What these strippers don’t understand is that they bruise everything that Dr. Martin Luther King worked so hard to acheive…and that is fairness for all…IF they are lying. Let’s face it, this world is not color blind yet and never will be, but when people play the race card just for their own gain, there is no deck left for those who are truly discriminated against.

The story can be found at:

http://www.newsobserver.com/102/story/433625.html

I met a man once who thought if a woman wore a red dress she was inviting sexual activity. I met lots of women who say that is the last thing on their mind, unless the right man comes along. It’s a delicate balance. Men and women are different, but in court both should have their day unimpeded by class concepts and individual politics.

I think if the Duke president and the DA acted politically, they both should end up with some jail time. People in power decision making circles will circle the wagons. But letting the rape allegation shut down a sports progeam is dead wrong. In life we have to learn to take our lumps and live with them. At least that is the non Marxist approach.

I think we will eventually have a violent revolution in this country if these left leaners can’t straighten out.

Was DNA found on the famous broomstick? Was it the young lady’s?

If this were a rape case why were the victim’s belongings being found in the house days after the alleged crime? Even Duke students who never watch CSI are smarter than that.

My take on what happened is this: The young lady shows up at the party intoxicated and starts giving a substandard performance that lasts less than 20 minutes. She was supposed to perform for 2 hours I believe for $800. The students get upset and say they are not going to pay her the entire or part of the fee. Things get ugly in the house – threats, words, etc. She gets very upset and when she sobers up a little gets even.

Well, after 13 years, no way they would be prosecuted for a “she said” situation where she dropped charges when asked to explain her timeline….and the 3 “accused” never even knew they were accused.

It would be illustrative for the Lacrosse lawyers to encourage a little “checkbook journalism” and see if the 3 accused boys, now men, have anything to say about the accuser and her past veracity.

I don’t get the DA and his preposterous claim that the rape shield laws are so strong that she is shielded from ever having a false allegation of rape made in the past come up in court unless “it was found to be a false allegation by a jury”..

Now lets see….Suppose the same accuser claimed she was abducted by 3 space aliens and anally probed by exotic instruments on “they UFO”.

It was awful. The 3 aliens restrained me by a paralyzing ray. I was levitated by the first little blue guy, whose name was Grokken, though he probably used a fake alien name..Despite saying it would cost them big time for the sight of my heavenly body and a little half and half, all they had was little chunks of aluminum which they said was rare on their planet but wouldn’t even get me a pack of cigarettes at no 7/11. Then they tore off my clothes while leaving them intact by some alien technology and probed and probed me. It was the worst of several rapes I’ve had, and those blue guys looked like preppies – expecially the tall one Uthed, who kept making cell phone calls as he probed my bottom with a glowing crystal. Then they blasted me with some forgetfulness ray and injected me with some strange shit. I woke up w’ some cop saying he found me in a drunken stupor and I was back at Detox w’ bunch of people I knows well wavin’ at me..then my memory came back and I went to the hospital, where the nurse said my ass looked “consistent with alien anal probing”. I’d have pressed it, but those little blue MFrs are nowhere to be seen getting away in they UFO to some other galaxy, but I more than seen ‘em!”

The stripper sobbed; “Then those Lacrosse rapers happened 3 years later and Mista Nifong believes I could be a victim of space aliens, but want’s to keep the last 3-way I suffered “clean of past rapes”.

DA Nifong squeezed the sobbing stripper-Victim’s hand comfortingly:

I’m just an honest prosecutor determined to do what is best for this woman and society. Which is why I want the jury to focus on the evil white Duke jocks that did it, not the horrific other rapes this Victim has encountered by boyfriends 13 years ago or by the anally assaulting aliens just 3 years ago. That is what shield laws are for…unless a jury formally says she wasn’t gang raped on charges she dropped over a decade ago, or we could have found and held the 3 alleged blue aliens who anally assaulted her and a jury acquitted them……none of that is relevant or should be introduced to the case I wish to present to the jury about the Lacrosse boy monsters who violated this mother of two’s human dignity.

I can still vividly recall the scene in the classroom. Now, as then, it seems surreal. The “instructor” delivered her “lecture” in a complete deadpan, oblivious to the looks of astonishment from the “students,” among whom were all manner of employees, even senior executives: “Sexual harrassment is a commonplace occurrence….It is defined EXCLUSIVELY in the eyes of the victim….A man can be unknowingly guilty of sexual harrassment, without even intending it…The full force of the Government will be brought to bear to protect the interests of victims, and to punish those who sexually harrass them…etc.

This went on for an hour, at the conclusion of which the “instructor” laid out the full spectrum of possible official responses to an allegation of sexual harrassment:

1) Verbal Reprimand
2) Written Reprimand
3) Suspension from Duty
4) Permanent Reduction in Grade/Pay
5) Dismissal from Federal Service

We were also advised that any official response to any allegation did NOT preclude the possibility of other civil or criminal remedies that the victim may seek as a matter of right.

Being young, idealistic, and definitely impolitic back then, I offered the “instructor” a question. I asked, “For the sake of completeness as regarding the list of official responses to an allegation of sexual harrassment, what are the provisions for complete exonoration of the accused?” She replied, “There are no provisions for exonoration.” I then decided to really press my luck. I asked, “For the sake of completeness once again, could you please specify the range of official responses to a FALSE allegation of sexual harrassment.” She replied, “There are none. By definition, the offense is strictly in the eye of the victim, so it is impossible for any allegation to be false.” I was then asked for my name and section, in the event I required “more personalized training.” Everyone left the classroom that day with the strange feeling that we were about to be witness to a full-on Stalinist purge on American soil.

We have a LOT of political prisoners in America.

BTW Benjamin Rush – a signer of the Declaration of Independence – warned of the cartelization of medicine while the Constitution was being drafted. Read about it here:

Addiction or Self Medication?

So yeah. For about the last 90 years or so America has had lots of political prisoners. Folks put in jail for their own good.

Since there is no statute of limitations on rape in N. Carolina, can the three men named in the original allegation ten years ago still be arrested and charged?

(Although with the amount of time that has passed, I doubt they could be either charged or cleared, wouldn’t this lay like a pall over their lives–an unresolved rape charge?
And would that constitute defamation or slander?
And how would they clear their names of that?)

ORIGINS

SCOTTSBORO, 1931: The case begins in an ugly, racially charged brawl on a freight train between a large number of black youths and a smaller number of white men. The white men lost, and were tossed from the train.

DURHAM, 2006: The case begins in an ugly, racially charged argument over money in a residential neighborhood between a large number of white youths and two black women. The black women lost, and left the property.

INTERVENION

SCOTTSBORO, 1931: In the aftermath of the brawl, a dragnet at the local railroad yard results in the detention of a number of people, including many of the black youths from the brawl and two lower class white women.

DURHAM, 2006: In the aftermath of the argument, police take into custody one lower class black woman. She, along with a second lower class black woman, had been among the principals in the earlier argument.

ACCUSATION

SCOTTSBORO, 1931: Facing possible charges, one of the white women claims she had been gang raped by 12 negro youths, some of the youths who had participated in the earler brawl.

DURHAM, 2006: Facing possible charges, the black woman taken into custody claims she had been gang raped by 3 white youths, some of the youths who had participated in the earlier argument.

CORROBORATION

SCOTTSBORO, 1931: The other white woman changes her initial story. She eventually claims that both she and the original accuser were gang raped.

DURHAN, 2006: The other black woman changes her initial story. She eventually claims that she believes that the accuser was gang raped.

EXAMINATION

SCOTTSBORO, 1931: The two white accusers were examined by a doctor, who declared that both women exhibited genital symptoms “consistent” with forcible rape.

DURHAM, 2006: The black accuser was examined by medical personnel who declared that the woman exhibited genital symptoms consistent with forcible rape.

IDENTIFICATION

SCOTTSBORO, 1931: The two white accusers were allowed to “identify” their attackers from among the black youths apprehended at the railroad yard.

DURHAM, 2006: The black accuser was allowed to “identify” her attackers from among photographs of men who attended the party that preceded the argument.

ALIBI

SCOTTSBORO, 1931: One of the accused youths was charged despite having been riding in a different railroad car at the time of the alleged rape.

DURHAM, 2006: One of the accused youths was charged despite having been provably elsewhere at the time of the alleged rape.

FORENSICS

SCOTTSBORO, 1931: The accused were charged despite the finding that semen taken from the two accusers was found to be non-motile. This would be consistent with a finding that the semen was deposited long before the alleged rape supposedly occured. Also, charges were brought despite the fact that the accusers were found to lack evidence of non-genital injuries consistent with their allegations. NO physical evidence therefore existed to substantiate any allegation of rape.

DURHAM, 2006: The accused were charged despite the finding that possible semen and other samples taken from the accuser yielded DNA that differed from that of the accused and from everyone else known to have possibly attended the party on the night in question. Also, charges were brought despite the fact that photographic evidence from the night in question demonstrates that various bruises and non-genital injuries sustained by the accuser were evident BEFORE the alleged rape occured. NO physical evidence therefore existed to substantiate any allegation of rape.

PREJUDICE

SCOTTSBORO, 1931: The case was prosecuted in a community where whites held all political power, and where blacks were deeply resented. The prevailing attitude is best summed up in the trial judge’s instruction to the jury: He told the jury it should very strongly presume that NO white woman would voluntarily consent to sexual relations with a negro.

DURHAM, 2006: The case is being prosecuted in a community where blacks hold the balance of political power, and where (especially well-to-do) whites are deeply resented. The prevailing attitude is best summed up in a widely published opinion by various observers: It has been opined that since the accused (or their friends) had allegedly asked specifically for BLACK strippers to attend their party, the clear presumption should be that the accused acted with premeditation in planning an eventual rape.

AMIBITION

SCOTTSBORO, 1931: The case was prosecuted by a politically ambitious District Attorney who shamelessly played to racial prejudices of his community.

DURHAM, 2006: The case is being prosecuted by a politically ambitious District Attorney who shamelessly plays to racial and social prejudices of his community.

ABANDONMENT

SCOTTSBORO, 1931: The NAACP, the supposed premeir advocacy group for the black community in the U.S. declined to grant any assistance to the accused, or to lobby on their behalf, or on behalf of fair trial procedures in their case. The organization feared possible PR backlash in the event the accused were convicted or proven guilty of the crime.

DURHAM, 2006: Both Duke University, where the accused attend school, and the mainstream media were quick to apparantly accept the accuser’s story, and to villify the accused. For its part, Duke precipitously fired the lacrosse coach, cancelled the entire season, and reportedly suspended all white members of the team from school.

CREDIBILITY

SCOTTSBORO, 1931: The two accusers were eventually found to be common prostitutes and women of generally low morals.

DURHAM, 2006: Both the accuser and the other woman have been found to be common prostitutes and women of generally low morals, having both been convicted of serious crimes. Moreover, the accuser had made an apparently false accusation of gang rape against three males 10 years ago.

CONCLUSION

The Scottsboro defendants were all quickly convicted and sentenced to death. This happened more than once, in fact, since their convictions were three times overturned on appeal by the U.S. Supreme Court. Though none was ever executed, the last defendant wasn’t released from prison until 1950. The case was recognized as a watershed event even at the time, so I’m practically amazed that it has been forgotten in our OWN time, when we so casually pride ourselves on how far we’ve come as a society in upholding justice, civil rights, and the rule of law.

The Scottsboro Case wasn’t a cause celebre because the defendants were such fine, upstanding citizens — far from it. It was a cause celebre because judicial practices as applied in their case were patently UNFAIR, and offered them no legitimate opportunity for a legal defense. This is exactly what we see today in the Duke rape case. In fact, the cases so closely, so exactly touch upon the same issues that anyone who can appreciate the injustice of the one, MUST acknowledge the injustice of the other. If the Scottsboro Case was a travesty of justice, then the Duke case is a travesty of justice. I’ll go further: If the Duke case embodies a legitimate exercise in jurisprudence, then the Scottsboro Case did equally so, the defendants were justly convicted, and by right should have been put to death. Now I ask, who DARES to argue this last point. Any prosecutor who is unaware of the Scottsboro Case or who cannot see the parallels to the current day, does not deserve to try a case anywhere in the United States of America.