Suspected Arrested in Durham for Rape

“but give it guess”

Going way out on a limb with this one but my guess is NO.

Where are the feminists, you ask? Just about the only thing that can get the feminists riled up these days is talk about the evil government’s refusal to subsidize daycare, or putting limits on abortion demand. Prosecution and stoning of rape victims in Iran? Clitoris clipping of small girls in Egypt? Naw . . . but the real critical issues are those things that affect pretentious, pampered yuppie women or the rights of their selected mascots (as in this alleged rape case, American “brown women,” exempting, of course, those American brown women whom they employ to raise the children that they had but don’t want to raise themselves. Those nanny women must forfeit their brown-given rights to equality and career advancement. Otherwise, who will mind the babies for the American feminists?

Double shame - 1st - that the Duke 3 were convicted before a trial by all the various groups headed by Nifong so he could promote his campaign.
2nd - that Michael Burch will be mollycoddled by the same groups only because he is black and the reverse racist/do gooders have pulled in their legal shingle

LaShawn,

Again, I use the phrase of the Los Angeles cool disc jockey, Paul Compton, who often referred to himself as PC, Primarily. No, nothing will be made of it due to: PC (politically correct)Primarily.

John

We can only hope that this case is tried as fairly as possible. We should have learned after the Kobe Bryant fiasco that it is and should be ‘innocent until proven guilty’. The DA (Nifong) needs to be disbarred and quickly.

I want to share something in regards to this comment you made:

“Honestly, who among the bitter, bored, and envious could resist demonizing a bunch of “privileged” white college boys, unleashing years of anger and frustration over their own failures or disappointments or inadequacies?”

I had a boyfriend who, when we were together, was mild on politics and didn’t even read the paper. He had a glamourous job at Disney and came from an upper, upper class family. He always felt he’d have the “good life”.

Then Disney lays off hundreds of artists..his dream job, the only one he wanted to do and had passion for. Starting then was the start of the degeneration of my ex.

He was at once a considerate, polite person now he is a raving leftist, owns MM’s DVD’s, deranged Bush hater, hater of Israel, sends me anti-semintic articles and cannot have a regular conversation without aggressively inserting politics, and often in a non-tolerant way. Gone is the sweetness and consideration he had before. I have never witnessed such a big personality change. It could be the anti-depressants or just the bitterness…but I think he a perfect example of what bitterness does to a person.

I think it’s very true that how we react to these issues is often a result of our own frustrations and disapointments in your life. The personal does become political. My ex, instead of dealing with his feelings, manifests it in intense anger and rudeness. Sad.

In answer to your first question regarding why they have not been suspended, there could be several factors at play:

1) Only one out of three tenants are members of the fraternity, and police are yet to disclose the circumstances, or which tenant, if any, was in possession of the drugs that were found. The drugs were also found long after the party had occurred, and thus, we can’t assume the fraternity had anything to do with this.

2) By whatever standard defined by the chapter, this might not qualify as an official fraternity event. Again, it occurred at a non-chapter house with only one tenant qualifying as a member of the fraternity.

3) The alleged-guilty party was not a member of the fraternity, nor was he a student of any university in the area.

4) It is possible that no rules (if they exist) of the local chapter or its governing body (if one exists at all), or its National office have been broken.

5) It is possible that Duke does not have the authority to sanction this particular chapter.

National Pan-Hellenic Council chapters (these are different from just “Pan-Hellenic” sororities, and include African American fraternities) often are not subject to the same rules and restrictions as other national fraternity systems. In a sense, NPHC chapters are self-governed on many campuses, answering only to themselves. While this may or may not be the case at Duke, it is the case at many schools nation-wide. At my alma mater, common sources of alcohol (kegs) are prohibited for chapter members of the Interfraternity Council (IFC), and Pan-Hellenic Councils (PHC) of the University, but not specifically prohibited by the National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC); violations are subject to sanction and referral to the administration judicial body. Additionally, an (IFC) fraternity event was defined as an event with 8 or more brothers in attendance, and guest lists were required for such events. Also required were sober party monitors, age verification, and more. For most chapters on campus, their national charters and insurance carriers also mandate adherence to these policies and others. NPHC chapters often have no such restrictions unless their individual council on campus enacts and enforces them. Without being subject to the strict rules and regulations of many National Fraternal Caucuses and Fraternal Insurance policy groups, NPHC chapters have the choice to behave differently, which in turn, fosters a situation with extraordinary legal liability in both criminal and civil cases. First, many national organizations have indemnified themselves from prosecution for the actions of individual chapters. Essentially for many chapters, they’re on their own if they screw up. So hypothetically, if the chapter here was providing a common source of alcohol and hosting an open public party, you can bet any trial lawyer worth his soul will go after the chapter officers, their parents, their parent’s homeowner’s insurance policies, and anyone else that might have played a role of negligence (no matter how minor). That’s if it can be proven as a “fraternity event”

Frankly, there simply may not be any rules at Duke that govern them, which truly puts the lives of many other innocent parties at risk. It is practically commonplace for the chapter officers of fraternities to be charged with complicity to any criminal charges that occur at fraternity events. If drugs were found, even if someone owns up to them, the police are within their authority to charge the ranking officers in the same way that the homeowner or lessee might be responsible if drugs were found in their home.

Even with evidence suggesting possible involvement of the fraternity in the party, the chapter likely hasn’t been suspended because the support system for discipline and sanctions was probably never there to begin with. In a sense though, I wouldn’t advocate revoking a charter anyways unless there was gross negligence. All too often, entire fraternities of good men are held responsible for the actions of their weakest few. Some say that’s the choice that’s made when joining a fraternity, as a former Fraternity President, I happen to believe otherwise. By all indications, Burch is not a member of the fraternity, and given the nature of college parties, it would not surprise me if the young man had very little association with its members Count on the fact that their brothers are ashamed to even be associated with this. That’s not to say that there’s anything wrong with the National office suspending the chapter pending an investigation, but again, if the national organization has no such rules in existence, on what authority can they do so?

Aside from all that is the fact that there simply is no solid evidence (known publicly) that would indicate the fraternity is responsible. If we blame an entire fraternity for the actions of one sordid individual, then how is that any better than what happened to the Duke Lacrosse team? Burch, the alleged-rapist, is not a member of the fraternity or a student at any university. Then there’s the fact that only one of the tenants in the house is a member of the fraternity, and the drugs were found long after the party had occurred. If the chapter organized the event, I can understand attributing some degree of responsibility to them if the drugs were found during the party. They were not, and it’s reckless to assume otherwise. Take it slow, wait for an investigation, and then determine the proper course of action.

#13

I think he a perfect example of what bitterness does to a person.

As somebody said on another board, his mother told him to “never become a victim; the pay isn’t good and there are no career openings”.

Michael,
EXCELLENT post. Well thought out. Number one son is VERY involved with IFC at Duke and they have absolutely no say in this matter. He tells me that a meeting is scheduled for campus leaders this week. No agenda has been given. Will report any scoop I can get.
Kemp

lashawn,

i have been reading for a while and have long debated about posting. the reason is because i so rarely agree with anything you said and ordinarily it annoys me too much to bother to comment. that said, your point of view is interesting because i appreciate people who force me to think and defend my own positions, so i don’t consider the disagreement a negative.

i’m posting now because i have been reading your duke rape case coverage and i don’t understand how you (and the other lacrosse player defenders) are claiming anybody got railroaded. they are not in jail, they have not lost their freedom. the only thing they lost was the privilege to attend duke university. and they got that back when the university told them to come back. so, what did these over-privileged, pampered white boys lose? (i use that language intentionally).

i’m a little sick of the whining about how poorly these boys were treated. welcome to the police state of america. this is not bitterness about these boys being white or rich or well-educated or any of that. my particular rant is directed at the fact that millions of PEOPLE (not black, not minority, not men, people) get harassed by the system every year. some times it’s a small thing, like a parking ticket you really didn’t deserve. some times, it’s this duke case: a false accusation that someone has to spend time and money fighting. and finally, some times, it’s a false conviction which really costs a person their life. why is the ordeal of these three white boys from duke university that much differentfrom anyone else’s experience with the system in this country? they are obviously not going to jail, so just shut up about the “injustice of it all” and move on, like the rest of america that has dealt with out-of-control cops/prosecutors.

okay, i feel a little better for having gotten that off my chest. as for this second “rape” case. i’ll believe it when i see some facts. as someone who waited for facts in kobe’s case and ultimately got none while all the time being told kobe was a rapist AND as someone, who initally believed the stripper until the story kept changing and changing and changing and…well, you get the point:), i am going to wait for an actual trial or something where somebody has to say something under oath, then i’ll start to listen. but until then, this is an irrelevant story to me because no one knows anything for sure.

#21
See this as a great opportunity to do something about the system. Until Judge Stephens’ performance in the court, my conception of the judical system was formed by watching TV. I was sure that Stephens, “the judge”, would set things right–quash the illegal warrant he was induced to sign, reprimand Nifong, and give a little lecture about wrongful indictment.

Instead, he turned out to be Nifong’s crony and enabler. Next up–Judge Titus–was the same. Then there was Judge Bushfan, the trumped-up arrest of Elmostafa, and all the other tricks which a DA can use to put pressure on a defendant to make him
crack even though he is innocent.

This case has been a real eye-opener, and the lessons will not be lost. I’m sure millions like me have now been ‘educated’.

So if ever there was a time to strike the heated iron for reform, it is now. Speedy trial laws, abolition of grand juries, appointed DAs, juries of peers, the right to a probable cause hearing,
and full discovery laws are just a few of the changes that can be made. (A few amendments in the rape shield laws would help, too.)

Right now is the time to argue for these changes. Next year, when the focus is on the latest Hollywood divorce, may be too late.

Just a correction to those who say innocent until proven guilty.
It should read Innocent UNLESS proven guilty.

The former assumes the person is guilty but it has not been proven yet.
Zorba

Lee-
Maybe maybe not. With all the press watching and waiting, especially Fox News and given the long list of violations, I think and hope he’ll get more than a slap on the wrist. A message needs to be sent to prosecutors around the country that they need to play by the rules, or face serious consequences.
Not only that but I doubt that his ‘fellow lawyers’ want the same kind of attention that he has gotten from the press and bloggers like our esteemed host here…

yd (post 21),

I am sorry you think the boys are whining and really haven’t been hurt.

Haven’t been hurt? OK if this happened to you or your children would you think you hadn’t been hurt?

Would you mind stepping up and sending their parents the $3,000,000 they have spent on lawyers, or do you just want to pay the interest on the $300,000 worth of bail they have had to post.

Or perhaps you’d like to pay the $21,000 that each Reade and Collin lost in tuition when they had to leave campus last spring.

Or perhaps you let us post your picture on the cover of Newsweek the next time they want to run a story on the case.

No nothing has happen to these boys at all.

Are you smoking crack? Sorry, I can not accept your post. You MUST be a troll.

Kemp

Kemp, on a golf course, folks woulda said we just “brother in law’d”, or maybe “ham ‘n egged”…. You took care of whupping up on “yd”, the whining troll. I spent my energy on Mr. Peters.

Time for a night cap, a good night’s sleep and a plate of Q at Jackson’s tomorrow.

“Ham ‘n egged” is the perfect rhetorical flourish! Kudos for a reprimand well done, Tater.

As far as yd is concerned, my reply to him disappeared into cyberspace so I was gratified to see you rail against the inanity of his comments, Kemp.

The Durham Herald Sun reporters must have flunked “compare and contrast” in fourth grade:

“Both of the alleged sexual assaults were linked to bathrooms and off-campus parties.

However, the new case involves only one accused suspect, while three people are indicted in connection with the March 2006 lacrosse incident.”

#29
Burch is out of jail on $50,000 bond.

#35
The three indicted have bills of over $3 million by now. That goes for DNA experts to hunt through hundreds of pages of data, cell phone experts, photo experts, private investigators, security, etc., plus the defense teams. The families pay on average $80,000 each per month. They may be ‘rich’ on paper but don’t have all that much in cash (the Seligmann’s had to borrow to get the $400,000 bail amount).
(Not to mention the human ‘cost’ of having the case linger always in their conscious thoughts, every day, for nearly a year, with no end in sight. It’s the ever-present guest.)

Unindicted players have had bills so far averaging $11,000 each; but that may go higher, since they STILL have to be wary of being charged should the SPs or Nifong or a new DA decide he wants to keep pressure on the team.

#38
Agree, this is not the first time. (Think Gell and Malloy). The Durham judges and police acted too readily to join Nifong in his corruption of evidence and justice; there was no hesitation at all. That strongly suggests that this is just the way business is normally done in Durham.

Finally, as for the ‘three indicted players/white boys/privileged males’, those are not the indicted. The indicted are Dave, Collin, and Reade. When people are turned into stereotypes they lose their personhood.

None of the above is a cardboard cutout or computer-generated image. Once they are
turned into symbols then whether they are in fact individually
guilty of anything or not becomes irrelevant.They
have to be guilty, or else the ideology/agenda
is wrong. And better the heavens fall, than
that the agenda should be incorrect. (wasn’t
that the quote?)

“The three indicted have bills of over $3 million by now. That goes for DNA experts to hunt through hundreds of pages of data, cell phone experts, photo experts, private investigators, security, etc., plus the defense teams.”

If you’re also including bail in that number, I could see that. Was that in the 60 Minutes piece?

I prefer discussions of tangible harm (the cost, etc.), which policy can be set to address to discussions of intangible harm (”listen to white men-hating white women called feminists using him to make generalizations and broad social commentary about the “white male” patriarchy or disgruntled white men-hating blacks making ridiculous comparisons between his case and plantation rape.”), which aren’t irrelevant, but are hard to shoehorn into the context of something like damages or loss, and extraordinarily difficult to quantify because (1) those elements exist, to some extent, in every indictment and (2) there’s no real way to say that Burch’s intangible harm is greater or lesser than that of the Duke Three (because there will be plenty of race pandering related to Burch’s case, judged solely by the post we’ve responding to).

Seahawk,
Thanks for the slap down of the fool who has no understanding of the cost of litigation.
Tatercon, good work, it’s lent, I’ve given up the booze, so posts will not have as many typos.
GO STATE! I don’t think we have a chance, but hope springs ethereal.
Kemp

tvd,

You clearly have NO clue of the cost of litigation. The $3 million does NOT include any bail costs. That was reduced to $100K per boy and will be returned when the case is dismissed.
So let me get this straight, you think Burch is “suffering” the same intangible costs that the boys did?

What you smoking?

Do you think he’ll be on the cover of Newsweek? Maybe we should all go over to the address he gave the police, which the owner says he does not live at, and see how many national TV trucks are out in front of his home.
Nancy Grace is going to start piling on this sucker any day now.
I guess his face will become recognizable all over the nation, just so when he goes anywhere folks can say, are you that rapist from Durham?

Let’s see we listed the lost tuition, $21,000 each for the two boys. I didn’t list Evan’s lost job as a cost. Let’s say the Boy’s are lying about their expenses. What would you put them at, half that. That would be $500k per family. Do you really think you could defend yourself against Rape, Kidnapping, and Assault charges for that amount?

If you do, you clearly know no lawyers and have never been involved in any court proceedings.

Debating one who knows nothing about a subject is very difficult, but I am trying. Try calling a lawyer in your hometown and telling him your son is in jail for rape and the case is now on national TV. The case is 700 miles from your home and you need his help. Ask him how much?

By the way, since you probably have no assets(VERY obvious since you have no of knowledge of costs), he’ll want it up front too.

Try it and report back to us.

Kemp

Peters, my rebuke of thee grows stronger.

Reading and re-reading your response post(at 41), my initial thought was “Damn, he’s wrong on so many levels…” Really, though, you actually stay stuck on one wrong level — you just leave piles of junk everywhere on the level at which you’ve chosen to reside — the “Let’s trash all the lawyers” level.

First, recognize that I defended the North Carolina State Bar in post #31 against your generalization that we are a “Good Old Boys Club” and would do nothing but slap DA Nifong on the wrist. In response, you say you’ve studied a California Bar Journal and a website and find that this month, 22 lawyers in California have had their suspensions “stayed”. What point are you making??? You’ve told us NOTHING about those 22 cases, and without such information, it’s utterly disingenuous to (1) make a comparison of the California offenses to those of which Nifong has been accused; then (2) leap to a logic that says the NC State Bar will follow California’s lead.

Citing me to my own Bar’s statistics reveals the additional disingenuousness of your post. After taking you up on your challenge (”And check out how your State bar handled lawyers this month. The [sic] were mostly given reprimands.”), I find nine reprimands were given for various and sundry ethics failures. You failed to mention the two censures, the one “suspension of license and stay” and the SEVEN disbarments — that’s TEN (unmentioned by you) disciplinary proceedings indicating our State Bar is doing a heckuva lot more than slapping lawyers on the wrist for the more serious offenses. (I’ll invite readers to go to the website at http://www.ncbar.com/discipline/)

Now to your challenges:

“But tell us TaterCon, if Mike Nifong is found guilty of the charges against him, will he be required to reimburse the Duke three for their legal expenses?” A: No, the North Carolina legislature did not empower the State Bar to enter a money judgment against Mr. Nifong of the nature you describe. Should Mr. Nifong ever make any sort of monetary payment to the “Duke three”, it wouldn’t be due to an order of the Bar under its authority to discipline lawyers and their priviledge to practice law. I’ll note, though, a voluntary payment might be viewed favorably as a factor for mitigation of punishment if the panel finds the charges in the Amended Complaint are true.

“Will the State Bar reimburse them for their fees?” A: No. Upon what statutory authority? Why should practicing attorneys of the State Bar elsewhere across the state have to “come out of pocket”, through our dues, for the violations of Mr. Nifong? (Perhaps you’re unaware, but there is statutory authority imposing an annual tax upon us for a mandatory contribution to the “Client Security Fund” — this fund being one designed to reimburse victims of attorney monetary fraud, most typically occurring from real estate trust accounts, decedent’s estate accounts and the like.)

“Will the defense attorneys waive or reduce their fees?” Q: Huh? Why? Were you involved in the contract retaining these attorneys for their services? Are you an arbiter whereby the best defense attorneys in the state must charge what you think is appropriate? Are you arguing that good attorneys should waive or significantly reduce their fees in all cases where successful results are procured, out of some sense that there’s injustice in someone being paid to labor for justice for another?

“Will the Duke three be allowed to sue Mike Nifong for their expenses?” A: Do you mean “successfully sue and recover”? That remains to be seen, and it’s been thoroughly debated here and in other blogs. There are all kinds of “sovereign immunity” issues, all kinds of potential exceptions embodied in federal civil rights statutes, etc. etc. The quick and flippant answer to your “Will [they] be allowed to sue Nifong…?” question is YES. A complaint, a civil summons and 95 bucks is all it takes to get a suit going here in North Carolina….

“So where is the justice to the real victims?”
A: If you mean by that “How do we undo injustice?”, I’m as stumped as you apparently are.
But I’ll go back to my conclusion that you’re wrong and stuck on a single level — the belief that the NC State Bar is the entity that will merely slap Nifong’s wrist, and thus will deny justice to the victims, is a misplaced belief. The State Bar is empowered to discipline lawyers for all sorts of ethical and professional conduct violations — and in the context of this case, that’s all it can do.

Perhaps “facts found” in the procedings will assist in bringing a brand of “justice” for the “Duke three” in another forum. And perhaps, as our regular bud Seahawk hopes, a precedent will come out of the State Bar procedings that will show teeth and deter prosecutors in the future from engaging in ethical departures.

Long and short, my rebuke of thee stands. As we say in these parts, you’re barkin’ up the wrong tree…..

TaterCon

#50

The three have been described as “boorish”, “racist”, “arrogant”, “privileged” “swaggering”–generally hubris-laden thugs who thought they could get away with anything. That was the collective judgment of the mass media.

Hence my remark :

“Once they are turned into symbols then whether they are in fact individually guilty of anything or not becomes irrelevant. They have to be guilty, or else the ideology/agenda is wrong.”

Referring to them here by their first names (contrary to my usual practice, btw) is simply to remind people that they remain individuals; and cannot be lumped together with any group and tarred with some collective sins.

(However, should the mass media one day turn on DAs, I promise–after I recover from my paroxysms of laughter–to similarly defend, on a first-name basis, whatever soul they are bent on rushing to the guillotine.)

TaterCon,

Reading your exchange with Lee Peters, I’d like to remind you (paraphrasing Economics professor Roy Wientraub’s elegant response to the Group of 88’s McCarthyism charge)…

“I ask you instead to understand that for various commentators to disagree with you in public or in private regarding the Bar Association’s sluggish response and our fears for their conclusion is neither McCarthyism nor an academic travesty and betrayal of the values of our institution, but is rather an expression of their believing otherwise.”

In other words, our suspicions of the willingness of NC Bar to do the right thing doesn’t make us bad guys. It just means that our experiences with the legal community have not been as professional and harmonious as yours.

Reb

Geez I had forgotten this even happen, hmm where’s all the news coverage?? Well one would said Anna Nicole(I still don’t get) yet I find myself watching too:(

It’s all very disturbing, 2 sets of rules or the stupidity of one man. I think its a bit of both(far more on the latter)

Point noted, Reb. But while Mr. Peters exhibited a willingness to “believe otherwise” in his predictions/assessments of what our State Bar may do in the Nifong proceedings, his beliefs seemed based on preconceived notions, stereotypes, comparisons of apples to oranges and expectations of things that should happen that the State Bar simply can’t make happen.

For all that, I tossed two rebukes out there and tried to tone down the rhetoric against the State Bar and its proceedings. La Shawn’s blog here has offered great opportunities for folks to both educate other readers and decry against preconceived notions, stereotypes and departures from due process. I just availed myself of the opportunities in my disagreements with Mr. Peters.

TaterCon

PS: I saw your post last night, but didn’t respond right away — ’twas in the throes of postgame jubilation after the TarHeels achieved a payback over NC State, 83-64. Sweet as a grocery store barbecue sauce….

TVD,

I pray you are correct, do you want to trade places with them.

Remember, EVERY employment application asks, “have you ever been arrested”.

And pray tell, how would YOU answer that if you were the boys? Just had a little misunderstanding while I was in college with a ho?

You really are VERY naive to think these boys are not scarred for life. Their Photos, Fingerprints and DNA are on file now forever.

Google any of their names and see what comes up!

And State lost too.

Kemp

“According to tvd, these boys are going to make some money as conservative media darlings doing the interview circuit. They’re going to rake in a lot of dough, become rich and live happily ever after.”

You don’t think that’s possible? Folks whom the conservative media establishment portrays as having been treated unfairly are often gainfully employed as experts of some sort, and are given a lot of airplay. I’m thinking specifically of Mark Fuhrman, Oliver North, Robert Bork, and the like.

I mean, be serious–conservatives in media love to bash academia, and this is a clear and present example of academia getting it very wrong. If I were trying to make an example of academia, this would be my textbook case, and the boys my Exhibits A-C.

The point, of course, was that the boys have strong supporters (although I think most of their supporters are not knee-jerk snarkers like yourself) who counterbalance their strong detractors. Because of that strong level of support, they should be fine.

Life may very well be different for them. I would suggest (and the statistics bear me out on this) that they will do better than a similarly situated group of black men falsely accused. In fact, I would suggest that the statistics bear out the proposition that they are better of than similarly situated black men accused of nothing at all.

“GET IT? What careers are the boys going to have to retire from, if no one will hire a former accused rapist.”

Let’s see. If they don’t get hired after graduation, I’ll gladly concede that point.

WHOA, tvd. You’ve earned yerself a TaterCon Rebuke!! Thou shalt not call the lovely Tate a “knee-jerk snarker” simply because she points out the folly in your premise.

Thus, I rebuke thee!!

TaterCon

I would prefer to call Gratz an ‘anti-race preferencialist’. I think that accurately describes her vocation and livelihood.

The day she takes a bullet for her beliefs like MLK did then would be the day she can be a called an ‘activist’.

The very notion of her being concerned about MY civil rights makes me want to vomit.

Ok, I was being a tad extreme. But you’re right, she does make me want to vomit. I find her actions to be self serving mostly and damaging but then you probably already knew I’d think along those lines.

RedBeard - LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think that qualifies at least for Activist First Class status, with 3 bars instead of 2.

TaterCon

You write that I did not give any detail about the 22 lawyers who were found guilty and given suspensions which were stayed. I gave the web address for the State Bar of California thinking you could look it up. So I will give the actual web page so you can read it yourself. The details are to voluminous to place on this page. You can read them yourself. I hope it shows up as a link on this page. If not, just copy and paste it in your browser.

http://www.calbar.ca.gov/state/calbar/calbar_cbj.jsp?sCategoryPath=/Home/Attorney%20Resources/California%20Bar%20Journal/February2007&MONTH=February&YEAR=2007&sCatHtmlTitle=Discipline&sJournalCategory=YES

You also say that the N.C. State Bar disciplined several lawyers.
1 was Censured and 9 were given Reprimands. I cannot find what a censure and reprimand involves. Is that like a light slap on the wrist vs a hard slap? Or something like “Shame on you”? Can you give us non members of the Bar a description? Does either involve a suspension or fine or an order to make restitution? Can they continue to practice law as if nothing happened? Do they have to notify their clients of this action by the Bar?

Speaking of the N.C. Bar, where were they when Mike Nifong was making all these statements to the press defaming the defendants? Why was he allowed to continue holding court in the press? Why didn’t the Attorney General shut him up? Why didn’t the Judge issue a “gag” order? What happened to the speedy trial guaranteed by the constitution? This “farce” has been going on for almost a year and the defendants have been refused an early trial date.. The system “broke” because it is run by incompetent and self serving lawyers. As I said before, a case of the fox guarding the hen house

Take issue with me all you like TaterCon, but I understand your defense of the Bar and legal system since you are part of that system. You would be singing a different song if you were one of the defendants rather than an attorney who makes money from a corrupt system. As Ted Kopple said on Nightline, a liberal is a conservative who has just been arrested.

The fair thing to do at this point is to dismiss all charges against the defendants with prejudice. But then who said the legal system was “Fair”?

And that long amended complaint you talk about is a “Joke” and a “farce”.
An example:
22. Nifong stated to a representative of the news media that the Lacross team members were standing together and refusing to talk to investigators.
23. Nifong made the statement referenced above in paragraph 22 above to a reporter for NBC News.
24. Nifong made the statement referenced above in paragraph 22 in March, 2006.

That can be done in one paragraph, but they take three to make it a “long” amended complaint. (Maybe they get paid by the words). What is it they say about lawyers? Only they can write a 80 page document and call it a “Brief”.

For those interested in reading this 32 page amended complaint, see http://www.ncbar.com/Nifong_release.pdf

And the prayer is a big laugh. Three short paragraphs.

When this case is heard on May 11, 2007, only one non-attorney will be present on the board, R. Mitchell Tyler, a non-lawyer from Lake Waccamaw.

Why not have him stand trial just like the defendants have to do. I assume it is because the lawyers write the laws and don’t want that to happen.

Hmmmm.

The disparity in treatment between the two alleged rapes, I know, I know, will only strengthen the civil suit when it comes against Nifong, DPD and Durham.

I’d hate to be a homeowner in that city. I don’t know how much the LAX players will ask for. But I can bet it’ll be a pretty big number. Particularly since one of the accused LAX players has already suffered significant losses in that he lost an assured job because of the accusation.

Tiffany said: “I would prefer to call Gratz an ‘anti-race preferencialist’. I think that accurately describes her vocation and livelihood.

The day she takes a bullet for her beliefs like MLK did then would be the day she can be a called an ‘activist’.

The very notion of her being concerned about MY civil rights makes me want to vomit.”

SteveDinMD: I guess that makes Tupac Shakur an “activist” according to your definition.

Tatercon,

I’ll be happy to slap around Mr. Peters for you.

Sir, what would you think if we were presumptuous enough to tell you what CA lawyers would do with this case? Would you not think us to be fools?

So, how is it that a member of the NC bar, and a former member of the General Assembly can tell you that Mr. Nifungu is going to get disbarred and you are presumptuous enough to question our knowledge. Do you think you know more about NC politics than those of us who live her do? If you do, sir, then, I’d say “you an idiot”.

TVD,
Please stop your Troll posts. Will you ever be kind enough to answer questions put to you? Or do you plan to continually return to the same old tune. Aren’t YOU getting tired of the same song? Play along here, answer questions or stop posting. We’ve heard your tune, we know your song and if your not tired of the song, WE ARE.

Have a nice day.

Kemp

Thanks, too, Tate.

My all time favorite quote?

Redd Foxx: When you crossin’ that big street
Don’t you watch dem red and green
lights — You watch dem cars.

Ain’t nobody ever got run over
by a light.

Mr. Peters @86;

You wrote:
Will things change because of the way Nifong and the Bar handled this case? My answer is NO. The public has a very short memory, and the Lawyers run the State Legislatures.

I can’t say with absolute certainty if things will change because of the way Nifong handled this case. But I can say this: The Duke Lacrosse Rape Hoax will remain in my memory and many others for a LONNNNNNNNNNNNNNGGG time. This is one case that WILL NOT be forgotten OR brushed under the rug. In MY state, I predict we will see some changes, as this case will set a precedent for future proceedings by DA and law enforcement officials who attempt to abuse their powers in the prosecution of innocent individuals…

Mr Peters:

Perhaps I mistook you for someone who has been following this case for a while. It is a YEAR old. Clearly since the December 15th hearing Mr. Nifungu has been toast. It has been reported here, on KC’s and at Liestoppers that the Bar does not allow lawyers to 1)lie to a judge, 2)withhold evidence and 3) lie to the Bar.

Each one of these offenses carry the DEATH penalty, you don’t get to have a law license. No one can remember anyone in the state with all three of these offenses.

If you had been following the case, I am sure you would see why we are so sure Mr. Nifungu will NEVER practice law again.

The Bar disbars lawyers all year long, without publicity of the cases. Mostly for stealing from clients, but lying to the Bar is a sure killer.

The term “you an Idiot” is used to describe silly acts, like commenting on something you know nothing about. I am sure you are not really an idiot.

Kemp

Kempermanx,

You said in #89, “the Bar does not allow lawyers to 1)lie to a judge, 2)withhold evidence and 3) lie to the Bar.”

With due respect to you and Tatercon, both of whom I have been privileged to know through these postings, no one who has had even the most cursory experience with lawyers, believes that statement.

My wife’s divorce attorney is guilty of all three listed items. Her punishment? She was just elected county judge here, despite multiple outstanding complaints regarding her ethics with the IL bar.

Excuse me if I’m skeptical about the Bar’s ability to do anything right.

Sincerely, I do hope that you and TaterCon are right. I DO listen when you basically say, ‘you out of state’rs have no right to tell us what is going to happen.

Actually, we’re not saying that. We’re expressing our concerns of what MIGHT happen. When the NC District DA’s association says, ‘we take care of our own’ WHICH THEY DID, our concerns are well founded.

Like it or not, the NC Bar (I forget the nuance is it the NC Bar Association or the NC Bar?) allowed a travesty of justice to go on way too long.

Defend it if you will, but do not berate those of us who wondered what kind of a ‘Get Out Of Jail Free’ card Mike Nifong held? He was allowed by your Bar to do damn near anything he wanted and your Bar cowered under the banner of ‘we can’t interfere with an on-going investigation’ for months. That was a very Nazi era response.

Now we wonder if this same bar has any real balls. We do so openly. And with my sincere hope that I’m wrong. But with an experience of the legal profession only discipling their own when they can not avoid it.

As I mentioned to TaterCon, just because we don’t believe that the bar has the ethics to do the right thing, doesn’t make us raving lunatics. It makes us veteran observers of the legal profession.

Mike Nifong did not suddenly learn to lie to a judge after years of being an honest ADA. He did it with years of experience at lying and felt that this time was no different. Give him credit that he had no experience with a national case. But PLEASE don’t tell me that your Bar (or any other) will not tolerate lying to a judge. It happens every single day.

I respect you and TaterCon. But both of you have blinders on in this one instance. And I’ll be the first to publicly eat crow if I’m wrong. And gladly.

Reb

Duke lacrosse returns :

Duke 17, Dartmouth 11 Final

http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/news/local/16776793.htm

The crowd of 6,485 fans - a few hundred shy of the school record - rivaled that typically drawn by Duke’s woeful football team.

While fans were not allowed to bring signs into the stadium, Duke had installed signs on the fence lining the field with the Latin phrase, “succisa virescit” - the motto for The Delbarton School in Morristown, N.J., where Seligmann and three current Blue Devils went to high school. Adopted by the Duke lacrosse program in the preseason, it means “When cut down, it grows back stronger.”

that’s “write” not right, not enough coffee yet

GO DUKE!!

(I thought I’d never say that, being that I’m a die-hard Tar Heel fan who loves thee so…)