Duke accuser told conflicting stories, police report says

[IndianaGreen]

Duke accuser told conflicting stories, police report says

Friday, June 23, 2006; Posted: 4:25 p.m. EDT (20:25 GMT)

DURHAM, North Carolina (AP) -- A woman who accused three Duke University lacrosse players of rape initially told police she was attacked by five men at a team party and at one point denied she had been raped, according to a police report released Friday by a defense attorney.

Authorities said previously in affidavits that the accuser reported she was raped by three men at a March 13 lacrosse team party where she and another woman were hired to perform as exotic dancers.

<snip>

The one-page report, dated March 14, was included in 536 pages of additional evidence prosecutor Mike Nifong handed over to defense attorneys Thursday. It was released by Joseph Cheshire, who represents defendant David Evans.

The defense has not released the entire discovery file, and it not known exactly what evidence Nifong might have, but the prosecutor has given no indication he plans to drop the case.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/06/23/duke.rape.ap/index.html

On edit: Here is related story from Thursday:

Defense gets more rape case papers

By John Stevenson : The Herald-Sun
Jun 22, 2006 : 9:15 pm ET

DURHAM -- Defense lawyers on Thursday received 536 additional pages of information about the Duke University lacrosse rape case from District Attorney Mike Nifong, and one of them promptly said the new documentation showed mounting inconsistencies on the part of the alleged victim.

"She's told so many different stories, I'm not sure I've counted them," said lawyer Joe Cheshire.

For example, the accuser, an exotic dancer hired to perform with another woman at a March 13 off-campus party, apparently claimed in the new material that she was raped by five people, Cheshire said after what he conceded was only a cursory review of the paperwork.

The woman said at another time that there were 20 rapists before she finally settled on three, according to other, previously released records

http://www.heraldsun.com/durham/4-746681.html

[pnwmom]

1. She also said there were three other dancers: Nikki, Tammy, and Angel.

We know that Nikki is Kim Roberts.

But what happened to Tammy and Angel?

My guess is that the police investigator made them "disappear" after the second dancer, and the videotapes, and the witnesses outside, failed to confirm them.

[Lenore]

2. Then there's that time she claimed Kim, aka "Nikki"

Was part of the sexual attack and that indeed it was Kim who stole all her money! I have heard this reported, as being one of her early stories, time and again this last few days (thank you MSNBC, lol)

[pnwmom]

3. Did you see the police report (with the attorney's letter)?

If not, you can see it here, if you click on "related document."

http://www.wral.com/news/9417203/detail.html

A police investigator interrupted the attorney's Thursday news conference to shout out that the accuser's story never changed -- that he had read all the documents himself and he knew it! So Evan's attorney responded by sending him the police report, and copying it to the media.

So even the police investigator doesn't know what's in his own file. . . or he chose to lie about it to the media.

[Lenore]

4. Oh that we don't have access to page 1305...

Or, as the saying goes "but to be a fly on their wall"

[pnwmom]

5. It was probably one of the investigator's restaurant bills for his

take-out dinner, lol.

One of the attorneys said recently that only 70 or 80 pages in the original 1300 were actually relevant.

[IndianaGreen]

6. He was probably one of Nifong's political hacks

and he got brownie points by defending his boss.

[pnwmom]

7. But he only succeeded in making them look

like bigger idiots.

[bigdarryl]

8. Duke case

Notice how the article starts out DEFENSE LAWYERS!! thats the problem these are statements from the defense not the other side. Every friday the defense comes out with leaks in favor of there clients.

[IndianaGreen]

9. These are not "leaks"! These are usually from motions filed in court

Nifong was forced to release an additional 500 pages of documents, which are now part of the court record. The defense lawyers are merely pointing out at problems in the prosecution case by using documents released by the prosecutor.

[pnwmom]

12. The vast majority is state evidence, not defense evidence. The defense is

merely pointing out all the discrepancies in the state's own case -- conflicts which SHOULD have caused Nifong to not proceed with the case at all.

If you're curious about this, you might want to look at my post #11 below.

[bluestateguy]

10. This case will fall apart, even if the guys are guilty

They have high-powered defense lawyers and publicists who know how to work the PR game. This woman is out of her league here.

[pnwmom]

11. The chances that the students are guilty are vanishingly small,

due to the conflicts in the accuser's statements alone, as documented in police and hospital files.

Since there is no DNA evidence (except pointing to the accuser's boyfriend), and no toxicology report showing a rape drug, everything comes down to the "victim's" credibility. An accuser who has said:

First, that there were three other dancers at the party, named Nikki, Tammy, and Angel. Actually, there was only one other dancer. Dancers often use pseudonyms, so it doesn't matter that Nikki was actually Kim Roberts. But doesn't it matter that Kim Roberts was the only other dancer at the party? If the accuser could make a mistake like that, how could her testimony be reliable about anything else?

When the accuser -- who was on probation for very serious alcohol related charges-- was about to be checked in for mandatory overnight drug/alcohol evaluation, she announced that she had been raped -- and got rerouted to a hospital. Then she said the rape didn't occur. Then she told someone else it did.

It was a vaginal rape. Or it was vaginal, oral, and anal. It was only groping. Or it was a brutal, 30 minute, rape, strangulation, and beating. There were five attackers. Or three. Or two. Kim Roberts was involved in the attack, and stole from her. Or she wasn't, and didn't.

Her physical exam conflicted with her description of the rape, since no bruising or other injuries were noted except for small scabbed scratches on her knee and foot. The only evidence of sexual contact was some edema in the vagina, which could have been the result of consensual sex before she got there . . . or related to the use of the vibrator she reported earlier that day.

She said that she hadn't had sex with anyone else in a week, but her boyfriend said he had sex with her the night before. Afterwards, he changed his story to be the same as hers . . . but his DNA was the only DNA found in her vagina. Also, he reported driving her, an employee of an escort service, to several appointments that weekend with men in hotels.

Although the police had thought she was passed out drunk, she said she had only had one drink that night, plus prescription muscle relaxant. The next day, she said she had had two beers before she got there -- two 22-24 ounce beers! -- plus her muscle relaxant.

She picked the students' pictures out of a lineup that included head and shoulder shots of ONLY potential suspects -- all photos of lacrosse team members. One of the suspects she described as the "little skinny guy" that had attacked her. He was actually 6'4" and well over 200 pounds, but his size wasn't clear from his head shot. Another suspect she didn't identify the first time she looked at the photos, but at a viewing weeks later she said he looked "like" her attacker -- if, she said, he had had a mustache.

ALL of the conflicts above are in the prosecution's OWN evidence related to statements of the accuser. All of these undisputed conflicts together should have been more than enough reason for Nifong to not go forward with the indictments. But on top of this, there is the other dancer's damning testimony (the rape allegations were a "crock") and the alibi and other evidence that the defense is sure to put forward.

The fact that these students families have enough money to hire good lawyers shouldn't make any of us feel better about this case. Worse, actually. If this is an example of Nifong's style, how many others has he railroaded in his career?

Fortunately, the law in North Carolina was changed a few years ago to require the prosecution to supply this kind of material BEFORE a trial, after a number of cases of false convictions involving DA's who withheld exculpatory material. And fortunately, this case -- and the media attention -- is doing a lot to expose the kind of prosecutorial misconduct that still can occur.

[idgiehkt]

32. no shit. I'm gonna buy me a brand new notepad and a new pen.

and keep them on hand in case I ever get gang-raped so I can write everthing thing down, real concise and accurate-like...just in case.

[pnwmom]

35. Don't you think that if you had been a dancer that night --

regardless of what happened later -- you would have KNOWN at least whether you only had one dancer with you, Nikki? Or three, named Nikki, Tammy, and Angel?

But if the couple of 22-ounce beers and the muscle relaxant that you took were enough to confuse you about how many dancers were performing with you, wouldn't that make you wonder about the rest of your memories? If you "mis- remembered" two extra dancers that night, what else didn't you remember correctly?

I can imagine that an actual rape victim, in the throes of an attack, might not know whether she had 3 attackers or 5. That doesn't bother me. But I can't figure out any way that the dancer -- in her right mind -- could have thought there were two extra dancers performing with her.

[laureloak]

43. Why are you so sure she was raped? n/t

[laureloak]

44. What makes you think she really was raped? n/t

[oneinok]

155. Where are the protests?

Are more protests being planned and organized?

[chookie]

55. No. She has powerful allies

Jesse Jackson got famous Florida lawyer Willie Gary to advise her. A guy famous for winning settlements worth hundreds of millions of dollars. Pro bono too. Presumably should the case evolve into a civil trial, Gary will represent her. She's hardly alone, without friends, or even without powerful friends. Gary is easily a match of any lawyer the defendents can get to represent them.
http://www.essence.com/essence/lifestyle/takeastand/0,16109,1186586,00.html

[struggle4progress]

13. ... The defense attorneys have declined requests from The Associated Press

to view the complete contents of the discovery file ...
http://www.wral.com/news/9417203/detail.html

[pnwmom]

14. A defense attorney stupid enough to do that would make himself liable

to a malpractice claim, since s/he is ethically bound to represent his client's interests only, and there would be no conceivable LEGAL benefit to any client in releasing a prosecutor's whole file to the media.

On the other hand, the prosecutor is bound NOT to represent the accuser (whose status as a "victim" has not yet been proven) -- but the interests of justice. He shouldn't have been withholding exculpatory evidence from the warrants that he was asking the judge to sign, and he shouldn't have been making those 70 statements, often inflammatory, during his election campaign. Nifong was supposed to be following a N.C. law that bars prosecutors from statements that increase public condemnation of defendants.

I'm wondering what the motivation was behind the Associated Press making such an odd request, since I'm sure their lawyers knew very well that the request could never be granted. The A.P. should have explained to their readers that standard rules of practice would prevent a defense lawyer from releasing the whole file to the media, since there would be no legal benefit to any client in doing so.

[struggle4progress]

21. So if the defense lawyers hand out snippets, AP shouldn't ask questions?

The idea that the press should just re-distribute whatever is handed to them, without seeking further information, sounds strangely familiar ...

[pnwmom]

23. Of course they should ask questions.

But the AP shouldn't imply that there is something wrong because these defense attorneys said no to doing something that no defense attorneys have ever done -- and are actually barred from doing.

[struggle4progress]

30. AP should ask -- but you'll question their motives?

In the short factual statement I quoted, AP didn't "imply" anything: the story simply said the defense attorneys had refused the request for more info. On the basis of this, you said you questioned AP's motives. What nefarious motives do you see there?

[pnwmom]

33. Asking questions is entirely different than asking to have the

whole file made public. . . . something the A.P. must have known couldn't happen. But I can understand the reporters' asking.
They probably thought . . . Why not ask? There's a first for everything. Maybe we'll get lucky.

What I object to is the writer's reporting this without noting that the defense attorneys, in not releasing the whole file, were merely following standard procedure. As it is, I think whoever wrote the article was trying to make it appear as if the attorneys were trying to hide something -- rather than just doing their jobs.

[struggle4progress]

34. AP should not only act as stenographers BUT vindicate the defense ..

.. attorneys, too, eh?

Oh, Brave New World, that hath such people in it ...

[pnwmom]

36. They didn't need to report the transaction between themselves and

the defense at all. But if they were going to, they should have reported both sides of the matter.

[struggle4progress]

37. You know that the defense told AP something different than "No"?

[pnwmom]

38. They didn't need to.

I'm sure any experienced reporter would know that defence attorneys never release prosecutor's whole files to the media at large. Before the reporters even asked, I'm sure they knew the answer would be "no."

[TorchTheWitch]

41. Oh, that's rich!

"... they should have reported both sides of the matter."

Go ahead and show me where the press has reported both sides of this matter! They have done nothing but report the defense side and have gone so far as to insist that Nifong drop a case they don't know jack shit about. They report on "evidence" that they have not seen and have no idea exists other than a claim by defense counsel that it does. They continually claim that Nifong has no comment but refuse to report when he does. For instance, where in the press has this public written statement been reported other than WRAL?...

http://www.wral.com/slideshow/9391482/detail.html?qs=;s=2;w=800
<snip>
"What has surprised me is the utter lack of any degree of skepticism on the part of the national media with respect to the claims of the defense attorneys, many of which are misleading and some of which are absolutely false. As an example, when those attorneys held press conferences to announce that the first round of DNA testing "completely exonerated" the lplayers (a claim that, on its face, is rather preposterous), I saw not one single report that any reporter had actually seen the test results (none of them had), or had asked to see them and had that request denied (which is what had happened to those who bothered to ask). Now you are going over "documents" in that case. Where did you get them? What other documents did they not show you? But, of course, you cannot possibly know. Is anyone surprised that the defense is spinning this case in such a way that things do not look good for the prosecution? Their job, after all, is to create reasonable doubt, a task made all the easier by an uncritical national press corps desperate for any reportable detail, regardless of its veracity."
</snip>

Well, obviously, the press certainly isn't taking heed that that! How bizarre that continually on DU we say the SAME THING about the bias of the press, but in this one particular case suddenly the press is just the epitome of critical reporting when they so obviously have not been. Here's a fine example of the bias of the press...

http://www.wral.com/dukelacrosseheadlines/9420464/detail.html
Toxicology Tests Not Done On Accuser In Duke Lacrosse Rape Case

POSTED: 8:48 pm EDT June 23, 2006
UPDATED: 11:59 am EDT June 24, 2006

DURHAM, N.C. -- Toxicology results on a woman who says she was raped were not included in an additional 536 pages of evidence that Durham's lead prosecutor handed over Thursday to three Duke lacrosse players' defense attorneys because he said no test report exists.

Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifong told the court on Thursday he did not have a toxicology report to turn over, although he later refused to say if such a test was performed.

Isn't that nice? They claim no toxicology report exists and in fact no toxicology test was ever done simply because the defense makes that claim because they apparently don't have a copy of it. But right in the article Nifong does NOT say anything such thing about whether or not the toxicology test was done, he just says he doesn't have the report to turn over. And here's the press making the determination that the defense is correct in claiming no test was performed and no report of such a test exists.

Here's something else the press has ignored that's available right in the exhibits that Osborn filed on behalf of Seligmann...
http://www.kirkosborn.com/Motions/MotionforRecusal4.0.pdf

Take a look at Seligmann's phone records and the ATM time-stamped photos. Supposedly, Seligmann makes a call at 12:23:10 that lasts until 12:23:32, gets out of the cab and approaches the ATM machine at 12:24:12 (EIGHT seconds between end of call and approaching ATM machine). After using the ATM, he gets back in the cab at 12:25:23 and makes his last call at 12:25:08 to the mystery person with the Kansas area cellphone number (supposedly his girlfriend). The ATM machine photos picture him at the ATM at 12:25:08 AND HE IS NOT ON HIS PHONE. There is an ATM photo of him holding his wallet and putting money in it at 12:25:04 - FOUR seconds before the start of his last call, and another ATM photo of him getting back into the cab at 12:25:23 where one arm is behind him closing the door and the other is in front of him nowhere near his head where a phone should be when it's in use. Therefore, that last phone call at 12:25:08 WAS NOT MADE BY HIM. How can we then assume that ANY of the phone calls between 12:05:49 and 12:25:08 were made by him? Well, because the defense SAYS SO. Gee, what a surprise. And not ONE THING in the press about this obvious discrepancy.

What a damn laugh that the press has been anywhere close to reporting anything about this case in an unbiased manner. Every single thing they write favors the defense, and they don't question or investigate a SINGLE THING that may look unfavorable to the defense. Clearly, the press has decided which way they are spinning this case, and right here on DU there are people that suddenly believe that the press is unbiased when they have always claimed before (and quite loudly) that the press is a bunch of biased propaganda. Holy. Fucking. Cow. If Nifong was a Republican, how much do you bet that the press would be spinning this in the prosecution's favor? Funny when so few at DU of all places ever asked themselves that when they NEVER fail to in any other circumstance. Even some of the VERY SAME PEOPLE here that have always before pounded on the biased crap propaganda the MSM regularly spews have suddenly decided that in this ONE case, they are just the most thorough and truthful of investigative reporters. Wow.

[pnwmom]

42. What's your theory about why the accuser

first reported that there had been three dancers, Nikki, Tammy, and Angel?

Doesn't that make you question her credibility?

[TorchTheWitch]

47. She was intoxicated

I don't care if she had at one point said she had been raped by 450 camels at the top of Mt. Everest, at another point she said she had been raped by 28 ferrets chewing bubble gum at the train station, and at another point she said she had been raped by 137 Martians weilding pitchforks and bibles. She was bombed out of her skull at the time, and like most people bombed out of their skull was not making a whole lot of sense in her answers to investigators' questions.

It's normal and expected that someone recently raped may be confused about who, how many, where, for how long and how she was raped when questioned so soon after the attack, and particularly when they aren't in their right mind at the time. Doesn't mean it didn't happen. Whether or not it happened in this case is for a jury to decide. Kind of ridiculous that some people just want to throw out the court system and let decisions be made on whether or not a crime was committed based on how the general public through the media decides whether or not a crime was committed based on information they don't have. Or did you somehow forget that in a court of law, ALL the evidence gets laid out in front of a judge and jury for a decision on innocence or guilt to be made?

Believe it or not, accusers have rights, too. They have a right for their case to be heard in a court of law and a decision be made based on ALL the evidence laid out before a judge and jury. I rather like the fact that we have a justice system in this country, and whether or not a crime is committed isn't left to the decisions of people with agendas when they don't know or won't acknowledge all the facts. Why don't you?

[pnwmom]

49. If she was bombed out of her skull enough not to know how many

dancers performed with her (and even to imagine the names Angel and Tammy) then how could we ever trust any of her identifications of the alleged assailants? Especially since they were picked out of a lineup consisting of nothing but photos of subjects?

Cases with evidence as weak as this ROUTINELY get stopped by the prosecutor's office; they don't proceed to trial. The fact that Nifong has let this go on I attribute to his political campaign, and now to his stubbornness. Plus, he has more to gain politically, even now, by just hanging on.

[TorchTheWitch]

52. Because she identified them when she was sober

Why is it so impossible to believe that WHILE someone is highly intoxicated they'd be confused about events and then remember more clearly those events when they are no longer intoxicated? Damn, my friends do that all the time when they get wasted.

You attribute Nifong pursuing this case based on assumptions that he has no evidence, and refuse to admit that you have no idea what he may have... just like the press. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT FACTS/EVIDENCE THE PROSECUTION HAS AND THEREFORE ARE NOT IN ANY POSITION TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS A CASE HERE. Why is this so fucking difficult to understand?

[pnwmom]

54. Because the memories a person forms when they are intoxicated are

seen through intoxicated eyes, and heard through intoxicated ears. The brain doesn't miraculously put the memories that were formed in an alcoholic haze into correct focus when the body is cleared of alcohol.

As I said in the other post, I can't think of any evidence Nifong could have -- short of a full confession by somebody OR very strong DNA evidence from the dancer's body (not the wastebasket) -- that would overcome all the doubt that has been introduced in the two dancer's various statements alone.

I just thought of one more -- if a neighbor was peeking in the window. That would certainly do it. But I'd be very surprised if that turned out to be the case.

More about alcohol and memory. Alcohol consumption is known to interfere with the formation of long-term memory; it interferes with short-term memories being moved into the long term memory. And if a person is in a black-out state (which can be happening even while a person is walking, talking, driving, etc.) they may form no memories of that time at all.

http://www.dentalplans.com/Dental-Health-Articles/The-Alcohol-Blackout-Walking-Talking-Unconscious-&-Lethal.asp

"Dr. Donal F. Sweeney, Fellow of the American Society of Addiction Medicine, reports that without memory formation, people in a blackout cannot learn, think or plan. They do not know where they are or what they are doing. Wholly impulsive, they are a danger to themselves and others. In his book, Dr. Sweeney details the cost to society and families from blackouts by detailing numerous criminal cases involving blackouts as a central issue.

"Blacked out people are able to drive, travel, work and generally function in society, all the while operating without forming memory. How this is possible is explained by Dr. Sweeney: "Alcohol blocks formation of new memory, but old memory remains. People know their family and friends, their schooling, all the procedures they knew previously. They can walk, talk, drive, etc. but they have no idea what happened a minute ago or what they are going to do next."

[TorchTheWitch]

61. I wasn't necessarily talking about alcohol

Don't know why you assumed I was.

I also never said that one's memory was impaired by intoxication, just that highly intoxicated people tend to do and say bizarre things and when sober have no or little difficulty with their memory. As I said, I've seen this among my own wasted friends dozens upon dozens of times.

For instance, just last weekend I went to a party where one friend got loaded and insisted first that their car was stolen, then insisted that it was parked over in 7-11's parking lot, then insisted that their girlfriend already drove it home and he needed a ride after the party (obviously, he needed a ride after the party due to his condition anyway). However, the next morning he knew to tell me that he needed a lift to go pick up his car that he knew had been parked on the side street. In other words, while he was bombed he had all kinds of stories about where his car was but in the morning when sober he knew exactly where it was and doesn't remember claiming it was all kinds of other places during the party when he was bombed. All night long while he was intoxicated I had to keep telling him that his girlfriend moved it to the side street so he wouldn't get a ticket since when he arrived at the party, he'd parked it in a tow zone... but all night long he kept insisting his car was all kinds of other places. He doesn't recall all the stories he claimed of where his car was while he was loaded, but he did remember once he was sober that while he was intoxicated I had told him his girlfriend had moved it to the side street.

At the same party, another friend while intoxicated kept losing track of her cigarettes and perpetually claimed she couldn't find them, or someone swiped them, or she smoked them all, or she forgot to buy any before she came, but remembered the next day that all night at the party they were in her pocket. She made a stink all night about her smokes going AWOL and had to be told every time she wanted one that they were in her pocket, but when she was sober the next day she laughed about the AWOL smokes that were never AWOL and knew had been in her pocket all night.

See? People can say crazy things when they're bombed and have no problem realizing when they become sober what really happened... and for some reason think it's hilarious that they said such ridiculous things for no reason.

[pnwmom]

62. I was assuming you were talking about alcohol because the dancer

reported (the next day) that before the party she had consumed a couple of 22-24 ounce beers in addition to muscle relaxants -- the combination of which could have left a small woman (as the other dancer described her) quite intoxicated. She also acknowledged that she had been very drunk.

I believe you that your friends had those experiences, but I have also known people who blacked out while drinking. In that state they appeared to be functioning -- they could walk, talk, etc. -- but the next day they had huge gaps in their memories. Also, memory researchers report that alcohol consumption interferes with new information going from short term into long term memory. . . . where it would need to be in order for her to answer questions hours later or the next day.

Beyond that, all I will say is about your stories is. . . I hope YOU were the designated driver. :7

[TorchTheWitch]

63. seems I'm always the designated driver

since I don't drink or do any drugs. It gets tiresome, but I'd rather someone was around to make sure these folks don't go off and kill themselves or other people on the road (or otherwise get themselves in trouble). Not that all my friends are a bunch of doped up lushes, but every so often some of them do like to get bombed or otherwise fry their brain cells. I don't get it, but what can you do... aside from the occasional alcoholic/drug ritual, they're good people (although I can't say I'm crazy about them much the next morning... there's nothing like babysitting a lush or druggie and then have to deal with their various complaints the next morning). :hangover: I guess I'll never understand why people tend to do these things to themselves even if it is just on occasion.

In any case, personally I think the accuser was under the influence of a date rape drug. Everything about her behavior indicates that, and it's something I've seen myself before. The rapid decline coupled with the time frame of when she drank the drink she was given at the party, falling down, lack of coordination and mental capacity... everything about it is just like I've seen before and is different than how one behaves under the influence of alcohol. The accuser is a known rather heavy habitual drinker, and heavy habitual drinkers require a LOT of alcohol to get into that bad of a state whatever their size. The amount of alcohol she had wouldn't have made a dent in a heavy habitual drinker, and combined with muscle relaxants would just make her sick to her stomach and probably throw up and not be able to stay awake. It would also tend to make her more uncoordinated but not effect mental capacity.

Like I said, everything about her behavior suggests a date rape drug, and is exactly the behavior I saw happen to a girl I work with who was slipped one in her drink. Luckily, we recognized what was probably wrong with her and kept her away from the bar for the rest of the night. Never did find out who gave it to her even with the surveillance tapes... it was just too crowded that night and could have been one of 5 or 6 people. Date rape drugs are horribly prevalent, and in this business, we're warned continually never to take our eyes off our drink or leave a drink with a customer. Because of that, I never even drink soda or water at work at the bar but leave anything I'm drinking in my locker (you won't even trust all the dancers I work with).

If I hadn't seen someone under the influence of a date rape drug with my own eyes and been able to recognize the difference of how she behaves when she's drunk or on some other drug, I wouldn't really know what to think in this case.

Because of the more recent onslaught of the use of date rape drugs, doctors are more inclined to do a toxicology test for that reason when someone claiming rape presents with these typical signs and symptoms. Raleigh, NC in particular reports a serious increase in the use of date rape drugs...

http://www.ncsu.edu/news/dailyclips/0303/032803.htm#DJ1
In the last few months, the NCSU Student Health Center has witnessed an increase in reports of date rape drug incidents. The reports primarily come from the NCSU Counseling Center, which is located in the Student Health Center.

According to Turnbull, there have been reports that date rape drugs have been used in different local bars in Raleigh, N.C. In some cases, perpetrators have been known to pay bartenders to slip these drugs into the drink of an unsuspecting victim. Betsy Kimrey, a psychologist and counselor at the NCSU Counseling Center, has worked with date rape victims.

Also, I was amazed to find that it may take up to 12 to 18 MONTHS to receive a definitive report about whether a date rape drug was used in communities that don't possess the ability to properly test for these drugs since they aren't found in an average tox screen and require special testing...

http://www.oanow.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=OAN/MGArticle/OAN_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1031779733808&path=!news!localnews
Victims of GHB, a date-rape drug, will no longer have to wait 12 to 18 months for test results. That's because East Alabama Medical Center's in-house Forensic Toxicology Lab will soon provide results within two to three days.

As early as January 2005, testing of GHB (Gamma Hydroxybutyric Acid) through blood and urine samples, will provide solid results in less time.

Allen Valaer, manager of the EAMC Forensic Toxicology Lab, was on hand Thursday morning to present an in-depth report of future GHB testing to some 20 nurses at the Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner's (SANE) quarterly meeting.

"We want to go live the first of the year. We're excited to be able to provide this service to the community, other hospitals and agencies, bringing GHB testing to the forefront," Valaer said. "We're the only independent accredited laboratory - there are no other independent accredited drug testing laboratories in the state of Alabama. But, we in no way want to interfere with the Department of Forensic Sciences; this is just a way to help assist and give victims some peace of mind by providing test results in a timely fashion. There is less than a 24-hour detection window to test for GHB. Only 10 hours from ingestion, urine can be tested and five hours in blood. Girls suspecting they have been exposed to the drug should immediately go get tested. If you wait too long, testing will not tell anything."

It may be that Nifong had to send out a sample for date rape drug testing and been given information over the phone about the results, but hasn't yet received the report. I have no idea whether or not Durham has the ability to test for a date rape drug without a sample being sent out to another facility, but have serious doubts that the sample could have been tested locally since the article above indicates the new facility in Alabama is the ONLY one in the entire state that has the ability to test for these drugs and can then give result reports in a few days rather than one to two YEARS. Makes me cringe to think it may be that way in my own state... I can't imagine having to sit on my hands for one to two years waiting on the results of a date rape drug if, God forbid, it ever happened to me.

I'm shocked that it should take that long in certain areas that don't have their own facilities capable of doing date rape drug testing to generate a report. Given the prevalent use of date rape drugs, this is just an outrage.

[IndianaGreen]

64. You can't speculate about date rape drug without a tox report

and Nifong admitted that there is no tox report, so any claims about date rape drugs will be inadmissible by the court.

Too bad that there isn't a tox report. I find it interesting that the accuser first mentioned raped when she found out she was going to be involuntarily kept at a drug treatment center.

[TorchTheWitch]

139. Nifong said no such thing

He said he had no tox report to turn over and refused to comment when asked by the press if a tox screen was done.

In any case, according to Attorney Osborn, Nifong formally said he intended to introduce it at trial...
http://www.kirkosborn.com/Motions/MotiontoDeferTimeDead...
1. On May 18, 2006, the Durham County District Attorney's Office hand-delivered to defendant's counsel "Response to Request for Voluntary Discovery, Statutory Notices and Reciprocal Motions." Contained within that discovery disclosure, the State noted: "Notice is also given to the Defendant, pursuant to the provisions of G.S. 15A-975(b), and where applicable N.C.G.S. 90-95(g) & (gl), of the State's intention to introduce at trial the following: (1) Evidence obtained from a search conducted pursuant to a search warrant when the Defendant was not present at the time and place of the execution of that warrant; (2) Scientific data accompanied by expert testimony; and (3) S.B.I. chemical analysis 1aboratory report and statement of chain of custody."

S.B.T. = State Bureau of Investigation. North Carolina's SBI has several locations, one of which is in Raleigh. However, it's difficult to tell from their website, at what facility they would have do the testing for a date rape drug. http://sbi.jus.state.nc.us/sbimain/drugchemistry.htm I'm guessing the one in Raleigh would do the date rape drug testing, but it really doesn't clarify.

http://www.realcrisis.org/SART%20NovDec%2004.doc
P.C. S.A.R.T. E-Newsletter
Volume 2, Issue 3 November/December 2004

LATEST INFORMATION ON THE SBI RAPE EVIDENCE COLLECTION KIT

According to a recent news release, a new test kit has been designed to help authorities investigate cases of rape. The new kits will include instructions for the forensic nurse examiner to obtain two blood samples to be sent to the state forensic laboratory for testing. Drugs including opiates, hallucinogens, antihistamines, and tranquilizers will show up in the blood tests within four to 35 hours of the crime.

After speaking with Special Agent Suzie Barker of the State Bureau of Investigation in Raleigh, NC, she reports that the current kit includes instructions to collect blood and urine samples in a drug facilitated sexual assault. These directions are listed on a small index card included in the kit. The directions are in two parts. The first part is for the kit collector. If sexual assault is facilitated by drugs or alcohol, 10 ml of urine and 2 gray top (potassium oxalate) tubes of blood should be collected. These samples are to be sealed with tape, initialed, and then placed in a zip-lock bag. The tubes, urine cup, nor the plastic bag are included in the kit. These samples should be collected using hospital stock. After these samples are sealed into a plastic bag, the small index card should be attached to the bag. This bag should not be placed into the kit. This facilitates analysis in the toxicology section of the SBI, which is different from the Forensic Biology section that analyzes semen, et al. The second part is for the law enforcement officer, which states that the officer should keep the sample refrigerated until they take it to the SBI. In order to submit it to the SBI, a letter from the DA's office must be sent with the samples. This letter should simply state that toxicology analysis is necessary for this case and state some specifics for the case. There is no way to screen only for the date-rape drugs, but it will document in black and white all the substances that are in the system (marijuana, alcohol, crack, etc). Once the samples are received by toxicology, a screen will be run. This screen will include alcohol and the five main areas of drugs, which include Rohypnol and GHB.

Apparently, when a person claiming rape is admitted to the hospital with signs of drugs or alcohol in their system, collection of blood and urine (which is standard in the rape kits) are collected for the purpose of a chemical analysis done by the SBI. This may explain why the SANE report apparently said there was no tox screen done since the chemical analysis for date rape drugs is not done by the hospital but by the SBI laboratory. Hospitals can do their own tox screens for certain drugs or alcohol, but date rape drug screens are done by the SBI laboratory, not the hospital. It's probably the case that the SANE said that no tox screen was done because the HOSPITAL didn't do it, the SBI did. The SANE can't report on something done outside the hospital in her report, and if the hospital didn't do the test, she can't indicate that they did.

Incidently, a toxicology test and a chemical analysis mean the same thing. Like saying someone is a brunette or has brown hair... just two different ways of saying the same thing. I only say this in case anyone is confused as to whether or not there's a difference.

Why would Nifong say he intended to introduce a chemical analysis report if there was nothing in it that helped his case? If all that it shows is that the accuser was under the influence of drugs or alcohol or both, that would actually hurt his case, and he wouldn't want to introduce that information. What could there possibly be in the chemical analysis that he would want to introduce if not evidence of a date rape drug?

Personally, I just have a feeling that Nifong does have the tox report and is purposely sitting on it until the tail end of the discovery phase. Were he to give it up now, we know the defense is going to claim that there is no sign of anything in it that harms their clients, won't let the press see it, and the press will harp for months that there is no evidence of a date rape drug even if there is since they claim everything the defense says is fact. I can see why Nifong would want to sit on it until the last possible moment to give the defense as little time as possible to make hay out of it. But, it could also be that the SBI hasn't given him a report yet... who knows.

[BrownOak]

68. So how long does it take to go from a phone report to a written report?

It may be that Nifong had to send out a sample for date rape drug testing and been given information over the phone about the results, but hasn't yet received the report.

It can't work both ways. If Nifong does have a phone report on the results of the toxicology report then he has to have had it very early in the process, otherwise he has very little to corroborate what appears to be a seriously inconsistent string of statements from the alleged victim. You can explain those inconsistencies as the result of rape trauma, but at some point in order for these allegations to stand up in court the prosecution will have to have something that supports at least one version of the AV's statements.

If that supporting evidence is a toxicology report given verbally over the telephone then the findings had to have been conclusive and they had to have happened at the very least prior to the first set of indictments. So how long does it take to go from a verbal report to a written one?

[pnwmom]

74. Good question, BrownOak. n/t

[pnwmom]

73. You're right. That's terrible. Why didn't they just send the results out

of state to a faster lab?

My niece's friend went to a bar off-campus, had a soda, and came-to in the dirt outside having been raped -- and no memory of the event at all. The hospital didn't do any toxicology screen, and this girl was too traumatized to know to ask for it. By the time her parents asked, it was too late.

Another friend of hers had been drinking beer with some friends, but they left her room. One guy didn't want to go, but she made him. The next thing she knew, she was regaining consciousness, discovered she had been raped, and guessed from the circumstances -- but had no memory -- of who had done it. She went to the hospital -- again, no toxicology screen.

Back to the Duke case: if you think this woman was given a date rape drug, then how would she be able to identify her attackers out of that whole group? Isn't that the whole point of that drug? That it renders the woman helpless and takes away her memory?

[TorchTheWitch]

135. Not always, no

Depends on the person, how much they ingested, and what type of date rape drug it was. The girl I know who was given one remembers pretty much everything. She was able to describe the few men around her at the time it was dumped in her drink, but there was no way to tell which man did it. She remembers us insisting she stay in the dressing room and being mad about that and arguing with us about that. She remembers arguing with us about calling the police or going to the hospital (she insisted she was fine and didn't want to do either... although clearly she needed to do both). Some details, especially about the sequence of certain events and the length of time for each of those events, are a bit hazy, but for the most part, she remembers pretty much everything.

At the time, she was totally out of control and completely not herself. She's young, a bit shy and quiet, but she tried to take a swing at the manager (except she miscalculated by about 2 yards and almost fell on her face), and was nasty to some of the dancers (I remember she made B___ cry because she ranted about her gaining weight and said she was a fat slob and some other cruel things that are completely unlike her). She could barely hold herself upright in a chair, and once she was done her little fit, mumbled a lot of stuff that made no sense (sounded like she was trying to argue with her boyfriend who wasn't there about some personal matter having something to do with the boyfriend's cats), and eventually fell asleep on the sofa in the manager's office.

Actually, the whole thing was so weird it was scary. We just didn't know what to do. I know I feel guilty for not insisting that the police be called whether she wanted them or not. Looking back, there was too much hand-wringing and not enough action, but we just didn't know what to do. Eventually, at the end of the night, one of the bouncers (who she used to date) managed to convince her to go to the hospital by threatening to tell her parents where she worked (she was absolutely adament that her family not know she was a dancer... they're pretty fierce bible thumpers, not very nice people in general, and would probably disown her). And besides, she didn't have much choice since we swiped her car keys (at least that was one thing that went right).

But anywho... drugs lose their potency over time, and since most of this stuff is illegally obtained, one never knows if it's past it's shelf life enough to be not so effective. I would guess that it's pretty much like buying street drugs... you never know if it's good stuff or crap.

[pnwmom]

136. Thanks for the info. One thing I do know, is that there is a very small

window of opportunity after the ingestion of a rape drug to get a blood or urine sample that will prove it. I hope you're never in this situation with a friend again, but it's something to keep in mind.

Hindsight is always 20/20. When you're in a weird, scary situation you're not going to be thinking clearly, and you did do your best.

Did she end up pressing charges?

[TorchTheWitch]

148. No, she never did

There was really no way to determine who it was that dropped the drug in her drink. Personally, I think even if she did know, she wouldn't have pressed charges for fear of her parents finding out where she worked and what she does for a living. I think she feels better that she knows for sure what happened to her, and now she's a huge influence in making sure people at the bar are careful with their drinks. She even helped to instigate a new rule that the bartenders/waitresses are required to throw out any dancer's drink if they walk away from it regardless of how much they trust who they happen to be with, and bartenders are no longer allowed to let a customer fill a dancer's drink order where that drink will be with him for any amount of time when the dancer is busy elsewhere (like while she's on stage).

[TorchTheWitch]

141. God, I'm so sorry about your niece's friends!

How terrible for them! These date rape drugs are becoming so prevelant in the last few years, it's really scary. I've heard that some bars supply these nifty drink coasters that when you put your drink down on them if there's a date rape drug in the drink, the coaster changes color or something like that. I remember seeing a 60 Minutes type of about that not too long ago. Still, the best way to be safe is to never take your eyes of your drink, and since some bartenders are being bribed to put the drugs in them themselves, always watch the bartender pour your drink. Personally, since I only drink soda or iced-tea or something like that, and I hate the bar supply since it always tastes awful, I sneak my own soda or Snapple into the bar anyway (that is, when I go to a bar to have fun and not to work). Women really have to be so careful these days.

Since date rape drugs have become so prevelant in the last few years, more and more states are including date rape drug testing collection supplies as standard equipment in their rape kits. SANE's are now supposed to collect the samples as standard procedure if the victim presents with symptoms of intoxication of any kind. NC does this, and the samples are then handed over to the police, and the prosecutor sends the samples off to the SBI...

http://www.realcrisis.org/SART%20NovDec%2004.doc
P.C. S.A.R.T. E-Newsletter
Volume 2, Issue 3 November/December 2004

LATEST INFORMATION ON THE SBI RAPE EVIDENCE COLLECTION KIT

According to a recent news release, a new test kit has been designed to help authorities investigate cases of rape. The new kits will include instructions for the forensic nurse examiner to obtain two blood samples to be sent to the state forensic laboratory for testing. Drugs including opiates, hallucinogens, antihistamines, and tranquilizers will show up in the blood tests within four to 35 hours of the crime.

After speaking with Special Agent Suzie Barker of the State Bureau of Investigation in Raleigh, NC, she reports that the current kit includes instructions to collect blood and urine samples in a drug facilitated sexual assault. These directions are listed on a small index card included in the kit. The directions are in two parts. The first part is for the kit collector. If sexual assault is facilitated by drugs or alcohol, 10 ml of urine and 2 gray top (potassium oxalate) tubes of blood should be collected. These samples are to be sealed with tape, initialed, and then placed in a zip-lock bag. The tubes, urine cup, nor the plastic bag are included in the kit. These samples should be collected using hospital stock. After these samples are sealed into a plastic bag, the small index card should be attached to the bag. This bag should not be placed into the kit. This facilitates analysis in the toxicology section of the SBI, which is different from the Forensic Biology section that analyzes semen, et al. The second part is for the law enforcement officer, which states that the officer should keep the sample refrigerated until they take it to the SBI. In order to submit it to the SBI, a letter from the DA's office must be sent with the samples. This letter should simply state that toxicology analysis is necessary for this case and state some specifics for the case. There is no way to screen only for the date-rape drugs, but it will document in black and white all the substances that are in the system (marijuana, alcohol, crack, etc). Once the samples are received by toxicology, a screen will be run. This screen will include alcohol and the five main areas of drugs, which include Rohypnol and GHB.

[pnwmom]

144. It was very very frustrating that they weren't given screens. Also, since

they had no memories, they couldn't prosecute. The worst part is that one of these college students was actually raped on two occasions; the second time she was walking home and got attacked by a stranger. I don't know how she managed to stay in college, or how her parents got through it either.

As far as the Duke case goes -- I hope that the SANE report box was wrong and that a toxicology report was done. I think they always should be done. But even if that test was performed, and there is strong evidence that a rape occurred that night, we're still left with the fact that the police royally screwed up the lineup. As bad as it was that they didn't use "fillers," they made it even worse when they announced to her that the pictures consisted of members of the team -- in other words, that there would be no wrong answers. So even if there was a rape, with so much doubt cast on the lineup they will have an awful hard time proving WHO did it.

We can probably agree that we both hope that the evidence at trial is a lot stronger than it appears to be now. Even I hope that, because I sure wouldn't want what turns out to be innocent young men -- and their families -- to have to suffer through this for a year. And I bet you wouldn't either.

(You're too smart to not have thought about this, but just in case -- always guard your soda or water, too. If you have to put it down, then get a new one when you're thirsty again. It's just not worth it to take a chance.)

[TorchTheWitch]

147. oooops, forgot something else...

Nifong has to go through NC's SBI since he doesn't have any real choice but to do so. His client is the state, and he has no one to bill if he sent the samples somewhere else for testing. He is required by law to have the NC SBI test the samples, but after that he could if he wanted then send the samples (once he got them back) to a private laboratory for additional or re-testing (like he did with the DNA). But that would take even longer. He's stuck with waiting on the NC SBI to generate their report and send him back the samples however long that takes. The NC SBI only has to return the report and samples within a reasonable time before the start of trial, and we know that won't be for another year at the earliest.

Since it appears that the NC SBI is in Raleigh, he may be able to use his influence and do some arm twisting to get the report back sooner than whatever is considered normal in NC.

However, personally, I think he already has the report and is sitting on it. I could be wrong, but with the NC SBI in Raleigh and his influence I would think he would be able to get the report generated as quickly as he got the DNA report generated. But who knows. It may also be that the NC SBI in Raleigh has to send the samples somewhere else for date rape drug testing because they may not have the ability to do that sort of testing like what was the case with Alabama.

I haven't been able to find any indication that the NC SBI is capable of handling the testing of date rape drugs, but since they are accredited, I'm assuming that they can. The NC SBI website is pretty sparse and gives no indication as to whether or not it is capable of doin testing for date rape drugs specifically.

[pnwmom]

152. So do you know how long N.C. discovery rules give him to produce

the results? Does he really get to wait until just before the trial?

[pnwmom]

46. About the rumors of a toxicology report

Why is it that you think one was done, apart from Nifong's reported "hinting" ? The nurse who filled out the SANE report didn't check the box saying that a toxicology report was ordered. (Discovery, page 543) Nifong says he doesn't have one to turn over.

And from other circumstances (a girl I know who was raped) I understand that hospitals don't usually order those tests anymore, because of their concerns that defense attorneys are likely to use them against a victim.

But after three months, and two requests for discovery, and a SANE report that says a toxicology report was never requested, you keep saying one might turn up. How come?

[TorchTheWitch]

50. Simple

Because in a defense motion filed by Attorney Osborn he claimed that Nifong formally told them he intended to produce a toxicology report at trial...

http://www.kirkosborn.com/Motions/MotiontoDeferTimeDeadline.pdf
1. On May 18, 2006, the Durham County District Attorney's Office hand-delivered to defendant's counsel "Response to Request for Voluntary Discovery, Statutory Notices and Reciprocal Motions." Contained within that discovery disclosure, the State noted: "Notice is also given to the Defendant, pursuant to the provisions of G.S. 15A-975(b), and where applicable N.C.G.S. 90-95(g) & (gl), of the State's intention to introduce at trial the following: (1) Evidence obtained from a search conducted pursuant to a search warrant when the Defendant was not present at the time and place of the execution of that warrant; (2) Scientific data accompanied by expert testimony; and (3) S.B.I. chemical analysis 1aboratory report and statement of chain of custody."

S.B.I. chemical analysis laboratory report is a State Bureau of Investigation toxicology report unless you want to believe that a chemical analysis was done on the beer that was found at the party to see if it was actually beer and what brand. Lord knows, if they were drinking good imported beer at this party nobody there could have possibly raped anyone, but if it was some cheap Coors or Bud out of a keg, well, the possibilities are just endless... imagine what horrors may have occurred at this party if they were drinking Miller slop or Rolling Rock swill! (especially if it was WARM!... eeeeeee gad!).

That's how come. If you want to keep believing the defense drivel that they claim to the press when their own court filings dispute what they claim to the press, that's up to you.

We've known from the beginning that the accuser was highly intoxicated on something at the time, so why does it matter so much how many different things she said and what it was? Of course anyone that is intoxicated at the time of a particular incident may not be credible. So what? I didn't see her or talk to her or have any reason to believe that she was lying at the time, and neither do you. It's hardly news that intoxicated people will say or do strange things that don't make sense while they are under the influence. Whether or not she could remember more clearly when she was no longer intoxicated is for a judge and jury to decide. Personally, I'd be more inclined to believe she may have lied at the time if she was sober. I've never known a highly intoxicated person to have the mental capacity to invent a deliberate lie, and don't know if such a thing is either possible or likely.

I see you haven't acknowledged that Seligmann could not have made at least the last phone call at 12:25:08 on his cellphone while he was occupied at the ATM machine (which means someone else had control of and used his cellphone) and don't question whether or not he made any of them between 12:05:49 and 12:25:08. Discrepancies like that just don't matter when there is defense drivel to trumpet as fact, huh?

[pnwmom]

53. I don't think it would matter if Seligman had ANY alibi evidence, or if

the defense has any evidence at all -- UNLESS there is either a full confession by at least one defendant, or very strong DNA evidence from her body (not the waste basket). Taken together, all the inconsistencies in the two dancers' stories ALONE provide enough doubt to overcome any possible scenario that I can imagine -- except the two I mentioned.

The dancer's credibility is shot. In the absence of physical evidence or a confession, why should anyone think that this drugged & drunken dancer (she admitted to having a couple of 22-ounce beers and muscle relaxants before arriving at the party) could possibly identify anybody?

[TorchTheWitch]

143. You watch too much CSI

Until that damn tv show, people never expected that there HAD to be DNA evidence to decide someone is guilty. People are found guilty based on testimony alone... even when it's conflicted by other testimony. There could be all kinds of OTHER evidence that adds up to guilt in the minds of the jury that has nothing to do with DNA. How in the world was anyone ever found guilty before DNA testing was invented anyway? Nobody expected a full confession in order to find someone guilty... that's absurd.

A couple of beers and a muscle relaxant hardly make anyone incapable of identifying an attacker. That's just nuts. What jury would ever think such a thing when there would be plenty of jury members that drink many times that regularly with no problem remembering even a casual conversation they had at the time? By the time the accuser got to the party the beers she had earlier would already have gone through her system since it takes approximately one hour to assimilate one drink. Theoretically, one can have a single drink every hour and never become impaired at all. Roberts says the accuser arrived sober, Bissey saw no evidence she was under the influence of anything when he observed her arrival, and the security guard did not detect the smell of alcohol on her at Kroger, so no one is going to care about what she took or drank before the party. They WILL care that soon after drinking one to one and a half drinks at the party that she was given by the players that she became suddenly VERY intoxicated coupled with the fact that Roberts did not because she didn't drink the drink she was given by the players at the party. If there's a chemical analysis that reports the presence of a date rape drug coupled with her behavior, guess what the jury is going to think?

There may be more evidence like that one pubic hair that was found on her. If that pubic hair can be shown to come from one of the accused, depending on where on her body it was found, guess what the jury is going to think especially when coupled with the above?

And what if Nifong can prove that one photo of the accuser getting in/out of the dark car that has a time-stamp indicating it was the end of the party had it's time-stamp deliberately changed to reflect that when it was actually the accuser arriving at the party, guess what the jury is going to think?

One or any combination of these coupled with the assumption that it can be shown that the accused were in the house with the accuser for enough time to rape her, they have a problem. No DNA or confession required, and that's as it should be since the real world doesn't work like a CSI tv show.

I have no idea why you believe that just because the accuser had a couple beers before the party and a muscle relaxant that she wouldn't be able to identify her attackers. Do you not drink or hang out with anyone that drinks or does drugs? Two beers and a muscle relaxant don't add up to her very intoxicated behavior.

Personally, I just believe that there will probably be at least one person on the jury that no matter what evidence there is simply will not believe that a stripper can be raped, and the accused will walk. I have never heard of any rape case of a stripper where the accused was found guilty especially if that stripper is assumed to be a hooker (and most people assume we all are).
I think for many people just that fact that she's a stripper is plenty enough reasonable doubt regardless of what evidence there may be. Even if DNA evidence WAS found all over her, many people would tend to assume it was a consensual encounter just because of what she does for a living.

[pnwmom]

146. I've never watched a single CSI.

Boston Legal, yes. CSI, no.

I have been around drunk people, though I can't say it's been fun. And what I have seen is that when someone guzzles a lot in a short period of time -- as she might have in fortifying herself for the performance -- they can seem normal at first and then a while later the alcohol suddenly kicks in and they're falling down drunk.

The accuser, by the way, didn't admit to just a couple of beers. She admitted to a couple of very LARGE beers -- up to 24 ounce beers. That makes 48 ounces of beer that she admitted to -- and drinkers are known for underestimating their alcohol consumption. She also said in the statement the next day that she had been very drunk at the party. Also, the second dancer acknowledged having some sips from her own drink, and said that the accuser spilled most of the accuser's. And then the accuser had sips from the second dancer's drink. How come the 2nd dancer didn't feel the effects, if they were both drinking from the same drink?

I am aware that DNA is a new piece of evidence and that rape cases in the past carried on without it. But they were also often very hard to prove, especially when the woman's identification of the suspect was unclear. And in the pre-DNA days, we had cases like the Scottsboro boys. That should be giving us pause, unless, as one commentator recently wrote, we think that this case should serve as some sort of "cosmic justice."

[BrownOak]

57. Not the same thing

Nifong did indeed tell the defense that he intended to introduce at trial the SBI chemical analysis laboratory report and statement of chain of custody, but that does not equate to a toxicology report. In fact, one of Osborn's complaints was that Nifong's notice was overly broad.

That chemical analysis could just as easily be the first round of DNA testing that was done by the SBI labs.

As for the discrepancy regarding the cell phone and the ATM photos, your speculation presumes that the two clocks are in sync. A variance of just 15 seconds would account for the discrepancies and would be rather easy to verify.

BTW - the defense has turned over all of the first round of discovery to MSNBC.

[pnwmom]

59. I know they let Dan Abrams look at it.

Did they actually release it?

I just looked at the website, and I still don't think they released it. They gave Dan Abrams a single viewing of all the pages (all sequentially numbered) and let him take notes.

[pnwmom]

60. Transcript of Dan Abrams recent Dateline interview about the case

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13530499/

SNIP

"Dan Abrams, who is also a duke alum, put the story of his alma mater front and center on his MSNBC show. Having watched the defense slowly leak information favorable to their clients, Abrams says he kept wondering if they might be holding something back.

"Abrams: And I convinced this source close to the defense that it’s important that all of the documents be seen.

"So the defense gave Abrams a one-time viewing of what it said were all the documents District Attorney Nifong used when the grand jury indicted the three players, including victims’ statements and hospital and police reports. He was not allowed to copy them, but took extensive notes. Based on what he read, Abrams says the prosecution’s case just didn’t add up for him—beginning with conflicting statements made by the accuser herself.

"Abrams: I saw at least four versions of what happened."

SNIP

[IndianaGreen]

66. Nifong has to disclose the SBI lab report during discovery

He cannot sit on it and then try to introduce it as evidence at trial, the judge won't allow it.

BTW - the defense has turned over all of the first round of discovery to MSNBC.

Not factually correct.

[BrownOak]

69. How so????

BTW - the defense has turned over all of the first round of discovery to MSNBC.

Not factually correct.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13438728/
DAN ABRAMS, MSNBC GENERAL MANAGER: Well, Susan, it‘s good to be back on the program. I‘ve got to say, we hear so many times on this program again and again, we talk about this case, well, we don‘t know everything...

FILAN: Right.

ABRAMS: ... well, we haven‘t seen all the discovery. Well now I‘ve seen them all. It‘s all numbered. Every page is numbered of the discovery. I‘ve seen it all now everything that the D.A. handed over to the defense team, and this case is even weaker than I originally thought.

http://www.dukechronicle.com/media/storage/paper884/news/2006/06/22/News/Abrams.Lambastes.Nifong-2117933.shtml?norewrite200606270920&sourcedomain=www.dukechronicle.com
Abrams said his skepticism arose from a lack of evidence supporting the district attorney's case and not
from any kind of bias.

He was the first member of the media to recently receive the almost 1,300 pages of discovery Nifong turned
over to the defense in May.

"There are so many contradictions in story that this DA never should have brought this case,"
Abrams said on "The Abrams Report" June 19, packet of evidence in hand. Abrams has argued the charges
against the players be dropped on the basis of insubstantial evidence.

[IndianaGreen]

71. "Turned over" is not the same as "letting look"

They let Dan Abrams look at what they got from Nifong during discovery. They didn't turn it over to Abrams or to MSNBC. "Turned over" is not the same as "letting look."

[pnwmom]

75. Thanks for the Abrams report link. n/t

[TorchTheWitch]

133. He CAN sit on it

He can sit on it until the very last moment which he undoubtedly will do. Discover is ongoing, and it is still in the voluntary phase. There is a WHOLE lot of time left in the discovery phase.

[TorchTheWitch]

131. DNA testing isn't chemicals

A chemical analysis is foreign substances in the blood/urine... i.e., recreational drugs, medications, alcohol, various poisons from ingestion or inhalation, etc. DNA is not a chemical and is not a foreign substance.

As for the discrepancy regarding the cell phone and the ATM photos, your speculation presumes that the two clocks are in sync. A variance of just 15 seconds would account for the discrepancies and would be rather easy to verify.

Seligmann's attorney claims they are. Do you really want to get into clocks being out of sync? Because that's a far better prosecution arguement that has been brought up many times before. Or are we just trying to make them out of sync JUST enough to put Seligmann in the clear? Arguing clocks being out of sync puts the entire defense timeline in jeopardy, and the dense is never going to go there.

BTW - the defense has turned over all of the first round of discovery to MSNBC.

Holy Mother of God... are people really that gullable? The defense CLAIMS they have turned over all of the first round of discovery to MSNBC. There is no way on God's earth they are ever going to make it all public... no possible way. NONE. Incidently, are they talking about THEIR discovery or the prosecution's discovery? No way in hell they'd produce all of it from both sides. Never happen. The very idea is just laughable.

[IndianaGreen]

65. Sorry, but Nifong is compelled to disclose a tox report during discovery

if there is such a thing. All you got is Nifong speculating about a date rape drug during one of the 70 interviews he gave to the media before the primary election.

This is not Hollywood or a TV show! There are no magic bullets or Perry Mason moments! Any prosecutor that withholds material evidence during discovery will quickly find that the court will rule that evidence inadmissible at trial.

[Name removed]

145. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[iverglas]

121. thanks to struggle4progress and TorchTheWitch

and probably others, haven't read the whole thread.

This is one of those bizarre "news" stories from south of the border that I try to avoid knowing about. And now that our year-long free preview of FoxNews on pay teevee has ended, that's much easier.

Up here, in the land of the real constitutionally guaranteed right to a fair trial (that's Canada), it is routine for publication bans to be placed on evidence before the trial begins. (You may recall the Paul Bernardo / Karla Homulka kerfuffle, when US media were defying the ban imposed by the Cdn court.)

This avoids all of this kind of mess: the defence leaking tidbits -- alleged tidbits at that ... and I have not grasped why the defence could supposedly disclose one part of the disclosure file and not other parts ... and the prosecutor making allegations in public beyond what is stated in the charge laid. And it makes it much more likely that an accused will get a jury without preconceived ideas about the case (and all the various extraneous elements of it, like the class/race colouring it has been given). And that a complainant will not be intimidated out of testifying. (The very idea of the name of a sexual assault complainant being published, unless at her own instigation, gives me the creeps.)

I find this approach frustrating at times -- and it can be argued that it too is exploited for political purposes, as in the case of the Liberal Party backroom boys in British Columbia charged with, uh, something relating to government corruption, where the release of the evidence was delayed by the judge after the date on which it was promised, coincidentally after a provincial election had been called for after the scheduled release date.

But essentially, it protects the integrity of the judicial system, and contributes to keeping it from falling into "disrepute" in the public's eyes. (Political games playing by judges is another threat to its integrity, but a different one, and one that is not solved by jeopardizing either the defence or prosecution case in individuals' cases by allowing evidence to be doled out in dribs and drabs by either side.)

Anyhow, stories like this are morbidly fascinating, from the outside. When one succumbs to temptation, it's always nice to hear more than one analysis.

[pnwmom]

123. Just one quick response, Iverglass

The reason the defense could "release" part of the prosecutor's file and not the whole thing is because what we are seeing are the legal filings with the court that are part of public record. For example, an attorney files a motion that refers to a search warrant, and attaches the search warrant. That motion and the warrant are then both a part of the public record and the news media is free to publish them. And we are free to read these "primary source documents" and decide what we think about them.

The reason we do things differently here than you do, is because we believe (we used to anyway) in a transparent system, so that average citizens could supervise, in a way, the workings of the system. I'm not saying our way of doing it is better, just that we have a rationale for it.

[iverglas]

124. certainly not how I understood it

The reason the defense could "release" part of the prosecutor's file and not the whole thing is because what we are seeing are the legal filings with the court that are part of public record.

The article referred to in the opening post talked about a "police report" included in the disclosure file. There is no indication that it had previously been filed in any court record. That's what the thread is kind of about, and that's what I was talking about.


The reason we do things differently here than you do, is because we believe (we used to anyway) in a transparent system, so that average citizens could supervise, in a way, the workings of the system. I'm not saying our way of doing it is better, just that we have a rationale for it.

Yeah -- and that's what we figure public trials are for. ;) (And I do hope that you were not implying that people in places like Canada don't believe in a transparent system, or have systems as transparent as anything in the US and in many cases considerably more ... because I'm afraid you'd be sadly disappointed, if so.)

And I'm increasingly convinced that we've got it close to as right as it can be got just now.

Of course, it's another of those instances where we do think it's just pretty fucked up to go to all the bother of electing a government and then claim not to trust it to do something as basic as prosecute a criminal case properly ...

[pnwmom]

134. The police report referenced in the OP has indeed been filed with the

court -- sometime last week, as I recall -- along with the accompanying defense motion. AFTER the attorney filed the motion with the attached police report, he gave both to the media. But it didn't really matter, because once it was filed it was available to anyone who came to the court and asked to see it; and members of the media are free to post it online. Most of the documents I have seen have been posted by the local newspapers and TV stations in sidebars to their stories. One of the attorneys also has a website (it turned up in google news one day) www.kirkosborn.com. At that site he has posted the legal filings that he's made on behalf of his client.

Perhaps your confusion is because of the words "discovery file." What has been happening is that the prosecutor had to give the defense copies of the evidence that may be used in the case. The defense attorneys have been going through this material. From time to time they will make a motion that references some document in the discovery file, e.g., a witness statement. At that point the motion is filed along with the referenced document. What was before only a piece of the discovery file is now a part of the publicly available record.

I wasn't implying anything superior to our way of doing things; actually, I explicitly denied that. But, since you mentioned it, with the gang that we have in charge these days, I think we need to retain every bit of transparency that we can. Bush would love to move the courts toward the English way of doing things but I think that, given the dictatorial tendency of some of our politicians, that would be a huge step in the wrong direction.

[iverglas]

162. no, I'm not confused

Perhaps your confusion is because of the words "discovery file."

I know perfectly well what a discovery file is, for pity's sake. Where I'm at, the defence is not permitted to disclose any of the contents to the public/media before trial, if a publication ban was ordered at the preliminary inquiry, as it usually is -- and in some instances may not disclose some of it to the accused him/herself (e.g. names/addresses of witnesses/complainants). What I understood was being said here was that the same applies there.

(A preliminary inquiry is our substitute for a grand jury. Prosecutors alone decide whether to charge, and then, in the case of indictable offences, rough equivalents of felonies, there must be a preliminary hearing where the prosecution presents the minimum elements of its case to support the charge proceeding -- to a judge, in open court. The judge decides whether the case may proceed to trial; if the judge finds that the case does not support the charge, the accused is discharged then and there. No rubber stamping of indictments -- and talk about yer transparency, eh?)

The article, dated Friday, said:

The one-page report, dated March 14, was included in 536 pages of additional evidence prosecutor Mike Nifong handed over to defense attorneys Thursday. It was released by Joseph Cheshire, who represents defendant David Evans.

You say:

The police report referenced in the OP has indeed been filed with the court -- sometime last week, as I recall -- along with the accompanying defense motion.

Since the defence apparently only received the document the day before the article was written, I'm somewhat skeptical about it having already been filed in a motion when it was released to the journalist. That is certainly not the impression I get. Normally, I'd spend an hour trying to find out, since I'm curious, but I gotta get some work done. (All about the military justice system, fascinating and yet extremely tedious ...)

[pnwmom]

167. You're right, I made a mistake.

I had confused this situation with another one. In this case, the document had not been filed with the court. Legally, that doesn't matter, because there is no gag order in place (that isn't the usual procedure here), but my statement was inaccurate as you realized.

What apparently happened is that after the attorney had been to court to file three other motions, he spoke to the news media there. While he was speaking to them about new discrepancies in the discovery file, he was interrupted by a police investigator, Linwood Wilson, who loudly proclaimed otherwise. Afterwards, Wilson told the media that he had read the entire file and that the accuser had not changed her story. The next day, the defense attorney sent a letter to the investigator pointing out the page in the discovery file that backed up his statements, and copied it to the press. Mr. Wilson spoke again to the press and reiterated his claims.

Thus, it is not only the defense attorneys who have been making public statements. Mr. Wilson, at least, has been making them too.

http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=triangle&id=4299691

"A bitter exchange that started outside of the courtroom when Linwood Wilson, an investigator for the District Attorney's Office, interrupted a press conference by defense attorney, Joseph Cheshire.

"The interruption came as Cheshire was referencing the discovery documents that indicate the accuser gave conflicting accounts of the alleged rape.

SNIP

"After the exchange, Wilson told Eyewitness News that he personally read all 1814 pages of discovery documents and has not read that the alleged victim changed her version of the story."

http://www.herald-sun.com/durham/4-747034.html

"Dear Mr. Wilson:

"Yesterday in front of the press you questioned my statement that the false accuser in the Duke case had stated she had been sexually assaulted by five people, as shown in newly released discovery. Since you are the District Attorney's Investigator, the press could have assumed -- falsely, as it turns out -- that you had actually read your file. You also asked to be directed to the page about which I commented. As a result, I enclose page 1304 of your office's discovery for your edification."

SNIP

Wilson said in an interview Friday, however, that Cheshire was "trying to twist what I asked him." He said he was questioning the lawyer's reference to 20 alleged rapists, not the reference to five.

"I was upset about the 20," Wilson acknowledged. "There ain't nothing about 20 in anything I've read. I wanted him to show it to me. One of the police officers did say there were 20 people present, but he didn't say 20 people raped this woman.

"We all know she said three," Wilson added. "We all know that because three people are charged. I wasn't questioning the three or the five. I was only questioning the 20."

[iverglas]

174. aargh

I had confused this situation with another one. In this case, the document had not been filed with the court. Legally, that doesn't matter, because there is no gag order in place ...

And whether it matters "legally" has never been in issue!

The issue I'm seeing has to do with the wisdom of forming opinions about the credibility of the complainant in this case based on dribs and drabs of prosecution evidence selectively released by the defence.

Where "legally" comes into it is, I gather, that the prosecution is under some greater obligation not to release evidence to the media/public, and thus presumably is not in a position to attempt to refute statements made by the defence, based on what may be very selectively cited information, by citing other information.

I'm still not clear on whether the defence has any obligation not to do release information in the discovery file, and -- my original question -- why it would be prohibited from releasing all of the discovery file (or at least the parts not otherwise protected, like medical records), as I understood to have been asserted here, and yet not be prohibited from releasing dribs and drabs of it.

As for the specific point on which you cite news reports, the police officer's explanation seems not unreasonable to me. I would certainly want to see video of the event, for instance, before assessing it -- to see what, exactly, the investigator appeared to have been responding to specifically. Taking someone's words out of context and assigning a meaning to them that was not intended -- in an attempt to persuade someone of something -- is really quite reprehensible, and if that were indeed what the defence has done in this instance, I would be most unimpressed.

If that is what the defence was doing, then for it to say:

Since you are the District Attorney's Investigator, the press could have assumed -- falsely, as it turns out -- that you had actually read your file.

-- an allegation that a statement was false based solely on its own misrepresentation of the statement -- would be doubly reprehensible and unimpressive.

I am curious what the "technical" word for the woman in this case is in that jurisdiction. Here, such an individual is normally referred to as "the complainant", in the context of the justice system. The Crown (the state) is the "accuser": the maker of the allegations, to a justice in the form of an information, that found the charge. Obviously, "victim" is inappropriate unless and until the charge is proved, and I find "accuser" -- as used by the defence here, "false accuser" -- to be misleading.

Just as an aside, I'll tell you something else without being asked. In addition to having been a victim of a serious sexual assault that was intended to end in my death, I have been the victim of a false allegation of a crime. I was charged, and, I really don't have any doubt, my life was adversely affected to a far more serious extent, until the charge was withdrawn much later, and permanently, than these young men's lives will ever be. (My account of the abduction and assault illustrates only one factor in the complex PTSD I suffer from, other instances of confinement and helplessness having contributed to it before and after that; now imagine being placed in a jail cell for several hours ... and again several weeks later, when the police knock on your door and you learn that your lawyer failed to appear for you in court several weeks before as arranged ... . Suicidal? Just a tad.)

So I am perfectly aware that prosecutors sometimes do pursue cases for inappropriate reasons and without properly assessing evidence, and of what the consequences may be. I am also aware of what it takes for a woman to pursue a sexual assault complaint. And I'm not generally impressed by what any third party (whether defence or prosecution counsel, for instance) might have to say about the facts of any case.

[pnwmom]

176. Torchthewitch provided a good explanation of why the whole file

can't be released somewhere else in this thread. Probably better than the one I will attempt, but I'll try anyway.

Almost any whole file is going to have information that any sane defense attorney isn't going to want the public to see. Even in the case of an innocent defendent there is always evidence that could be misinterpreted or twisted or is prejudicial. A defense attorney is ethically bound to represent his client's best interests; that would preclude him from releasing any potentially harmful information to anyone who might harm his client.

I think you need to see the document that was in dispute, in order to know whether the investigator's response (that he had read all 1800+ pages and the story didn't change) was reasonable. In case you haven't, you can find it here:

http://www.newsobserver.com/102/story/454117.html

It's not in the main article. It's in a link on the right hand side, under the words "Related content." "Attorney Joe Cheshire's letter to Linwood Wilson."

But my other point was that the prosecution side is not as close-mouthed as it is said to be. Mr. Wilson, in any case, seems to have no reluctance to talk to the press.

[iverglas]

178. that's dandy

Almost any whole file is going to have information that any sane defense attorney isn't going to want the public to see. Even in the case of an innocent defendent there is always evidence that could be misinterpreted or twisted or is prejudicial. A defense attorney is ethically bound to represent his client's best interests; that would preclude him from releasing any potentially harmful information to anyone who might harm his client.

But it obviously leads us right back to the whole original question: why would anyone base an opinion about the merits of this case on the tidbits of evidence that defence counsel DID decide to release to the media/public??

Everything you have said points to the need NOT to do that, surely!

I think you need to see the document that was in dispute, in order to know whether the investigator's response (that he had read all 1800+ pages and the story didn't change) was reasonable.

No, actually, I'd need to see exactly what I said I'd need to see: the CONTEXT in which the words spoken were spoken.

The intended meaning of a statement very commonly depends on what it was spoken in response to. If I say "yes", you have no idea what I am agreeing with unless you know what I was responding to. If I say "I never tied my shoe!" you can call me a liar, based on having seen me tie my shoe on a Tuesday in February, but if what I was responding to was "you stopped to tie your shoe during the Boston Marathon", you would not be representing my statement accurately.

I have no idea whether the defence is representing the investigator's statement accurately, because it was a statement made in the heat of the moment, in a very particular context, which may have been the allegation that the complainant initially made allegations about 20 men. That's a reasonable explanation, but of course it may be entirely untrue.

But my other point was that the prosecution side is not as close-mouthed as it is said to be. Mr. Wilson, in any case, seems to have no reluctance to talk to the press.

Me, I'm seeing rather a difference between an outburst in response to something that the individual apparently found outrageous and the calculated manoeuvres that defence counsel appear to be engaged in, in this case.

[pnwmom]

180. It wasn't just a single, ill-considered outburst. According to the

articles, he spoke to them at least two other times about this matter. He spoke to the TV people sometime after Cheshire finished his press conference, and he also made a media statement the next day.

[BrownOak]

58. But they have given all of the first round to MSNBC n/t

[pnwmom]

76. The attorneys allowed a trusted reporter one viewing of the file

and allowed him to take notes. They didn't release the file to the general media or allow Abrams to publish the file.

The key word is "trust." These defendants, and their clients, clearly trusted Abrams. Otherwise, they wouldn't have let him see the file.

Whether any of us is going to trust Abrams is another matter. On this issue, I personally do. But it would be justified to ask if he is biased, given his Duke connection.

[customerserviceguy]

15. What I'm most worried about here

is the potential effect on race relations. We have white America and black America starting to choose up sides here, and unless there is a clear resolution to this, it's going to be the OJ case all over again.

[IndianaGreen]

16. I am more concerned about due process and a judicial process

that is untainted by political or racial considerations.

Too many people chose sides solely based on their views on the class and race of the parties in this case, when they should have waited for the facts to come to light before forming an opinion. There are enough facts now available to lead a reasonable person to the conclusion that Reade Seligman was not even present at the house when the alleged rape took place, and Dave Evans did not have a mustache (fake or otherwise) and should not have been indicted.

[TorchTheWitch]

149. You have got to be kidding

I am more concerned about due process and a judicial process

Since when? You've been louder than most proclaiming the accuser is a lying ho and should be prosecuted without seeing the evidence and even before a trial judge is selected. You've come to that decision based on claims from the defense that aren't backed up with fact even when some of those claims directly contradict themselves. You are aware that our judicial system insists on a court of law where all the evidence is laid out before a judge and jury so they can then determine innocense or guilt? You are aware that the MSM is biased propaganda and they're regulary and consistantly full of shit? Due process and judicial process my foot. :eyes:

[pnwmom]

17. That's why Nifong is slime. He took advantage of racial divisions that

existed in the town -- and stirred them -- in order to win votes.

[struggle4progress]

20. Do you come up with this stuff yourself or is there a listserver?

[pnwmom]

22. I'm not sure what you're asking.

Are you asking where to find the filings?

[struggle4progress]

31. "Slimy Nifong" exploiting "racial divisions"?

[pnwmom]

39. Exactly. His black Democratic primary opponent accused him of using

the case to benefit his campaign, and I think his opponent was right.

The prosecutor was in a very tight democratic primary race, where the winner would be running unopposed in the fall. One of his close opponents was African American, and Nifong, who is white, knew that he needed a significant number of votes from black voters in order to win. When this case dropped into his lap , he probably decided that he was in a win-win situation.

While he was campaigning, he fielded dozens of interviews with the press and in front of the TV cameras, where he claimed that he knew that a brutal rape had occurred and that he would personally see to it that the guilty were dealt with harshly. He attended at least one rally at the accuser's college during the campaign. Then, after he won his election (by a close margin), he stopped talking to the press.

He probably still thinks that the case will benefit him no matter what the outcome is at trial. If he manages to win the case, after poisoning the jury pool with all his pre-indictment publicity, then he will have won. But even if he loses, he'll have established himself as a champion of the African-American community. He was the David against the Goliath of the rich white northerners and their fancy attorneys -- but he did his best to stand up for the poor wronged local woman. That will be his story, if he loses.

[TorchTheWitch]

150. He stopped talking to the press when the indictments came down

Which he is ethically bound to do. Not all prosecutors will heed that and continue to leak to the press and give interviews anyway.

Is the defense counsel LESS slime for doing the same thing? They claim they just HAD to respond to the press because of Nifong's interviews which is complete rubbish. Part of the defense's job is to slime the accuser in the press since in this country for some reason they're allowed to. There is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that whether Nifong said anything at all beyong "no comment" they would have done the same thing in the press since that's what they do. This wouldn't be such a huge problem if the press actually did its job in proper unbiased investigative reporting, but when the hell was the last time they did something like THAT? The press is nothing more than info-tainment these days.

I never thought it was right that either side be able to discuss a case in the press. Why is poisoning the jury pool part of our judicial process? It shouldn't be. This trial is going to be just as much of a biased circus in one direction or the other just like all the other big trials that came before like OJ, Kobe Bryant, Michael Jackson, Rodney King, Scott Peterson, and on and on.

[pnwmom]

153. Ever since 9/11 I can hardly stand to turn the TV news on.

I never know when I might have to see GWB, or hear him, and feel my skin start to crawl.

So I don't know what the defense attorneys have been doing in terms of media interviews. I can't think of any attorney interviews that have turned up when I've googled. Have they been doing that a lot? Or is it just reporters taking their motions and attachments and writing articles about them?

The thing about Nifong, he was talking to the press a great deal when he had his 46 suspects -- and he was loudly blaming them for that "wall of silence." But since they were ALL SUSPECTS and "hooligans" and possible accomplices what did he expect? Several of them cooperated before their parents found out, but of course their attorneys made them all stop talking.

When you say the attorneys have been sliming the accuser, what do you mean? Have they been making statements about her?

[pnwmom]

40. I think I finally figured out what you were asking.

The local media, not surprisingly, have thorough coverage. The News-Observer, The Herald-Sun, and WRAL are some that come to mind. I first found them on google-news when my mother was asking me about things she had heard about the case on TV. She was worried about the three students. I was telling her that they sure sounded guilty to me. After all, the prosecutor had medical reports --he said -- that showed she had been brutally raped. Therefore some of those students HAD to be guilty. But then I started looking into it and the more I read, the more I had to admit that her instincts were right. This prosecutor can't be trusted. He or his associates have been deliberately or negligently holding back evidence that didn't fit their theory.

I've never seen anything about a list-serve.

[NashVegas]

18. More Cherry-Picked Info From the Defense

My understanding is that media outlets have made repeated requests for the defense atty's to turn over the whole shebang, and that the defense continues to release only the info they want before the public.

I don't know who's telling the truth in this matter, I don't know who isn't. I think it's foolish for anyone to make up their mind based on info that comes from one source, with an agenda: taint the jury pool and intimidate the accuser.

[IndianaGreen]

19. Taint the jury pool? Intimidate the accuser?

Taint the jury pool? It was prosecutor Nifong who said that the accuser was given a date rape drug, then failed to produce a tox report supporting his public charges. It was the MSM that had the pictures of the students on the front cover, publicly convicting them in the absence of any other evidence other than the prosecutor's statements. It was the prosecutor that told a judge that the victim was choked and raped anally in order to get a search warrant, yet none of the medical examinations released by the prosecutor mention any evidence of anal rape or of choke marks.

Intimidate the accuser? Not when the accuser is a new version of Tawana Brawley!

Doubts About Duke

The prosecutor insists his rape case is strong. One big problem: the facts thus far.

By Evan Thomas and Susannah Meadows
Newsweek

June 29, 2006 issue - The order had come, signed by a judge, requiring that the Duke lacrosse team give DNA samples. The prosecutor was trying to identify the three players who had allegedly raped an exotic dancer at the house rented by three of the team's co-captains on the night of March 13-14. All 47 players had gathered in a classroom near the lacrosse field to hear their lawyer, Bob Ekstrand, tell them what they needed to do. Ekstrand was about to tell the players that they could appeal the order as "overbroad," too sweeping in its scope, when the players got up and started heading for their cars to drive downtown to the police station. (The team's one black player was not required to go; the accuser, who is black, claimed her attackers were white.)

Ekstrand was struck to see how little hesitation the players showed. After all, if the DNA of any one of those men matched DNA found on the accuser's body, it could ruin his life: disgrace followed by many years in prison. But there was no talk of hiring individual lawyers or stalling for time; the players seemed to want to get on with it. "I was watching to see if anyone hung back," Ekstrand told NEWSWEEK. No one did.

It is possible, almost three months later, that the players are maintaining a conspiracy of silence. But it seems highly unlikely. Rather, court documents in the case increasingly suggest that Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifong had very little evidence upon which to indict three players for rape. Indeed, the available evidence is so thin or contradictory that it seems fair to ask what Nifong could have been thinking when he confidently told reporters that there was "no doubt" in his mind that the woman had been raped at the party held by the lacrosse team.

The media coverage of the case has been enormous. NEWSWEEK put the mug shots of two of the players—Reade Seligmann, 20, and Collin Finnerty, 19—on its cover the week after they were indicted. Some early accounts raised doubts about the guilt of the players, but the story more typically played as a morality tale of pampered jocks gone wild. Lately, as more evidence from police or medical reports have been filed or cited in court documents by defense lawyers, the national and local media have been raising questions about Nifong's conduct of the case and his motivations.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13392547/site/newsweek/

[pnwmom]

25. And it was the prosecutor who called the students "hooligans" and

said that he had "no doubt" that the accuser had suffered a brutal rape -- despite the hospital report that showed otherwise -- and who vowed before the cameras that he would prosecute the case himself and that the guilty parties would be treated "harshly."

[NashVegas]

26. The Hospital Report Now Says She Wasn't Raped?

I missed that one.

[pnwmom]

27. The hospital report doesn't make a judgment about rape.

But it certainly doesn't support her claim that she underwent a thirty minute rape, strangulation, kicking, and beating involving vaginal, oral, and anal penetration.

It does say that she had no bruises or other visible injuries on her body, except for very small scabs on her knee and foot. The only relevant finding was some edema in the vaginal area (and not the rectal area), which doesn't prove rape -- just some sort of sexual activity. Since she admitted to the use of the vibrator that day, and since DNA from her boyfriend was found in her vagina, that could explain why she had evidence of having had sex.

[IndianaGreen]

28. The hospital report does not support accuser's account, as pnwmom says

Nifong E-Mails Claim Defense 'Spinning' Duke Lacrosse Case

NBC's Dan Abrams Deems Case Weak After Reviewing All Evidence

POSTED: 7:24 am EDT June 19, 2006
UPDATED: 8:09 pm EDT June 19, 2006

DURHAM, N.C. -- Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifong fired back Monday at Newsweek magazine, which published a story about the Duke University lacrosse rape case this week that described Nifong's defense of his case as "angry."

<snip>

But NBC chief legal correspondent Dan Abrams said Monday that he has reviewed all 1,278 pages of evidence that Nifong handed over to defense attorneys last month, and he said the case doesn't look good for the prosecution.

"This case is even weaker than I originally thought," said Abrams, a Duke alumnus. "I don't understand how Mike Nifong brought this case. I really don't understand."

Among the inconsistencies he pointed to were statements from the accuser that she was beaten by her attackers, when a nurse who examined her found no evidence of other injuries. Also, the accuser's statements that a second dancer at the party was separated from her before the attack, or alternately, that the second dancer assisted with the assault.

http://www.nbc17.com/news/9389239/detail.html

[pnwmom]

29. IndianaGreen, you might be interested in this Salon commentary

written back when Clinton was facing all the allegations of sexual assault.

I think the biggest problem liberals face with this whole case is that the presumption of innocence -- a cherished value -- is in conflict with the liberal belief that women don't lie about having been raped.

If they never lie, why bother having a trial? The government could save a lot of money. That is the logical conclusion, if you really believe that women who press charges of rape are always telling the truth.

http://www.salon.com/news/1999/03/cov_10news.html

"Who says women never lie about rape?"

SNIP

"The judicial system is not monolithic; stories of excessive zeal in pursuing alleged culprits can always be countered with stories of callous indifference to real victims. Still, there is no doubt that in many cases, the "women don't lie" dogma has led to serious infringements on the rights of accused men.

"The trouble with the feminist position is that it seems to leave no room for the presumption of innocence when a woman accuses a man of violating her. After the notorious sexual assault trial of sportscaster Marv Albert, defending the judge's decision to admit compromising information about Albert's past but not about the woman's, attorney Gloria Allred decried "the notion that there's some sort of moral equivalency between the defendant and the victim" -- as if the defendant did not have the same moral standing as his accuser until he has been proven guilty.

"To recognize that some women wrongly accuse men of rape is no more anti-female than it is anti-male to recognize that some men rape women. Is it so unreasonable to think that a uniquely damaging and stigmatizing charge will be used by some people as a weapon, just as others will use their muscle as a weapon? Do we really believe that when women have power -- and surely there is power in an accusation of rape -- they are less likely to abuse it than men? As Columbia University law professor George Fletcher has written, "It is important to defend the interests of women as victims, but not to go so far as to accord women complaining of rape a presumption of honesty and objectivity."

"Feminists have often been accused of betraying women out of allegiance to Clinton. The charge of hypocrisy is hard to refute, since many of these same feminists have made solidarity with women a basic principle. But feminism shouldn't be about supporting Clinton, or blindly supporting women. It should be about fairness, including fairness to men who find themselves under the cloud of a charge that can never be proved or disproved."

In this particular case, however, I don't think the accuser was using these charges as a weapon -- but as a shield -- because in her drunken state she was trying to get out of being put in a mental health facility, and she knew that she could be in violation of her probation. I do think though that Nifong was using these charges as a weapon in his campaign against his primary campaign opponents, and that's unconscionable.

[TorchTheWitch]

154. The defense CAN'T let the press look at the SANE

The SANE report is personal medical records that are under court seal... Osborn even had to attach it to his motion under seal since even though once a motion and it's exhibits are filed they can be viewed by the public, there are laws against any personal medical records to be made available to the public.

Ain't no way Abrams saw a SANE report or any lab reports or any DNA reports since by NC law, those reports are not permitted to be released to ANYONE other than who is involved in the case (i.e., the judge, investigators, prosecution, defense, relevant laboratory personnel, etc.). Lab reports, hair analysis, chemical analysis, DNA reports - ANY medical information of BOTH the accused and accuser is required by NC law to not be released to ANYONE outside of the judicial system/investigation.

All Abrams could have been legally allowed to look at would be investigative/police reports/notes, written testimony, phone records, photographs not medically related, etc. In other words, the claim from the defense that they released ALL the discovery from the prosecution to the public is BULLSHIT. The defense would only release that discovery that they are legally allowed to and only what they WANT to. To seriously imagine anything else is ludicrous.

[chookie]

56. A SANE does not interpret evidence

A SANE examines a person who reports a sexual assault. The SANE provides comfort and support, and performs a careful objective examination. The information/evidence they report is turned over to doctors, law enforcement and legal reps, who interpret the evidence as to whether it supports or does not support a report of rape. The SANE does not interpret the findings of the examination.

[TorchTheWitch]

151. We don't know WHAT the SANE report says

The defense has claimed they received only 5 sections of a 17 section SANE report and are basing their findings only on those sections they claim to possess. Obviously, the prosecution would have submitted the whole thing to the judge/magistrate who then determined that a search warrant was proper. Is it not logical that the 12 sections of the SANE report the defense claims not to have must say SOMETHING?

Once again, more bullshit from the defense.

[pnwmom]

168. But we know what parts of the report say, unless you think that

the attorney filed a false affidavit with the court. If the nurse who did the physical exam noted no significant injuries, then anything that said otherwise in the other pages wouldn't clarify anything, would it? We'd be left with -- at best -- a SANE report that was internally inconsistent. Once again, something to add to the reasonable doubt.

[pnwmom]

24. When have you EVER heard of a defense attorney turning

over a prosecutor's whole file to the news media?

Never. Because it can't be done. Not unless an attorney wants to risk a malpractice claim.

A defense attorney is ethically required to represent his clients. Period. Not the news media, and not the public.

The D.A., on the other hand, doesn't represent the accuser. S/he represents the public and the interests of justice.

I've been wondering where this idea came from -- why the AP would ask for the file, and why people would think that was a reasonable thing to do -- and I came to the conclusion that people were making the analogy from the fact that politicians like Kerry are asked to open up their files, and do.

But these students are not politicians. They're not running for office. They're under the threat of criminal indictments and facing charges that could send them to jail for decades. Their lawyers are supposed to be representing their legal interests -- no one else's -- not satisying the curiousity of the public.

You say that the information has been "cherry-picked." What the news media is able to access, for the most part, are the legal filings and the attached documents. Many of those documents are things like witness statements and police reports. You can read the original documents word for word, online. When I read these statements and reports, I'm overwhelmed with the sheer number of inconsistencies in them. For example, how could the accuser not be certain whether there were THREE other dancers, or only ONE? She even named the three! And yet we are supposed to believe, in her drunken state (which she admitted the next day in a statement that you can also find online) that she was able to ID her three (or was it five? or two?) bathroom assailants.

This case has come down to a question of her credibility -- and because of the inconsistencies in her stories, she has almost none. I can't think of any evidence the prosecutor could come up with, short of a full confession by one of the defendants -- that would overcome the doubt that is produced from reading just her own conflicting statements, along with those of the other dancer.

[laureloak]

45. Since you don't know who is telling the truth,

it would be correct to say that you have a shadow of doubt about the girl's story?

[philosophie_en_rose]

48. So people in trauma are expected to have photographic memories?

Unlike the majority of people in this thread, I'll freely admit that I am not investigating this case nor privy to actual evidence.

However, it is interesting that people cannot give a little room this woman.


Whether or not there is enough evidence to legally convict a person accused of rape (or whether a traumatized rape victim can remember all of the details - or ANY details - or wants to end invasive exams or questions) does NOT PROVE THAT SHE WAS NOT RAPED.

[pnwmom]

51. You're right, it doesn't. That's not how our system, with its presumption

of innocence, is supposed to work. The prosecutor is supposed to prove (1) that she was raped AND (2) that each of the three defendants is guilty.

I think the problem for many DU'ers is that this case puts some of our cherished values in conflict. One -- the presumption of innocence. Two-- support for the underdog. We see her as the underdog, and we also want to think that women never lie about rape. But if that were the case, there goes the presumption of innocence. Why bother even trying the men? If women always tell the truth, why not just throw the men in jail?

Of course, women are just as capable of doing wrong as men are. Personally, I think she made the accusation out of simple, human weakness. She was on probation for very serious charges (involving drunk driving and chasing a police officer with a stolen vehicle). When she found herself being taken to the Durham health center for intoxication, she knew that she might be in a lot of trouble. So out pops the story about the rape, and she gets a trip to the hospital instead.

If you read the police reports, medical reports, and other filings, you might better understand why many people are doubting her story. When my mother first asked me about the case, all I had heard was the prosecutor's side. So I told her: the evidence says she was raped, so it must be some students at the party. But then I looked into it, and eventually I became convinced that this case has been extremely weak from the very beginning. It's just that the prosecutor withheld a lot of exculpatory evidence from the warrants and made claims in his media appearances that turned out not to be true.

[Pastiche423]

95. Have you ever been raped?

[onenote]

97. have you got a point?

[Pastiche423]

99. Do you make it a point to answer a question

poised to someone else?

[onenote]

101. send a private message if you want it to be private

this is a message board, not private email. Apparently you think its okay for you to respond to pnwmom's post, which wasn't directed to you in particular, but not alright for anyone but pnwmom to respond to you. Sorry, it doesn't work that way. I've been participating in this thread. You posted a question on it that didn't have any explanation of why it was being asked. I was curious what the point was of the question. I still am. Apparently you either don't have a point or are unwilling to make it public.

[FredScuttle]

102. Manners are important too

You could have the common sense and courtesy to realize that Pastiche was asking a direct question of pnwmom and let her respond instead of jumping in the middle and ganging up on her. But, if you have to insert yourself, go ahead, it's a free country.

So, onenote....have you ever been raped?

[onenote]

105. nope. And here's a question for you

How is that question relevant to anything pnwmom wrote? Or, for that matter, what I wrote?

Oh yeah, at least I had the manners not to ask Pastiche if she/he had been raped.

Finally, Mr. Manners, if I had waited for pnwmom to respond (and I haven't seen any evidence that pnwmom was offended by my jumping in ahead of her), would it have been proper for me to respond to pnwmom, or at that point would the entire subthread have been a conversation limited by "manners" to two people? That would be a new one for me here at DU....

[pnwmom]

111. LOL. Thanks again, onenote.

[FredScuttle]

112. Why don't you let pnwmom answer for herself?

She's more than capable of speaking for herself...why don't you let her respond?

And I asked you if you had been raped because you and others on this thread are posting quite authoritatively on how a true rape victim should act in the wake of her rape vs. someone who is obviously faking it. Are you speaking from personal experience or speculation?

[pnwmom]

115. I think onenote was doing a good job of responding in my stead.

And, for onenote, I'll ask you to show me where in this thread anyone says how a true rape victim should act in the wake of her rape?

[onenote]

118. show me where I've posted anything close to what you claim I've posted

I'll grow old waiting, but I'm a patient guy. I've not posted a single word on this thread about how a "true rape victim should act." In fact all I've posted (apart from trying to get an explanation of a particularly snarky post from Pastiche) are links to false rape claims,a post that also specifically stated that I don't think false claims are common.

So what exactly are you referring to?


Oh yeah, by the way, how have I been preventing pnwmom from responding. Are the servers here at DU that slow that only one person can post every five minutes or something?

on edit: oh yeah, i forgot. I also posted a response questioning why someone posted a message that suggested that the defendants got a free ride into duke by citing an article about Harvard.

[Name removed]

104. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[pnwmom]

109. Do you make it a point to ask such personal questions in a public space?

[pnwmom]

108. Thank you onenote. That was a better answer than I could come up with

as I pulled my jaw off the floor.

[FredScuttle]

100. Amazing

Amazing how, even in her highly intoxicated state, this girl concocted a complex and detailed gang rape hoax, all on the way to the hospital. She's a genius, that one! :sarcasm:

[pnwmom]

110. Not amazing at all.

In her intoxicated state, she came up with a bunch of confusing and contradictory answers to the questions of the medical staff and police.

[IndianaGreen]

67. Yeah, we gave more than a little room to Tawana Brawley

and we all got burned by it.

[FredScuttle]

78. You do realize that the grand jury declined to indict in the Brawley case

right?

Otherwise, you'd look pretty foolish continually bringing up that single case over and over and over and over again because IT HAS NO RELATION TO THIS CASE.

If you have another example of a false rape claim resulting in indictments, convictions, executions of innocent defendants, I'd love to hear it.

Oh yeah! I got one! The Scottsboro Boys!



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottsboro_boys

[IndianaGreen]

79. Al Sharpton made a name for himself off Tawana

and found himself civilly liable.

The relation to this case is that an accuser made false allegations that resulted in permanent harm to the accused.

If you have another example of a false rape claim resulting in indictments, convictions, executions of innocent defendants, I'd love to hear it.

It happens all the time, together with false claims of child abuse. Black defendants have been imprisoned and sentenced to death because of false rape claims. Only DNA science was able to get them out of death row, after DNA evidence showed that they were innocent. It can happen to anyone!

Does DNA Technology Warrant a Death Penalty Moratorium?

by Barbara McCuen
Wednesday, May 3, 2000

On January 31, Illinois Governor George Ryan (R), a death penalty supporter, put a hold on executions in the state after 13 inmates on death row had their convictions overturned. Since the state reestablished the death penalty in 1977, Illinois has released more prisoners from death row after proof of their innocence than it has put to death?13 overturned convictions and 12 executions. In recent years, journalists rather than lawyers in the system have been largely responsible for pursuing the exculpatory evidence. A Northwestern University journalism professor and his graduate students conducted investigations resulting in the overturning of three murder convictions, one of them days before the scheduled execution.

The moratorium has a number of supporters who back the death penalty, but want to ensure that it is justly applied. Crime solving using DNA technology has made tremendous strides over the past two decades. Many of the overturned Illinois convictions were supported by DNA testing and other evidence. Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy (D) has introduced legislation that would make DNA testing less complicated for death row inmates and improve the counsel they are afforded at the state and federal levels.

http://speakout.com/activism/issue_briefs/1231b-1.html

[FredScuttle]

80. "false allegations"

Are you working with Nifong? You have definite proof these are "false" allegations?

You are beyond belief.

And, I asked for examples of FALSE RAPE CLAIMS, not convicted people exonerated by DNA. Being found not guilty of rape or cleared of a rape by DNA evidence does not automatically equal false rape claim.

[IndianaGreen]

81. "real or imagined" rape

In 1918 the historian Ulrich B. Phillips, citing 105 cases of slaves accused of raping white women, challenged the "oft-asserted Southern tradition that Negroes never violated white women before slavery was abolished."(1) Phillips was writing at a time when the rape, whether real or imagined, of white women by black men was highly politicized.

http://uncpress.unc.edu/chapters/sommerville_rape.html

[FredScuttle]

83. Hello?

Could you please answer my question? What proof do you have that this case, the Duke Lacrosse gang rape, is a false rape claim?

[BrownOak]

84. The inverse of that would be

for you to supply some proof that it is a true rape claim. You've been very outspoken in your personal belief that the suspects are guilty and that you don't have to strive for the same level of proof as a court of law. So, what is that proof that you have that makes you so adamant it is a true rape claim?

[FredScuttle]

88. The victim said she was raped

I believe her. So does the DA. End of story. Any other questions?

[pnwmom]

92. The victim ALSO said, at least two other times, that she WASN'T raped.

But you don't believe those statements. You believe her -- selectively.

And you don't KNOW what Nifong actually believes, unless you're a mind-reader. You only know what he SAYS he believes.

[FredScuttle]

98. Let's try this again

Nifong announces the case and says this woman has been gang-raped and he believes her.

Defense leaks alleged statements attributed to the victim that she wasn't raped.

Now, am I going to believe that Nifong is proceeding with prosecuting a rape case, especially one with as much attention as this, he doesn't personally believe happened or am I to think that the defense would love to throw out anything that hurts the victim's credibility, including statements she may have made while under the influence?

[pnwmom]

107. The original documents that are out there aren't a result of "leaking."

They're attached to legal documents that got filed in court and are available to the public to read, in their entirety.

I'm not saying that the whole file is available. But there are numerous pieces of "primary source" data that are available, and the contradictions in them are enough to torpedo Nifong's case.

I think Nifong thought he had a win-win situation. So he went around giving his 70 interviews during his election campaign and proceeded with the indictments. He knew that he had plenty of time to work up a case AFTER getting the indictments, since NC has pretty loose definitions of a "speedy trial." If he eventually won the case, he would be a hero. If he lost, then he would still the the champion for the local African-American community, an important block in his Democratic constituency.

And, by the way, that theory was also held by his African-American primary opponent, who accused him of grandstanding on this case.

[FredScuttle]

126. So the black voters of Durham voted for him based on one case?

So nice you can make sweeping generalizations on how blacks vote. Ken Mehlman would love your advice in his outreach campaign.

[pnwmom]

137. He won by a very small margin, and he got twice as many black votes

as either of the other candidates, who happened to be black. Nobody thought that was likely -- before the publicity began about this case.

[FredScuttle]

156. So the causality is....?

I'm waiting for the exit polling showing a majority of black voters saying they voted for Nifong solely because of his handling of the Duke case. Conversely, I'd like to see how many voters voted for one of the other two candidates because of his handling of the case.

[pnwmom]

169. Obviously, there was no exit polling, but it doesn't matter.

It doesn't even matter, in the long run, whether or not he won any actual votes through his actions. The point is, he could have taken those actions because he THOUGHT it would get him votes. I believe he did think that -- and that's why he appeared in a rally on the accuser's campus and made so many statements about the case during his campaign. But that's just my opinion.

[FredScuttle]

182. It doesn't matter?

Then on what do you base your attack on Nifong for exploiting a racially explosive case to win election? You think black people only vote for a DA based on one case?

[pnwmom]

185. His black opponents believed he was exploiting the case to win the

election and they said so. What they said made sense to me.

[FredScuttle]

189. Oh, and his black opponents had no dog in the fight eh?

Did his black opponents speak for the black community in Durham? Did they say blacks were voting for him solely based on this one case?

[pnwmom]

194. If you don't live in the community they very well may know more

about it than you do.

[BrownOak]

116. Alleged Statements?

Are you talking about the statements that the alleged victim gave the investigators which were released to the defense during discovery?

What exactly is alleged about those statements? Are you saying the police are working with the defense now to discredit the alleged victim?

[FredScuttle]

117. When they're introduced at trial

then I'll call them official.

Along with the other alleged statements the victim may have made, including more details of her assault and identification of her attackers. Of course, that's speculation, but we won't know until the trial.

[pnwmom]

119. The documents that have been filed are already part of the official

court record in this case. That won't change after they've been introduced at trial. The prosecutor won't dispute them -- they're a part of HIS record. The defendant's lawyers won't either -- they help their case.

For the sake of argument, let's assume that I am right and that Nifong doesn't have any big pieces of evidence up his sleeve to add to what we have seen. In that particular situation, do you still think he was right to choose this case to prosecute?

And, assuming I'm right and there isn't any more solid evidence and these students are found not guilty -- will you still think these students should have had to spend a year of their lives and huge sums of money defending such a weak case?

[FredScuttle]

127. Assuming you're right....about what?

Nifong could have loads of evidence that 1)establishes there was a gang rape committed and 2)establishes the guilt of the defendants, but he still has to impanel and convince a jury of that. The defense has waged a blitzkrieg to ensure that potential jurors get a load of doubt in their minds before this thing even reaches trial.

Do I think he was right to choose this case to prosecute? I think the people of Durham have a DA who is not afraid to prosecute what he knew would be a sensationalized case against a privileged class (Duke athletes) based on the evidence he's seen. I think he's right and frankly, I could give a shit that these defendants have to spend a year defending themselves and spending their parents' (and boosters') money on the very people attacking a rape victim on a weekly basis.

[BrownOak]

132. So do you think he's turned over this potential load...

...of evidence to the defense as per the open discovery laws in NC?

If so, do you think that Dan Abrams is lying to the public when he says he's seen all of the evidence turned over in that first round of discovery?

If you feel that Abrams has seen it all do you think that he's lying to the public when he says that the case is weak, that the alleged victim's statements are full of contradictions not just with her various versions of what took place but with the statements from other witnesses, and that he doesn't understand how the DA could bring the case to trial?

[TorchTheWitch]

160. Abrams CAN'T have seen all the discovery

The defense by law may not show the public any medical records of either the accused or the accuser which would include the DNA tests, lab reports, chemical analysis, SANE report, etc. Therefore, Abrams has NOT seen all the discovery given over to the defense.

No defense attorney will EVER EVER EVER hand over to the public ALL the discovery particularly when that discovery includes items they are required by law not to disclose (and that they will lose their license to practice if they do), nor will they hand over to the public one single solitary tidbit of information provided by the prosecution that in any way, shape or form could possible damage their case. We know that the police questioned the players and determined that they lied about who they were for the specific purpose of attempting to make it difficult for the dancers to identify them in the event that their identity would become an issue. There is no way on God's earth that the defense handed over ANY of that transcript, reports or notes. We don't even know what else that may damage the defense's case that may be in the discovery Nifong gave over to the defense since there is no way in hell the defense will let the public see it.

Why do you THINK the defense claims that let Abrams look at ALL of the discovery they were given in the first round? Obviously, because they are trying to make it appear that there is not one single shred of evidence of any kind against the accused. It is simply IMPOSSIBLE for the defense to have let Abrams see ALL of the discovery the prosecution provided in the first round.

[pnwmom]

138. So even if all three defendants are actually innocent, you

don't "give a shit" about what they and their families are going through. That answers my question all right.

I do care about what the accuser is going through, even though I believe that while she was intoxicated, she made a false claim that she then felt she had to stick to. I think she should be in treatment somewhere, and that Nifong should resign.

[FredScuttle]

166. And if they're guilty, I should do what?

stand and applaud? They're criminal defendants in a gang rape trial...I don't know them personally so I don't care particularly what they're "going through". Any sympathy I could muster for them is mitigated by what their lawyers have been doing to a rape victim for the last few months.

You claim to care about what the victim is going through and then accuse her of making a false rape claim in the same breath. OK.

[pnwmom]

170. I think she is a woman who has had a tough life and made

some serious mistakes, including -- I believe -- in actions with regard to this case. I also believe that Nifong has made things much, much worse for her, by almost forcing her to dig herself in. Another prosecutor might have refrained from pushing for an indictment, and instead pushed her into alcohol treatment. Nifong, IMO, decided to use her.

[FredScuttle]

181. A DA pursuing a gang rape case is "using" the victim?

Nifong isn't a substance abuse counselor, he's a prosecutor who is fulfilling the responsibility of his office in pursuing this matter.

I guess Nifong also forced the Duke Lacrosse team to get all those police visits for rowdy behavior and set up the party with strippers as well, eh? Don't forget...he also made one of the defendants go to D.C. and commit a hate crime. Busy man, that Nifong. :sarcasm:

[pnwmom]

183. A DA pursuing an ALLEGED gang rape case, based on contradictory

testimony and an irregular lineup, who stands in front of the cameras and at rallies during his campaign and vows that he will personally see that the guilty parties (who must be lacrosse team members) all are treated "harshly" -- yeah, that DA is using the ALLEGED victim.

[FredScuttle]

191. Let me ask you this

If this case is so flimsy and such a farce and mockery of justice, why hasn't the defense moved for a dismissal? If all this evidence impeaches the victim and clears the defendants, why no motion to dismiss the case? Have the defense lawyers convinced their clients that it's good to keep spending their money to prolong this because they'll get a killer book deal out of it?

[pnwmom]

195. I'm not a lawyer and I don't know the judge involved, or what

the tactics would be. But probably the lawyers are waiting for discovery to be over before they move for dismissal. Otherwise, the prosecutor would just counter by saying that they haven't seen all of his case yet.

[FredScuttle]

201. ah....."waiting for discovery to be over"

what a refreshing concept.

[TorchTheWitch]

159. He HAS to

For the sake of argument, let's assume that I am right and that Nifong doesn't have any big pieces of evidence up his sleeve to add to what we have seen. In that particular situation, do you still think he was right to choose this case to prosecute?

Once again... there are three criteria for a prosecutor to determine that a case must go to a jury trial in a rape case:

1. The accuser wants to go forward with the case
2. There is SOME kind of physical evidence that suggests the accuser was raped
3. The accuser identified her attackers

THAT'S IT. Even if Nifong believed this case is an absolute loser, he STILL is ethically bound to go forward to trial.

Prosecutors do not CHOSE what cases to prosecute otherwise they would only chose those cases that are absolute slam dunks and to hell with all the other victims that have a RIGHT to have their case prosecuted when all the criteria are met and the RIGHT of the citizens of the state to be protected from criminals by the proper procedure of a criminal trial in which the defendant may be found guilty and given appropriate punishment. The most Nifong could do is dump the case on an assistant DA to try so he would have minimal involvement. He CANNOT chose what cases to try and what cases not to try by his own whim. If he could, no rape case would EVER be tried in his jurisdiction unless the defendant gave a full confession... even with abundant DNA evidence any rape case can still be judged to be an act of consensaul sex in which DNA evidence would be noted. It THAT how you want Nifong to run his jurisdiction??? By letting HIM pick and chose which cases to prosecute and which cases not to???

A prosecutor has a duty to the state to prosecute any case that meets the minimal criteria for a jury trial as it is the job of the government to protect the public from criminals by the proper procedure of a criminal trial in which the defendant may be found guilty and given appropriate punishment. Is there some reason you want it to be some other way?

[onenote]

163. I don't think that's right -- prosecutorial discretion is well settled

Not a criminal law expert, but its my understanding that prosecutors generally have broad discretion to decide whether or not to pursue an indictment. Indeed, even after indictment, criminal charges, including rape as well as other charges, can and sometimes are dropped by the prosecution.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/09/AR2005080901504.html
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/howard/bal-ho.charges23jun23,0,4985608.story?track=rss
http://www.csulb.edu/~d49er/Spring1996/vol3-03/3nbarrett.html

[pnwmom]

171. Since the ID's did not follow police dept. or NC procedure, was the

prosecutor still bound to consider them to be legitimate I.D.'s, or was this within his discretion?

[pnwmom]

188. You're not allowing for prosecutorial discretion.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3805/is_199806/ai_n8790682

Georgetown Law Journal, June 1998

"PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION

"Courts recognize a prosecutor's broad discretion to initiate and conduct criminal prosecutions, in part out of regard for the separation of powers doctrine695 and in part because "the decision to prosecute is particularly ill-suited to judicial review."696 In the absence of contrary evidence, courts presume that criminal prosecutions are undertaken in good faith and in a nondiscriminatory manner.697 So long as a prosecutor has probable cause to believe that the accused has committed an offense, the decision to prosecute rests within her discretion.698 A prosecutor has broad authority to decide whether to investigate,699 grant immunity,700 or permit a plea bargain,701 and to determine whether to bring charges,702 what charges to bring,703 when to bring charges,704 and where to bring charges.705"

In other words, "so long as a prosecutor has probable cause," s/he can exercise his or her discretion and choose whether or not to prosecute a case.

[BrownOak]

113. OK

The suspects say they didn't rape her. IndianaGreen believes them. So does Dan Abrams who has seen all of the prosecution's evidence. That makes the allegations false. End of story. Any other questions?

[FredScuttle]

129. Yeah.....when was Dan Abrams made the judge in the case?

He's seen "all the prosecution's evidence"? Really? Or has he seen what the defense allowed him to see? And, in the absence of having the case actually, ya know, PRESENTED to him, he's made up his mind that it's a crock?

Pfft.

[BrownOak]

130. Right about the time Mike Nifong was made the judge in the case...

So it's OK for you to presume guilt based on the statements of the alleged victim and the actions of the DA, yet when someone else presumes a lack of guilt based on the statements of the accused and the reporting of a third party who has seen all, yes all, of the prosecution's evidence released in the discovery you dismiss their opinion.

You can't have it both ways. IndianaGreen's view of the situation is every bit as valid as yours, perhaps even more as his/her opinions are backed by the only documented reports from investigators that have been seen by the public. You can try to discredit all that's been released in those motions as defense spin, but the fact remains that those snippets of reports are more substantial than the comments from the DA who may very well have his own reasons for spinning the case.

[FredScuttle]

157. Let me ask you this...

Who has more knowledge of this case and the evidence - Mike Nifong or Dan Abrahms?

And the conflict here isn't necessarily on the guilt of the defendants. This whole thread is asserting the victim made a false rape claim, with which I vehemently disagree. I think the defendants are guilty, but I can't say that with any certainty until the trial is conducted. What I do believe is that this girl was raped.

[pnwmom]

172. It is actually possible that Abrams knows more, since Nifong had

the opportunity to look at the defense's exculpatory information and turned it down.

[FredScuttle]

184. Do you believe that Abrams has seen more evidence than the DA?

If there was this magical exculpatory information, how come the defense hasn't moved for a dismissal?

[pnwmom]

140. Abrams claims that he saw all the pages, that they were numbered

in sequential order, and that he made sure that no pages were missing.

[FredScuttle]

158. "All the pages"? All of what?

There is no way you can claim Dan Abrams has seen ALL of the prosecution's evidence. As mentioned above, he's only seen a portion of the SANE report due to HIPAA regulations.

[pnwmom]

173. I didn't say that Abrams said he had seen all of the prosecution's

evidence. But he does claim to have seen all of the evidence that the prosecution turned over to the defense.

But you're right about HIPAA regulations. He can't have seen all of that.

[pnwmom]

91. We have proof that the accuser made multiple claims about the alleged

rape that conflict with each other, in many and significant respects. For example, how many dancers were with her that night -- one or three? She said both, at different times. One claim is false.

How many assailants? Three or five (or possibly 20)? There's only one right answer (probably zero). The others are false.

Did the dancers cling to each other before the attack, while the students pulled them apart and dragged the accuser into the bathroom? Or did the second dancer help carry the protesting first dancer into the house so that she could steal her money before the students raped her? The dancer reported both scenarios. Pick one -- the other is false.

She said she was kicked and beaten during the rape. She said she wasn't assaulted during the rape. Both statements came out of her mouth. Both cannot be true.

You get the idea. She didn't make ONE false claim. She made numerous false claims. Then there is the other evidence that conflicts with her various claims, for example:

the medical evidence, which shows no bruises on her body
the DNA evidence, which matched only her boyfriend
the second dancer's statements, which conflict with each other and with the accuser's statements

Facing all of this squarely, as Nifong should have done before he took this case to the grand jury, we are well beyond the threshold of reasonable doubt. IMO, her numerous false claims along with the other exculpatory evidence adds up to one big "false rape claim."

And by the way, the fact that the grand jury rubber-stamped this doesn't mean anything. Good for the jurors on the Brawley case, but it is unusual for a jury to not approve a prosecutor's case. On the other hand, maybe that prosecutor didn't provide misleading statements on the search warrants and withhold exculpatory evidence, as Nifong did.

[FredScuttle]

93. You have all the evidence lying in front of you, then, right?

What's that? You're relying on what's been released in the media? Well, we can rest assured that there's no bias or strategic leaking of info there. Everything on the up and up. :sarcasm:

I asked for proof. You have no proof because you don't have all the evidence. Neither do I. What you have is speculative garbage leaked by a defense team that is looking to paint the accuser in the worst light possible - maybe to influence potential jurors, maybe to intimidate her into dropping the charge. You cannot state that you know, beyond a reasonable doubt, that a rape didn't occur because you don't have all the evidence.

Yet you and the others here will go on posting how awful it is that this girl filed a false rape claim. I wish you luck. I'm waiting for the trial. You know, the process initiated by a grand jury "rubber-stamping" this case? So what....we should throw out the grand jury component of our judicial system and have prosecutors bring cases to trial based on whether they pass your smell test?

[pnwmom]

103. No one needs to see the entire file to have proof that the dancer

made false claims, because that can be shown simply by comparing the documents that ARE a matter of public record.

There are numerous documents available online that are a part of the court record in this case. Things like search warrants, police reports, and witness statements -- documents filed in court that are attached to motions. You can see the conflicting statements for yourself.

All the doubt I have now would overcome ALMOST anything the prosecutor could come up with, short of a full confession by one of the defendants or a witness who has been hiding in the woodwork. I'm willing to bet that won't happen, but I'm open to changing my mind under those circumstances.

No prosecutor brings to the grand jury all claims that come into his office. They ALWAYS are selective about which cases they prosecute. I think Nifong went ahead with this one because it suited his personal, political agenda, not because this was a more solid case than the others that came across his desk that day.

And where have I EVER posted "how awful it is that this girl filed a false rape claim." Nowhere. I've repeatedly expressed my opinion that she said something in a weak moment, while drunk and not wanting to be put into the health center for intoxication (she was under probation for charges involving intoxication). The person I blame in all of this is Nifong, who took advantage of her case and is playing with these students lives for the sake of his own political career.

[pnwmom]

86. By your definition, there would never be a false rape claim.

Or at least, it would never be possible to prove one.

[FredScuttle]

87. Uh, yeah there would (and have been)

Ever heard of Gary Dotson? He was exonerated through DNA, but the "victim" came forward and confessed she filed a false claim.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Dotson

I've got a serious question....why do all of the Duke defenders use Tawana Brawley to reference a false rape claim case? Why don't you ever cite this case?

[pnwmom]

94. I've never cited the Brawley case, and I'm a DU'er.

So you should ask someone else about that. But my guess is that the Brawley case, because of Sharpton, got a lot more national publicity.

[FredScuttle]

96. My apologies

Didn't mean to say you specifically cited the Brawley case.

on edit: you are right that the Dotson case didn't get as much publicity as the Brawley case, but it certainly was huge news in 1985 (recall Phyllis George on the CBS morning show after she interviewed Dotson and his accuser, she asked them if they wanted to hug. That caused almost as many headlines)

[pnwmom]

114. thanks, Fred Scuttle.

I had forgotten all about the Brawley case, until it kept coming up on these threads.

And living on the other side of the country, I was only vaguely aware of the final outcome. I remembered that the defendants were vindicated, but not when or how.

[onenote]

89. since you asked

http://www.highbeam.com/doc.aspx?DOCID=1G1:64617061&ctrlInfo=Round20%3AMode20c%3ADocG%3AResult&ao=

http://www.wtnh.com/Global/story.asp?S=331894&nav=0RdaI12H

http://www.walb.com/global/Story.asp?s=2197042

Let me be absolutely clear that I don't think false rape claims are common. But to suggest, as you have, that they don't exist, is to cast a blind eye to reality.

(waiting for inevitable explanation that the women in these cases were forced to recant or chose to recant for various reasons other than that they had made up the story in the first place....)

[FredScuttle]

90. Let me be clearer

I asked IndianaGreen what proof he has that THIS CASE, the Duke Lacrosse gang rape case, is a false rape claim. I don't deny that there have been false rape claims of note in the past (in fact, I listed a couple above - the Scottsboro Boys and Gary Dotson).

Just burns me when people bring up the Tawana Brawley case as being equivalent to this case (the Duke case)

[iverglas]

122. donchew know??

Oppression and exploitation and victimization are the lot of people of colour and people of the working classes ... not of women!!

There ain't no such thing as misogyny. White women are oppressors and exploiters and victimizers, rich women are oppressors and exploiters and victimizers, and women of colour and working class women are oppressed and exploited and victimized by the white and the rich of both sexes -- never by men of colour or working class men! Pshaw, what an idea. And the notion that white women or rich women might be oppressed or exploited or victimized by men of colour or working class men ... why, that's just too bizarre to imagine. Fortunately, we don't have to imagine it here. Phew.

When yer a doctinaire socialist, that's how the world is. Black and white -- and rich and poor, but never male and female. I don't get it myself, how black and white got in there and male and female didn't, but there ya go. I'm a sort of feminist social democrat myself (that's as socialist as circumstances permit), and I've never seen the need for these rules ...

And oh yeah, I've been raped (we still called it that up here back then; these days it's sexual assault). In case anyone wondered. Lucky to get out alive, since that wasn't the plan. And I could describe the single accused down to the scar above his left eye and his licence plate, because I'm kind of an odd person, and was in law school and working on a study of the sentencing of dangerous sexual offenders at the time, and when he had his hands around my neck and I was starting to lose consciousness, I was calculating the odds that this was going to be a rape-homicide and not just a rape ... and decided I'd hit the jackpot despite the really very low odds and my usual inability to win any game of chance. I don't expect most people in the world to be like me, and I don't always judge someone else's behaviour or ascribe them skills based on my own.

Funny how it's not that difficult to have very firm opinions about matters of opinion, and yet an open mind about matters of fact that one knows bugger all about, eh?

[pnwmom]

142. Why is it that so many of the posters here who talk about defense

spin and waiting for the evidence, etc., aren't bothering to look at the evidence that is already out there? I'd be more interested in your opinion if you would actually read the police reports, the search warrant, and the witness statements.

[iverglas]

164. dang, eh?

I'd be more interested in your opinion if you would actually read the police reports, the search warrant, and the witness statements.

And the amazing thing is that not only have I not expressed any opinion about this case or any aspect of it -- I don't have one!

What I said in the post you replied to was:

Funny how it's not that difficult to have very firm opinions about matters of opinion, and yet an open mind about matters of fact that one knows bugger all about, eh?

Whether or not someone committed a criminal offence -- and whether or not the prosecution has the evidence to support a charge or convict, or is acting out of impure motives, etc. etc. -- are not matters of opinion.

At least not in the ordinary sense; the question of sufficient evidence is of course a matter of the opinion of a properly instructed trier of fact which has heard and considered the admissible evidence, that opinion being authoritative -- but not necessarily "correct". The opinion of anyone who is not properly instructed and does not have access to the relevant evidence is just hot air, generally.

I quite often state "no opinion" in situations like this, while objecting to some of the opinions expressed (which I haven't even done in this case, actually -- I simply stated that I appreciated hearing more than one analysis) ... and am not infrequently ascribed an opinion nonetheless.

[pnwmom]

106. Speaking of the Scottsboro boys

Nicholas Kristoff wrote about them with regard to this case.

http://www.wilmingtonstar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060613/NEWS/606130306/1050&template=currents

SNIP

Nifong may have had a motive for prosecuting a case that wouldn't otherwise merit it: using it as a campaign tool. Heavily outspent in a tough three-way election race, he was the lone white man on the ballot, and he needed both media attention and black votes to win. In the end, he got twice as many black votes as his closest opponent, and that put him over the top.

Unfortunately, many in the commentariat started by assuming that the lacrosse players were thugs.

We have a shameful history in this country of racial prejudice. One of the low points came in the 1930s when the Scottsboro Boys were pulled off a train in Alabama and charged with rape because of the lies of two white women. The crowds and media began a witch hunt (one headline: "Nine Black Fiends Committed Revolting Crime") because they could not see past the teenagers' skin color.

So let's take a deep breath and step back. Black hobos shouldn't have been stereotyped then, and neither should white jocks today.

[IndianaGreen]

70. Defense lawyers: Dancer claimed she wasn't raped (June 26)

From Reade Seligmann defense team. Seligmann was the defendant that was at the bank ATM machine when the alleged rape took place.

Defense lawyers: Dancer claimed she wasn't raped

By John Stevenson : The Herald-Sun
Jun 26, 2006 : 8:56 pm ET

DURHAM -- A new batch of prosecution information showed that no rape occurred during a Duke University lacrosse party in March and revealed roughly a dozen conflicting statements by the accuser -- who even once told authorities she was not sexually assaulted -- two defense lawyers contend in court documents filed Monday.

Lawyers Kirk Osborn and Ernest Conner, representing indicted rape suspect Reade Seligmann, said they needed to know which of the accuser's stories District Attorney Mike Nifong intended to use "in his attempt to falsely prosecute" their client.

Osborn and Conner were responding to 536 pages of documents about the case that they received from Nifong last week, on top of 1,298 pages they got earlier.

The documents consist "mainly of extraneous, irrelevant material," the defense lawyers wrote of the new documents.

None show any crime occurred, they added. In fact, they said, the documents show the accuser -- an exotic dancer hired to perform at the party -- said no rape occurred, and gave about a dozen conflicting statements.

http://www.heraldsun.com/durham/4-747701.html

[genie_weenie]

72. IndianaGreen stop already you are trouncing sacred cows

This is a make up case for all the people who did suffer at the hands of the white, privileged athletes of Duke. Don't start bringing up facts, or truth into this case, it's NEVER been about that...

[pnwmom]

77. Genie_weenie, I am afraid

you are so right.

:shrug:

[superconnected]

82. Those poor kids who worked so hard to get into duke...likely not

http://www.gladwell.com/2005/2005_10_10_a_admissions.html

[onenote]

85. non sequitur much?

[pnwmom]

120. I think a number of the posters here have a misunderstanding about

the justice system.

It isn't about finding ultimate "truth." It is about evaluating conflicting claims.

In evaluating the credibililty of a witness's statements, one thing that jurors are directed to do is to look at both the internal consistency of the statement, and the consistency with other statements made by that witness and by other witnesses, as well as the rest of the evidence.

It may well be true that a "typical" rape victim makes lots of mistakes in her account, because of the trauma. That doesn't change the standard, however -- it just explains why rape cases can be hard to prove. In other words, jurors are STILL supposed to be evaluating any rape accuser's statements to make sure they are consistent and make sense, and fit with the rest of the evidence. Otherwise, it lowers the accuser's credibility.

If an accuser was intoxicated, it explains why she may not have made coherent statements. But it doesn't change the standard either. If the stories of a drunken accuser fail the consistency test, that reduces her credibility.

Again -- the standard of looking for consistency in a witness's statement applies EVEN in rape cases EVEN though rape victims may have a harder time than other less traumatized victims of meeting this standard. We don't have a different standard for truth in rape cases. And we still give the defendant a presumption of innocence.

[iverglas]

125. well, I'm seeing another misunderstanding

I think a number of the posters here have a misunderstanding about the justice system.
It isn't about finding ultimate "truth." It is about evaluating conflicting claims.

Actually, it's about evaluating allegations based on, among other things, admissible evidence. Oh, and -- all the admissible evidence presented by all parties to the case.

This here, of course, is not the justice system. And therein may be where the misunderstanding lies.

Here, people can say what they want and judge as they like, without taking a stitch of admissible evidence into account, or based on completely inadmissible or even false evidence, or their personal prejudices or past experience, or the side of the bed they got out of. And no one is under any obligation to present any evidence to us here at all -- and it is probably in the interests of one side or another not to present at least some of the available and perhaps admissible evidence to us, for one reason or another.

It isn't necessarily going to be a very worthwhile exercise to form such opinions, but there you are.

It may well be true that a "typical" rape victim makes lots of mistakes in her account, because of the trauma. That doesn't change the standard, however -- it just explains why rape cases can be hard to prove. In other words, jurors are STILL supposed to be evaluating any rape accuser's statements to make sure they are consistent and make sense, and fit with the rest of the evidence. Otherwise, it lowers the accuser's credibility.

I'm not sure ... but I really don't think that's what I was taught in law school. Do you teach criminal procedure or some such, and have things changed since I left practice? Or are they really all that different down there?

Up here -- and I'd bet down there too -- it wasn't all that long ago that a jury had to be cautioned that it was "unsafe" to convict a man charged with rape on the uncorroborated word of the victim. That was the law when I was assaulted, as a matter of fact. I knew it, because I'd just completed first year crim law. That's why when I made my escape -- running barefoot headlong out of an abandoned gravel quarry, losing my glasses when I fell, terrified that the man was going to run over me or stop the car and attack me after I had the presence of mind to run when he turned his head for an instant, after being careful to keep my purse (and ID) with me by convincing him I needed to have my cigarettes close at all times when he let me out of the car with no door handles and said we were going for a walk -- I ran straight to the farmhouse I could dimly make out down the road, and banged on the door and announced "I've just been raped" to a startled stranger: because "recent complaint" was corroboration. And I knew it. I kind of suspect that 99% of the population didn't.

Rape victims are not the only complainants, or witnesses, who make confused, contradictory statements. Eyewitnesses are in fact notoriously unreliable, and can not uncommonly be tripped up on what they think they remember. The witness's state of mind at the time of the event is very definitely relevant -- it can make his/her testimony non-credible, *or* it can explain inconsistencies where there is a credible account among the inconsistent versions.

Rape victims' traumatized state really is not "why rape cases can be hard to prove". If they are, there are a number of reasons, not least of which (but, one hopes, declining) is widespread resistance to believing rape complainants.

We don't have a different standard for truth in rape cases. And we still give the defendant a presumption of innocence.

-- IN COURT. As you point out, a trial is not about finding the truth. The presumption is not a statement that an accused IS INNOCENT, it is a rule meaning no one may be punished for a crime unless the crime has been proved to the requisite standard. It actually has bugger all to do with "innocence". The point is simply that someone who is not found guilty cannot be punished, and no one is found guilty until a court finds him/her guilty.

No member of the public who is not trying the case has any obligation to presume any accused person to be anything. A sensible person does not form an opinion about anyone's guilt or innocence without having the necessary facts, of course. Guilt or innocence. I don't presume these individuals to be innocent anymore than I presume it is raining -- because my presuming doesn't change whatever the facts actually are, even if I don't know what they are, and so it would be plain pointless.

[onenote]

128. i don't have a problem with not presuming their innocence, but i do have

a problem with presuming their guilt.

My position has been, and continues to be, that I have reached no opinion on whether the accuser was in fact the victim of a forcible sexual assault or whether, if she was, the accused were the perpetrators. I'm waiting to see a more complete picture of the evidence on both sides before forming that opinion. Having said that, I've also said that I don't have a problem with the fact that others here have formed opinions, on both sides.

What I do have a problem with is with those who argue that the information made public by the defense (either in court filings or press statements) is only a part of the picture but then still adhere to the point of view that the accused are probably guilty -- even though that the only basis for that conclusion is itself partial information. I think anyone with an open mind has to acknowledge that, unless there is evidence to counter what has come out so far (and there very well may be such evidence, which is why I've reached no conclusions), the case is weak.

Put it another way: if the defense was staying completely silent and court papers were being filed with medical reports showing severe physical trauma of the kind frequently and typically associated with a forcible sexual assault, would some of those posters who criticize those who believe the indictments were a miscarriage of justice be as quick to say "but wait, the defendants haven't had their day in court" or would they be hanging them even before a trial?

[iverglas]

161. the giveaway

... if the defense was staying completely silent and court papers were being filed with medical reports showing severe physical trauma of the kind frequently and typically associated with a forcible sexual assault ...

Severe physical trauma IS NOT typically associated with sexual assault -- and whether a sexual assault was "forcible" is an entirely different question. "Rape" is non-consensual sexual assault. Nonetheless, it is entirely possible for a sexual assault to be forcible and for there to be no signs of "severe physical trauma".

In my case, I was confined in a car from which all interior handles had been removed. I directed the driver to release me. I screamed, leaned on the horn, and attempted to kick out the passenger window. I was choked into near-unconsciousness. And then I got very friendly. And the only sign of "severe physical trauma" to come out of any of this was the large bruise on *his* stomach where I pinched him hard (missed my target, unfortunately).

Anyone who expects signs of "severe physical trauma" in a sexual assault victim -- and anyone who chooses to remain skeptical of allegations of assault where they are not present (or have not been brought to his/her attention) -- is, as we say in the law biz, applying the wrong test.

And it's a test that has left women vulnerable to victimization for, well, millennia.

... would some of those posters who criticize those who believe the indictments were a miscarriage of justice be as quick to say "but wait, the defendants haven't had their day in court" or would they be hanging them even before a trial?

I wouldn't know. The lynch mob hereabouts is usually large and loud, so I'd expect at least some people here would be clamouring for a hanging, but I have no idea what the people in question would be doing. I'd probably be forming a tentative judgment in my own mind, and what I'd be calling for would be the laying of charges or an explanation of why no charges were laid, if that were the case.

Since I'm not the judicial system, it really wouldn't matter a whit whether I thought them guilty or not guilty, so I wouldn't likely be expressing an opinion on the subject.

I do understand here that the issue at present is whether indictments should have been brought, it being possible that that process, which is not transparent like a trial, can be perverted.

Personally, I would neither form nor express an opinion in that regard, because, in addition to my finding the idea of releasing evidence to the media/public before trial bizarre, the whole concept of having elected individuals in charge of the process, rather than impartial public servants, is too bizarre for me to get my head around. It kind of seems to me that if a society is going to set things up so that the criminal justice system is politicized in that way, it can hardly expect that it is not going to be perverted for political purposes, or be surprised if it is.

(Just for background, in Canada, the federal and provincial/territorial attorneys general are members of cabinet, i.e. are elected as MPs or MPPs and then appointed to their positions by the Prime Minister or premier. After that, all members of their departments, including the prosecutors in all local offices, and the senior prosecutors who are in charge of those offices, are public servants who are hired and promoted on the merit principle. They make prosecution decisions, exercising their prosecutorial discretion. Political motivation is not entirely unheard of, on the part of people with an interest in advancing their careers, but their security of tenure and redress processes go a long way to ensuring there is no political interference or personal interests in play.)

I'm not in the "they're guilty" or "they're not guilty" camp, here. I understand the objections to tarring and feathering a sexual assault complainant without the facts, and I also understand the reluctance to trust a possibly politically-motivated prosecution and the feeling that wait-until-trial isn't really a sufficient solution to that problem, if it exists. It strikes me that it's still the best one, though, particularly given that if the skepticism turns out to be founded, the victims of the witchhunt, if it is one, would have redress.

The public's interest in the prosecution of violent offenders is a rather important one, and speculation about prosecutorial (or complainant) motivation isn't really a sufficient basis for choosing a course of action that might severely jeopardize that interest.

[onenote]

165. My apologies. I should have chosen my words more carefully

What I was trying to convey is the following: that where there is evidence of physical trauma, it often is an indication of forcible (and non-consensual) sex. I didn't mean to (although my poor choice of words inadvertently did) convey the impression that evidence of physical trauma is required to establish rape or even that it is typically found in rape cases. A rape can, and commonly often does occur without being manifested in physical trauma. My only point (poorly made) was that if the only information being publicized about this case was highly prejudicial to the defendants, my guess is that there would be a number of posters (and I did not mean to suggest that you are one of them) pointing to that evidence as "proof" of the defendant's guilt, even though the defendants had not had their day in court and an opportunity to rebut.

[pnwmom]

175. But this woman claims to have been kicked, beaten, and strangled by

three (or five) large, strong guys over a period of thirty minutes. Granting your point that a forcible rape wouldn't necessarily leave any visible trauma -- wouldn't the kind of assault described by this accuser be expected to leave some marks?

I agree with you that having elections for prosecutors seems like a very dumb idea. I was just about to say that I thought our federal system was much better (appointed prosecutors), when I realized who is in charge of appointing them. So maybe the situation is hopeless.

As the the idea of redress, if the students turn out to be "not guilty." I understand there is very little that can be done, in that case. Actions here for malicious prosecution are notoriously difficult to win, if that's the kind of redress you're talking about. And the state won't be repaying the students' parents for all the hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars spent in attorneys' fees.

[iverglas]

177. balancing interests

I give up; what is the perfect solution here?

(I mean, apart from you guys bothering to elect governments that are not fascistic, and then adopting a justice system that is a little more likely to act in the public interest ...)

Someone else here, perhaps TorchTheWitch, make this point rather more eloquently than I bothered to do in my post in this subthread: the public has an interest in ensuring that people who commit crimes are dealth with as we have decided that such people should be dealt with -- and in ensuring that allegations of such acts are investigated and brought before the courts for determination if the criteria for doing so are met.

A prosecutor is not a court; the standard that must be met for prosecuting is not the standard that must be met for convicting. Given that (and a load of other factors), it is inevitable that people will sometimes be charged and prosecuted when they have committed no crime ... or when it is impossible to prove that they committed a crime.

It appears to happen not infrequently, in fact. Death penalty advocacy groups seem to have a decent body of evidence to that effect, just for starters.

I'm curious whether the people here who are so concerned about what they see as an unfounded prosecution in this case evince quite as much concern when the victim of the miscarriage -- often just as politically motivated as this case is alleged to be (look up "Stanley Faulder" perhaps) -- isn't quite as young, handsome, wealthy and white, and hasn't got quite so many expensive lawyers and quite the same access to the media.

The justice system is a human system, just like all our other systems. And it is particularly afflicted by conflicts of interests -- not on the part of the system itself, but in the nature of its very functions: the public interest protection from crime and criminals, and the individual's interest in his/her liberty and security not being taken away without justification.

We have invented whole bodies of rules to try to ensure that neither of those interests is elevated too high at the expense of the other. We have rules that make forced confessions inadmissible, rules requiring speedy trials, rules that compel the prosecution to turn over its evidence, the basic rules of what proof is sufficient for conviction, and on and on and on.

I can think of a few rules that look, to me, to be needed in this instance, and eliminating politicized prosecutors would be the first one -- even if this particular prosecutor is not acting out of any political motivation, the appearance of political motivation certainly seems to be present.

But within the existing rules, I don't know that anyone has any solid basis for claiming that the prosecution in this case should be abandoned. Again, I am not stating an assessment of the arguments on either side of the issue; I could spend the rest of the week investigating the situation and still not have the information I needed in order to do that. But I'm not the one making a claim or trying to persuade anyone or asserting that anyone else's claims are motivated by something other than reasonable conclusions from available facts.

As for redress, I might just suggest that if these individuals and their counsel are considering such an action in the event that they are acquitted or the charges withdrawn, they're not doing themselves any favours at present -- from what I can see. They're looking just a little less than straightforward, and I would think they'd do well to make their case, to whomever they want to make it to, somewhat more simply and with a little less flinging of mud.

[pnwmom]

179. I doubt that they are considering any attempt at redress because,

as I explained, there isn't any good avenue for this.

As for your point about the defendants being "young, handsome, wealthy, and white," I think that for many (possibly the majority of) DU'ers, the students' outward appearance was a major strike AGAINST them, at least at the beginning of this case. I read many snarky comments here about how guilty they "looked," about how they acted "entitled," about how they dressed like Republicans (horrors) or that their parents were Republican. Obviously, according to many DU'ers, that made them guilty as hell.

Liberal democrats are always more comfortable championing the underdog. My initial reaction, as I've admitted, was also to assume that Nifong's statements about this "brutal rape" were true, at least some of the students must be guilty, and that this was just typical spoiled jock behavior. I didn't change my mind because of the way the boys look (personally, I don't think any of them is particularly good-looking, but that's my opinion and entirely irrelevant here.) I changed it after seeing the serious contradictions in the witness statements, and after learning about how the police lineup was carried out. Given all that, I will be very surprised if the prosecutor's case turns out to be provable.

[FredScuttle]

186. Their appearance was a major strike against them?

Try again, dear. For "many (possibly the majority)", it was the terrorizing of their neighbors, the multiple visits by police, the wall of silence they erected after the gang rape to protect the assailants (allegedly), the e-mail from one of the partygoers fantasizing about kidnapping another stripper for a skin-peeling session and so on and so on...

These "boys" are grade-A assholes. The trial will determine whether they're rapists as well.

[pnwmom]

190. In the early weeks of this case I read MANY posts by DU'ers focusing

on the appearance and family background of the students, and associating those factors with the likelihood of their guilt.

[FredScuttle]

193. It's fruitless to go on quibbling about this

I'm sure there were posts condemning the lacrosse players because they were affluent and coddled and looked like junior Republicans, so fine. I was here at the beginning and I and many others felt that their bad behavior in the neighborhood previous to the gang rape was enough to warrant criticism.

[pnwmom]

197. Sure their behavior warrants criticism.

But not ten or twenty years in jail or millions in attorneys fees. Not unless they actually committed the crime -- and there are already truckloads of reasonable doubt that they did.

If it turns out that Nifong has something up his sleeve and they are actually guilty -- fine. I'd feel a lot better about that than I would to think that young people guilty of nothing more than attending a party where a stripper happened to be dancing could end up in prison for decades.

And yes, innocent people have been convicted before. That's no justification, in my book.

[iverglas]

199. perhaps it cuts both ways

Some look at those factors as indicators of the kinds of character flaws that make allegations like these credible (they're narcissistic little assholes) ... some look at them as factors that, statistically, make the allegations less credible in the circumstances (they have too much to lose by doing such things and people like them don't commonly do such things).

Or either side would say that's what it's doing, and in fact both sides are operating from prejudice. And of course the fact that someone states a conclusion influenced by prejudice doesn't mean that the same conclusion stated by someone else to be drawn from facts is not reasonable.

The fact remains that the attention focused on this case -- by a whole lot of people of differing opinions -- does seem to have been generated by the richness, whiteness and maleness of the accused and the unrichness, unwhiteness and unmaleness of the complainant. Take away the class / race / sex advantage on the accused's side of the ring, and what do we have? A sordid little tale that would likely never make the papers.

That was really my question:

I'm curious whether the people here who are so concerned about what they see as an unfounded prosecution in this case evince quite as much concern when the victim of the miscarriage -- often just as politically motivated as this case is alleged to be (look up "Stanley Faulder" perhaps) -- isn't quite as young, handsome, wealthy and white, and hasn't got quite so many expensive lawyers and quite the same access to the media.

-- there are many miscarriages of justice in this world, and specifically in the US, that people might choose to get outraged about. Many of them appear to be prompted by an accused's race or sex or class. I'm curious whether people who are outraged at what they see as a miscarriage of justice in which the victims are white, rich and male spend as much time seeking out and protesting miscarriages of justice involving different kinds of accused ... or maybe just wait for expensive lawyers and complicit media to hand them a case to be outraged about on a platter, and don't give a thought to why they might be getting handed *this* one and no other.

(Stan Faulder was a working-class, possibly brain-damaged white drifter from Canada charged with murdering the mother of one of the wealthiest men in Texas a few years ago. The prosecution was privately funded by the rich man, who of course counted prosecutors among his cronies, witnesses were paid, evidence was inconsistent, Faulder was never informed of his Geneva Convention rights ... and nobody in the world ever knew about it all until years later when it was just about too late. He got executed, and there is a pretty good chance he committed no homicide.)

Kinda like those cute blond missing little girls and adolescents, y'know. Are there really no ugly missing girls, no missing girls of colour, no missing girls from the wrong part of town? (Might it not be a thought to just boycott all the media crap about the cute blond suburban ones until the media starts paying some attention to the others?)

Since motives seem to be everything in this situation -- the prosecutor's, the complainant's, the defence's -- I think it's reasonable to look at the motives of everybody involved in the discussion. And if I *don't* see them getting all hot under the collar about equal or worse miscarriages of justice -- these individuals have not even been tried yet, let alone executed -- I just do wonder.

Of course, some people are just easily manipulated, and not really motivated by class / race / sex prejudice. And again, not that anyone's motives have any influence on the reality of anything. I'm just damned if I can figure out why so many people seem to have so much invested in this particular case.

If these individuals truly committed no assault, they may be getting victimized for some reason not yet clear to us all. I would never say that whatever the reason is, it's karma doing its thing for what I gather is the pretty nasty lives they have led -- but I might consider whether my own time and energy is better spent on championing someone with fewer champions and resources, or even on some other more earth-shaking problem altogether.

Me, I'm just procrastinating when I need a break from military justice research tedium.

[FredScuttle]

187. Who cares about the $$ their families are spending in attorney's fees?

If that's such a hardship, let 'em be represented by the public defender like 95% of the rest of the docket. Christ...I gotta feel sorry for millionaires with fucked up kids? Please!

[pnwmom]

192. No one has proven that those students are any more

"fucked up" than average young men their age. The Coleman report showed that they have good academic records and that their alcohol related incidents are just run-of-the-mill for college students.

No, you don't have to feel sorry for them or their parents. But if you care about the 95% of the docket using public defenders, you should worry about them having to face a prosecutor like Nifong, who is apparently willing to use a case for political gain.

[FredScuttle]

196. Is "homo-bashing" a run-of-the-mill activity for college students?

Maybe at Liberty University. Mr. Finnerty likes to beat up strangers on the street after mocking their orientation. I call that thuggish.

[pnwmom]

198. Are you prejudging that trial? You really don't believe in the

presumption of innocence, do you.

I haven't seen any evidence at all in that case, have you?

And it seems odd to me that you regard Colin Finnerty's as yet untried case as more important than the accuser's record of stealing keys from a taxi driver while giving him a lap dance, stealing his car, and then drunkenly chasing after a policeman while driving the car.

Oops. I forgot. It's okay to besmirch the character of the defendants because they're . . . well, the defendants. But it's never okay to besmirch the character of the accuser. . . . because, because . . .

I forget. Why is that again?

http://www.talkleft.com/new_archives/014492.html

"According to a 2002 police report, the woman, currently a 27-year-old student at North Carolina Central University, gave a taxi driver a lap dance at a Durham strip club. Subsequently, according to the report, she stole the man's car and led deputies on a high-speed chase that ended in Wake County.

"Apparently, the deputy thought the chase was over when the woman turned down a dead-end road near Brier Creek, but instead she tried to run over him, according to the police report. Additional information notes that her blood-alcohol level registered at more than twice the legal limit."

[FredScuttle]

200. Because the accuser isn't on trial for gang rape, that's why.

But, you're right. Presumed innocent and all that....I'll change my description of Mr. Finnerty to "alleged" hate crime perpetrator. Kind of bookends his "alleged" gang rapist description. Such a charming boy.

[pnwmom]

202. Nope. He wasn't charged with a hate crime. They specifically

ruled out charging him with a hate crime, based on the circumstances of the incident, and charged him with simple assault instead.

[ShortnFiery]

203. I'm honestly amazed!

IMO one has to be BORED SHITLESS to enjoy this hyped-up gossip? :wtf:




However, to each his/her own! :hippie: :shrug: :hi:

[Moderator]

204. Lock

No longer breaking news
circular arguments
flames
off topic posts

Feel free to open a discussion in a topics or general forum.