also the topic is one that many people find it difficult to be dispassionate about for various reasons. Finally in the case of inmyhumbleopinion, I believe she sometimes baits her opponents in hopes of provoking them into saying something stupid and indefensible that she can then repeat back at them until the end of time.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#71)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jul 10, 2006 at 12:55:57 AM EST
    Angelfire, you are welcome here to post your thoughts and questions regardless of your viewpoint. All I ask is that you do so civilly. If you get attacked, let me know and I will delete the comments attacking you. No one can express their true beliefs amid fears. I won't allow any one poster to belittle you or ridicule you, so long as you don't do the same to them. There is going to be intelligent discussion on TalkLeft, or there will be none at all. So jump in, get your feet wet, and e-mail me if there's a problem.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#72)
    by weezie on Mon Jul 10, 2006 at 05:02:35 AM EST
    Mr P, could FA or any of her family/friends possibly have had the chance to obtain the "WANTED" posters featuring the entire lax team that were heavily circulated on campus and in Durham? Considering how many Durhamites work for Duke, it doesn't seem that far-fetched that she would have had ample time/opportunity to study the photos even if the online source was suspended. And Newport, I'll be watching for your posts.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#73)
    by wumhenry on Mon Jul 10, 2006 at 05:09:22 AM EST
    J.B. Shearer wrote:
    The main pieces of evidence that the accusation is not substantially correct are: .... 2. The inherent unlikelihood that three rich white kids would forcibly rape (in such a way) a black woman in the vicinity of many uninvolved witnesses.
    Not to mention the unlikelihood that three rich white kids would rape a $100-a-trick prostitute within earshot of many uninvolved witnesses.
    3. The inherent unlikelihood that such a forcible rape would not be noticed.
    and the unlikelihood that dozens of uninvolved witnesses would cooperate in a conspiracy of silence instead of ratting to avoid the risk of prosecution for aiding and abetting.
    4. The claim by all the potential suspects that no sex occured.
    Before DNA testing, when the safest strategy, for anyone who was guilty, would've been to admit to admit the sex but allege consent.
    5. The failure of a timely rape exam of the AV to find substantial evidence of forcible rape or even sex.
    by anyone but the accuser's boyfriend.
    6. The initial skeptical reaction by Roberts. 7. The evidence that the AV is not a reliable person. 8. The narrow time window in which a rape could have occured.
    And the fact that at least one of the defendants has an airtight alibi for that time period.
    9. The apparent lack of possibilities for still secret evidence that Nifong could have supporting the allegation.
    There's a few more things worth mentioning, but that'll do for starters.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#74)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jul 10, 2006 at 07:08:59 AM EST
    MrPrecedent:
    If she'd only been dancing for 2 months, she wouldn't have been required to claim it on any tax returns as of yet.
    She'd been dancing for several years accoring to the Brian Taylor interview. It was the one-on-one dates as an outcall escort that she'd only been doing for a couple of months. wumhenry:
    A far better outcome for them would be for the AV to recant. If she's been lying, that's the least she owes the defendants.
    Barring that (since I think it's highly unlikely to happen), the best they can hope for is for the new DA to review the evidence in depth and announce that he doesn't have a strong enough case to warrant prosecution since there's not enough evidence for a conviction beyond reasonable doubt.
    Not to mention the unlikelihood that three rich white kids would rape a $100-a-trick prostitute within earshot of many uninvolved witnesses.
    AND they already paid her $400 for her "services." weezie:
    Considering how many Durhamites work for Duke, it doesn't seem that far-fetched that she would have had ample time/opportunity to study the photos even if the online source was suspended.
    Perhaps even coached? Some people wanted blood.
    And Newport, I'll be watching for your posts.
    Me, too.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#75)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jul 10, 2006 at 07:09:31 AM EST
    weezie asks:
    Mr P, could FA or any of her family/friends possibly have had the chance to obtain the "WANTED" posters featuring the entire lax team that were heavily circulated on campus and in Durham?
    Of course. But what for? She'd already seen many of them at the party. Why would SHE add images of the ones who definitely WEREN'T there to her list of choices?

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#76)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Mon Jul 10, 2006 at 07:50:55 AM EST
    Shearer's list of problems with the prosecution's case was a good starting point.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#77)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jul 10, 2006 at 08:16:03 AM EST
    mik posted:
    She'd been dancing for several years accoring to the Brian Taylor interview. It was the one-on-one dates as an outcall escort that she'd only been doing for a couple of months.
    According to the interview I read, he had just met her two years ago, and had seen her dance at a couple of clubs. I don't know how the clubs work, whether she'd have been hired as an employee or as a self-employed independent contractor.
    Barring that (since I think it's highly unlikely to happen), the best they can hope for is for the new DA to review the evidence in depth and announce that he doesn't have a strong enough case to warrant prosecution since there's not enough evidence for a conviction beyond reasonable doubt.
    That would be interesting, coming from someone with ZERO recent experience in criminal law. He has said that if he runs and wins, he'd ask for a special prosecutor to be appointed to handle the case. If there is video or photo footage of an assault or one of the other players caved, it's likely they'd have plenty to continue as planned. It would be foolish for anyone to expect a new DA to just wave a wand and make the case go away, especially since he'd potentially have riots on his hands in the even the whole thing was just dropped without a major revelation.
    Perhaps even coached? Some people wanted blood.
    There are people on BOTH sides who 'want blood'. It's just as likely that the players have been coached, or will be, once they have to start talking.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#78)
    by inmyhumbleopinion on Mon Jul 10, 2006 at 08:32:20 AM EST
    James B. Shearer posted:
    Finally in the case of inmyhumbleopinion, I believe she sometimes baits her opponents in hopes of provoking them into saying something stupid and indefensible that she can then repeat back at them until the end of time.
    I am to blame for the "stupid and indefensible" comments made by those who make personal attacks againt me? hahaha

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#79)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Mon Jul 10, 2006 at 08:50:48 AM EST
    It would be interesting to find out the AV's history in the sex industry, if only to dispel the image of her as a virginal flower that some of her defenders would like to cling to. If the AV claims that she was only stripping for a couple of months I wouldn't want that to be the last word on the subject. We know that she had auditioned for a strip club the night that she robbed the taxicab and was charged with trying to run over a cop. That was in 2004. And I'm not sure what the importance is for how long her career in stripping, or in prostitution (the one-on-ones) was. The AV had already learned in 2004 that, like other forms of employment, showing up to a job drunk and out of control doesn't work in the stripping industry either. Even just two months of stripping would provide a good view into the world of stripping and the culture surrounding it. Bottom line: The AV's career in the sex industry doesn't have probative value in determining whether or not a rape occurred. I think that attempts by AV enablers to make Precious appear as innocent as possible is more action on the sideline to promote the AV as a victim when the actual evidence shows that she is most likely a false accuser.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#80)
    by january on Mon Jul 10, 2006 at 09:34:30 AM EST
    If there is video or photo footage of an assault or one of the other players caved, it's likely they'd have plenty to continue as planned...
    Mr. P - why do you think anything like this exists?

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#81)
    by weezie on Mon Jul 10, 2006 at 11:13:45 AM EST
    Mr P asks,"Why would SHE add images of the ones who definitely WEREN'T there to her list of choices?" Right, so correct my misunderstanding; are you suggesting that perhaps FA picked men who weren't there after having studied a team roster? I'm not trying to antagonize, just not clear if you are agreeing or disputing.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#82)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jul 10, 2006 at 11:38:52 AM EST
    MrPrecedent:
    If she'd only been dancing for 2 months, she wouldn't have been required to claim it on any tax returns as of yet.
    And
    According to the interview I read, he had just met her two years ago, and had seen her dance at a couple of clubs.
    Which is it? Two months or two years? Actually, it's longer than that. She was auditioning for a job at a strip club when she decided to joyride in a taxi she didn't hire in 2002. That's four years ago where she was seeking employment as an exotic dancer.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#83)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jul 10, 2006 at 11:44:27 AM EST
    january -
    Mr. P - why do you think anything like this exists?
    He doesn't. He just wants to continue to repeat a desperate impossibility that appears to refute prior statement.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#84)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jul 10, 2006 at 12:14:13 PM EST
    It's official. Lewis Cheek will be on the ballot in November. Yes, it does mention that he hasn't yet made up his mind whether or not to run. However, I think it's just a foregone conclusion that he will win.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#85)
    by january on Mon Jul 10, 2006 at 02:58:37 PM EST
    Alas, mik, I fear you are right about Mr. Precedent. Good to hear Mr. Cheek will be on the ballot in November though.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#86)
    by weezie on Mon Jul 10, 2006 at 06:14:49 PM EST
    So that's it?! We've finally been knocked off the front page of TL. Wow, kind of an odd moment...

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#87)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jul 10, 2006 at 06:57:23 PM EST
    You'll be back on the front page as soon as there is news. I've put the links to the forums and the Duke blog page and the Duke archives under the search box on the right side of the front page so you can find it easy. Feel free to email me with news when it happens.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#88)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jul 10, 2006 at 07:20:10 PM EST
    Bob In Pacifica posted:
    Bottom line: The AV's career in the sex industry doesn't have probative value in determining whether or not a rape occurred.
    Of course not. So WHY do you keep bringing "the sex industry" up?

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#89)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jul 10, 2006 at 07:34:40 PM EST
    If there is video or photo footage of an assault or one of the other players caved, it's likely they'd have plenty to continue as planned...
    january posted:
    Mr. P - why do you think anything like this exists?
    I don't necessarily think it DOES exist. I think it COULD exist. We know that the Prosecution turned over 2 videotapes and a CD of photos. What is in them? The Defense is not telling. Surely nobody thinks that 40 young men with two strippers entertaining them only took a total of 19 photos, with most of them being of one of them clothed on the porch and in a car?!? We know that a "confidential source" turned over the McFadyen email. WHO was it? The email was allegedly just sent to the other team members. Is one of them providing OTHER information on the sly?

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#90)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jul 10, 2006 at 07:39:44 PM EST
    weezie posted:
    Mr P asks,"Why would SHE add images of the ones who definitely WEREN'T there to her list of choices?" Right, so correct my misunderstanding; are you suggesting that perhaps FA picked men who weren't there after having studied a team roster? I'm not trying to antagonize, just not clear if you are agreeing or disputing.
    No, I'm asking what SHE would GAIN by studying a team roster if she really was raped (or if she wasn't). Adding 6 members to the 40 you're trying to remember being there doesn't seem like an advantage, either way.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#91)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Jul 10, 2006 at 07:46:36 PM EST
    mik posted:
    Which is it? Two months or two years?
    2 months dancing with an escort service. Brian Taylor MET her 2 years ago, and had seen her dance at clubs since then.
    Actually, it's longer than that. She was auditioning for a job at a strip club when she decided to joyride in a taxi she didn't hire in 2002. That's four years ago where she was seeking employment as an exotic dancer.
    If she didn't get the job, she may not have been doing it then.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#92)
    by january on Mon Jul 10, 2006 at 11:57:28 PM EST
    I don't necessarily think it DOES exist. I think it COULD exist.
    Why? Where? Not in the discovery unless Nifong is planning an illegal trial by entrapment. Do you think Dan Abrams is lying when he says he saw everything? If so, why? He has a lot more to lose by lying than by telling the truth. And why would the defense not be looking for a plea bargain if such evidence exists? You make no sense.
    We know that a "confidential source" turned over the McFadyen email. WHO was it?
    Evans turned over all his e-mail records.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#93)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jul 11, 2006 at 12:45:39 AM EST
    wumhenry posted:
    And the fact that at least one of the defendants has an airtight alibi for that time period.
    I don't think Seligmann's alibi is completely airtight (although it is certainly helpful for his defense). In any case I am considering the evidence in relation to whether a rape occurred at all. Whether the three accused are guilty is a different question. It is fairly common for rape (and other crime) victims to make faulty identifications so I would not consider proof of Seligmann's innocence by itself to be strong evidence that a rape did not occur.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#94)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jul 11, 2006 at 01:27:06 AM EST
    wumhenry posted:
    Not to mention the unlikelihood that three rich white kids would rape a $100-a-trick prostitute within earshot of many uninvolved witnesses.
    I guess you are suggesting they could just have purchased her services. I think there are too many cases of rich thieves for this to be a convincing argument. mik added:
    : AND they already paid her $400 for her "services."
    I don't really see why this is evidence against rape. It provides a possible motive in that they might have been feeling cheated and entitled to sex. My understanding is that if you pay a woman for sex and she refuses to make good and you force her this is legally rape (although perhaps it would be hard to convince a jury to convict). There is also the consideration that some men are more willing to mistreat prostitutes (as compared to "decent" women), either because they feel contempt for them or because they know legal retribution is less likely. Note it is my understanding that the quoted rate for escort services generally does not buy any illegal services although these can often be purchased for an additional negotiated price from the escort. So I don't think the assumption by some posters that the AV's escort dates always involved coitus is justified.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#95)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jul 11, 2006 at 01:36:53 AM EST
    mik posted:
    It's official. Lewis Cheek will be on the ballot in November.
    Yes, it does mention that he hasn't yet made up his mind whether or not to run. However, I think it's just a foregone conclusion that he will win.
    While one would like to think Nifong is sure to lose I am not so sure. Jim Garrison was reelected to a third term as DA in 1969 after pulling stuff that was much worse than what Nifong has done so far. Or did you mean to say Cheek is sure to run not win?

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#96)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jul 11, 2006 at 02:16:00 AM EST
    january posted:
    Why? Where? Not in the discovery unless Nifong is planning an illegal trial by entrapment.
    There were 2 videotapes and a CD of photos included with the first batch of documents that Nifong turned over. Have you seen them? Have you heard a description from someone else who's seen them? There may or may not be anything incriminating in them. We don't know.
    Do you think Dan Abrams is lying when he says he saw everything?
    To my knowledge, he hasn't said he saw 'everything'. He indicated that he saw all the documents that the Defense said the Prosecutor showed the grand jury. Does 'documents' include videos and photos? We don't know.
    If so, why? He has a lot more to lose by lying than by telling the truth.
    If he believes he saw it all, he's not lying. Has he seen the rest of it since then?
    And why would the defense not be looking for a plea bargain if such evidence exists?
    As long as the Defense doesn't release stuff like that, it's not likely to get out anytime soon. I'd guess that they think they have a pretty good chance of getting the charges dropped if they keep up with their current spin, whether the players are innocent or guilty. The job of the Defense attorneys is to get their clients acquitted, not to make sure the public has all the facts.
    Evans turned over all his e-mail records.
    Since we know about that, he's probably not the CONFIDENTIAL source. Or do you think Evans is the one who squealed about the email back on 3/27?

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#97)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Jul 11, 2006 at 02:19:14 AM EST
    James B. Shearer posted:
    I don't think Seligmann's alibi is completely airtight (although it is certainly helpful for his defense). In any case I am considering the evidence in relation to whether a rape occurred at all. Whether the three accused are guilty is a different question. It is fairly common for rape (and other crime) victims to make faulty identifications so I would not consider proof of Seligmann's innocence by itself to be strong evidence that a rape did not occur.
    Agreed.

    Re: Announcing the TalkLeft Duke Lacrosse Forums (none / 0) (#98