home

Duke Lacrosse Player Convicted in D.C. Assault Case

After Colin Finnerty was named in the Duke Lacrosse case, prosecutors in D.C. moved to revoke his deferred prosecution and make him stand trial on a misdemeanor assault charge. Finnerty's trial to the court (no jury) concluded today and the judge found him guilty and sentenced him to 6 months probation. The prosecution did not object to the sentence.

One of the victims, Jeffrey Bloxsom, testified that Finnerty pushed him on several occasions during a prolonged confrontation on Georgetown's main drag. Finnerty also threw fake punches that landed within inches of Bloxsom's face and hurled various vulgar homophobic epithets, Bloxsom said.

Bayly said he believed Bloxsom was guilty of "menacing" Bloxsom as part of an assault, even though it was one of Finnerty's friends who admitted punching Bloxsom at the conclusion of the confrontation, giving him a bloody lip.

Finnerty's lawyer, who said he will appeal the conviction, had this to say:

"Judge Bayly found Collin Finnerty guilty of simple assault because he threw fake punches ... and because he scared one of the complaining witnesses in the case. That's it."

The Judge decided Bloxom was more credible:

The judge said he found Bloxsom's account of the fight more credible than those offered by Finnerty's friends, who testified that the first blows in the fight were struck against Finnerty by Bloxsom's friend.

Among those who testified for Finnerty was former Duke lacrosse captain William Gerrish, who was with Finnerty that night. Gerrish said on the stand that he saw Finnerty get punched in the head, even though he had previously told police that he never saw Finnerty get hit. Bayly said he found major inconsistencies in Gerrish's account of the fight.

Finnerty's lawyer also says the verdict should have no bearing on the rape charges in Durham.

< Novak Discloses Role, Not Source in PlameGate | Late Night Music for Bob Novak >
  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    These young men seem like good candidates for some sensitivity training at the very least.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Player Convicted in D.C. Assault (none / 0) (#2)
    by weezie on Tue Jul 11, 2006 at 07:01:27 PM EST
    Well, Newport, I saw you weighed in on the last post. We've missed you. Are you of the opnion that if Colin's misdemeanor gets dragged into a Durham trial, then FA's will be, too? And, btw, the imho-p virus has been rampant on the new forum. Go vote on my poll! Make up a fake name like, HuntingtonBeach...

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Player Convicted in D.C. Assault (none / 0) (#3)
    by wumhenry on Tue Jul 11, 2006 at 07:15:21 PM EST
    IMHO wrote:
    I think it is more serious than previously reported.
    Why does IMHO think so? Mainly because Bloxom, the accuser, testified that Finnerty shouted in his face and called him a fag. IMHO doesn't bother to mention another fact not previously reported: Finnerty never hit anyone! Very sly, IMHO, even for you.

    Finnerty isn't charged in Durham with making racial slurs against the accuser. He's charged with rape. I doubt this conviction would be admissible.

    What if the defense produces witnesses to vouch for Finnerty's good character like they did in the D.C. trial?
    McCool said the character witnesses "show the character of the man," but Bayly disagreed in part.
    "When he is sober," Bayly said. "Do you think your character witnesses knew your client was using a fake ID to get into bars? People's character changes when they're drunk."


    I doubt the lawyers in N.C. would call character witnesses. According to the N.C. rules of evidence, character witnesses can be called to testifyonly for the person's reputation for truthfulness. It's not admissible in the prosecution's case in chief. Interestingly, though, N.C. does allow impeachment by prior conviction of certain misdemeanors. Even if this conviction fit the definition, if Finnerty didn't testify, they couldn't raise it.

    Looks like the prior conviction is not admissible in N.C. Link It is interesting how N.C. Rule 609 differs from its federal counterpart F. R. Crim. Evid. 609 which only permits impeachment with crimes involving dishonesty. The N.C. rule is not so limited, any prior convictions are admissible if within the rule. The DC conviction likely will still not come in under the N.C. rule because the maximum sentence was 6 months. Of course, if Finnerty was to offer character evidence of his character for non-violence then the prior conviction would be admissible to impeach that testimony. He would be a fool to do that. Finally, the prior assault conviction will never be admissible as character evidence to prove that he acted in conformity with his character under the general rules regarding character evidence.

    wumhenry posted:
    Why does IMHO think so? Mainly because Bloxom, the accuser, testified that Finnerty shouted in his face and called him a fag. IMHO doesn't bother to mention another fact not previously reported: Finnerty never hit anyone! Very sly, IMHO, even for you.
    Finnerty never hit anyone? That's not what was testified to at trial. Newsday Washington Bureau
    Herndon testified Finnerty punched and kicked him, although he suffered no significant injuries.


    Weezie, under the N.C. rules I don't think there is any question that the FA's prior convictions come in because those rules do not require the prior conviction to involve lying or other dishonesty. Interestingly enough, under the federal rules of evidence they probably would not be admissible to impeach the FA's credibility because they were pled down to misdemeanors and because they do not involve dishonesty or false statement. Although, I suppose one could argue that theft of a taxi involves dishonesty, so maybe it would get in there too. Robert's prior embezzlement conviction is the gold standard for impeachment with convictions for crimes involving dishonesty. It comes in under all evidence codes.

    Then there is this from the AP:
    Prosecutors said Finnerty instigated an attack on two Georgetown bar patrons in the early morning of Nov. 5. One victim, Jeffrey Bloxsom, testified that Finnerty pushed him, threw fake punches that landed within inches of his face and hurled homophobic epithets.
    Superior Court Judge John Bayly said he believed Finnerty was guilty of "menacing" Bloxsom as part of an assault, though it was a friend of Finnerty who admitted punching Bloxsom. Finnerty's two friends admitted criminal responsibility but avoided prosecution under a special program for first-time offenders.
    Never touched the guy.

    He never touched Bloxsom. He did punch Herndon. The only question is if Herndon punched him first (Herndon says no, Finnerty says yes).

    But he wasn't charged with assaulting Herndon, was he? Only Bloxsom, or do I have that wrong? If so, though, while the conviction for simple assault (takes me back to law school, differences between an assault and a battery) may come in to impeach Finnerty if he takes the stand, the defense attorneys can make it clear that he was not convicted for actually striking someone, for a "vicious beating" as imho likes to call it, just for "menacing." I think a jury would find that a mitigating factor, although the overal picture of what the judge found as fact does not put CF in a favorable light. Of course, if his alibi stands up as indicated by his parents, it shouldn't have that much of an impact as he might not even take the stand.

    I was responding to this by wumhenry:
    IMHO doesn't bother to mention another fact not previously reported: Finnerty never hit anyone! Very sly, IMHO, even for you.


    SharonInJax posted:
    for a "vicious beating" as imho likes to call it,
    Source?

    I'm not sure if he was charged with assaulting Herndon. Does it matter? I don't think we are arguing the conviction. I think we are arguing what the events of that night teach us about CF. If he hit Herndon, that says something regardless of what he was charged with. Of course, getting in a fight proves nothing about a seperate rape case.

    Finnerty was rightly convicted. The fake punches he threw at Bluxom could not be excused. Assault does not require touching. Finnerty's actions satisfy all classic definitions of assault. He forfeited his right to claim self defense as to grabbing or punching by Herndon by throwing fake punches at Bluxom before the grabbing occured. His lawyer should have taken a plea to avoid the public spectacle. Another bad tactical move on the part of Finnerty's lawyers, especially since it was being tried to the court and not a jury where he could have hoped for a hold out or two. It really was pathetic that this whole thing happened and this Bluxom was such a pathetic individual to not just let it go. Finnerty didn't even get his money's worth. Finnerty has to be the world's unluckiest guy. First, he gets caught and charged on a bar fight in Georgetown, and then he gets put up on false charges in Durham (in all likelihood based on the bar fight) and gets his diversion revoked. This case doesn't say a whole lot for the DC U.S. attorney's office who saw fit to go forward with this case (at Nifong's urging, no doubt) but couldn't see fit to indict a congresswoman who strikes a cop. Amazing. Probably doesn't matter a whole lot in the long run because the assault conviction is going to get expunged.

    Newport posted:
    His lawyer should have taken a plea to avoid the public spectacle. Another bad tactical move on the part of Finnerty's lawyers, especially since it was being tried to the court and not a jury where he could have hoped for a hold out or two.
    I agree. Newport posted:
    This case doesn't say a whole lot for the DC U.S. attorney's office who saw fit to go forward with this case (at Nifong's urging, no doubt)
    Source?

    noname posted:
    He never touched Bloxsom. He did punch Herndon. The only question is if Herndon punched him first (Herndon says no, Finnerty says yes).
    Finnerty didn't say anything.

    Finnerty wasn't charged with assault of Herndon. He was convicted of assault of Bluxom because of the threatening fake punches. My source for Nifong talking to the U.S. attorney is what I have read here, I think Photios's previous postings.

    My source for Nifong talking to the U.S. attorney is what I have read here, I think Photios's previous postings.
    Did Photios have a source?

    Upon further review, simple assault under North Carolina law is classed as a type 1 or 2 misdemeanor. Under N.C. Rule of Evidence 609, the simple assault conviction from DC may be used to impeach Finnerty's credibility if he choses to testify. I was originally hoping that the assault might be an unclassified misdemeanor under Rule 609 and hence inadmissible because it carried a potential jail term of less than 6 months. North Carolina cases interpreting Rule 609 have said that unclassified misdemeanors like DWI are only admissible is they carry a potential sentence of more than 6 months. Alas, this is not the case, assault is a class 1 or 2 misdemeanor. This is unfortunate. Finnerty may need to testify as to his alibi.

    Sorry, forget to include the link re N.C. statutory definition of assault. Here

    What is really interesting about this question of impeachment by prior conviction is that North Carolina has this really weird rule of evidence that does not require misdemeanor convictions to involve dishonesty or the like before they can be used to impeach credibility. It cuts both ways in this case, however, as the FA's prior misdemeanors are coming in along with Finnerty's assault conviction. I wonder about Evan's noise conviction, does it come in too? Probably, everything goes in N.C., but I'm too tired to look it up.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Player Convicted in D.C. Assault (none / 0) (#24)
    by january on Tue Jul 11, 2006 at 11:40:41 PM EST
    weezie, I'd love to vote in your poll over on the Dark Side, but can't figure out how. (I'm being really picky about what I read over there, so that may be a factor.) Do enlighten me! Newport: welcome back!

    I wonder if Finnerty and his parents realize that him being seen with so much as one beer could literally get him killed. He should move to Mexico for the next 6 months. That's what I would do anyway, find a nice little hacienda by the sea and sit back, brush off my shoulders, grow a mustache and really long hair, and pound cervezas all day.

    Oh, and before I sign off for the night, you know why I think Reade Selligman got picked, you know the heavy set one? He got picked because the Durham police, like certain trollish posters on this board, were very very suspicious of the captains leaving Selligman off the list of party attendees. They had a picture of Seligman at the party and their evil genius brains said, "ah, ha," he must be the guilty one. Thus, he got picked. Evans is easy. They had a fingernail from his trashcan with a DNA sample that could not exclude Evans. Maybe the "special towel" factored in here as well. I'm still working on where the fake mustache came from. That one has been keeping me awake at night. One other thought, if you look back at Nifong's public statements on the case, the one thing that really jumps out is his tremendous emphasis on the FA acting in a manner consistent with a traumatic event at Duke hospital. He must have made that point 20 times. This really is the sole basis for him bringing this case as far as I can tell. It is why he "believes" her. The ESPN source Lora keeps bringing up reported that the FA was screaming and hollering. What caused that? I think it was the combination of flexeril as pointed out by Photios in his insightful post, and the fact that Robert's really did steal her money. The FA probably did have a lot of money on her and some of it probably was owed to her pimps. Claim rape to cover with the pimps or escort agency for the stolen money? The owner of one of the escort agencies is supposedly a really bad man. Has this been investigated? Of course not. Did Robert's deposit money between 12:53 and 1:22 am as the FA claimed to the initial police responders? Who knows, but someone ought to be checking it out. Where are the defense subpoenas for Robert's deposit activity on the night in question. Where is the investigation into whether the escort agencies had been violent with their women in the past?

    Newport
    I wonder if Finnerty and his parents realize that him being seen with so much as one beer could literally get him killed. He should move to Mexico for the next 6 months.
    Moving to Mexico (or Canada) won't help. By DC rules, being falsely accused of anything is enough to constitute probation violation, and alibis against the false accusation don't count. Bayly will be reading Wonkette daily.

    Newport Your hypotheses about why Nifong picked the three he did are very plausible. As for this
    I'm still working on where the fake mustache came from.
    I've read that before the previous line-ups Precious had been read some general instructions including a line about keeping in mind that the suspect's appearance may have been changed by, among other things, shaving off a mustache. She probably remembered this, didn't realize it was just boilerplate, and took it to be a specific instruction to say something about a mustache. Admittedly, this doesn't explain why it was Evans who got picked as the mustache-wearer.

    Newport posted:
    I wonder if Finnerty and his parents realize that him being seen with so much as one beer could literally get him killed. He should move to Mexico for the next 6 months. That's what I would do anyway, find a nice little hacienda by the sea and sit back, brush off my shoulders, grow a mustache and really long hair, and pound cervezas all day.
    Or there's always taking on the hardship of not drinking a beer for six months.

    Newport posted:
    Oh, and before I sign off for the night, you know why I think Reade Selligman got picked, you know the heavy set one? He got picked because the Durham police, like certain trollish posters on this board, were very very suspicious of the captains leaving Selligman off the list of party attendees. They had a picture of Seligman at the party and their evil genius brains said, "ah, ha," he must be the guilty one. Thus, he got picked.
    The prosecution had seen a photo of Seligmann at the party before April 4th? Source?

    immie, How's the summer sabbitical going?

    I'm on an extended sabbatical, the summer is not long enough to keep you company at here at Talk Left.

    Apparently, it's just a day for news in this case. A reporter from the N&O has seen a copy of the accuser's phone records from the night in question, and it narrows Nifong's timeline even more. The accuser received two calls from her "agency" at 11:33 and 11:36 pm, the second one lasting until 11:39. That now becomes the earliest time she arrived. She then makes a call to another escort service at 12:26 am. Looking for more employment that evening, perhaps? Then there's this gem at the end of the article:
    There is nothing in evidence reviewed by The N&O or filed in court to indicate that Durham police investigated the call made at 12:26 a.m.
    Just who is running this investigation? Barney Fife?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Player Convicted in D.C. Assault (none / 0) (#34)
    by weezie on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 05:56:14 AM EST
    january, just go to the main page of the forum, look for the "rape accusation" poll thread and fire away. No need to comment even. Newport,mik and photios the picture line-up idea that FA felt compelled to be a good little faker by mentioning a moustache is smooth. And is it only the prosecution that can supoena bank records? To see if Kim was at an atm during the timeline? Again, forgive the legal ignorance.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Player Convicted in D.C. Assault (none / 0) (#35)
    by peacrevol on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 06:39:14 AM EST
    why does something like that even get to court. it's not that big of a deal. a couple of groups of guys went out, got drunk talked some $&1t and one dude got punched...happens all the time. personally, i think the judge should have just sent everybody home and told them not to act like such a bunch of p***ies. end of story. no probation, no fines, just a stern 'dont come back to the judicial system looking for a remedy of such an insignificant problem'.

    weezie:
    And is it only the prosecution that can supoena bank records?
    I don't think so. The attorneys for Seligmann got the ATM photos through a private investigator. I don't know if they could get Kim's account records, per se, but maybe the pics from the ATM? Oh, and good luck to Kim if she deposited a large amount of cash in an ATM. I once had around $100 ripped off that way. I think the banks discourage it. They would rather you use the little zipper bags with the lock in the night depository. Can't you just see Kim now -- putting her cash in one of those zipper bags and putting it in the night deposit box?

    I said it over at the imholand board and I'll say it here. Finnerty should get a little counseling, get a prescription for prozac and stay away from anywhere that serves alcohol. Maybe volunteer someplace for the next six months. The DC incident doesn't prove the depths of his character, but he's been living in a jock culture and maybe he's been embracing the worst of testosteroninity. Or is that testosteronety? Anyway, barfights are good for country songs and dentists but not necessarily good for self-enlightenment. Like I also said over there, wouldn't he make a great choice to pin a rape charge on? Too bad he was at the Cosmic Cantina.

    Is it too late for Nifong to charge Roberts with slapping someone at the party?

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Player Convicted in D.C. Assault (none / 0) (#39)
    by january on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 07:31:44 AM EST
    Thanks, weezie. I found it and voted.

    The N&O article says that there is no evidence in the discovery that they reviewed saying that the police investigated the 12:26 a.m. call. Think about it. That is right in the middle of the time period when the alleged gang rape could have possibly occurred. And the police haven't investigated it? This is unspeakable. Whenever Nifong sticks his head out of his office there should be someone from the media there with a microphone asking him why he hasn't investigated the 12:26 phone call. I wonder if any Nifong enablers can explain that one. I'd also be curious as to the speculation on what the phone call was about. Perhaps a complaint that Kim wanted to split and she wanted to make more money? That would be about the time that that dispute arose between the two dancers, no? Or maybe she was trying to get a ride home because Kim was tired of her sorry act. I think I need a refresher on the timeline, too. Roberts says that she arrived at 11. The AV doesn't get there until approximately 40 minutes later. Does that mean that Roberts had no contact at all with the party until the two of them entered the house a little before midnight? Just sat in her car getting p*ssed waiting for Precious to show? When again was the show supposed to start? Finally, some help here: Is "Centerfold" another name for "Bunny Hole Productions" or is it Roberts' escort service?

    BOP
    Too bad he was at the Cosmic Cantina.
    Has any evidence been released on this point yet? I haven't followed the case for a month or so. Based on the N&O timeline, Seligman's defense is looking VERY strong.

    No evidence of Finnerty's alibi other than his parents saying he has one, though they may be confused to what it is. During an interview the father said Collin saw the dancers come and go and then the mother interjected, "no he didn't see them go, he left early."

    Ha! If he saw them come and go it wouldn't be much of an alibi, would it?

    Finnerty may have been there when Kim arrived and left before the AV got there. Kim got there around 11:00 and it appears the AV didn't arrive until after 11:39.

    Finishing my previous thought. Finnerty may have been there when Kim arrived and left before the AV got there. Kim got there around 11:00 and it appears the AV didn't arrive until after 11:39. After Finnerty left he went to eat and returned at say 12:30. He would then have been there when Kim arrived & left and not been able to be part of a gang rape.

    markyb posted:
    Finnerty may have been there when Kim arrived and left before the AV got there. Kim got there around 11:00 and it appears the AV didn't arrive until after11:39.
    After Finnerty left he went to eat and returned at say 12:30. He would then have been there when Kim arrived & left and not been able to be part of a gang rape.
    That doesn't work well with "he saw them come and go," or "no, he didn't see them go, he left early."

    None of this stuff is being investigated by the DPD because, well the DPD is a small town unprofessional police force. The DPD lacks leadership, doesn't follow it's own procedures and apparently is not interested in finding out the truth when the truth may clear people. No big surprise. A bigger problem is the press down there. You can expect the normal corruption and unprofessionalism in the DPD but you don't expect the lack of any decent investigative reporters. This Neff of the N&O seems like the only reporter down there who is really plugged in on this case, and even he is simply waiting to be spoon fed information. It doesn't appear that any of the reporters get up from their desks to do some digging. Why no stories on the FA's background. Why no interviews with friends and associates? Same with Roberts and the other witnesses. The local press was gung ho to smear the falsely accused when this thing just broke and they did some digging then into the "lacrosse culture." Why no more digging? Too PC to do their job, like imho and the hate mongering racial opportunist gang of 88? Who gave this Neff the telephone log? Had to be the defense. Why doesn't Neff figure out who the 12:26 am phone call went to and what the conversation was about. Nifong's not going to do it. Nifong told the court the phone was irrelevent. Nifong's got his head buried you know where because it wouldn't help his crusade on behalf of Chan Hall of NC Central fame and those similarly situated. So why doesn't Neff get off his ass and start making some calls and doing some leg work to expose the biggest hoax since Tawana Brawley and then write a bunch of exposing articles on the unprofessionalism and criminality of the DPD and the DA's office. He could probably get a Pulizter prize.

    The 12:26 am phone call almost certainly had to be made from Robert's car because shortly thereafter at 12:30 am the FA was on the back porch trying to get back in the house. Has Robert's been asked if the FA made calls from the car trying to line up more gig's to "make more money."

    I'm not going to pile on Finnerty because he has already been unjustly vilified. He's just a kid doing stupid stuff like kids do when they drink. It doesn't excuse the behavior but it does explain the behavior. I can't believe they were stupid enough to get caught. And, I certainly don't like the fact that he was part of a larger group that went after a smaller group. That is not right and the fake punches, totally juvenille. If you have a reason to defend yourself you don't antagonize. I can just see Finnerty in the DC jail when the inevitable question arises: Inmate: Hey kid, I am in here on a triple homicide, what you in here for? CF: Um, I threw fake punches at a guy on the street.

    A minor dust-up did occur in DC, but CF wasn't even convicted of hitting anybody. This is much less damning than I first thought.

    In view of the production of the calls recorded on the FA's phone,I would like to refer the group to a communication by Daddy Precious about the middle of May on Fox TV.Unfortunately I did not take the exact date but it was probably a weekend and immediately after the release of the driver's(BT's) statement. Daddy was very emphatic that his innocent baby(he had no idea that she was into exotic dancing ,never mind prostitution ,despite her front page newspaper interview to that effect) twice called him on the way to the party to ask directions. Why she would not call the escort service or why she would assume that Daddy would be able to provide a Duke address does not yet appear. Moreover,we can now reasonably assume that Precious was not in any way confused about the events of the night in question and felt she would have to account for her recorded calls.Probably with false evidence. Daddy did state in the interview that she arrived at the Duke house about eleven thirty.And further stated that she had been in his presence until about ten forty-five on the fatal evening.He very positively remembered shopping with her around ten p.m. and she drank grapefruit juice with him(and nothing else so help me)before departing for Brian's at about ten forty-five.He had no idea of how she made the considerable distance to her driver's house before she began calling him for directions. Unfortunately,as we know,while Brian likewise leaned toward an earlier timeline(is this Nifong's secret timeline?) of an around eleven thirty arrival,he stumbled badly and had Precious showing off her underwear to him from nine o'clock onwards until they took off. Everyone seems to agree that Precious was expected about eleven and that she received two telephone calls from the boys(the caller is as yet unidentified but was probably Dan)telling her the deal was off if she didn't come quickly.(Strange conduct for rapists).Another obvious question:why didn't she ask directions from her employers on either call coming from the house? The answer is now quite obvious: by May she knew she would have to move the "thirty minute rape" back before the photographs. Her Dad and Brian were willing to go along with this but she stupidly neglected to correlate her time problem with both men at the same time. I will confidently predict that the two early post eleven pm calls (which Daddy remembered receiving) will now be shown as Dukie calls and the two late calls between ll:30 and 11:40 are the real calls to Daddyfor whatever purpose).In other words she arrives,as this gang of three well knew all along , between ll:40 and ll:50.Makes a quick change with Kim and goes into action. There is no room for a rape(with all that fingernail painting) before or after the dance. And BYTW Covergirl is a third booking agency,identical with neither Bunneyhole or Alure.At 12:29 A.M. she was still planning to turn more tricks later in the evening.

    We're having problems with comment registration. I had to turn it off for today. Please use your regular "name" when you comment.

    Anon, is it Centerfold or Cover Girl? Whatever the name of the agency she called at 12:26, wouldn't that indicate that everything was copacetic in her flexeril-addled mind? That no rape had yet occurred? Does anyone have a theory wherein a gang rape occurred by Seligman, Evans and Finnerty and the AV was calling yet another escort service at 12:26? It seems a stretch that she would be calling to report that she was in the process of being raped. 911 would be sufficient, no? I remember earlier there was a theory that the gang rapists had taken her phone from her, but if that were so, did they call another escort service to send yet another unwitting stripper to Hell House for sodomizing? Doesn't seem likely. Thanks for the theory, Anon. Let me think about it for awhile. Regarding Finnerty's location at the time of the alleged gang rape, we'll have to wait until the trial. I don't think his lawyer is going to release anything official. The scuttlebutt is that he was at the Cosmic Cantina. +++ imho's a real piece of work. Notice how she jumps on Finnerty's parents but will bend over backwards to explain an alleged decade-long hoax perpetrated by the AV and her mother to keep her father in the dark about the alleged 1993 rape. I pity the fool. +++ Has Nifong arrested Jakki for anything yet? +++ Has Nifong made any arrests of Centerfold/Cover Girl employees?

    Newport, I hope you didn't think I was piling on Finnerty. In the greater scheme of things, I don't hold public shadow-boxing high on the list of criminal activities. I'm sure he more than anyone else knows he's got to lay low for the duration.

    BIP, no not at all.

    I'm pretty sure the same co-conspirators who were using Seligmann's phone during his rape of the accuser in a brilliant premeditated scheme to give him an alibi also realized that stealing and dialing the accuser's phone during the rape would hurt the accuser's case and benefit their rapist blood-brothers.

    SUO, I seriously thought someone else would be making the claims about the accuser's phone call. WE JUST DON'T KNOW WHO USED THE PHONE. Bob, Nifong hasn't made any arrests at Cover Girl or Centerfold. He hasn't even investigated the call. He doesn't know if the accuser called to report she was being assaulted or called to find out what other "parties" were going on that night. As far as I can tell, they only called Kim's escort service to get her phone number and nothing else. No checking to see if the accuser made calls to them for any reason whatsoever. No finding out about the company's policies about bouncers, ID, payment, ANYTHING. I'm tellin' ya -- they've got Barney Fife in charge.

    Please do not denigrate Barney Fife. Mr. Fife is far more competent than anyone in a position of leadership at the DPD.

    By the way, there's an Op/Ed piece by Wendy McElroy on Fox News about current media skepticism in this case. Most of it's just a rehash, but she brings up Buckley v. Fitzsimmons re: prosecutorial immunity. I haven't finished reading it yet, but the first thing that struck me was the bit about the false testimony from the late Louise Robbins from NORTH CAROLINA. Lawd, I hope she didn't leave any disciples still hanging around Durham.

    The thing about the DC case that I don't understand is how CF & friends were identified/charged. Did the cops show up mid-scuffle and thereby have all the participants in hand? If the DCAV went to the police after the incident to report it, wouldn't CF & friends have been long gone?

    You're probably right about good ol' Barn. He's a trained deputy. They probably have Ernest T. Bass in charge instead.

    SUO, somehow, someway, CF and his friends were literally caught on the spot by the police. How this happened is beyond me, but it did in fact happen.

    SUO: I'm just speculating here. It's been a long time since I've wandered the streets of Georgetown in the early morning hours, but I don't imagine it's changed much. It's very likely a patrolman saw the incident occur, or at least a large part of it. The cops in DC try very hard to keep the touristy areas as safe as possible.

    Thanks guys. The kid is learning some lessons the hard way.

    wow! that was fast!!!!

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Player Convicted in D.C. Assault (none / 0) (#67)
    by weezie on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 03:04:30 PM EST
    So what would be the very first opportunity for the defense to walk into court and request that the case be dismissed entirely or in particular, against Seligmann? When does the weight of the new cell phone call and Seligmann's alibis begin to swing his way?

    FYI, the cops haven't been trying to keep tourist Dc very safe lately, Six more people were attacked on the mall last night. And ths is on the heels of the throat slashing murder in Georgetown last weekend. I wonder if the DPD is on a working field trip to DC.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Player Convicted in D.C. Assault (none / 0) (#69)
    by weezie on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 03:08:39 PM EST
    Sorry mik, not sure how your name ended up on that last post, it was me, weezie. I know you are a far better typist!

    Hey, it's okay, weezie. It looks like strange things are happening here today. I guess things have changed around DC since I was there. Back when I was in college, the drinking age in MD, PA, and VA was 21, but 19 in DC. I remember Wisconsin & M used to be crawling with cops in those days.

    Weezie wrote,
    So what would be the very first opportunity for the defense to walk into court and request that the case be dismissed entirely or in particular, against Seligmann? When does the weight of the new cell phone call and Seligmann's alibis begin to swing his way?
    Apparently, never. Defense can't swing a motion to dismiss under N.C. law. Defense can swing motions to supress the lineups and photo id order. Don't hold your breath. Absent a dramatic turn of events like a recantation, this is going to a Durham jury and there will be a split decision at best. Hung as to Evans, acquital as to Seligman, who knows on Finnerty. Release of the phone records means defense has completed their own investigation into the phone records. They have had a couple of weeks to dig. Either they struck out and are hoping for an assist from the investigative staff of the newspapers or they have what they need from Centerfold and are greasing the skids for release of that info.

    So if the AV had her phone to make call a at 12:26, did she not notice that she had just been raped? If she had her phone and she didn't call 911, then let's move the possible time for a rape to begin at 12:27, unless we have a rape where both Seligmann and the AV are on their own phones. She's on the porch at 12:30? I'm going to have to look at that Skakel case now.

    BIP, among other things like broomsticks, eyes swollen shut, hip knocked out of joint and such, the father told Rita Cosby that the boys took the FA's phone when she was trying to call 911 during the rape. I guess they gave it back to her after the rape so she could call Centerfold to get a new gig. This case is more preposterous every day and it will not stop because there are no checks on a run away prosecutor. All that screaming and hollering in the hospital is all that is needed for a case. Oh, that and deep seated resentment on the part of the DA of Duke and its white athletes. Nifong's willingness to believe this fantastic tale is telling of his attitudes, prejudices, and willingness to assume the worst about Duke white lax players.

    BIP, sorry that last one was from me, I screwed up.

    BIP, Anon: Any behavior at all on the phone is "consistent with" having just been brutally raped, owing to "rape trauma syndrome". Haven't you been told this (several times) by the local experts?

    There's trouble with the log-in (as noted on Talk Left's main page), and she is letting anyone post without logging in (which I for one have found impossible to do). One result, apparently, is that the correct poster's name doesn't appear with postings. The one saying "Posted by Anonymous 5:32" was actually posted by me, Photios, at 7:32.

    to Newport I thought before trial, they can ask for a Motion to Dismiss based on law -i.e, if they get the id's thrown out, then there is no reason to charge them since you need both an accusation and an id to charge I thought after the trial starts, they can ask for a Motion to Dismiss after the DA presents his side on lack of evidence?

    In a rape case, North Carolina requires an accusation and an ID to get to a jury. If the prosecutor establishes those two things the case will get to the jury. If the defense is successful in getting the ID's suppressed prior to trial, an unlikely outcome in my opinion for reasons unrelated to what should happen under the law, then there is still the issue of whether an in court ID would be permitted. The defense would argue that in court ID should not be allowed as an unlawful fruit of an unconstitutional lineup and because the in court id would be unreliable. Whether they would be successful is doubtful as mentioned above. To answer the question, if the defense was successful in getting the id suppressed prior to trial and the in court id suppressed too, then the case would have to be dismissed, but the dismissal would be an outgrowth of the motion to suppress the id's, not a separate motion to dismiss which would rely on evidentiary issues unsuitable for a court to decide -- jury issues.

    Newport wrote:
    ...if you look back at Nifong's public statements on the case, the one thing that really jumps out is his tremendous emphasis on the FA acting in a manner consistent with a traumatic event at Duke hospital. He must have made that point 20 times. This really is the sole basis for him bringing this case as far as I can tell.
    Newport, I absolutely agree with you. In fact, a few weeks ago I considered making a post about this issue, but it was really off-topic from what people were discussing at that time. If you read DA Nifong's early statements, it is clear that the AV's demeanor had a profound effect on the development of this case. If you are a person who believes the rape story is a hoax, how do you explain this behavior? One possibility is a reaction to drugs, like a Flexeril/alcohol combination. Or the emotions could have been a genuine remembrance of a prior incident, such as the AV's allegation of a three-man gang rape when she was a teenager. Also, people can act. A week ago a woman was sentenced to a year in jail for falsely claiming a restaurant served her a dead mouse in her soup. When she supposedly found the mouse, she became so hysterical that people left the establishment.

    Re: Duke Lacrosse Player Convicted in D.C. Assault (none / 0) (#80)
    by weezie on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 05:25:20 PM EST
    Did anyone see Laker Kwame Brown's rape accusation was tossed by the DA out there due to lack of evidence and no signs of forcible intercourse?

    The rape couldn't have happened between 12:26 and 12:30 because this is when the witnesses Bissey and Roberts say the FA attempted to reenter the house. She never got in, because the boys locked her out per Elkstrand and the photo's of the FA on the back porch trying to get in. She was on the porch for like at least a minute looking through for bag and trying to get in before she passed out and fell down the steps. The FA had to have made the 12:26 am phone call from Robert's car or from outside the house as she was attempting to gain reentry. This has been covered extensively here before. Elkstrand's initial account from the boys lines up almost perfectly with Robert's initial story to the cops and Bissey's affidavit. There was only one attempt by Precious to gain reentry and it was unsuccessful because she was locked out at 12:30. The boys had struggled to get the strippers out of the bathroom and they were not about to let Precious back in the house in her intoxicated state. For those who don't believe me compare Elkstrand's statement when the photo's were released with Roberts (initial police statement) and Bissey's statement. They all match up.

    Newport is correct his analysis of the motion to suppress. If the out of court line up is thrown out, the in court ID would be the fruit of the poisonous tree and would be excluded. If there other physical evidence (i.e. DNA), the case could possibly go forward. In this case, even in NC, it would be impossible to proceed without the AV's ID. At the end of the state's case and at the end of the trial, the defense would make a motion for judgement which is the criminal equivilent of the civil procedure motion to dismiss or motion for summary judgment.

    There was only one attempt by Precious to gain reentry and it was unsuccessful because she was locked out at 12:30. The boys had struggled to get the strippers out of the bathroom and they were not about to let Precious back in the house in her intoxicated state. Not according to defense attorney Robert Ekstrand: Newsweek
    The partygoers get nervous about what the women are up to and start slipping money under the door asking them to leave, says Bill Thomas, a lawyer who represents one of the captains. The women go out to the second stripper's car at about 12:20, but the accuser has left her purse behind; she goes back inside to get it, according to Ekstrand. A photo at 12:30 shows the alleged victim standing outside the back door of the house looking down into two bags with what appears to be a smile. She's wearing only her scant red-and-white outfit and one shoe. By the time she realizes she's missing a shoe--a few minutes later--the guys have locked the door to keep her out, say the attorneys.


    OOPS! the first paragraph is a quote by Newport.

    That quote doesn't state that she ever actually got in the house. I don't read it that way. In any event, Robert's only supports one attempted reentry as does Bissey. Now, Roberts may be wrong, and Bissey may have missed the first attempt at reentry and caught only the second, but it doesn't matter in the overall scheme of things here. It amounts to quibbling. Whether there was a first reentry (to get a purse) prior to the second unsuccessful attempt at 12:30 am as documented by photos does not matter because the FA made a phone call at 12:26 am to Centerfold moments before the 12:30 reentry attempt. She could not have been raped before this time (12:26-12:30) for two reasons: 1) no reasonable person would attempt to reenter a house where they had just been violently raped and beaten just minutes before, and 2) no reasonable person would call an escort agency after a rape rather than calling 911. Finally, there is no possibility of a rape after 12:31 am because the FA was documented passing out on the porch and was carried back to the car. CASE DISMISSED FOR THE 100TH TIME.

    Newport posted:
    That quote doesn't state that she ever actually got in the house. I don't read it that way. In any event, Robert's only supports one attempted reentry as does Bissey.
    Newsweek
    The partygoers get nervous about what the women are up to and start slipping money under the door asking them to leave, says Bill Thomas, a lawyer who represents one of the captains. The women go out to the second stripper's car at about 12:20, but the accuser has left her purse behind; she goes back inside to get it, according to Ekstrand. A photo at 12:30 shows the alleged victim standing outside the back door of the house looking down into two bags with what appears to be a smile. She's wearing only her scant red-and-white outfit and one shoe. By the time she realizes she's missing a shoe--a few minutes later--the guys have locked the door to keep her out, say the attorneys.
    It sounds like she retrieved her purse.

    Quiet Before The Storm
    Nifong, though, remains confident in the case, according to Durham Mayor Bill Bell.
    "It would surprise me if he were not to proceed with the trial," Bell, 64, said. He believes Nifong's support in the city - with a population that is 46 percent white and 44 percent black - is steady.
    "I just had a conversation with Mike and he feels strongly about the case," Bell said. "He wants to see it in the court. "
    ...
    Few who know Nifong well believe he'll be deterred by defense lawyers' public attacks on nearly 2,000 pages of evidence released so far, said Kerry Sutton, a Durham lawyer, who represents a player not accused in the case.
    "I spoke with him a couple of days ago, and he is as confident as ever," said Sutton, whose client is Duke lacrosse player Matt Zash, of Massapequa.


    Re: Duke Lacrosse Player Convicted in D.C. Assault (none / 0) (#88)
    by weezie on Wed Jul 12, 2006 at 07:53:32 PM EST
    Pretty nice of Sutton to chat Nifong up after he cursed her out in the courthouse. You lawyers are made of some stern stuff. All's fair, I guess.

    Sickening article. I can only hope that Nifong will soon be the most humiliated man in America.

    Agree, Newport. It would have been nice if Newsday had actually pointed out the weaknesses of the case. By the way, how come humble didn't post this from the article: Mary Sheehan Pollard of the Center for Death Penalty Litigation in Durham, a lawyer with no connection to the Duke case, said the case does appear to be weakened, based on what has been made public. She said she was particularly struck by Nifong's early statements that there was strong medical evidence of assault, evidence that to date hasn't materialized. She said that she, and many others in Durham, initially considered the case to be strong, but are now unsure. "I wonder whether the case is what we thought it was," she said.

    Nice find MarcusCA. That article shows how certain people can fool everyone and become great actors when they need to be. I'm glad you came to the same conclusion about the profound effect the FA's behaviour at the hospital had on Nifong. I feel we have become desensitized to shocking exculpatory evidence in this case. In any other case, if the phone call evidence showed that the AV was on the phone with an escort agency, and not 911, after a rape was alleged to occur, the hue and cry to drop the case would be enormous. Not here -- most already suspected this would be coming. When I first thought about the phone call evidence from the FA's phone I said to myself, what would be the most exculpatory time for the call possible. It certainly would not be 12:15 am or so because then it could be argued that there was still time for a rape between 12:15-30 am. So, what do we get? We get the absolutely most devastating to the prosecution time for the call -- 12:26 am, effectively negatating any possible argument for a rape, yet here we are. Is there any possible more exculpatory time for the call? I don't think so. We'll see what happens in the next few days as the press picks up on this latest bombshell.

    Here's the true story on the Finnerty case. According to his codefendants, Finnerty didn't even throw any fake punches. Why would this judge believe Bluxom over the other two participants? Now I see why the lawyer tried the case. How is it that none of the news stories posted here mentioned that the two codefendants testified and offered testimony that directly conflicted Bluxom on the fake punches. The USA Today reporter on Greta never mentioned this either. This judge had it out for Finnerty based on his statements and his reading of Wonkete (whatever that is). What a bum deal for Finerty. BTW, immie, I guess the codefendants didn't have to take the fifth after all.

    Newport posted;
    BTW, immie, I guess the codefendants didn't have to take the fifth after all.
    No one has to, they chose not to. If they get their deals revoked, Boannano, who admitted punching Bloxsom will "go down" at trial as well. Finnerty's attorney for the rape trial agreed with the judge:
    Cotter said Tuesday's assault conviction was made even more unfortunate by the fact that Finnerty apparently threw only a fake punch at the victim.
    Looks like the witnesses turned their backs at an inopportune time: Convicted in D.C. assault
    After trying unsuccessfully to engage Bloxsom and Herdon in a fistfight, Bonanno said, he and D'Agnes turned to walk away, leaving Finnerty behind. When he looked back, Bonnano said, he saw one of the men hit Finnerty in the back of the head. After rushing to his defense and landing a few blows, he said, they decided to leave.


    You were the one that said they wouldn't testify and that they would take the fifth. I merely pointed out that you didn't know what you were talking about.

    Well that didn't work. Posted by Newport June 30, 2006 07:08 PM imho argued,
    Finnerty's witnesses may be in a position where they have to take the fifth to avoid incriminating themselves.
    why would that be true? Didn't they already plead? How can you take the fifth if you face no consequences for any self incrimination you may provide. Answer: You can't. That's why you can't plead the 5th if you have transactional immunity.

    Look's like the accuser never got her purse. Here is the search warrant.

    Here is what I said:
    I wouldn't underestimate the seriousness of Finnerty's D.C. case. Diversion programs aren't as readily available fo