Monday, April 24: Comments closed on this post. A defense lawyer wants to see the evidence. Read and discuss the latest news.
Friday, April 21: Comments closed. Read and discuss the latest news on the case.
Thursday, April 20: Looking for pictures of duke stripper?
Update V (4/18 @ 4:32 p.m.): This will be the last update for today, unless something really explosive is revealed.
By the way (TOTALLY off-topic), if you’re in DC this Saturday, come to the Milblog Conference 2006. I’ll be live-blogging, but that’s not why you should come. You’ll get to meet some of the top military bloggers and hear them talk about their experiences as service men and women…and bloggers.
Back to the case. ABC News comments on photos from the night of the alleged rape:
12 a.m.: This is the first picture of the strippers. Students are watching the show, but not grabbing or attempting to touch the women. Bruises are clearly visible on the legs and thighs of the alleged victim.
12:00:40 a.m.: Another picture taken 40 seconds later shows bruises on the accuser’s knees. Her right knee appears to have an open cut.
12:03:57 p.m.: About four minutes after arriving, a picture shows the strippers leaving the room. The photo clearly shows that the alleged victim left behind one of her shoes.
Between 12:10 a.m. and 12:30 a.m.: No photos were taken between this time.
12:30:12 a.m.: The next photo shows the alleged victim on the back porch, carrying what appears to be her purse and a makeup bag. Her clothes are intact.
12:30:47 a.m.: A photo taken 30 seconds later shows the alleged victim on the porch and she appears to smile.
12:31:26 a.m.: But 30 seconds after that, a photo shows the alleged victim stumbling down the back steps of the house.
12:37:58 a.m.: A series of photos are taken, all showing the woman lying on her left side on the back porch, seemingly passed out or asleep. She had visible cuts on her legs and buttocks that did not appear in the previous photos.
The cuts may be from falling. The cuts on her buttocks line up with the edge of a screen door she may have hit on the way down.
12:41 a.m.: The final photo shows the accuser and the second dancer in a black car. The accuser is in the passengers seat.
————————————————————————————————————————-
Update IV (4/18 @ 1:04 p.m.): Some of the players admitted to using each other’s names at the party, so there appears to be no discrepancy between the search warrant and the accuser’s identification of the alleged rapists. Although…
The DA issued has issued a statement, but it contains nothing we haven’t read elsewhere.
Duke’s president issues a statement.
2:19 p.m.: For the time being, I’ll just link to new information and leave the editorializing for another day. From CNN: “Sources close to the investigation told CNN Tuesday that the defense will present evidence — including ATM receipts and a cab driver — that neither Seligmann, 20, nor Finnerty, 19, were at the team party at the time the alleged rape took place.”
See, I knew I couldn’t do it. I must editorialize. Witness more of the media’s class-envy coverage. This is the real case, my friends. Everything else is filler.
3:50 p.m.: The second stripper speaks.
Interesting article: Duke lacrosse case far more complex than it looks
———————————————————————————————————————————-
Update III (4/18 @ 11:17 a.m.): According to the search warrant, the accuser said three men named Adam, Bret, and Matt raped her, but Reade Seligmann and Collin Finnerty have been charged with the rape. Hmmm…
ESPN sources ABC News: “Prosecutors have informed defense attorneys that the alleged victim has identified two players with 100 percent certainty and is 90 percent certain on a third player…”
I don’t get it. She named “Adam, Bret and Matt” as the rapists but identified Seligmann, Finnerty, and a third person.
Here’s more fallout: WTOP is reporting that the U.S. Attorney’s Office in DC is considering a move to revoke Collin Finnerty’s community service agreement for assaulting an alleged homosexual because of the Durham indictment.
12:13 p.m.: The Smoking Gun has obtained a copy of the indictment.
——————————————————————————————————————————–
Update II (4/18 @ 6:25 a.m.): The alleged rapists named in the indictment have been arrested. No names yet. Or charges. The indictments are still sealed.
7:08 a.m.: WRAL: “The two men, who attorneys say are sophomore Reade Seligmann and sophomore Collin Finnerty, surrendered to authorities at the Durham County Magistrate’s Office at about 4:55 a.m.”
7:39 a.m.: Charges: “rape, sexual offense and kidnapping”.
Finnerty was recently in court for a simple assault incident that occurred back in November. He reportedly hit a homosexual (“alleged” homosexual?) in the mouth, drawing blood. I’d like to know whether Finnerty’s DNA was indeed connected to the assault accuser. [Note: I assume he had to submit DNA in that case. This is speculation, not fact.] If so, isn’t it strange that his DNA wasn’t connected to the stripper, who he allegedly forcibly raped and beat as she tried to defend herself against him and two others? Curious…
An indictment in itself is damning, no matter how easy it may be to indict someone. We don’t know what evidence the DA has, though I suspect it’s pretty flimsy. But that’s my opinion and will remain so until I see more evidence. Blogger Ed Cone reiterates that we’re still in the dark.
The father of two lacrosse players comes forward.
10:07 p.m.: A commenter-lawyer writes:
The DA had no obligation to present any exculpatory evidence to the grand jury. He could have presented only the following: (1) the alleged victim’s testimony that she was raped and her identification of her attackers and (2) the hospital nurse’s testimony that the alleged victim’s injuries were consistent with rape. These facts would be sufficient for an indictment, which is all the Nifong needs for his re-election campaign.
At trial, however, the jury will have the following exculpatory and impeachment evidence to consider: (1) the absence of any DNA match, (2) photographs of the alleged victim showing bruises before the alleged attack, (3) various inconsistencies in her story, and (4) evidence of the alleged victim’s bad character for honesty and truthfulness (i.e., her prior criminal record). It is highly unlikely in my opinion as a lawyer for the past 25 years that based on this evidence a jury would find guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
The only way that Nifong can get a conviction here is if one or more of the boys in the house testifies in support of the alleged victim’s story. Will that happen? Who knows.
Fellow southerner and blogger Mary Katharine Ham recommends a change of venue for the trial. Riehl World View’s comment section is interesting.
——————————————————————————————————————————–
…today, although it could be under seal. Or the case may be carried over until May 1.
At any rate, it’s not over until the grand jury indicts or throws out the case if Mike Nifong sent the case to the grand jury. There’s no confirmation. Now he decides to clam up. 
Developing…
Update (4:19 p.m.): According to CNN, the grand jury issued two indictments under seal.
5:06: The CNN alert is gone. Don’t know what that means. Drudge is still reporting the sealed indictments, and ABC News (also reporting seal indictments) has an exclusive:
ABC News has obtained a tape in which a security guard — who may have been the first person to see the alleged victim of a Duke lacrosse gang rape after the alleged attack — says there were no signs or mention of rape or sexual assault.
ABC News has obtained an audio recording of what is purported to be a private investigator interviewing a security guard at a Kroger grocery store. It was this security guard whose call to 911 brought police to the Kroger parking lot, where they found the woman who claims she was raped by lacrosse team members.
7:47 p.m.: The AP is reporting that two Duke lacrosse players have been indicted. On tax day!
From ABC News:
A grand jury in Durham, N.C. handed up two sealed indictments in the Duke lacrosse rape investigation today.
A sealed indictment does not mean an arrest must be made though it does provide the prosecutor leverage with potential defendants who believe once their names are public their reputations will be destroyed.
The sealed indictments put the attorneys for the accused in a touchy position because they will be told their client has been indicted but not what the charge is and how many counts, making it difficult to defend.
Were the players indicted on charges of rape? Assault? Thought crimes? Believe me, it won’t stay “secret” for long. Until I see more evidence, I’m sticking to my story.
Talk Left: “The prosecutor seems to be milking this for all it’s worth.”
And this from the New York Times:
Ekstrand said that he and other defense lawyers had asked Nifong on Thursday and again today to issue public indictments so that anyone who was charged with a crime could voluntarily surrender. Ekstrand said Nifong refused the request, “so we’d be left in the dark.” He said the situation meant students could be arrested in classrooms or paraded in front of the media. “I can’t imagine any other reason but humiliation.” he said in an interview while the grand jury was in session.
Sounds about right.
Previous posts:
- Is Duke Stripper Channeling Tawana Brawley?
- Fake Rape at Duke: Next Steps
- The ‘Black’ Helen of Troy?
