Wednesday, May 31, 2006

General topics 6 - Full

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


At 9:23 AM, July 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Re the 10:09 pm post from 7/11:

"I'm glad someone else is thinking of Collin's safety. The trial in DC, fair, wierd, or not, hopefully made a few things clear to Collin and may save us all from a collective heart attack. He's gotten in trouble in the two worst possible places for him to do so and is now notorious enough to be in danger of being recognized should he fail to walk the line."

First, I would think that 3 months of virtual house arrest for being an equal participant in a bar scuffle (take a closer look at that angel Herndon's prior arrest record for being in a drunken brawl outside a bar in Virginia (at age 27 that's a whole lot less becoming that at 18 or 19) and for being the one who first sucker-punched Collin in the back of the head while jumping on his back) should have been more than ample to make things clear to Collin.

Collin (and the judge, who incessantly rode him for things he didn't even do, like skipping curfew when he had permission from the judge's pre-trial services staff to be away and criticizing him wrongly for being at a party in DC based on a blog) didn't need a conviction to make that clear. So much for trying to abide by the rules -- you get screwed anyway. I agree with Greta, Jeannine Pirro and Kevin Brown (name of her other guest?) -- the verdict was "stunning" and the trial was a complete misuse and waste of taxpayer money, given the real problems they have in D.C. and given the fact that the prosecution didn't ask for any jail time. Talk about a show trial. I wonder if the AUSA who chose to prosecute the case (who happens to be an African-American female) was persuaded to revoke the diversion offer (it was her call to revoke the deal, not the judge) because of the circumstances she thought existed in Durham? Or maybe there is some thought of helping out Jeffrey in any potential civil windfall from the Finnertys? I'm disgusted with the whole thing.

Second, what is the collective heart attack we're all being saved from? Do you mean that he was lucky to get probation instead of jail time?

Third, I do agree that he has gotten in trouble in two very bad places -- I've been to Durham once when my son was looking at college -- once was enough, with apologies to all you Dukies. We couldn't wait to get out of town.

Fourth, the irony is that Collin is now so "notorious" as you put it (I wouldn't have chosen that adjective) that he appears to be able to defy the space-time contimuum and be in D.C. for a party when he was not even in the city. So much for being in danger of being recognized for failing to walk the line. Folks seem prepared to put him at the scene of almost anything without the small detail of actually requiring him to be physically present. How can he logically go anywhere without being pilloried for being in a stupid dust-up that sounds like one of his friends started by calling out the other guys and that at least one of them responded to by throwing the first punch?

The biggest irony is that after 6 months, he can apply as a youthful offender to have his conviction expunged and his record sealed. A lot of good that will do him, now that his face is plastered everywhere. The point of all these diversion programs is to give young people (primarily teenagers who screw up in the process of growing up) a second chance to get it right. He took the opportunity to turn things around by agreeing to community service (and NOT pleading guilty, contrary to what that nitwit Lise Wiehl on Fox said) and because he was falsely accused of this travesty in Durham, his second chance was yanked away from him. I find that to be extremely troubling, because in essence you are presumed guilty by virtue of being arrested, even if it turns out to be a malicious prosecution.

This whole mess should be a discouraging eye-opener to everyone about just how political the whole justice system really is, and I'm a lawyer!

At 9:36 AM, July 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The question going forward for Collin is -- if the conviction as a youthful offender can be expunged after the 6 months of probation are up (i.e. 1/11/07), will Nutty Nifong be able to use that expunged conviction against him in a trial next spring. I'd like to think not, but then again, this is Nifong we're talking about.

A similar question exists for Dave Evans -- the report on his conviction said that it would not appear on his record, so will that be used against him or not?

Any North Carolina lawyers want to tackle this one?

At 9:39 AM, July 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Amen to all of the above!

At 9:58 AM, July 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am already discouraged by the justice system. I don't think my opinion could get much lower.

At 10:01 AM, July 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Who will be first to publish a book about this hoax?

At 10:07 AM, July 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The News & Observer this morning has a report about the accuser's cell phone records:

The records show that she had a phone call from 11:36-39 p.m. before she arrived at the house, setting a limit has to how early she got there. This fits with previous evidence and the time-stamped photos.

They also show a 1 minute call at 12:26 a.m., setting a limit as to how late the "assault" could have happened. Of course, RS and KF have alibi evidence that they weren't there at the time.

These call records seem to be consistent with the defense time-line, and preclude Nifong from claiming that the dancers arrived much earlier.

At 10:17 AM, July 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I agree 100% with all of the above. We have all been living in a fog thinking our criminal justice system is fair. Its not -- it’s political and if a prosecutor sets its sights on you then heaven help you! This judge clearly had bias and I hope his lawyers do appeal. His statements were over the top and he seemed to be playing to an audience greater than that was in his courtroom. His constituents from DC & the liberal media. He clearly had an agenda. I also agree about Durham. While Duke may have been a great institution --- while Brodhead is president and Nfong the Da, I WOULD NEVER SEND A CHILD THERE!

At 11:21 AM, July 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Regarding the phone records:

It simply is not credible that the Durham PD did not investigate this call.

If Gottlieb's report (when it finally arrives) does not mention an investigation of this call, then it now becomes likely that either Ben Himan or Mark Gottlieb (or likely both) have engaged in criminal manipulation of the case.

If the above is true, we may see at least one of these 2 guys serve jail time before this is over

And should. From what we now know, they are both bad cops engaged in faking a case for the DA.

Of course, Nifong will walk away scot-free.

At 11:38 AM, July 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is getting pathetic.

Julie Lineham, one of Nifong's campaign workers, attempts to defend the rogue DA and winds up damning him further
Whining about Nifong

She clearly implies in the letter that she doesn't believe that Nifong has a case (and that Nifong should drop the case)

And then her only 2 defenses of the jerk are:

1. Nifong isn't "political".

I agree in part, Nifong isn't an _effective_ politician. But trying to start a race war to earn a few votes in a primary is surely polical in the basest sense.

True, it backfired and Nifong would up with a competitior (or two) in the general election.

2. Nifong never wanted to be a DA.

Ms Linehan if that is so, then then why did he run?

And why did fire his chief competitior for the job?

And why are you, Ms Linehan, helping a serial liar and race-baiter like Nifong with his campaign?

It shows you, Julie Lineham, as nothing but an amoral political opportunist.

No, Nifong is getting exactly what he deserves. Infamy...and a ruined career.

At 11:39 AM, July 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"We have all been living in a fog thinking our criminal justice system is fair. Its not --"

This is the Black Community's point. The justice system is not fair.

Ironically, this is the one issue that everyone could now agree on.

After these boys are cleared, the real work should begin by; 1. throwing Nifong out of office,
2. changing laws that allow false accusations w/o repraisal, and
3. sue the hell out of Durham and send the message to all municipalities that they need to get their "DA Houses" in order.

As a start, IMO


At 1:25 PM, July 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The N&O story this AM on the accuser's phone calls was placed by them in the Sports pages. I hope some lawyer somewhere is keeping track of all this.

Outrageous. Like everything else in this case.

At 3:00 PM, July 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The West edition (I live in Durham) of the N&O had the cell phone story on A1 (where it should be). I guess it was in Sports in the Raleigh edition? Wonder why?

At 3:19 PM, July 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

How are the falsely accused players and their families able to handle the injustices being served them at every turn ?

DA Mike Nifong has destroyed the lives of their sons and now they are trying to keep them out of jail for charges that are only based on the accuser's inconsistent statements (i.e. no physcial evidence corroborating any of her multiple stories).

The Duke administration has abandoned the falsely accused players and their families. I believe President Brodhead's current position is that we need to allow the justice system to take its course now that no other players are under a cloud of suspicion.

In my opinion it is totally unfair (and somewhat revealing) for the falsely accused players and their families to be fighting this battle without the support of the Duke administration.

I graduated from Duke and for the first time in my life I am embarrassed to be a Duke graduate. This embarrassment emanates from how the Duke administration has totally abandoned the falsely accused players despite the fact that the Office of Student Affairs and Dean Sue Wasiolek had the opportunity to come forth with critical information very early-on that would have changed the course of this entire case.

In my opinion (and in the opinion of other lawyers that I have consulted) the falsely accused players and their families have solid grounds for a lawsuit against Duke University based on this fact alone.

Although the Duke administration has failed the falsely accused players and their families I hope that the Duke alumni and friends of Duke University can demonstrate their support of these fellow members of the Duke family. The legal bills must be staggering and there is a link from this blog that describes how donations can me made to help support the pursuit of truth and fairness in this case. Please consider making a contribution.

At 4:04 PM, July 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am a long time NC resident, a Duke graduate and not an attorney. I have served in federal and NC Superior courts as an expert witness. I have attorney friends, doctor friends and business friends. Here is my take on this entire disgusting mess:

1. I'm entirely familiar with "one hand washes the other" and looking after ones brethren as the legal profession likes to do (find out how many disbarred attorneys later regain their law licenses for example). Any attorney who defends the NC legal system “as is” without admitting the numerous inadequacies as revealed by the Duke case whether it be from the police, DA or judges actions is simply out of touch with reality. As taxpayers we feel ripped off.
2. There is only one honorable position for Nifong to take and that is to resign from this case. Any professional would do the right thing and extricate himself from a matter in which his personal actions had undermined the integrity of the proceeding. Thanks to Nifong we now know that some of the least competent attorneys end up on the state payroll.
3. Our poor/black citizens have got it right in that few of them would be able to mount an effective defense in a case stacked against them in a similar fashion. But then their bond would have at least started off lower.
4. Durham is the laughing stock of the country due to the caustic actions of the DA and others. And I think my alma mater has done an abysmally poor job of taking care of its students. I guess you could give Duke a few points for re-admitting McFayden, but actually that says more about his character in that he would actually consider returning.
5. I took a bike trip in Marin County, CA a few weeks ago. I mentioned I was from NC, and the comment back “Duke, huh”. Let’s hope a tobacco road basketball team does well next season so we can at least regain a little pride.
6. Bloggers and the cable news outlets have done a nice job blowing this case apart. Props in particular to The Johnsville News for pulling it all together. We’ll never hear the conventional news outlets admit their reporting may have been biased. Let’s hope most of the evidence we are seeing now makes it into court.

My prediction is this case will either not go to trial or will be returned with a not guilty verdict. Same thing I would have said in March.

At 4:22 PM, July 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Melanie reappeared at the blog today (her "deus ex machina" move) to correct my statement about Sports page placement. But earlier posters mentioned that VERY PLACEMENT. Who knows. Glad to be wrong however.

At 4:29 PM, July 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Duke Lacrosse Rape Suspect Convicted In D.C. Assault Case
Defense Attorney In Rape Case Not Concerned About Conviction

POSTED: 4:09 pm EDT July 11, 2006
UPDATED: 11:05 pm EDT July 11, 2006

WASHINGTON -- One of the three Duke University lacrosse players accused of raping a woman at a team party in March was convicted in an unrelated assault that occurred last year in Georgetown.

Collin Finnerty, 19, of Garden City, N.Y. was convicted of misdemeanor assault and sentenced to six months of probation in connection with an attack on two bar patrons in the early-morning hours of Nov. 5.

The maximum jail term on the misdemeanor conviction was six months in jail. Prosecutors did not ask the judge to impose jail time.

Superior Court Judge John Bayly also ordered Finnerty to undergo drug and alcohol counseling if required by probation officers. He must also stay out of Georgetown during his probation and stay out of any establishment where alcohol is served unless accompanied by his parents.

"Collin Finnerty and his friends were looking for a fight and would not be deterred," prosecutor George Verghese said in closing arguments.

Finnerty also threw fake punches that landed within inches of Bloxsom's face and hurled various vulgar homophobic epithets, Bloxsom said.

Bayly said he believed Finnerty was guilty of "menacing" Bloxsom as part of an assault, even though it was one of his friends who admitted punching Bloxsom at the conclusion of the confrontation, giving him a bloody lip.

Finnerty's two friends admitted criminal responsibility in the case but avoided prosecution under a special program for first-time offenders.

Outside court, Finnerty's attorney, Steven McCool, said he will appeal the conviction.

"Judge Bayly found Collin Finnerty guilty of simple assault because he threw fake punches ... and because he scared one of the complaining witnesses in the case. That's it," McCool said.

He called the sentence "fair and lenient."

Finnerty declined to speak after the trial and declined to address the judge before receiving his sentence.

"My client has been very nervous throughout the proceeding. He's under a great deal of stress" in large part because of the rape charges, McCool told Bayly.

The judge said he found Bloxsom's account of the fight more credible than those offered by Finnerty's friends, who testified that the first blows in the fight were struck against Finnerty by Bloxsom's friend.

Among those who testified for Finnerty was former Duke lacrosse captain William Gerrish, who was with Finnerty that night. Gerrish said on the stand that he saw Finnerty get punched in the head, even though he had previously told police that he never saw Finnerty get hit.

Bayly said he found major inconsistencies in Gerrish's account of the fight.

Prosecutors had initially agreed to drop the assault charges against Finnerty as a first offender. They decided to go to trial after Finnerty was arrested in April in connection with allegations that he, along with two other Duke lacrosse athletes, raped an exotic dancer.

Finnerty's attorney in the rape case, Wade Smith, told WRAL Tuesday that he was not concerned about the conviction and that it probably would not have any impact on the rape case, even if it were brought up in trial.

Previous Stories:
July 11, 2006: Duke

At 4:39 PM, July 12, 2006, Blogger Jess said...

I do not blame, as some do, the Duke Administration for their initial reaction to the lacrosse situation. The media frenzy, largely fueled by Nifong's unprofessional and prejudicial conduct, created a situation in which it would have been impossible for the lacrosse season to continue and probably unsafe for the indicted players to remain at Duke. However at this point, and especially in the face overwhelming evidence that the charges are false, the administration should reconsider its position on the suspension of the indicted students. If Duke has a policy of suspending those charged with a felony, it is a policy that has not been strictly enforced in recent years, and clearly there is administrative discretion allowed. Besides "innocent until proven guilty," basic human decency demands that the university allow these boys to regain at least some sense of normalcy in their lives, unless doing so could endanger the rest of the student body. They should at least be offered the opportunity to continue their studies at Duke in some way next semester. This will be such a difficult year for all three and their families--and I think most parents realize any of our children could have been in a similar situation. While I know many of us are extremely disillusioned with our legal system, I hope our university will find a way to do the right thing.

At 5:10 PM, July 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Re the Julie Lineham article referred to in the 11:38 am post today:

First of all, who is she kidding? If Nifong never wanted to be the DA and was so content to be an assistant, why in the world did he run such a hotly contested race? Let me guess -- the Duke lacrosse players forced him into it. Nobody held a gun to his head. He made the decision to do so. Period. Evidently he is utterly incapable of taking responsibility for any of his own actions and has to have his sister and his campaign workers go to bat for him. This is known as enabling where I come from.

Secondly, what planet is she on that now that Nifong has made this mess he is the only DA capable of properly resolving it? Believe that and I have a bridge in Brooklyn I'd be happy to sell you. That observation is an insult to objective prosecutors and special prosecutors everywhere. Clearly, anyone else who took over the case would have to go back to square one and review all the "evidence" before deciding on the next course of action. The only reason everyone has reached the conclusion that that next step would be to drop the charges is because there is simply "no there there" so the only logical step to take would be to drop the charges.

As another poster said, this is Alice in Wonderland -- the only one who can save us from this mess is the one who created it in the first place.

At 5:30 PM, July 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

A polite answer to an e-mail recieved July 6. If Ms Sill is still to busy to cruise the blogs perhaps she could assign the job to a young reporter.

> Thanks for your note. If you have questions about N&O coverage, please
> email them to me and I'll try to answer. I do not have time to cruise
> Duke lacrosse blogs; also, many of those questions are really for other
> people to answer. Thanks.
> Melanie Sill

At 5:40 PM, July 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To the 4:39 PM poster I respectfully disagree with your statement regarding Duke's initial reaction to the March 13th incident. The Office Of Student Affairs and Dean Sue Wasiolek failed to share the initial Durham Police report information relating to the initial incident with the Duke president for 8 days (this is stated in one of Duke's official reports). It was during that 8 day period that the seeds of deception were being sown in DA Mike Nifong's office and the Durham Police department. If the Duke administration had taken the appropriate actions with the information it possessed in the hands of the Office of Student Affairs (and Dean Sue Wasiolek) this case would have taken a vastly different path. Rather than taking responsibility for her ineptitude Dean Sue Wasiolek knifed Coach Pressler in the back with the Duke administration and Coach Pressler was effectively "forced" to resign. Even Coach K publicly questioned what Coach Pressler did wrong in his first press conference since the March 13th incident. Coach Pressler did not do anything that would have warranted him being "indefinitely suspended" or "forced to resign". Coach Pressler got knifed in the back by Dean Sue Wasiolek (a Duke administrator) who was the same person who sat on the initial Durham police report information for 8 days. Let's not forget about Coach Pressler who is another significant victim (falsely accused by Dean Sue Wasiolek) in this case. Coach Pressler coached Duke Lacrosse for 16 years and the Duke administration totally let him down. This act by the Duke administration happened relatively early-on. Coach Pressler was not "suspended" rather he no longer has a job to support his family and his repuatation has been destroyed. All this at the hands of the Duke administration. I am embarrassed I graduated from Duke.

At 6:37 PM, July 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The college in Fresno treated their students rather differently than did Duke. They made sure they had attorneys, for one thing.

Clearly too much for Duke (which has a law school on the campus) to have done. (sarc/off)

At 9:49 PM, July 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To Joan Foster.

The story WAS on the sports page originally. Here's the link to the original.

At 11:02 PM, July 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What is race-baiting?

I and others have used the term race-baiting to describe Nifong’s behavior leading up to his election.

It is not just a meaningless insult but is a specific pattern of behavior at the root of the Duke case. We have two classic examples published today of the two main categories of race-baiting

1. White liberal race-baiting

Today's example: Nifong’s communications director Julie Linehan in a lame defense of her boss published in today’s Durham-Sun says, “There will always be many who will believe that Duke University supporters bought "justice" in Durham”

Who are these many in a white liberal's mind? They are of course “black people”, amorphous, faceless black people, meant to stand in for an entire race. This black stereotyping is at the core of white liberal race-bating

a. The white liberal claims to speak for black people as a group, because they are too weak and powerless to do so as individuals;

b. The white liberal at base regards all black people, as a group, as fragile beings, prone to superstition and overly emotional, arational opinions whose desire for revenge against their white oppressors needs to be coddled, even encouraged.

--Yeah OK, so saying white people blew up the levees in NO is loony…but you gotta understand…400 years of oppression.--

This type of race-baiting was in full flower in the Duke case and is essentially white liberal racism in service of maintaining permanent black victimhood to flatter liberal prejudices about how the world works.

2. Race-baiting by black politician demagogues.

This is the Jackson/Sharpton routine we all know well.

Today's example: Despite presiding ineffectively for years over a crime-ridden, terribly-run and overtaxed city, Durham Mayor Bill Bell has found time to repeatedly pressure Nifong to pursue the lacrosse case for Bell's own political benefit.

Mayor boxes Nifong in

Bell said today, “many in Durham remained disquieted by the accusations by a black woman”

There is that mysterious many again.

It’s meaning here is slightly different than above. Used by a political demagogue like Bell, many is meant to stand for the abstract “black community” that he is pandering to for votes. It is a nudge-nudge-wink-wink acknowledgment that this is just a game to gain power. False accusation and corrupt public charades of outrage as a grotesque mimic of the glorious civil rights struggles of Bell’s youth.

Of course, Nifong participated in both types of race-baiting in this case.

His public statements (and campaign website) are awash in white liberal pieties about the need to protect poor people (read: Blacks) from themselves.

And his pandering to the black community at the NCCU rally was standard Sharpton stuff (I suspect like Clinton, Nifong has a self-image as an honorary black person).

There is of course some limited power to real black people in exploiting race-baiting to boost their own self-esteem. But it is now (always has been) at a great cost in that they risk being seen by others as weak, vengeful and lacking any talent but victimhood. (The Recent Duke study show that is exactly how most Hispanics regard "black people" as a group)

When you stereotype your race yourself as a ploy to gain personal power (or let liberals do it for you), then you have nobody to blame but yourself for what follows.

Race-baiting is ubiqitous and counter-productive choice that white liberals and black politicians make that benefits nobody but themselves.

It should be condemned, once-and-for-all.

At 7:34 AM, July 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Above: Excellent comment, very well said.

At 9:20 AM, July 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

When DNA is enough :

Fresno rape case

Attorney Jack Revvill says Davis' family hired him and he expects DNA evidence could help his client, "Mr. Davis himself eagerly awaits the results of DNA tests that will clear him of any allegation that he raped or had sexual intercourse with this young runaway girl."

Great. If these guys are shown to be innocent from the DNA tests, then let them go.

But if DNA can prove innocence, then why are the Durham three still charged??
Every second they remain charged after the DNA results came back
is an offense against them and the whole system of justice.
And every person in the NC system who has the power to end this travesty and who has not used it
is a part of that offense.
If Nifong doesn't drop the charges,
then any judge affiliated with the case should do so immediately.
Or an appeal to another judge should be made to do so.
Or the NC AG should intervene (he DOES have the authority under law)
Or the governor should force the AG to intervene (he appointed Nifong in the first place).
It is simply not possible that conclusive proof of innocence which is acceptable and used in the rest of the country is not proof in Durham.
If this charges are not dropped immediately, there should be an organized boycott of N. Carolina to force the state's officials to act.

At 11:57 AM, July 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Exactly - why does DNA exonerate convicted rapists and murderers everyday in this country and yet not these innocent 3?

At 12:18 PM, July 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is from, "Whither the Duke Case" (7/11)suggesting there could be grounds to sue Nifong:
"If all charges are dropped or if the accused are acquitted, can the accused young men sue Nifong for malicious prosecution?

The answer appears to be, 'perhaps.'

In Buckley v. Fitzsimmons (1993), the Supreme Court considered a suit for damages against "prosecutors for fabricating evidence during the preliminary investigation of a highly publicized rape and murder in Illinois and making false statements at a press conference announcing the return of an indictment."

The Supreme Court held that a prosecutor's immunity against being sued was not absolute but qualified. One of qualifications was that "statements to the media… are not entitled to absolute immunity. There…[is] no common law immunity for prosecutor's out-of-court statements to the press, and…such comments have no functional tie to the judicial process just because they are made by a prosecutor. Nor do policy considerations support extending absolute immunity to press statements…"

In an article entitled "Why The Defendants In The Duke Lacrosse Rape Case Can - And Should - Sue Durham's District Attorney For Malicious Prosecution If They Are Acquitted," attorney and legal analyst Jonna Spilbor observes that the accused "must hinge their claim [against Nifong] on his statements at press conferences."

They will have to demonstrate that, during the 70-some interviews Nifong gave before indicting the accused, 'he made knowingly false or misleading statements -- mischaracterizing evidence, or omitting to mention important evidence favoring the defense. Thus, the question for the defense becomes this: What did Nifong know, and when did he know it?'"

It seems there could be ample evidence that Nifong made statements he knew were false, mischaracterized evidence, etc.....

At 6:35 PM, July 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hi: My great Gran-Pa was at Gettysburg in July of 1863. I thought that, when the war was over, we were one United States again where one is innocent until proved guilty. Why did we allow North Carolina to opt out of that?

At 9:15 PM, July 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

In a way, the above comment is funny.
But its also quite sad.
Charlotte and Research Triangle are 2 of the most rapidly growing, educated regions of the country.
However, this case reflects poorly on the judicial system in NC. If the governor and state sentate had any brains/courage, they would make certain that this travesty of a case was resolved quickly, before the rest of the US begins to think of NC as a backwoods, backward state.

At 10:40 PM, July 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Who would want to relocate to NC now? Durham seems filled with gangs, Duke abandons everyone and runs for cover (or even joins the other side--at least Fresno has a much better record than that) the chief of police is seen about as often as Bigfoot, and the city government seems to dabble in more corruption than most.

Want THAT for your new home?

At 11:11 PM, July 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

No, of course not.
I am not setting my foot anywhere in NC, let alone Durham.

At 11:28 PM, July 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Too bad this judge doesn't work Durham

At 12:52 AM, July 14, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I agree. Let's get that judge down to Durham at once.

(There is now, by my count, at least ONE honest judge left in the US. We'll see Monday if there are two.)

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

To 6:35 above, with law professors like Wendy Murphy teaching in law schools and stating on the news she "doesn’t believe in the presumption of innocence" isn't it any wonder that we have lost this major tenet of our system of justice -she was on fox news Reilly last night - I really can't believe anyone listens to her or allows her on her show anymore as she’s shrill and insulting to TV hosts

At 3:44 PM, July 14, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

N&O reports that Chalmers is retiring next year:

The article had me laughing out loud at some of his ridiculous statements, e.g.:

"I've been working real hard to put some things in place," Chalmers said. "We've gone through what I consider to be my final reorganization [of the department]."

Glad he thinks it's now in such fine shape. Who is he kidding?

"In the past year, Chalmers has revamped the top-level administration of the department, including naming a deputy chief, a position that had long been absent."

If he's been unable to speak to the press about this case because of his sick mother, why on earth have we not seen this invisible deputy chief in front of a microphone instead of Nifong? Think of every police investigation you've ever seen on TV -- who is in front of the camera -- the police chief or his/her deputy. Not so in this case.

"The chief later was notably absent at a Durham City Council work session, in which council members asked to be briefed about the case.

Officials instead were briefed on behalf of Chalmers by City Manager Patrick Baker, who said the chief had been in regular contact.

"I was a little surprised with [the chief's] absence, but I felt the city manager did a good job in presenting the police and the city's response," council member Eugene Brown said Thursday."

So instead of briefing his deputy on what to say (or having his deputy brief him) he instead speaks about ongoing police investigations to the City Manager?!

"Chalmers' lack of public commentary on the rape investigation contrasts with his history of addressing the community during other trying incidents.

When four young men were killed inside a South Durham townhouse in November, the chief publicly assured the community that officers were working double-time on the case, though arrests are still to come.

When homicides mounted at the end of 2005, Chalmers was informing the public on his department's efforts to address gang and youth violence.

But the public's safety is not the concern with the Duke case, he said.

"We had no one going around randomly shooting people; we had no homicides," Chalmers said. "We had one group of people who decided they were going to have a party. ... The community has never been concerned about public safety as it relates to [the Duke case.]"

I guess if you have a party in Durham you're on your own when it comes to expecting the police to treat your case fairly, especially if you're a carpetbagger who has the audacity to attend a major university (and major employer/investor) in town.

At 5:20 PM, July 14, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I played fullback for an undefeated Air Force football team in San Antonio in 1961. We had a very wise and very pointed coach.
He would say things like, "You gotta get knocked down and get back up so you know you can." But, Coack K also made a statement that has been burned into my business career for over 40 years. Coach "K" said, "If you fumble, admit it and get back in the game. You will be respected for having done so." I wonder if Nifong has ever played football.

At 5:34 PM, July 14, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have sent the following comments to the News & Observer:

There is a lot of investigative reporting the N&O could do:

1) Why hasn't the DA turned over the required written police report of Sgt. Gottlieb yet? Why the delay in putting the statements of police and witnesses down on paper? What about the meetings between Nifong and police investigators with he alleged victim?
2) How was Nifong able to talk about condoms, choke-holds, and date rape drugs when he already had the statements by the SANE nurse, alleged victim, her driver, Kim contradicting these charges?
3) What is the relationship between Kim's bond reduction and her change in view that a rape could have happened?
4) Why are so many associates of the alleged victim in jail now?
5) Why has Chief Chalmers been uninvolved?
6) What is the size of the bathroom at 610 Buchanan? Could 4 or 5 people actually fit into the bathroom?
7) What has the cost of the investigation been for Durham County-- the extra DNA tests, invetsigators' time, alleged police protection for the alleged victim?
8) Where is the alleged victiom now? Has she been in detox or psychiatric treatment in the last 3 months?
9) What is the position of the Duke law faculty on the case?
10) Would Duke consider a waiver to allow Seligmann and Finnerty to return before a trial? Would the 2 defendants ever consider returning to Duke?
11) What is the relationship between the Durham PD and Nifong at this time?
12) Is there any relationship between ongoing prostitution arrests and stings and the alleged victim? Have the alleged victim or Kim ever cooperated with the Durham PD on past law enforcement investigations? Have individuals associated with the case been past clients of the alleged victim or Kim?
13) What is the past history and current status ot Allure and Bunnyhole Entertainment-- the two escort service involved?

These are just a few of the many questions I have about this case. Please look critically at your coverage-- there is a lot more to be done.

At 6:28 PM, July 14, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Above: Excellent comment! This gives us ideas for raising even more questions. Thank you for sharing your list with us.

At 6:33 AM, July 15, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

As far as ideas for raising even more questions, this discussion board posting seems to point to some major flaws in the investigation:

At 9:37 AM, July 16, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

There are some good posts on the Court TV message boards as noted above. Any posts that could be of long term value should be saved on ones hard drive or elsewhere. The courttv moderators tend to delete entire strings when one or two posters get out of line. They tend to delete the valuable posts indiscriminately.

At 10:35 AM, July 16, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Speaking of the Court TV message board, I just noticed that one of my posts from there was copied word for word here.

While I'm glad that somebody thinks my comment was intelligent enough to copy, it would be nice to get a little credit.

i.e. "Here's a post from another message board:"

At 12:13 PM, July 16, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

From today's New York Times.

As Accusation at Duke Festers, Disbelief Gnaws at Suspect’s Supporters

Morristown, N.J.

PATRICIA CRAPO has been teaching religion and writing college recommendations for a quarter century, but only once did she allow herself to put so much of her heart on the page.

“If I had a son, I would hope he could be like Reade,” Mrs. Crapo wrote three years ago on behalf of a student applying to Duke . “I have been teaching at the high school level for 24 years, and I have never said or written that about another student.”

The letter, written about a student, Reade Seligmann, whom she taught for four years at the Roman Catholic Delbarton School here, still rings completely true to her.

But that letter can sum up the jarring disparity that characterizes Reade Seligmann’s life now. On the one hand is the person his acquaintances know. On the other is his role as one of three white Duke lacrosse players accused of raping a black woman hired to dance at an off-campus party. The case has inspired endless jeremiads on race, gender and class despite growing questions about whether the accusations are true.

On the surface, the most obvious disparity is that records, photographs and eyewitnesses’ accounts from his cellphone, a taxi driver, an A.T.M. and his electronic dorm entry card seem to show that he was either on the phone or far from the party virtually the entire time the attack is to have occurred. (Lawyers for both the other accused players say they have compelling alibis and have passed polygraph tests claiming their innocence.)

But to teachers, coaches and monks at Delbarton, to his neighbors in Essex Fells, N.J., and to his friends at Duke, the disparity between the indictment and these circumstances is not the biggest absurdity. Instead, it’s that he is part of this story at all.

Father Luke Travers, the Benedictine monk who is Delbarton’s headmaster, and Katie Fisher, a recent Duke graduate, have little in common except for making the same point in similar words. When they heard he had been identified as one of the suspects, the whole story began to lose any credibility.

“Before anyone was charged, rumors were flying all over campus, but no one ever guessed for one second she could name Reade,” said Ms. Fisher, referring to the accuser. “And when I heard it was Reade, I knew 100 percent in my heart this was a completely false allegation.”

Full disclosure: I graduated from Duke long ago and have a son there now. And I’m slightly involved in alumni affairs through a board, composed mostly of journalists who are Duke graduates, which meets twice a year to advise the alumni magazine.

But you don’t need ties to Duke to look at details that have emerged about the case — the accuser’s history of past accusations and differing accounts of the crime, a lack of DNA evidence, a police lineup of only Duke lacrosse players, a second dancer’s original statement saying no rape could have occurred — and come away queasy.

Maybe he and the others are the monstrous incarnation of white, male privilege, or maybe this has become a cautionary tale of a rush to judgment before facts were known, of a toxic brew of politics and race in the middle of an election for district attorney.

Reade Seligmann, a barrel-chested high school All-American and top student, was recruited by nearly every top university in the country, including all the Ivies, to play lacrosse or football.

His nickname on the team at Duke was “Frazzle” because he worried so much about getting anything wrong: a dropped pass, any kind of misbehavior. He was viewed as the team’s resident Nervous Nellie. The family joke is that he worries for two weeks if he feels he didn’t give someone a good enough handshake. “He was a person of definite goals, but especially of values,” said Abbot Giles Hayes, the monk who oversees Delbarton. “Sixteen- and 17-year-olds aren’t finished yet, but Reade acted finished. He acted like he was 37 or 47.”

HE was an honor student at Duke and a member of the Atlantic Coast Conference academic honors team. He chose to live in a separate part of his dorm from most of his teammates, not because he disapproved of them (he doesn’t), but because he didn’t want social pressures to impinge on academic ones. He told friends that he attended the infamous party reluctantly and mostly because he thought it would seem rude not to be there.

There’s not enough space for all his character references, but at Duke you could start with Yani Newton, the only black member of the women’s lacrosse team, who had a regular breakfast date with Mr. Seligmann before an 8:30 class, and who knew he was the only white student in his African-American studies class. Asked if he had ever given indications of being racist, she said: “Oh my God, absolutely no, a resounding no. The idea is just laughable.”

Is Reade Seligmann a saint? Not many of us are. Did some kids on that team behave like complete jackasses? Absolutely. And there are certainly cases where good kids do unspeakably stupid things — particularly when alcohol is involved.

But it’s easier to spin the narrative of race, class and privilege when it’s not attached to a real person. So Mrs. Crapo has dug out an old picture she took of her former student in class and put it on her dresser at home to blot out the pictures from mug shots and courtrooms, the sickening images that look to her like a good kid caught in a bad movie he can’t escape.

At 3:00 PM, July 16, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Reading the above, especially the Frazzle part the only conclusion one can reach is that this poor guy (Seligmann) is the victim, the loser of an idiot game of eenie-meanie-miney-mo. I hope some smart lawyer out there is working on a lawsuit that will leave Nifong destitute and penniless.

At 3:05 PM, July 16, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Re three messages above (10:35 am): Thank you for informing us that one of your messages was copied from Court TV to this site without proper reference to you. We are concerned about this and would not like to see it repeated. While it may be okay to copy and paste messages from one board or source to another, it is not okay to do so without giving full credit to the original source and author. Please help us identify where this incident happened (i.e. where is the post that was copied here without giving full reference? We will try to remedy the situation. Also, we will alert our readers that this is against our rules. Thank you for your assistance on this matter. Let us hope that it will not be repeated.


At 3:29 PM, July 16, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dear Moderator,

I keep wondering about several items and don't know if they are helpful, but others on this board may have a way to connect the dots.
If the N & O was the first media outlet to start this conflagration and Samiha Khanna was the reporter, why did she think this particular story was worthy of attention and in the manner in which it was reported. Did someone alert her to the Duke story? If so, who?

Secondly, it appears that Mark Simeon, African American activist and small time lawyer in Durham, began to support Nifong right after Nifong's first media appearance. He has also been reported to have been the connection for the AV's family to NCCU alumnus and personal injury lawyer, Willie Gary. I WONDER what the real initial spark was for Ms. Khanna's report and who said what to whom first?

Texas Mom

At 3:48 PM, July 16, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I just read today's New York Times article about Reade Seligmann (two posts above).

I am very, very shaken and full of tears! How could this happen to a kid like Reade? How could the whole world sit around and watch this injustice take place as if it was a show on TV or a movie in the theater? These kids are not guilty of rape; these kids are victims of lies and victim of political games by the Durham DA. There is nothing further to it. We, all of us, must all act now. We must do everything we can to help, not just Reade, but all three of the falsely accused Duke students. It will be criminal not to do so...

At 6:57 PM, July 16, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

For on-going information and commentary about the case,I recommend the Johnssville News, a blog:

At 7:06 PM, July 16, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

A kinda weasely story in today's N&O has the following interesting tidbit

"(Stuart) Taylor is now writing a book on the case that examines instances of what he sees as prosecutorial misconduct, media bias and academic misconduct on the part of Duke faculty."

I personally hope Mr Taylor rips Peter Wood, Orin Starn and Joseph DiBona to shreds.

Those 3 need to resign and go spread their brand of defamation at a community college in a farm state where they can't do much damage to their students.

At 7:18 PM, July 16, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

They wil need to work on the marketing of the followup film of Stuart Taylor's book.

"Nasty, embittered, aged and
unproductive tenured Marxist faculty gone wild"

is likely to turn a lot of people away from the theaters.

At 7:23 PM, July 16, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

A Ditty to the Duke 88...Attn. Brodhead:

Dear Illustrious Grad and wife
We pray your doing well in life

Once more we ask you... send us cash!
(though we despise the priviledged class)

We covet what your money buys
We want you in those old school ties.

Build us a building!.. better still
Put AlmaMater in your will!

Though we abhor all you've achieved
We sneer."How easy to deceive..."

Send us your athletes, (but between cohorts
We damn the violence of ALL sports)

We know that we are a breed superior
And those rowdy louts are quite inferior

But we'd never ONCE articulate it.
How much your priveleged sons are hated!

We hide our sneers, and sip your wine
Always praying for the time...

When evil may befall your fate
and facing malice, lies and hate

YOU ask support, then turn aghast
When we draw our knives and start to SLASH....!

At 7:27 PM, July 16, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Feel free, if you wish, to send my poem back in LIEU OF CHECK at the next Duke solicitation.

At 12:18 AM, July 17, 2006, Blogger Marco2006 said...

Isn't clear we have a Potbangers Network that includes former DAs & the Press? Despite the overwhelming amount of evidence they refuse to admit this is a travesty! Lisa Weihl even went so far as to suggest that Nifong can withold evidence in discovery by just listing witnesses and not what evidence they have! Where did she get that talking point? They are very desperate! They have even invented the non discovery discovery!

At 12:35 AM, July 17, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Who will play Nifong in the movie which will surely be made from Taylor's book?

At 8:19 AM, July 17, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

DNA clears another one

"It’s been one stop after another for freed inmate Alan Newton, who was released from prison last week after 22 years in jail for a crime he did not commit.

"After a week of parties, picnics and public appearances, Newton, a former bank teller from the Bronx, is adjusting to life on the outside after DNA testing cleared him in the vicious rape and beating of a Bronx woman whose shaky identification sent him away for nearly half his life.


"It didn’t matter that his alibi was tight: Newton had seen a movie with his fiancee and spent the night. Newton was convicted and sentenced to up to 40 years on the charges."

Wonder if we’ll have to wait 22 years to clear the Duke players–wait! They’ve already had their DNA
testing–that means they can be cleared now, right? (sarc/off)

At 9:08 AM, July 17, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Loved the article about Reade -- he sounds like the greatest. He deserves all the positive commentary he can get. Now how about some positive ink about Collin and Dave, like all the charitable efforts Collin and his family was/have been involved in both at home and in the Durham community before he was under the microscope and mis-branded the poster boy for bad behavior. Talk about a crucifixion. Guess that would be an "inconvenient truth" for Brodhead et al. to admit to.

At 10:30 AM, July 17, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Above: Point well taken. We should start finding more about Dave and Collin. Reade Seligmann sounds wonderful. His parents must be very proud of him (despite the current unfortunate circumstance he finds himself in). God help these kids and their families...

At 11:21 AM, July 17, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am glued to TV, listening to MSNBC for news on the Duke Lacrosse case. There was brief update a few minutes ago saying "something important or interesting might happen this afternoon in the court room". I do not know what to make of this. Was this a regular teaser to keep us watching or do they know something that we don't? I do not know, but I found that statement interesting by the reporter.

I hope something important does happen this afternoon. How about dropping the charges against the three Duke students and dismissing the case? If that is too good to hope for, how about dropping the charges against Reade Seligmann? He has ample evidence to prove his innocence. I suppose Nifong would be too worried to drop the charges against him because the rest of his case will fall apart (as it should). So, instead, he will try to keep this travesty alive for as long as he can. What if he identifies another kid to torture/destroy and drops the charges against Reade? That will not get us anywhere.

Let us brace ourselves and hope for some positive developments this afternoon.

At 12:49 PM, July 17, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...



Football players gang-raped girl, 11, police say
Victim was a runaway from a group home

Monday, July 10, 2006)

Sex Crimes
FRESNO, California (AP) -- The rape of an 11-year-old girl may have involved as many as 10 men, most of whom are football players at local community colleges, police said.

Police arrested two men in connection with the rape Saturday night, and officials said they identified eight others as persons of interest in the case. Most or all are students at either Fresno City College or Reedley College, police said.

The victim, a runaway from a group home, went to a Fresno apartment complex Saturday night to visit an acquaintance, said police spokesman Jeff Cardinale.

While she was inside one of the units, she allegedly was sexually assaulted multiple times by several men, he said. (Watch a neighbor describe the suspects -- 1:41)

The girl then fled the apartment and sought help from a couple on the street who called police, Cardinale said.

The victim was taken to University Medical Center for an examination.

Mackey Davis, 20, and Eddie Scott, 19, were arrested on one count each of child molestation with a victim under 14 and oral copulation with a victim under 18. Both were being held Sunday at Fresno County Jail on $100,000 bail.

The rape allegedly took place in housing arranged by the Fresno City College football team. Davis and Scott were students at Reedley and may have been in the process of transferring to Fresno City, Cardinale said.

Calls and e-mails to the Fresno City athletic department were not immediately returned. Calls to Reedley went unanswered.

At 4:27 PM, July 17, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

After watching the proceedings today, it is clear that NC "case management system" has itself created many of the problems in Durham justice.

This "system" permits utter incompetance in investigations to persist among the Durham PD (and allows malicious hacks like Nifong to thrive by exploiting the system's inherent delays and lack of accountability.

The drawn out nature of such case management trials assures that nearly the entire roster of judges will participate in most cases, and therefore none take any accountibility or oversight.

They simply pass motions and work from one to another. To see an unprepared (and frankly lazy) judge like Titus in action explains the whole system.

Pass the buck and let the uncompleted cases multiply until gridlock is reached.

With his snarky comments (today stating that the lawyer's hoped that their clients would be indicted so they could get camera time) and his failure to produce discovery in a timely manner, Nifong plays a broken system of justice for his enjoyment.

Knowing he will never be called on it by the rotating cast of disengaged and ineffective judges.

All posturing and no work getting done.

Yes, at every turn, Nifong has shown himself to be malicious and lacking in integrity but it is the broken system in Durham that supports and rewards his conduct.

At 5:16 PM, July 17, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Reference the above post: These guys need to be in Congress. (not the defendant's attorneys). Nothing gets done their either. What a joke! Shame on your North Fongonia's judicial system.

At 6:03 PM, July 17, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Judge admonishes lacrosse case lawyers July 17, 2006 Newsobserver

Where was the judge when Nifong was doing all the talking?

At 6:36 PM, July 17, 2006, Blogger Alaska 2007 said...

Nifong says he wants the Duke Card information on the other 43 members of the men's lacrosse team to see "where they went afterwards." What in the world would that show to help him in the alledged rape which supposedly took place before that? Some probably went back to their dorms, others to a bar, some bought a pizza, others bought gas for their car,... What does that information have to do with an alleged rape? How much of this procrastination are they going to allow? This case is going nowhere... because there is no case! Let's stop all of the BS, and end this travesty!!!

At 10:43 PM, July 17, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

A verbatim transcription of one of Nifong's comments today (courtesy of CTV boards)

If Cheek doesn't run after reading statements like this, then there really _is_ something wrong with the guy.

Here's what Nifong said:

If the defendants prevail in this particular motion, then the State will certainly have to come to the court and provide a request to the Court for the information with respect to these home addresses and everything so we can subpoena these people as witnesses. I think that we’re entitled to that.

These people were witnesses whether they want to be here or not. And they don’t have you know anything other than the Fifth Amendment right at this point not to incriminate themselves because they’re not charged with any offense.

And I know that it looked sometimes over the course of the last few months as if some of these attorneys were almost disappointed that their clients didn’t get indicted so they could be part of this spectacle here in Durham. But that’s the situation.

We only indict based on our evidence. We can’t indict everybody. But we are entitled to present a case to the citizens of Durham whereby they can determine what occurred in this case.

At 11:52 PM, July 17, 2006, Blogger Marco2006 said...

If Nifong really wanted to find out what happen wouldn't you think he would have looked at exculpatory evidence the Defense tried to present to him?

I totally agreed with the Defense fighting everything. In retrospect it was a mistake to submit to the DNA tests without a hearing, but I understand the players knew they were innocent and wanted to get back to their life.

Who would have thought a DA would try to frame them as I am convinced he knows they are innocent.

At 12:15 AM, July 18, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Did you see little boy Detective Himan today, he looked totally lost and Nifong wouldn't even acknowledge him, Fong was so busy showboating and sighing.

My guess is that both Himan's and Gottlieb's careers in LE are effectively over with this case, as well they should be.

(I am predicting Gottlieb will try to write a book about his career in witness tampering in this case)

At 9:56 AM, July 18, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why the defense will lose this case (unless they change strategy)

Although we are just 3 or 4 preliminary hearings into this case, the Nifong strategy is clear. And it will be devastatingly effective.

First off, any sense that Titus (or any of the Durham judges we have seen) will intercede to stop this farce is misplaced. Titus looks to be another Ito warming to his new-found fame and will become increasingly bizarre in his behavior as time goes on. Highly predictable.

Then there is Hamlet Cheek, who has just apparently ended his career by his egotistical vacillation, and will be of no use.

OTOH, Nifong’s approach is already completely apparent, and will build with each court appearance. He intends to try the 43/44 unindicted Lacrosse players (and their 20 “high-priced” lawyers) as unindicted conspirators

(He managed to dupe Aaron Beard of the AP into exactly trumpeting that line in newspapers across the country yesterday, with the headline “DA: Entire team could be witnesses” –read in Nifongian: Entire team _could_ be guilty, I just didn’t want to charge them to save time.).

It will be the wolves-in-khaki strategy from beginning to end. Nifong will repeatedly point out the hulking suited LAX (including their teammates in the gallery to provide moral support). And imply that no matter what the evidence shows that the 3 indicted and 43 unindicted wolves must be guilty of something.

And the team of defense lawyers will make things even worse.

In the preliminary hearings so far, all of the Lawyers shuffling back and forth and making disjointed, incomplete arguments looked like they were guilty of something themselves.

Nifong will continue to inject his timely sarcastic insults (unimpeded by the trial judge, as he has apparently been for the past 27 years) and the defense lawyers collectively will be unable to effectively respond as a group.

They will end up looking weak and disorganized, as they did when Nifong (not for the first or last time) accused them of a legal Blue Wall of Silence yesterday.

It is time to stop underestimating Nifong. His early public comments and his courtroom asides are intentional and premeditated efforts to blur the facts of the case and instead use a smear campaign as the state’s case.

And that will be a slam dunk for the DA.

With Nifong standing there as the sole defender of the safety of the citizens of Durham against marauding out-of-state jocks, both black and white jurors will respond.

If this case goes to trial, and it will, it is imperative that the defense lawyers attempt to sever the cases and try each individually.

To try and break this dynamic. It will not be easy but if they don’t, Finnerty, Evans and Seligmann may well be convicted.

At 10:35 AM, July 18, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Re the above poster--give Cheek some time. You obviously have never seen him run a campaign. If he has to get his house in order to run, give him the time to do it. This was sprung on him, he didn't seek it. Just because the N&O is saying that people are balking supporting him doesn't make it true. (Can you imagine, the N&O doing something to support the FA/Nifong?)

As a Durham voter, I am anxious to see Mr. Cheek accept this proposition. I do not want that miscreant DA a minute longer than I have to suffer him. But I also want the candidate opposing him to be 100 percent able to slay the dragon. If Mr. Cheek balks, Mr. Monks will run a write in...and if Liefong's insanity continues, I know all the supporters on the Cheek petition I circulated will be able to spell M-o-n-k-s to get the job done.

The sky is not falling yet. Durham may have aspects that approve of this but my crowd sure doesn't. And once Mr. Cheeks signs on, you will be amazed to see the campaign. This guy is the real deal.

At 10:47 AM, July 18, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am posting this article so all realize the extent to what nfong has damaged these boys. There are employment lawyers -see below- who advise their clients (corporations, banks etc) to fire all employees who have been charged with crimes --even those who have have been acquitted of crimes!

On the firing line
Employers handle dilemma of workers charged with a crime.
Tresa Baldas/Staff reporter
July 17, 2006
IN COURT: Sharon Spangler and her attorney, Jennifer Salvatore, contest Spangler's termination.
Image: Frank Weir/ Washtenaw County Legal News

Former DaimlerChrysler Corp. employee Sharon Spangler says she has a pretty good reason for missing a company-mandated medical exam: She was in jail on murder charges.

The company fired her, prompting Spangler to file a lawsuit last month that attorneys say raises a unique challenge for corporate America: How do you treat an employee who has been charged with a crime, but not convicted?

In the Michigan case, Spangler was acquitted of charges that she murdered her husband. The jury found that she acted in self-defense. But she lost her job while on trial and is now suing to get it back.

DaimlerChrysler maintains that she was fired because she missed the mandatory medical exam, not because of the charges.

The Spangler case highlights a growing dilemma for employers whose employees land in jail.

"I think companies are concerned that if they take action against the employee, the employee may bring a claim. And if they don't take action, others who are injured may bring a claim," said employment attorney Jonathan Segal of Wolf, Block, Schorr and Solis-Cohen in Philadelphia. Segal noted that companies are increasingly dealing with employees who miss work because of criminal offenses like drunk driving or assault charges.

"This pattern has arisen more than I thought," said Segal, who recently advised a client to fire an employee who was charged with assault and had access to patients and students.

Such firings are justified, he said, maintaining that companies have a legal right to protect employees and customers from a potentially dangerous worker, as well as their reputation.

"In the criminal justice system, you're innocent until proven guilty. But in the private sector/employment context, that presumption doesn't apply," Segal said.

Debating presumption

But plaintiffs' attorney Jennifer Salvatore, who is representing Spangler in the Michigan case, believes the presumption of innocence should apply to workers.

"The safest thing for an employer to do is to wait until there is a jury verdict. People are wrongfully accused all the time," said Salvatore of Nacht & Associates in Ann Arbor, Mich.

In the Spangler case, Salvatore claims that DaimlerChrysler fired her client to protect its image. Spangler v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., No. 06-073490-CZ (Oakland Co., Mich., Cir. Ct.).

Spangler was charged with murder in November 2002, about two days after she shot and killed her husband in self-defense. DaimlerChrysler fired her about six weeks later. She was acquitted in March 2004. By then, her job had been eliminated as part of a massive downsizing initiative.

Salvatore has filed a gender discrimination claim against DaimlerChrysler under the state's crime victims rights act, which prohibits employers from taking adverse action against a crime victim who has to appear in court.

She argues that Spangler was a victim of domestic abuse who was unfairly punished by DaimlerChrysler, and, claims that several male employees there have been granted extended leaves of absence for substance-abuse problems and other personal matters.

DaimlerChrysler has denied any wrongdoing.

"Ms. Spangler's case was treated in accordance with company policies and procedures," company officials said in a statement. "Like all employees on medical leave for similar claims, Ms. Spangler was required to attend a company arranged medical evaluation. When she failed to report for the exam, she was terminated-the same consequence other employees would have faced in this situation.

"At a time when thousands of auto workers were losing their jobs it would have been unreasonable to expect any company to hold a job open for a year-and-a-half," the company stated.

Employment attorneys note that while, generally, employers of at-will employees can terminate employees for any reason-except for discrimination or jury duty-some states have statutes limiting an employer's ability to consider an employee's arrest or criminal charge.

For example, Wisconsin, California and Hawaii all generally prohibit employers from discriminating against an employee because of an arrest record. New York, however, has a law that specifically allows employers to consider pending criminal charges in making employment decisions.

Labor and employment attorney Warren "Wit" Hall Jr., a partner at Atlanta's Alston & Bird, said employment decisions shouldn't have to be based solely on acquittals.

"Just because there was an acquittal in criminal charges doesn't meant that there wouldn't be a problem for you in the workplace," Hall said. "They could still pose a danger to your company." In recent years, Hall advised a Fortune 100 company to fire an employee who had been acquitted of a violent crime, but had contact with customers.

"Even though [the employee was] acquitted, we felt that they could and should make that decision," Hall said.

He noted that "[p]erhaps the biggest danger in this area of dealing with employees charged with crimes is that you're not going to apply the policies consistently, and you set yourself up for a disparate treatment claim," Hall said.

Karl Lindegren, a labor and employment lawyer at Fisher & Phillips' Irvine, Calif., office, recently advised an auto dealership not to hire an applicant whose criminal background check revealed he was out on bail on five felony charges related to burglary and possession of a loaded weapon.

According to Lindegren, state labor officials argued that the company should have hired him anyway because state law bans asking employees and applicants about current criminal charges.

"My argument to them was, 'Would you want to buy a car from this guy?' " Lindegren said. "Are you going to put this guy to work and put him on test drives? It's a liability. What if the guy does something?' "

Lindegren also had a client who earlier this year fired an employee after seeing him on a Dateline NBC special that revealed alleged child predators. The company fired the employee not because of the alleged crime, Lindegren noted, but because he lied about where he was during the show. He said he was home with tonsillitis, he said.

"The way we got around that was he had lied," Lindegren said, noting California law makes it tough for employers to take action against employees accused of crimes. "Arrest records, you cannot even ask about them."

Lindegren also cited a 2003 court decision in which a federal judge found that a trucking company violated a law when it removed an employee from a driving position because of pending driving under the influence charges. Piutau v. Federal Express Corp., 2003 WL 1936125 (N.D. Calif.). "It makes employers think twice about what do you do about employees who drive for a living," Lindegren said.

At 11:21 AM, July 18, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Re the 9:56 am post: I have to agree with you to the extent that no judge seems prepared or inclined to rein in this unbalanced nut at the helm of the DA's office -- they all either used to work together in the DA's office or have been running things side by side in that courthouse for years, so once again, I attribute their actions to the good ole' boy network in action. Coupled with the ridiculous system of having each pre-trial motion or proceeding come before a different judge, it's easy to see how you achieve the kind of cockeyed and uneven result as took place in Dave Evans's case.

Among the myriad instances of galling prosecutorial misbehavior, I find it particularly telling that at Reade's May "first setting" (a silly, time-wasting procedure that always sounds more to me like Mother's Day seating at a restaurant -- first seating -- than legal preceedings), Nifong was seen on TV laughing at Kirk Osborn's observations that Reade had a solid alibi. This crass and unprofessional courtroom behavior has now been repeated with his childishly malicious and irrational ad hominem attacks on his opponents, the attorneys for the unindicted players, when he says that they wished their clients would be indicted so they could get more publicity. It's time we all recognized what is going on here -- with his prior boasts to the effect that the defendants' lawyers are trying to poison the jury pool because they don't want to try a case against him and his profane screaming tirade on the 6th floor after Joe Cheshire's DNA press conference, it's clear that Nifong is seriously unbalanced and has lost all semblance of reality where this case is concerned.

It's also clear that none of these local yokels is used to having their courtroom antics recorded on TV for the outside world to see just how poorly behaved and unprofessional they are in the conduct of "the people's business."

Nifong has cloaked himself in this case as a way to be the knight on a white horse riding to the defense of mentally unstable complainants everywhere (remember, he started out as a social worker) with the simultaneous benefit of keeping his job in that office (which he would surely have lost, as a previous poster observed, if Freda Black had won the primary and fired him as he had fired her in his very first act as appointed DA). He is a vindictive, unstable and irrational individual, and his abuse of prosecutorial power is staggering.

Moreover, the complicity of the cops on this case is equally staggering, but can be explained by the fact that once they gave him enough one-sided and distorted and doctored "evidence" to conduct his witch hunt, their butts were on the line and they had no choice but to continue to promote the lie or they would risk losing their jobs and being criminally charged for their own misconduct.

You can't make this stuff up. Only problem here is -- it is all too real.

At 11:31 AM, July 18, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What the hell is going on in that courthouse? If North Carolina enacted this admittedly anemic protocol called "the open file system" in an effort to level the playing field somewhat for defense attorneys by requiring the prosecutor to turn over all his evidence by now, how is it that the judge can refuse to set a deadline for turning over discovery? The "deadline" is the second setting, which has now passed. There are no outstanding test results, etc., and it's Nifong's own fault for dragging his feet on the FA's computer and cell phone records and police statements. Furthermore, how laughable is it that he waits until July to argue why he needs the other players' records when he could have tried to obtain them in March in the form of witness statements, etc. What an incompetent moron -- it's just disturbing that the judicial system permits this nonsense to go on unchecked. And then the judge admonishes the defense attorneys while he permits Nifong to insult them on the record with his scurrilous comment about their ulterior motives. These people give real prosecutors, judges and police officers a bad name.

At 2:26 PM, July 18, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here's a new low in shameless attempts to cash in on another human being's misfortune:

In today's N&O -- Trouble with a capitalizing Tee

It profiles 3 disgusting individuals, Tom Rauen of Dubuque, Iowa, Eric Katz of Atlantic Beach, and Kadia Khanan of Forest Hills, N.Y., all of whom have designed offensive t-shirts about the Duke case and have been selling them either online or at public avents. I only reprint their names because I want to emphasize what parasites they are. Their explanations for engaging in this inane and cruel behavior are that they "just wanted to have fun," and that they "saw an opportunity to have fun and ... took it." Sounds like Kim Roberts. While others ask what kind of upbringing these lacrosse players have had that would lead them to hold this party, blah,blah, blah, I would ask what kind of upbringing these three individuals had to lead them to think it is appropriate and "fun" to try to make hay out of another human being's tragedy. They are scum. Perhaps they would like a taste of their own medicine -- let he who is without sin, etc. I'm sure they're not perfect and would not care for their private mistakes and embarrassments or misfortunes to be plastered all over the Internet. I'm just sick of the rank opportunists who see this case as a way to make money, fool around, let off steam or opine about all their personal baggage, etc. These are real people with their lives on the line, for God's sake!

At 2:37 PM, July 18, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Re the coverage in yesterday's H-S of Monday's court proceedings:

"There was nothing secretive, there was nothing underhanded, there was nothing suggestive about the subpoenas," Nifong contended. "This is not a fishing expedition. This is an attempt to put the state into a posture to try a case where there are a lot of witnesses who haven't cooperated with police."

Does Nifong seriously mean to suggest that all the efforts of the various players from Day 1 to clear this mess up constitute failure to cooperate with police? Is that how he would characterize the actions of Dave Evans and his housemates in response to the initial search of their home, where they did everything humanly possible to cooperate, or the actions of all 46 players who came in and provided DNA samples and submitted to photographing at the precinct? I'd hate to see what he thinks cooperation looks like -- maybe taking space on a billboard in town and proclaiming guilt for something you didn't do so the prosecutor can't accuse you of not cooperating. In all my years as a lawyer I've never come across someone as incompetent.

As for the information he's seeking, why not just do what Butch Williams suggested and call the attorneys and ask for the players' home contact info? Going this circuitous and legally dubious route just reinforces for me this guy's cluelessness about how to conduct a legitimate criminal investigation.

BTW -- where is Duke's counsel in all of this? Did they even show up for the hearing, let alone argue the point? Why are these innocent players footing the bill defending the university's position? Maybe Duke could tap into some of those huge donations mentioned in yesterday's paper to pay for the cost of defending against this illegal subpoena.

At 4:54 PM, July 18, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

A poster above mentioned an Ito-style judge who does bizarre things. In the Simpson Trial, Ito ruled that anyone who read newspapers, watched TV news, or went into bookstores, could not serve on the jury. In this trial, the judge may add reading blogs on the case to the above restrictions. The likely result is predictable.

At 5:28 PM, July 18, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I found this article featuring Karla Holloway. Perhaps someone already posted it, since it was dated 6/13/06. It it titled, "Black Professors Under Pressure At Duke; Six Black Faculty Quit"

"Holloway says she decided to stay on the committee after she was convinced that it would have more of a voice with her participation. She says she has seen improvement at Duke. For example, she says her students have shown steady improvement dealing with racial issues."

Interesting that her students showed so much improvement from the date of the Group of 88 ad and 6/13/06.

The article points out that Duke has hired 10 Black professors, half of whom signed on after March. Two of the ones who left, of course, are Baker and his wife.

At 5:40 PM, July 18, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nice to see that justice continues to be dispensed in an even-handed fashion in Durham: In today's N&O: Murder suspect out on bond

Keanan James Odom, 20, was charged this past April with murder and was given $80,000 bond. While out on bail, he was subsequently arrested and charged on July 4 for resisting a public officer and was released on $700 bond the same day. He is now, according to the article, "free on $30,000 bond, charged with second-degree kidnapping, assault on a female, assault by strangulation and communicating threats in connection with a July 8 incident on Crest Street. He surrendered to police Monday, said Kammie Michael, spokeswoman for the Durham Police Department." With that repeat arrest record and litany of charges, Odom's bond (which he has been repeatedly extended despite his continuing alleged crimes) now comes to $110,700, which is barely more than the adjusted bond the Duke players were eventually given after an initial bond of $400,000.

At 1:23 AM, July 19, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Good followup by the Durham-Sun

Nifong's parting shot before going on well-deserved vacation

Whaddya wanna bet he keeps CGM in lockdown while he's away getting his hair done.

At 6:04 AM, July 19, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Re: The last posting -"Nifong's Parting shot, Etc."

Surely, there must be some professional organization or some governmental entity that can stop this out-of-control DA. Nifong reminds me of the kid in 6th grade who got to play touch football in the street with the high school kids just because they needed one more player to make the teams even. But, then the kid shows off so much, he ruins the game. Nifong has destroyed the legal system in Durham and what are the politicians and the legal community doing about it?

At 10:22 AM, July 19, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Seriously an employment lawyer (above post) who advises his client to fire acquitted people and brags about it? what craziness! I think we can all learn from duke that anyone can be accused of anything today by any nut mental patient. What about people who are proved innocent by DNA ? They should never be hired to work according to Hall? Would attorney Hall of Alston & Bird advise any potential employer of Reade Seligmann that he should be fired or not even hired even when he is acquitted...... Is anyone as outraged as me by this??

At 10:45 AM, July 19, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Above: Yes I am as outraged as you. But I am not as pessimistic as that! Once this mess clears up, I suspect there will many companies/employers who would be willing to hire a person like Reade Seligmann (or, Colin and Dave). These kids just need to get over this immediate obstacle. If they do, the rest should be fine. I bet these three young people are now a lot wiser than their much older counterparts because of what they gone through over the last three months. If I were an employer, I would hire all three in a heart beat, so long as the criminal case is resolved.

At 1:30 PM, July 19, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Re the 10:22 am post: having just read the Herald-Sun article about the defense attorneys' reaction to Nifong's parting shot, I initially read your comment -- "I think we can all learn from Duke that anyone can be accused of anything today by any nut mental patient." -- to refer to Nifong instead of the FA. What does that say!

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

I am outraged too! Thank God that these 3 have this board and the support of some media so Nfong can be exposed so that they can probably get good jobs. But this whole case has really opened my eyes to how many other innocent people in this country without this support or finances must be improperly convicted of big offenses and even small offenses that can ruin their records in this country every day by some power hungry or ambitious da. And with employment lawyers such as Hall advising employers not to ever employ them this truly becomes tragic. Even Collins case has shown us how facts can be misinterpreted even in a big city like Washington DC. While I agree that these 3 fine boys will probably get jobs and lead excellent lives I do fear for those convicted of crimes that they did not commit who are forever punished because their cases don't receive this publicity. PS I was never a bleeding heart liberal etc. I think if someone commits a crime they should pay the consequences but all of this has shown me how vulnerable the criminal jsutice system is to crooked das and power hungry judges.... how many people really don't commit crimes and have probation, fines jail and have their records forever ruined and then have employment lawyers advising clients not to hire them? I think durham has become a national disgrace and shame on all in Congress, DOJ etc. who refuse to look into this. But how many other cities and da offices share in this disgrace?

At 2:41 PM, July 19, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here is an article published in the Duke Chronicle today. The title sounds a bit like the now infamous Rolling Stone article: "Sex and Scandal at Duke". I hope some of you will react to this article, especially those following the N&O's early coverage of the case. I cannot help myself but ask "is Duke its own worst enemy?"

Sex, Race, Privilege Place ‘Duke Lacrosse’ in National Headlines

At 3:24 PM, July 19, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here is a very good article from today's Chronicle. It is a real eye opener.
Living a Nightmare: Lax Players Speak Out July 19, 2006 Duke Chronicle

At 4:33 PM, July 19, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Don't forget to check the Editor's Blog at the N&O. There are usually new posts there every day. You might say the readers are delivering broadsides at the editor, Melanie Sill.

At 5:02 PM, July 19, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dean Sue Wasiolek is a university administrator. She is therefore either:

(1) A white hating minority affirmative action hire racist who took the opportunity to destroy 43 white males solely because they are white males

(2) A white hating white female marxist radical who took the opportunity to destroy 43 white males because the marxist radicals who inflitrated and now rule Duke University know that it is only white males who stand in the way of the marxist radicals take over of the entire country.

What she did came from the political/ideological agenda of Duke and every other University and college. Destroy white American and western civilization.

If the whites who fund the colleges and universities would bother to investigate exactly what the universities teach about whites they would stop the funding immediately. Ward Churchill is not unusual. He is a run of the mill standard white hating university professor, just as the Duke professors and administrators are standard white hating racists.

Never, ever give another dime to Duke.

At 7:41 PM, July 19, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I disagree with the broad generalizations of the above post, but agree that this case has revealed that most of the liberal arts faculty at Duke are unproductive, malicious poseurs.

However, University administrators are (in general) cowardly and condescending people who have "failed upwards" not Marxists. Most of the behavior of Wasiolek and particularly the excreable John Burness can be explained in this context.

Both of course should be fired.

The 88 professors' behavior in this case is of course far worse, motivated almost entirely by their hatred and/or jealousy of their own students (e.g. upper crust rich brats like Anne Alison and Peter Wood who have never grown up and are still playing at being marxists)

or by the tenured tyrant syndrome (e.g. Orin Starn and Karla Holloway) who feel entitled to judge everyone but themselves.

The tenured tyrants are often, in my experience, the most deeply flawed, lazy and unethical folks in the bunch.

At 8:56 PM, July 19, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Two messages above: We need to watch our language on such delicate matters. We do not want to send the wrong message here. That will not do any good. As senior Kennedy said some years ago, “it is not who you are that counts, it is who they think you are”. In my opinion, the same messages could have been delivered using much less inflammatory language. Just a suggestion! Your basic point is right on, just a language thing.

At 9:26 PM, July 19, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Congrats to FODU for the strong positive publicity regarding your open letter today.

Duke University's soul is in more jeopardy than its administrators currently acknowledge.

As a start, most would agree that Group of 88 vigilante profs should have _no_ role going forward in the campus community.

By their reckless and malicious behavior, they have ceded any moral highground and cannot be taken seriously as leaders in any ethical discussion of race, class or any other topic for that matter.

If you read this abysmally written blog entry linked by KC Johnson today, Is Professor Wahneema Lubiano writing in English?

you would have to conclude that the Duke 88 are only qualified to lecture on mumbo-jumbo in po-mo speak.

(Back to high-school composition class for you, Prof. Lubiano)

The FODU letter is indeed a teachable moment for Duke.

Based on their conduct in this case, much of the faculty in liberal arts and the Duke administration needs to be rebuilt from scratch.

They are pathetic, and will have lost the respect of Duke's students.

At 10:16 PM, July 19, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Two comments.
1) The open letter To Dr. Brodhead is to be commended. Well-written, balanced, concise, and honest.
2) The blog by Dr. Lubiano? Yikes. What a bunch of double-talking new-age speak nonsense. The search committee needs to be doing a better job.

At 10:34 AM, July 20, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Whew! Prof. Lubiano is one of the worst writers I've ever come across, especially at her level of education and experience, and I say that as someone trained both as a lawyer and teacher. Frankly, I'm appalled at her resume -- how could that many institutions of higher learning have hired her without asking for a writing sample? The piece suffers from tortured syntax, thesaurus-speak and an obvious struggle with the concepts of Philosophy 101. I would give this paper a D, and I would give Duke a D as well for hiring her. In a nutshell, her point seems to be that we need not reduce the accuser and the accused in this case to stereotypes in order to confront the terrible injustices that are, in her view, present in the "culture" and need addressing. In other words, this is simply another person with an agenda who wishes to use this simple case of a false criminal allegation to advance that agenda. Period. Why she had to use 2,000 words to torture her readers and cloak her prejudices about the case escapes me.

At 10:57 AM, July 20, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Lubiano post is actually pretty typical academic speak. It has a couple of ideas wrapped with amazing and obfuscating verbiage meant to make them sound really smart. Academics make up new words out of old ones and then try to explain what the new words mean, like her use in this case of "spectactularity" and "victimage".

What she's actually saying is not bad really. Often, those who choose sides in a situation like this demonize (oops, there I go, but this word is in popular parlance, isn't it?) the protagonists of the other side without recognizing their complexities or shades of gray. And in looking at evidence in any case, everything doesn't have to fit together perfectly to demonstrate a particular event or crime took place. Lubiano sails past the idea that when many items of credible hard evidence (time stamped photos, telephone logs, ATM receipts, dorm card swipe logs) contradict the softer evidence of victim or witness allegations, fair minded people can make valid judgments as to what took place, free of their own biases--sexist, racist or otherwise.

Her final point is easily recognized and hardly arguable: That Duke doesn't have to be thought of as a a completely wonderful place or a compeletly awful place to hope and expect that positive social changes can take place there.

I wonder if one of the changes Lubiano or Holloway would want to take place is that so many people on campus, particularly highly educated adults such as the Group of 88, would stop assuming white atheletes are arrogant, callous, hostile, sexist and racist hooligans, simply because of their color, body type and social background. Can we move toward the dream where a man (or woman) will be judged by the content of his character instead of the color of his skin?

At 11:19 AM, July 20, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To the above poster:

You are being far too kind to Prof Lubiano. Her post and her reasoning are utter garbage (I even detect a whiff of PC limousine liberal condescension towards her in your tone)

Remember underneath the tortured syntax, she is actually writing an apologia for her despicable actions in signing the "We're listening" letter.

It is always best when apologizing to do so in straightforward language.

I myself wrote in po-mo speak for a number of years (before entering a recovery program) and there is an art and a style to such writing that is completely lacking in her post.

(This tortured form of academic speak got its start by American wannabes emulating the translations of the labyrinthine analytic style of the French structuralists. But those guys weren't even writing in English to begin with)

Based on the evidence of this one blog posting (and affirmative action aside) Lubiano would be hard pressed to find a job at community college. She certainly doesn't belong at Duke.

Or, sadly, maybe she does.

At 11:57 AM, July 20, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

There are good discussions going on over at the Courttv board regarding the Chronicle article about the Lax Players. Some of you may be interested in the comments being made there. Here is the link:

New comments from other Duke LAX players

At 12:07 PM, July 20, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Another good article over at The Johnsville News. This is on both the Lax story that appeared in the Chronicle and the Open Letter to Duke. I do not want to sound mean, but I love the ending of this article. What a beauty?

Duke Case: Truth is putting on its shoes
July 19, 2006 The Johnsville News

At 12:29 PM, July 20, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To the 11:19 am poster:

I accept your criticism of being too kind and yield to your superior knowledge of the writing style. It's been quite a few years since I read much of that style, back at a Connecticut institution with school colors similar to Duke's. I have this nagging recollection of Houston Baker having been an English instructor there when I was, which I have not been able to confirm with dates.

I did chuckle at the limo-liberal tone comment, though. I don't think my midwestern middle class roots have been completely obliterated by education. Besides, if I owned a limousine I would have had to sell it to pay my son's tuition, room and board.

I hope Lubiano IS apologetic for the "Social Disaster" flyer. She is on the campus culture committee along with Holloway and Wood.

At 12:42 PM, July 20, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I would be in favor of the administration appointing one more committee.

A student-run committee to evaluate faculty ethics and competence in the liberal arts.

Instead of a mandatory DNA test, each faculty would be required to submit a writing sample.

At 12:51 PM, July 20, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Re above: I approve your suggested committee. Not a bad idea.

At 2:36 PM, July 20, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here is an "interesting" article from the Chronicle (Sports section).

Duke examines impact of lacrosse incident July 19, 2006

At 5:19 PM, July 20, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

One of Nifong's district attorneys has a page on myspace?

C. Destine Couch myspace page.

C. Destine Couch District Attorney (he is in the back row).

Another link:

At 5:29 PM, July 20, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Duke Administration said it would respond to the FODU letter--where is that response, which was to come yesterday?

At 11:35 PM, July 20, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Brodhead and the university must be afraid of a lawsuit and so are keeping quiet.

But there is something else going on here. Forget the law suits and the caution. Three innocent young men now stand in extreme peril. If Brodhead realizes that, and the part he played in bringing it to pass, then is it too much to expect him as a human being to now do everything in his power to reverse that?

A statement from him denouncing the entire incident as a hoax, of which he himself now regrets that he was a victim, would do much.

He can offer to resign. He can write his own open letter to the students and faculty,and to the people of Durham. He can go out to NCCU and make another speech,
this time about justice. He can single-handly focus attention on Nifong's actions in a public way that few others can.

That is what his moral obligations are. Why settle for anything less? He may be jobless at the end, but if he did that, he might deserve to continue on as university president. Remaining silent while the lynching is going on will haunt him for the rest of his life, if he doesn't act.

At 7:51 AM, July 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

There has to be someone in the Durham PD with more interest in Justice than keeping a job.
There has to be someone in the Durham DA Office with more interest in Justice than keeping a job.
There has to be some reporter or news organizatrion in Raleigh/Durham who can get someone to blow this thing wide open.
I have followed this case from the beginning and every day that passes brings more pain. There has to be a judge in Durham who can see that the 3 accused are treated fairly. I can only hope that a fair and ethical person connected with this case comes forward. The cover-up will continue only as long as it is allowed to continue.

At 8:23 AM, July 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

This from DBR, Rudra said on July 21, 2006:
Justice is non-negotiable

“There was an alleged crime purportedly involving university students. If there is something other than justice that the university should have concerned itself with, pray tell. Once the demonstrators and Nifong had inflamed this incident into something that it clearly isn't, a crime for starters, evidence of racism or privilege, for seconds, seems to me that there was nothing more important to address than not inflaming matters worse, diffusing the thunder if possible. But, that is only if you think that the university owed that to 46 members of its student body, 3 of whom face a nightmare that for all the evidence shows was oh so completely not of their making.

As, for classy, the things that I have read that students and faculty have done to these 46 students are passing classless. They offend every sensibility I have. Sorry, class left the scene a long, long time ago. The only ones behaving with class in this entire tragedy farce are the 46 students who also play lacrosse, and those who have treated them with decency. For the rest, classy is the last thing that comes to my mind.”

At 8:34 AM, July 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...
Several of us have had fun with this link, but it does deserve serious attention.

This ADA graduated with AV at Hillside.

Upon examining his page at myspace, one has no problem believing he knows the local clubs (Teasers Platinum)

Does he know AV or Kim?

Further, look at that picture of his lower body wrapped in a towel...look at the shadow.

Think about it.

He uses his REAL name and posts that picture.

He represents Durhams's DA. Very poor judgement and he would have no credibility in court as far as I am concerned.

At 9:02 AM, July 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The ADA has set his preferences to private- guess the DAs office checks the FODU site daily. Interesting.
Texas Mom

At 9:40 AM, July 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Re Above: That is a scary notion, the DA's office lurking on our site! Now that Nifong is on vacation, do you suppose he is wondering about and studying the blogs? I would not put it past him.

At 9:44 AM, July 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Texas Mom, I was just checking to see if anyone had posted the "private" news.

Lord God, I would have loved to have been a fly on that wall.

This particular ADA's Mom is a Duke Law grad. She sued Duke Medical for negligence in the death of another son.

She sued for 30 million.
Got 2.5 million.
Considering her lawyer was Willie Gary (remember him?), not a big settlement.
Parts of the verdict were later overturned, not sure if she collected anything.

At 9:58 AM, July 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Above: This is getting more and more interesting. So, these people have prior experience in extracting money from Duke University. Why stop now, obviously they want some more. But, why on earth bring the three young men into it? Couldn’t they come up with another scheme to extract some more money from Duke?

Durham sounds like a lovely place to live...

At 9:59 AM, July 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Danowski got the head coach job in Duke. Let up hope for the best. My heart goes out to Pressler. He did not deserve what he got. Let that be a lesson to us all.

At 10:04 AM, July 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Cache of ADA C. Destine Couch's webpage.

At 10:33 AM, July 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ha- she cancelled !
Invalid Friend ID.
This user has either cancelled their membership, or their account has been deleted.

At 10:34 AM, July 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Home: I looked at this website and I want to puke. Is he really working in Nifong's office? I wonder if the others working there have similar tastes and hobbies. What is wrong with these people? So, does this guy chat with Nifong every day, as if he was a normal person? Can someone is Durham find out what type of a job this guy has in Nifong's office? What are his duties? How does he do them? What other extacurricular activities does he engage in?

At 10:47 AM, July 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think we are getting a glimpse at the catastrophe that is Nifong's office.

Instead of lawyering, you got an ADA (Destine Couch) spending all of his time bodybuilding, professional wrestling, modeling and visiting strip clubs.

Doesn't leave much time to do any work or investigation.

I wonder how many other no-show ADAs Nifong has on staff

At 11:01 AM, July 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What do they ADA and the accuser have in commom?

The assistant DA graduated with the accuser from high school.

He is a "model." and she is a "dancer."

Strip clubs apparently.

Willie Gary scored for Mom against Duke..... Willie Gary is "advising the accuser."

On another note , let's review those statistics that show no Durham Prostitution arrests in past two years ..till a few weeks ago.

The FBI needs to get down to Durham and get involved.

At 11:02 AM, July 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

And now spending time cancelling accounts

His myspace account has been cached. It's out there. And so is the infamous towel picture.

Can anyone say H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-T-E

At 11:38 AM, July 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Above: To think that these are the characters who are trying to lynch the three inncocent boys only on the account of under-age drinking (there is no other crime!!!!). When did the world come to this?

At 12:47 PM, July 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Judge Titus ruled that Nifong could have the address info but not the key card info. I think that is better for the LAX guys. After all, the address info is available thru a white pages search.

On another note, I did think the my space profile of the ADA was funny and sexually suggestive. Obviously, someone associated with Nifong is monitoring this site. Even paranoid people have enemies.

At 12:49 PM, July 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Two new articles:

Nifong Does Reek; So Vote Lewis Cheek July 20, by Michael Gaynor

Blasting the Nifong Bunker with Ballots
July 21, The Johnsville News

At 12:54 PM, July 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Two above: I agree, if I had to choose between the two, I would give the addresses and not the card information. Now, does Duke have to give the addresses or can they reject the request?

At 12:59 PM, July 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

More chatter on the C. Destine myspace webpage here -

At 2:17 PM, July 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am an old man. But, I hope I live long enough to see the movie "Durham". It will be funnier than a Three Stoogies Movie, more unbelievable than a 1950's Outer Space Movie, but sadder than "Titanic" all in one. The FBI needs to be involved (I repeat a prior message). This has gone too far.

At 2:54 PM, July 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

As an undergraduate, and now as a college professor, I am aware of the "Peter Principle" which states that "Ultimately, everyone will be promoted to his (or her added by me)own level of incompetency". How true it is.

At 3:50 PM, July 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

If politics is the basis of the charges against the Duke 3, then politics is the way to end this disgraceful case.

Lewis Cheek will announce next week whether he will actively campaign against Nifong (he is already on the ballot).

I hope anyone connected with this site who knows Mr. Cheek will encourage him to run so the people of Durham County have a real choice in November.

At 4:12 PM, July 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I HOPE that someone is making hard copy of some of the things that are being discovered on the Internet. I just read the editor's blog at N&O and the reference to C'Destine's friend, Jay. A few posts later, Jay's info is, apparently, gone. Speaking of "discovery". Print it when you find it, folks, Nifong's office is racing to erase whatever they can.

At 4:36 PM, July 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I HOPE that someone is making hard copy of some of the things that are being discovered on the Internet

This what you looking for?

At 5:50 PM, July 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...


At 7:05 PM, July 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Fatty and Duke"

An interesting article in the Weekly Standard's website.

At 10:49 PM, July 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Clearly Destine Couch now needs to be fired (there is _no_ way an ADA command the needed respect when the internet is literally littered with pics and references to his exploits, as below

Nifong's towel boy

It is also inconceivable that he is not deeply connected to the strip club scene in Durham.

But I suspect (as we have long read) that the rest of the new ADAs in Nifong's office are similarly unqualified and distracted with extracurricular activities.

We have already have documented cases where ADAs in his office dropping the wrong cases and failing to clear cases in a timely manner.

More will emerge every day.

Clearly, Nifong's failings did not begin with the LAX case but has affected every aspect of his office since taking over last year.

At 11:09 PM, July 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

BTW, does anyone know if Destine Couch was a patronage hire.

He seems to have flunked out of his own mom's law firm.

Did she contribute to Nifong's election campaign in return for a no-show job for her son so he could spend all his time modeling underwear?

At 11:59 PM, July 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Interesting speculation by flojo on the no arrest string at Court TV May be a coincidence but who knows. Daghda did claim inside information??

Where is Dagdha??????? Kinda a funny since our male/model/D.A. has been "outed", Daghda )the AV's selp promoted Godfather) is missing in action??
Is anyone thinking what I am????

Does one need to take steroids to acquire a body like Destine or is weight training sufficient?

At 2:11 AM, July 22, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Don't know if Destine is into steroids but internet porn...

He may just be a huge porndog, which is pretty ironic.

As cappadonna21 and many other nics, Nifong's ADA is all over the sex sites.

I'm not sure flojo is right.

Dagdha was/is actually funny so I doubt you can pin that rap on Mr Destine "Codpiece" Couch who seems rather stuck on himself.

At 6:29 AM, July 22, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Posted at the N&O blog:

Yes, Truth is putting on its shoes these days. We watched a lie go half way around the world, but we have our marching orders now.

The blogs are abuzz with good people who will question and delve and do the discovery we wish this newspaper would do. We see the travesty of the Duke lacrosse case and we are up and running.

Running to look at every detail about the lives and times of the fascinating main characters in this farce. Reading old, old cases, parsing curious statistics, seeing how all the players , um-m-m, inter-relate. Every night on the internet, lawyers and sane nurses, statisticians, and students are diggng and posting what they find. Each morning brings new postings..a labor of love for the defense attorneys to read. The silence of the N&O is actually the wind at our back. It inspires the commited to do more. Are you hearing footsteps?

The stories are being written and read. Just not by you.

Truth is sprinting to the home stretch. You have been left in the dust.

For some, an old Nancy Sinatra song sets the pace.
WE dedicate it to all who continue to perpetrate this hoax against Collin, Reade and Dave.

"These boots are made for walking and that's just what they'll do.

One of these days these boots are gonna WALK ALL OVER YOU."

Yes,indeed, Truth is putting on it's boots...oops, shoes.

Back to the Blogs.

At 9:42 AM, July 22, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wonderful Joan Foster: Thank you for another wonderful piece, each better then previous.

We are with you Joan; we are putting on our shoes!

At 9:55 AM, July 22, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Left Editor Melanie Sill this post today. And, yes "Truth is putting on its Shoes"...we're on the march!

The Reporter's Lament

Back in early Spring
Man, my cell phone would ring!
Melanie on the line...
Dig up all you can find!
Now I'm lonely and bored
Don't get around much anymore...

Found interviews in the Hood
And quotes the kids were no good.
Ran the poster, ..remember then...
That "Swagger" headline was a gem
Now I sit here ignored.
Don't get around much anymore.

Wanted to hit City Hall
Give Pat Baker a call
One story! He said it!
But Mel says "Forget it."
What AM I here for...?
Don't get around much anymore.

Thought I'd drive round the State
Talk to other D.A.'s
"Should the line-ups be tossed?
(They were ONLY Lacrosse)
"Are you kidding?" "What for?'
Don't get around much anymore

Our blogs are loaded with questions
Leads and suggestions
Could win a Pulitzer Prize
But Mel says"No dice."
Might shake Durham to the core?
Don't get around much anymore.

See here's the real scoop
I can go after Duke
Take down out-of -town laddies
That have rich out- of -town daddies
Their misdeeds we adore
And ....go after full bore

It fit our certain world-view
Now we're in quite a stew
So we've "shut down" on this case
I spend days at MySpace
God, the truth is a bore!
Don't get around much anymore

At 2:35 PM, July 22, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Since we are poetizing (which I love), perhaps a riddle would be appropriate.

There once was a DA named Nifong
He couldn't tell wrong from the Rightfong.
He got all his votes
But forged all his notes
And was sent to jail for a longfong.

Sorry, I don't want to make like of this - This in indeed not a Durham disgrace, it is a disgrace to the already untrusted judicial system in our country.

At 5:21 PM, July 22, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Above: I love the riddle and I love both of Joan Foster's pieces.

At 6:13 PM, July 22, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Didn't there use to be an FBI in this country?

There's a lynching going on in Durham, which many people believe is being conducted by a corrupted city government and police department (there's not enough room on this board to put all the evidence for that!).

Where's Gonzales? Where's his press conference from Durham, saying that the Feds are investigating?

Where's the US attorney for the area?

Where is the Federal Grand Jury with its indictments?

Did I miss something? It surely couldn't be that they aren't interested in political corruption. Or that they aren't interested in protecting the civil rights of Duke students. Or that they could care less about what happens to preppie white kids.

No. I don't want to believe that. Gonzales, please help me still believe in the FBI.

At 9:34 PM, July 22, 2006, Blogger Marco2006 said...

Looks Like Two of our Favorite Officers in Durham are in trouble, Chief of the Investigation Gottlieb & Clayton.

There was no shadow boxing here!

"No charges have been filed, but Raleigh and Durham police confirmed Saturday that some Durham officers are suspects in the alleged beating of a restaurant cook at Blinco’s sports bar, 6711 Glenwood Ave., apparently after an angry verbal exchange"

"But when asked specifically about the status of Sgt. Mark Gottlieb, the supervisor in the Duke investigation, police spokeswoman Kammie Michael said Gottlieb had been assigned to administrative duty with pay Friday.

Also on Friday, Investigator Richard Clayton was placed on administrative duty with pay, Michael said. Clayton has assisted in the Duke investigation and works under Gottlieb."

At 11:12 PM, July 22, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To the 9:34 PM. July 22, 2006 post: This is a must read. A White Duke rape investigator from Durham PD is alleged to have used a RACIAL SLUR against a Black cook who was on a work break. The Black cook also alleges that he felt a shoe graze his face during the alleged attack.

At 11:28 PM, July 22, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

So now Sgt. Gottlieb is on administrative duty. This case gets stranger by the day. I have heard some speculation to the effect that Gottlieb's notes about the Duke case may have not yet been turned over to the defense because they may implicate Nifong in some way. I wonder if this new alleged assault is a set up to pressure Gottlieb to change his notes to something that would not implicate Nifong (or Durham). This alleged assault may be as fishy as everything else connected to the Duke case. There may be a lot more to this than meets the eye. There should be federal or state intervention (i.e. a special prosecutor) looking into all these matters.

At 11:47 PM, July 22, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Above: Yes, I agree. This is too fishy. There are things going on that we are not aware of. There is a huge cover up going to make thing look right for Nifong. When will all this end? By whom?

At 12:01 AM, July 23, 2006, Blogger Marco2006 said...

no this is about assault, it has nothing to do with the notes. It is an actual incident. It is a present from the Karma gods!

At 12:36 AM, July 23, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

someone needs to write a book; Sex, Lies and the Durham PD....

The only thing about Karma, is that the right people haven't gotten it.. Like Nifong, The City Manager...

At 1:53 AM, July 23, 2006, Blogger Marco2006 said...

Keep the pressure on! Nifong will be discovered, we have truth on our side! It is unwinding! It's been a good week!


At 7:26 AM, July 23, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wow! You folks are wonderful. If I had a problem like this, I would sure want you on my side. God Bless all of you and let's keep it going. I think that almost everyone familiar with this case knows what Nifong is. He just needs to be found out by an entity like the FBI or other Federal Agency. Forget any justice from North Carolina's government at any level.


<< Home