Wednesday, May 31, 2006

General topics 14 - Full

This page is full. Please go to General Topics - OPEN to continue with your comments.


At 8:46 AM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

On a lighter note, guess who was released from jail on Monday

Why it wouldn't be the handbag thief (and 127-time arrestee)


Now, that wouldn't have anything to do with procuring perjured testimony in the cabbie case today, would it?

Let's ask Mike Nifong and his corrupt stooge Assistant DA Ashley Cannon.

At 9:54 AM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous K.P. said...

what is a troll attack? Nifong has a letter coming to him today. Can someone go out and send him something for a headache.

At 10:12 AM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Troll attack" is when random people (not members or regulars) start posting unwelcome or nasty messages on discussion boards they oppose to disrupt the regular flow of conversation. It is a cyber crime.

At 10:29 AM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Jim Q said...

Is there a defense fund for Elmostafa?

At 10:50 AM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ironic how Karr has now been cleared from the Ramsey murder due to lack of DNA evidence, yet the three boys are still on trial, despite of the lack of DNA evidence.

At 11:01 AM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Is there a defense fund for Elmostafa?

Apparently Lisa Hawkins is only being moved from one detention facility to another (perhaps so she can be closer to the court to testify).

This case is still an outrage, though, and the Department of Justice should hear about it :

(From the DOJ website) :

"E-mails to the Department of Justice, including the Attorney General, may be sent to "

"E-mails will be forwarded to the responsible Department of Justice component for appropriate handling."

civil rights division of the Dept. of Justice snail mail address :

U.S. Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20530

Assistant Attorney General

Wan J. Kim
(202) 514-2151

Civil Rights Criminal Division (where a threat of force or violence is involved) snail mail address :

U.S. Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Criminal Section, PHB
Washington, D.C. 20530

Mark Kappelhoff

Principal Deputy Chief
David Allred

At 11:20 AM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Duke Students Organize To Oust Nifong Over Lacrosse Case

POSTED: 10:27 am EDT August 29, 2006
UPDATED: 10:38 am EDT August 29, 2006

DURHAM, N.C. -- Two students at Duke University have launched a voter registration drive to oust Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong.

Emily Wygod and Christiane Regelbrugge, both juniors on opposite sides of the political spectrum, said they were outraged by Nifong's handling of the high-profile rape case against three members of the Duke men's lacrosse team.

"The people that Durham residents elect need to be held accountable to treat every resident fairly," said Regelbrugge, an economics major from Charlotte.

Nifong has been criticized for the way he handled allegations by an exotic dancer who said she was raped during a team party for Duke lacrosse players earlier this year, including public statements he made before filing criminal charges against three players.

Wygod and Regelbrugge received 35 completed registration forms after handing out 300 forms on campus Monday. They hope to register more than 2,000 students by Oct. 13, the registration deadline for the November elections.

Last week, Nifong supporters started their own voter registration drive.

Nifong will be challenged on the ballot in November by Lewis Cheek, a county commissioner who said he would not serve if elected even though he collected about 10,000 signatures to get his name on the ballot. If Cheek wins, the governor would appoint the next district attorney.

Republican Steve Monks, who failed to get enough signatures to make the ballot, will challenge Nifong as a write-in candidate.
Copyright 2006 by The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

someone concerned chees and monk will split the vote?

Email This Story Print This Story

At 11:38 AM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...


At 11:48 AM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Applause to Emily and Christiane at Duke! Courageous young women who are unwilling to be apathetic. Also, kudos to Steve Miller for his opinion piece in the Duke Chronicle.
Texas Mom

At 12:51 PM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Re Above: Agreed! We are proud of all three students and the nameless others who are working with them. We have every confidence in the Duke Student body. They exemplify excellence in more ways than one.

At 1:12 PM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

post 10:12 thank you for explaining that to me. I never heard that term before. and post 11:38 I'm glad you listened to that song I listed it about two or three boards ago. It really does fit, and thanks for the e address for the doj.

At 1:47 PM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Lucky "D" said...

I personally don't think Monk has the proverbial "snowball's chance" to win the DA election as a write-in in November. It would be a shame for Nifong to win by the margin of votes that Monk had gotten that may have gone to Cheek. Monk should join the ABN effort and set aside his bid this time. Maybe, if Nifong loses, Governor Easley will appoint him. I see Monk, at that point as a positive for NC.

At 2:00 PM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...


The Duke Lacrosse incident is an unusual case of alleged rape.

In many rape cases, the accuser and the accused are known and no one disputes that sex took place. The issue is whether the sex was consensual. The Kobe Bryant and William Kennedy Smith cases are examples.

In other rape cases, the accuser is known and sex occured but the identity of the accused is at issue, This situation may obtain when there is a home invasion and subsequent rape, or the rape of a woman in a park.

In the Duke case, only the accuser is known. At issue is 1) whether a rape acutally occured, and 2) if it did, the identity of the rapist(s).

From the beginning all of the players at the party have insisted that no sex or rape happened that night. The team captains made this clear at the start:

The defense attorneys also made the "no sex, no rape" claim by refusing to consider any plea bargain:


While they have not discussed the specifics of the party on the advice of lawyers, evey player who has spoken out or been interviewed has insisted "no sex, no rape." This includes Dave Evans, Matt Zash, Bo Carrington, Tony McDevitt, John Walsh etc.

The "no sex, no rape" defense is unusual and also risky (if not true). It assumes, an this is a big assumption, that there is no DNA or other forensic evidence indicating sex and linking the accuser to the accused. With advances in DNA and other CSI it is unlikely that nothing will show up when penetration and/or ejaculation occured. Even condom use can be detected.

The players and the lawyers claimed "no sex, no rape" even before the DNA or other tests were available. They were also unanimous in this claim, despite Mr. Nifong's threats to indict for aiding and abetting, the improper attempt of LE to interview them in their dorms when they already had attorneys, and the fake e-mail claiming one of them had "turned."

Mr. Nifong described this as a "blue wall of silence," despite the captains at first giving testimony without attorneys and cooperating in the search of the Buchanan house.

I find it implausible that so many lacrosse players would remain silent if a crime occured. This would imply a degree of callousness and conspiracy on the part of so many people that it boggles the mind. Certainly one of the players, top students at a top university, would come forward. They did not, consistent with "no sex, no rape."

Also, as the Newsweek article points out, the entire team went for DNA analysis when their lawyers argued that the request was too broad. They were not afraid of the facts and believed the DNA result would exonerate them. Thiese are not the actions of people trying to hide somethiing.

The only way the "no sex, no rape" defense works is when it is true.

By his actions Mr. Nifong indicated he believed the accuser and Sgt, Gottlieb, and did not fully consider the possibility that no crime ocurred.

The truth will out-- "no sex, no rape"

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

08-29-2006 06:02 PM

At 2:54 PM, August 29, 2006, Blogger NDLax84 said...

My open letter to the Duke student body, prompted by Stephen Miller's fantastic article, "Persecution", in yesterday's Chronicle

At 2:57 PM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I just went to the N&O website and the front page says " judge asked to throw out shoplifting charge. The A.D.A. said that the shoplifting charges have nothing to do with him being a witness for Reade" It's there now.

At 3:35 PM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

From the same N&O artice:

"Defense lawyers in the lacrosse rape case have said that Elmostafa was charged because he is a favorable witness to the defense. Loflin put one of the lacrosse investigators on the witness stand this morning and produced typed notes from the lacrosse case that show District Attorney Mike Nifong wanted to be informed when Elmostafa was arrested.

Assistant District Attorney Ashley Cannon told the judge the shoplifting case has nothing to do with the rape case."

Can you believe the insanity going on in Durham? Is this for real?

At 3:50 PM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yet another indication that Duke is having an identity crisis. It seems, Brodhead needs a PR firm to tell him what the strengths of the university are. You would think that if anyone knows what the strength of a university is, it must the president. Or, is the PR firm actually asked to do some damage/image control for Brodhead himself? God knows, he needs it. Most bizzare...

Duke enlists PR firm in wake of Lax

At 4:02 PM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous CHIN said...

Saying is:

Best PR is truth!

At 4:09 PM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chin: you have real good sayings. I enjoy each and every one that you posted so far. However, my all time favorite is your first about the hunter.

"If hunter hunts in a forest with no game, game not smart hunter dumb"; or something to that effect. I really enjoyed that one. Thank you for sharing these very wise "sayings".

At 4:25 PM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous WJD said...


At 4:59 PM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Good news on the cabbie. He must have received a fare trial!

At 5:01 PM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

gosh!!! nfong even has the hechts store security lying for them - he lies and the sotre ssurveillnace tape shows the exact opposite of what he testifes to under oath -- well most store security officers are professional liars !!

At 5:03 PM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes, the store security officer appears to have lied for the store or to save his own hide or for nfong! So typical... and yet so sad. I agree they are usually professional witnesses ie liars.

At 5:10 PM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tony Soprano of CourtTV and TalkLeft discussion board fame had this comment about the case:

"Message to Nifong:
The Meter's Running!"

At 5:51 PM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I bet Nifong is kicking himself for changing those charges. Give one to the good guys. By the way not all of us store security guards are in it to save our jobs. I quit mine when my employer wanted me to lie, just to get someone fired that he did not like.

At 5:57 PM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous K.P. said...

above I worked hand and hand with store security. They wanted me to lie for them and I refused. Within five mins. I quit my job. I can't stand for that even I don't like the person.

At 6:10 PM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Stuart Taylor has an excellent commentary on the New York Times article.

At 6:10 PM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous WJD said...

SLATE reporter, Stuart Taylor is relaying that a toxicoligy test was done on CGM, but no DATE RAPE DURG was found. Check it out here:

This report is down near the bottom of the aritcle.

At 6:31 PM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Stuart Taylor's article is excellent--just as his earlier work was. Everyone should read it. And this is the first I've heard about a toxicology report--I thought Nifong had said no toxicology tests had been performed. I guess he didn't want to admit one had been done so he could perpetuate the notion that there could have been a date rape drug....

At 6:35 PM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

above: either there is a tox result and Nifong didn't want to admit to it, because he and she both knew she was on drug, but not a date rape drug. Maybe coke, or herion

At 6:41 PM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Stuart Taylor also claims that Mark Gottlieb has had repeated run-ins with Duke students before.

Anyone with information on that, please post. It is one of my goals to make sure that racist rogue cops like Mark Gottlieb and RD Clayton go to prison.

In that regard, I have received some useful information but could use some more leads.

At 7:30 PM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have a question about a topic I have not seen addressed on this (or any) site ...
I think Nifong is motivated by an intense hatred of Duke .... and is obsessed with bringing Duke to its knees. Just think of how swelled his head must be. He has been able to indict three priviledged Dukies (Yankees, no less); he has forced the resignation/firing of the Duke lacrosse coach (whose teams beat the holy crap out of the UNC teams of late); he has caused a whole restructuring of the Duke athletic policy; professors and students are at war with each other; Brodhead thinks and talks about this issue every day .... need I go on????? Nifong must be living out a DREAM! He has done more to destroy Duke than Dean Smith and Michael Jordan combined.
Is there anything to this intense Duke hatred on his part? Is it motivated by a life-long Duke-UNC rivalry? If so, doesn't his make Nifong too emotionally tied to this case to be rational?

At 7:31 PM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

When I was in the US Marines, in 1969, stationed in Jacksonville NC, Marines were alway harrassed by the local police. This is apparently the same, but it is in Durham, NC. The people in NC, just want to go after outsiders. Fortunately for me I was transferred in 1970 to NJ and was realeased from active duty in NJ in 1971.

At 7:33 PM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It was like the NC police, no matter where you are will be targets if you are from the north, I was from NJ. This is a PS to my last post

At 7:54 PM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous K.P. said...

just think how long did it take for CGM to i.d. falsly to. I bet Mikey and the Durham PD did background checks on this team, to see who she CGM could extort money from. I live in MA. and the cops up here just solved a rape, murder in less than 72 hours. They do have the right person up here. I body was found in the killers backyard. This crime didn't happen in my city. The only crime our cops can solve is the case of the missing doughnut in my city. I'm not kidding.

Why does CGM still have her children? With the line of work she's in they should be in the hands of the state. Who takes care of these kids while she is out all night having sex for money?

Sorry about spelling in a rush to get everything out.

At 8:11 PM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

TO: 7:58PM
Why don't you post some of that complaint online, so we can read and maybe get some more ideas, about filing a complaint.

At 8:15 PM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The end of the SLATE article, by Stuar Taylor goes like this:
Condoms, date rape: The Times cites Nifong's suggestion in early April that the reason no semen had been found might be the use of condoms. It fails to explain how deceptive this was: Nifong's own files showed the accuser saying her rapists had not used condoms and that she had spat semen onto the floor.

The article also mentions police speculation that the lacrosse players might have slipped the accuser a date-rape drug to incapacitate her. And Joseph Cheshire, Evans' lawyer, noted in a recent e-mail exchange with me that the prosecution "has suggested to the media numerous times in the past that the accuser had been given such a drug." Another deception? "A toxicology report that the defense was informed of last week was negative for any date rape drug in the accuser's system," Chesire tells me.

Cheshire adds that the Times' strong implication that defense lawyers have deceived the public is not only false but "especially ironic in an article about a prosecutor who has and continues to deceive the public about his case."

Nifong must be praying for jurors as easily deceived—or as willing to see past the evidence to what they want to believe—as Wilson and Glater of the Times.

back to top

At 8:27 PM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous K.P. said...

8:11 post it would take me to long to list everything here. But just go to the N&O archives and the WRAL archives and pull up what ever you can about this case. I almost forgot goto and search there and you can read, all the statements that Nifong had to say. Before he had anyone charged and you can also read how he threatened to Men's Lacrosse Team to try and make them talk about what Nifong thinks he knows happened that night. I have six volumes of stuff that would make anyone sick you not want to eat for a year or more. If you need or want me to help anymore please use my initials I will now post using them at all times.

At 8:34 PM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous K.P. said...

p.s. if you go to the you can read the entire report of the false I.D. She named six people as her attackers and she could even remember what one of the team members was wearing for pants. In the report you will see where the detective kept reminding her that she was dancing in the living room not the master Bedroom as she keeps trying to say. she is being coached as what to say and how and when to say it.

At 8:36 PM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

TO: 8:27pm Post,
Well besides all that info, there is the latest post from Slate Magazine that Nigong did have a TOX report. I think Nifong's ship is sinking and Nifong and Gottleb should be in jail, not persecuting cases.

At 9:51 PM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The End of the Affair

As we push for the end of this sorry case, we must make sure that all of the corrupt civil servants who have collaborated with Nifong pay a heavy price for their actions.

For Nifong's assistant DA Ashley Cannon, her role in pushing a fraudulent prosecuation (of the cabbie) at the urging of her boss should noted be forgotten.

It is a sure sign of an absolute lack of ethics and morality when somebody so early in their (law) career is willing to abuse the powers of their office soley to please their boss.

I for one will be watching, and will make sure that every one of Cannon's missteps and abuses of power is fully documented on the internet.

In the ready reach of any future employer. Now and in the future.

After her actions in this case, Ashley Cannon's sorry legal career should begin and end in the Durham DA's office.

At 11:51 PM, August 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just _5_ days after holding Duff Wilson up as a role model in my daily Herald-Sun Editorial briefing, I am forced to retract.

In the interest of ethical reporting, here is today's letter to the troops.

To the Herald-Sun crew:

Oops, maybe I was too hasty in suggesting you use Duff Wilson as a career role model.

In piece-after-piece on the blogs this week, newly-hired NYTimes "sports" reporter Duff Wilson has been exposed as a liar and tool of prosecutor Mike Nifong for his recent front-page propagandizing.

Like his agenda-driven predecessor Judy Miller before him, I'm afraid nobody will ever trust anything Wilson writes again.

Here's a sampling of the analysis of the Duff Puff piece:

(one could list 50 more)

I don't like to admit I was wrong about Duff but the internet can have a purifying effect.

I know I said that Duff applied for and won a whole host of "journalism" awards at his prior job.

Awards for stories that I am sure in retrospect will likely turn out to be Jayson Blair-style outright fabrications.

OK, crew, back to writing stories about cub scouts.

Forget about that ambition stuff.

At 12:16 AM, August 30, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

One of the early urban legends in Durham was that Duke Medical Center fiddled the DNA evidence (never mind how you separate semen from alleged perps from that of the boyfriend on a swab). I was surprised that Duke admin. did not come out blowing and going defending Duke Medical Center then. I hope now they have quietly steered the SANE nurse and examining doctor to their own competent counsel who should be telling them to play it straight, strickly from their reports and notes. Do nothing that could be seen as helping or going along with the Nifong railroad. When this thing runs off the rails neither you nor Duke want to be among those defending civil lawsuits already being preped.

At 12:32 AM, August 30, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To 9:51 PM above:

Here's a good account of Ashley Cannon and the trial:

At 1:33 AM, August 30, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Good ole Linwood. Sure missed ole' Barney Fife.

"But Linwood Wilson, the district attorney's investigator, denied that the shoplifting case was used to pressure Elmostafa.

"There ain't no truth in that," he insisted.

(Seriously, is there anyone who works for Nifong that is not a sex addict, a racist or a jackass)

At 1:58 AM, August 30, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Check out the picture at the link below. The commentary preceding the link is from a poster who goes by the name "ME" at Liestoppers:

Nothing captures the essence of the Hoax better than the picture taken today by the N&O's Chuck Liddy. In the picture, soon to be acquitted taxi driver Moezeldin Elmostafa listens to testimony during his bench trial in District Court today.

At 2:07 AM, August 30, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To 1:33 AM above:

The Linwood Wilson quote makes a nice caption for the picture linked at the 1:58 AM post above.

At 2:21 AM, August 30, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wow, John Stevenson just came storming into the Herald-Sun newsroom totally drunk and raging about Elmo-this, Elmo-that.

Another bad night at Blinco's apparently, for our intrepid crime reporter and his pals in the DPD.

He banged out his story pretty quick on his old Olivetti:

I feel for Stevenson tonite, you can practically touch the rage in his heart that a black immigrant cabbie didn't get framed by Nifong.

Against our pleadings, Stevenson demanded the right to retry the case again in his news article, to "make things right for Mikey".

Ashley agreed. And even helped out with a line or two when Stevenson passed out.

I played devil's advocate, as usual. Trying my best to stay out of the way of Stevenson's spittle.

The Herald-Sun spin: "During Tuesday's shoplifting trial, two officers gave testimony contradicting that of Elmostafa."

The Truth: Yeah, turns out nobody thought your racist drinking buddies were telling the truth. That's why the case was laughed out of court.

Herald-Sun Stevenson spew: "Massey said the tape then showed Elmostafa speeding away with the woman inside his car, running one stop sign in the Northgate parking lot and failing to come to a complete halt at another."

The Truth: Yeah and the taped showed something else. AKA your drinking buddies were lying on the stand.

Herald-Sun spin: "Cannon disagreed in her closing argument Tuesday."

The Truth: Yeah and she was laughed out of court, especially when she said the prosecution "had nothing to do with the Lacrosse case"

Herald-Sun closing argument: "If we use any common sense and take all the evidence, we can see he [Elmostafa] did know about this before the larceny took place, while it took place and after it took place," Cannon said."

The Truth: Yeah, and she lost the case, you drunken racist chump.

All in all, a bad day for Nifong, Ashley and Stevenson.

They'll sleep it off and be back strong in the morning.

"Stevenson for years ran a side business publishing a legal newsletter that detailed Durham trials for an audience of local attorneys--an enterprise even Stevenson (who has since sold the business) admits "might have been seen as a conflict of interest."'

Gee, Stevenson, do ya think?

At 3:08 AM, August 30, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Must read on DNA from Durham in Wonderland (final 2 paragraphs excerpted):

The Nifong theory of DNA is a simple one: this scientific evidence can prove guilt but, apparently, can never exonerate. If his vision of justice prevails, groups like the Innocence Project would have no purpose, since DNA evidence could be used solely to help get convictions.

Is there any responsible legal figure outside the Durham County District Attorney's office who would embrace such an "old-fashioned" belief? If not, they should start speaking up, before the Nifong Rules extend beyond Durham and expose more innocent defendants to the pernicious effects of "old-fashioned" justice.

At 6:00 AM, August 30, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

By George, they've done it:

Duke Students for an Ethical Durham seeks to encourage students to fulfill their civic obligation to register and vote in Durham County. We believe that Duke Students, as residents of Durham, need to become active in the political process in order to express their views on issues facing the community. In order to ensure fair treatment and due process from authority, we strongly encourage Duke students and Durham residents alike to vote in the upcoming election in November.

At 9:23 AM, August 30, 2006, Anonymous K.P. said...

good morning. I just read all the posts from overnight and I could not stop laughing. I love all of you when I wake up. I just got off the phone with my attorney and he told me that he received my package and that, every member of the team can and should sue not just Nifong but every person in his office, the cops that tried to play these guys as fiddles. And for taking that nasty e-mail with out a warrant. Because the cops wont say how they got it. I can hear the sounds of silver bracletes being used. Nifong must not be happy today.Not at all.

At 9:29 AM, August 30, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Looks like, with cabbie being found not-guilty, Nifong's ship has been shot by his own Cannon. (Sorry for the pun). Next will be the other members of his gang. I bet every honest police officer (I prefer those words for the many many thousands who are honest)are angry at the Nifong Cops. I would be.

At 9:56 AM, August 30, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Lisa Hawkins was not released from jail on Monday, rather she was returned to the NC DOC facility from whence she came.

The DA's office brought her over to discuss the particulars of Mr. Elmostafa's case and when they couldn't get her to "play ball" and say anything useful to them in court, they sent her packing back to Rocky Mount. (Of note, they sent her back the same day she arrived so that the defense would not be able to call her the next day as a witness because she was not "readily available.")

At 10:28 AM, August 30, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

If you have not read Jason Trumpbour's comments on the Stuart Taylor article yet, you should. It is on the "from moderator" page of this site. He makes Taylor's article sound even better than first read. Good synthesis Jason!

At 12:48 PM, August 30, 2006, Anonymous K.P. said...

to the person who blogged me last night the time was 8:11pm 8/29 I did want to let you know of four things I thought would be helpful in putting in your paperwork to disbarr Nifong.

1) Nifong didn't want to hand over the results of the first round of DNA tests until the very last minute. Nifong might have needed that time to find a way to change to results. And when he did it was on a Friday night at 5 o'clock.

2) Look at all of the favors he is doing for his witness's a.k.a. Kim Roberts and the cops. He is going to sink to a whole new level of dirty.

3) Nifong is going to try and mess with all of the defense witness's, He is over stepping his powers as D.A.

4)Nifong went to a grand Jury even before he had any proof of a crime at all. I just read that there were four people there that were not duke lacrosse players and they have yet to be tested for DNA

At 3:23 PM, August 30, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just a thought, as a retired police officer, I can only think of a couple of reasons not to have written notes from an investigation. First, the infamous the dog ate my homework or I lost them. Second you used a recording device to record your interviews. Third, you just don't turn them in, because they may conflict with your typed statement. Fourth, you are lazy and don't like taking notes. Usually this fourth one indicates lower grades in school, and poor job performance. Fifth, this one is highly unlikely, for most of us. You have a photographic memory and can remember all you see and hear. Which of these catagories would Sgt. Gottlieb fall into?

At 3:47 PM, August 30, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I go for Number 6.

That Mark Gottlieb is a crooked cop who has never (or rarely) been called on his misdeeds by a corrupt and broken system of justice in Durham.

At 4:20 PM, August 30, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Stuart Taylor's latest piece on the Duke case makes any temptation at "60 Minutes" to go soft foolish as well as shameful.

At 4:33 PM, August 30, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Curious, is anyone looking at whether Nifong leaked all this info to the NYT. Remember, Gottliebs statement was not turned over to the prosecution until July 17, the same day Judge Titus put his unconstitutional gag order on all involved in the case. The only person that benefitted by the leak to the NYT, was Nifong.

At 4:56 PM, August 30, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What better way for Gottlieb, who is being investigated internally by the DPD, to overcome the charge of racism, then to write a story supporting CGM. I call it a story, because that is exactly what it is, not an investigative report on what he really found out. He will do anything he can to overcome, any internal investigation. Chief Chalmers is not running the DPD, King Nifong is and that is who Gottlieb has to impress. The whole internal investigation has probably been squashed.
By the way what ever happened to the internal investigation, Gottlieb is probably in charge of that investigation also and they are waiting for his report.

At 5:08 PM, August 30, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"The only person that benefitted by the leak to the NYT, was Nifong."

Actually, Nifong benefitted for a few hours. Afte the rebuttals, it would have been better for Nifong if The Times had outed another secretive national defense practice.

Scrutiny, Nifong cannot survive.

At 11:39 PM, August 30, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Did anyone see Greta? She interviewed the two students who are heading a voter registration drive among Duke students.
(see link in 6:00 AM August 30 post)

I thought they gave an outstanding appearance. They came across as honest and intelligent. They were a bit nervous as you would expect, but that did not detract at all from their effectiveness. And what an absolutely refreshing contrast they were to the corrupt and malicious characters we are used to seeing on the other side.

Greta gave them the stage, and they delivered their message loud and clear!

At 2:56 AM, August 31, 2006, Anonymous CHIN said...

Saying is:

Man who own too much, owe too much.
Not money only - people also!

At 7:12 AM, August 31, 2006, Anonymous K.P. said...

I saw the interview. I think those young ladies did just fine. Yes nervous but they got their message out, and we all heard it loud and clear. Way to go!!!

At 7:52 AM, August 31, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ruth Sheehan's column

on the Elmostafa case is another chapter in her lifelong mission since childhood to prove that she is the snarky-ess person in the room.

Between the lines of a reasonably good column, she takes swipes at the judge, the bloggers and even the (cabbie) victim himself- snarkily tossing out that even though there is not a single shred of evidence (presented in a full-day show trial), he might be guilty anyway.

Note to Ruth: Most people get over their snarky phase when they are 12 or 13 years old. It's very umbecoming in an aging boomer.

Sheehan, it's past time for you to grow up.

And own up to their own role in creating the lynch mob mentality that Nifong exploited.

We know you know.

At 8:29 AM, August 31, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

My Herald-Sun editorial comments today directed at reported William West, entitled

"Is hair analysis of John Stevenson in order?"

Mr West:

It was gratifying to see that the malicious, drunken racist John Stevenson was removed from the lacrosse beat for at least one day following his Tuesday spew.

A mild note of criticism on your otherwise excellant balanced piece.

Attorney: Date-rape drug test negative in lacrosse case

The most important thing to ask is why the DA has been hiding this result for months.

(In court, Nifong has repeatedly denied a toxicology report existed - even though he himself ordered it, apparently in April. Although he wasn't under oath at the time, these were still bald-faced lies)

Testing hair for unknown drugs strikes me (at least) as a total act of desperation, but hiding a negative result is worse.

(The blood and urine samples that they took the night would have been the logical source for testing and I think likely were tested, as we will eventually find out)

You are seeing a (very expensive) prosecutorial fraud playing out.

If I were you, I would start asking those in the DA's office some very hard questions. About obstruction of justice.

Nice job on the article.

At 9:07 AM, August 31, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey, for me this was the money quote in Ruth's article :

"There are some charges that, for the sake of the accused, the victim, and the community, it just might be better to drop."

At 6:45 PM, August 31, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I liked Ruth Sheehan's article in the N&0.

It gave a sense of how absurd the taxi driver case was, and by inference, the case against the LAX players.

Ms. Sheehan has really come around to be suspicious of Nifong and company.

At 9:50 PM, August 31, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

There has been no comment from the "Feds" on this disgrace and certainly they have been notified, contacted and read blogs. Does anyone have any thoughts that maybe they are taking the "give him enough rope" theory? Nifong that is! I think he has already hung himself.

At 10:01 PM, August 31, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Above: How do we know that the Feds were notified? Perhaps, nobody took the time to write to them. They cannot act without a formal complaint. Maybe someone needs to write to them and make sure they have a formal complaint to base their investigation on. Preferably an NC resident should submit a complaint. The address, at the state level, was published on this site several times. It may be a few pages back in the general topics. Can an NC resident file a formal complaint to the Feds and let us know that he/she did it by posting here? That way, we will know if the Feds are keeping silent despite the formal complaint or if they are silent because there has not been a complaint. Thank you.

At 10:36 PM, August 31, 2006, Anonymous CHIN said...

Saying is:

Heavy worry of heart at night
sometimes gone when sun comes.

At 10:57 PM, August 31, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Is anyone else irritated by Nifong referring to the "good old fashioned way" of trying rape cases?

To me, "good old-fashioned" conjurs up wholesome visions of mom and apple pie.

Doesn't belong in any serious rape case.

More evidence that Nifong is a Bozo.

Or maybe it is his subconscious saying that this isn't really a serious rape case, its just an attention-grabbing scheme.

At 2:32 AM, September 01, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...


To the poster at 10:57 PM, August 31, 2006, who asked:

Is anyone else irritated by Nifong referring to the "good old fashioned way" of trying rape cases?

The answer to your question is a resounding "YES!"

At 2:48 AM, September 01, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ray Gronberg of Herald-Sun today asks the question, "When will the Durham police's coverup of the role of Mark Gottlieb in instigating a racist beating of a Raleigh line cook be complete?"

The answer: 7-10 days

They are apparently waiting for hair analysis of the bald cop to come back.

Mike Nifong could not be reached for comment.

At 7:55 AM, September 01, 2006, Anonymous K.P. said...

Test shows lacrosse case accuser was free of controlled substances.

This is from the N&O today.

This is just a small part.

According to Sgt. Mark Gottieb's typed account of his investigation. Gottieb called a number of laboratories in April and May, looking for one that would test hair for traces of drugs.

On April 27, Gottieb called the N.C. Office of the Chief Medial Examiner, the crime laboratory at the State Bureau of Investigation and the Federal Bureau of Investigation crime lab. Each lab replied that it did not do such hair tests.

At 7:59 AM, September 01, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

All of the lawyers a mad a hell and Nifong better start running.

At 8:08 AM, September 01, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have read many of the posts complaining, complaining, complaining (you get the idea)...........about Mike Nifong's unethical practice of law. How many of you have taken the time to actually read the NC Lawyers' Code of Professional Responsibility (Hint Rules 3, 4 and 8)?(// How many of you who feel so strongly have taken the time to file a complaint on which the State Bar can act (

At 8:53 AM, September 01, 2006, Anonymous K.P. said...

above My lawyer just sent me back my paperwork and told me one thing K.I.S.S.

All I need to do is show dates and statements he"Nifong" has made. Weather it be in the papers or on any morning show. Just get his exact words and then send it back to him. "My lawyer" for review, then it is on it's way to N.C.

At 11:53 AM, September 01, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Moved from recommendations

Is there any method to learn more about the police involved in the Blinco case? Today there was a picture of six of them in The Herald Sun. I always assumed that Mark Gottlieb was white, but in looking at his picture in the paper today, I think he seems to be of mixed race. He does not look as light as Baker, the town manager, whose photo is in the beginning of the article. In fact, his eyes remind me a lot of Kim Robert's eyes. Could he be related to her? I feel as if there must be some reason why he fabricated the story regarding the lacrosse id's, besides his loyalty to Nifong. Has anyone else noticed this? Perhaps, seeing him in person would yield another perspective. However, in the photo, he looks as if he is definitely of mixed race, in my opinion.

At 12:12 PM, September 01, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Moved from Links section
In today's N&O: District Attorney's race may attract Duke vote

The article ends by noting that "Victoria Peterson, a Nifong advocate and outspoken critic of the defense lawyers representing the indicted players, persuaded Kim Brummel, a freelance writer, to form the Citizens for Mike Nifong Committee."

It goes on to state --

"We feel Mr. Nifong is the most qualified candidate," said Brummel, a registered voter in Granville County.

How is it that Kim Brummel, who is not even a resident of or registered voter in Durham County, is the appropriate person to form such a committee? Is it because Peterson realizes that if she herself formed the committee it would be laughed out of town as a publicity stunt for her own advancement? Can they not find a Durham resident/voter who is willing to lead this committee and so must resort to outside agitators? At least those of us out-of-staters writing in and offering opinions on this blog wouldn't be so presumptuous as to show up in Durham and conduct this sort of electioneering campaign more suited to actual citizens.

According to the article, currently there are 1357 registered voters on the NCCU campus and 1362 on the Duke campus, but with a registration drive underway at Duke, those numbers may change. While an earlier poster made the point that not all Duke students who register may share the views of the FODU on this case, I believe that the vast majority of new registrants at Duke this fall would be likely to vote against Nifong. I would urge them to vote Cheek instead of Monk in order to maximize the impact of their vote. Votes for Monk will only dilute the effort to unseat this nut.

At 12:16 PM, September 01, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Good ole fashioned way is meant to convey without that pesky scence or dna -you know all that pesky new fangled stuff that proves an defendnat coudln't have done the crime they are accused of - not like the good old boy old fashioned way of witness id (unreliable) police intimidation and da intimidation etc... crooked judges

At 12:19 PM, September 01, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Moved from Links section - originally posted on August 13 - sorry for the late move, but I could not delete this.

In the 8/13 edition of the N&O: Lacrosse error clouds story's credibility

Ted Vaden should stop all the sanctimonious hand-wringing and leave Joe Neff alone. How much more of this self-serving flagellation does he think Neff should be subjected to by the powers that be at that paper so they can cover their collective asses? They've run a front-page correction and now done a thorough job of investigating how superficially the editorial staff in fact supervises their reporters. Fine. It's almost as though the real story here is that one lone reporter is trying to swim upstream with both hands tied behind his back and the paper let him publish this story only to obscure the real import of it by subsequently blowing one mistake in it all out of proportion, thus trying to bury its own story on the case.

While he does say how highly regarded Neff is at the paper, it sounds like he's now in the doghouse for an indefinite period.

"I also wondered: Can Neff continue to report on the lacrosse case with credibility among readers and the various actors in the lacrosse story? Removing him from the story would send a message to readers about the paper's commitment to impartiality and accuracy, in the lacrosse case and in News & Observer journalism in general. [It would also muzzle the one voice there that has done a thorough job of investigating all the improprieties in this case.]

But it would also be a loss to the paper's coverage because Neff is a solid investigative reporter whose skills and experience are particularly suited to the lacrosse story. His Sunday report -- save the error -- plowed new ground in the lacrosse case. Sill and Riley said they retain full confidence in him.

I think Neff should remain on the case. His mistake was one of carelessness, not of malice. Removing him would be a form of scapegoating, in the sense of blaming one person for an error that was allowed by a team of professionals. And it would be depriving the paper, and readers, of The N&O's best journalism."

Melanie Sill's observation about Neff is particularly amusing and ironic:

"Melanie Sill, The N&O's executive editor, said she doesn't think the case indicates a flaw in the paper's fact-checking system, but it will raise consciousness going forward. 'Editors will be more diligent about talking to reporters about what they have fact-checked. Any error does raise a question about your potential for errors.'"

Look to thyself, Melanie!

I think that the correct course of action for the paper would be to run a follow-up story that contains the right date but continues the analysis that shows how Nifong's knowledge even earlier in the timeline of facts advantageous to the defense does NOT change the import of the initial story, namely, that he proceeded with a case in which there was significant exclupatory evidence as well as evidence of conduct by the FA that would explain her condition that evening.

Joe Neff should be allowed to continue his reporting and his paper should take more of the blame for not supporting him on this story. The best way to do that would be to run another article setting the record straight in context, not just referring to several paragraphs of a prior story, which leaves the reader hopelessly confused unless they're sitting with the two papers side by side and have nothing else to do but compare them. As of now, what we have is the implication that the great initial story is now worthless, which couldn't be further from the truth (a commodity with which many in public life in Durham seem to be unfamiliar.)

At 4:41 PM, September 01, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dear KP and Professor Plum, I apologize for sending the partial letter after editing it (by mistake of course). Below is the full version of the letter. However, in view of Professor Plum's earlier comment, you may need to shorten it to eliminate the details of Nifong’s misdeeds. Let us give the professor a chance to read the entire letter and perhaps he can advise you on how to proceed. Good luck with the letter.


To the DOJ officials:

I am writing to express my concerns over the handling of the Duke Lacrosse case in the state of North Carolina, by the interim District Attorney Michael Nifong. Through this letter, I am requesting that a formal investigation be conducted by the DOJ, to look into Mr. Nifong’s conduct in handling the Duke Lacrosse case. My name is Kerri Paradis. I am a rape victim who happens to be disabled and confined to a wheelchair. Because of my background, I take a very special interest in this case. I have been following it quite closely from the day it broke into the national media.

At first, based on what I heard from Mr. Nifong on TV and what I read in the newspapers, I believed that a rape did occur on the night of March 13th. However, over the last few months, after following the case very closely and observing the Durham interim D.A. Michael Nifong break the law and ignore justice at so many different levels, I am convinced that the three accused Lacrosse players are the ones whose rights are being violated by a law enforcement agent (i.e. the District Attorney) and his associates.

In my opinion, and this is shared by many others, there is enough evidence of gross misconduct by D.A. Nifong to warrant an official DOJ investigation. I will list below only the most glaring of these and expect that your investigators will uncover all the rest. As a very concerned US citizen, I believe that one of the most important duties of the Department of Justice is to look into matters like this and assure the citizens that such injustices, if proven to be true, will not be tolerated. Isn’t that the primary mandate of the DOJ?

1. Misleading statements against the accused by a minister of justice – D.A. Michael Nifong knowingly gave misleading information (not supported or totally contradicted by evidence) to media during the 50 to 70 interviews he gave early on in the investigation. This was a clear and very serious violation of the law, and it has been acknowledged and documented by many legal experts.

2. Witness intimidation – A taxi driver who is providing an alibi to one of the accused Lacrosse players was intimidated by Mr. Nifong’s Lacrosse case investigators. Again, the details of this injustice are available from more authoritative sources than me.

3. Providing favors in exchange to false testimony - Mr. Nifong provided legal favors to those involved in the Duke Lacrosse case in exchange for getting them to change their original statements regarding the incident. The most glaring of these is his reduction (or waiver) of the bail for Mrs. Kim Roberts (the second dancer) who was on a bond for embezzling 25,000$ from her work place.

There are many other points I could make that all point to D.A. Nifong’s gross departure from ethical conduct and over stepping his legal boundaries. However, an exhaustive list should be necessary to open an investigation into this matter. The items I listed above are serious enough that they should warrant an immediate investigation by the DOJ. Thank you for your attention on this most important matter. If you want me to provide any additional information, I will be happy to do it.

At 5:49 PM, September 01, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Has anyone filed a complaint with the North Carolina State Bar? There is a form on the State Bar web site that you can fill out and send to the Bar.

At 5:55 PM, September 01, 2006, Anonymous K.P. said...

5:49 post I did get my paperwork back from my lawyer today. All he told me is to

No one wants to read that much at one time. Keep it short and to the point. Then later hit them with everything you have. In my case it will be six volumes worth.

At 6:30 PM, September 01, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To 5:55 post, if you read the complaint form, they don't want much, but you could be called to testify, before them. That's the way I read the form. Also the form is quite short and simple. I guess that is why a lawyer, who is probably a member of the Bar said KISS. I know exactly what that means, when I typed reports that was the motto KISS.

At 6:42 PM, September 01, 2006, Anonymous CHIN said...

Saying is:

Few words heard
better than many not heard

At 6:46 PM, September 01, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To 6:35 post: I am a retired P/O and that is the way we submitted report KISS, kind of like Dragnet, just the facts. I never wrote a story like Gottlieb. I never would perjure myself in a report or in court. Had I seen an injustice I would speak out. I did at times see injustices and would testify for the defense. If you ever get caught in a lie, either on a report or in court you can kiss your credibility goodbye and also probably your job. Gottlieb, from what I read has almost 20 years as a P/O, maybe he can retire and receive a pension, after he is exposed. If that's the case, he wins, unless he is charge with perjury, found guilty and they may be able to take his pension away. The least he should be charged with is durilection of duty, a internal charge, for the tardiness of his report. I had to submit reports in a timely fashion and 3 or 4 months was not considered timely. Had I waited that long I would have to submit supplemental reports along the way, so there would be no contradictions in my final report. Durham seems to have no safeguard against that.

At 7:07 PM, September 01, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What surprises me is that no one in the Durham leagal community wants to file a complaint with the North Carolina Bar, against Nifong. This includes all those legal experts at the Duke Law School and the ACLU@DUKE. Nifong wants to talk about the wall of silence, well he is being protected by one. In fact to go one further, no lawyer in the country want to file a complaint with the NC Bar against Nifong, that's a pretty big wall.

At 7:37 PM, September 01, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

K.P. any lawyer in the entire country could file a complaint against Nifong. Some are writing articles, but none are complaining to the NC Bar.

At 10:16 PM, September 01, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hannity & Colmes reported tonight on this week's tox test news and the NYTimes article. They reported that a "hair" was used for the tox test and that initially DPD had trouble finding the appropriate lab to run the test. Reportedly even the FBI said they could not do it only a specialty lab that specialized in hair. The tv show mentioned that the hair must be tested within a certain amount of time. A pro AV Blogger on court tv board is already saying, so of course it is negative the test is flawed, they didn't perform it soon enough.

My reason for posting here for the first time is that on Sunday Aug. 27 the NY Daily News ran a full page article "Failing the Test
Date rape drug issue overlooked in Duke case and others" By Christian Red. If you search the archives you need to pay to see the whole story. (I've never posted here before and don't know how to do the link.) It does give the headline and a document summary for free at the website.
I have the print version in my hand the pertinent point here is:
Quoting the article: It is conceivable that tests could still be done on the woman's hair (as long as she has not cut it in the six months since the incident), or on urine or blood that has been properly preserved.
Still quoting the article: "GHB gets incorpoarted in protein that is called keratin that makes hair. As long as you don't cut the hair, you will have GHB there," Dr. Nikolas Lemos, the chief forensic toxicologist at the San Francisco office of the chief medical examiner, said in a recent interview....
What I like about these two paragraphs of the article is that it shows there is a possibility that this hair testing may indeed be reliable.
I follow the case fairly closely and haven't been posting but I have not seen any mention of this Daily News article even after the Slate article this week was the first to break the news that there was a tox test.
The article was more about the testing and why it is often overlooked (not enough training with officers regarding date-rape drugs) than about the speculation caused by Nifong's insinuation (without any proof as we see now) that a drug could have been used.

Just rememmbered one other good point from Hannity & Colmes....if a date rape drug had been used the effect would have more likely been CGM having no memory of the incident...the fact that she says she remembers and that she id'ed three people is really contradictory for a date rape drug.

As the toxicology report news continues to get reported, I thought knowledge of this Daily News article might be helpful. I would be happy to fax or mail a copy to anyone interested.

At 10:24 PM, September 01, 2006, Anonymous K.P. said...

10:16 blog CGM did not name three she name 4 I have a copy of the report. Word for Word

At 10:35 PM, September 01, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The whole data-rape thing is what it is called in a "old-fashioned way", a red herring.

I suspect that Nifong ordered the hair tested _precisely_ to discredit his own test. (Oh, there _could_ have been rohyp that we missed)

The whole episode also provides further proof that the Durham PD is incompetent in a felonious way.

That they would even consider such a worthless test. A month after the fact.

It is true grasping at straws. So don't get distracted by Nifong's games.

There was urine and blood from CGM taken, they chose not to test it.

They knew she was drunk and likely high and didn't want the result.


C'mon, people, some straight thinking here.

This isn't the CTV boards. Or social hour.

At 12:39 AM, September 02, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...


Is it possible to remember that this is a discussion board for the Friends of Duke University and our focus is the Duke Lacrosse Scandal? We need to concantrate on our "Duke Three", but not the discussions on grammer rules and/or spelling mistakes or asking personal questions. I am so pleased that K.P. has a great letter now and let us leave her alone so that she can finish her job. For exchanging emails and other questions, I assume you can use
address and ask the moderator to help you, privately. I appreciate your attention in this matter.


At 8:45 AM, September 02, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Good morning FODU readers. I fully agree with above comments. I could not have said it better. Yesterday, I took a low profile and simply observed the exchanges on this board. Here is what I came away with.

We are happy that some friends helped out with KP's letter. That was outstanding. However, there may be more letters to be written in the future. Although we welcome the cooperation, we simply cannot go through the same process for handling the editing efforts among our readers. To facilitate that type of cooperation and exchange, I decided to make available an OFF TOPIC discussion forum. Once that forum is released, I will expect all off topic discussions to move there. FODU will not take responsibility for the contents of that forum, and it will not be moderated. It will simply be there to facilitate your needs to interact with one another on any topic you choose. Hopefully, your discussions relating to the Duke Lacrosse case will remain here.

I will take a little time this morning to move the exchanges relating to KP’s letter, from yesterday, into the OFF-TOPIC board. This should serve as an example for that board. When I am done, I will post the address of that board and the rule outlined here should go into effect immediately. If comments are made here that are off topic, we will simply move them to the new board. In fact, you can all help with this process. In the future, if you see discussions taking place here that you consider to be off-topic, point them out and we will take corrective action. Note that our objective is to maintain a high quality site on the Duke Lacrosse case. So far, we have been able to achieve this objective; it will be good to maintain it going forward. I hope you will agree with me on the proposed solution and help to implement it. Thank you.

I expect to post the address of the OFF-TOPIC board before 10am today (Saturday). Have a good and safe Labor Day weekend.


At 9:28 AM, September 02, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks, Moderator. Well said. Back to business.

In today's H-S article -- Lacrosse Players' Defense: Documents Being Withheld:

"The request to Judge Osmond Smith comes after Durham County's chief prosecutor told Smith and defense lawyers at a recent meeting that a toxicology report indicated the accuser's [sic] tested negative for the presence of controlled substances.

That undercuts public hints by Nifong in April that the woman might have been given a date-rape drug, defense attorney Kirk Osborn said.

In court papers filed this week, the defense argued it hasn't seen the written report despite indications Nifong would provide copies."

So Nifong not only concealed this evidence past the legally required production date, he now refuses to turn it over even after it's existence has been confirmed.

Again in the same article:

"[T]he defense is calling for Nifong to hand over complete copies of information regarding laboratory testing in the case by the State Bureau of Investigation and by the testing firm DNA Security Inc."

This information should have been turned over with the report itself.


"[T]he defense also is pressing for more information about what happened in the hours after the alleged attack, particularly information regarding the accuser's trip with police to the Durham Access Center, a mental health and substance abuse facility, for involuntary commitment.

The accuser reportedly began making rape allegations while at that center.

The defense cites the lack of a substantive report about the accuser's presence at the center, and the defense points to a blank check-in log as an example of inadequate information."

I find Nifong's resistance to this aspect of the production very troubling. It was here that it appears that the FA was essentially spoon-fed a line of questions that made it easy for her to concur with the notion that a rape had occurred, i.e.,

"Did something happen to you?"
"Were you raped?"

From there, it appears that this woman saw an out and took it, and the system has been protecting her ever since.

The article goes on:

"[T]he defense wants to find out what was said at a meeting Nifong and police had with the accuser April 11 at the county courthouse.

The defense said Nifong argued to an earlier judge that such information was off-limits to the defense.

More specifically, the defense argues Nifong claimed at a case hearing June 22 that the defense was not entitled to know because facts regarding the legal action were not discussed with the accuser. And the defense adds that Nifong considers that to be a confidential communication. [As if he were her personal attorney!]

Debunking that argument, the defense says, is that an investigator -- Sgt. Mark Gottlieb -- in a typewritten narrative said Nifong and the accuser met and talked about the case."

Gottlieb's lies are now going to begin to catch up with him. If you create too perfect a scenario, it can also be subject to picking apart. You can't have it both ways, Mark and Mike.

In the same piece:

"The defense points out, additionally, that a police major issued a memo stating all police personnel involved in the investigation were directed to produce all e-mails to and from one other about the case.

The defense said that while the message specified a June 5 deadline for compliance -- with threats of disciplinary action for failure to comply -- there is evidence police have not fully complied.

The defense argues that, in one instance, a crime scene investigator produced a number of e-mails -- but only after defense attorney Brad Bannon found them in the investigator's case file July 18 while at the police station.

The defense goes on to contend that nearly a dozen law enforcement officers who have been involved in the case have not provided all their handwritten notes."

Sounds like Bannon's inadvertent but fortunate discovery while reviewing police files is just the tip of the iceberg. How many more pieces of correspondence have been generated by the police in this case that have not been turned over? Does this mean that the collective response to the memo was a nod and a wink (i.e., to make it look like they were complying but had no intention of doing so) or a giant yawn (more reflective of a complete indifference on the part of the rank and file to the new production requirements in effect in North Carolina in the last couple of years)?

Further in the same article:

"The defense also wants to know more about what police have on file about the woman's background in Durham and about her interaction with the local criminal justice system.

The defense, again citing the July 18 date, argues that Bannon's review of an investigative file at the police station reflects the accuser was involved -- as a suspect, witness or otherwise -- in at least five other probes."

What?! Why wasn't this information already turned over? Are all these other cases more recent than the Duke case? Somehow, I doubt it.


"[T]he defense wants to see what police may have communicated to the Durham City Council.

According to the defense, Gottlieb, in a typewritten document, said that on April 4, he was asked by a captain to produce a timeline of events for the city manager, Patrick Baker, for possible presentation to the council.

The defense wants a copy of that timeline plus a report of the substance of any meetings between or among law enforcement officers, the manager and any council member.

Baker soon afterward briefed the City Council on several points about the case."

Again the Gottlieb "report" coughs up evidence of still more documentation that hasn't been produced in accordance with court procedure and deadlines. He is apparently so busy showing how prodigious his memory is that his arrogance has caught up with him again.

Look at the dates in question on all this documentation that Nifong et al. have thus far failed to turn over, despite their legal obligation to do so -- April, June, July. It's clear to me that this misconduct typifies the long-standing way of doing business in North Carolina that finally prompted the change in the one-sided laws there to require the production of evidence in this discovery phase. These guys have been walking all over the defense for so many years that it just kills them to have to play by the new rules. They can't stand it, in addition to which they're desperately trying to cover their tracks in this fraud, and they seem doggedly determined not to comply with any of these rules unless dragged into court kicking and screaming to do so. What Nifong and the DPD still seem not to have digested in this case is that they're in way over their heads, because they continue to engage in this infantile behavior despite now being the subjects of national media coverage. It's obvious that they are not used to this much scrutiny (witness Nifong's unprofessional courtroom behavior on-camera in May) and persist in their belief that if they continue with business as usual, this matter will go the way they want it to, even though their misconduct is now being exposed on a daily basis.

What a disgrace.

At 9:51 AM, September 02, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The last two Herald-Sun articles have been by a different reporter (William West) who seems to be doing a good job actually reporting and getting new information.

It is too early to tell if Nifong-Gottlieb buddy John Stevenson has been pulled of the beat, or if he is just somwhere sleeping off a jag.

At 11:54 AM, September 02, 2006, Anonymous Out-Joe said...

I need to apologize for my post last evening at 7:07. I did not mean to offend anyone on our team. I know what I wanted to say, but it came out wrong. I meant that we cannot depend on anyone on the Durham Police Department or any ADA's to turn Nifong in to the NC BAR. I did not mean that folks out here in our world were rattlesnakes. Please accept my apology for my blunder.

At 12:18 PM, September 02, 2006, Anonymous K.P. said...

To the Site: I am VERY Sorry for yesterday, I didn't mean to move left of our mission here. It will NEVER happen again from me. I am working on the re-write of the Letter to the DOJ and I will Post it in the Correct Spot On Sunday.

At 12:21 PM, September 02, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

During my service in the US Marines, I was stationed in NC for close to 2 years. While there in the late 60s and early 70s, I never saw so many untrained and unprofessional police officer in my life. I certainly thought by now there would be trained and professional police officers there, but the actions of the DPD and DA, makes that theory wrong.

At 12:28 PM, September 02, 2006, Anonymous Lucky "D" said...

Does anyone have any information regarding the next court date for our guys? I have a sneeky suspician that, with this new judge, we may have some positive rulings, even to the extent of, ready? "Dismissal". I think that Nifong is so confident that we will be elected over the "empty chair" that he really would like this hot potatoe off his plate.

At 12:36 PM, September 02, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

to 12:39- All of us are here daily for one reason only: to find out what is going on with the Duke 3 and what we can do to help. To that end, I pointed out that when we communicate to the DOJ or to media (letters to the editor,etc) that it is crucial that we use good grammar and spelling so that we appear credible. It is easy for the newspapers and other media to discount our comments as coming from a bunch of uneducated hicks if we do not write them well.
I have no interest in turning this forum into an English lesson, only to help us all to be heard.

At 12:53 PM, September 02, 2006, Anonymous WJD said...

To 12:28, I believe that the next court date is Sept 22, but with no camera. How ironic, just 2 days before the rumored "60 Minutes" expose.

At 12:57 PM, September 02, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Earlier today, a new open discussion board was released. This board is intended to be used for all off-topic discussions. The address of the new Open Board is:

FODU Open Board

One caveat, this is a free service and some advertisements will appear on your screens from time to time -–usually when you first access the board. You will have to close those by clicking on the close box. Since the open board should be used only for off-topic discussions, it does not make financial sense to subscribe to a paid service.

I already filled in a sample discussion topic using comments from yesterday’s exchanges on this site. Please review those comments as they illustrate quite well the type of exchanges that should not be included on this site.

I will make a more proper announcement of this facility later, on the moderator’s page. Feel free to use the open board beginning now. When posting or commenting, you do not need to fill in any of the information you will be asked (name, email, web address etc.) unless you want to. However, it may be useful to choose a nick name or an alias. This makes communications a little easier when others are responding to you. Thank you for your cooperation on this matter.


At 1:41 PM, September 02, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I find yesterday’s Herald Sun article on "documents being withheld from defense" quite disturbing. What are Nifong and his criminal gang up to know? What are they trying to pull off this time? What are they trying to hide? What are they trying to fabricate? The link to the article is on the Links page of this site.

At 2:56 PM, September 02, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wouldn't any meeting with the city council have a recording secretary present to take notes?
Texas Mom

At 3:07 PM, September 02, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

That's a good question. Probably they figured out a way, in Durham, to do away with any rule/procedure that might help expose the deeply rooted corruption going on there. I thought this scale of corruption was a thing of the past. Was I wrong? It seems Durham is left over from an older time. Remember the movie Brigadoon --except this is a vicious version of that.

At 3:48 PM, September 02, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Moderator, thanks for organizing the FODU Open Board. Your efforts are much appreciated.

Joan Foster wrote an excellent letter, titled, "Thinking About Moms" on September 1. In order to read her letter, please visit

Duke07 Mom

At 4:38 PM, September 02, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Duke07 Mom: Thank you for alerting me to Joan Foster’s wonderful letter. We have come to expect nothing but excellence from Joan; and this letter is certainly an example of perfection and excellence. For those who have not read the letter yet, you should. I will add a link to our Links page as well as to the moderator’s page.

Thinking About Moms by Joan Foster

You may also want to revisit Kathy Seligmann's words in the following CBS article.

Duke Player's Family Speaks Out


At 4:50 PM, September 02, 2006, Anonymous K.P. said...

I just finished reading the Herald sun's piece. This is the second time that the attorneys have had to go and find documents that Nifong and his crew do not want to hand over.

I thought the whole point of dicovery is to hand over everything you have. The good, the bad and the ugly. Nifong only seems to want hand over what he calls the bad and ugly.

I also read the story that CBS did with the Seligmann's? I hope I spelled that right. Reade looks a lot like his mother. Collin looks like his dad and David looks like David.

At 6:19 PM, September 02, 2006, Anonymous WJD said...

To K.P.
I read the H-S story to. I think this is just a stall tactic for Nifong. I remember at the last hearing, which was the second setting, as they call it in NC, the defense asked that the judge set a time limit on giving up discovery. The judge did not give a date for full disclosure of all the discovery. Nifong is just pulling everyone's chain on this, he seems to wait until he is with the judge and then produces the discovery. He is using this to delay the trial. If you recall Seligman's lawyer asked at the first setting for a speedy trial and the judge did not agree. All the motions were going to be handled by the trial judge, now that there is one mayber something can start to move. NC court procedures seem to be totally against the US Constitution, a setting is not a trial. In my state, when a lawyer asked for discovery, it is turned over immediately, or as quickly as possible.

At 9:35 PM, September 02, 2006, Anonymous K.P. said...

Duke Rape case just made Fox News the Line - Up. They said not to make much out of the fact that the drug test was negative. They said if CGM was given something, it would have washed out of her sysem with in 24 hours.

They also said CGM went to the police within a few hours after this so called "rape".

The cops should have tested her blood and urine right then and there. I didn't want to say earlier, but I had a death in the family. I wont be around for a few days. I will be back on Monday.

At 9:45 PM, September 02, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

K.P. take care. You are in my thoughts and prayers.

Warmly, Duke parent

At 10:18 PM, September 02, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

First discovery in the case, I don't know much about North Carolin, but here in New Jersey we have a postal service, that can deliver discovery. You can send it by certified mail so you get signatures. My guess is that NC does not yet have a US Postal system. Next on Michael Boden on FOX tonight, he is his usual ambiguous self. Had the hair been retrieved the night of the alleged rape, it would not deteriorate, whatever drugs were taken would be persent. There was an aritcle that I read today, that unless you got a recent haircut, the drugs, if any, would be present. So I guess CGM went and got a haircut, right after she was raped. The only thing I can request is that NC use the US Postal service to mail copies of their discovery. Talk about living in the 14 century, that is where Nifong is living. Discovery should be made immediately available to the defense. For that matter he could have FAXed his discovery to the defense, apparently he has no FAX machines either. Nifong is a fraud, liar and utilising the DPD to do his dirty work. I still don't know why anyone is investigating him and the DPD?

At 1:00 AM, September 03, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks so much for the link to the CBS article about the Seligmans. I would not have seen it otherwise. I just hope that Reade will return to Duke when all of this nightmare is over. Everyone at Duke (except that prune: Wood) thinks he is one of the nicest guys they have ever known. That comes from my son who is a student.

At 9:01 AM, September 03, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Intesesting comments at :

The New Yorker has an excellent story about the Duke Lacrosse Rape Case, which in a just world would be referred to as the Durham Prosecutorial Misconduct Case.


And the primary reasons they assumed the players’ guilt? They are almost uniformly white and mostly come from wealthy backgrounds.
In academia these days “privelege” has become a secular equivalent to original sin.

At 9:59 AM, September 03, 2006, Anonymous k.p. said...

10:18 post: The reporter that was interviewed even said that this case smells bad. Kim G "the Line-Up Host" said "you saying he is fabracating his evidence" Reply I'm not the only one saying. All of the legal blogs , and the blogs that deals with rape victims. Victims even think, these guys are getting the short end of the stick.

At 10:11 AM, September 03, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

A friend from Free Republic board forwarded the following link to us documenting a NY court ruling on a case that has some similarities to the Duke Lacrosse case. Our legally inclined readers will probably be interested in looking over the document. It includes 31 pages. Here is the link:

NY Court Ruling

To see related comments on the FreeRepublic board, go to: Comments.


At 10:29 AM, September 03, 2006, Anonymous K.P. said...

above thanks for that link. I agree with it. The state of N.C. should just put out the FOR SALE sign. The State of MA. is being hit with a very large law suit because of the young lady, that was killed in the Big Dig Tunnel. I know two different things but, someone should have ended the good old boys club, in N.C. a long time ago.


<< Home