Tuesday, May 30, 2006

General topics 4 - Full

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


At 4:11 PM, June 17, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...


Please be careful what you wish for now. I point to a recent article posted on your site by the infamous liberal UCLA law professor, Susan Estrich, as an example of what is happening with ever increasing speed. Even the liberal media wants Nifong gone - not because of his unethical practice of law but because he is perceived by them to be incompetent, blowing it. They want their own "heavy hitters" to come in and be given the case. Don't expect for a minute that the selection of his replacement will be fair. Too many Durham Trinity Park pan bangers, Duke University liberal professors, Duke administrators, Durham City politicians, and hate mongers have too much at stake here to let Nifong blow it!

Yeah Nifong is what you see, biased, unethical, a liar, a desperate politician, and a really bad lawyer. He is what he is and is being recognized as such. Don't think for one minute a new federal prosecutor or replacement AG prosecutor will drop the case.


Duke Senior Parent

At 4:11 PM, June 17, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To the previous poster: As to the first part of your last paragraph -- "Yeah Nifong is what you see, biased, unethical, a liar, a desperate politician, and a really bad lawyer. He is what he is and is being recognized as such."
I couldn't agree more.

As to the balance of the same paragraph -- "Don't think for one minute a new federal prosecutor or replacement AG prosecutor will drop the case.


I couldn't disagree more. The likelihood of his removal is not that high to begin with because of the Byzantine nature of North Carolina criminal law practice and procedure, and the odds therefore are that the case will remain with him, where it has an alarmingly high chance of being railroaded through a biased jury and resulting in 3 wrongful convictions. Nonetheless, it is still a course worth pursuing. I can assure you that DAs and AGs across the country have focused on this case and what a dreadful example of prosecutorial misconduct it represents. It would be in the interest of legitimate prosecutions everywhere to replace this nut with someone who could restore some confidence in the system for those with real grievances and for those who have been the real victims of crime. If this were done with some regularity and some degree of transparency it would give the citizens of Durham, as well as Collin, Reade and Dave, the justice they deserve.

At 4:11 PM, June 17, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Poster 2 above: This is a scary notion. Are you suggesting that the boys are doomed and we should write them off? In your view, what is a possible solution for getting that "elusive justice" in this case? Are you saying it will not happen? This is quite depressing indeed.

At 4:28 PM, June 17, 2006, Anonymous joan foster said...

There is a spotlight on Nifong now, on the Durham PD, on Judge Stephens, on the N&O. Like cockroaches , they are most vulnerable in the light. We must keep writing, and vocalising ,and reminding them the eyes of America are upon them. Make them understand their every word, every motion , every move will be scrutinised. We must be loud, persistant, and pervasive. Make it part of our everyday routine, to somewhere...write or speak or stand-up for Colin, Reade and Dave.... every single day!

At 1:41 AM, June 18, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Today, Newsweek published the most clear condemnation of Nifong yet in the MSM.

Has Duke case collapsed

Since Nifong admitted to Newsweek that he reads the blogs, I will address him directly:

Nobody is more deserving of public humiliation and disgrace than Nifong.

I will not rest until he is disbarred and has not a single ally left in Durham.

At 8:52 AM, June 18, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Newsweek article is great. Looks like Nifong is becoming unhinged!

At 11:17 AM, June 18, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I cannot get to the Newsweek article through the links provided above. Perhaps, I need a subscription to the magazine. Can someone copy and paste it here? Thanks.


At 11:35 AM, June 18, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...


At 4:58 PM, June 18, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

While the Newsweek article clearly states the deficiencies in Nifong's case, I am not so optimistic that charges will be dropped. I think it unlikely that Judge Stephens will throw out the possibility of the accuser being able to do an in-court identification. It is also unlikely that the NC Atty. Gen. or Governor will act (although I have written them, and urge you to do so). I think the guys have a better chance if Mr. Cheek unseats Nifong in November, but as a write-in this would be difficult.

It seems the best possibility would be if the accuser decided not to testify. Otherwise we are in for months of waiting while the accused are twisting in the wind, and the legal bills mount up into the millions.

If the case does go to trial, a change of venue and caerful jury selection will be key, because Nifong's only hope would be to get a jury which ignored all the "reasonable doubt."

The truth will eventually out, but I hope it is sooner rather than later.

At 2:43 AM, June 19, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, well, well

Ms Ruth Sheehan actually
comes out swinging- even intimating that Nifong may be disbarred before this is all over

DA ought to hand off case

Nifong just lost his most tireless defender, in a big way.

At 8:31 AM, June 19, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Congratulations to our own Joan Foster who spent many tireless days and weeks communicating with Ruth Sheehan. Good job Joan Foster!

At 12:39 PM, June 19, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Susan Filan was just on MSNBC 12:30 pm (Mnday) and called Nifong to to do the right thing and drop the charges. She said she does not know if Nifong has what it takes to do the "right thing". We will have to wait and see.

However, if Nifong is not capable of doing the right thing, there surely must be some way to force him to do the right thing. I would think that Nifong can not rule America, can he?

At 12:44 PM, June 19, 2006, Anonymous Joan Foster said...

Dibona does Shakespeare.

Mr.Dibona: Re your letter in the Herald Sun…. “Brodhead can’t handle it.”

I find it of interest that you paraphrase Shakespeare’s masterpiece,Julius Caesar, in your rebuke of Brodhead’s decision to reinstate the Duke Lacrosse.team. Brodhead “ should be made of sterner stuff ”, you say. Of course, one assumes you know the actual quote to be ”Ambition should be made of sterner stuff.” My, we have seen much of ambition in this Lacrosse case, have we not? From a morally deficient D.A. using a bogus rape charge for political gain , to the Traveling Tragedy Show types that fly in to exploit the “Drama du Jour” for headlines…this case is top heavy with individuals finding something sweet for themselves at the expense of these young men. . Of course, I would not imply that your almost sycophantic praise in the first paragraph might reference your own ambition (just in case Brodhead bunkers down), but in any event, your choice of phrase brought Julius Caesar to my mind.

While on topic, Marc Antony’s funeral speech contains a few other quotes that are suitable to this Duke debacle. “Oh judgment thou art fled to brutish beasts” might be one. You actually say that Brodhead should wait till “the team was found innocent or guilty.” Excuse me? “The team?” Even the nefarious Nifong has said no more charges will be brought in this case. “The team” is not on trial…much as you and some others might like that to be the case. “The team” will not be found innocent or guilty. “The team “is not part of the “forthcoming jury trial.” By presuming them under some sword of judgment, Mr.Dibona, your own “judgment” seems poorly thought out.

If you wish to outlaw this team, then you must put that wish in a much larger context and require the same standards of every team ,fraternity,and “Save the Whales” group , etc on campus. Because at this juncture, we can only be discussing raucous behavior, that can be your only charge. . There is no proven racial context to this story, and, last I looked up from my Shakespeare tome, there was still a presumption of innocence. . So, may we defer that discussion for another day? The story we see now of possible prosecutorial abuse is so much more important to America, than bad behavior on Buchanan St. that once again, your judgment seems infantile. Every day, America grows more appalled, as we learn more of Mr. Nifong, his case, his tactics, his lies and his motives.

As for the lacrosse team: yes, the party was a mistake. Indeed,.” it was a grievous fault and grievously has it been answered”. Far, far too grievously in the minds of fair minded Americans unencumbered by ambition or agenda themselves.

If you can still look at this unfolding tragedy of young men’s lives, sacrificed on the altar of one man’s ambition, and not see the great themes of revenge, righteous bigotry and betrayal….then I suggest you need to read more of Shakespeare yourself. .

And that this flawed logic should come from an associate professor at Duke University….to quote Marc Antony in Julius Caesar again… is “perhaps the unkindest cut of all." Joan Foster

At 12:55 PM, June 19, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

There is going to be a news conference today at 4PM announcing a Republican running against Nifong. His name is Steve Marks and he is the head of Durham Republican group.
He is trying to raise money for a newspaper adds.
If you would like to contribute to his campaign please call 919.430.4121.
(Charlotte Woods)

At 12:59 PM, June 19, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Re above: Another good piece from Joan Foster! Joan, we have come to expect nothing but the best from you. Thank you a million times.

At 1:10 PM, June 19, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Re Republican Steve Marks running against Nifong, I am worried about this. What if the whole case turns into a democrats vs republicans political fight and three innocent kids are forgotten in the process. What if the democrats who are sympathetic to the players now turn their back to the case? This case just seems to be getting out of control. Why can't the case be only about "evidence" or "lack of evidence" or better yet about "truth" or "lies?" I wish there were no politics, no racial issues, no class issues involved in this case. The only question should be "was there a rape or not". What a nightmare...

At 1:17 PM, June 19, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Now that the false accuser's many different statements are public, will Brodhead and Robert Dean of the Duke Police apologize to the Duke officer who "overheard" that very same information?

At 1:39 PM, June 19, 2006, Blogger Fair-minded said...

Joseph DiBona, PHD, Associate Professor at Duke wrote:

“Duke University President Brodhead has made the most unfortunate error of his life by reinstating the lacrosse team and as a consequence should resign his office. … The question I would put to President Brodhead is, Why are you still clinging to a job you obviously cannot handle?”

As part of his argument he states:
“…and here he suddenly chooses to ignore the forthcoming jury trial. In other words, it no longer matters whether the team will be found guilty or innocent.”

This is clearly a case where PHD stands for Piled Higher and Deeper. Since when is the TEAM on trial? Will the TEAM be found guilty or innocent? Here is another (Associate) Professor at Duke that has turned his back on the whole team. By his logic, the whole University should be closed down. The three (innocent!) young men are on the lacrosse team, so shut the team down. Well, the team is part of Duke University, so take it to DiBona’s next logical step – close the University. I have a better idea, instead of Brodhead stepping down, why doesn’t DiBona step down?

At 1:48 PM, June 19, 2006, Blogger Fair-minded said...

As you know, the Duke Lacrosse Scandal has taken on a life of its own. There is blind hate out there and a group of people that want to latch onto this case as a venue for venting that hate. The burden of fighting ignorance, and in some cases ideological radicalism, should not fall on the shoulders of the members of the Duke Lacrosse team! That is why we need people to support and fund the defense. It’s not just the 3, but the entire team that is still under investigation – way beyond anything relevant to this case. They have all worked hard both at school and at lacrosse. For some, Lacrosse was the vehicle to have an opportunity that they wouldn’t normally have had – to attend Duke.

Support the Duke Men’s Lacrosse Team. Duke Lacrosse Wristbands are now available. All donations go to “The Association for Truth and Fairness”. Further information on the wristbands can be found at http://dukelacrossewristbands.blogspot.com/

At 2:11 PM, June 19, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thankyou for your donations in supporting the duke lacrosse bands and there purpose. Not only will this help with the financial stress put on the lacrosse families but also, wearing the band, to proclaim the boys innocence,is very rewarding.

At 3:13 PM, June 19, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Amen to the above. It is the least we can do. Please go ahead and order your bands. Give the extra ones to your friends, show you support to a very just cause.

At 4:46 PM, June 19, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Regarding Associate Professor J. DiBona: What do you expect from a University of California Berkeley 1967 graduate? Common sense? The intelligence to realize it is no longer 1968? Not only that, but his guy is 60 and he's still an associate professor. Hello! This guy is a laugh a minute and should be treated as such. Gnats may be pesky, but when do they cause damage? When you swat at them, then miss and hit something really important.

At 5:09 PM, June 19, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Since a few have quoted Shakespeare - and we are from Duke University - I quote the following in honor of "the three" and "the team" who have and will in the days to come hold their head high and be remembered for the battle they have endured and will certainly win. Like Henry V, the Lacrosse team are fighting for themselves and for something greater - and I'm not being sappy - the rights of freedom, liberty, and justice.

This day is call'd the feast of Crispian.
He that outlives this day, and comes safe home,
Will stand a tip-toe when this day is nam'd,
And rouse him at the name of Crispian.
He that shall live this day, and see old age,
Will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbours,
And say 'To-morrow is Saint Crispian.'
Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars,
And say 'These wounds I had on Crispian's day.'
Old men forget; yet all shall be forgot,
But he'll remember, with advantages,
What feats he did that day. Then shall our names,
Familiar in his mouth as household words-
Harry the King, Bedford and Exeter,
Warwick and Talbot, Salisbury and Gloucester-
Be in their flowing cups freshly rememb'red.
This story shall the good man teach his son;
And Crispin Crispian shall ne'er go by,
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be remembered-
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition;
And gentlemen in England now-a-bed
Shall think themselves accurs'd they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.

At 7:37 PM, June 19, 2006, Anonymous Joan Foster said...

This is a beautiful quote and most fitting. Thank you.

At 9:38 PM, June 19, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I find the new email FODU campaign against Professor DiBona pretty unfair.

True, he is a tired old leftist fossil whose only academic output over the last decade has been an occasional outburst at faculty meetings (and now apparently one short letter to the editor attacking Broadhead).

True, he is practically a dead-wood poster child for ending tenure.

But, please, he never even got a chance to sign the Faculty of 88 vigilante letter because the angry black faculty and Barbie-doll-studying young leftists don't even know he exists.

I think he should sue those rich white posers in the cultural anthropology department for age discrimination for excluding him.

After all, he hates the lacrosse players as much as anyone, damnit.

And he knew Karl Marx and Walter Benjamin personally!!

At 9:52 PM, June 19, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Poster above: We will talk to the professor once again tomorrow and try to identify if there has been a misunderstanding somewhere. Right now, we are not able to see any misunderstanding. He made it clear to us that he wants the Lacrosse team shut down for ever, and what is more, he wants every member of the team to stand trial (even though they are not all indicted!) In any event, we hope to have a constructive conversation with him tomorrow. Perhaps, he will change his stance on this.

At 10:13 PM, June 19, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Some more "innocent" than others?

I am writing to point out the obvious lack of "equality" in the handling of the JJ Reddick DUI situation. While I'm not intending to put either him or Coach K down, I would like to point out the obvious: Coach K was able to publicly support his player, while Coach Pressler was not only denied the same opportunity, but was figuratively "gagged" by his dismissal from the Duke lacrosse program! It seems that President Broadhead takes a "hands off" policy in regard to the big revenue-producing sports; and I wonder if anyone on the faculty will march or protest at Cameron because JJ Reddick not only was driving over the legal alcohol limit, but also did an "illegal u-turn" to avoid the police spot-checking the street. Will we have marches by driver's-ed teachers eveywhere? Will substance abuse experts be called on by CNN to testify ? Obviously, I am being facetious to an extreme, just wondering when the cockroaches will come out of the woodwork on this event . . . Stay tuned for the next exciting chapter.

At 11:55 AM, June 20, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Friends, as suggested, I moved the recent comments made on Collin's DC trial to a new page. Here is the link for the new page: Collin's DC trial

Please continue your comments on the DC trial in that new page. Thanks, Moderator

At 5:49 PM, June 20, 2006, Blogger st295x98 said...

ok ... new horse in the race. where does the Friends of Duke Stand when it comes to Steve Monks?

Here is his website http://stevemonksfordurhamda.com/

At 5:58 PM, June 20, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nifong won the primary with less than 50% of the vote because TWO opponents split the remaining votes. The new entrants in the race mean people on the ground since a broad enough disaffection with Nifong to make him vulnerable. That's good news, but if there are multiple candidates again, Nifong just might win again with less than a majority vote. If Nifong's opposition really care about Durham and don not just see a personal opportunity, they to caucus and get behind the one person with the greatest appeal.

At 6:28 PM, June 20, 2006, Anonymous Joan Foster said...

Anyone in the Durham area, I'd love to see an organised group outside the courthouse Thursday quietly holding signs asking:


At 8:59 PM, June 20, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To Joan Foster:

You are priceless! It would be great if the Duke supporters could hold up signs, or wear T-shirts. The media has turned on Nifong and would gobble this up. The New Black Panthers would be ignored. (Hey, they just have those boring black costumes, anyway.)

How about:
Have YOU been Nifonged?
WILL you be Nifonged next?

At 12:23 AM, June 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Love the t-shirt idea. How about
Have YOU been Nifonged Y.E.T.(You're Eligible Too)

At 6:46 AM, June 21, 2006, Anonymous Joan Foster said...

Editor Sill has asked for "specific" complaints about the N&O coverage. She tells her blog reader she is very "proud" of their coverage of the Duke case. I made my comment this morning. Anyone who might drop in over there today and make a comment, ..it's a good time and place to be heard.

Melanie, to further mutual understanding, please help me to see the newspaper's point of view on the following issue. This is no rhetorical question.

There was an accusation of gang rape. The accuser was a "stripper.". The accused were members of the Lacrosse team. Early on, you ran two very prominent front page stories.

In the accuser's case (or victim as you called her then), an interview with her seemed to ask the public, not to judge her as part of any "group"...as a "stripper"... but rather as a mother, a soft-voiced woman who was a good student and "new ", so she told you then, to "exotic dancing." Would you disagree that this was a sympathetic portrayal? The negative aspects of the Escort community certainly were not addressed. Nor was she asked to "carry" them. See her as HERSELF, you said. Fair enough.

The second piece was the "Swagger "story. Here the resources of this newspaper were used to unearth every misdeamor charge, every negative aspect of the Lacrosse team. Mostly obnoxious college stuff, probably not what "profiling" the world of escort services might have gleaned....but this was the COUNTERPOINT.
So exactly at the time Reade and Colin and Dave...three individuals, are to be charged with rape...you do an expose on their "peer group." You tell the reader this team is "out of control." Is it much of a stretch then, for the reader to assume Reade and Colin and Dave were out of control as well? I question the timing of this story. I question the fairness.

Only if one assumes a rape took place... can the timing and tenor of these two stories, juxtaposed against each other , be justified.. But you assure us this paper has or had no such position. The woman has been separated out from the world of "escort " services by a sympathetic portrayal. Colin , Reade and Dave, on the other hand, are now carrying a brand of a "out of control" lacrosse team. Not seen as themselves. Colin, Reade, and Dave.

To run an "expose on a team, while three young men were about to face the fight of their lives...seems like piling on.
Help me see where I have this wrong.

At 10:57 AM, June 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hi there...First of all, Joan I already (not as eloquently as you, of course) posted my response to the deeply in denial Melanie...

I am a Durhamite and I am troubled by Monk's throwing his hat in...as a previous poster noted this potentially splits Nifong's opposition and that would be an incredible tragedy (again.) Lewis Cheek is really the man with the name here...I have voted for him every time I have seen his name on a ballot and no one I know has anything negative to say about him (except maybe his ex-wife ;).)

I hope that if Cheek does officially sign on, that Monks will do the right thing and pull himself out. We desperately need an honest broker for this and all trials. I still can't believe this is happening in my community (and my country!) When resources are pulled off a quadruple-homicide (google Lennis Harris) to follow the false accusations of a call-girl, one can't help but be disgusted.

Durhamite Mommy a/k/a ImpeachNifong

At 11:31 AM, June 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Durhamite mom: It is good to know that people in Durham care about justice and want justice to be served in this case. Because we hear so much of the other "biased" view coming out of Durham, we sometimes forget that there are sensible people there. Thank you for reminding us. It is special coming from a Durhamite.

At 12:11 PM, June 21, 2006, Anonymous Joan Foster said...

Durhamite Mommy, your comments on the blog are heartfelt and succinct! You make your points beautifully. I hope Editor Sill's long reply today means she has begun listening to what we are all trying to say. I hope she will continue to "follow the lies." Let's keep "talking" over there!

At 5:26 PM, June 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hope this is an ok place to ask this. Anyone know how I can sign the Lewis Cheek petition? I'm a registered Democrat and voted in the May primary (against Nifong)but I heard the mass mailing went out to voters who voted in the last 3 elections. I haven't lived in Durham that long. Thanks in advance.

At 7:55 AM, June 22, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The behavior of the Duke faculty of 88 is even worse than it appears.

With the release of Reade Seligmann's transcript, it appears that Reade was majoring in the field that the vast majority of the vigilante Duke professors teach in.

He was taking African American History from one teacher (raymond.gavins@duke.edu) who is among the vigilante letter signers. And 2 of his previous cultural anthropology professors also signed the threat letter

Reade turned out to be one of their own, a kid honestly engaged in trying to understand race, history and culture.

And in return, his professors called him a racist and a sexist and promised vigilante justice.

They should all be fired for malicious conduct.

Signers letter



At 8:37 AM, June 22, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The N&O is asking for the medical records to be unsealed!

At 9:10 AM, June 22, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

With respect to the N&0's request for the accuser's medical records to be unsealed => does anybody out there know the NC law with respect to having these records unsealed ?

My assumption would be that these medical records might need to be sealed due to NC law due to privacy concerns. There was a report that the accuser is bipolar and if this medical condition is identified in these sealed medical records then there probably are laws against unsealing this information.

Is there a lawyer out there who knows the NC law with respect to unsealing medical records ?

Thank you.

At 10:13 AM, June 22, 2006, Anonymous Joan Foster said...

To Ruth Sheehan today:

Either way this story turns,Ruth, we are scraping the bottom of human depravity here. Something is obscenely rotten in Durham. Let's admit it, we don't KNOW yet. But here are our sorry choices.
Either three young men viciously gangraped a young woman and their 46 teammates are so morally deficent that for MONTHS they continue to offer these rapists cover ....or....

An appointed district attorney in a tough race to keep his job pursued a bogus case for his own political agenda. And his colleagues in the Durham PD... and D.A.'s office ...and City Hall are so morally deficent that for months THEY continue to offer HIM cover.

That's the choice.

Because as you once said , Ruth.... " We know you know. " There is group cover-up, a "pack mentality "as the N&O called it, here in this story....either way.

Nifong invited America into his parlour as he spun this terrible tale....night after night. We're all here now....the media, the interest groups, the talking heads, the blogs. Every word will be examined, every statement parsed. Every evening, there are web discussion groups , where lawyers, and SANE nurses, and the occasional nut ...dissect every move, every word, every motion filed for intellectual sport. We are here in the parlour, Mr. Nifong, and this close up, we can see every wart on your face. This case better be real, real pretty. The facts compelling and clear. "Honey, you can't leave" this party or this parlour., Mr. Nifong...till we know ALL you know.

If in time we should learn, the dancer gave multiple versions of her story that night, and Mr. Nifong was permitted to choose the one that worked for his campaign...we'll know some stood silent.

If in time we should learn, that it took five or six line-ups to get Nifong his "indentifications...we'll know he had help.

If in time we should learn, that having an old warrant served on the taxi driver by the DETECTIVES on this case was in any way unusual, we'll know we have witness intimidation.

If in time we should learn, the City Manager lied to the media when he vilified the Duke report that claimed "multiple stories", we'll know we need to investigate a wider web.

We know now Nifong appeared to give. Kim a sweet deal when she upgraded her story. We know now many of his early media statements are reported not to match sworn court filings. Many of us just DIDN'T know, this was what often passes for justice in Durham, in America. We know now we were naive. Dumb.

A clean strong case against these three boys should not seemingly NEED dirty tactics. When the truth is on your side, no "deals", no lies are needed to bolster it.

The accuser and the accused have all been savaged by this case. Many people who invested their belief in this story early.on..are now branded by it. Like it or not, as the story unfolds, ..they are wearing the teeshirt that says , "I believe Nifong." You wereone of those , Ruth, but the numbers are legion. You now seem to have changed into something more comfortable, but others are still sporting that shirt around town. Time will tell if the fashion fades.

That said, the consequences of this story on everything from rape shield laws to local and national reputations could be huge.

If in time we should learn, that ALL this was ...was a tale of a small town D.A. , in a race to keep a job he'd wanted for 23 years and losing to an old nemisis. ... who saw in a shaky story from a distraught intoxicated woman, a winning campaign strategy for himself........If that's all it was, there is no public humiliation , no condemnation ..no punishment severe enough for Mr. Nifong. None.

So let him continue. The truth will out. We are all pushed up against him in the parlour now, hanging on his every word. His friends still wearing his tee shirts are here and so is all the rest of America. "You can't leave , honey," we all say to Mr. Nifong. Tell us all.

At 10:22 AM, June 22, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have been trying to follow this drama (from 800 miles away in Massachusetts). I have more than a passing interest. I had a very brief connection to the Duke lacrosse team many years ago when I was a student. It was a club team back then, so anyone could try out. I quickly found out that I was not good enough to be a college athlete or skilled enough as a player. It was a good experience nevertheless.

I seek one piece of information. I have read that the game with Georgetown was cancelled at the last minute, that the Hoyas were already on the field warming up. Is this true?

If it is true, then I seek opinion. Why did this happen? It seems to me to be very disrespectful of Georgetown. Why penalize them after they had already travelled down from D.C.? Why not wait until after the game to terminate the season? Was there the prospect of a nasty demonstration at the game?

And why have I never met a woman who can write as beautifully as Joan Foster?

At 11:05 AM, June 22, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Poster above: We will find the answer to your question regarding the Georgetown game. It is a curious one. Regarding Joan Foster, she is great, isn't she?

At 11:19 AM, June 22, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Re post at 7:55 June 22. Thank you for the links for those documents. I read them and I cried. Reade sounds like a nice, intelligent, hard working, and very responsible young men. I could not believe the academic load he was carrying at the same time as being an athlete in such a high ranked team. Reade does not sound like a sexist or a racist. On the contrary, he sounds like an honorable person, someone that any parent, any teacher, or friend would be very proud to have as a son as a student and as a friend. How can a two cents worth of a prostitute destroy this young men's life? And, look at how his entire family is being destroyed on the account of these lies. How could this happen?

At 11:31 AM, June 22, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't know if Georgetown was inconvenienced. If so, it is because Duke's president, Richard Brodhead, is a very thin reed in the mildest of winds, let alone a hurricane of hysterical lefty race baiters and pot bangers. If by "meet Joan", you mean shake hands and have a chat, I can't help. She is indeed eloquent, but there are plenty of others, e.g. LaShawn Barber (www.lashawnbarber.com) and North Carolina native Mary Katherine Ham writing on www.hughhewitt.com and Laura Ingraham. God rest Barbara Olsen, a great conservative female writer silenced Sept. 11 when her plane crashed into the Pentagon.

At 11:34 AM, June 22, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here is the link for two responses to Professor Dibona's opinion that was published on June 17 in Herald Sun. Thank you for both commentators.

Two responses to Dibona opinion piece in Herald Sun

At 2:57 PM, June 22, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To the New Durham Voter from yesterday evening--all you need to do is go to the Board of Elections located katty corner from the old Bulls ball park and ask to sign Lewis Cheek's petition. (It is in the same strip as Yoga Spot.) Or, as I am the proud recipient of a fresh petition to get Cheek on the ballot, you can contact me via the moderator (if the moderator doesn't mind.) There is space for 20 signers and I'd be more than happy to fill it with eighteen more voters.

Moderator, I will email you again to remind you of my address. Thanks in advance for your help in this.

Durhamite Mommy

P.S. As I write it is ten minutes to the boy's hearings. Let's all pray that the Judge serves honorably.

At 3:19 PM, June 22, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dear Joan Foster,

I would love to hear your thoughts about Nancy Grace's (Court TV and HNN Nancy Grace Show) commentary relating to this case since it sent public ?

Thank you.

At 3:28 PM, June 22, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I saw an announcement that Nancy Grace will address the hoax tonight. There is also a teaser for the Situation with Tucker Carlson tonight on MSNBC. He is calling Nifong a rogue DA. Not a bad term since most of us are familiar by the damages that can be done by rogue cops.

At 4:32 PM, June 22, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

As per the above comments: Anyone wishing to get more information about how to sign the petition for Lewis Cheek, please contact us via email and we will send you the instructions. We will have an announcement on this tomorrow morning in the "From Moderator" section.


At 4:40 PM, June 22, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I listened to Nancy Grace yesterday on the Imus morning show. She was pushing her book “Objection”. When Imus asked her about the Duke case, she did not have any apologies and she said all we are hearing is defense spin. I doubt she will have any major change in her views tonight. They just choose these intriguing teasers to attract listeners. Once you start listening, you discover that it is still the same old broken record playing. I will skip tonight, but if there is indeed a change in her position, I will be happy.

By the way, I really think Wendy Murphy has some kind of a disorder. I watched her last night. The way she was rolling her eyes when she was attacking the Lacrosse players was plain scary. I would be scared to be in the same room with that woman. She needs some serious psychiatric treatment.

At 6:00 PM, June 22, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I hope Duke is ready for the next attack from partisons questioning why toxicology testing was not performed on the accuser's blood. After DA Nifong's unethical and unlawful publicly offered theory (during his media frenzy) of date rape drug usage I am sure those who believe the accused are "guilty until proven innocent" will "allege" this somehow was a Duke cover-up.

I am sorry for the negativity but the dimensions of injustice in this case are incomprehensible. I'd say DA Mike Nifong is doing his UNC Chapel Hill alma mater proud by destroying as much of Durham as possible by 1 human being.

At 6:06 PM, June 22, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Good news! Reade Seligmann's bond was reduced. This is just on TV right now. New bond set to 100K.

At 6:11 PM, June 22, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

John Burris (some black prosecutor - a talking head) is bitching about it saying that Duke players are getting special treatment. Yes, we all know they are getting special treatment. No question about it. They are getting a very special "lynching" from people like John Burris. I honestly hope that a lightning strikes John Burris and he drops dead! That is the special treatment he needs...

At 6:51 PM, June 22, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To the writer above, I believe the accuser had to consent to toxicology tests during the SANE exam. I believe one of the defense motions indicates that she said 'No'.

At 6:53 PM, June 22, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I believe the accuser had to consent to toxicology tests during the SANE exam. I also believe one of the defense motions indicates that she said 'no'.

At 8:10 PM, June 22, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I caught the action on CourtTv today.

No offense to all the Mom's out there, but Nifog looks like a guy who still lives with his mother -

I'm serious. He has a very peculiar temperment.

At 9:22 PM, June 22, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

John Burris is not some black prosecutor - he is a professional race-baiter, a lawyer who makes his living playing the race card to get settlements from police departments for (often worthy) black clients.

He is like a slightly more ethical Alton Maddox.

At 9:35 PM, June 22, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Re: Article in the Wilmington Journal on Duke alumni offering to buy off the false accuser.
Are the Duke alumni going to put up with this?

At 12:21 AM, June 23, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Wilmington Journal is not a credible source.

At 12:49 AM, June 23, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

During the Duke case segment of one of the nightly cable news shows (this evening) one of the former prosecutors on the panel stated that "no formal complaints" had been filed against DA Mike Nifong regarding his conduct in this case.

What is required to have a complaint classified as a "formal complaint" against DA Mike Nifong's conduct ?

I have formally complained to Attorney General Roy Cooper (UNC-CH undergraduate & law school graduate). I have also formally complained to Governor Mike Easley (UNC undergraduate, "NCCU" law school graduate) who appointed Mike Nifong (UNC-CH undergraduate & law school graduate) to his Durham County DA position in 2005 after the departure of former DA James E Hardin Jr (Duke undergraduate, Mercer University law school graduate).

Because of the politics associated with so many aspects of this case at each ascending level of government it seems naive to expect any sanctions against DA Mike Nifong. However, there should minimally be an acknowledgment of the "formal complaints" being levied (they clearly exist and in large numbers) and a judicial review of his conduct.

As stated many times before DA Mike Nifong must be defeated in the November election. This is the only way that objectivity, fairness, and justice can be restored to this case.

For DA Mike Nifong to call the accused => "rapists" <= in a public forum to countless media outlets is unethical and unlawful. There is no doubt that Nifong has no conscience. He has trapped himself into a corner with the African American community and is so devoid of ethics and morals that he will not admit his mistakes and take the appropriate corrective action. DA Mike Nifong made this a case about race due to his political ambitions.

In 2004 the former Durham County DA James Hardin was voted one the top 10 lawyers of the year after leading the sucessful prosecution in the Michael Peterson case. I truly believe that DA Mike Nifong was not just trying to secure his primary election win (by giving 50 to 70 inverviews to media the first 8 days of the case well before the completion of the investigation of evidence) but he also had visions of a top 10 lawyer award for himself.

Instead, now he will be the first DA to lose to a petitioned candidate in the history of North Carolina. There is no doubt he has no conscience.

Only God knows if he has a soul.

At 8:23 AM, June 23, 2006, Anonymous Joan Foster said...

Would any attorneys reading here care to post their opinions on yesterday's hearing, the judge's decisions, etc? Good and just or good ole boys?

At 9:27 AM, June 23, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Following up on joan foster's post, why would the judge not force Nifong et al to reduce to notes his meeting (April?) with the accuser and the detectives? Could this not be the meeting where they found out the DNA was not from the lacrosse players? (Seems important enough to me.) What would have been the downside for the judge?

At 10:05 AM, June 23, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To formally complain against a lawyer you have to file a charge with the disciplinary committee or appellate division of the state.

At 10:15 AM, June 23, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The hearing was sobering. I truly believe that when Susan Meadows said after she released her new Newsweek article that she received many complaints from black Durhamites saying they believe the women was raped (all evidence to the contrary) is the reason Mike Nfong is so bizarrely self assured. He doesn't have to convince you or I or most Americans, he has to convince 12 Durhamites of the players guilt. He knows how most of the town feels (these are the people who elected him after all) and that if he can get a biased jury he will win. Chilling. If educated black attorneys like Georgia and the other prosecutor who is on Dan abrams still believe that a rape occured and refuse to look at the evidence that they were trained to look at then how do you think 12 durhamites (who know the av's family) will rule?
A reverse OJ. Even Susan Fialin commenting on the hearing yesterdy said that nfong is so assured despite all evdience and HE WILL NEVER dismiss the case. This is an American tragedy. If this case goes forward then there must be a change of venue.

At 12:13 PM, June 23, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...


Why is this still on the Duke website?
Can we send a letter to Brodhead?Board of Trustees?

At 12:43 PM, June 23, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Re above: It is not Brodhead or the Trustees who put that document in that website. It is the Gang of 88 (the ones who are really in charge). Frankly, I do not think Brodhead or the Trustees have any authority to remove the document. The document is still there because Duke lacks any real leadership, any moral, and it is suffering enormously from self-inflicted wounds. They seem to like pain down there, so why stop it?

At 12:47 PM, June 23, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Below is a link for a very interesting piece in La Shawn Barber's Corner. It is entitled "Hauntings" by Nancy Kidder.

Hauntings June 23, 2006

At 2:51 PM, June 23, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

How can it be possible that with the case clearance rate Nifong recently touted to the papers he still hasn't had time to review the contents of the FA's computer or cell phone or that his investigator has still not written up his notes of certain interviews conducted two months ago? Any hope of those notes being of any value is now gone, as they are no longer contemporaneous recordings of what took place. If they ever materialize, they will either reflect the memory lapses that are inevitable with the passage of time (hence the requirement to write them down at the time!) or they will have benefited from post-event doctoring to make them read more favorably for the prosecution (see the "adjustments" to the original search warrant for another example of revisionist history.) What a collective disgrace to law enforcement this kangaroo court operation has become.

At 4:42 PM, June 23, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

This case shows the sad state of race relations in America. As a native North Carolinian and Duke parent, Im truly saddend by this whole mess.Evertime I speak to my son on the phone I tell him to please be careful if he is out in Durham i.e. Do not even spit on the sidewalk.Duke IMHO has huge target on it by an out of control D.A. And please friends, for goodness sake why do the talking heads say that they do not know why Nifong is pressing the case! LISTEN TO WOODY VANN! Nifong is afraid of retaliation by the A.A, community, and I do not mean the ballot box. Im afraid there will be no change of venue, and these young men will be railroaded... God let me be wrong!

At 5:08 PM, June 23, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I just listened to Georgia Goslee on Abrams show basically saying the accuser can have all the inconsistencies in the world, and there can be any number of problems with the evidence, but the case will go to trial and that Nifong will win. That really sums it up.

This is not about the facts, or evidence, or any of the typical elements of a trial. This is about the black Americans demanding revenge/payment for all the ills they suffered over the centuries from these 3 boys. They have been identified as the responsible party for all that has gone wrong with the black race all these years. That is a pretty big charge indeed. And, we though we made some progress in the race relations. Obviously, we have not moved a single inch, the prospects for making progress appears grim at best.

At 5:15 PM, June 23, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I apologize for going back in time but approx 6 to 8 weeks after the initial incident Duke University representatives claimed in a "report" that they did not take immediate action with respect to the accuser's allegations against the Lacrosse players because a Duke Public Safety officer had witnessed a Durham Police officer state that the most severe charge that would be levied in this incident would be misdemeaners. Duke's Office of Student Affairs was provided this information within 48 hours of the original incident.

Why did Duke sit on this information (for 6 to 8 weeks) that could have greatly benefitted the players and coach ? The Duke president claims he had knowledge of this Duke Public Safety officer's report within approx 8 days of the original incident. Rather than going public with this information the Duke administration sat on this information for weeks. During this period of time DA Mike Nifong obliterated the lives of every player on the Lacrosse team, their families, the relationship of Duke with the Durham community, and Duke's reputation.

Why did Duke sit on this information for so long ? It seems Duke should have immediately gone public with their initial police report knowledge in order to help the Lacrosse players and coach. It is possible that DA Nifong was not even aware that the Duke Public Safety officer had witnessed the Durham Police officers statement regarding the worst possible charge of misdemeaner.

If the Duke administration had stepped in immediately and communicated this information this whole case may have taken a different path.

Why didn't the Duke administration immediately come to the defense of the Lacrosse players and coach with their knowledge of this initial Durham police report ?

At 8:33 PM, June 23, 2006, Anonymous Joan Foster said...

What about the city manager who informed a press conference... weeks ago... that the report of the accuser telling "multiple stories" was in error...that the Duke officer only "easedropped" on a call by Durham police. He said he spoke to Durham police and they knew nothing of multiple stories. He stated he was staying on top of things because he didn't want to be "embarassed" later.

Well, either the police lied to him or he lied to the media. I asked Editor Sills to ask him which was true.. days ago...to no avail. Now we see the actual report. Someone needs to follow the lies. The national media needs to get these questions answered!

At 10:08 PM, June 23, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It was very interesting to read about Sue Wasiolek's (Dean of Students) involvement in this case (via the recent 6/26 SI Duke article).

It sounds like she totally knifed Mike Pressler in the back. Duke A.D. Alleva gives Pressler the choice of "resignation" vs "indefinite suspension" i.e. Pressler was forced to resign. Even Coach K stated publicly he wonders what Mike Pressler did wrong.

I hope there is a very close examination by Duke of Dean Sue Wasiolek's handling of the complaints against the Lacrosse team since 2003 including the most recent ones from the March 13th party.

I think there is a good chance she was one of two key Duke officials who sat on the Duke Public Safety report that described the witnessed statements provided by the Durham Police shortly after the initial incident (stating the worst charge would be misdemeaners for this incident).

We know for a fact that this information was not shared with the Duke president until 8 days later.

For her involvement in this decision to withhold this information from the Duke president for 8 days I believe she needs to be held accountable. Mike Pressler has already paid the ultimate price thanks in part to Dean Sue Wasiolek selling him down the river at the most difficult time in his career. I do not think the facts are going to support Dean Wasiolek's statements made with respect to Mike Pressler.

I pray for Mike Pressler, his wife, and 8 year old daughter. As stated in the SI article you were a "sacrificial lamb" in this case. For Dean Sue Wasiolek you were simply a scapegoat to take the focus off her performance.

At 10:18 PM, June 23, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I agree with the other posters than _any_ Durham African American on this jury will be essentially compelled to convict by his community.

What else is one to say about a 'community' in which a egomaniacal charlatan like Cash Michaels is the self-appointed spokesman.

Yes, the ultimate fallout from slavery...but 150 years out, we see a self-defeating black racism and victimology rising once again.

And the black community gets played by a monstrously amoral prosecutor, for his own ego gratification.

At 12:41 AM, June 24, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think some folks are unnecessarily anxious, at this point at least. Nifong is still a long ways from a jury trial. Even so, Durham County is a slight white majority county, so the jury will not be all black. I have served on both a criminal and civil jury in the South with blacks and they take their oath and duty no less seriously than I. I also suspect that many in the black community know who the accuser is and what she is and resent the ugliness and anger she has caused.

At 2:57 AM, June 24, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mike Nifong's banal evil is apparently genetic.

In a despicable letter today to the N&O, Mike Nifong's sister displays what is apparently a family trait - malicious self-pity.

Susan Nifong lashes out

She gets one star for blatant familial loyalty but displays maliciousness and bitter sarcasm that we have all come to recognize in Mike.

She lashes out at the "multi-million dollar" defense team (which wouldn't have been necessay if her brother wasn't a rogue DA bent on using race-baiting to win an election)

and Duke University (which has not criticized Nifong one whit)

And then whines that Nifong didn't profit as a defense lawyer.

What a self-serving wretch this woman is.

The attacks on Mr Nifong's non-existent integrity will continue, Ms Nifong, every day for as long as this charade lasts.

We recognize absence of integrity when we see it.

At 7:41 AM, June 24, 2006, Blogger Lax Parents '02 said...

Susan Nifong's letter to the N&O titled Nifong's Integrity is the ultimate oxymoron!

At 8:08 AM, June 24, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is a great effort to support the innocent and I'm thankful of the effort and prayers on their behalf.

It will take a while for the case to unford given Durham's backwards justice system.

Someone should place a billboard in Durham that says "Shame on you, Mr. Nifong. Stop prosecutorial abuse" with a picture of him, perhaps the one laughing at a court hearing.

At 8:23 AM, June 24, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

This case has chilling similarities to the spate of day-care center child molestation cases from the 80's. There was the McMartin case in California and the Little Rascals case in North Carolina and others. Outrageous and implausible accusations were made. The prosecutors said "we must believe the children; they don't lie about these things." The scary part is that a lot of people were convicted and spent time in jail with there having been no real evidence. It was not that the prosecutors and the jury were corrupt, it was a sort of mass hysteria. The nation has swept it under the rug.

More information: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/innocence/

Which is scarier? A corrupt prosecutor or one that believes the unbelievable?

At 9:27 AM, June 24, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I do not know Susan Nifong's email address, but I am definitely wrting to her though the N&O editors. She needs to hear our views about her brother's integrity and more. How dare she? Please send as many letters to the editor to be sent to Susan Nifong as possible. We need to make statemnt abour her dearly beloved brother.

At 9:59 AM, June 24, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just when Joan Foster gets Melanie Sill and Ruth Sheehan to start to look at reality, out comes Barry Saunders. Looks like we need to remind Saunders of citizens rights' as trampled upon by Nifong.


At 11:16 AM, June 24, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

His name is "Dingdong" not "Nifong"

At 12:07 PM, June 24, 2006, Anonymous Joan Foster said...

For whom does Barry Saunders write?

"Impeach Nifong" has made some powerful comments on the N&O Blogs! I loved reading them! Let's keep encouraging them to develop this prosecutorial abuse story...follow the lies!

I loved the billboard suggestion.I have read many great suggestions on here to make our support more visible in Durham. What is it we need to actually implement any of these ideas in Durham going forward?

At 12:58 PM, June 24, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

There is no way the false accuser will ever testify in this case. She will never face up to having told so many horrific lies. No one could get on the stand and be able to handle having told so many lies. It may not come until the morning of the trial, but she will back out.

At 2:58 PM, June 24, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I do not live in the Raleigh, Durham area. Can anyone please post the address for the N&O letters to the editor page, or preferably, an e-mail address for same.

At 3:44 PM, June 24, 2006, Anonymous Joan Foster said...


Please visit the Editor's blog as well...lots of new comments blasting Nifong today. Here's my reply to Nifong's sister:

Please someone buy Mike Nifong’s sister “ Bartlett’s quotations” She needs to read what some great wordsmith’s have said about the quality of integrity. Only then can she put her brother’s actions into context.

Virginia Woolfe wrote this about integrity: “If you cannot tell the truth about yourself, you cannot tell it about another person.” Let's remember Brother Mike on TV ...demonstrating the choke hold, talking about condoms, and hinting at date rape drugs. Just telling us all about himself and all about what evidence he’d seen. Sister, whether you believe the accused..or the accuser., Mike Nifong betrayed both. Knowing the accuser’s truthfulness would be an issue, he owed it to HER to guard his own credibility. He sold her out when he embellished ...or misrepresented... or misinformed a national audience about his evidence. Whether to benefit himself politically or promote Mike's Magical Media Tour, he did the accuser no favor. . Spare me from such a self-serving champion.

If you believe the the young men are innocent,Sister, we need to send you a thesaurus as well. It will take a commitee of all of us to find a word so base, so vile that it would describe a man who would sacrifice three young lives for his personal gain. Do you know "nifong" has become a verb on the internet...defined, Sister, as that very thing?

TThe writer Chilton opined he’d “prefer a loss to a dishonest gain. One brings pain at the moment , another for all time.” A tight election campaign against a bitter rival is daunting. But, Sister, integrity is not a coat you can take off at a heated campaign appearance: it’s a second skin. Nifong spoke of “hooligans and “daddy’s money.” Also, contrary to his statement to Newsweek , pundits count about 20 comments about the case after April 4. Read "The hauntings " on http://lashawnbarber.com… for a fulll review of ALL your brother's statements to the media. Fit integrity into that scenario.

Sister, John D. MacDonald tells us, “Integrity is not a 90% thing, not a 95% thing, either you have it or you don’t. “ Your brother is a man who would go on national TV , time after smirking time,…. slurping up the the attention… while he spoke of condoms and choke holds and such. While in his desk drawer, lay the accuser’s statement that belied his very words. That is not the standard poster child for integrity. even a loving sister should see that. Sister ,we'll also enclose a book of fairy tales. You know, Gipetto loved Pinocchio but he called him on his lies.

At 3:54 PM, June 24, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

wow, joan. your best yet.

Please go easier on Nifong's dog when she starts barking for the N&O.

The dog was a reluctant character witness. All Nifong promised her in return was a lady's red shoe and a toxicology report to chew on.

At 4:19 PM, June 24, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey Joan--Barry Saunders is at the N&O also--see http://www.newsobserver.com/134/story/454107.html

Unfortunately, Barry doesn't have a blog so we'll all just have to email that so and so.

Great email to the SheFong, by the way.

ImpeachNifong/Durhamite Mommy

At 5:26 PM, June 24, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I just read the SI article. The thought of Brodhead taking over the athletic department at Duke should send chills down everyone's spine. The better suggestion is that he be the one, not Pressler, who is forced to resign. I once hoped that his resignation would quietly appear then disappear. Now I want it to be headline news. Here is why: every American president from Harry Truman through GHW Bush played college football team. College athletics is about teamwork, leadership, and dealing with adversity. Personally, I think both Clinton and GW Bush might have been better presidents if they had played a college sport. With college basketball and football turning into cheap farm teams for the pros (who can more than afford farm teams) Lacrosse is still an example where players leave with more than a win/loss record. Duke needs college sports and we need leaders. We don't need an acedemic dinosaur like Brodhead turning Duke into Princeton.

At 12:34 PM, June 25, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What Nifong’s obscenity-filled tirade following the Evans news conference says about his character

In the US system, the long term prosecutor/DA gradually assumes the mantle of prosecutor, judge and jury. Since most cases are now decided by plea bargain, DAs essentially bypasses the checks and balances of the judicial system and do whatever they want. In the face of this absolute power, a few good DAs manage to maintain a sense of fairness and balance but nearly all long-term DAs are bent by the process and become increasingly unethical, cutting corners, making stuff up and playing favorites (the number of defense lawyers among Nifong’s inner circle are a pathognomic sign of an imperial long-term DA).

When the media started paying attention in the Duke case to Nifong (for the first time for him in over a decade), he was simply engaging in his usual behavior: making facts up, manipulating the police investigation and abusing his subpoena power. And happy to show it to the world. As shown in the case, it becomes the practice of an imperial DA to stop reading the evidence before indictment and just lazily relying on his coercive behavior to settle a case.

In a way, typical (albeit unethical) long-term DA behavior in Nifong’s part. Revealed for the first time to the public, in Nifong’s case, because the media was recording his every word.

In a corrupt system like Durham’s, the police readily participate in an imperial DA’s system of coercion intimidating witnesses, suppressing and manufacturing evidence to obtain the needed pressure for a plea bargain (I strongly suspect the reason lead investigator Mark Gottlieb hasn’t yet produced his report is that early on he was engaging in his routine practice of providing misleading and fantastical reports to the DA and the Grand Jury and now is trying to figure out how to “adjust” them).

But after the Chesire/Evans news conference with the 3rd indictment (which is _actual_ time Nifong stopped talking to the press), Nifong went into a complete panic.

He realized (1) That no rape had taken place (because he finally read his case file carefully for the first time) (2) That no plea bargain was going to be possible.

He was at-sea. That is the character-building moment for any person- caught in a lie with huge stakes.

The honest and decent person in that circumstance finds a way to make things right; no matter how painful to them it is. The cad blusters on.

Nifong spewed obscenities and then fell into a sullen, smirking silence; all the while dragging his city’s judicial system down with him.

At 12:59 PM, June 25, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To the poster above: Excellent post. All of Nifong's behavior points to trying to get one of the lax players to flip and then get a plea.
You should add your post to the Editor's Blog over at the N&O. I'm sure Nifong is a frequent reader there, as his sister just gave us a clue.

At 1:04 PM, June 25, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hello folks. If anyone wants heartburn go checkout the Duke LAX discussion on TalkLeft. Specifically, scroll down until you see a poster named "MrPrecedent" who claims to be a Dukie employed by Duke. He/She is extraordinarily condescending and hostile to any anti-Nifong talk. Sigh. Wonder if he's one of the group of 88?

At 1:06 PM, June 25, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

HI everyone...just wanted to let you know, that Mike NIfong's deplorable behavior has been officially entered into the american cultural lexicon.

nobody deserves it more



At 1:07 PM, June 25, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

edit...the above link to Wikipedia should have a "d" on the end so it reads "NIfonged"

At 4:48 PM, June 25, 2006, Blogger SweetMagnolia_ said...

I really enjoy Talk Left- especially since I stopped reading the posts of IMHO and Mr.P.

At 9:07 AM, June 26, 2006, Anonymous joan foster said...

FYI, the reporter for SI is a hand-puppet for Nifong. Last night, on Fox's show with Kimberly Neusome, he opined that the lacrosse team has a "sense of entitlement."

When asked, if he thought them capable of a violent rape, he said "Absolutely!." He explained their "crimes" were "escalating." The latest was theft: young men who had no financial need to do so were misusing other students credit cards! Thankfully, the segment was short. You should all read the actual transcript when posted.

I hope whomever is assisting with the media will do two things. Be aware of what this man is saying, and get out in front of it.

And should this story drag on (though we pray it won't) REMEMBER this, and give SI no more access to any of the lacrosse players or families. Two wordsfor SI: no comment.

At 9:40 AM, June 26, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To joan foster:
Great post to the N&O today!

At 9:52 AM, June 26, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"The latest was theft: young men who had no financial need to do so were misusing other students credit cards!"

I agree with your assessment of the reporting. The students were using each other's credit cards to pay for pizza! (O, the horror!)

If that's the standard being used, then what will have to be said about drug use/sales or boosting cars or other such crimes (but none of which the lacrosse team were guilty of)?

The outrage over those crimes will have to go off the scale on the meter. (Except that Durham seems to exist somewhere in the Twilight Zone, where reality
isn't what it seems to be. . .)

At 10:01 AM, June 26, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

BTW, let's suppose the AV decides to change her story again, and accuse George Bush, Condi Rice, and Dick Cheney of the rape.

We'd all think that was ridiculous and dismiss it immediately, because they have alibis and witnesses and even video tape to prove they were elsewhere.

But the accusation by itself is enough, right? Even when there is absolutely no physical evidence (not even a strand of DNA, let alone a strand of hair). And we can't disbelieve women who say they are victims of rape.

So the DA has the duty to prosecute, and the case must go to trial.

Ridiculous? Not at all. Because that is exactly the same position the lacrosse players are in.

At 8:36 AM, June 27, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

In today's Durham Sun, Duke Professor Karla FC Holloway claims to be working hard this summer having a difficult conversation about "the problematic issues about race..."


Wonder who she's having that conversation with?

Maybe its her fellow 88 vigilante Duke faculty who publicly proclaimed their intention to administer justice in the Duke Lacrosse case, regardless of the outcome of the investigation?

Given the fact that most of those particular faculty are on 3-month summer vacations (as befits the stereotype of the lazy LibArts Professor), she must be having the conversation by cell phone from the porches of their summer homes on the Outer Banks.

That sound you hear is not a heavy sigh from honestly engaging "race matters at Duke and in Durham" but the Merlot being poured on the beach.

Surf's up, hypocrites!!

At 9:06 AM, June 27, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...


OK, I misspoke, only 87% of you Vigilante Faculty are on vacation, based on automated responses.

But what is pretty funny os that if you email Professor Holloway....this is the response you get.

Guess she's not working _that_ hard in Durham this summer discussing race!!
"Karla_Holloway", holloway@aas.duke.edu, wrote:

Thank you for your message. However, I will be away from the office and
will not be reading email regularly until August. Until that time, the
most reliable way to reach me is to post your correspondence to:
304F Allen Bldg., Duke University, Durham, NC 27708.

If your message is urgent or time sensitive, please contact the English
Department Office at (919.684.2741).

At 9:17 AM, June 27, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Re above: We should all let Ms. Holloway know how much we appreciate her hard work over the summer. Let us share our minds with her. Let us all contact her and provide input to her investigation. I will, for sure.

At 9:27 AM, June 27, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Now we see who have been fabricating the "race problems" in Duke: Duke professors like Baker, Dibona, and Holloway. Eliminate them, and there will not be any "race problems" left in Duke. President Brodhead, I say it is worth to try. Why pay big bugs to these trouble makers? There are plenty of qualified faculty (black or white) for the hiring. Isn't that what the professors are supposed to do: teach? When they stop “teaching” and they start “preaching”, it is time for them to go.

Good bye Baker, good bye Dibona, good bye Holloway and good bye remaining 86 preachers! Go do your preaching elsewhere. This is our school and we intend to keep it. We will not surrender it to you. You have grossly under estimated us. But, you will learn your lesson pretty soon, a lot sooner than you might think.

At 12:38 PM, June 27, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

For those on this board who think Africans Americans in Durham can overcome their prejudice and be fair-minded in this case should look at what happened today to Dave Evans.

Judge Elaine Bushfan who is a black NCCU law school (and BS) graduate found Dave Evans _guilty_ of the exact same charge that his two housemates had been previously found innocent of.

Apparently the overwhelmed Judge Bushfan is not too busy to engage in a little race-motivated payback (See comment).

Disgraceful, another sad chapter in Durham (in)justice. A one more sign that a change of venue for this trial is essential for any semblance of fairness to occur.

"Judge Elaine Bushfan has a law degree from North Carolina Central University (NCCU) School of Law and a Mathematics degree from NCCU."

Chief District Court Judge Elaine Bushfan told attendees that court dockets are filled to capacity. Some days, she said, more than 500 people are awaiting their turn in court.

At 1:09 PM, June 27, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Evidently she must think this case is of vital importance :

(from Jan. 2006)

Chief District Court Judge Elaine Bushfan told attendees that court dockets are filled to capacity. Some days, she said, more than 500 people are awaiting their turn in court.

“Am I herding cattle, or am I imparting justice?” Bushfan asked. “The way that we are being funded – it’s not right.”

(So why didn't she put this case off until 2007?) (sarc/off)

At 1:27 PM, June 27, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Re above: Very scary! I just hope we do not wake up one day and discover that these kids are going to be locked up in a prison for 50 years for a crime they did not commit just so that the Black racist professors in NCCU and Duke feel better. I cannot believe that this country has come to this.

Why can’t all races have justice at the same time? Why must be the justice acquired by one race be at the expense of the other? What type of justice is this? So, what do we have left; anything? If any lying accuser can claim our lives and put us away for 50 years because we are white, then what protection is it that we have here? We are now in a lot worst shape than most third world countries. At least, they have an excuse for it. What is our excuse? That we have developed so much that we lost justice and liberty along the way? That when they develop as much as we have, they will also become totally corrupt. Oh yea, nice going North Carolina.

At 3:24 PM, June 27, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

We have for too long allowed the Karla Holloway's on this planet to define the "problematic issues of race , respect and equity." These are people who require, no DEMAND great sensitivity toward their own fragile egos, but will slam anyone to the ground who is not anointed BY THEM with victim status.

At the beginning of the Iraq war, a professor at Columbia called for our soldiers to kill their own officers. Even if one opposes this war, decent people should not tolerate this. Ward Churchill's smear of the 9-11 victims,protestors at military funerals, the viciousness that passes for politics on both sides... none of us seemingly require a modicum of decency anymore. We call out the other side,but we never critise our own. It's the new morality.Never criticize your own. Savage the rest.

The AA community has long complained of "broken" justice...a rush to judgement, crooked cops, rogue D.A.'s. This might have been an "A-ha!" moment for them."See, this is what OUR community often faces. Help us fix it." Instead, increasingly, it looks like a "Got-cha!" moment. If a black team had been gang-tested, if a white D.A. had met with the Klan, if a white judge today had singled out a young black man....would Karla and company stand quiet? But, this is the other side. Suspend reason. Slander. Send them to jail.

The girl? Her faults? Her problems? Minimize. Moralise. Never criticise your own.

This world would be a better place if black leaders in Durham would call for dismissal of this case.

If white leaders would call for compassion for the accuser.

If we all would agree to demand a standard of decent behavior, and CALL OUT OUR OWN!

At 3:43 PM, June 27, 2006, Anonymous joan foster said...

Don't know how I posted the statement above as
as "Anonymous." I feel I need to sign it....Thanks,Joan

At 7:04 PM, June 27, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Amen, Joan!

At 8:21 PM, June 27, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I will point out that a lead African American state legislator from Durham, Paul Miller, has resigned because of an arrest for fraud.

Of course, this is a federal prosecution. Nifong and his cronies would look the other way in a second.

Durham is a cesspool of corruption.

At 10:19 PM, June 27, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

After emailing the recommended letter to Attorney General Cooper (via "From Moderator" link on June 14) itemizing concerns about DA Mike Nifong's conduct in this case I received the following response today (6/27/06):

from: "NCAGO" NCAGO@ncdoj.com

subject: RE: DOJ Public 'Contact Us' Correspondence

exact email content:

"In North Carolina, District Attorneys are independent, constitutional officers elected by the people of their district, and not a part of the Attorney General's Office. In addition, the Attorney General's Office does not have supervisory authority over District Attorneys."

If this response has already been addressed by a previous post I apologize.

Is the only way to realistically have DA Mike Nifong removed from this case is by insuring he is defeated in the November election ? Please share your thoughts and recommended actions.

Thank you.

At 10:45 PM, June 27, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Write Mr Cooper back and call him a buck-passer like I did.

Cooper has a lot of options, including an investigation of Nifong.

He should start one NOW.

At 12:32 AM, June 28, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The best editorial yet in the liberal MSM on this case. Simple, concise and damning for Nifong.

It has the ring of commonperson truth

Ruth Marcus


At 8:20 AM, June 28, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Two posts above regarding Roy Cooper's response. We are aware of that standard, “this is not my affair” response he is sending to everyone. Yet, we think it is useful for him to be aware that a large number of people do not approve of the way DA Nifong is handling this case and these people are willing to voice their opinions on the issue. Please ignore the response you received from his office. Your letter has served its purpose already. We thank all those who sent letters to Mr. Cooper and we actually want our readers to continue sending those letters. He can keep silent, and he can keep pretending that everything is going well for so long. At some point, he will have to acknowledge some reality. Our letters are serving a purpose.


At 9:15 AM, June 28, 2006, Anonymous joan foster said...

To those who have been posting over at the Editors Blog: Editor Sill has now "moved on"...as she put it...from the Duke thread. She indicates she will respond to no more questions there. She has posted no new Duke thread.

Today, in defiance of Blogger etiquette , I posted ...somewhat off topic... on the "Times Editor Explains" thread.

Please keep posting over there. It seems all these formerly passionate "porveyors of truth" just want to change the topic now. Let's not let them.

"It's clear from the debate on the NSA eavesdropping and the financial records monitoring that opinions are divided as to whether these practices passed muster in terms of oversight. The idea of our democracy is that citizens get to decide how we want government to operate, not the reverse. An independent press (print and electronic) serves citizens by informing them. " Melanie Sill

Melanie, would you please drop in on the Duke thread and apply your excellent statement above THERE. We do have a right to decide how we want our government, police , D.A.'s office etc to operate . The N&O has a duty to inform. We are asking questions about "Whether practices passed muster in terms of oversight at the police department and D.A.'s office. " We are asking for comparisons elsewhere in North Carolina. What is the duty of the local press here? It is, of course, easy to champion holding Federal officials feet to the fire, , harder to step on toes in your own hometown.

I apologise for asking here but you have moved on from that thread and in essence leave us without a place to dialogue with you. When you state you are no longer reading there, how do we ask our questions? Or are questions on the Duke case temporarily forbidden. Thanks.

At 12:04 PM, June 28, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The following are 2 excerpts from the 6/26/06 SI "The Damage Done" article:

"It has been almost two months, says the accuser's mother, since they have seen or talked to their daughter or her two young children. She and Travis have grown accustomed to the media descending on their home to ask about the case. "Duke did something to those DNA results so they would favor those boys," she said on the April afternoon after the results were released. She said her daughter had gotten angry with her parents each time they'd appeared on TV. "We told her we were just trying to help her," the mother said. "I asked my minister to pray with [her], but she won't come to church.""

"The accuser's mother went last month to Carrboro, N.C., to meet famed Florida lawyer Willie Gary, raising the possibility of a civil suit against the players or the university, which purchased the lacrosse players' house just a month before the party. (In response to neighbors' complaints about student drinking and rowdiness in the Trinity Park district, the university has been buying up fraternity houses and other student residences, with plans to rent them to families.) Gary confirms that he met with the mother but will say only that he has "not officially taken the case.""

The accuser's mother believes Duke did something to the DNA results to favor the Lacrosse players. This is a real shocking theory in view of the fact that Duke University, to my knowledge, has made no public statement defending the innocence of the Duke Lacrosse players (please correct me if I am wrong => believe me I want to be wrong about this). Duke seems to have taken the politically correct high road especially with its willingness to accept the forced resignation of Mike Pressler as opposed to investigating the initial Durham police findings (via Duke Office of Student Affairs) that support the innocence of the Duke lacrosse players.

Duke needs to step up and defend the legimitacy of the DNA results and sooner rather than later. By not doing this Duke continues to significantly hurt the accused players and their families as well as Duke as a whole.

Why does the accuser not want to attend church ?

Willie Gary, famed Florida lawyer, must be hoping that the Duke Lacrosse players are convicted by a "jury of their peers" in Durham. If the ultimate injustice occurs and these players are convicted then Willie Gary will more than likely file a civil lawsuit against Duke and/or the accused Duke Lacrosse players' families.

Why is the accuser's mother thinking about a civil lawsuit at this time ?

DA Mike Nifong must be removed from this case.

Duke's administration must speak out and publicly support the falsely accused players. Duke has a record (via Duke Public Safety officer witness) of the initial Durham Police statments that contradict the basis of DA Mike Nifong's charges against the players. Duke needs to use this information in order to support the falsely accused players.

In 6/26/06 SI "The Damage Done" article DA Mike Nifong makes the following statement on April 12th at a candidate's forum:

"I am not going to allow Durham in the mind of the world to be a bunch of lacrosse players from Duke raping a black girl in Durham!"

How has DA Mike Nifong gotten away with these types of unethical and unlawful statements despite our complaints to the NC Attorney General's office ?

DA Mike Nifong must be removed from this case. If nothing else gets him removed he must be defeated in the November election.

At 12:57 PM, June 28, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Above poster: We all share your frustration! I agree: Duke must speak up. Keeping silent has not helped them a bit. In fact, it hurt a great deal. It hurt the three accused innocent students and it hurt the Duke University itself. I do not know is providing PR advice to President Brodhead, but he is getting real bad advice. In the public opinion, the more silent they remain the worst their image is becoming.

From the beginning, all they had to do was to stand by their students and most of this nastiness would have been avoided. They inflicted the biggest wounds on themselves by this "silent strategy". This strategy is clearly not working. It has failed. It is time to hear from Duke. It is time for the administration to say "on the face of the evidence, we now realize that our students may be quite innocent, we will stand by them until they are proven guilty".

There is no other way president Brodhead. As embarrassing as this may sound, this is the best choice you have. Show us what you are made of, and show us now. The world is anxiously waiting.

At 12:57 PM, June 28, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Above poster: We all share your frustration! I agree: Duke must speak up. Keeping silent has not helped them a bit. In fact, it hurt a great deal. It hurt the three accused innocent students and it hurt the Duke University itself. I do not know is providing PR advice to President Brodhead, but he is getting real bad advice. In the public opinion, the more silent they remain the worst their image is becoming.

From the beginning, all they had to do was to stand by their students and most of this nastiness would have been avoided. They inflicted the biggest wounds on themselves by this "silent strategy". This strategy is clearly not working. It has failed. It is time to hear from Duke. It is time for the administration to say "on the face of the evidence, we now realize that our students may be quite innocent, we will stand by them until they are proven guilty".

There is no other way president Brodhead. As embarrassing as this may sound, this is the best choice you have. Show us what you are made of, and show us now. The world is anxiously waiting.

At 1:59 PM, June 28, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

From post at Court TV

Dolly, was it you who suggested that the defense might use a lifesize mock up of the bathroom.

That would surely be way more riveting that Johnny Cochran's glove demonstration. "If the guys won't fit, you must acquit."

At 2:59 PM, June 28, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

There is a very good comment in the Responses to media page of this site. It is written in response to the Andrew Cohen article published yesterday in Washington Post (The Media Rush to Duke's Defense). See last comment on that page dated 2:28pm June 28; it is a very good read. We should send more responses like this to the Post.

At 9:17 PM, June 28, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

One of the worst of the Duke faculty (and who has to date escaped my wrath because he was not one of the 88 signers) is Peter Wood.

He publicly condemned the Lacrosse players and exactly the time when the witch hunt was building.

Here is an open letter to Professor:

TO pwood@duke.edu

It is one of the worst moral failings for a person to denounce publicly those facing a show trial

That's what you did, Professor Wood.

In China under Mao and Russia under Stalin, many were forced to do that under threat of death or

You did it voluntarily. Stepped forward and publicly
condemned a group of students, who any reasonably
aware person would have guessed with 80% certainty
were being railroaded for racial and political

Speaks volumes about your lack of moral character...or
your lack of intellect and judgment.

Regardless of why, your actions were a deeply
disgusting thing for a teacher to do, and I suspect
that students will remember them for a long time. It
may even become your legacy.

And if it does, you will have deserved it.

At 11:20 PM, June 28, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The boating accident involving Duke AD Joe Alleva and one of his sons is the quintessential manifestation of the Duke hypocrisy levied against the 3 falsely accused lacrosse players, their teammates, and their former coach.

I originally thought this boating accident might be the life changing event that would finally result in Duke AD Joe Alleva speaking out to the public in support of the belief that the 3 falsely accused Duke lacrosse players are innocent. Unfortunately, now Joe Alleva's supportive words would not be taken seriously.

I do not understand why Duke AD Joe Alleva did not voluntary give a breath or blood sample. As a person who truly believes in the innocence of the 3 Duke lacrosse players and who would like to do anything in the world to help them out of their current "living hell" it is very demoralizing to have the Duke AD setting this kind of example.

Am I being too harsh ?

At 11:28 PM, June 28, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Above: No, you are not too harsh. I feel exactly the same. Alleva must go. There will not be any healing in Duke, with Alleva there. His time has long been up.

At 12:01 AM, June 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just in case, people think I am exaggerated about Professor Wood's role in get the lynch mob assembled in April.

Wood actually gave more interviews to the media in the week following the incident than Nifong himself. At least 25 by my Google count.

Here are a few of my favorites:

From the NYTimes, April 1

Peter H. Wood, a history professor who played lacrosse at Harvard and was captain of the team at Oxford, said that lacrosse players on campus stood out for their aggression, which he said was in some ways endemic to the game they played. Lacrosse was invented by Native Americans, who called it the little brother of war and played it violently, town against town, with hundreds on the field at a time. It was popularized in 20th century in the prep schools of the Northeast.

"The football players here are often rural white boys with baseball caps or hard- working black students who are proud to be at Duke," Wood said.

"Basketball players are held at a higher level and are more tightly controlled. Too often, there seems to be a surliness about some lacrosse players' individual
demeanor. They seem hostile, and there is this group mentality."

And then most damning in the Duke Chronicle itself

Peter Wood complained: “At what point does team loyalty become blind
obedience? That's a question we all have to answer, whether we're in the Lacrosse team, the Army or anywhere else... when do I go along with group, and when do I stand up for myself and say what I think"

But most despicably, in every one of the 25 interviews that Professor Wood gave, he made sure to mention that he went to Harvard and Oxford (and got the reporters to include that detail).

What a nice package for a tenured academic: blinding ego, bitter maliciousness and media whoredom.

What a swell guy this Professor Peter Wood is.

Just the guy to lead a lynch mob. Or as Robespierre said....

At 12:50 AM, June 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Above: Mr. Peter Wood indeed sounds like quite a piece of work. No wonder, there are problems in Duke. With professors like Baker, Dibona, Holloway, and Wood what else could we expect? Perhaps, out of all this mess, some good will come. These professors will be exposed for what they are, and they will be scrutinized carefully from now on. Let us give them a little bit of their own medicine and see how they like it. There better not be any hidden skeletons in their closets.

At 1:43 PM, June 29, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here is an excellent rebuttal to the Weekly Independent article written by Hal Crowther “Sympathy for the Devils?”

Responses to media


<< Home