Thursday, June 22: This post is closed to comments. The Wilmington Journal reports that “alums of Duke” offered the stripper-accuser $2 million to drop the case. Do you believe it? Discuss here.
Update III (3:00 p.m.): The journalist’s private info has been redacted. Download the PDF at will!
I heard a rumor that Nifong will make a public statement soon. True? Later…I heard Shep Smith say it himself. If Nifong speaks, I’ll live-blog. Scroll all the way down to the bottom for that update. Even later…I don’t think there’s going to be a press conference. Shep Smith mentioned Nifong’s e-mail. I think that was the “statement.”
Update II (2:30 p.m.): Newsweek has asked me to black out the journalist’s private e-mail address and cell phone number in the PDF document. I don’t have the Adobe editing software to do that, so I removed the link. The media relations person asked Nifong to resend the press release with the info redacted. If/when that happens, I’ll re-repost the link…unless a reader knows where I can get a redacted copy.
Update (1:00 p.m.): In response to Newsweek’s story, Mike Nifong released a copy of his e-mail (PDF) [link deleted] Newsweek, in which he defends himself. Badly. (Hat tip: Robert KC Johnson)
——————————————————————————————————–
You know Durham DA Mike Nifong is getting desperate. He’s talking about the blogs!
I was delighted to read a Newsweek article on the Duke case yesterday about facts instead of the reporters’ opinions. Mainstream media’s (MSM) tendency to disguise editorials as news stories is why we conservatives are always ranting about “liberal bias, liberal bias!” The New York Times is notorious for editorializing on its front page, which is supposedly reserved for hard news.
Objectivity, my eye.
Anyway, I love when journalists, politicians and controversial public figures say negative things about blogs (see Nick Coleman’s Blog Envy, ‘Manly’ Maney Says Blog Novelty Will Wear Off, and Ken Fuson’s Confusion).
According to the article, Nifong sent an “angry e-mail” berating the same media he was so eager to talk to a couple of months ago. His case isn’t going quite the way he planned, and the media tide has shifted against him. Nifong e-mailed: “None of the ‘facts’ I know at this time, indeed, none of the evidence I have seen from any source, has changed the opinion that I expressed initially.” He ranted about “media speculation” and said “it is even worse on the blogs.”
This makes me wonder which blogs Nifong has been reading. I’ve published at least 10 posts about the Duke case (see Duke Rape Case category), and my blog comes up high in most related keyword searches. History professor Robert KC Johnson has blogged about this case a lot. So has the The Johnsville News and Talk Left (left-leaning lawyer Jeralyn Merritt is also critical of Nifong). It’s possible that my “speculation” is contributing to his frustration.
And the thought gives me pleasure. 
I haven’t said anything about Nifong on this blog (or elsewhere) that I would not say to his face. If he is perusing LBC, I hope he pays special attention to what I’ve written about his shameless race pandering and how angry I am that he’s using simmering racial tension and gambling with three men’s lives just to keep his lousy job. 
After reading the defense motions and articles similar to Newsweek’s, you’ve got to admit that his rape case is lousy, too. From the article:
It is possible, almost three months later, that the players are maintaining a conspiracy of silence. But it seems highly unlikely. Rather, court documents in the case increasingly suggest that Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifong had very little evidence upon which to indict three players for rape. Indeed, the available evidence is so thin or contradictory that it seems fair to ask what Nifong could have been thinking when he confidently told reporters that there was “no doubt” in his mind that the woman had been raped at the party held by the lacrosse team.
Given legal and ethical considerations, it’s also unlikely that Nifong has a smoking gun yet to be revealed. He is required by law to turn over evidence. It is logical to conclude that he’s indeed turned over everything he’s gathered during the course of the investigation. If not, he has a lot more to worry about than media and bloggers.
I won’t parse the article. You can read. I just wanted to make you aware of it. If Newsweek, the same publication that instigated riots based on false information and its eagerness to side with the enemy and against the United States, is making the unprecedented move to report on the Duke case rather than editorialize it to death, Nifong’s days are numbered.
(Photo credit: Harry Lynch / The News & Observer-AP-pool)
Bloggers: Wizbang, Captain’s Quarters, The Johnsville News says, Show Us the Subpoena Timeline, Independent Conservative, Pirate’s Cove…
More bloggers: Coalition of the Swilling notes discrepancies with dates in the discovery documents, Customer Servant…
Are you Duke blogging? Trackback, and I’ll link.
Addendum: Republicans will challenge Democrat DA Nifong in November. He barely scraped by in the primaries, but he’ll have to run a real campaign to win the election. I suspected that Republicans would do something like this, which is why I predicted Nifong would continue with the case through November. I doubt a Republican can win in that district, but the competition will be good for the case. If you thought Nifong was pandering to blacks before, you ain’t seen nothing yet. 
Commenter Greg writes:
It occurs to me from the comments of Montie in #2 above that this case represents sort of a test of consistency for those on the left side of justice issues. You know the ones. They argue for the release of people convicted of crimes like rape if DNA testing — not available when the accused were tried — subsequently fails to yield a match…It seems to me that this case has much in common with the cases of people having their convictions overturned based on subsequent DNA testing: no DNA match and a questionable identification.
Previous Duke posts below (format borrowed from The Johnsville News):
- Duke Rape Case: That Motion! [June 12, 2006]
- Duke Rape Case: Duke Discusses Lacrosse Program [June 5, 2006]
- Journalist Says Lacrosse Women ‘Ignorant’ for Supporting Accused Lacrosse Players [May 29, 2006]
- Duke Rape Case: 1,300-Page Discovery Bolsters Defense [May 23, 2006]
- Duke Rape Case Hearing [May 18, 2006]
- Duke Rape Case: DNA Matches Stripper’s “Boyfriend” [May 13, 2006]
- Duke Rape Case Report and the Twisted Sister [May 9, 2006]
- Rape Shield Law and the Duke Rape Case [May 4, 2006]
- Duke Lacrosse Lawyer Demands Evidence [April 24, 2006]
- Duke Rape Case: Vulgarity, Hypocrisy, Double Standards, Myths, Money, Etc. [April 21, 2006]
- No (Public) Indictment in Duke Rape Case… [April 17, 2006]
- The “Black” Helen of Troy? [April 14, 2006]
- Fake Rape at Duke: Next Steps [April 11, 2006]
- Is Duke Stripper Channeling Tawana Brawley? [April 10, 2006]
Lashawn,
Check out ABC news this morning. Republican’s to run a candidate against Nifungu! He doesn’t have a snowballs chance in Hell, but it a sign of how weak Nifungu is getting. The Democrats are working on getting another candidate on the ballot, a county commissoner. June 22nd! This Thursday is the day this goes away. Maybe even Nifungu will give it up, we’ll see. Happy Juneteenth? Kemp
Comment by kemperman — 06.19.06 @ 8:44 am
La Shawn,
I am glad to see that “Newsweek” is examining the facts presented thus far in this case objectively. I would never have gotten this case accepted by the DA’s office here, based on the facts made public so far.
I noticed that they also (as I mentioned to you by email) picked up on the fact that with a line-up made up exclusively of team members she could not pick a wrong suspect! My city recently settled a case involving a man who was wrongfully imprisoned for 14 years based on an improper photo lineup presentation for $12.5 million. What got him out? DNA evidence. Just like the Duke situation, the recovered DNA belonged to someone else.
Nifong might have qualified immunity but the police don’t if they acted improperly in any way in fluffing up this case. I hope the City of Durham has some extra money stashed away, they may need it.
Comment by Montie Burchett — 06.19.06 @ 9:10 am
HAHA - he blames blogs! If you wrote about Enron more, perhaps Ken Lay would be a free man today
Comment by Mark — 06.19.06 @ 9:38 am
and in there is some good news in the world category, rapes are DOWN 85%
Today’s Washington Post had a front page article, Statistics Show Drop in Rape Cases:
The number of rapes per capita in the United States has plunged by more than 85 percent since the 1970s, and reported rape fell last year even while other violent offenses increased, according to federal crime data.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/18/AR2006061800650.html
Comment by UNK — 06.19.06 @ 9:52 am
Nifong Now Faces Republican Challenger
Matt Nifong’s pursuit of the Duke rape charges regardless of the evident collapse of the case has generated at least one reaction — he now will face a Republican challenger in the general election.
Trackback by Captain's Quarters — 06.19.06 @ 10:34 am
It occurs to me from the comments of Montie in #2 above that this case represents sort of a test of consistency for those on the left side of justice issues. You know the ones. They argue for the release of people convicted of crimes like rape if DNA testing — not available when the accused were tried — subsequently fails to yield a match.
It seems to me that this case has much in common with the cases of people having their convictions overturned based on subsequent DNA testing: no DNA match and a questionable identification. Do you suppose there are folks out there who side with releasing people like the guy Montie describes, who nevertheless support the continued prosecution of these lacrosse players? Can you have it both ways?
Comment by Greg — 06.19.06 @ 10:44 am
An interesting part of the Newsweek article was that Ms. Magnum’s father said he has that his daughter is struggling with her “nerves” and may not be up to testifying in a trial. According to their lawyer, Mark Simeon, the accuser’s parents have not heard from their daughter for weeks and are very concerned.
Would that be a recurrence of the mental problems she had before?
I’m sure none of us with common sense (those of us who never believed her story from the beginning) are surprised to hear that.
Where are the “New Black Panthers”, Jesse and Al at now?
Comment by Tracey — 06.19.06 @ 11:13 am
The real ‘head-shaker’ in all this is that Ni-wrong sticks to every inflammatory comment he has made publicly in this case so far and has seen NOTHING to make him think otherwise.
Wow - just wow.
We have 3 options here:
1. Nifong is the smartest man on the planet and can see something no one else sees.
2. Nifong is the dumbest man on the planet and can’t see what everyone else sees.
3. Nifong is nuts and sees things that don’t exist.
One also has to wonder, how does the Judge that issued the original DNA test warrants feel about all this? Does he feel ‘had’ by Nifong - ‘played’ for Nifong’s political gain?
What are the conversations behind closed doors in the Durham Justice system on this? Has Nifong become a pariah or do they support him? What do Durham Justices really think of this case?
Has anyone been able to interview any members of the Grand Jury to find out exactly what Nifong told them (or didn’t tell them)? Is that a matter of public record or is that information sealed?
Disclaimer - In case Mr Nifong is reading this, I have no scientific proof that, you sir, are nuts. That is just my personal opinion based upon the facts as I see them. I do not hold forth as an expert on nuttiness and have performed no triple-blind studies in order to arrive at my opinion. It is a purely subjective viewpoint and should be considered as such by any readers of this post.
Note to self: Don’t get a ticket in Durham any time soon.
Comment by Bill Mitchell — 06.19.06 @ 11:15 am
where is case going?
Who benifits?
Imagine the questions as a light is shined on the work-a-day world of the AV.
Only court TV would want that.
Comment by richard moore — 06.19.06 @ 11:24 am
LaShawn, as I remember, you wrote a blog a few months back concerning the power of the blogosphere. I think Nifong’s reference to the blogosphere proves that its pretty powerful. That’s good, because it has exposed him. I think the blogosphere has also been very powerful in the political debate on illegal immigration, providing information the MSM does not.
On the other hand, whoever dominates in the influence world of the blogosphere is as important from an impact and truthfulness standpoint as any other media, and the pendulum swings both ways. Let’s hope the truth seekers prevail.
Comment by dianne — 06.19.06 @ 11:28 am
We have 3 options here:
1. Nifong is the smartest man on the planet and can see something no one else sees.
2. Nifong is the dumbest man on the planet and can’t see what everyone else sees.
3. Nifong is nuts and sees things that don’t exist.
I think the most popular theory of the pro-boys crowd is:
4. Amoral political opportunist to win the election
My theory is:
5. An average DA in over his head, with tunnel vision.
There is also
6. Smart, holding a card up his sleeve – which seems unlikely given discovery and unwilling to quickly try and jail “rapists.†Any NC lawyers – could one withhold witness impeachment information such as prior rape attempts from discovery since one does not know if the defendants will not take the stand?
Also “crazy” “smartest” and “dumbest” see like all or nothing extreme statements to me.
Comment by UNK — 06.19.06 @ 11:42 am
Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong Being Fed His Own Foot. Race Baiting for Votes.
The defense in the Duke lacrosse rape case is handing Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong his own foot for consumption.
Lawyers: DA jumped gun on info
DURHAM — Two defense lawyers in the Duke University lacrosse rape case unveiled Thur…
Trackback by Independent Conservative — 06.19.06 @ 11:45 am
Okay before I thought Mike Nifong was an idiot because he spoke before knowing all the facts, but now I’ve come to realize that Nifong doesn’t care about facts, at least facts that conflicts with his, which is everything from the DNA to the rape exam.
Because misandry feminist have been reacted so irrationally about this false rape claim, I recently tried to inject levity into my comments (i.e. see below), but there’s nothing funny about a DA acting with such negligence and gross contempt for justice. Nifong must be a misandry feminist too.
“I love cherry pie, but I don’t like cherry picking. Some people are trying to claim that the defense attorneys are cherry picking, but more rational people claim Nifong is the champion cherry picker.
But much of the information Mike Nifong leaked wasn’t so much cherry picked as it was artificially created. (i.e. date rape drug, his reasoning of no DNA match, etc…).
Maybe Nifong is just clumsy and trying to make a pie, which would explain why he has egg on his face.â€
http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/journalgazette/14826913.htm
Comment by Betty Friedan — 06.19.06 @ 11:49 am
Mr. Nifong belongs in a third-world country, not this one. I continue to contend that simply based on the excessive pre-trial publicity hounding by the prosecutor alone, those 3 boys could no longer be convicted. And I especially love the hypocrisy when he finally DOES shut up that he criticizes the defense attorneys for - - - defending their clients! Apparently Mr. Nifong prefers to run a kangaroo court down there. The man is responsible for the state of his own soul, but I can tell you truly that if his motives for his despicable actions are politically motivated, then he is as contemptible a creature as any I have ever holding public office in this country - and let’s face it kids - we’ve had some doozies!
Comment by Gayle Miller — 06.19.06 @ 12:20 pm
Nifong is unbelievable. I mean, there’s stupid and there’s corrupt…and Nifong takes both to a new level. He “hasn’t seen any evidence that would make (him) change (his) mind about the Duke case”?? Isn’t he missing the point? There was never any real evidence in the first place, and now that it’s clear to rational humans that the Duke boys didn’t do anything wrong (besides hiring really bad strippers), he needs to look at what he has and realize it’s time to DROP the case and not clutch it within his slimey hands in order to win over black voters who have no desire to see the truth.
I just hope and pray that Nifong and Tawana Brawley II both get sued by the players. THAT would be sweet justice…
Comment by Stanford Guy — 06.19.06 @ 1:01 pm
Is Nifong really a UNC grad? I just heard that.
Hilarious.
Another angry Tar Heel who got rejected from Duke admissions. This moron is taking his anger to new levels though…
Comment by Stanford Guy — 06.19.06 @ 1:03 pm
Bill,
Post #8, There are definitely rumblings in Durham. Why do you think a sitting Democrat county commisioner would allow his name to be used in a petition drive to get on the ballot. The drive is being run by Nifungu’s former campaign manager. The rats are jumping ship faster than you can say disbarred. June 22nd Nifungu can only hope the Judge accepts defense motions and throws out photo ID, next motion for dismissal, granted! Next, civil suit against city of Durham, et al for damages. Then the fun will begin! Nifungu, TOAST. Kemp
Comment by kemperman — 06.19.06 @ 1:06 pm
Duke DA Nifong and Blogs
Durham County NC District Attorney Mike Nifong, prosecutor of the Duke lacrosse rape case, isn’t happy that citizens with blogs are paying critical attention to his handling of the case–Citizen Barber is probably at the top of his list….
Trackback by Pajamas Media — 06.19.06 @ 1:16 pm
Apparently the defense team has released the entire 1300 page discovery into to the media (thus ends the “cherry picking” allegation).
And, apparently, it now looks even worse for the prosecution (if that’s possible)
Comment by Seahawk — 06.19.06 @ 1:28 pm
Greg writes:
“It occurs to me from the comments of Montie in #2 above that this case represents sort of a test of consistency for those on the left side of justice issues. You know the ones. They argue for the release of people convicted of crimes like rape if DNA testing — not available when the accused were tried — subsequently fails to yield a match.”
Speaking as one of those “on the left side of justice issues”, I know of nobody who argues for the release of convicts where new DNA is inconclusive (”fails to yield a match”). However, when new DNA evidence proves innocence, then that’s another story.
That said, many here seem to take the position that the absence of linking DNA evidence proves that the lacrosse players are innocent, and the “victim” is lying. That’s simply not true. DNA evidence would certainly make Nifong’s task easier, but the absence of DNA evidence doesn’t mean he’s got no case.
UNK asks: “Any NC lawyers – could one withhold witness impeachment information such as prior rape attempts from discovery since one does not know if the defendants will not take the stand?
Nifong cannot withhold information of this sort (assuming it exists) from the defendants. The defense is entitled to everything the prosecutor knows, and it makes no difference whether or not the defendants take the stand.
My own thoughts about Nifong are quite simple: he’s doing his job. Prosecutors understand that they are not juries. It is the right of the people, not prosecutors, to determine guilt or innocence. And Nifong probably recognizes that his ethical duty is to prosecute the case as best as he can, and let the people (i.e., a jury) decide. From most accounts, he’s stuck with a bad case, but it is a case, which means he has to do the job for which he’s paid. I feel bad for him, actually.
Comment by Kman — 06.19.06 @ 1:29 pm
kemperman,
Nifong is the new patron saint of the “One-sided Attack”.
When no one knew the real facts so he could not be contested, you could not shut Nifong up. Now that the facts are out there where almost anyone could argue with him and win, he won’t talk to anyone.
Newsweek asked for an interview, yet he refused. He then shot off an angry email. Once again, a one-sided attack.
How can this man who attacks but cannot bear confrontation in which he stands to lose and lose badly even hope to argue this case in court?
Nifong’s own campaign manager in the primary is now promoting the candidacy of a challenger. Who knows Nifong better that his campaign manager and they jump ship to have him defeated.
Wow - just wow.
Comment by Bill Mitchell — 06.19.06 @ 1:45 pm
I’d like to think he has hit on some of my stuff, since I am listed on WRAL and the News And Observer, being sorta local to Durham, but, if so, I would probably have a lawsuit pending now! Heh
Comment by William Teach — 06.19.06 @ 1:47 pm
Yep, all us moonbat bloggers have no idea what we’re talking about, and we don’t get that word spread to the entire world in a matter of seconds…
I really don’t think this Blog and Internet thing is gonna catch on…
It’s a passing fad…
Keep hammering La Shawn, and many thanks for listing my new site and address, you are simply the best…
Y’all don’t tell La Shawn I said this, but if I wasn’t already married, I’d be in her neighborhood, singing love songs outside her window and all that sappy stuff…
LMAO… Sorry…
Comment by TexasFred — 06.19.06 @ 1:55 pm
Having just read the email correspondence between Nifong and Meadows, I am amazed at how Nifong initially states that he is declining to grant another interview and then proceeds to give an “auto-interview”. A simple, “Thanks, but no thanks” would have done quite nicely.
Comment by Belle — 06.19.06 @ 1:58 pm
Nifong has released his email to Newsweek, which is an angry diatribe at the national media. Anyone who thinks this case is going away soon is kidding themselves. Nifong’s tone of arrogant self-righteousness is frightening.
Link removed for now. - Admin
Comment by Midwest — 06.19.06 @ 2:08 pm
It was very thoughtful of Nifong to post the phone number provided by Meadows.
Comment by Ralph — 06.19.06 @ 2:29 pm
No wonder he needed this case so badly, he’s an awful politician! His effort to side-step the reporter’s question is soooooo clumsy!
The question topic is pretty straightforward: “…how certain things were said in public when the facts were known to be different.”
Nifong’s response is (paraphrased): I can’t comment. But just let me say that my public pronouncements of unquestionable guilt were made prior to the 3 hooligans being indicted. I had no ethical duty to anybody prior to indictments!
Not only is this a weak effort to misdirect the reader from the question about explaining the lies he told, but I’m pretty sure (hopeful, anyway), the NC’s ethics rules would disallow a prosecutor from making such inflammatory comments regardless of any indictments having been made at the time.
This guy’s got serious issues. Mainly a hubris-driven tunnel vision.
Comment by jc — 06.19.06 @ 2:33 pm
It seems to me that he has difficulty keeping his mouth shut. That can get a person in trouble!
Comment by Belle — 06.19.06 @ 2:36 pm
La Shawn, when I bailed on all of this Duke coverage awhile back, it was because I thought it was descending into gossip. I was wrong-the Nifong race pandering is a real issue. The smoking gun is pointed right at his own head-he’s committed to the case and it is political suicide. But, of course, I didn’t think the New Orleans Mayor would have been re-elected, so there you go.
Comment by Doug — 06.19.06 @ 2:46 pm
Question: Why is Nifong speaking out after weeks of silence? Answer: Because it has become clear that he’s going to face a contested election come November.
The “ethical” way for Nifong to start the Big Smear, Round Two is in written response to the defense motions to be heard Thursday. I predict an ugly week for Dave, Reade & Collin.
Comment by Midwest — 06.19.06 @ 2:47 pm
Mike Nifong’s going to be wearing a lot of egg on his face. Since the man can’t seem to bolster his own case, he’s taken to blaming bloggers, and, surprisingly, the media. Everybody but him and his defenders has it all wrong, of course, and no matter what we’re all seeing, the girl was raped, and he’ll prove it. And for once, the mainstream media is actually reporting the facts, instead of editorializing. Nifong e-mailed: “None of the ‘facts’ I know at this time, indeed, none of the evidence I have seen from any source, has changed the opinion that I expressed initially.†Sounds to me like his mind’s already made up, and the facts be damned. When this case finally is thrown out…
Pingback by customerservant.com — 06.19.06 @ 2:48 pm
There is only one word for Prosecutor Nifong - trifling.
Comment by Gayle Miller — 06.19.06 @ 2:55 pm
Just heard that Nifong is suppose to make a statement (not sure if it’s new from La Shawn’s updates)… should be on one of the news channels in the next 30 minutes or so.
Comment by Renee — 06.19.06 @ 2:55 pm
Fox News reported it on a news alert…Shep Smith said it is upcoming (no official time)
Comment by Renee — 06.19.06 @ 3:02 pm
Breaking News!!!
Nifong is supposed to make a statement to the media sometime this afternoon according to Fox News. I can’t wait to hear what this moron has to say.
Comment by Brian Murphy — 06.19.06 @ 3:07 pm
IMO, it’s as much a mistake to focus on Nifong to the exclusion of other players in the Rape Case as it is to fixate on Osama bin Laden and “bringing him to trial” as the only threat radical Islam poses.
1. The cops are the ones that did the “cooked” photo lineups, lied to the Judge that issued the search warrants, have possibly crossed the line in witness intimidation (taxi driver, duke players - tell us they story we want to hear or we will harass you), and may have concealed, misrepresented evidence in their Grand Jury Testimony. One name keeps coming up - Benjamin Himan, the rookie investigator. The cops, not Niphong, are exposing Durham to significant legal liability. And if legal consequences happen, it will be the cops swinging, not Nifong. I can see Himan facing criminal charges.
2. William Brodhead appears to have thrown his students, unprotected, to the mob. And done considerable damage to the schools reputation. This is a guy who tossed an innocent Yale professor out when his PR machine and New haven media falsely fingered the professor as a murderer. Already in the Duke alumni ranks, a movement is growing to deny Duke alumni funds over a President that reflexively guns for his wards if any trouble happens and who tarnishes his school’s good name. Duke may face substantial legal exposure from cleared students over Duke administration violating their civil rights, and the fired Lacrosse coach may sue to recoup the value of his damaged reputation and loss of future income from Brodhead tossing him to the wolves.
3. In defense motions, attorneys are persisting on having the Court force divulgence on who conceived and issued the “Wanted Poster” on the 46 “guilty” Lacrosse players. The Durham police explaination that they “only advise” and have “no reponsibility” to dilulge who may have made up and distributed the poster is not flying with the attorneys. With the average legal costs of the 43 non-indicted players already over 12,000 dollars apiece as of 2 weeks ago and the good names of all 46 publicly impugned as conspirators, lawsuits for malicious defamation may be launched to recoup damages. If not the Durham Police, who on the Board of Crimestoppers did it? Was it approved by the Board, and who on that Crimestopper’s Board was there as an employee of a prominant local business, NCCU, or a Well-Endowed University (hint!) with Deep Pockets??? All it takes is just a few defamed players to pursue this as a civil tort. If Nifong or any of the police were in on it or pushed it and City of Durham provided the computer or printing resources Durham could be in for a major lawsuit outside the criminal case. Nothing like private citizens never charged with a crime having their names and faces slapped up by a quasi-official group out to destroy their reputations by groundless slander.
4. Little conversation has gone into what sort of repercussions should fall on “Crystal”. Many believe none - as she is a victim, or is so “troubled” - that as a single mother of two she only merits “sympathy”. I disagree. She needs to face justice for the enormous damage her false accusations of rape did to the Duke players, the coach, the community….and would have done to the 2nd stripper if the police and Nifong had gone with Crystal’s charges that Kim was an active participant in the bathroom rape. Her tax cheat and welfare fraud crimes from unreported high income stripping and prostitution should not be ignored by the Feds or NC taxpayers. Finally, the rape shield the mainstream media and most alternate media maintains should be removed on conclusion she was a false accuser out to victimize others - her name and face should be covered in every media that plastered the names and faces of the 3 false accused all over their product.
5. Yeah, Nifong. While fixation on him masks other major culprits in this - he will be getting his. I just worry that liberal media and the people in power in Durham are just waiting on word Nifong is stepping down or Crystals “tremendous trauma” will prevent her from testifying — to launch the immediate “OK, it’s all over now, time to move on!!”, claim. With demands that “What the community needs, what the poor woman needs” is “CLOSURE and Time to Heal” - with no consequences to Crystal, Nifong, or any of the other players that made a mockery of justice.
Comment by Chris Ford — 06.19.06 @ 3:11 pm
While we wait for Nifong to smirk and announce publicly that no one has seen all of his evidence or knows his timeline, apparently Dan Abrams resurfaced this morning after having viewed the complete discovery file. There are quite a few doozies in it.
1. The accuser told the SANE nurse in a detailed narrative that Kim assisted in the attack by helping to carry the accuser back into the house.
2. Kim and the accuser were hugging each other (for protection, I guess) and that three guys grabbed Kim and dragged her away.
3. “Matt” hit her while Adam and Bret kicked her, although she told the other doctor(s) she was never struck.
It’s a video from the Today show this morning.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/
On the right side, it’s the second link down under NBC NEWS HIGHLIGHTS
Wow.
Comment by SLee — 06.19.06 @ 3:14 pm
kmann #20:
“From most accounts, he’s stuck with a bad case, but it is a case, which means he has to do the job for which he’s paid. I feel bad for him, actually.”
Let’s not feel sorry for Nifong - because he chooses the cases he wants to prosecute. He has discretion to “unselect” them.
The most elegant, traditional, and politically sensible way to “unselect” here would be to have an evidentiary pre-trial hearing.
I have no doubt the lawyers for EF&S would cooperate (to possibly avoid trial and get things done promptly), though they might not allow testimony by the defendants.
Lack of testimony from any defendant at a “prelim” could be used to help decide if there was or was not probable cause.
Just going through the witnesses in court should show the holes in the case (as in the Kobe case in Colorado).
Then, the DA can dismiss, based on no probable cause, or let the judge decide there is no probable cause.
Call it a preliminary hearing, by stipulation, based on questions raised about full disclosure to the grand jury.
If the Black Panthers II wanted to claim unequal justice, they could be shown the record from the preliminary court proceedings. AV would have her “day in court.”
If the AV wanted to participate by submitting a non-sworn written statement (as opposed to live testimony under oath), fine, but the lack of oath and lack of personal appearance could be used to decide if the case has support (or no support) in probable cause.
Comment by cfw — 06.19.06 @ 3:16 pm
Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong is a little upset. Not over the way he himself has handled the Duke Rape Case, but, over the media treatment, including blogs, in the latest Newsweek (via Wizbangblog)
Pingback by Pirate’s Cove — 06.19.06 @ 3:18 pm
Nifungu wants to have it both ways, in his email response to Newsweek. You haven’t seen all the stuff I have, but I had to give the defense all the stuff, so the defense MUST be lying, not me.
Question to Nifungu, earth to Nifungu, Why would the defense release any information if it could be disputed or questioned? Does Nifungu think Rove made up the cell phone logs or photo shopped the ATM picture? Did they photo shop the time stamp on the Duke Hospital report? Did they change the nurses testimony that Crystal said no condom was used. How many lies does Nifungu have to be caught in?
I hope Newsweek runs a cover story, case DISMISSED, Nifungu to be disbarred, Durham faces multi-million dollar lawsuit. Nifungu plans to go to Chapel Hill to work at Alumni office. Sorry, Tatercon, couldn’t resist. Prison for this A**hole. UNBELIEVEABLE! Is this man an IDIOT? YES! Kemp
Comment by kemperman — 06.19.06 @ 3:19 pm
Seems like you were already ahead of the game
Blogs are GREAT!!! LOL
Comment by Renee — 06.19.06 @ 3:32 pm
“And Nifong probably recognizes that his ethical duty is to prosecute the case as best as he can, and let the people (i.e., a jury) decide. ”
Kman, you are right this would be a seventh possible explanation
7. “let the jury decide†or the more derogatory “I wash my hands of this†aka Pontius Pilate
A weakness of this is that the jury decides not every accusation, or the alleged victim would also be facing a trial. Also as a matter of policy even if a crime has been committed, waiting for more evidence such on one of the boys to change testimony or a disgruntled exgirlfriend is preferable to going to trial with a lost case.
Comment by UNK — 06.19.06 @ 3:53 pm
“her name and face should be covered in every media that plastered the names and faces of the 3 false accused all over their product.”
This is also an argument for not posting the names and pic of the accused, as is done in some European countries.
I can’t recall the public trial arguments, but I seem to recall some reason for the accused not having a right to privacy.
Comment by UNK — 06.19.06 @ 3:58 pm
A couple questions no one is asking:
1. Is the accuser still dancing while this thing awaits trial?
2. Is she still turning tricks?
3. I read that her parents haven’t heard from her in weeks. Wow, really, that is strange.
4. No one has ever interviewed the Escort Service in this case. Since they are apparently involved in prostitution, are they being prosecuted?
5. Why has the accuser not been indicted on prostitution charges? Is that being investigated?
Comment by Bill Mitchell — 06.19.06 @ 4:13 pm
If the accuser is still dancing, what would stop some “entrepreneur” from video-taping the dance (or other antics) and posting that on the internet? Can imagine the ‘hits’ on that website?
If she isn’t dancing, what is this struggling mom doing for cash?
Enquiring minds want to know…
Comment by Bill Mitchell — 06.19.06 @ 4:16 pm
Hey, I just thought of a new drinking game. During the Nifong TV interview, every time he ’smirks’, you have to drink.
I should be plastered about half way through.
Comment by Bill Mitchell — 06.19.06 @ 4:17 pm
In Nifong’s e-mail, he mentions the “Michael Peterson case of 2003″ and asks the reporter whether she remembered how that trial went. Was he referring to the soldier/writer accused of killing his wife and all the pre-trial publicity made it seem like there wasn’t enough evidence against him, but he was convicted of the murder? And Peterson was a former Duke student? Did Nifong have anything to do with that case?
Comment by Leon — 06.19.06 @ 4:33 pm
I don’t think Nifong had anything to do with that Peterson case. Jim Hardin was the lead prosecutor, and he moved on to some other job (judgeship?) which left Durham without a DA and led to Nifong getting the interim appointment, which led to Nifong running for DA as the “incumbent” this year.
Former Asst.DA Freda Black assisted in the prosecution of Peterson. One of Nifong’s first acts after being appointed DA was to force Black to resign (else be fired). Black was one of the two attorneys that ran (and lost) against Nifong in the recent Democratic primary. I understand she had pretty good name recognition in Durham because of the Peterson case…possibly enough to have won the election if not for Nifong’s public treatment of the Duke lacrosse case.
Comment by jc — 06.19.06 @ 4:44 pm
I should have been more clear that Hardin got some better job AFTER winning a conviction in the Peterson case.
Comment by jc — 06.19.06 @ 4:45 pm
So, what happened to Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and the Black Panthers? [I came here to ask that, #7, Tracey - saw you had - no one knows?]
Possibly the reason Crystal’s parents haven’t heard from her - she’s already started going to that college that Jesse said he’d pay for?
Someone said that European countries may not post photos and names of the “accused,” neither do papers in the Middle East. The papers in the Middle East, do, however, post 1/4 page photos of the VICTIM, along with her name, city she resides in…
Back to Jesse, Al and the Black Panthers. Where are they, in all of this, now?
Thx.
Comment by Beth T. — 06.19.06 @ 5:13 pm
well, ive been watching Fox and Nifong never came on. Was that a false alarm?
Comment by Bill Mitchell — 06.19.06 @ 5:16 pm
Just back from a workout and a friend there went to HS with Nufungu, in ROCKINGHAM,NC his parents moved to Wilmington his Junior year. What was his take on Nifungu. His words “He was a Dork”. Once a Dork always a Dork, er Tar Heel. Ha Ha Kemp
Comment by kemperman — 06.19.06 @ 5:54 pm
“Question to Nifungu, earth to Nifungu, Why would the defense release any information if it could be disputed or questioned? ”
I don’t think that the defense would release bad information, but I don’t think the defense would release a smoking gun either if there were one.
There may be medical records or telephone numbers that should not be released to the public, but in the past few days, some reporters have claimed to have read “ALL” the file, and not seen any smoking gun or “anything.”
Usually police, seeking a conviction, have in incentive to omit exculpatory evidence, such as the witness was not sure about 2 or 3 or 5 or 10 or 20 attackers. – which they usually do by not writing it down in the first place – not hiding papers.
My impression is that the prosecution would have no reason to withhold a smoking gun from the defense and it would take a legal loophole to withhold the evidence.
Comment by UNK — 06.19.06 @ 6:06 pm
UNK:
“Usually police, seeking a conviction, have in incentive to omit exculpatory evidence, such as the witness was not sure about 2 or 3 or 5 or 10 or 20 attackers. – which they usually do by not writing it down in the first place – not hiding papers.”
Unfortunately for the accuser in this case, it was the numerous stories she told to various doctors and nurses that examined her that were memorialized for the medical records that show her lack of credibility.
Comment by SLee — 06.19.06 @ 6:20 pm
Bill,
On the Big Story at 5 on Fox it got a mention, nothing to write home about. Sounds like Greta is going to have after Nifungu this evening. Tune in, I suspect O’Reily will also pipe up. Kemp
Comment by kemperman — 06.19.06 @ 6:44 pm
As I see it, when this is complete, if the players are aquitted/exonerated, there needs to be a whole list of lawsuits. Everyone needs to be suing the accuser. The accused for obvious reasons, especially the one who’s had a post college job offer withdrawn (seems to me she owes him for all the money he won’t make). The rest of the team for dragging their name through the mud and taking their opportunity to play a game they love. The school for the lost revenue of the lax season (though they chose to close that out so I can see losing that one.) I’ve been in the place of the accused for a situation similar to this and I think there should also be cause to put her on a sex offender watch list. Granted she never touched any of these men, but in my case, my sexual history was upended and shown to everyone who had no business knowing it. I was found innocent but EVERYONE, Including my parents saw the list. I’m an independent person, but I needed their support and in letting them in on the situation, they were suddenly privy to every sarcastic comment, explicit e-mail, or suggestive conversation I’d ever had. They were great about it but now, 5 years later, things are only starting to get back to normal and I felt like I’ve been violated. Plus I recently found out she’s been making speeches at college about being a rape survivor. I think I’m entitled to a portion of her speaking fees (if not all, I did all the suffering after all) and she needs to be publicly known and labeled as a sexual nuisance.
Comment by John — 06.19.06 @ 6:49 pm
#20 … I vehemently disagree. A prosecutor is never a mere apparatchik, with tied hands. He or she is never forced to play out a bad hand, confident that a jury will make sure justice is done on his behalf. Rather, a prosecutor is a quasi-judicial officer who both professionally and ethically must be reasonably certain that there was a crime and that the defendants are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. He or she should never proceed with a prosecution, or drop one, simply on the basis of pressure. Reason, law and prosecutorial experience should prevail. So I don’t buy your exculpation of Nifong.
In reality, it appears Nifong has abandoned any sort of prosecutorial detachment. He is pushing a case that has all the appearance of being an outright sham. The NC Attorney General should step in and take control and/or re-assign. But don’t hold your breath for that to happen. The NC Attorney General is a Democrat.
Comment by Tryptich — 06.19.06 @ 6:53 pm
“there needs to be a whole list of lawsuits. Everyone needs to be suing the accuser. ”
The AV, like about a third of the population is most likely “judgment proofâ€
Comment by UNK — 06.19.06 @ 7:13 pm
I should clarify my own statement:
“Usually police, seeking a conviction, have in incentive to omit exculpatory evidence”
Police would not want to frame innocent people, they would definitely write down if a suspect had blonde or red hair.
However, if the witness was saying “I don’t know what color hair he had. I didn’t get a good look,†a cop may not think this is important enough to write down and it could come back to hurt the case if the attacker is later identified by his eyes, nose and mouth.
Comment by UNK — 06.19.06 @ 7:22 pm
Nifungu plans to go to Chapel Hill to work at Alumni office. Sorry, Tatercon, couldn’t resist. Prison for this A**hole.– Kemperman, at 40.
So, um, Kemp, are you saying prison is going to be your penance for being an A**hole?
Comment by TaterCon — 06.19.06 @ 7:54 pm
Once a Dork always a Dork, er Tar Heel. Ha Ha Kemp
Comment by kemperman
Son, are you tryin’ to find the one raw nerve I got left? Do I recall your sweet bride is a grad of the fine university in Chapel Hill? Do I recall you’re a grad of West Raleigh Bovine U.?
And the boy is at Dook?
How does the sweet bride of yours put up with all of y’all?
Comment by TaterCon — 06.19.06 @ 8:08 pm
What’s up with the defense getting the accuser’s cell phone log?
It must have happened by now…
Comment by mem — 06.19.06 @ 8:36 pm
Now THAT is a good question, just barely is probably the best answer.Kemp
Comment by kemperman — 06.19.06 @ 8:51 pm
Well if nobody sues her I hope dearly that she will at least be held for court costs, or charged with prostitution at the very least, fraud in declaring her income (it’s not much but it took Capone down so it can’t be all bad). It’s clear by this point that she was engaged in illegal activities. It seems likely she pulled this accusation out of her…(hey maybe that caused the irritation). After all the S@#$ she’s dragging everyone through, it hardly makes sense to let her get away with it.
Comment by John — 06.19.06 @ 8:55 pm
tatercon,
email me your address, I’ve got some watford’s bbq sauce for you. Kemp
Comment by kemperman — 06.19.06 @ 9:25 pm
What those supporters of Nifong don’t realize is that MANY, MANY DA’s are corrupt. I personally have a friend, who’s an assistant DA, who MUST carry out trying to convict an innocent person, just because the conviction give a political advantage to her boss. This is honest to God truth, and if you don’t believe me, go to law school, and befriend DA’s, and find out for yourself.
As far as Nifong is concerned, this … is truly deserving of punishment. A … that ruins a couple of kids’ lives just so that he could get reelected, is one public servant that actually needs to be jailed. Their crimes inflict worse damages than anything else. People are so afraid of this “black” voice thing, but if you want the society to function honestly and correctly, they must be shown that black or not, nobody is allowed to make up … 20 different stories about whether there was a rape or not, or what happened. Any supposed “victim” that makes so many different versions, should be REQUIRED BY LAW to present ALL their different stories IN COURT, so that people can see what kind of lying bastards they really are. And the DA’s that support those “victims” needs to go to jail with them. Then maybe they won’t be so eager to damage other people’s careers next time..
Comment by alex — 06.19.06 @ 10:02 pm
Chris Ford’s post #36 is awesome!
Comment by Betty Friedan — 06.19.06 @ 10:09 pm
66
Uh no. Your friend does not have to do anything. That’s like saying that I have a right to kidnap someone if my job depends on it. Sorry, that dog don’t hunt. Were I your friend, I’d tape the MFs talking about it and publicize it. Sorry, sometimes you just have to do what’s right, no matter what.
If more people did what was right (or refused to go along with nonsense), then the Mike Nifongs of the world would not be able to do this. Obviously, Mike Nifong is not the only one working on this case. He has to have assistants. They should be resigning in protest. I understand that people have families to feed, but that does not give you the right to work to incarcerate innocent people.
It’s called honor and moral courage. And it is lacking in America today.
Comment by SPO — 06.19.06 @ 10:34 pm
Post 36 is awesome only as a conspiracy theory.
The world is more incompetence and sequence of errors than conspiracies.
The police “knew†it was most probably a hoax to get out of jail/hospital, but of course did not put it in writing, but gave the “fake†unimportant case to the rookie investigators, who did not even get around to interviewing Kim for a week later.
The whole thing would have died as the AV got her belongings back a week later, if the community did not pressure the police to solve the crime. Pressure the police and they may catch the wrong guy.
Precautions are skipped in the lineup in an effort to get an identification – most of the time when one gets any, even a sketchy identification (of the guilty), one can use it to get a confession or plea bargain.
Add the tendency of police to spin their evidence and limits on investigating rape victims.
A DA with mostly traffic court experience.
A below average DA who can’t read between the lines if he read the file at all and the rest is history.
Comment by UNK — 06.19.06 @ 10:38 pm
And it was likely the same psychological effect that caught both Nifong and the AV.
The AV most like got away with lying to her family and the police for years about being an “escort,†because they did not bother to check.
Nifong most likely got away with a minimal job in traffic court because no one bothered to check his work.
Then like thousands of “street n——“ who thought they outsmarted the cops because they got away with BSing the beat cop, one finds it’s not as easy to lie to a homicide detective. And Nifong finds out that traffic court work does not cut it for a rape investigation.
Comment by UNK — 06.19.06 @ 10:51 pm
Americans concerned about Duke Rape Case encouraged to contact NC
Michael J. Gaynor, independent columnist at The Post Chronicle, is encouraging those Americans, who are concerned with what has been going on in the Duke Rape case, to contact the Attorney General of NC, the NC Governor, and the Executive Director of t…
Trackback by Tidbits And Treasures — 06.19.06 @ 10:51 pm
I just watched “The Situation with Tucker Carlson” on MSNBC. His guest tonight, Susan Filan stated that she viewed the 1300 page report along with Dan Abrams and that within the report the accuser stated that one of the accused players had ejaculated in her mouth during the rape and that she spit the contents out on the floor in the bathroom of the house (sorry about the graphic detail-YUCK!). The reason I mention this is that we now know she lied again because the rape examination would have found evidence of this during the oral swab of the rape examination if it were indeed true. Unbelievable!!!!
Ya know, every night I keep saying to myself this case cannot get any more pathetic and yet I keep getting surprised time and time again. Where did Nifong get his law degree?? Perhaps it came in the form of a prize out of a box of Cracker Jacks???
Another thing I wanted to mention here was to ask if anyone else had seen the numerous appearances on Fox news and MSNBC of Ultra leftist feminist Wendy Murphy over the past couple months?? This lady has to be the most obnoxious person I have ever seen on TV. She has the same exact narrow-minded view as Nifong only worse. If you heard this woman talk about this case you wouldn’t sleep at night. I’ve seen her on several programs in recent months and she frightens me. I actually had a nightmare of her last week and I woke up in a cold sweat with her evil face burned into my memory. She feels that any woman who makes an accusation of rape is telling the truth WITHOUT EXCEPTION!!! Women NEVER lie about rape in her narrow-minded opinion. I am especially ashamed that I share the same last name as this “lady”. I truly feel sorry for the guy who has that cold fish to go home to every night. If you are out there somewhere you have my deepest sympathy.
~Murph
Comment by Brian Murphy — 06.19.06 @ 11:42 pm
she disgusts me she woeuldnt even anser the questin of what evidence could nifong possibly have.
Comment by shari — 06.20.06 @ 12:25 am
Not to defend my post #36 overly much, but the defense lawyers have charged, in the May 25th motion - pretty convincingly IMO - that the police broke several state laws, violated their own lineup rules, and appear to have misled a Judge while under oath on waiving suspects civil rights protections for search warrants.
UNK says no conspiracy, just police out to spin their evidence and limits on investigating rape victims.
There is a term for it, UNK, it is called “railroading” and typically involves a conspiracy of several in the law enforcement community.
My other points that the inquest into the “Wanted” poster of the 46 white players is being pushed by lawyers for the “non-accused” which have amassed legal bills of close to half a million in part from that poster, the alumni consequences now starting against Brodhead, the potential lawsuits galore, the Accuser’s fate - stand.
Same with the “Niphong fixation” causing cops, Brodhead far deeper into the dark to be overlooked. And my guarantee that when this witch hunt collapses, the Main Media Message will be - “It’s best that everyone stop. No lawsuits, no pesecution of this DA or this poor young working mother. What is NEEDED - (delivered soooo earnestly by writers and TV reporters is ) “All need move on, to let the “healing process begin” so CLOSURE can be achieved.” Yuck!
===============================
Brian Murphy -
I agree 100% on Wendy Murphy. Can’t stand that woman. Both Fox and MSNBC could do better if they wanted a feminist perspective that pick that ranting man-hating psychopath. She is so repulsive that it doesn’t even make sense “stirring up controversy” for ratings by using her. Not only do I flip from Fox when I see her, the wife does as well (and also Susan Estritch because my wife likens her voice to something worse than fingernails on the blackboard).
Face it, if you saw Wendy Murphy’s fanatic eyes staring back at you from within a Burqua, you’d be expecting a suicide bomb to go off.
Comment by Chris Ford — 06.20.06 @ 1:35 am
Deading the Duke rape case?
Is the media helping the defense attorneys in Raleigh-Durham to kill the Duke rape case?
Trackback by ReidBlog — 06.20.06 @ 10:05 am
I guess Miss Magnum does have a bad reputation:
http://webapps6.doc.state.nc.us/apps/offender/offend1?DOCNUM=0801264&SENTENCEINFO=yes&SHOWPHOTO=yes&numtimesin=2
When will this case get dropped. This crazy woman has caused enough problems now and in the past.
Comment by Tracey — 06.20.06 @ 11:03 am
Kman writes: “Speaking as one of those “on the left side of justice issuesâ€, I know of nobody who argues for the release of convicts where new DNA is inconclusive (â€fails to yield a matchâ€). However, when new DNA evidence proves innocence, then that’s another story.
That said, many here seem to take the position that the absence of linking DNA evidence proves that the lacrosse players are innocent, and the “victim†is lying. That’s simply not true. DNA evidence would certainly make Nifong’s task easier, but the absence of DNA evidence doesn’t mean he’s got no case.”
KMAN, you lost me. How was the DNA inconclusive? From what I understand — correct me if I’m wrong — it is conclusive that none of the lacrosse players’ DNA was recovered from the AV. Correct? It’s also conclusive that there was semen recovered from the AV and that it was conclusively linked to a source other than a lacrosse player (Crystal’s boyfriend). How is that inconclusive?
Joe Convict comes back to court in 2006 and says the semen recovered from the victim in my 1986 rape case should be tested. It is and the DNA shows it was some other source than Joe Convict. In addition the identification was questionable. Courts have been letting guys like Joe Convict go.
SF&E can say the exact same thing. The only DNA material recovered from the AV was conclusively linked to a different source and the identification was spurious. If Joe Convict goes free, then SF&E go free.
I’m interested in seeing how you explain how DNA can “prove” innocence in other cases yet amazingly cannot in this case. Again, you can’t have it both ways. And allow me a follow-up question since I’m guessing what your response to the first question will be. The follow-up question is: given the AV’s description of the assault — no condoms, ejaculation into her mouth, scratching and clawing her attackers, etc. — how is it even possible that NONE of SF&E’s DNA would be left behind? How is it even possible that the ONLY source of DNA was semen that was conclusively linked to someone else? If that doesn’t “prove” innocence, what does?
Comment by Greg — 06.20.06 @ 11:53 am
After reading Nifong’s response to Newsweek, it seems even more imperative that the trial happen sooner rather than later. IF he turned over all of his discovery - which he has maintained was more than enough to convince both himself and a grand jury - then what could be gained by delaying the trial? He has made it clear that he has more than enough to proceed - his smirking confidence implies that he is certain he can sway the jury. Why delay then? Is he bluffing and hoping that as someone mentioned in a previous post, a disgruntled girlfriend comes forward, evidence gets lost, or that some gets “found” (manufactured)? He has made it clear the investigation is over….indictments have been handed down and he is convinced of guilt. Why wait? He certainly pushed the DNA testing ahead of other cases….
Comment by Lisa M. — 06.20.06 @ 12:23 pm
I think Nifong knows he made a mistake in judgment here but cant figure out a way to extricate himself.
Kinda like Bush and his Iraq war.
Maybe this new guy will get on the ballot and Nifong will be pushed out.
Comment by lukeNC — 06.20.06 @ 12:42 pm
Deading the Duke rape case?
Is the media helping the defense attorneys in Raleigh-Durham to kill the Duke rape case?
REPLY: Nope, this case is dieing a slow death on its own accord. If there were even a chance that this case had any real merit the media would be on the D.A.’s side because it would sell. This case just happens to be so transparent that most people in the media know they can no longer back the prosecution hence the Newsweek folks doing a complete 180 degree turn in their view of the story. Early on they were writing stories that were highly favorable to the accuser. Why?? They figured that the D.A. Nifong must have had something concrete against the young men he had indicted. When the MSM realized exactly how sad the prosecution’s case was after the discovery process they went into a damage control mindset. Nobody wants to back a clear loser (Nifong, if you’re reading this, that is YOU!).
Having a corrupt D.A. is the main reason this case is where it is. I feel that the D.A. made it known to the investigators in this case that he wanted to indict these young men and the investigating officers complied by patching together a flimsy case. He says that he was not politically motivated but we know that that is complete BS. I have heard several prosecutors on TV say that they would never have brought a case this transparent to trial. Now I think Nifong is incompetent as well but the main reason this case (or lack there of) made it this far is that Nifong thought he could use it as a springboard to getting reelected. And guess what?? He was right. The only problem is that he thought the case would die a slow quiet death and he would be able to walk away saying, “I did everything I could but we couldn’t get a conviction”.
I hope that when this case is finally thrown out of court that those responsible are made to pay. I hope the young men involved can file civil suits against the false accuser and the city of Durham for all the damage they have caused them. I heard another poster on this blog state that they didn’t want to see the case die and then hear the predictable cliché “We all need time to heal”. My ass! I WANT BLOOD!!! We need to make an example of those involved in this travesty of justice. We as a society need to put pressure on the people of Durham to hold the race panderers and extortionists responsible for their actions. NO EASY WAY OUT FOR THEM THIS TIME!!!!
Comment by Brian Murphy — 06.20.06 @ 12:53 pm
Ditto Brian!! Why not call for a show of support for Reid at his hearing on the 22nd? Where’s the power of the Blog? Lashawn time to get them fired up! Email the usual suspects and see if we can get folks to show up Thursday in “The Bull City”. Named after Bull Durham tobbaco, but now it is the city with TOO much BullS***! Kemp
Comment by kemperman — 06.20.06 @ 1:15 pm
Great post, Brian (#80). I am in TOTAL agreement…
Comment by Tate — 06.20.06 @ 1:15 pm
#80 - great post! As for the ‘healing’ - there would never have been a reason for any type of healing, had there been a competent DA! This guy was certainly only concerned with winning the election. And, I believe he’s holding off until the Spring, trying to make sure he wins in November. But, perhaps this is going to be his undoing, since most people are tired of the ‘waiting game.’ I believe he’s ruined the lives of these boys for no reason - very flimsy evidence, if any evidence at all. They just happened to be at the wrong place at the right time. But, that doesn’t make them guilty. And, from day one, he’s pronounced them guilty! He needs to be removed from the case, the case dismissed, and then sue them all! These boys’ lives will never be the same. There will always be those that think they are truly guilty.
Comment by Barb — 06.20.06 @ 1:34 pm
77 Greg:
“The follow-up question is: given the AV’s description of the assault — no condoms, ejaculation into her mouth, scratching and clawing her attackers, etc. — how is it even possible that NONE of SF&E’s DNA would be left behind? How is it even possible that the ONLY source of DNA was semen that was conclusively linked to someone else? If that doesn’t “prove†innocence, what does?”
Pretty good argument since we have a statement from AV (probably not in her own hand) as to ejaculation.
MD/nurse could claim it is possible to have no mouth DNA if AV did a good job spitting.
Nurses note of no condom is hearsay - AV could claim she never said that or maybe she was mistaken (at least down below).
I am convinced of actual innocence, but arguing “no DNA is conclusive” seems legally perilous.
I gather most “Joe Convict” cases involve dead bodies, not suspected prevaricators who are very much alive, such as AV.
Comment by cfw — 06.20.06 @ 2:22 pm
“I’m interested in seeing how you explain how DNA can “prove†innocence in other cases yet amazingly cannot in this case.”
DNA can “prove” innocence when another rapist’s DNA is found AND the odds of being raped twice by two random rapists on the same day are next to zero AND there NO gang rape by two rapists (the woman reported only one man or crime scene evidence (footprints) shows only one man in case of dead body).
The lack of DNA is not good, but it’s not conclusive or the case would be over.
Comment by UNK — 06.20.06 @ 4:04 pm
con’t
For example, IF there was DNA from 3 other Duke boys AND one takes the AV’s word that only 3 raped her, it would prove the original 3 innocent.
Comment by UNK — 06.20.06 @ 4:10 pm
Whoa, UNK, whose side are you on here? (j/k)
Comment by Greg — 06.20.06 @ 4:12 pm
REPLY TO KEMP: I wish I could be at Reid’s hearing on Thursday but unfortunately I live in Massachusetts. If I lived anywhere near Durham N.C. you can be sure that I would definitely take a day off of work to attend the hearing and show support for the accused. Especially after the last hearing when we had to see the Black Panthers trying to intimidate this innocent young man and his family. It would mean allot to me personally because the way I look at it is that this could have easily happened to me as well during my college years and its important that people stand up and say enough is enough! These young men had their futures stolen from them for absolutely NOTHING!!! People should be outraged but instead they remain silent because the accused are from well to do backgrounds. Why?? Because the PC Police have brow beaten us into submission and no one wants to appear as if they are biased, even at the expense of a few privileged white men. Well, that’s an act of extreme cowardice in my opinion. Kemp, I hope you and anyone else who feels the same will indeed show up for the hearing because they could definitely use the support. You would not only be helping these innocent young men involved in this particular case but you would also be helping others in the future from having to endure this same type of atrocity.
~Murph
Comment by Brian Murphy — 06.20.06 @ 4:53 pm
How could a case this strong go wrong for the defense?
The evidence in this case is tilting so overwhelmingly in favor of the defense that the lawyers for the accused should scrupulously avoid any suggestion Nifong-esque overreaching -
Reference post #74, and the most recent defense motions, one such potential pitfall for the defense is embodied by the stretch-the-facts allegation, in paragraph e. 7 (page 5) of the defense’s June 7 Affidavit Of Counsel In Support of Motion to Suppress (yes Lashawn, I for one obeyed your entreaty to actually read it). In the pleading, the defense lawyer asserts that but for Himan’s bumbling Keystone coppery (paraphrase) he “would have discovered sooner that [AV] was involved in some sexual manner with at least four different men during the weekend from March 10 thorugh March 12, 2006.” The defense cites to Himan’s summary of his March 21 interview of Jarriel Johnson (the driver) as support for this allegation. But the Johnson statement (which on balance does sound for all the world to my own suspicious mind like a pimp’s account of ferrying his “employee” to & from her various pay-for-play “dates”) (1) does not in fact say or imply that any sexual relations of any sort took place at any of the hotels between March 10 and 12, & rather relates only “performances” by AV to the 3 unidentified men at the various hotels (how hard do we suppose the Durham police looked for the benificiaries of said “performances” after Johnon gave his statement?) and (2) contains an odd recantation by Johnson at the very end as to the sexual encounter which he initially claimed to have enjoyed with AV very shortly before her infamous encounter with the lacrosse players - Johnson evidently went back & checked his “records” (a datebook & cell phone) & realized that his sex with AV was in fact 1 week PREVIOUS to the lacrosse party. Why does this matter? because (1) some of us (myself included) had taken it as near-fact that AV had engaged in sex very shortly before the lacrosse party with persons other than the lacrosse players & (2) the defense appears to have fallen - at least on this one point - into the regrettable but very tempting trap of tweaking the evidence just a notch to make a strong point stronger. Great cases (for the defense and prosecution) are often lost by succumbing to just such a temptation, and the defense case here is SO strong that it would be abominable for similar fate to befall the defense in this case.
Comment by Karl — 06.20.06 @ 6:15 pm
If I could afford to take off work and support these young men on Thursday, I would do it in a heartbeat. I want so badly to be a voice for these young men… A voice of principle, reason and outrage! LaShawn is right; we need to stand up. What is holding us back? I’m willing to risk my life and safety to show my support. And I’m a single white female. That’s how strongly I feel…
If things turn out badly on Thursday (God forbid) would anyone in the local area be interested in holding a rally? A march? I’m hip if you are…
Comment by Tate — 06.20.06 @ 6:26 pm
If I can get out of a meeting I’ll go and report back. tatercon, you want to go too? can you check court calendar and find time and room number? You know, the secret attorney call to the clerk routine. Kemp
Comment by kemperman — 06.20.06 @ 7:04 pm
90 Tate:
“If things turn out badly on Thursday (God forbid)”
At best, look for a draw on Thursday, I suggest.
A draw would be “come back to me in x weeks with some witnesses.”
If judge says I have all I need, I will let you know, I would expect a decision to let the case proceed.
Prosecutions are hard to stop just based on motion papers. If the Judge says “bad lineup,” Nifong can appeal (or seek a writ). I have seen no cases that say “you must have non-team members in a lineup.”
Even if the line-up is thrown out, Nifong can try to prove identity other ways (such as with in court ID). FS&E can say “tainted” but that is hard to sell.
If the indictment is considered invalid, Nifong can convene another grand jury.
Judges are political animals, or once were, and know that a “throw out” without any witnesses being examined is asking for political turmoil. Why rush to judgment just based on blogs and MSM shifts in favor of FS&E, the Judge will ask himself (or herself)?
On another subject, Nifong’s latest press release violates the old “one rhetorical question per argument” rule. He came up with five. Dump truck lawyering. How did Durham choose to elevate a traffic court lawyer to DA? Mind-boggling.
Comment by cfw — 06.20.06 @ 7:11 pm
Karl, good points in post #89. How much would you be willing to bet that Jarriel’s first statement of when he had intercourse with AV was actually the correct one? Read the narrative and he’s got the timeline pretty well down. And when you find out a day later that serious allegations were raised about what happened over night, you’re going to tend to remember those events. It’s like remembering exactly where you were when you heard Kennedy was shot (or Reagan or whoever you’re old enough to remember). I’d be more inclined to believe his first story.
Comment by Greg — 06.20.06 @ 7:18 pm
Glad to hear the Republicans are putting someone on the ballot to run against this horrible man in November . . .
However, interestingly enough, if our NC election process were like Indiana’s, Nifong would have been history in the primary.
In North Carolina, you have to register Republican, Democrat, or Unaffiliated. And if you’re registered as a member of either party, you can’t choose to vote in the primaries on the other party’s ballot. If you’re unaffiliated, you can choose whichever ballot you want.
Too bad more registered Republicans in Durham didn’t know this at least six weeks before the primaries. I’m happy I did and I’m glad to say I was able to vote against Nifong.
But many of my friends whose voter registration cards list them as Republicans sadly found that they had no say in whether Mike Nifong or Freda Black went on the to general election in November. (My understanding is that Nifong won only narrowly against Black.)
Had they been allowed to vote with the saner Democrats in Durham, he’d have lost.
Let this be a lesson, though! There’s really no good reason I can think of to put party affiliation on your voter registration card in states like North Carolina, and one HUGE reason not to (of course, if you live in New Mexico, registering “unaffiliated” won’t help you at all because you won’t be able to vote in any primary).
LaShawn, seriously. Give your readers a little civics lesson and have them check out their state’s election laws. If their laws are like North Carolina’s, issue a call to action!
Love your blog. While I don’t always agree with you, you state your positions with intelligence and you make me think. It’s a breath of fresh air in a medium that is too often full of emotionally charged, over-the-top rhetoric.
keep it up!
kelly
Comment by kelly — 06.20.06 @ 7:30 pm
cfw,
It has been over a month, but I seem to remember that the Judge who first heard the case, Shepard?, is at retirement age. Term of his office over 2008, so he is sort of immune from the politics of the thing. That assumes the same Judge will hear the case Thursday. If so, I think that goes well for the boys. From his Bio, vetnam vet, etc., he seems to me a no nonsense kind of guy. Only question is who will be assigned to the hearing. Kemp
Comment by kemperman — 06.20.06 @ 9:44 pm
Has Jesse Jackson recinded his absurd offer to pay the for the stripper’s tuition? I mean, it was so WONDERFUL of him to jump on the damn bandwagon of Duke haters before knowing the facts. But now that it’s becoming actually clear that the woman is a horrible person, a liar of the very worst kind…will Jesse continue to reward this racist? He should stand in front of the Duke chapel (if Brodhead were to allow him) and apologize to all Duke students and alumni. and then Duke should have him escorted from the campus immediately.
The stripper, Nifong, the 2nd stripper, Jesse jackson… This is just a slice of the terrible side of human nature.
Luckily for Duke, the school has SO much good to out weigh these false accusations. Although, with the media shifting back toward Duke finally, I will say that, in the end, Duke will probably come out looking great. Just give it another year.
Comment by StanfordGuy — 06.20.06 @ 10:14 pm
1) Okay, Mr. Nifong, defense counsel’s election to term the worthless DNA results “exonorating” of the players was a transparent spin. Um, where is the “People’s” evidence to the contrary? Funny you didn’t use your rant to Ms. Meadows as a sounding board for that. Oh, forgot, you’ve now indicted three young men and “can’t comment” on the eviden…er…travesty you’ve created.
2) There ain’t never gonna be no trial. You know it. I know it. We all know it. You really just look silly, and incompetent, at this point.
3) Lemme understand this: that which you’ve elected to label “ironic point #1″, i.e., those seventy-some-odd press briefings within a week of the story’s breaking, were merely your altruistic attempt to “effectuate a more accurate public discourse on an issue with great societal resonance.” How Jerry Springer of you. Gee, and here I thought your job was to professionally evaluate evidence, irrespective of public discourse, to determine whether or not a sustainable prosecution might be brought.
Considering it was you, and only you, Mr. Nifong, who was disseminating information at that time, information you passed off as “facts” when, IN FACT, you hadn’t even seen the ER report, and couldn’t conceivably have had any idea of the accuser’s credibility implosion and suspect identification problems you would later encounter, tell me, exactly how were you acting as gatekeeper to “accurate” public discourse? Indeed, it was YOU, Mr. Nifong, more than any other, who MISLED the public. You’re nearly a laugh. But you’re really a cry. Maroon.
Comment by MIke McCusker — 06.20.06 @ 10:32 pm
I don’t know anything about NC politics, but it looks like Nifong barely won the primary with the backing of “extreme†Democrats.
Could either an independent or a Republican with support of the “moderate†Democrats?
And I am not totally comfortable with a case being dropped or started for political reasons.
Comment by UNK — 06.21.06 @ 1:00 am
Mikey is stung by the “irony” of my initial comments on the situation before there was a case against any identified defendant which would trigger the ethical rules resulted in my being accused of unethical behavior. Hmmm, within 24 hours of his involvement, he expressed absolute certainty that the stor(ies) of our hard-working collegiate mother of two were true; went on to call the lacrosse team “hooligans” and publicly dared them all to, basically, “‘fess up.” He effectively convicted 46 young men in the court of public opinion, by manipulating the very press he now vilifies, before he had a shred of “evidence” other than Tawan…er…our hard-working collegiate mother of two’s stor(ies). Isn’t it ironic? F’ing retard.
Comment by Mike McCusker — 06.21.06 @ 10:43 am
Comment by Mike McCusker — 06.21.06 @ 10:53 am
if you want to know how I am going to do that, you will need to attend the trial.
Comment by Mike McCusker — 06.21.06 @ 11:00 am
Greg writes:
“KMAN, you lost me. How was the DNA inconclusive? From what I understand — correct me if I’m wrong — it is conclusive that none of the lacrosse players’ DNA was recovered from the AV. Correct? It’s also conclusive that there was semen recovered from the AV and that it was conclusively linked to a source other than a lacrosse player (Crystal’s boyfriend). How is that inconclusive?”
Because the absence of lacrosse player DNA evidence does not mean they didn’t commit rape. Not all rape results in tangible DNA evidence.
And the presence of another person’s semen also doesn’t mean the lacrosse player didn’t commit rape either.
It’s like taking fingerprints at a crime scene. You may find many fingerprints there, but not that of your main suspect. The absence of his fingerprints doesn’t render him innocent (he simply may not have left any behind), nor does it render him guilty (obviously). Hence, it’s inconclusive.
Greg further writes:
“I’m interested in seeing how you explain how DNA can “prove†innocence in other cases yet amazingly cannot in this case.”
Well, it depends on the other circumstances. Let’s say that a man was convicted of raping a virgin back in 1986. And now, 20 years later, they finally test the DNA of the semen, and determine it was not his. That would “prove” his innocence.
Despite what you suggest, nobody is being released now based solely on “new” DNA evidence. It is DNA evidence in conjunction with other known facts.
As to commenters who suggest that I shouldn’t feel sorry for Nifong, I do. I think you’re right in pointing out that he has some discretion in deciding which cases to pursue and which not to pursue, but that discretion is not unlimited.
I feel sorry for him because he’s caught between a rock and a hard place. If he pursues the case, he’s subject to all the criticisms that are echoed here on this board and elsewhere. If he drops the case, he’ll be criticized for bowing to public pressures and not letting the people hear all the evidence (or, as the case may be, lack of evidence).
The best thing for all concerned is for him to do his job, let the defense attorneys do their job, and play this whole thing out. Try the case before a jury of the people.
Frankly, a trial is in the interest of the lacrosse players as well — if they are truly innocent, there needs to be a public exoneration that can only come from a trial. But if Nifong simply buries this, the “rapist” stigma will follow them around forever.
Comment by Kman — 06.21.06 @ 11:50 am
Greg - on your post #93 I agree whole-heartedly with you about which story is more credible - the level of blow-by-blow (pun intended) detail which the pimp (excuse me, “driver”) set out in his initial statement relating the comings & goings of himself & the AV damsel between March 10 & 12 is far more credible than the lame post-script on his statement which essentially says “aw gee, I got it wrong - the sex I had with her was actually a week earlier”. In most suspect/witness statements I’ve seen (and that would be a lot, having spent a decade as a criminal defense lawyer), an “amendment” to a suspect/witness statement as significant as the one on the Jarriel Johnson (see, even the guy’s NAME sounds like a pimp…), statement, particularly one which sets out a variance as significant as this one is usually the product of police intervention or pressure of some sort -here we know by the hand-written notations at the bottom of the pages (if they are accurate…) that Johnson changed his story on this critical point almost a half an hour after his original account. hmmmm… I wonder (1) how long after the initial statement the “driver” actually “remembered” he had in fact had sex with AV 1 week before the lacrosse party, rather than the day of, (2) what pressure was put on him by police/DA office in that half hour after his initial statement that affected his recollection of the sex timeline (to the exclusion of all the other events he details in the statement!) - hard to believe a guy in Jarriel Johnson’s line of work wouldn’t have SOMETHING he would need police/DA help with (a la Kim Roberts & her bail reduction personally authorized by Nifong) & (3) what Johnson has said to the defense investigators more recently on this point.
But returning to the initial point of my post (after all, the main thing is the main thing) the defense is running a BIG RISK with gambits like the overreaching claim in e. 7 of the June Affidavit in Support of Motion to Suppress, - in the long run IT DOESN’T MATTER WHAT JOHNSON SAID OR DIDN’T SAY - AV had someone else’s semen inside her, and not the lacrosse players, whom AV says (among other variants of her story) penetrated her without condoms - and this is just one nugget along with a couple of dozen other teflon-coated facts which ALL favor the accused. The poster (cfw, #92) who observed that this motion to suppress is unlikely to be dispositive of the case is right on. A judge is going to be thinking “Nifong, you dug yourself this hole, I’m not pulling you out of it at my own risk …” You have to realize that probability as the defense lawyer, and you just don’t want to go filing sworn statements to a judge that shade the facts in an arguably slimy way - in a case like this credibility is everything - not only for the defendants and their accuser but also for the laweyers . Nifong squandered every bit of his believability long ago, and that significant advantage to the defense will evaporate if they don’t play it straight and true…
Comment by Karl — 06.21.06 @ 12:05 pm
CFW (at rougly #92), don’t you think the defense motion was designed to place defense-favorable information from the discovery files into the public domain? I mean, if there are ethical rules against pre-trial publicity, you can still get your point across by filing a motion that you know the press will examine. And when you attach exculpatory documents to that motion that were not otherwise available for public consumption, you can leak things to the media without actually having to leak things to the media.
Comment by Greg — 06.21.06 @ 12:18 pm
KMAN, on #102 I could not disagree with you more about feeling sorry for poor little Nifong. Being THE district attorney is by definition a HARD JOB, and the DA is required to make these very difficult life-altering decisions on a day-to-day basis guided solely (OK, everybody, hide your smirks & giggles here)by the concept of doing justice, not with an eye toward public opinion, or winning a big case, or animus against a particular defendant or his lawyer, all of which appear to be Nifong’s motivators. The fact that Nifong is allowing the latter to enter his decision-making is a basis for contempt, not pity. Even if I hedge you that a charge a serious as gang rape should ALWAYS be pursued by police initially, that doesn’t mean you move forward with such a case once it becomes abundantly clear to all concerned (and gang, I lean FAR further to the left than probably 99% of us posting and reading here) that JUSTICE requires dismissal of the case. Even if I give Nifong every benefit of the doubt about his actions up until right now, he cannot conceivably go forward with this case while upholding his oath of office - at the VERY BEST (for him) he was snookered into going forward with a case based on a misunderstanding of the evidence - evidence he now knows to be polar opposite of what he publicly represented it to be. This one isn’t even close.
Comment by Karl — 06.21.06 @ 12:19 pm
Kemp 95:
“It has been over a month, but I seem to remember that the Judge who first heard the case, Shepard?, is at retirement age. Term of his office over 2008, so he is sort of immune from the politics of the thing. That assumes the same Judge will hear the case Thursday. If so, I think that goes well for the boys. From his Bio, vetnam vet, etc., he seems to me a no nonsense kind of guy. Only question is who will be assigned to the hearing. Kemp”
I have been impressed so far with the judges in Durham who have said no to the subsidiary prosecutions (noise issues).
I was not too impressed with the magistrate who was going on and on in the press about the other Duke rape case (alleged insemination while unconscious). Just not his/her place to brief the press. I was also not too impressed with magistrate who issued warrants to Nifong without much fact sorting, and the judicial officer who supervised the grand jury (no steps to remind gj of the rights of the gj to demand real, balanced presentations).
If this was the judge who said, in effect “I just do administration, and the trial judge does the heavy lifting,” I hope he has changed his mind. Now that Nifong has produced the 1300 pages of “evidence,” and EF&S have presumably produced what they n