Wednesday, May 31, 2006

General topics 21 - Full

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


At 11:46 AM, October 06, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I urge everyone on this board to read the letter written by Concerned Parents for Duke Students and follow the recommendations they make. If you cannot do all of their recommendations, you should surely be able to do one or two of them. Please remember NOW is the time to act, LATER may be too late. The letter I am referring to was just published on our front page.

Thank you FODU readers for your continued support and all the wonderful emails you send me on a daily basis.


At 11:47 AM, October 06, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The media has dropped the story until they have something sensational to report. Many folks in the nation don't have any idea what happened with the case. They still think the boys are guilty. Wouldn't it be a good idea for a spokesperosn for FODU to contact Bill O' Reilly or Katie Couric to try to secure time on their shows or ones like theirs to spell out all the Nyfongian illegal tactics? This spokesperson needs to be someone who is eloquent and also can think fast on his/her feet. Obviously, the boys or their parents or team mates cannot speak out now, but some folks with this group,who know the case as well as the lawyers do,could inform the nation of the travesty of justice that is happening down here.

Look at all the press given to the Mark Foley case over lurid im's to 17 year olds! These three Duke boys (barely older than 17) are REALLY being ABUSED by the legal system here and are threatened with prison. They did NOTHING wrong --except maybe drinking a beer or two in a private residence-- and their lives have been totally turned upside down!

This ABUSE needs media coverage, and that is the recommendation I have for FODU. Joan Foster and others have proved their superior literary prowess. Could they be persuaded to contact the media stations and get air time asap?

Also, there are radio shows in NC that might be glad to feature FODU speakers. I agree with the moderator. The time to act is now!

former Duke Mom

At 12:28 PM, October 06, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The letter written by Concerned Parents for Duke Students has the registration ending October 13. DSED says registration ends October 12:

Q: What is the deadline for registration in order to vote in this November's election?

A: You need to have your registration postmarked or delivered by 5:00 PM, October 12.

At 12:45 PM, October 06, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The biggest mistakes the kids made was to 1) not hire a better class of strippers - not that as a woman I approve of that particular "boys will be boys" behavior, one which is being emmulated by their female peers, an activity that had when I was young and still has a really high "ick" factor - and 2) to underestimate the corruption of the Durham police. Durham needs a new city symbol. It used to be a set of tobacco leaves. It should now be a very green face - the Envy Capital.

That said, I want to join those moms. My son graduates this spring. Most of his friends are in InterVarsity so he isn't likely to be caught in Mr. Niphong's sights, but that doesn't matter. Something could happen to him or any other student. So, please, how do I join them?

Mom in South Carolina, '07

At 1:12 PM, October 06, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

First, let me make a correction. In my 11:46 post, I mistakenly referred to Concerned Parents for Duke Students. That should have been Concerned Mothers for Duke Students.

Mom in SC '07 (re your 12:45pm post above), if you want to contact this group of mothers, please send me an email. I will be glad to put you in touch.


At 4:34 PM, October 06, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

One thing is very clear. Nifong is not a God fearing man. Due to the damage he intentionally caused to 3 young men, their families, the university (although most of that is self inflicted), the citizenry of Durham and trust in the NC Judicial System, if he does not at some point in his miserable life ask for foregiveness, he will burn in hell!

At 4:51 PM, October 06, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

OH MY GOSH -did anyone see the show on vh1 last night about north carolina strippers who do porn hip hop videos- if these boys had hired a scores stripper or professional stripper this would never have happened- these north carolina girls were so illiterate -most were unwed mothers hwo had no high school education and just wanted money -one said "i would do anything for the green" they admitted they would get naked or have sex with a hip hop star to be in a hip hop video can only imagien what they woud do to be able to sue some what they would see as rich white boys from duke

At 5:26 PM, October 06, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

John Mark Karr has been released with no charges pending although he is known to have possessed child pronography among other things. The prosceution lost the computer that stored the images. They stated that you can't prosecute anyone without solid evidence. I wonder if anyone prosceuting these three boys were listening?

At 5:34 PM, October 06, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

A HUGE thank you to the "Concerned Parents!" I know Beth Brewer is working heart and soul in Durham to rid her neighbors of this soul-less prosecutor.
Please help in any way you can.
I am embarrassed sometimes to keep asking...(I never have even hosted a tupperware party) but it is so desparately important.
Nifong has the two newspapers propping him up. We need to do mailings...get people to the polls.
She'd love to rent a billboard...print more signs.Signs are being stolen everyday.
Please ask even those who don't read here....if they would help.

Sorry to sing the same song again.Please take it as an indication of my dedication to ending this tragedy!

At 5:52 PM, October 06, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Joan, this is a good and worthy song you are singing. And, you may sing it on this board as many times as you wish. We love hearing it. However, I hope our friends are paying attention to what you are singing. I hope every single friend is doing everything he or she can. NOW is the time!

Duke parent

At 7:24 PM, October 06, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Close watchers of the deeply racist, corrupt black Durham power structure will be not be suprised by this comment below from Judge Bushfan

Bushfan is in charge of the Durham courts. And had previously let a suspected murderer and serial criminal out on $10,000 bail, where he promptly killed again

Bushfan would have let this suspected serial murderer out on the streets again for a 2nd time but she (and Nifong) are getting community complaints for coddling violent criminals simply because they are black.

Durham man arrested on murder charge

"Chief District Judge Elaine Bushfan rejected pleas from Odom's attorney for a reduced bond.

"Even to me, someone who has empathy for the plight of the black man in America ... this is out of control," Bushfan said to Odom after rattling off about two dozen other charges against Odom in addition to the murder counts.

"At some point, someone's got to say, 'You need to stop.' If you can't stop yourself, we can."

Apparently the price of racial solidarity is two murders and a dozen felonies.

At 9:39 PM, October 06, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I hope you all are aware of the statement posted on the N&O blog by Editor Linda Williams. It concerns the first interview with the accuser last Spring. Please note the references to what was with-held from the public.

"The reporter’s interview with the woman was brief, an encounter that lasted a few minutes outside the woman’s parents’ home in Durham. Only two things the woman said at that time did not make publication. She provided a description of the then-unidentified second woman who had also been hired to dance at the lacrosse team party. She also offered an opinion about the other woman’s actions that night. The latter was clearly an opinion, offered without any substantiation. Omitting from published news articles unsubstantiated opinions is a standard, normal part of the journalistic process. The description of the second woman proved to be accurate when Kim Roberts exposed herself at a later date. That description was withheld in March, not because of doubts about its accuracy, but because it was deemed irrelevant since we had no other information to tell readers about the second woman."

"She offered an opinion about the woman's actions that night."

Remember in some of her early statements, the accuser claimed Kim assisted in the "rape" and/or robbed her.

She may well have told this THAT DAY to the N&O and they withheld it. This at a time when they printed every angry neighbor's negative opinion of the boys.They shaped that story.

Bloggers are livid at the N&O Editors Blog. One commented at the Liestopper blog..

"Imagine how different the second half of March and the first half of April would have unfolded if the discussion had included the AV's charge that Kim robbed her and assisted in the rape.

It's like a giant wrench in all the stereotypes that drove that period."

If you are as enraged as we the N&O and let Melanie Sills and Linda Williams know.

Demand they release the details!

Post on the Editors Blog! Hold their feet to the fire!

At 10:07 PM, October 06, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Agree wholeheartedly with 9:39 PM poster. Melanie and Linda are getting well-deserved scorn in the comments section. Here is a link:

At 11:34 PM, October 06, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

More on Melanie, Linda, and the N&O coverup on the Liestoppers discussion board:

At 9:08 AM, October 07, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

There is a new,major article by Allen Breed, AP national writer, which summarizes problems with prosecutorial misconduct in the LAX case. This is a very important article:

At 9:35 AM, October 07, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Agree with the above.

The tone of this article is that it is a simply a given that Nifong acted with malicious intent.

(the H-S unintentionally linked this AP article without reading it-you can bet they will remove it as soon as the bald weasel gets his marching orders from Nifong)

At 11:12 AM, October 07, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thank you Patsy!

At 3:10 PM, October 07, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here's something everyone can and should do:

Donation Information
If you would like to donate to Duke Students for an Ethical Durham you can do so either by check or wire.
Checks can be made out to Ethical Durham and sent to:

Ethical Durham
PO Box 61417
Durham, NC 27715

If you would prefer to wire a contribution, you must email (or US mail) contributor information for receipt by our treasurer within 10 days of the deposit.
Contributor information includes Name, Street Address, City, State, Zip, Phone Number and the amount of the contribution.

RBC Centura Bank

Account #0700173316
Routing #053100850

And this:

Donate to Recall Nifong-Vote Cheek by credit card

Donate to Recall Nifong Vote Cheek by mail or fax

At 8:35 PM, October 07, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Once again the Duke lacrosse team missed a pefect media opportunity to speak out and support their falsely accused former teammates.

There is no gag order on them. There is no conceivable reason for their silence.

Kudos to Ms Zash for standing up.

A poor showing by the current captains and their timid coach.

At 12:04 AM, October 08, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Whoever you are--who continuously nags on the team and Coach Danowski for how they are moving "forward" and remaining silent with regards to their indicted teammates.

What is your problem and what axe are you trying to grind?

Yes, I am the person who has asked you this before--assuming you are the same person who continues to challenge the current team and their actions.

AGAIN--they are doing what they are told. Most if not all are likely to be called as witnesses when this goes to trial. Anything that they say--can and will be used against their three indicted teammates in a court of law. No matter how wonderful--or how supportive it may sound to YOU--this manipulative DA and his cronies will find a way to twist any public/positive statements and turn those words around to hurt the indicted kids. You don't think it will happen? You wait and see if things that players said this summer (think Chronicle) aren't used against these three boys. Just wait.

These kids love their teammates--they have taken time away from Duke this semester to travel north to visit and spend time with them so they know that they are both loved, supported and missed.

Whoever you are--how DARE you question their loyalty?

P.S. Kudos to Mrs. Zash is right. She is not going to be called as a witness in this case...she can say what she wants and good for her for doing so.

At 2:57 AM, October 08, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To the person above I would simply say:

Stop defending adults like they are children.

It it is the choice of every member of the lacrosse team to remain silent (whether on the advice of their lawyers, their coach, because of their own desire to put it behind them or whatever their reasoning)

It is a moral choice they are making.

It may well be the wrong moral choice.

If the worst happens and one or more of their former teammates is convicted in this hoax, they will have to live with their decisions to stay silent.

That is obvious to everyone.

I am simply pointing out that like all of us they have choices in how they face the most momentous moment of their lives.

At 3:22 AM, October 08, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

important piece by Joe Neff

Experts: Lacrosse IDs likely tainted

The pressure to remove the racist thug Mark Gottlieb from the Durham police force needs to continue

At 8:54 AM, October 08, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The 8:35pm and 2:57am comments were both posted by Michael Gaynor. Yes, the same one who was told not long ago and more than once to stop this stupidity, or at least, post under his own name “like a man” -- his own term for anonymous posters. Obviously, he is either enjoying this too much or his disorder has advanced to the point that he cannot stop!

I have all the proofs in the world to document his identity, in case he denies – as he has done in all the past episodes. I challenge him to deny! Or, he can come out and apologize. It is up to him.

At 8:55 AM, October 08, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Response to 2:57 AM Above:

This situation is WAY past moral choices! Each player has an attorney and is strictly following their advice (and rightly so). How many surgical patients tell the surgeon, "I want to remain awake so I can tell you where to cut."

From here on out this is in the hands of the experts who give advice based on experience and training. May I suggest you go to law school, pass the bar, take the responsibility for defending people in life determining cases, and then, and only then, start making moral judgments that involve legal decisions.

Again thanks must go to the criminal defense bar who protect us all from the persecutors and advice as provided by anon at 2:57AM. WB

At 8:59 AM, October 08, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Greetings all. Sorry to be a bit picky this AM. There is a picture or Mr. Nifong in the Johnsville News this day. In the background are, what appear to be, two flags on staffs.

I wore a military uniform under Presidents Eisenhower and Kennedy and thought I was up on flag courtesy.

The flag closest to Nifong appears to be our American Flag (red and white-with the blue field hidden). It was always my understanding that the American Flag should be at the far right of staffed flags in line.

But, maybe the other flag is the Nifong Family Crest. That would explain it. Nifong before America just like in this case.

At 10:07 AM, October 08, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Re: Jason's comments on moderator's page--The three key points you refer to HAVE been made by Pres. Brodhead and the administration. I have heard them on two separate occasions, and I imagine they were made on other occasions as well. But they weren't covered by the press. In fact, the Alumni Association's "talking points" really are excerpts from past administrative presentations.

At 10:12 AM, October 08, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dear Plum, good observation on the flags. I will wonder over to JohnsvilleNews to check it out. Thanks for the tip.

At 10:31 AM, October 08, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...


Then why are y'all waiting on 60 minutes?

The court of public opinion never closes; it is open 24/7.

And the court of public opinion doesn't go to law school.

The court of opinion also doesn't charge $500/hour like Wade Smith (or have inherent conflicts of interest and a need to maintain a certain carefully crafterd personal public image)

Be careful of being so dogmatic.

As Nifong will tell you, in a crimimal case, there is never any _right_ answer just shades of gray.

And winning and losing.
-not Michael Gaynor

An article demonstrating the consequences of player's not speaking directly and clearly but hiding behind indirect statements

"Among current team members, the innocence of the three players is an article of faith."

Duh....they were there.

At 10:44 AM, October 08, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

A side-bar from the new Joe Neff article details the lineop and identifies Matt Wilson as the fourth player identified in the April 4 line-up;

At 11:24 AM, October 08, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Regarding the details in "The Problem with Matt". This case is a disgrace.

Nifong's only evidence, a failed ID, is a complete shambles.

If and when Nifong wins the election, there needs to be a concerted effort on all fronts to have him removed from malpractice.

At 1:34 PM, October 08, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

After reading the alumni website page on how to answer questions regarding the Duke lacrosse case, I am beginning to think that the alumni association is being run by wimps. Are they that afraid of Brodhead and his fellow conspirators?

Was Duke always this way? What happened to "sincerity"? Does the administration think all alumni are so dumb that they can play mind games with them? Or, do they think that alumni don't care about the truth?

Yes, I am worried about Duke's reputation but not because the boys were accused of a crime they did not commit.

I just do not think anybody with half a brain will allow his gifted offpsring to apply to a college that is run by insincere, pompous asses whose main concern is catering to the loudest, in-your-face groups rather than being an "in locum parenti" for its students. Who will pay full fare for this type of treatment? In the future, Duke will need to give a full ride to all its students as incentive to go there! There are many choices when you have 42 thousand to spend a year on your kid's education. It's a free market. Why would anyone choose Duke and Durham NOW over another school in its league? Duke will need to recruit even more international students from abroad than it already does. Do you think this was the vision of the Dukes?--- ------even more astonished after reading alumni web page

At 6:36 PM, October 08, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Neff's article is an eye opener. Clearly there is no method to the accuser's madness. She seems to have picked people totally at random and she couldn't even maintain any consistency between lineups. Her identifications are just like her contradictory versions of the non-rape - all over the board.

Nifong's entire case rests on these "identifications". It's pathetic. This mess couldn't even survive a probable cause hearing.

At 8:17 PM, October 08, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Does anyone have the skinny on when the 60 minutes show will be airing? Thanks!

At 9:07 PM, October 08, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To Mr. Nifong

Saying is...

One who lies cannot even trust self to do right thing!

At 9:45 PM, October 08, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

If you are an alum of Duke, please take time to let the Duke Alumni Association board members know what you think of the "talking points" on their web site. You can get to the page from the link in Jason's article on today's FODU home page. Click "contact us" at the top and then contact individual members. Please be polite, my sense is some are leaning hard our way. Thanks

At 10:40 PM, October 08, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I just got home from visiting my son - a med school interview kept him from coming home for the break so we visited him - and I saw Niphong yard-signs all over the place. I saw many more Niphong signs than Cheek signs. I was particularly distressed to see so many Niphong yard-signs in the Hope Valley area. That's the affluent part of Durham, not the black population that you might expect to prop him up. If the election were held today and sign represented votes, Niphong would win and that's horribly distressing.

I was also stunned to see yard-signs for a Supreme Court position. I thought those positions were elected by the legislature and served for life - to prevent tacky things like conflict of interest or repaying political favors. Call me a cynic, but if that's the case, I'm not surprised that Durham, if not the rest of North Carolina, is so corrupt.

At 10:51 PM, October 08, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

An astonishing article today in the leftie NY Magazine that proclaims Duff Wilson's NYT pro-Nifong fraudulent reporting nauseating.

“I’ve never felt so ill,” says one reporter about the paper’s (NYT's) coverage of the Duke lacrosse-team case. Luckily, a blogger’s on the story, too.

The worm is clearly starting to turn.

At 11:25 PM, October 08, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To 10:40

I bet many of those pro-Nifong signs in Hope Valley are rich defense lawyers(I wouldn't be surprised if even a few the lacrosse lawyers have them in their yards, right Kerry?)

Corruption is all about greasing the skids and Nifong learned well from his predecessor.

Durham's lawyers are afraid of that foul-mouthed bully and his impact on their livelihood.

Durham's lawyers will vote for Nifong en masse.

At 7:52 AM, October 09, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I just E-mailed Kerry Sutton's office. I hope she will rebut the previous post...if it is untrue. Otherwise, what does that sign mean? It means she endorses Nifong and his tactics.

Dear Ms. Sutton, I am one of the bloggers and posters drawn to the Duke Lacrosse case by the compelling words of Dave Evans that Spring afternoon months ago. I remember you well as you stood there with him. Though I have no connection to Duke, Durham, or Lacrosse...I was sufficiently moved that day, to find a place to post or blog almost every day in support of your client.

The more I have read , the more convinced I have become that this Hoax was perpetrated by a politically motivated prosecutor who played fast and loose with procedure, misled the media, staged a no-wrong answers line-up, pressured and prosecuted Mr. Elmostafa and allowed Gottlieb's notes to expand from 2 pages to thirty some. Most of my "information" came from releases from the team of defense lawyers. I didn't know such abuses of power were possible in this country. I was naive.

Now I am grasping for a word that exceeds "naive." Maybe "idiotic?" A poster on Friends of Duke University blog has intimated that one of the Duke lawyers.."Kerry" has an "Elect Nifong" sign on her lawn. What does that say to the rest of us out here? It's all smoke and mirrors? Take it all with a wink and nod.?

If this is untrue, please rebut it publicly. If true, I guess I must thank you for waking me from the stupor. I will use my further blog posts to inform other bloggers and apologize for my idiocy.

At 8:46 AM, October 09, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Speaking of election signs. I heard that Mike N. this morning had a
"Recall Nifong, Vote Cheek"

Sign on his front yard!

One of my collegues is a neighbor of Mike.

At 8:53 AM, October 09, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I hope pictures were taken of RN-VC sign in Nifong's back yard.

At 10:36 AM, October 09, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

This was in the print edition of the N&O yesterday regarding the accuser's IDs on April 4th:

"Brad Ross (not at party)
AV said was at party in March and April

3 Players (the names are listed in the article)
AV said in March "yes at party", in April "not at party"

12 Players, including Matt Wilson (the "4th rapist"), Dave Evans (indicted, without moustache), Peter Lamade (the real broomstick guy), and 9 others with names listed in the article
AV said in March "not at party", in April "yes at party"

AV said "70% yes at party" in March, then "rapist" in April

Tony McDevitt
Identified as broomstick guy, but wasn't

Chris Loftus
Not at party, but AV said in April he was."

I think we can finally put to rest the speculation that she was an "unwitting" participant in this hoax. She didn't have to identify these people at all. She was trying very hard to make her IDs of the "rapists" seem more credible at that time to the police and to Nifong.

At 1:07 PM, October 09, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

There was some information about Collin Finnerty and what he is doing in the Newsday article about the LAX team scrimmaging on Long Island:

"Among current team members, the innocence of the three players is an article of faith.

"Every guy in the locker room believes in them. We reach out to them," said Douglas, who said he often phones Finnerty. "When I called him last week, he said he's keeping busy with lots of stuff in Garden City and taking a class at Hofstra."

Their coach applauds the team's faith in the players.

"In everything they do, they include those guys, Collin and Reade. They are so supportive and steadfast in their belief," he said. Evans, the third accused player, has graduated and is not as closely linked to the remaining players, Danowski said.

As he awaits his trial, Finnerty lifts weights and practices lacrosse skills in the hope that, if acquitted, he will be allowed to rejoin the team, Danowski said.

With their every move under public scrutiny, the team members look out for each other, the coach said.

"They're still enjoying themselves and the college experience, but they're wary," Danowski said. "They're such great kids, but even so, I think they're looking over their shoulders to make sure things don't get misinterpreted."
Among current team members, the innocence of the three players is an article of faith.

"Every guy in the locker room believes in them. We reach out to them," said Douglas, who said he often phones Finnerty. "When I called him last week, he said he's keeping busy with lots of stuff in Garden City and taking a class at Hofstra."

Their coach applauds the team's faith in the players.

"In everything they do, they include those guys, Collin and Reade. They are so supportive and steadfast in their belief," he said. Evans, the third accused player, has graduated and is not as closely linked to the remaining players, Danowski said.

As he awaits his trial, Finnerty lifts weights and practices lacrosse skills in the hope that, if acquitted, he will be allowed to rejoin the team, Danowski said.

With their every move under public scrutiny, the team members look out for each other, the coach said.

"They're still enjoying themselves and the college experience, but they're wary," Danowski said. "They're such great kids, but even so, I think they're looking over their shoulders to make sure things don't get misinterpreted."

At 1:25 PM, October 09, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

If DNA is Nobel-worthy, so is innocence

Michael Daly NY DAILY NEWS

The 2006 Nobel Peace Prize will be awarded on Friday, but there is little chance it will go to two truly deserving New Yorkers, the two being Barry Scheck and Peter Neufeld of the Innocence Project.
For all the knuckleheads who have taken up the old street chant "No justice, no peace," the essential truth remains: There truly can be no peace without justice.

And nobody of late has done more for the cause of justice than the nonprofit outfit that Scheck and Neufeld founded in 1992 with the noble notion of using DNA evidence to free the wrongly imprisoned.

The most immediate and vital result of the Innocence Project's work has been the freeing of 183 souls who never should have been jailed in the first place. These include a Bronx man who was freed in June after serving 22 years for a rape he did not commit, a Peekskill man who was freed in September after serving 16 years for a rape and murder he did not commit and a Brooklyn man who was freed last week after serving 21 years for a rape he did not commit.

Scott Fappiano was ordered released Friday in Brooklyn Supreme Court. Scheck was out of town due to a previous commitment, but he used a wonderful word to describe the hearing.

"I couldn't be at the exoneration," he said.

Each exoneration raises the question of who really did commit the crime and presents the possibility that the actual perpetrator might be prosecuted. The DNA in Fappiano's case was not originally extracted by an approved lab and the authorities had balked at testing it against the database of known offenders, even though nobody is disputing its authenticity and provenance. But the Brooklyn district attorney's office is determined to surmount this bureaucratic hitch and hopes to identify who really did break into a Brooklyn home and repeatedly rape a cop's wife in 1983.

There is no telling how many subsequent victims might have been spared if the true evildoers in this and the 182 other cases had been grabbed in the first place. At least one murder could very well have been prevented.

Together, the 183 exonerations should be enough to remind any decent soul that our legal safeguards are in place for a reason - that "lawyering up" is a good thing. And, every time The Innocence Project proves someone wrongly convicted it also proves even a system as magnificent as ours has its flaws.

The 183 exonerations were based on DNA, but the wrongful convictions were often the result of faulty witness testimony. False confessions have also been a factor, as well as malfeasance, ineptness or simple sloppiness on the part of the police, the prosecution and, on occasion, the initial defense.

Such failures of the system surely come into play just as often in cases where there is no DNA evidence. The question is how many of the unjustly convicted are sitting in prison on cases where there is no immediate and scientific way to determine guilt or innocence.

"That's 90% of the cases," Scheck said yesterday. "That's something that people should think about. That's what we should be wondering about."

By studying the DNA cases where there is no doubt an innocent man was convicted, we can determine what went wrong. We then can apply the resulting lesson to all criminal cases and at least reduce the chances of future wrongful convictions.

Much of the DNA work that has made these telling exonerations possible was facilitated by a scientist named Kary Mullis. He was driving at night through the mountains of northern California with his girlfriend asleep at his side two decades ago when he had an epiphany.

Suddenly, as clearly as if it appeared in his headlights, Mullis saw how to replicate unlimited copies of a fragment of DNA. The tiniest bits of genetic material could be amplified into a quantity sufficient for testing.

In 1993, Mullis' discovery earned him the Nobel Prize for Chemistry. Scheck and Neufeld had founded the Innocence Project the year before, and they proceeded to use the revolutionized DNA technology to replicate one exoneration after another.

Ever more exonerations are sure to come. The folks in Stockholm should see the perfect poetry in following Mullis' Nobel Prize for Chemistry with a Nobel Prize for Peace for New York's true champions of true justice.

Originally published on October 8, 2006

Fresh stories hot off the site every day via RSS!

Have stories like this emailed right to your inbox!

At 3:44 PM, October 09, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

For the record, Peter Neufeld (who is a lawyer with no scientific or lab experience) was widely quoted by the media in April as saying (apropos of no data) that the absence of incriminating DNA evidence in a reputed brual gang case meant nothing in the Duke case

When he was called on it, he claimed not to know or care about any of the facts of the case.

And then blustered that he had more important things to do than defend his own public statements.

The only Nobel Prize that Peter Neufeld should win is for talking out of his hat.

At 4:24 PM, October 09, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Isn't Barry Scheck the same Barry Scheck, a defense lawyer for OJ, who discounted the DNA evidence in the OJ case and convinced the jury to discount it? OJ went free despite his DNA proving he was the killer. I hope Barry Scheck is a different man now.

At 4:51 PM, October 09, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

4:24 post: Yes that is the same Barry Scheck. He is now one of the few lawyers that fight the wrongdoings of a D.A. that is not in their right minds.

At 5:30 PM, October 09, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To 10:40 PM, October 08, 2006

Unfortunately many of the Recall Nifong signs that went up over the weekend of 9/29 in the area that you speak of (Hope Valley, MLK, Shannon Rd) as well as several other areas of town, were gone by Monday afternoon. Signs were stolen in mass, stands and all.

The committee to Recall Nifong - Vote Cheek is offering a reward for pictures of the theives and license plate numbers.... just kidding but it is very maddening.

At 6:02 PM, October 09, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The New York Magazine article referenced above is fantastic! Read it, because it will make your day! Kurt Andersen is my nominee for the Hero of the Hoax.

At 7:24 PM, October 09, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Above: Sorry, but KC Johnson is my nominee for the "Hero of the Hoax"

At 7:32 PM, October 09, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I agree. KC is the hero.

At 10:27 PM, October 09, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I second KC, but don't forget liestoppers, John in Carolina, and Johsnville News, all bloggers who have kept asking questions. In the mainstream media, Joe Neff has done the best job (although his paper, the News & Observer, has a checkered record).

At 11:43 PM, October 09, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Moved from elsewhere

As an out of towner who has only read about this case, my impression is that the hard Left faculty and feminst students have literally indicted those guys and basically accuse anyone of challenging them of racism---against Blacks of course. This condition has shut off any debate on campus.


At 7:59 AM, October 10, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Everyone please check out the N&O

Durham race draws outside money

The parents of two undindicted lacrosse players gave a total of $5,000 to a politicial action committee working to register voters, mostly on Duke's campus

At 11:43 AM, October 10, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

My point for posting the NY post article re Neufeld/Sheck was not to support them for a nobel prize yet to show how many innocent people are convicted of rape and sit in prisons every day, innocent. I think there is a lot of naiveté on this board that Duke is an isolated case and Nfong is an isolated example of a prosecutor gone astray for political reasons. Unfortunately, this is happening all over the country in big cities and small towns to rich people to poor people to white, black and to purple people. The amount of unchecked power individual prosecutors have is incredible and can be very dangerous if used by an unscrupulous prosecutor. John Grisham "the innocent man" while I disagree re Shecks comment in this case, one cannot doubt he has made an enormous contribution by bringing to light bad prosecutions for rape in this country. The problem in many cases is that there is no dna evidence so those convicted who are innocent cannot be exonerated easily by a finding of a dna sample etc. Which bring to light an important element in this case, if the boys are convicted even on lack of dna the chances for overturning this case are made even more difficult. I am not being gloomy just practical – i.e. did any of think the case would go on this long --yet here we are. Unbelievable as it is. This brings up the actions of Brodhead, the faculty and law professors. They know immersed as they are in the law that unfair prosecutions and convictions happen all the time. So their silence and statements have only assisted DNA and the mistaken belief that the court of law will be the way to
“Discover the truth” These men know how many times that is not the case. I also think that Cheeks actions in this have been inexcusable. He know that he has confused the election and Monks is no great shakes either. It is really a shame that not one citizen of north carolina nor professor of law at duke did not have the courage to stand up and actively run for this election against Nfong.

At 11:45 AM, October 10, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...


At Columbia, Students Attack Minuteman Founder

By ELIANA JOHNSON - Staff Reporter of the Sun
October 5, 2006



Students stormed the stage at Columbia University's Roone auditorium yesterday, knocking over chairs and tables and attacking Jim Gilchrist, the founder of the Minutemen, a group that patrols the border between America and Mexico.

Mr. Gilchrist and Marvin Stewart, another member of his group, were in the process of giving a speech at the invitation of the Columbia College Republicans. They were escorted off the stage unharmed and exited the auditorium by a back door.

Having wreaked havoc onstage, the students unrolled a banner that read, in both Arabic and English, "No one is ever illegal." As security guards closed the curtains and began escorting people from the auditorium, the students jumped from the stage, pumping their fists, chanting victoriously, "Si se pudo, si se pudo," Spanish for "Yes we could!"

The Minuteman Project, an organization of volunteers founded in 2004 by Mr. Gilchrist, aims to keep illegal immigrants out of America by alerting law enforcement officials when they attempt to cross the border. The group uses fiery language and unorthodox tactics to advance its platform. "Future generations will inherit a tangle of rancorous, unassimilated, squabbling cultures with no common bond to hold them together, and a certain guarantee of the death of this nation as a harmonious ‘melting pot,'" the group's Web site warns.

The pandemonium that ensued as the evening's keynote speaker took the stage was merely the climax of protest that brewed all week. A number of campus groups, including the Chicano caucus, the African-American student organization, and the International Socialist organization, began planning their protests early this week when they heard that the Minutemen would be arriving on campus.

The student protesters, who attended the event clad in white as a sign of dissent, booed and shouted the speakers down throughout. They interrupted Mr. Stewart, who is African-American, when he referred to the Declaration of Independence's self-evident truth that "All men are created equal," calling him a racist, a sellout, and a black white supremacist.

A student's demand that Mr. Stewart speak in Spanish elicited thundering applause and brought the protesters to their feet. The protesters remained standing, turned their backs on Mr. Stewart for the remainder of his remarks, and drowned him out by chanting, "Wrap it up, wrap it up!" Mr. Stewart appeared unfazed by their behavior. He simply smiled and bellowed, "No wonder you don't know what you're talking about."

"These are racist individuals heading a project that terrorizes immigrants on the U.S.-Mexican border," Ryan Fukumori, a Columbia junior who took part in the protest, told The New York Sun. "They have no right to be able to speak here."

The student protesters "rush to vindicate themselves with monikers like ‘liberal' and ‘open-minded,' but their actions, their attempt to condemn the Minutemen without even hearing what they have to say, speak otherwise," the president of the Columbia College Republicans, Chris Kulawik, said. On campus, the Republicans' flyers advertising the event were defaced and torn down.

The College Republicans expressed their concern about the lack of free speech for opposing viewpoints on the Columbia campus in the wake of the evening's events. "We've often feared that there's not freedom of speech at Columbia for more right-wing views — and that was proven tonight," the executive director of the Columbia College Republicans, Lauren Steinberg, said.

The Minutemen's arrival at Columbia drew protesters from around the city as well. An hour before Messrs. Stewart and Mr. Gilchrist took the stage, rowdy protests began outside the auditorium on Broadway, where activists chanted, "Hey, hey, ho, ho, the Minutemen have got to go!"

At 12:29 PM, October 10, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

More from Nifong:

"It's kind of hard for them to say credibly that this is about anything other than the Duke lacrosse case no matter what name you give it. Whether you call it 'Students for an Ethical Durham' or you call it 'People Out to Change the District Attorney's Office Because They Don't Appreciate Duke Students Getting Indicted,' " Nifong said. "You have people from outside Durham who are seeking to influence the district attorney's election here because of their disapproval of a single case, based on a less-than-complete exposition of what went on."

Nifong really doesn't like Duke students---and any "outsiders."

Please, Duke students, register to vote!

At 2:00 PM, October 10, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ruth Sheehan has a new blog posting:

At 5:25 PM, October 10, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Regarding the Nifong comment, that's really fair game for him to say in a campaign. You have to expect him to try to rally his supporters and certainly there are precious few outside of Durham now who would support him. Of course, a good follow up question for that statement would be, "If the perception of the Duke committee is 'less than complete', is there further information your office has that has not yet been turned over in discovery?"

BTW, I had about a dozen Duke students stop by my house for a road trip break over the weekend and I asked them if they were registering to vote in Durham or in their home towns. Of the 1/2 dozen who said anything, three of them said they registered in Durham because they want to vote against Nifong. It was an occasion for the knowledgeable ones in the group to speak in favor of the team and the indicted guys, and they did.

At 6:02 PM, October 10, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I keep having this feeling that we're in the eye of the storm today. Yesterday the trolls went berserk at the TalkLeft Forum boards and today they're fairly quiet. This hoax has all the earmarks of a conspiracy on so many different levels- someone from the DA's office monitoring the blogs and threads so that C. Destine's myspace page disappeared in record time, thoughtful discussions of different inconsitencies in the evidence presented in discovery have been hijacked over and over again by trolls who post twenty-four hours a day (more during work hours, which makes me wonder if they work on the sixth floor), and on and on...

I keep hoping that the 60 Minutes expose will put an end to the conspiracy and send the perpetrators scattering like cockroaches when the lights come on. I don't think I've ever seen such maliciousness as I've seen surrounding this hoax. It does make me wonder what happened to us in this country- or maybe I was just always too naive to know that people like Nifong, Gottlieb, Broadhead, et. al really existed.
Texas Mom

At 6:33 PM, October 10, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think it is important to vote Nifong out for 2 reasons---1)he has clearly not earned the trust of the people of Durham and 2) once he is no longer in a position of power, it will be more likely that people will speak out against him and this hoax will be exposed.
He has bullied people into silence for too long.

At 6:45 PM, October 10, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To Texas Mom (6:02 pm post),
Don't be pessimistic. Things are moving in the right direction. The mainstream media is waking up and those that aren't are being chastised (New York magazine article about the Times' coverage; the incredible reader responses at the News and Observer's Editors' Blog; Joe Neff's excellent series of investigative reports; Allen Breed's national AP article about prosecutorial misconduct). The bloggers such as KC Johnson, liestoppers, The Johnsville News, etc. are forging ahead, asking the right questions. The upcoming "60 Minutes" show. The tide of public opinion is turning, and the hoax is being exposed. Nifong is being outed as an arrogant bully, and Gottlieb as an out-of-control red-neck. The truth will come out. While I hope the Duke 3 and their families do not have to endure a trial, in the end they will prevail. Stay strong!

At 6:47 PM, October 10, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I found the same thing yesterday myself. It seems to be coming from a lot of the hate groups out there and the people who don't want anyone to talk about CGM and her motives.

As well as the motives of the corrupt D.A. Mike the wimp Nifong.

I have a gut feeling that some people from Duke, are going to get hurt no matter how they vote, and it will come from all of those hate groups.

The trouble has come from Nifong and his sharing of the evidence with the NBPP before he even went and got the indictments.

Evidence has been destroyed on the orders of Nifong. Talk left was not the only site to have really nasty things posted on it,and there should be some form of government stepping in to protect the students of Duke.

This case stinks on so many fronts.

On one of the sites I was on it did openly make death threats on Collin and Reade. This is because they will probably return to Duke, and these hate groups will be waiting for them.

I will see if I can find the site and post the address for all to see.

I did print them out so I would have a hard copy just incase I do hear from the Department of Justice.

At 7:23 PM, October 10, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks, all. I've spent way too much time reading the Hoax supporters' vitriol at TL. I just asked the Moderator there to cancel my account. I agree- the tide is turning (none too soon, but patience is not one of my virtues) and I'll let out a big "Hooray" for the boys and for due process. Thanks for bucking me up.
Texas Mom

At 12:57 AM, October 11, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I sent this email to Kurt Andersen at New York Magazine yesterday:

I thought "Rape, Justice, and the 'Times'" was excellent, and I agree with your view on KC Johnson's blog.

The editors at the Raleigh News and Observer, Melanie Sill and Linda Williams, are engaged in what I would call an act of great deceit. They are withholding key information in the Duke rape case, and are refusing to acknowledge it. IMO, this is worse than what Duff Wilson did in the NY Times article. I am providing 3 links which will give you the background.

From KC Johnson's Durham in Wonderland:

Here is the post and commentary at the N&O Editor's blog which touched off this firestorm:

Here is another good post summarizing the problem:

The editors have erected a wall of denial - and we are having an impossible time getting through it so far. Do you have any suggestions, or can you possibly help?

At 2:02 AM, October 11, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Details of Nifong campaign finances from KC Johnson:


Nifong obtained indictments, including one against Reade Seligmann. Days later, Seligmann produced evidence, which the district attorney had violated state ethics guidelines by refusing even to consider, showing he was demonstrably innocent.

Regardless, Nifong edged Black in the primary by just under 900 votes, scoring well among African-American voters. In the following weeks, he secured around $3,000 to begin repaying the $28,989 in campaign loans to himself. His campaign finance report for July through September has been filed but hasn't yet been posted by the Board of Elections.

At 6:55 AM, October 11, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

From The Herald-Sun:

All three defendants also were interviewed for the "60 Minutes" segment, sources told The Herald-Sun. The interviewer is veteran reporter Ed Bradley.

The three -- Collin Finnerty, Reade Seligmann and David Evans -- remain free under $100,000 bonds as they await a trial that is expected to occur next year. Each maintains he is innocent.

Neither they nor their families could be reached Tuesday for possible comment about the CBS show, and their attorneys had no comment.

Defense lawyers apparently will not appear on the television program. Neither will District Attorney Mike Nifong, who has been widely criticized for allegedly rushing to judgment in the case and making inflammatory public statements before he had sufficient evidence

At 7:20 AM, October 11, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

today in the N&O
Advisory body opposes Central Campus plan.

snip - too much commerial development, they say, could further isolate the walled-in campus from the city, giving students few reasons to go to nearby restaurants or stores.

WoW I wonder what gives them that impression. The cops and Nifong maybe?

At 7:41 AM, October 11, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thank You!! for telling me that the Duke Three did 60 minutes.

I had absolutely no intention of watching. Now I have ever reason to. I want to hear from the wrongly accused.

Nifong has dug himself a hole he can't get out of.

At 8:52 AM, October 11, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Worth perusing the names of Nifong contributors, who as KC points are nearly all layers, who is patently corrupt on its face.

And is a testimony to the (tawdry) republic of fear that Nifong and his predecessor created. With Justice for Sale in Durham for a couple of hundred bucks.

There's donor Finesse Couch, mother of the sex-addicated ADA Destine Couch, who Nifong hired just about the time his mommy gave Mikey the case.

There's tje largest contributor who is of course Nifong's mouthpiece John Bordelon. And #2, his wanna mouthpiece JOhn Fitzpatrick.

Both of whom have been carrying Nifong's water in the press for months.

And there's Lacrosse lawyer Bill Thomas who gave Nifong money in January. Before the case.

And finally...Does any know if the "Attorney James Williams" listed as giving Nifong cash in _late April_ is lacrosse lawyer James D Williams?

If so, I would suggest....

(never mind the FODU faithful NEVER, NEVER second guess lawyers)

At 8:52 AM, October 11, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

K.C.'s article about Nifong's personal loan of $30,000 to his campaign is excellent. It adds to his absolute determination to indict before he had evidence that a crime had occurred.
Texas Mom

At 9:19 AM, October 11, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I just posted this comment on KC's blog in response to a discussion of Nifong's attempts to prop up his sagging campaign finances as well as a reference to the infamous "meeting" with the NBPP to "discuss the case":

"First, the excellent investigative reporting done by KC here underscores the lie in Nifong's representations to the media about how he had never wanted to be DA and was not a professional politician. If that were the case, he would have accepted the writing on the wall in Feb/Mar that his campaign was all but kaput and gotten on with his life. I submit that his personal ambition, as well as his personal animus toward Freda Black, made him decide to go forward with the campaign by bankrolling it himself when he clearly couldn't have had that much disposable income to throw in this direction. Having made this commitment, he had to pursue this fiasco to the bitter end to recoup his otherwise certain financial losses.

Second, w/re the alleged meeting with the NBPP to discuss the case, I find it very interesting that he has never confirmed or denied that such a meeting took place. If it did, it would constitute an outrageous case of official misconduct. If it didn't, it would undermine the credibility of this hate group and perhaps throw some cold water on that group's attempts to fan the flames of racist hatred in the community.

The fact that he has allowed the stench of this rumor to linger in the air speaks volumes about how Nifong is perfectly willing to manipulate the story for his own advantage. By leaving it unclear whether such a meeting took place, he doesn't have to disappoint the radical fringe who want to see these three guys destroyed, and yet he doesn't have to be accountable to anyone later on if it turns out that such a meeting never took place. Nifong continues to try to have it both ways and play fast and loose with something he evidently knows nothing about -- the truth."

At 10:06 AM, October 11, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think Finesse Couch is a Duke graduate.

At 10:22 AM, October 11, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

There is a devastating attack on the charges against Reade Seligmann posted on the Talk Left forum. Anybody who has doubts about the innocence of the 3 players ahould read this thoroughly documented summary. Highly recommended!

At 12:19 PM, October 11, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Finesse Hull Couch is listed in Duke's alumni directory. L'84 JD

Her undergraduate degree is from NC State.

At 12:55 PM, October 11, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Thank You!! for telling me that the Duke Three did 60 minutes.

"I had absolutely no intention of watching. Now I have ever reason to. I want to hear from the wrongly accused.

"Nifong has dug himself a hole he can't get out of."

You are welcome. The Duke Three should give the Durham voters any more assurance they need to oust Nifong.

At 1:19 PM, October 11, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I was the person who posted at 7:41a.m.

I just didn't want to hear from all of the little liars in the Durham legal system.

I normally don't watch it so I don't know when it comes on.

Can anyone tell me when it comes on.

At 2:53 PM, October 11, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Latest news from the Duke campus:

Duke administration offered free plane tickets (and to pay all the other expenses) for Duke students who would be willing to travel to another city (selected by the admissions office) during the fall break and talk to HS students to convince them to apply to Duke. My son was asked to go to Milwaukee, he declined. He had better things to do than playing admissions officer.

Yes indeed! That is how “unconcerned” the administration is about this year’s recruitment. This offer is a first in the history of the university. Don't they know qualified HS students have many good choices for college? Why would anyone want to go to Durham after hearing all the “Duke student bashing” going on there? And, the 60 minutes did not even air yet. That’s going to be real turning point. I suspect many early admission applicants will cancel their applications on October 16th. I would, if my kid was applying to Duke. Wouldn't you?

At 3:05 PM, October 11, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Above: Here is another problem for Durham cops to worry about..
Some Durham residents receive hate mail.

it sounds like one of the hate groups Nifong invited to the city of Durham so parents, please worry about the saftey of your childern.

At 3:25 PM, October 11, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I thought this was "Friends of Duke University." It doesn't sound like it. I realize most of you have complaints about the administration's apparent lack of support for the indicted payers. But Duke is a great school and has a lot to offer students. I'm personally getting tired of the Duke bashing, and, although I have tried to help the players in whatever way I can throughout this process, it often makes me less enthusiastic about this site, if not the case in general. Just my opinion. By the way, I have two children there.

At 3:35 PM, October 11, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Especially considering Yankees were included as those who should get out.

At 3:35 PM, October 11, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The 60 minute website has been updated. The site includes pictures of each of the young men being interviewed. The most interesting picture was of Kim. She has had quite the makeover - hair, makeup, and very conservative clothing. It is almost hard to recognize her. I guess it is to make her at least "look" more credible. I just worry that 60 minutes will snip and spin the interviews. As you can tell, I have very little faith in that show. How long is the segment? There is so much information that I worry that whole story still won't be told. I hope to be proven wrong. It is so amazing to me that this case continues that perhaps I have become extremely cautious in putting faith in the MSM.

At 3:37 PM, October 11, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I do independent college counseling and have a 17 year old stepson. I can't say I'd recommend Durham for anyone right now.
Texas Mom

At 3:44 PM, October 11, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Please notice, all Duke alums, parents, etc. that I said "Durham", NOT "Duke". Duke is a wonderful university and I hope that the situation in the CITY changes and Duke students are no longer targets.
Texas Mom

At 4:11 PM, October 11, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

re 3:25 above: We all love Duke just as you do. But, we love the real Duke not this new imposter masquerading as Duke. We don't even recognize this beast! Our fight is against the imposter. After we get the real Duke back (the caring, loving, and respectable Duke), we will rest – but not before.

At 4:39 PM, October 11, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Today's DBR headline:

60 Minutes Lax Piece Confirmed

In the big news of the day, 60 Minutes will definitely do the Duke lacrosse story, apparently this Sunday. They will have interviews with all three defendants and Kim Roberts, aka Kim Roberts Pittman.

Perhaps (we have no idea, we're just speculating) they'll talk to KC Johnson as well.

Johnson, who has done an amazing job following the story, today takes the old advice and follows the money and puts together a circumstantial argument about the funding of Mike Nifong's campaign and decisions Nifong made in the lacrosse case.

And as Johnson and Liestoppers both point out, either Nifong did or didn't interview the alleged victim. But he can't have it both ways.

At 4:48 PM, October 11, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Annonymous 4:39pm:

Looks like the Defense team agrees with you:

At 7:30 PM, October 11, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I need help from readers of this blog. My memory of the day the NBPP came to Durham to parade through the Duke campus was during spring exams. I also remember that Dick Brodhead refused them entry to campus so they held a speech in front of West Campus gate. The next day an article appeared in the N&O written by Barry Saunders. Barry said he witnessed a DPD officer questioning one of the NBPP members who was packing a gun under his shirt. The officer instructed the NBPP member to return the gun to his car. If it had been me, I'd still be in jail! Does anyone have a link to that article? I'd like to find out from DPD why the person wasn't booked for carrying a concealed weapon.

At 8:22 PM, October 11, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

above: please go to foxnews and check out the archives on the Duke case they ran the same story. I don't have the exact link but you can go to or try the wral

I this helps you.

At 8:54 PM, October 11, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nifong lied in court again, latest from the news.
Click on the link to read the 12 page letter sent to Nifong, from the defense council.

At 9:05 PM, October 11, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Check this out, Nifong lied in court again.
Click on the letter link and see how Nifong probably will be called as a witness. The letter is 12 pages long.

At 11:17 PM, October 11, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hello again. So what if Nifong lied in court? He owns the courts, the Police Department and the entire Judicial System in Nifong County, and the Governor's Office, to boot.

The Governor, obviously lied to the people of Durham County in selecting an honorable new DA. He has got to be "wacking himself up the side of his head" for making that very bad appointment. I bet he would like to take that "interception back" if he were ever man enough to play football. Unlikely never over the "ballyard" level.

Don't forget Neasley is running for a higher office. Would you trust him to make another Nifong mistake?

At 10:30 AM, October 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dear FODU readers,

Blogspot/Google (our host) had some technical problems this morning. As a result, our site was down for about an hour. Sorry for the inconvenience.


At 12:47 PM, October 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am a little behind and trying to catch up on news related to the story so hoping someone can answer a question. I just saw an affidavit on wral

about the defense survey that hit the news a couple of weeks back. I have never heard of this second affidavit (know all about the one from Nifong's wife) and have not seen it on any other news source. Can someone fill me in on this affidavit? Thanks.

At 12:57 PM, October 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

This must be the "anonymous" affidavit. It means nothing. That was just a ploy by Nifong to grab attention during the last hearing. It is over, it had a shelf-life of 5 seconds.

Why are you so hooked on it when there are so many more imporant developments? Are you writing from the 6th floor?

At 1:04 PM, October 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

An article in this week's Chronicle by Stephen Miller entitled "Making Duke Perfect: Part I"is a must read. Miller nails his points with absolute clarity and maturity. Can't wait to read Part II.

At 1:09 PM, October 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Why are you so hooked on it when there are so many more imporant developments? Are you writing from the 6th floor?"

Forgive me, but I clearly stated that I'm behind on the news and had never even heard of this affidavit before. I simply asked a question. Refrain from accusations, please, as I'm sure we're on the same side and I honestly just wanted to catch up on what is what.

At 1:11 PM, October 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...


Thu Oct 12 2006 12:34:11 ET

In an interview set to run Sunday night, 60 MINUTES' Ed Bradley talks with the other exotic dancer caught up in the alleged Duke Lacrosse tape:

"In the police statement, [accuser] describes the rape in this way: 'Three guys grabbed Nikki,' 'That's you,' says Bradley, "'Brett, Adam and Matt grabbed me. They separated us at the master bedroom door while we tried to hold on to each other. Bret, Adam and Matt took me into the bathroom.' Were you holding on to each other? Were you pulled apart?"

"Nope," replies Roberts, who says she was hearing this account for the first time.


At 1:14 PM, October 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Above: I agree. There is a link to Miller's article in the Links page of this site.

Everyone, it is time to write or call Steve Monks and ask him to remove himself from the DA race, for the greater good. Do it now, there is not a minute to waste.

Tell him how he does not stand a chance to win. Tell him he could be holding the lives of three innocent people in his hands. If anything bad happened to these kids, how is he going to look into the mirror or live with himself for the rest of his life? This is not the time to play politics, not when three lives hang in the balance. Shame on you Monks! You are showing your true colors. And, anyone who is planning to vote for Steve Monks, shame on you too. This is a clear proof, if you needed one, that you value politics above human lives. Shame on you....

Steve Monks
6 Thackrey Place
Durham 27707

At 1:20 PM, October 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

1:09 above. Sorry, that was me earlier. I am a little nervous today. I apologize, it will not happen again.

I am worried about Nifong apologists trying to inject themselves into conversations. But, clearly I was wrong.

A Duke Friend

At 1:21 PM, October 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Duke Dancers Give Different Accounts
Bradley Also Speaks To Defendants In Rape Case

Duke Rape Case
Duke lacrosse players are charged in high profile case that has caused tension in Durham, N.C.


DA: Duke Lacrosse Attack Was Brief
Says Alleged Rape In Duke Case Took 5-10 Minutes, Not 30 As Stripper First Claimed


DA: Stop Duke Lacrosse Case Polling
Defense Has Been Surveying Durham Residents About Feelings On The Case


No Challenger For Duke Lacrosse DA
County Official Says He Won't Campaign Against Prosecutor Mike Nifong


(CBS) The dancing partner of the woman who accuses three Duke Lacrosse players of raping her refutes a key part of her partner’s account of the alleged crime.

Kim Roberts, who danced at the same party where the alleged rape took place, makes the revelation in an interview with 60 Minutes correspondent Ed Bradley this Sunday, Oct. 15, at 7 p.m. ET/PT.

Roberts' answer to Bradley’s question directly contradicts a crucial statement the accuser gave to police. Bradley asks whether she, Roberts, who goes by the stage name "Nikki" when she performs, was holding onto the accuser at the beginning of the alleged crime.

Says Bradley, "In the police statement, [accuser] describes the rape in this way: 'Three guys grabbed Nikki,' 'That's you,'" says Bradley, "'Brett, Adam and Matt grabbed me. They separated us at the master bedroom door while we tried to hold on to each other. Bret, Adam and Matt took me into the bathroom.' Were you holding on to each other? Were you pulled apart?"

"Nope," replies Roberts, who says she was hearing this account for the first time.

Roberts also denies the accuser's statement to the police that after the alleged rape, Roberts came into the bathroom and helped one of the rapists dress her.

When pressed by Bradley about whether she saw signs of rape from the accuser, such as complaining about pain or a mention of an assault, Roberts says, "She obviously wasn't hurt...because she was fine."

Bradley's report also contains interviews with the three defendants, Collin Finnerty, Reade Selligmann and David Evans, all of whom proclaim their innocence, and others involved in the case.

Produced By Michael Radutzky and Tanya Simon
© MMVI, CBS Worldwide Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Now you're in the public comment zone. What follows is not CBS News stuff; it comes from other people and we don't vouch for it. A reminder: By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.

Post Your Own Comment

At 1:32 PM, October 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

to 1:20 (a Duke Friend)

Thanks for the apology. No worries.

At 1:35 PM, October 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It sounds like someone (a real friend) explained to Kim there is no money or fame to be gained by lying on the case. It might also occur to her that she has more to gain by telling the truth -- not to mention how much easier it will be to defend the truth in the court of law. After all, it is too late for Nifong to take back the favors he bestowed upon her early in the game.

What do you know? Kim may have outmaneuvered Nifong! But, let us see if she is going to go all the way through. I will save my congratulations to her until after she comes all the way through and destroys Nifong’s lies. Remember, she is operating from a much stronger position (truths) against Nifong who has to defend a bunch of “fantastic lies”. Not, so easy to do. I say, “advantage Kim.”

At 2:08 PM, October 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

As some of you will surely have noticed, this site was difficult or impossible to get on to for a period this morning around nine. So were several other sites: John in Carolina, Johnsville News, and CrystalMess. More recently TalkLeft was effectively shut down for half an hour. These appear to be signs of frustration on the part of hoax-supporters as they find virtually all news these days going against them. Be, therefore, of good cheer.

At 2:18 PM, October 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Re: 1:35 post above.

Excellent.Maybe Nifong has been Nifonged!

At 2:30 PM, October 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Photios above: I hate to disappoint you, but the hoax supporters are not that powerful. The Blogspot, where FODU, John in Carolina, LieStoppers and a whole bunch of other blogs are located, crashed this morning. They were out of business for more than an hour. That's what happened to the sites you listed above.

Thank god the hoax supporters are not behind it. That will really get me worried. But, I agree with you fully that it must not have been much fun being a Nifong/Hoax supporter during the last few days. Hopefully, there will be none left by Monday. Who wants to be on the side of "cheap and bad" liars?

At 3:46 PM, October 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The next Duke hearing is, I believe, scheduled for October 27. That's Parents' Weekend at Duke!
Does anyone know if a group of Duke parents plan to attend? I would love to join them...

At 4:07 PM, October 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

3:46 above: Yes, a group of parents are planning to meet during the Parents weekend. Please contact the moderator via email to get the details. We would love to see you among us.

At 7:45 PM, October 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nifong has one last ace in the hole, take it to trial and hope for "jury nullification". Excepting the Bronx, NY, 95% of the criminal defendants in the USA who go to trial are found guilty. In the Bronx, 70% of the criminal defendants are found NOT GUILTY. Overwhelmingly, black jurors there stated they disregard evidence of guilt because they don't want to destroy any more of their young black males by sending them off to prison. The LAX-3 is all about race -vs- race. Nifong is hoping to pick a jury ala Johnnie Cochran that will
ignore the evidence pointing clearly to innocence, just as educated people such as the Group of 88 have ignored exculpatory evidence. He'll try to eliminate objectivity and rationality, and appeal to racial passions.

At 7:59 PM, October 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Above: Yes agreed. This is what we have been afraid of from the beginning. This is why we are trying so hard to get Nifong out of the DA’s office. If there is no Nifong, there is no case. He is the one keeping the case going because of his own self-interest and stupidity. If he had dropped the case a couple of months ago, he would have now sailing through the elections. Who would have bothered to struggle with him? I suspect nobody.

In summary, he did a huge disservice to himself as well as so many others by refusing to drop the hoax. Now, is the time to pay for his mistakes! Yes, that day is fast approaching.

At 8:39 PM, October 12, 2006, Blogger August West said...

There is no chance, nada, nil, goose egg, zippo chance that Nifong could seat a jury of twelve "nullifiers."

But this is a moot point. Dey ain't gonna be no trial.

At 8:48 PM, October 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Even Katie Couric made a reference to "some ugly things happened at that house." At least Ed Bradley said none of that can be attributed to the Duke 3.
Katie's not ready for hard news stories...IMO.

At 9:29 PM, October 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

When did Katie Couric say that? Was it recently, or when the story first broke?

At 9:38 PM, October 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just now. At least Bradley defended the three accused.

At 7:24 AM, October 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm glad "60 Minutes" story seems to be an expose of the Hoax, but I'm sorry I missed Katie Couric and Ed Bradley last night. From the description of Ms. Couric's words and facial expression, she has forgotten what it was like at UVa when she was there. Having partied at UVa and W & L "back in the day", seven or eight years before Ms. Couric and before illegal drugs were commonplace, I know that Ms. Couric's alma mater had parties much wilder than the party at 610. And, underage drinking, strippers and public urination do not constitute a "racially motivated rape." I imagine Ms. Couric has forgotten what college was like, and how much underage drinking went on in the past, and that she has delusions about what college is like today. It has been my experience that much of what is going on in high school today is more serious than what went on in college in the sixties and seventies. I imagine that Ms. Couric has been insulated from the realities of the behavior of young people in college today. She may also suffer from the revisionist history that most parents (including myself) suffer from- the "twenty miles through the snow and studied by candelight" syndrome. We seriously try to forget what we did in high school and college- with good reason!

Also, since Ms. Couric has only female children, she may not understand that little boys pee in the grass, in the pool, in a Tonka truck, wherever- and then they grow up and go to the Bohemian Grove and pee on the trees! It's a fact that surprises and horrifies most firsttime mothers of boys, but we learn to adjust and sometimes pretend we didn't see it. No mother likes that her little boy does it, but it's impossible to change completely. Find me a man who says he's never, ever peed outside and I'll show you a man who isn't telling the truth.

I hope Ms. Couric loses some of her self-righteousness- the news needs someone who has a strong sense of right and wrong but tempered with a huge dose of compassion.

At 7:53 AM, October 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ed Bradley on the news this morning clearly stated that Nifong declared that David, Colin, and Reade were guilty before Nifong had any evidence. He also said that Kim Roberts refutes the accuser's statements of what happened that night.

At 7:57 AM, October 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Brodhead was also interviewed by Bradley.

At 8:23 AM, October 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To those of us who believe that the accuser's allegations of rape are lies, the "60 Minutes" story comes as good news. The other woman present that night disputes key elements of the accuser's story.

But is this the end of the case? Unfortunately, not necessarily.

Under North Carolina law, Mike Nifong can continue his persecution of the Duke 3 based solely on the grand jury indictments and the allegations of the accuser. He can go to trial without any other evidence because he does not need to prove probable cause at this point.

What could stop the case from going to trial?

1) Nifong could be defeated in the November election and he would be out of office as of January. If Cheek "wins", Gov. Easley would be required to appoint a DA to serve the next 2 years. The question is whether Monks, running as a write-on, will split the anti-Nifong vote, and whether the voters of Durham trust Easley, since he's the one who appointed Nifong in the first place. (If I lived in Durham (NOT!), I would still vote Cheek). Nifong's successor would have to decide whether to continue the prosecution.

2) Judge Smith could throw out the ID by the accuser by ruling that the photo-ID sessions were fatally flawed and that any in-court ID would be "poisoned fruit" resulting from the flawed ID sessions. If the ID is thrown out, there's really not much left. Unfortunately, I am not sure Judge Smith is inclined to end the case this way-- at best he might throw out the photo-ID but allow an in-court ID.

3) The accuser decides not to cooperate with Nifong and refuses to testify. While Nifong could technically still continue, he probably would throw in the towel since the accuser's testimony is his main weapon. There is speculation that the accuser has been pressured into cooperating, but this is only rumor. She may get cold feet closer to a trial date when the possibility of perjury becomes more pressing. Early in the case, there were rumors of a "grand settlement" where the accuser would claim she was impaired, recant her allegations, and seek treatment, but the situation has progressed to where such a deal is unlikely.

4) The federal government, state government, or North Carolina bar intervene-- not likely before the criminal charges are resolved so not a way to end the prosecution now.

5) If Nifong is re-elected, he realizes his chances of winning a conviction are next to zero so decides to drop charges. This is what any sane DA would do, but Nifong is a stubborn, arrogant bully. Also, delaying the criminal case delays the civil suits he faces. Even with the "60 Minutes" piece, there is nothing to prevent him from going to trial if the accuser cooperates.

While "60 Minutes" might be the beginning of the end, this case will continue.

At 9:28 AM, October 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

In this morning's Herald-Sun

Durham City Manager Patrick Baker expressing doubt for the first time in my knowledge:

"But, he cautioned, "Keep in mind these men were indicted by a grand jury. ... It wouldn't be the first time an indictment has occurred based on information that is later proven to be false. I think justice needs to be served. I don't want anyone to go through indictments when they're innocent. If the witness or the victim is not telling the truth, that's going to come out."

At 9:39 AM, October 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Judge Smith could also throw out the indictments all together, but don't count on that either. Forcing his his case of he said she said to a wole now level. I believe he is capable of doing such a thing, the man has no morals.

At 10:21 AM, October 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To 8:23 and your 5 outcomes:

I have long predicted your #3, that CGM would decide not to go forward as the case nears trial. She'll say some BS about how this is too stressful for her family and she wants to go on with her life. That is why I've hoped for an early trial date so she would be forced to that point.

With the apparent 60 minutes slam on Nifong coming so close to the election, ABN might win, though. Let's hope.

At 11:09 AM, October 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What Kim has to say will have an impact on the accuser too. Kim is supposed to be a friend, on her side. If Kim is so contradictory to her allegations, can you imagine how it will go with the witnesses who are not her friends. The accuser does not stand a chance – not with these lies. She should be asking her handlers the whereabouts of all the money and glory they promised her. If she has any brains in her had, she should follow in the footsteps of Kim Roberts and turns against Nifong -- the real criminal of this case.

Kim and AV joined together can take very good care of Nifong. And, they might even get their hands on that cash. Two strippers used and abused by a DA, that sells books and movies. Two strippers losing a false rape allegation case in court? That does not sell anything, not for them. So, it is the time for the truth to make an appearance. It is really up to the accuser to decide. Does she want to line herself up with the losers or the winners? It seems, Kim at least, is on the right track. Let's pray AV will come to her senses too. And, if she does not, then we will not have to feel sorry for her. We will be able to say "she had the opportunity and refused it". Remember “you can lead a horse to water but you cannot make him drink.”

At 11:41 AM, October 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I just watched the 60 minutes video entitled "The early show". It is really good.

Bradley seems one hundred percent convinced that these kids are innocent. Kim Roberts seems to suggest the accuser is lying, in no unclear terms. I cannot wait to see the rest of it. My video recorder is ready to go.

At 11:42 AM, October 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Two strippers used and abused by a DA, that sells books and movies.

I've said the same thing; they'll take this line and soon they'll be doing interviews on Oprah and selling their book(s).

And then there are the movie rights...

At 11:42 AM, October 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is all over fox news that Kim Roberts now might not be called by Nifong as a witness to back up CGM. They will care a full story on this at noon today. Now this means Roberts can and should be called by the defense if Nifong does push this any further.

At 11:43 AM, October 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

As Prof Johnson points out the fact that Nifong did not have police interview Roberts is another point of violation of NC's rules of prosecutorial conduct. I'd say now that he's at high risk of civil liability to the boys if they are so inclined to sue, and I never thought so before.

Another flash of speculation: After the 60 minutes story, Nifong might go for the dramatic and withdraw the charges before the election. He could come up with some hokum about not knowing Roberts would undercut CGM and in his laudable zeal for the downtrodden lead him to believe CGM's story.

What a fantastic Christmas (holiday?) present for the boys and their families if it all could be over by then and two of them could re-enroll for the spring semester.

At 12:32 PM, October 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Above Duke09parent: That would be nice if it happened. But, let us not get too optimistic. Nifong is unlikely to drop the charges between 60 minutes and the election. That will be nothing short of a suicide for him. Just imagine, he will be out of a job, highly indebted, and fully disgraced with no opportunity of employment anywhere. I am not saying he should not do it (in fact, he should, this may be one of his better alternative) but the situation being what it is, I do not see him doing it. More likely, he will try to extend the pain for as long as he can.

The only short-term solution to this terrible saga appears to be Nifong’s loss in the November elections. This is why every Durham resident needs to come out and vote "Recall Nifong - Vote Cheek." It is time for Durhamites to speak up, as loud as they can, and be heard all over America. It is time for Durhamites to take their town back from the hands of crooks and criminals.

At 12:52 PM, October 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Saying is:

Large house built of deceit crumbles when first brick falls.

At 1:03 PM, October 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think the movie about this farce should be called, "Durham Place" much like the movie and then TV series, Peyton Place. But, who would be villainous enough to play Nifong?

At 1:10 PM, October 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I propose Al Pacino for Nifong. I love and admire Al Pacino and I hate to even mention his name in the same sentence with Nifong. But, he can do a real good job with this super-villain. Does any one agree with me?

At 1:16 PM, October 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Who should play Nifong in the movie: Philip Seymour Hoffman, without a doubt!

At 1:40 PM, October 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am the Al pacino fan above. Actually, Hoffman is also a very good choice. Not a bad idea.

At 1:55 PM, October 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Today, three protest letters were posted on the new Fodu Discussion Board regarding the homecoming weekend incident. Use the link below to read those letters.

Protest letters sent to DOJ

At 5:11 PM, October 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Georgia Goslee was on Tucker today on MSNBC. She corrected Tucker when he questioned he about her saying the Duke three are guilty. She stated that she didn't say they were guilty, but that they perpertrated the crime. Talk about spin, what is the difference between perpertrating the crime and being guilty?

At 5:17 PM, October 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

They usually rerun Tucker at 6PM on MSNBC for anyone interested. She Goslee, was on at the end of the show. If anyone watches her and would like to ask her a question her e-mail address is:

At 5:18 PM, October 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Can't MSNBC find ANYONE other than Georgia? She's not especially bright and she's so shrill that I can hardly listen to her. She almost makes Nancy Grace look good. She's absolutely wedded to that $2 million fantasy. Wonder what she'd say if the AV said she was never raped and the DA and Gottlieb forced the charges and IDs on her? Would Georgia say that the AV's being "drugged" by the white establishment to recant? Facts and reality do not seem to matter to that woman. Find someone else, MSNBC!!!
Texas Mom

At 5:51 PM, October 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Congratulations to DSED and LAX members for a very successful "get out the vote" gathering yesterday on campus. I am told that 200 additional voter registration forms were gathered at the event. The support that the team is receiving is very gratifying and hopefully gratifying Reade, Collin and Dave.

At 9:35 AM, October 14, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Check out

At 11:14 AM, October 14, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

1:03 I think Alex Baldwin would be great in the Nifong role in Durham Place. He's beefy enough these days and he can play nasty roles well. What do you think?

At 11:39 AM, October 14, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To above post: Lucky "D" at 1:03 here. Baldwin would be good except how would you get his hair to look as terrible as Nifong's. Sorry, Mikey, you need to do something about the "do".

At 1:38 PM, October 14, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To the 9:35am post - Wow, you can't stop a moving train. Can't wait until this site is up and running and find out the particulars on how we can all be involved. Its creator did a great job on the graphics.

At 2:46 PM, October 14, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Interesting exchange on DBR. I thought I might share.

by GoDukies21 - 10/11/06 08:07

Ok, so I am clearly not impressed with the way Nifong has handled the Duke case and would like to see him out of office. Unfortunately, the fact that we have a three-man race (if you include Monks) for DA means the "anyone but Nifong" vote is going to be split. Supporters of Monks say that he is the best choice because he will actually serve if elected. However, Cheek's name will actually be on the ballot.

So who is projected to get more votes--Cheek or Monks? I want to vote for the person that has the best chance of beating Nifong.

by Rudra -10/11/06 13:56

This is a watershed event. Fairness is the issue here. You want guidance, we all do. If the so-called progressives do not get out in front on this, and stand for fairness and justice, that is, for a defeat of Nifong by supporting the other guy ON THE BALLOT, then the democrats in Durham, actually the entire state, take a huge hit, in my opinion. Can't be for civil rights, and be for Nifong. That's the list. The silence from those who should be speaking the loudness is deafening and extremely disheartening.
As for this Republican, of course he wants to split the vote. As I said months ago when I first started posting here, Nifong's the best thing that has happened to the Republican right wing since Jessie gave up his radio career. Voting for the Republican is voting for Nifong; if the Republicans had a shred of decency, even Jessie's boys, they'd tell you the same thing. That they too are silent is disappointing, but they can rightly say that this is not of their making, that, it is the other guys who are at fault. And, you know what, for the first time in my adult life, which has unfortunately been a long, long time, I'd have to say that they have it right!

At 3:26 PM, October 14, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Leftist faculty, well described.

At 6:54 PM, October 14, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

A pretty disgusting article in Durham News.

At 7:04 PM, October 14, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You mat also want to check out this:

How should a newspaper crawl back? October 13, Slate, By Jack Shafer

At 7:16 PM, October 14, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Re the 6:54 post on the Durham News article -- hey, Chuck -- when you say that you'd prefer to get your news from the local reporters, do you mean the lonely Joe Neff and Benjamin Niolet, or are you referring to the gang that either ignored or misrepresented the case for the past 6 months? Perhaps you'd like to get your news from Michelle Williams or some of the other sorry excuses for "journalists" that have poured gasoline on this fire. Wake up, Chuck. If you want news, sometimes you need to leave Durham and LaLaLand behind and see what the real world's take on this mess is.

At 7:31 PM, October 14, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Duff Wilson opens his mouth again.
New Account of Party at Duke NYT, By Duff Wilson

Published: October 14, 2006
No, there is no need to add this to the Links page.

At 8:38 PM, October 14, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To Charles Jeffries at the Durham News - Charles you and the local press have had seven months to get the facts of this story out and you have chosen to bury your heads in the sand and continue business as usual. What are you afraid of? Could it be that the national media might just shine the light of truth on this case not only exposing the incompetance and/or perhaps criminal behavior of the DPD and the prosecutor and thereby asking why the local media chose to ignore same. Hopefully, the ratings of 60 Minutes will be through the roof on this story which would mean that they got the message out. Now go back to your nap.

At 9:46 PM, October 14, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You need to vote for Cheek. I will probably take alot of flak for this, but Easley talks to many members of the community before he makes the decision to appoint someone to office. He is very fair and smart. Nifong took many of us here in Durham by surprise. We knew of his sarcasm and temper, but we thought it would be put to use against real criminals and not innocent people for political gain.
I hoped Nifong would "rise to the occasion" and that the office he was appointed to would temper his ego. Unfortunately, that has not been the case. Vote for Cheek, and we have two years to find a viable candidate if the next appointee disappoints us. How could they on the level that Nifong has? It would be impossible.

At 11:50 PM, October 14, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Has Gov. Easley been fair in failing to denounce Nifong's prosecutorial abuse?


<< Home