NC - Two Duke Lacrosse Players Indicted

[calus_3]

Well if Nifong thought what he was doing would help him keep his job, he's sadly mistaken. In fact, its still my hope that he won't even be able to keep his license to practice law.

Well, like I said earlier in the post, nifrog got a little taste of the Scott Peterson effect. Both thought that the case wouldn't make national headlines. Both thought the case would fade over time.

There really isn't any argument that nifrog heard the report, realized it was his chance to get the black vote in durham and win reelection. He was 15% points behind a woman he fired, which meant he would be gone if he lost re-election. He immediately charged out and told the black community that he wasn't going to let those white boys rape a black girl and get away with it. He hit the projects before the ink was dry on the police report. He refused to meet with defense attorneys (who he knew personally for YEARS) to hear the alibi information that was clear and profound. Clearly, this was a man bent on getting reelected and who had no interest in the truth. Then (I think) he planned to let the case drop bit by bit and delay by delay. He had to make the deal with the manager of the DNA testing outfit to suppress the DNA results because they were received before the election. This is a travesty of the worst kind.

Nifrog will be disbarred if he doesn't quit first and this *advertiser censored* will end up shaking that money maker for her three new pimps. As soon as the charges are dropped, you will see civil lawsuits against Duke, Nifrog, and the lying *advertiser censored* of Babylon.

Cal

 

[Jeana (DP)]

Nifong Faces More Serious Ethics Charges

Raleigh — The North Carolina State Bar Wednesday filed new and more serious ethics charges against Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifong, accusing him of withholding DNA evidence and misrepresenting the truth to the judge in the Duke lacrosse case.

"It almost doesn't get any worse than lying to the judge in terms of ethical violations, but lying to the judge about information that suggests the defendant is innocent is even worse," University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill law professor Joe Kennedy said.

The State Bar revised the ethics complaint it filed in December, adding that Nifong allegedly withheld exculpatory evidence from defense attorneys and lied about it.

Exculpatory evidence is evidence that can negate a defendant's guilt.

Nifong was already scheduled to appear in a hearing for the first charge, which alleges he violated ethics codes for pretrial comments he made early in the case, when he received the amended complaint,

The State Bar cites findings from April 2006 that a second set of DNA tests found excluded all of the Duke University lacrosse players as potential contributors.

It also states that Nifong and Dr. Brian Meehan, the director of DNA Security, which conducted the tests, agreed only to report to defense attorneys positive DNA matches to certain pieces of evidence. The complaint also states that they agreed to knowingly omit DNA matches to other men found on the accuser.

The defense requested at least four different times for Nifong to hand over all the testing.
In court hearings, Nifong told defense attorneys and the judge presiding over the case that he had released all of the evidence that would potentially benefit the defense.

"According to the state bar, they concluded he lied to the court -- not made a mistake," Kennedy said. "Not said something that wasn't a reasonable interpretation of the facts -- the state bar concluded that Mike Nifong lied to the judge in this case."

more at:

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/1177453


The accuser in this case couldn't have taken it to the level its at without Nifong breaking the law on so many levels.

 

[calus_3]

I don't think it is defending the accuser - or denying the damage she has done - to say she seems very troubled. Nor is it defending her false accusation to say some things may have happened at the party that disturbed her further.

(I will repeat what I said at the time: assembling a large crowd of men to drink heavily and leer and jeer at half-naked women is hardly angelic behavior. That doesn't mean the men deserved to be ruined, but let's don't pretend this travesty was visited upon them at random.)

Surely Nifong - whose job it was to evaluate the evidence objectively and who presumably had the leisure to do so - bears a higher responsibility.

No doubt a higher responsiblity for nifrog.

However, this argument is full of holes. It is like saying a woman who goes to a bar in a mini skirt with no panties on deserves to get raped.

While I wouldn't counsel my son to be engaged in the activites of that night, it wasn't illegal and in some people's mind wasn't immoral. So no, their trouble wasn't randomly brought onto them while they were holding a bible study. But that, in no way, makes what that hoochie momma did right. Sorry but that argument is a back handed way of saying that they got what they deserved all because they were doing something you didn't like.

Cal

 

[nanandjim]

I wonder how many rape victims will not come forward because of this "woman" crying rape?...

I have thought about this, too. Women are already reluctant to come forward. I can well imagine that some prosecutors will make true victims jump through many uncomfortable hoops because of this accuser.

 

[nanandjim]

...(I will repeat what I said at the time: assembling a large crowd of men to drink heavily and leer and jeer at half-naked women is hardly angelic behavior...

The photos that I saw taken that night did not show men leering and jeering. They were sitting on couches, presumably watching the "show." It did not appear to me at all that they were an unruly bunch of kids who thought that they were above the law.

 

[angelmom]

OMG, WH-WH-WHAT?

A woman single handedly cursed the lives of these players forever, got them kicked out of school, cancelled the Lacrosse season, got a coach fired, cost the taxpayers of Durham millions to fund the prosecution, cost nifrog his job (soon) all on a patently FALSE CLAIM OF RAPE.

And you don't care if she is indicted? Are you serious?

Am I to take it that you feel it is okay for a woman to cry rape for shame, anger, or revenge for some event? Some punitive action because she was in a bad place at the time? That would be like me saying that if a man encounters a woman in a bar and he had a bad day at work or his wife is ragging on him, it is okay to drag her into the back and just rape the hell out of her.

Staggering? Hopefully you just mispoke.

Cal

No, I did not misspeak (or type as the case may be). I think she did a terrible thing, but I don't think she is the one who ruined these boys' lives. I think there are many cases where a woman (or girl) cries rape and even a half-hearted investigation leads her to recant her story without any of this mess going on.

If the police or the DA's office had made the slightest attempt to confirm her story before leaking it to the media, and if the media had made even the slightest attempt to confirm her story before judging and sentencing these men, then none of this would have happened.

Does she deserve to be indicted for making false allegations? Sure. Is it comparable to raping someone? Not a chance. Is she the main culprit I am worried about? No. And here's why. She will never get away with this again. She can't tell people the sky is blue anymore without them going outside to check. But if the police and the DA's office get away with this, it will just reinforce their beliefs that they are bulletproof, that they can allege anything and ruin anyone's reputation with impunity. They are far more dangerous than some low rent stripper. They are the the ones we should truly fear. She is just a side effect.

 

[Nova]

No doubt a higher responsiblity for nifrog.

However, this argument is full of holes. It is like saying a woman who goes to a bar in a mini skirt with no panties on deserves to get raped.

While I wouldn't counsel my son to be engaged in the activites of that night, it wasn't illegal and in some people's mind wasn't immoral. So no, their trouble wasn't randomly brought onto them while they were holding a bible study. But that, in no way, makes what that hoochie momma did right. Sorry but that argument is a back handed way of saying that they got what they deserved all because they were doing something you didn't like.

Cal

Cal, I said no such thing and you know it. (And for the record, your analogy of the mini-skirted victim is poor: the proper analogy would be if I said, "Well, the boys did something, so they deserve to be convicted.")

The accuser's story is hogwash. Charges should be dropped and should have been long ago. Nobody argues that, at this point.

And you did a great job of summing up Nifong's misuse of his office for political gain. Throw the book at him! Nobody here is arguing that, either.

But we were discussing the relative moral culpability of the victim. And we are left with a disturbing context: a large crowd of (mostly) drunken, relatively well-to-do white men using two, relatively less well-to-do black women for purposes of so-called "entertainment." I don't have to find that admirable (even though, yes, I realize the women agreed to participate).

And we have questions to which we don't know the answer:

What actually happened that night?
What prompted the accuser to fabricate her accusation?
Even if her story has too many holes to be used as credible evidence, is it based in part on some actual events?

But we do know something of the accuser's troubled history.

Add up what we do know and what we do not. I'm not ready to indict the accuser, much as I regret her false accusation.

But I certainly can assign a greater culpability to Nifong's conscious and calculated misuse of his office.

 

[Nova]

The photos that I saw taken that night did not show men leering and jeering. They were sitting on couches, presumably watching the "show." It did not appear to me at all that they were an unruly bunch of kids who thought that they were above the law.

Just going by what I have read (in articles highly critical of the prosecution, BTW). And by my experience, having been a guy in college.

 

[Nova]

Does she deserve to be indicted for making false allegations? Sure. Is it comparable to raping someone? Not a chance. Is she the main culprit I am worried about? No. And here's why. She will never get away with this again. She can't tell people the sky is blue anymore without them going outside to check. But if the police and the DA's office get away with this, it will just reinforce their beliefs that they are bulletproof, that they can allege anything and ruin anyone's reputation with impunity. They are far more dangerous than some low rent stripper. They are the the ones we should truly fear. She is just a side effect.

Very well put, angelmom. I still have to know more before I agree to prosecute the accuser, but you are absolutely right about who is "dangerous" in the future.

 

[Nova]

If I were a black resident of Durham and reading this thread, I'd be thinking:

"The accuser was wrong and the prosecutor should be charged.

But a little perspective is in order here. It wasn't too many years ago that if the races of the accuser and defendants had been reversed, the men would have been lynched long before anyone investigated the allegation.

That doesn't make what happened to them in this case right, but it's something we should keep in mind."

 

[southcitymom]

No, I did not misspeak (or type as the case may be). I think she did a terrible thing, but I don't think she is the one who ruined these boys' lives. I think there are many cases where a woman (or girl) cries rape and even a half-hearted investigation leads her to recant her story without any of this mess going on.

If the police or the DA's office had made the slightest attempt to confirm her story before leaking it to the media, and if the media had made even the slightest attempt to confirm her story before judging and sentencing these men, then none of this would have happened.

Does she deserve to be indicted for making false allegations? Sure. Is it comparable to raping someone? Not a chance. Is she the main culprit I am worried about? No. And here's why. She will never get away with this again. She can't tell people the sky is blue anymore without them going outside to check. But if the police and the DA's office get away with this, it will just reinforce their beliefs that they are bulletproof, that they can allege anything and ruin anyone's reputation with impunity. They are far more dangerous than some low rent stripper. They are the the ones we should truly fear. She is just a side effect.

Excellent post, angelmom, though I am not entirely sure the girl should be indicted - maybe punished in some way. As you statedly so eloquently - the slightest investigation into the story of this, IIRC, drunk woman would have proved it false and she would have recanted.

 

[Jeana (DP)]

I believe the accuser is responsible for making false accusations, the entire case was facilitated by a prosecutor with a personal agenda. Had it not been for this "agenda," I don't think things would have progressed to the level that they have. The accuser has profitted from her lies, not to mention the hundreds of hours of manpower wasted. While I don't want to see her in jail or anything like that, it should be made clear to the public that this sort of thing cannot be tolerated.

 

[Nova]

I believe the accuser is responsible for making false accusations, the entire case was facilitated by a prosecutor with a personal agenda. Had it not been for this "agenda," I don't think things would have progressed to the level that they have. The accuser has profited from her lies, not to mention the hundreds of hours of manpower wasted. While I don't want to see her in jail or anything like that, it should be made clear to the public that this sort of thing cannot be tolerated.

Well put, Jeana.

(To anyone who thinks this post seems to contradict my earlier posts, let me point out I never said the accuser was blameless. I'm just not ready to string her up, particularly when we still don't know what may have happened that night.)

 

[nanandjim]

I believe the accuser is responsible for making false accusations, the entire case was facilitated by a prosecutor with a personal agenda. Had it not been for this "agenda," I don't think things would have progressed to the level that they have. The accuser has profitted from her lies, not to mention the hundreds of hours of manpower wasted. While I don't want to see her in jail or anything like that, it should be made clear to the public that this sort of thing cannot be tolerated.

Just like the "Runaway Bride" and others who have made false accusations, this woman should be made to pay back some of the tax dollars that went into this investigation.

 

[angelmom]

I believe the accuser is responsible for making false accusations, the entire case was facilitated by a prosecutor with a personal agenda. Had it not been for this "agenda," I don't think things would have progressed to the level that they have. The accuser has profitted from her lies, not to mention the hundreds of hours of manpower wasted. While I don't want to see her in jail or anything like that, it should be made clear to the public that this sort of thing cannot be tolerated.

I do agree that she should be held responsible in some way...in the same way that others who file false charges would be. Not more b/c of the ensuing insanity. Not less b/c of the infamy of the case or the desire to sweep it all under the rug. And I agree with Nova that we don't know exactly what happened. The only reason I don't care that much about having her indicted is that I think it is probably exceedingly rare for a woman in a less publicized case to be indicted for such a thing. The humiliation is punishment enough goes the thinking, I guess.

And while she did get the ball rolling on the manpower wasted, and she may have profited (did she ever get that tuition from Jesse Jackson?) in some way, I still would venture to say that under NORMAL procedure none of that would have happened.

If any investigation had been done before the pressers and Today show appearances, if Nifong hadn't been flat out lying, if the police hadn't been bullying some poor cab driver, if the media would have checked a few sources, and if the Ivory Tower inhabitants at Duke hadn't been raging against the sports machine, NONE of this would have happened.

This is all about power, and that girl has none. I have nothing to fear from her. In my mind, the lesson to be learned from this case is about what can happen to an innocent person if the powers-that-be decide that they will benefit if you are guilty, and nothing - not an ATM receipt, not a key card, not an eye witness - will convince them that you didn't do it.

People like Nifong scare me to death.

 

[Nova]

Just like the "Runaway Bride" and others who have made false accusations, this woman should be made to pay back some of the tax dollars that went into this investigation.

It wasn't the investigation that was the problem. It was the LACK of investigation and she's already paying for that.

Somebody please enlighten me, but do we know for a fact that her entire accusation was made up out of whole cloth? Or do we just know she was wrong about the identity of at least one man she accused and perhaps some other details?

If you want to talk about a chilling effect on victims coming forward, let's start prosecuting everyone who makes a mistake in her account of the crime.

 

[nanandjim]

It wasn't the investigation that was the problem. It was the LACK of investigation and she's already paying for that.

Somebody please enlighten me, but do we know for a fact that her entire accusation was made up out of whole cloth? Or do we just know she was wrong about the identity of at least one man she accused and perhaps some other details?

If you want to talk about a chilling effect on victims coming forward, let's start prosecuting everyone who makes a mistake in her account of the crime.

Have you kept up with the account of this accusation? There is no mistake in an account of what happened. Her so-called witness (the second dancer) has also refuted what the victim claims to have happened. Heck, they even have photos of this accuser leaving the home and smiling for the camera.

 

[angelmom]

It wasn't the investigation that was the problem. It was the LACK of investigation and she's already paying for that.

Somebody please enlighten me, but do we know for a fact that her entire accusation was made up out of whole cloth? Or do we just know she was wrong about the identity of at least one man she accused and perhaps some other details?

If you want to talk about a chilling effect on victims coming forward, let's start prosecuting everyone who makes a mistake in her account of the crime.

Excellent point (part I bolded). I don't think her account of the crime was a "mistake" though.

We don't know exactly what happened. We know that no one who was at the party had a DNA match to the multiple semen samples taken from the rape kit.

After the accuser found that out, her story miraculously changed again to say she may not have actually been raped but was penetrated by an object. I don't recall any evidence being reported in the extensive (and voluntary) search of the house that turned up anything that points to such an object. So even if you only rely on forensics and totally discount the multiple, changing testimony of the dancers, it doesn't sync. The only testimony that holds up under the evidence is that of the lacrosse players.

 

[Nova]

Excellent point (part I bolded). I don't think her account of the crime was a "mistake" though.

We don't know exactly what happened. We know that no one who was at the party had a DNA match to the multiple semen samples taken from the rape kit.

After the accuser found that out, her story miraculously changed again to say she may not have actually been raped but was penetrated by an object. I don't recall any evidence being reported in the extensive (and voluntary) search of the house that turned up anything that points to such an object. So even if you only rely on forensics and totally discount the multiple, changing testimony of the dancers, it doesn't sync. The only testimony that holds up under the evidence is that of the lacrosse players.

Thanks, Angel and Nan. Nan, I don't claim to remember every development on this case and was sincerely asking.

Seems to me there are two, very different issues:

One is proof-beyond-reasonable-doubt or even probable cause to try the men. The changing story of the accuser and the conflicting circumstantial evidence make this proof almost certainly impossible. Dismiss the charges!

But when we talk about charging the accuser, the burden of proof changes. Now we have to prove (beyond reasonable doubt) that the woman knew her story was false at the time (each time) she made the accusations.

Aren't rape victims often unclear on some of the details of their attack? Isn't this one reason why rapes are hard to prosecute? I'm not claiming this is what happened here. I am saying you will have to prove the accuser was NOT confused by some trauma, and that's a different matter. It would at least require a further investigation into everything that did occur that night.

Because if you are going to prosecute alleged victims simply for misstating facts, you might as well legalize rape and every other crime.

 

[chicoliving]

CHAPEL HILL, N.C. — Kirk Osborn, a lead defense attorney in the Duke lacrosse sexual assault case, died early Sunday, a fellow defense attorney in the case said.

Osborn had a massive heart attack on Friday and died shortly before 1 a.m. Sunday, attorney Joe Cheshire said.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,261127,00.html