Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: The Duke Rape Case: A DA's disgrace

  1. #1
    Working rage-aholic
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    a rocky planet with one moon
    Posts
    863

    The Duke Rape Case: A DA's disgrace

    Well, I was intrigued by the case enough to watch 60 Minutes, something I never do. The more I see and hear of the case, the more I'm convinced, the kids aren't guilty. If this woman even was raped, they almost certainly aren't the perps.

    In the original photo lineup, the 'victim' couldn't or didn't pick any of them. She picked them in a second photo lineup, some time later. Did her hazy memory, fogged by alcohol and a muscle relaxant, improve with time?

    Second, the photo lineups had no 'fillers'. These are guys who had nothing to do with the crime, but are put in to make sure the victim isn't randomly fingering people.

    Third, there was no DNA evidence or sperm, even though the 'victim' claims the rapists didn't use condoms, and she says she's sure one of them ejaculated inside her.

    Fourth, atleast one of the perps appears to have an air tight alibi.

    Fifth, the medical exam was inconclusive at best. The nurse found evidence of recent sexual intercourse, but it was likely consensual. The victim told police she'd had sex with her bf earlier that day.

    Sixth, the cuts she had appeared to have been there before the alleged assault.

    There are even more discrepancies, but you get the idea.

    The most troubling aspect of this case is that the DA, up for re-election in a largely African-American community, has made statements to the effect of 'I'm not going to let these rich white kids buy their way out of this."
    Is this guy so without a conscience that he's willing to send 3 innocent kids to prison for 30 years to further his career?

    And if so, the next question for me is: why do we have elected DAs? Why aren't they appointed for a term, like judges? EB, do you have any expertise in this area? Am I being naive? Help me understand because it seems awful to me, and I grow more certain that the number of innocent men in prison is greater than I'd feared when I hear of reckless DAs like Nyfong.
    Last edited by btyger; 10-17-2006 at 10:54 PM.
    Why are homely people discriminated against...we're the majority

  2. #2
    A poor corrupt official
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Casablanca
    Posts
    1,236

    The Duke Rape Case

    Btyger, you've given an accurate summary of the case. It's an incredible example of how a DA can seek to ruin lives just to get elected. I was glad to see the report on 60 Minutes, because it keeps the case in the national spotlight and they did a good job of outlining all the glaring weaknesses in the DA's case. I truly hope to see the case go to trial so that the defense can rip apart the accuser and the DA. That's the only way the players can hope to salvage part of their reputations.

    For more info, here are some blogs that do a good job of keeping track of the case:

    John in Carolina

    Durham in Wonderland

    The Johnsville News

    Liestoppers


    Here's a good profile of the accuser from The Johnsville News:

    Duke Rape Accuser: Crystal Gail Mangum
    Last edited by CaptRenault; 10-17-2006 at 11:44 PM.
    Strasser: By the way, the murder of the couriers, what has been done?
    Renault: Realizing the importance of the case, my men are rounding up twice the usual number of suspects.
    Heinze: We already know who the murderer is.
    Strasser: Good. Is he in custody?
    Renault: Oh, there's no hurry. Tonight he'll be at Rick's. Everybody comes to Rick's.

  3. #3
    History repeats itself.

    Remember Tawana Brawley?

  4. #4
    Working rage-aholic
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    a rocky planet with one moon
    Posts
    863
    It's not necessarily a black/white thing. Remember when Michael Irving was accused of rape-falsely. If rape is a serious crime, and it is, then so is a false accusation of rape. A woman who falsely accuses a man of rape should be subject to prosecution, and the DA who goes along with it, knowingly, should be as well.
    Why are homely people discriminated against...we're the majority

  5. #5
    A poor corrupt official
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Casablanca
    Posts
    1,236
    The Duke lacrosse case is back in the news in a big way this week.

    Today defense lawyers filed a motion asking a judge to exclude evidence from the prosecution's bogus photo lineup that is key to the prosecution case.

    It was also revealed this week that the prosecution witheld key DNA evidence from the defense. This evidence consists of a finding by the private DNA firm hired by the prosecution that the accuser's body and clothing contained genetic material from several males but none from any lacrosse team member.

    Furthermore, a Raleigh TV station is reporting that the accuser gave birth today.

    Duke Lacrosse Accuser Gives Birth

    But to really understand all the angles of this case, you have to read the blogs and the best one is Durham in Wonderland, a blog written by KC Johnson, a history prof at Brooklyn College. Johnson has delved into all angles of the case, but my favorite posts are the ones that expose the bizarre behavior and backgrounds of some of the nutty left wing Duke professors who have helped lead the attack on the lacrosse players. Here's his post about one such nitwit prof:

    Wahneema's World

    There's a good chance that this case will never go to trial, either because the judge dismisses it or because the accuser and the DA get cold feet and refuse to go forward. But I hope that the case goes to trial. Ultimately I think it's the best way for the three players prove their innocence.
    Strasser: By the way, the murder of the couriers, what has been done?
    Renault: Realizing the importance of the case, my men are rounding up twice the usual number of suspects.
    Heinze: We already know who the murderer is.
    Strasser: Good. Is he in custody?
    Renault: Oh, there's no hurry. Tonight he'll be at Rick's. Everybody comes to Rick's.

  6. #6
    http://www.usatoday.com/sports/colle...-charges_x.htm

    The rape charges have been dropped.

    But the prosecutor is still seeking charges for kidnapping and less serious sexual assault charges.

  7. #7
    A poor corrupt official
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Casablanca
    Posts
    1,236
    The CBS News show 60 Minutes had another report tonight about the Duke lacrosse case. It was a devasting exposé of the many misdeeds of DA Mike Nifong and his coconspirators (the head of the DNA lab, the Durham police, certain Duke faculty and certain black "leaders" in the city of Durham).

    The Duke Case
    Lesley Stahl Talks To Parents Of Accused, Prosecution Forensics Expert
    Jan. 14, 2007

    CBS) When Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong recused himself from the Duke lacrosse case and was replaced by a special prosecutor Saturday, it was the culmination of months of questions about the D.A., going back to Ed Bradley's story on the case last October. Originally, three white lacrosse players – Collin Finnerty, David Evans and Reade Seligmann – were accused of raping an African-American stripper.

    Nifong was forced to drop the rape charges last month when the woman changed her story. The three still stand accused of sexual assault and kidnapping. Now, for the first time, their parents speak out together in an interview with correspondent Lesley Stahl.

    And Stahl speaks to the forensic expert who changed the course of the case when he testified that he and the D.A. knew – but did not report – crucial DNA evidence that could help exonerate the defendants, whose DNA was never found in the accuser.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dr. Brian Meehan was hired by District Attorney Mike Nifong to conduct DNA testing on evidence collected hours after the alleged attack last March. What Meehan discovered in his lab has undermined the prosecution's case because he found DNA on the rape kit and the accuser's underwear that belonged to at least four unidentified men, none from any of the lacrosse players. But when Meehan issued a report of his findings, he left out that potentially exculpatory information about the other men.

    "You never stated in your report that you found DNA that belonged to men other than the accused in her underwear?" Stahl asks.

    "I did not specifically say that," he replies.

    "You never said that you found DNA belonging to other men in her rectum?" Stahl asks.

    "No, I did not specifically state that," Meehan says.

    Asked if that shouldn't have been in the report, Meehan says, "In retrospect, I know that there there's a better way. And I should've done a better job at conveying that information."

    "So, when you've produced other reports, if you have found other people who aren't suspects, you would leave it out of the report? Have you done this before?" Stahl asks.

    "We haven't done that before," Meehan admits.

    Leaving test results out of a report is a violation of industry standards, and of Meehan's own company's guidelines; the organization that accredits forensic labs has launched an investigation of his company.

    "I have to tell you that we spoke to a lot of forensic specialists, people who do what you do and sex crime prosecutors. And, they all say they never heard of anything like this – ever," Stahl remarks.

    "I said it was an error," Meehan replies. "It was an error in judgment on my part."

    "But a big one, right?" Stahl asks.

    "Certainly, it was a big error," he replies.

    Asked if it was his decision and his alone, Meehan says, "Well, it was my decision based on my understanding of what was asked in this case from when the case began."

    At a hearing last month, Meehan testified that he and Nifong agreed to limit the report to "just the stuff that matched" the lacrosse players or three of the accuser's friends. After Meehan found there was DNA evidence from other unidentified men, he says he spelled out that information to D.A. Nifong in person and on the phone – before he completed his report.

    "Did the district attorney specifically ask you to leave the information about the other males out of this report?" Stahl asks Meehan.

    "Absolutely not," he replies.

    "He knew the information was there. Did he ever ask you specifically to include it?" Stahl asks.

    "That specific information? No, he did not," Meehan says.

    "Did he ever come back to you and ever say, 'I need a second report with everything in it?'" Stahl asks.

    "No, he did not," he says.

    Asked if he thought Nifong was going to ask for it, Meehan says he "expected him" to ask for it.

    The key here is that the D.A. was required by law to turn that information over to the defense in the first place. He didn’t do that until a judge ordered him to six months after he learned about the DNA belonging to other men. What’s more, during that time, the D.A. told the court he was "not aware of any additional information" which may be exculpatory.

    Asked if Nifong was lying, Meehan says, "Well, I know that I told him. I sat down in our conference room and went over all of the information in this case with him."

    Four days after Stahl interviewed him, Meehan submitted an amended report with all his findings.

    There was probably nobody more shocked by Meehan’s testimony about the DNA than the parents of the three boys who have been indicted – Collin Finnerty's parents, Kevin and Mary Ellen, David Evans' parents, David Sr. and Rae and Reade Seligmann's folks, Kathy and Phil. They were all in the courtroom that day...
    Strasser: By the way, the murder of the couriers, what has been done?
    Renault: Realizing the importance of the case, my men are rounding up twice the usual number of suspects.
    Heinze: We already know who the murderer is.
    Strasser: Good. Is he in custody?
    Renault: Oh, there's no hurry. Tonight he'll be at Rick's. Everybody comes to Rick's.

  8. #8

    Duke case hurts prosecutor's career

    Hopefully the player's families will sue Mr. Nifong, and his next job will be at McDonald's.

    Here's a good article on the case:
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070114/.../duke_lacrosse


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •