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

The team may be headed for a championship; unfortunately two of those who wanted to play
can still not take the field (though their jerseys
remain in the locker room as a reminder).

I have no doubt that lawyers withhold evidence and lie, or fudge to a judge, BUT note, none that I know, lie to the State Bar and live to see the end of the day.
Divorce lawyers and trial lawyer can play fast and loose with the facts, BUT this is a criminal case. Criminal cases are raised to a higher standard, because someone might go to jail. If you get screwed in a divorce, you are still not going to jail, unless you don’t pay. You also, at least in NC, can file a complaint with the State Bar. As I mentioned to Mr. Peters, lots on lawyers get disbarred or disciplined ever quarter in NC. Every profession has bad apples.

By the way, I not a lawyer. I just have bad taste in friends and I also helped right the damn laws.

Kemp

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.”

Just to clarify. I have known many fine, upstanding lawyers.

Nothing in what I say here suggests that your profession is by definition corrupt. Nor is it filled with angels.

Reb

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

But I send my thanks for enlightening me about how the bar will handle this case against Nifong. I really and truly hope you are right.

You also wrote that: 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?

No Kemp, I would not think of you as fools. And I assume you meant District Attorneys of the various cities in California, not lawyers in California.
I would say you are entitled to your opinion. I once had an adversary tell me: “reasonable men will often disagree”.
Remember that the Constitution and Bill of Rights were not slam dunks. Not all the colonists wanted to go to war. Not everybody agreed that we should invade Iraq.

But just a note on that subject:
Since the Duke case broke, at least 6 athletes in Los Angeles have been accused of rape and sexual assault. One was a football player for the USC Trojans, another a basketball player with the L.A. Lakers, Kwame Brown. Both minorities. The District attorney refused to arrest or indite any of the 6 players on the grounds that there insufficient evidence of any crime.
Here is an article on Brown: Brown was under a Los Angeles Police Department investigation of a rape allegation in 2006. A woman reported that Brown sexually assaulted her. He was cleared of all charges by the Los Angeles District Attorney’s office on July 11, 2006.

On the other hand just a few days ago an athlete at UC Santa Barbara was arrested on rape charges.

Never know how the D.A. is going to handle these things. One can only hope with integrity and caution, and with supporting evidence.

Lee

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

Sure we can, we use the one thing even lawyers fear, and that’s the press, blogs etc., to keep up the pressure. The power they have is only what we allow them to have. I think the Nifong fiasco is a good place to start but he’s not the first and won’t be the last. Do you think the term Nifonged will get coined? If it does you saw it here first…

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…

Re: Your post #43. As you can see by the posts by TaterCon & Kemp, they do not share our opinion about the way in which the various State bars fail to handle wayward attorneys. In fact Kemp has decided to refer to me as an “Idiot” because he disagrees with what I have to say (83), while TaterCon seems to choose “Fool” (80). (But I am not sure if it is me or himself he refers to.)

The simple fact is that the public will never be able to change the way in which the various State Bar Associations handle Attorney discipline. The State Bars are much to powerful, and spend a lot of money to lobby the legislatures to insure that things do not change. After all, they created the system, and most legislators are attorneys. And they like the way the system works.

Most of the public has no idea what goes on with lawyer discipline within the Bar associations. The only reason that the N.C. Bar has gone after Nifong is that this case has gotten so much press and the public has been made aware of the way Nifong has (mis)handled this case.

When 60 minutes covered the story, not once but twice, (Oct. 15, 2006 with Ed Bradley, and Jan. 14, 2007), see: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/11/60minutes/main2352512.shtml
it became national news and showed how badly the Duke 3 and the case were being handled by Nifong.

In the interview by Bradley with the 2nd stripper, Kim Roberts called the allegations against the Duke 3 as a “crock”. She said it never happened and that the alleged victim asked her (Kim) to scratch her so it would look like she had been assaulted. That plus the fact that it was learned that Nifong had never interviewed either her (Kim) or the alleged victim. Only then did the State Bar step in. But Nifong remains in his post as the District Attorney. He should be arrested and brought to trial just like the Duke 3, or anyone else who violates the State laws. But the Bar is not going to loose control of this and allow this to happen.

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.

Kemp says (83) that “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.”

I have no knowledge of who he is talking about or where the statement is published. But whoever he is talking about is not going to be hearing the case or deciding what happens to Nifong. IF he is disbarred or suspended, it is only because of the national publicity and public outrage over this case.

As one of the parents said in the 1/14/07 interview, “Mister Nifong, you’ve picked on the wrong families. You’ve picked on the wrong families that you’ve indicted; you’ve picked on the wrong family of the Duke lacrosse team. You’ve picked on the wrong family of Duke University, and you will pay every day for the rest of your life,’”

I hope she is right.

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.

Thanks again. Someday I’ll get a chance to watch your back …..

Tater

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