Duke rape prosecutor hasn't even talked with the "victim"

[Widescreen]

OMG. I cannot believe this. Nifong must be the worst prosecutor in the history of jurisprudence. He's bound and determined to press this thing through and apparently doesn't even know why.

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/10/27/D8L15CTO0.html


The district attorney prosecuting three Duke lacrosse players accused of raping a woman at a team party said during a court hearing Friday that he still hasn't interviewed the accuser about the facts of the case.

"I've had conversations with (the accuser) about how she's doing. I've had conversations with (the accuser) about her seeing her kids," Mike Nifong said. "I haven't talked with her about the facts of that night. ... We're not at that stage yet."

Nifong made the statement in response to a defense request for any statements the woman has made about the case.

"I understand the answer may not be the answer they want but it's the true answer. That's all I can give them," the prosecutor said after the hourlong hearing.

Defense lawyers said outside court that they found Nifong's statement surprising.

"One of the most interesting things to me of course is Mr. Nifong did admit that he in fact has basically never talked to this woman and has absolutely no idea what her story is, and yet he has chosen to continue to go forward with this case," defense lawyer Joseph Cheshire said.

Nifong said none of his assistants have discussed the case with the woman either and only have spoken with her to monitor her well-being. They have left the investigation of the case to police, he said.

Attorneys for indicted player Dave Evans wrote in a letter to Nifong earlier this month that they believed he had talked with the accuser based on a court motion in which Nifong stated the woman told him she had not taken the drug Ecstasy on the night of the March 13 team party for which she was hired to perform as a stripper.

In response to a claim by a lawyer for an unindicted player, Nifong said he called the accuser to ask her whether she had used the drug.

"She said, 'I've never taken Ecstasy,'" Nifong said. "That was the extent of the conversation because that's all I had to know."

Nifong said he met with the accuser and an investigator on April 11, but didn't discuss details of the case because the woman was "too traumatized." Nifong said the woman didn't make eye contact with him and often seemed on the verge of crying. Their discussion centered around how the case would develop, he said.

"She probably did not speak 15 words during the meeting," Nifong said.

Evans, 23, of Bethesda, Md., was charged in May with rape, kidnapping and sexual offense. A month earlier, a grand jury indicted players Reade Seligmann, 20, of Essex Fells, N.J., and Collin Finnerty, 20, of Garden City, N.Y., on the same charges. The accuser, a student at nearby North Carolina Central University, told police she was raped in a bathroom by three men at the off-campus party.

The players' lawyers have strongly proclaimed their innocence.

If these people are guilty, I hope they get what's coming to them. However, it seems like most of the evidence thus far is in the defendants' favor. This is really sounding a lot like a prosecutor trying to make a name for himself.

[SoonerProphet]

What, a government prosecutor playing fast and loose with the facts...say it ain't so. Cept' this dirtbag ain't playing fast cause he has no case.

[NormanPride]

I have no idea what to think of this. The instinct is to pile on the accused, but nothing's really come out about the case. I guess this is why.

[Mjcpr]

60 Minutes interviewed the other stripper that was there that night and she pretty much disputed everything that the victim said happened.

[NormanPride]

Well, if 60 minutes said it...


;)

[SoonerInKCMO]

And wasn't one of the alleged perps recorded on an ATM's camera at the time of the alleged rape?

[Mjcpr]

Well, if 60 minutes said it...

;)

60 Minutes said nothing.....the co-stripper did. :D

[Beef]

It's my duty to post in a thread that mentions strippers. Carry on.

[GrapevineSooner]

They're not at the stage of discussing the case, but the DA has already made up his mind?

When the end justifies the means...

[handcrafted]

For some reason I thought the case against the players had been dismissed months ago for lack of evidence and/or an ironclad alibi.

[SoonerInKCMO]

And wasn't one of the alleged perps recorded on an ATM's camera at the time of the alleged rape?

Maybe not on camera... but a receipt and an eye-witness.

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/LegalCenter/story?id=1858806&page=1


Aside: $400 for 2 hours? Bargain. :texan:

[handcrafted]

I am :stunned: that this is even still a news story.

[NormanPride]

60 Minutes said nothing.....the co-stripper did. :D

Well, if a stripper said so...

[GottaHavePride]

March 13th party? and it is now almost November? That's almost 8 damn months. And most people have extremely ****ty memories. By which I mean, often if you ask someone to repeat to you EXACTLY what someone said to them even three days ago, they get parts wrong. 8 months later, you'll be lucky to get anything even resembling what actually happened.

I think his 8 month delay on interviewing the alleged victim is not just bad procedure, it's a chance for the "victim" to figure out some sort of story that might hold up under scrutiny. And if she hasn't by now, I'm going to go ahead and call bull**** on the whole thing.

[Fugue]

he's gettin' close to an ethics complaint.

[Stoop Dawg]

Well, if a stripper said so...

Isn't the accusser also a stripper?

[crawfish]

Man, I was pretty mad after watching the 60 Minutes interview. One of the accused has his picture taken at an ATM at the time of the rape, miles away. The others say thay have similar evidence that they weren't there. The DA bypassed normal procedure to get an indictment and the police used questionable tactics to identify them. There's no way any case against them will stand up in court as far as I can see.

Of couse, the indictment will likely help the DA get re-elected...

[1stTimeCaller]

Did he get his start as an assistant DA in Cleveland County?

[soonerboomer93]

he's gettin' close to an ethics complaint.

Lawyers have eithics?

(Phil, and other Sooner laywers on this board excluded of course :D)

[TheHumanAlphabet]

They're not at the stage of discussing the case, but the DA has already made up his mind?

When the end justifies the means...

The DA (a true ********* and ****** rocket!) will drag this out until after the election and then declare he has no case or that it can't be tried or can't convict and drop the charges...

This has all been about getting re-elected.

[AlbqSooner]

"Nifong said the woman didn't make eye contact with him and often seemed on the verge of crying. Their discussion centered around how the case would develop, he said.

'She probably did not speak 15 words during the meeting,' Nifong said."

I have had prosecutors make very similar statements about my clients and say that is the basis for disbelieving and consequently charging them with whatever crime was being investigated.

Problem with these type cases is that under Title 42 Section 1983 USCA, prosecutors are immune from suit for their misdeeds even in the face of evidence that they acted with actual malice.

[Okla-homey]

he's gettin' close to an ethics complaint.

They got a special ethics rule for prosecutors. The ABA has "model" rules, but North Carolina may not have adopted this particular one it in its entirety. If it has, I agree, Nifong may be flirting dangerously close to an ethical violation for which he could be disciplined by the NC Bar. Anyhoo, the ABA model rule reads:


Model Rules of Professional Conduct
Advocate
Rule 3.8 Special Responsibilities Of A Prosecutor

The prosecutor in a criminal case shall:

(a) refrain from prosecuting a charge that the prosecutor knows is not supported by probable cause;

(b) make reasonable efforts to assure that the accused has been advised of the right to, and the procedure for obtaining, counsel and has been given reasonable opportunity to obtain counsel;

(c) not seek to obtain from an unrepresented accused a waiver of important pretrial rights, such as the right to a preliminary hearing;

(d) make timely disclosure to the defense of all evidence or information known to the prosecutor that tends to negate the guilt of the accused or mitigates the offense, and, in connection with sentencing, disclose to the defense and to the tribunal all unprivileged mitigating information known to the prosecutor, except when the prosecutor is relieved of this responsibility by a protective order of the tribunal;

(e) not subpoena a lawyer in a grand jury or other criminal proceeding to present evidence about a past or present client unless the prosecutor reasonably believes:

(1) the information sought is not protected from disclosure by any applicable privilege;

(2) the evidence sought is essential to the successful completion of an ongoing investigation or prosecution; and

(3) there is no other feasible alternative to obtain the information;

(f) except for statements that are necessary to inform the public of the nature and extent of the prosecutor's action and that serve a legitimate law enforcement purpose, refrain from making extrajudicial comments that have a substantial likelihood of heightening public condemnation of the accused and exercise reasonable care to prevent investigators, law enforcement personnel, employees or other persons assisting or associated with the prosecutor in a criminal case from making an extrajudicial statement that the prosecutor would be prohibited from making under Rule 3.6 or this Rule.

[Widescreen]

Problem with these type cases is that under Title 42 Section 1983 USCA, prosecutors are immune from suit for their misdeeds even in the face of evidence that they acted with actual malice.
That is absolutely outrageous. In general, I'm a law-and-order guy and tend to send with the prosecution but that rule is a load of crap. Why on earth would a prosecutor be immune from intentionally making a mockery of our justice system? :mad:

[Okla-homey]

That is absolutely outrageous. In general, I'm a law-and-order guy and tend to send with the prosecution but that rule is a load of crap. Why on earth would a prosecutor be immune from intentionally making a mockery of our justice system? :mad:

Because Congress said so. I don't agree, but there it is.

[GrapevineSooner]

Well, if the accused can't sue this ******rocket (love that word!), then a pox upon his house!!

[Widescreen]

Something's happening. This could be fun!

http://www.newsobserver.com/1185/story/520626.html


A North Carolina congressman has asked the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong's handling of the Duke lacrosse case.

In a letter to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, U.S. Rep. Walter B. Jones said Nifong may have engaged in prosecutorial misconduct and violated the civil rights of the three lacrosse players charged with raping an escort service dancer hired to dance at a team party in March.

The players have emphatically said they are innocent and have said the accusations are lies.

Three former players, Dave Evans, 23, of Bethesda, Md.; Collin Finnerty, 20, of Garden City, N.Y.; and Reade Seligmann, 20, of Essex Fells, N.J., are charged with rape, kidnapping and sexual offense.

Nifong has come under intense criticism for his handling of the case. Jones, a Farmville Republican, said he was concerned that Nifong directed the Durham Police Department to conduct a photo identification procedure that violated the department's guidelines.

Jones also complained that Nifong's numerous public statements in the early stages of the case prejudiced the community against the players.

"Mr. Nifong's statements ranged from labeling the Duke players ‘hooligans' to falsely stating that they refused to cooperate with his investigation," Jones said.

Jones' letter apparently came in response to a letter from a defense lawyer for Finnerty. Michael Cornacchia of New York City had written to federal officials, senators and congressional representatives, including the entire North Carolina delegation, asking them to support a federal investigation into Nifong's actions.

Nifong declined to comment Tuesday.

[Okla-homey]

The scary part about all this is these kids are prolly gonna walk because their parents can afford a high-powered defense. If they didn't do it, and based on what I've seen about the case, I don't think they did, thats great!

OTOH, think about the jam these kids would be in of they were poor. For example, if this had been gone down at a bachelor party at a trailer park, instead of bunch of rich kids attending an elite college? Yikes.

[Oldnslo]

In this particular instance, brother and sister South Ovarians...

Y'all don't know **** about dick.

Dude can rely all day on the reports generated by police officers who have interviewed the victim at length. Unethical? You're kidding, right?

Let me shed a little light on what it's like to be a prosecutor. In Tulsa, they'll file, oh, about 10,000 felonies a year. That gets spread out among 5 (maybe 4, I forget) judges and prosecuting teams. You'll have about 40-50 preliminary hearings to put on EVERY WEEK, while you're also preparing for whatever trials, motions, arraignment dockets and whatever else you've got. When I was a prosecutor, we usually didn't interview the victim until the preliminary hearing. And when I say "usually", I mean "it didn't happen except maybe once". You file charges based upon the police report. Period. oh, and filing charges is something else you're required to do for as long as it takes, once a week, with every team taking a day in turn.

You don't have a chance to investigate the case until the prelim. There's no time, no matter how big a case is. You just can't contact all the victims and witnesses in every case. And no matter how big a case is, you can't just forget about the other 40 cases on your desk, with their victims all deserving justice, too. Investigating the basic facts of the case is pretty much the responsibility of the police department. Yes, prosecutor's offices generally have investigators on staff, but they're used to investigate where the hell the witnesses have secreted themselves off to, instead of receiving their summonses and subpoenas where they said they'd be.

Now, as for filing cases, different jurisdictions have different guidelines. Some allow filing on probable cause. Some require more. In a perfect world, you'd only file cases which you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt. But, the world isn't perfect, thus the need for the DA's office in the first place. If you set the bar that high, too many "okay" cases don't get filed and WAY too many criminals don't get to face charges and WAYYYYY too many victims don't have a shot at seeing justice.

Now, did Dude do right by talking to the media? Maybe not. But to think that he's out of line because of an 8-month delay or because he hasn't personally interviewed the victim by a certain date? Not so much.

Back in my day, we did have a rule that nobody was to take the stand who hadn't been interviewed. However, a Great Many interviews took place just before the hearing. A Great Many.... especially interviewing officers who just got away from whatever else they were doing in order to testify.

[Frozen Sooner]

In this particular instance, brother and sister South Ovarians...

Y'all don't know **** about dick.

Dude can rely all day on the reports generated by police officers who have interviewed the victim at length. Unethical? You're kidding, right?

Let me shed a little light on what it's like to be a prosecutor. In Tulsa, they'll file, oh, about 10,000 felonies a year. That gets spread out among 5 (maybe 4, I forget) judges and prosecuting teams. You'll have about 40-50 preliminary hearings to put on EVERY WEEK, while you're also preparing for whatever trials, motions, arraignment dockets and whatever else you've got. When I was a prosecutor, we usually didn't interview the victim until the preliminary hearing. And when I say "usually", I mean "it didn't happen except maybe once". You file charges based upon the police report. Period. oh, and filing charges is something else you're required to do for as long as it takes, once a week, with every team taking a day in turn.

You don't have a chance to investigate the case until the prelim. There's no time, no matter how big a case is. You just can't contact all the victims and witnesses in every case. And no matter how big a case is, you can't just forget about the other 40 cases on your desk, with their victims all deserving justice, too. Investigating the basic facts of the case is pretty much the responsibility of the police department. Yes, prosecutor's offices generally have investigators on staff, but they're used to investigate where the hell the witnesses have secreted themselves off to, instead of receiving their summonses and subpoenas where they said they'd be.

Now, as for filing cases, different jurisdictions have different guidelines. Some allow filing on probable cause. Some require more. In a perfect world, you'd only file cases which you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt. But, the world isn't perfect, thus the need for the DA's office in the first place. If you set the bar that high, too many "okay" cases don't get filed and WAY too many criminals don't get to face charges and WAYYYYY too many victims don't have a shot at seeing justice.

Now, did Dude do right by talking to the media? Maybe not. But to think that he's out of line because of an 8-month delay or because he hasn't personally interviewed the victim by a certain date? Not so much.

Back in my day, we did have a rule that nobody was to take the stand who hadn't been interviewed. However, a Great Many interviews took place just before the hearing. A Great Many.... especially interviewing officers who just got away from whatever else they were doing in order to testify.

You just made Sam Waterston cry.

[Okla-homey]

Okay, so certainly no ethical requirement to interview the victim, but, given this case has garnered flippin' international attention, no other witness comes close to corroborating the victims account, it's sullied the rep of a great university, has the potential to ruin the lives of several kids while simultaneously setting back race-relations in Durham oh, say 10-15 years in the process...might the DA have, just perhaps, bothered to interview the victim?

I think that's why folks are shocked.

[Oldnslo]

Okay, so certainly no ethical requirement to interview the victim, but, given this case has garnered flippin' international attention, no other witness comes close to corroborating the victims account, it's sullied the rep of a great university, has the potential to ruin the lives of several kids while simultaneously setting back race-relations in Durham oh, say 10-15 years in the process...might the DA have, just perhaps, bothered to interview the victim?

I think that's why folks are shocked.
Folks being shocked isn't news.

Listen, it's a rape case. That means that the victim has already undergone substantial interviews and a rape kit exam. Nothing like having 40 pubes plucked by a caring medical technician to make a day go smoove, huh? A swab for your trouble, perhaps?

Generally, one handles sex crimes victims with kid gloves. You don't re-interview them and you don't introduce additional people into the team, just for the joy of re-interviewing them. The detectives assigned to this beat are just about the best the police department's got. Yes, you can rely on their reports. Does it sometimes not work out so great? Sure. I did a pretty high profile case that went vertical, too, when the victim changed her testimony. Funny thing: I had interviewed her twice. On the stand, it changed from "he broke down the door" to "I opened the door".

Gotta get to a board meeting.

[jk the sooner fan]

i'm sooooo glad oldnslo posted this......i had thoughts of posting something similar when the thread first came round, but let it go.....of course my response wouldnt have been as eloquent as his....

but in my years of taking cases to DA's and AUSA's.....i've never had one of them say "i need to interview the victim"......

oh sure, maybe on a case with a kid or something......but a rape? get real....

standard operating procedure is about all i've seen

[AlbqSooner]

Old n Slo has eloquently stated the unfortunate reality of the DA's office in Tulsa, and most every other jurisdiction in this country. Another reality is that trials in most districts are conducted by ASSISTANT District Attorney. I tried many cases over the years in which the District Attorney had no information on the case beyond that which was provided to him by the Assistant handling the case during the Charging conference. (Meeting to decide whether or not to file)

However, given that reality, I do not recall ever seeing a case where the District Attorney is making public comments on the evidence without having familiarized himself with the facts. That, to me, seems unjustifiable under any circumstances. Particularly unjustifiable since said public comments were made immediately preceeding election day.

[Frozen Sooner]

Folks being shocked isn't news.

Listen, it's a rape case. That means that the victim has already undergone substantial interviews and a rape kit exam. Nothing like having 40 pubes plucked by a caring medical technician to make a day go smoove, huh? A swab for your trouble, perhaps?

Generally, one handles sex crimes victims with kid gloves. You don't re-interview them and you don't introduce additional people into the team, just for the joy of re-interviewing them. The detectives assigned to this beat are just about the best the police department's got. Yes, you can rely on their reports. Does it sometimes not work out so great? Sure. I did a pretty high profile case that went vertical, too, when the victim changed her testimony. Funny thing: I had interviewed her twice. On the stand, it changed from "he broke down the door" to "I opened the door".

Gotta get to a board meeting.

Not commenting on this. That's a great Mitch Hedburg quote in your signature.

[SicEmBaylor]

The scary part about all this is these kids are prolly gonna walk because their parents can afford a high-powered defense. If they didn't do it, and based on what I've seen about the case, I don't think they did, thats great!

OTOH, think about the jam these kids would be in of they were poor. For example, if this had been gone down at a bachelor party at a trailer park, instead of bunch of rich kids attending an elite college? Yikes.

In the case of most Duke students that's probably true, but in the case of at least one of the accused it certainly isn't. His family is mid-middle class at best and was only able to attend Duke on scholarship. His parents have had to sell their house in order to pay for the kid's defense.

[OCUDad]

Not debating Oldnslo's observations about procedure, but if the workload is so crushing, where does Nifong find the time to talk to the media so often?

[Mongo]

Not debating Oldnslo's observations about procedure, but if the workload is so crushing, where does Nifong find the time to talk to the media so often?

GREAT POINT!!!111!!

The outrage comes from Nifong stating his opinion about the case and how he is going to prosecute as hard as he can, yet he knows nothing about the case.

[jk the sooner fan]

is it possible that the overwhelming and unusual number of media requests in this case prompted a statement?

granted, he made a poor one....

[TheHumanAlphabet]

I'm betting Nifong, after a successful re-election, was going to have this quietly go away for "lack of evidence". However, he has dagged the kids and Duke Lacrosse's reputation through the mud for a lying, drunk, drugged up ho's lie. Nifong did all of this for political gain. He should feel political ramifications.

Enough has been said and printed to question the veracity of the ho's statements. She has been impeached by a taxi cab driver, by the stripper that gave her a ride and by the alibi's of at least one of the said accused. What more do you need?

[Oldnslo]

Enough has been said and printed to question the veracity of the ho's statements. She has been impeached by a taxi cab driver, by the stripper that gave her a ride and by the alibi's of at least one of the said accused. What more do you need?

Again... you're kidding me, right?

How about evidence that conforms to rules fashioned over hundreds of years to ensure the accuracy of what is weighed by the trier of fact? Were any of the statements made under oath? Subject to cross examination?

Were the reporters completely accurate in restating all of the hearsay you've described?

Really, sometimes what is needed is a jury trial. One person telling the truth can outweigh a dozen telling lies or misstatements. Conversely, liars are seldom able to pull off a whole trial. OJ notwithstanding.

You really want the media to have power to determine who gets prosecuted? Good Lord, sports writers can't even pick a football champion.

[Fugue]

Again... you're kidding me, right?

How about evidence that conforms to rules fashioned over hundreds of years to ensure the accuracy of what is weighed by the trier of fact? Were any of the statements made under oath? Subject to cross examination?

Were the reporters completely accurate in restating all of the hearsay you've described?

Really, sometimes what is needed is a jury trial. One person telling the truth can outweigh a dozen telling lies or misstatements. Conversely, liars are seldom able to pull off a whole trial. OJ notwithstanding.

You really want the media to have power to determine who gets prosecuted? Good Lord, sports writers can't even pick a football champion.

Maybe, but I also don't want the word of one stripper to be an automatic ticket to court when her testimony is flying in the face of many other folks and cell records etc... Especially if I'm a poor person, I want this resolved by common sense before I have to pay an attorney an assload of my money.

[Widescreen]

Absolutely. If this thing makes it to trial (which I doubt it will) I can't wait to see what allsome evidence the DA has. Because everything that's come out in the press seems to point to innocence. (And yes I realize not all evidence in the press is guaranteed accurate).

[Widescreen]

DOH!

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,236362,00.html




DURHAM, N.C. — The woman accusing three members of the Duke University men's lacrosse team of rape at an off-campus party had DNA from multiple males in her body and underwear, according to a defense motion filed Wednesday.

The News & Observer reported that the private laboratory hired by the prosecution, DNA Security of Burlington, found that the DNA did not match the three defendants being charged in the case, their lacrosse teammates or anyone else who submitted their DNA to police, including the accuser's boyfriend.

"This is strong evidence of innocence in a case in which the accuser denied engaging in any sexual activity in the days before the alleged assault, told police she last had consensual sexual intercourse a week before the assault, and claimed that her attackers did not use condoms and ejaculated," lawyers for the three players being charged said the motion they filed Wednesday.

"There is not a single mention of this obviously exculpatory evidence in the final DNA Security report."

The DNA report was included in a slew of documents handed over to the defense by Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong in October.

The three now former lacrosse players — Dave Evans, 23, of Bethesda, Md.; Collin Finnerty, 20, of Garden City, N.Y.; and Reade Seligmann, 20, of Essex Fells, N.J. — are facing charges of rape, kidnapping and sexual offense. All three have not only proclaimed their innocence, but the innocence of their teammates as well.

Their trial is not expected to begin until the spring.

The accuser, who is an exotic dancer, was one of two women hired to dance at an off-campus lacrosse party in March. She claims she was gang-raped by three men in a bathroom over a 30-minute period. She told hospital officials that not only was she raped, but that one or more of the men ejaculated, and that her assailants did not wear condoms.

All but one lacrosse player submitted to DNA tests back when the charges first surfaced earlier this year. The sole black player on the team did not get tested because the accuser, who is black, said her attackers were white. Tests failed to conclusively show any lacrosse players' DNA in or on the accuser.

The prosecution has claimed that those tests do not positively prove that no lacrosse players were involved, only that they were careful during the alleged attack.

A few hours after the party on March 14, a doctor and nurse at Duke Hospital examined the accuser and collected standard evidence for a rape kit, the News & Observer reported.

On March 28, the lab at the State Bureau of Investigation found no evidence of semen, blood or saliva. But the Durham police called DNA Security for more extensive testing, the newspaper reported, which included more sensitive Y-chromosome testing that analyzes only male DNA.

The lab would test the swabs and panty stains for DNA and match any results to the 46 players, the accuser and any other DNA samples collected by police.

On April 8, 9 and 10, DNA Security found DNA from multiple males on the panties and from rape-kit swabs, but none matched the lacrosse players, the newspaper reported. More tests were done on April 18 and 19 and still no match to any of the players was found.

The director of DNA Security, Brian Meehan, apparently never included any of these DNA results in his final report to Nifong on May 12 — a direct violation of company policy, according to the motion filed by defense attorneys Wednesday.

Nifong did not immediately return calls to the News & Observer for comment. Meehan told the paper he could not comment on the case without first carefully reviewing his files.

Rep. Walter Jones, R-N.C., wrote a letter to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales Tuesday asking for an investigation into Nifong to determine whether he is guilty of prosecutorial misconduct.

"Over the past several months, many of my constituents and a growing number of mainstream media outlets have raised serious questions about the accuser's allegations and Mr. Nifong's prosecution," Jones wrote.

Jones' complaints to Gonzales repeat criticisms that defense attorneys and others have raised about Nifong's handling of the case.

[jk the sooner fan]

i would think a strippers crotch and panties would be a DNA breeding ground....

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Again... you're kidding me, right?

How about evidence that conforms to rules fashioned over hundreds of years to ensure the accuracy of what is weighed by the trier of fact? Were any of the statements made under oath? Subject to cross examination?

Were the reporters completely accurate in restating all of the hearsay you've described?

Really, sometimes what is needed is a jury trial. One person telling the truth can outweigh a dozen telling lies or misstatements. Conversely, liars are seldom able to pull off a whole trial. OJ notwithstanding.

You really want the media to have power to determine who gets prosecuted? Good Lord, sports writers can't even pick a football champion.

"I'm a lawyer and this pie chart means that its tastey..." To paraphrase an SNL skit.

Old, I know you have to say this, but there is also something called common sense and balance of evidence. The DA needs to take these into account when determining whether to file charges or not. It is at his sole discretion - am I not correct? He was in the middle of a tough re-election, in a town that has a strong black population. Of course he is going to take that into consideration. From what I have seen, and believe me, rich white boys don't get an automatic pass, I don't think there was a crime, let alone a rape. I bet she was ****ed that they didn't pay her all the money she was due becuase she was hopped up and couldn't "dance" so she was going to get "even".

You ask about the evidence, I don't think there is any, at least not against the Dukey Boys...I bet they could find something from the ho's pimp or "boyfriend"...

[AlbqSooner]

There are some cases that a DA would be remiss to substitute his/her judgment for that of a jury. Those cases simply have to be submitted to a jury in our system. EVEN IF the DA has doubts about the veracity of his witnesses or the strength of his case, a prosecutor should seldom make the decision not to charge based on his belief that the case might not be winnable.

HOWEVER, the role of a prosecuting attorney in our system of justice is to seek justice rather than seeking convictions. There is a saying among prosecutors that anyone can convict a guilty man, convicting the innocent man is the real challenge. It is despicable that any prosecutor would espouse that thought, but it is not uncommon to hear it. I feel certain that Old n Slo has heard that sentiment. I feel equally certain that he is not one who accepts it.

[Okla-homey]

HOWEVER, the role of a prosecuting attorney in our system of justice is to seek justice rather than seeking convictions. There is a saying among prosecutors that anyone can convict a guilty man, convicting the innocent man is the real challenge*. It is despicable that any prosecutor would espouse that thought, but it is not uncommon to hear it.

See Grisham, John "The Innocent Man: Murder and Injustice in a Small Town" 2006.

[Oldnslo]

There are some cases that a DA would be remiss to substitute his/her judgment for that of a jury. Those cases simply have to be submitted to a jury in our system. EVEN IF the DA has doubts about the veracity of his witnesses or the strength of his case, a prosecutor should seldom make the decision not to charge based on his belief that the case might not be winnable.

HOWEVER, the role of a prosecuting attorney in our system of justice is to seek justice rather than seeking convictions. There is a saying among prosecutors that anyone can convict a guilty man, convicting the innocent man is the real challenge. It is despicable that any prosecutor would espouse that thought, but it is not uncommon to hear it. I feel certain that Old n Slo has heard that sentiment. I feel equally certain that he is not one who accepts it.
Kobe had to be prosecuted.

If the DA here had not prosecuted, you'd be just as likely to hear that he was in Duke's pocket, or some of the 'rich white boys' had paid him, or whatever.

Sometimes, you just need to run it up the flagpole.

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Yeah, I hear you. I am surprised a judge hasn't summarily thrown out the charges for "lack of evidence", but then again, I don't know if a judge has seen the case to the extent that this type of motion would be offered. If what has been stated about the ho is true, then I hope they throw the book at her and that the Whitey "Dukey" boyz sue the hell out of her for defamation and Nifong for malicious prosecution...

[jk the sooner fan]

they could make a game show out of who the dad is for the strippers baby....



"i'll take white lacrosse players for $500 alex"

[TheHumanAlphabet]

She's preggo?

[jk the sooner fan]

yep, read the news dude.....she had a baby, born 9 months after the rape

[TheHumanAlphabet]

When was baby born? I never heard any of that. You'd think that would be splashed all over the media if the baby were mixed race...

I don't believe anything regarding this ho...

[Fugue]

it looks like she has given birth and jk will confirm that in the next post. :D

[jk the sooner fan]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,236695,00.html

[Scott D]

When was baby born? I never heard any of that. You'd think that would be splashed all over the media if the baby were mixed race...

I don't believe anything regarding this ho...

probably because nobody outside of durham, nc gives a ****.

[C&CDean]

probably because nobody outside of durham, nc gives a ****.

Thanks Scott. I was fixin' to say that.

[jk the sooner fan]

it looks like she has given birth and jk will confirm that in the next post. :D

well i did tell him to read the news!

[TheHumanAlphabet]

An easy solution...Test the baby's dna against the players. Since the tests show no player dna in the samples, this could be interesting...Since the tests showed multiple dna samples and none of the players, I wonder who the daddy is?

EDIT: Surprised CNN isn't runnig the story. They have a story about who knocked up Anna Nicole and Rosie's ching-chang-chong apology, but no lacrosse story...

[Scott D]

the daddy is mike nifong. so now, nobody outside of durham, nc still gives a ****.

Finnerty will end up in jail eventually even after this stupid case gets dismissed.

[Mjcpr]

An easy solution...Test the baby's dna against the players. Since the tests show no player dna in the samples, this could be interesting...Since the tests showed multiple dna samples and none of the players, I wonder who the daddy is?

She's probably wondering the same thing.

[jk the sooner fan]

helllloooooooooooooooo "name that daddy" game show

jeezus

[Fugue]

i wonder if they had a color swatch with them at the birth to determine race. :D

[Scott D]

i wonder if they had a color swatch with them at the birth to determine race. :D

Ironic you mention that. Back in the 90s a Dutch couple was having trouble concieving, so they did the artifical semination thing. The wife ended up giving birth to twins...one was classic scandanavian appearance, blonde hair, pale skin, blue eyes...the second child was black. It was six months before the place they went admitted that they somehow got another man's sperm mixed with the husbands when they were fertilizing her eggs.

[Fugue]

It's amazing that they could keep from admitting that for a full 6 months.

[Scott D]

I think it was more of a refusal to admit fault..you know, like most labs/companies/corporate entities ;)

[Fugue]

yeah, but still, there is no gray area here. The issue, for maybe the first time in history, was black and white. :texan:

[Scott D]

Michael Jackson would be proud of you Farinelli :mack:

[TheHumanAlphabet]

What was that movie about the guy that dreamed and then his dreams became reality. I think he got rid of racism by turning everyone gray...

[Widescreen]

yeah, but still, there is no gray area here. The issue, for maybe the first time in history, was black and white. :texan:
Sorry to derail the thread but this post made me think of something funny that happened yesterday. We took our kids to the mall to see Santa. As we were exiting through Sears, there was a display of cheap CD's. I picked up a Jackson 5 CD and was showing her what they looked like (she's seen Michael now but has never seen what they looked like back in the day). Her comment was "He looks black." As in "He's white but in that particular picture he looks black." :D

Anyway, back to our regularly scheduled programming.

[Fugue]

Michael Jackson would be proud of you Farinelli :mack:

"the kid is not my son"

[Scott D]

"the kid is not my son"

ymssra

[jk the sooner fan]

"the kid is not my son"

but i'd be happy to babysit him

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Does anyone speak the truth on this case???

From a FoxNews story...

Now Nifong says:

Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong (http://javascript<b></b>:siteSearch('Mike Nifong');) said Friday that the stripper accusing three Duke University (http://javascript<b></b>:siteSearch('Duke University');) lacrosse players of raping her is in fact pregnant, but that she become pregnant at least two weeks after the party where she says she was raped.

EDIT:
Now from a CNN story...


The woman has said the three men raped her in a bathroom at a March 13 team party where she had been hired to perform as a stripper.
Medical records included in a defense motion filed Thursday were not made public, but Cheshire said the woman was given a pregnancy test immediately after reporting she was raped -- and it was negative -- and she took an emergency contraceptive.
"The possibility of her having gotten pregnant (from) these alleged incidents is an impossibility ... an absolute impossibility," Cheshire said.

[Widescreen]

Foxnews is reporting that the rape charges are being dropped. Merry Christmas, Dukies!




DURHAM, N.C. — A prosecutor dismissed rape charges Friday against three Duke University lacrosse players accused of attacking a stripper at a team party, a defense attorney said.

Joseph Cheshire, an attorney for one of the three players, said charges of kidnapping and sexual offense remain in place. District Attorney Mike Nifongdid not immediately return calls seeking comment.

The accuser is a 28-year-old student at North Carolina Central University. She has said three men raped her in a bathroom at a March 13th team party where she was hired to perform as a stripper.

Attorneys for players Dave Evans, Collin Finnerty and Reade Seligmann stressed for months that no sex occurred at the party. They have often cited the lack of D-N-A evidence in the case.

Evans has graduated from Duke. Finnerty and Seligmann were both sophomores who were suspended following their indictments.

[Scott D]

*yaaawn* Finnerty ends up in prison within 10 years even without this.

[TheHumanAlphabet]

I'm betting Nifong, after a successful re-election, was going to have this quietly go away for "lack of evidence". However, he has dagged the kids and Duke Lacrosse's reputation through the mud for a lying, drunk, drugged up ho's lie. Nifong did all of this for political gain. He should feel political ramifications.

Enough has been said and printed to question the veracity of the ho's statements. She has been impeached by a taxi cab driver, by the stripper that gave her a ride and by the alibi's of at least one of the said accused. What more do you need?

Gee, was I prophetic or what?

Talk about making it go quietly away...You release this info on a Friday (spin will quickly die), you release before a MAJOR Holiday (spin will really quickly die) and you release it so it has a week that all major news people and radio shows are off for the end-of-the-year hiatus (the spin will really, really die). Nifong must've been using ole Bill Clinton spin meisters, Donna Brazille and ole Crazy James Carville on this one...

Nifong should be charge with prosecutorial misconduct and he should charge the ho with filing a false report.

I hope Duke, the ex-Lacrosse coach and the Dukey boys sue the hell out of the ho for all the **** she dragged them through...

[TheHumanAlphabet]

*yaaawn* Finnerty ends up in prison within 10 years even without this.

You think he got scared straight?

While he is no choir boy, he didn't deserve what the ho did to him...

[Scott D]

You think he got scared straight?

While he is no choir boy, he didn't deserve what the ho did to him...

nah, I think he'll go get drunk and beat up another alleged 'homo' eventually. Either that or commit a white collar crime.

[Okla-homey]

The kids still face two very serious charges. Kidnapping and seckshual assault. If convicted, they could still do 40-60 years in the state pen.

Nifong said he had to drop the rape charge because in NC, rape requires penile insertion, and with absolutely no physical evidence, no corraborating witnesses and an accuser who repeatedly changed her story, he couldn't possibly prove the rape beyond reasonable doubt.

What they're left with is an admittedly mentally unstable stripper who went to a house party without a bouncer, and, I might add, had accused a group of guys of the same crimes a few years back. That earlier incident came to nothing when the state dismissed. Unfortunately, that last part may not get admitted for the jury's consideration.

Now all they have are her words against the boys, and presumably the prosecution's hope a jury will believe her when she says they held her in the bathroom for 30 minutes and did kinky stuff to her against her will...although apparently no penises were employed. Notwithstanding the fact her stripper colleague, who was present at the party during the alleged "kidnapping," will testify she was not aware any of that happened and considers the accuser
to be batsh1t crazy.

I really hope, for the boys' sake, the defense can get in the fact her drawers had a dozen guys' DNA in them who were NOT at the party.

Anyway, this whole mess really engenders public confidence in district attorneys.

[stonecoldsoonerfan]

Anyway, this whole mess really engenders public confidence in district attorneys.

it surrrrrrrre does. that's the scary part about this thing is that the whole system can be used for someone's legal fantasy.

[Okla-homey]

You can read the court doc of the rape charge dismissal here:

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/1222062duke1.html

[jk the sooner fan]

the allegations of the conspiracy between the DA and the lab are really disturbing

[Okla-homey]

the allegations of the conspiracy between the DA and the lab are really disturbing

well, technically, I believe the lab is an agent of the DA under these circumstances. Therefore, the info is released (if ever) through the DA's office, and not to third parties. That said, it is unquestionably exculpatory evidence, and the DA is ethically bound to give it to the defense. IMHO, the fact it's taken this long is probably not a big deal, despite the yowls from the boys' lawyers, because the trial is still a long way off. I just wish Nifong would drop the remaining charges and let everyone get on with their lives.

[Scott D]

I wish Duke would fall into an abyss and allow the rest of the country to get on with their lives. I mean there are clearly important issues like finding Natalie Holloway than some silly sexual assault in Durham ;)

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Scott - I agree, however that dumb DA won't let it die the death it needs. He painted himself into a corner and now can't get out. Perhaps he should recuse himself and his staff, pass it on up to the state DA for review and be done with it...Really, he should drop all charges, but he can't do that as that would open himself up to malicious prosecution charges and what not...

[Widescreen]

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/12/28/D8MA49OG0.html


The North Carolina State Bar filed an ethics complaint Thursday against Duke lacrosse prosecutor Mike Nifong, accusing him of breaking four rules of professional conduct when speaking to the reporters about the sensational case.

[Sooner_Havok]

Uh oh, some one got caught lieing his *** off!