http://www.wral.com/download/2006/0609/9346930.pdf

Read it, and laugh. Mike Nifong is a foolish man. I hope to have the post up in the next hour, so check back later.

I think it’s only some of the black community screaming, as I think some in the white community would scream, but because of past discrimination, the black community has a very high solidarity and very few, except some like Ms. Barber, go against the community.

You anti-Kim crowd are really shooting one of the best defense witnesses even though she has obvious fluid relationship with the truth.

First, it’s totally irrelevant if Ms. Roberts THINK it’s “crook” or something happened in a bathroom. Ms. Roberts, like every other witness is good for testimony about FACTS that she saw or heard.

Ms. Roberts confirmed that 1) the amount of time the alleged victim (AV) was alone was very short, although I am sure she was not timing it, 2) that the AV did not cry rape in her presence, 3) that the AV was delusional about having her bag in her hands 4) even after the alleged rape, the AV wanted to return again for more money and 5) the AV was not even able to provide her address for a ride home.

There is nothing wrong about benefiting from PR or expressing an opinion. Ms. Roberts could lecture on any theories she wants. Only changing and selling testimony is a crime.

http://www.newsobserver.com/102/story/449748.html

http://www.michnews.com/artman/publish/article_13088.shtml

http://www.nationalledger.com/artman/publish/article_27266325.shtml

I saw this on Fox, but did not believe it until I read the handwritten account by the second stripper.

She is the first known violent rape victim to want to return to her rapists since there was more money to be made – after the alleged rape in addition to the fist time they returned after the broomstick handle “joke.”

Of course “anything” is possible, and the second stripper could be confused, but she was so concerned about the in her words “crazy” stripper would return to the house after being carried to her car, she locked her in her car.

A legal lynching affects the entire community of which he is a part. He can perch on Olympus all he wants, but he’s still invovlved merely by being in Durham and at Duke, whether he wants to be or not.

A simple letter recalling the worthiness of maintaining a presumption of innocence might not have been out of order (as well as decrying publication of pictures of the entire team, the wanted posters, the circus-like atmosphere of the court procedings, etc.)

A line to Pres. Brodhead and the 88 rush-to-judgment faculty about waiting for the trial before condemning the accused would also have been a properly administered reproach.

“Duke also has a law school; and this case is sure to be studied as an example of prosecutor misconduct. Is it going to be said then that all the Duke law professors just remained silent during this time? (Hardly good for their reputation. . . )”

We should recall that Coleman is with Duke law school, as is Ekstrom, one of the defense counsel.
Both have done their bit to help the lax players. There has also been a call (two op eds) by a Duke prof for a lie detector test of AV.

That said, there might have been a “teach in” or two about how to conduct a rape prosecution.

Most of the top law students at top law schools are focused on getting jobs paying $125-$150k per year (to keep loan expenses under control) and do not spend much time with “blue collar” crime (like rape).

Faculty tend to teach what the students want to study – corporations, tax, IP, civil procedure, contracts, property, etc.

Maybe two one-semester courses (criminal law and criminal procedure) make up the full exposure of the typical Duke law student to rape-type matters.

If one asked Prof. Cheminsky (Duke’s star in constitutional law and prosecution areas) why he has done zero publicly, he would probably say he was not asked to do anything.

This is probably an ok answer (since the parents of the lax players are well-heeled), and consistent with the idea that judges (and lawyers) should generally not speak and opine in public about cases of non-indigents unless and until properly assigned the cases. Too many cooks could spoil the broth, right?

If Mike Nifong doesn’t get disbarred after this, then there really is a corrupt system in Durham that protects rich white guys.

AFFIDAVIT OF COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO SUPPRESS NON-TESTIMONIAL PHOTOGRAPHS

3 (b) The probable cause affidavit implies there is no question that [deleted] was sexually assaulted on March 14, 2006, at 610 N. Buchanan by three men. But three days before Investigator Himan signed his affidavit, March 20, 2006, at 10:10am., Investigator Himan interviewed Kim Pittman, the only eyewitness to the events of March 14, 2006, at 610 N. Buchanan. Before Ms. Pittman was granted extremely favorable bond consideration by District Attorney Nifon personally on april 17, 2006, she told investigator Himan [ deleted ] allegation that she was sexually assaulted was a “crock.” Instead Investigator Himan alleged that [ deleted ] “reported that she was sexually assaulted for an approximate 30 minute period.”

3 (e), (8) She told Investigator Himan first that she had consumed a 24 ounce bottle of beer and thereafter that she had consumed two twenty-two ounce Ice House beers. Finally, She told the S.A.N.E nurse in training that Kim Pittman assisted the players in her alleged sexual assault and that Kim Pittman stole all her “money and everything.”

http://www.wral.com/download/2006/0609/9346930.pdf

It is vital reading for anyone interested in the truth of this case because it includes the entire handwritten statements of Kim the second dancer (before she got $$ signs in her eyes) and of Crystal’s driver. These are simply amazing documents.

As a former prosecutor here in California, it is simply inconceivable that this case was filed with no DNA evidence and these two witness statements. And the conduct of the investigator in distorting the statements in his summary for the warrant is so outrageous that it seems he must have been pressured to do so by someone up higher. Why would he do it on his own?

Kemp, I hate to say it, but either Republican Senator could pocket veto your friend’s Fed judgeship if they are unhappy no one intervened in possible civil rights violations, DA misconduct, police misconduct, was a “reluctant but knowing party” to the embarassment of North Carolina and it’s legal system.

With the 3 accused having non-refundable bills topping 100K, non-accused players bills already averaging 12,000 a family – there will be a strong drive within and without the Duke Community for some repercussions – on the stripper, by Brodhead’s alumni fundraisers, on Nifong, on Durham, etc.

Perhaps the easiest target may be the rookie Lead Investigator. While Nifong is fairly protected from liability in many ways by his elective office , Bejamin Himan is wide open due to laws that permit the “burning of cops” for knowingly railroading citizens. [Unless Himan was ordered to conceal evidence from Judge Stevens bearing on probable cause warrants and what was selectively given to the grand jury by him - by someone Himan may want to discuss at another grand jury rather than see his law enforcement career end with felonies].

Other police, including the experience SGT Gottlieb, may one day have to explain who instructed him to arrest a witness, go into question players knowing they had retained council, who told them to willfully violate state and Durham police Dept lineup procedures. And name the person withing the Durham Police Dept that constructed the Wanted Poster of all the players, and exactly who if anyone within CRimestoppers requested the Poster be made in hundreds of copies so names and faces could be plastered all over town.