Posted on 01/04/2007 8:11:42 AM PST by maggief
Chapel Hill — WRAL has confirmed that the accuser in the Duke lacrosse case gave birth at UNC Hospitals on Wednesday.
Sources tell WRAL the woman had the baby by Cesarean section. She was not due until February.
(Excerpt) Read more at wral.com ...
Po' hoes working for escort services sometimes don't have bodyguards. It's usually an indication that they're at the end of the stable and on their way to the streets. It isn't worth the money to the pimp to pay for their protection when their looks are going or gone or they're unreliable or too troublesome, all of which describes Mangum.
This case may have been different, though. It may have been thought that some young white Duke boys party would not pose any serious threat.
The white car that showed up as they were leaving may have been somebody showing up for Kim's benefit - to take her money and ensure she was okay. She may have called her pimp when she was sitting in the car while Mangum went back in for her shoes and her pimp or one of his guys came over to collect and make sure all was well. She may have handed over her $400 and pocketed Mangum's $400 unknown to her pimp or the bodyguard - whichever, if in fact it was one of them. All he would do would be to pull up, leave his motor running, hop out and run over to Kim's car window, ask if it went okay, count the money real quick in front of her, and then jam - less than a two-minute stop altogether.
"I think we can both safely assume, at this moment, her hopes for that breast augmentation is kaput."
LMAO!!! :>
"I read the legal doc - she just folded so quickly, just like a rat scurrying away under a bright light."
Or a cockroach. They're even smaller. :)
Yep. Tip of the iceberg. The discovery gleaned in Dowd's case will lead to other suits.
Gentlemen, start your engines. :>
Curtis should be the first one to get a boot in the a$$ so forcefully administered that it lands her in the unemployment line with a splat!
These useless ivory tower theorists and writers of pointless, taxpayer-financed studies and "papers" are the pinnacle of abject absurdity in education. This country would not suffer one minute without them if every last one of them fell off the earth tomorrow. In fact, it would be an improvement.
Yes, the dollar amount determines what court you file in in most jurisdictions.
"Blog Hooligan" ping
http://www.newsobserver.com/559/story/528708.html
Point of View:
Published: Jan 05, 2007 12:30 AM
Modified: Jan 05, 2007 05:31 AM
In the aftermath of a social disaster
Cathy N. Davidson
DURHAM - Last April I added my name to an ad published in the Duke Chronicle. The ad said that we faculty were listening to the anguish of students who felt demeaned by racist and sexist remarks swirling around in the media and on the campus quad in the aftermath of what happened on March 13 in the lacrosse house.
The insults, at that time, were rampant. It was as if defending David Evans, Collin Finnerty and Reade Seligmann necessitated reverting to pernicious stereotypes about African-Americans, especially poor black women. Many black students at Duke disappeared into humiliation and rage as the lacrosse players were being elevated to the status of martyrs, innocent victims of reverse racism.
As it turned out, 87 other faculty members were alarmed at this distressing side-effect of the lacrosse incident and signed the ad. I am positive I am not the only professor who was and continues to be adamant about the necessity for fair and impartial legal proceedings for David, Collin and Reade while also being dismayed by the glaring social disparities implicit in what we know happened on March 13.
A team of distinguished athletes at an elite and highly respected university hired two local women to strip at a house filled with men (including those underage) who had been drinking too much. That's sleazy, to say the least. That those women were women of color underscores the appalling power dynamics of the situation.
As a professor at Duke, I felt shame when the media's account of the behavior in the lacrosse house came to stand for all Duke students and the institution itself. So many students, faculty and administrators here work hard to live down our unflattering old segregation nickname, "the Plantation." Yet after March 13, Duke again came to symbolize (seemingly for the entire world) the most lurid and sexualized form of race privilege.
The ad we signed explicitly was not addressed to the police investigation or the rape allegations. The ad focused on racial and gender attitudes all too evident in the weeks after March 13. It decried prejudice and inequality in the society at large. "It isn't just Duke, it isn't everybody, and it isn't just individuals making this disaster," the ad insisted.
The lacrosse incident is a textbook example of what Harvard sociologist Orlando Patterson calls "social disaster" (a phrase used in the ad). "Social disaster" refers to complex power arrangements that underpin even minor events and give those events symbolic (and disturbing) meaning for society as a whole.
The lacrosse incident became one of the top news stories of 2006 because Americans saw the case as symbolic of many of their deepest social concerns. Race, gender, sexuality, class, athletics, the South, poverty, privilege, the younger generation: those are some features of the brew that captured the world's attention and fed its moral voyeurism.
Like the other faculty members who signed the ad, I constantly receive e-mails asking me to rescind my signature. Some people write out of real misery for their children, Duke students who are distraught that their friends may have been falsely accused and unfairly treated. They believe professors have sided against the lacrosse players, and they are outraged. If we had written what they suppose, we would deserve their anger. But we didn't.
I empathize deeply with these parents and friends. I regret the additional pain they felt when they heard about this ad. However, when I send them the actual ad, they are often surprised that it does not condemn the lacrosse players but focuses on larger campus and national concerns. I was touched, recently, when one mother concluded our thoughtful exchange by noting that she still didn't like the ad, but hoped that her daughter would have the opportunity to take a class with me someday.
On the other hand, most of my e-mail comes from right-wing "blog hooligans." These hateful, ranting and sometimes even threatening folks don't care about Duke or the lacrosse players. Their aim is to make academics and liberals look ridiculous and uncaring. They deliberately misrepresent the faculty and manipulate the feelings of those who care about the lacrosse players in order to foster their own demagogic political agenda. They contribute to the problem, not to the solution.
We are in the midst of a social disaster where 18 percent of the American population lives below the poverty line and a disproportionate number of those are African-American. We live in the midst of a social disaster where 30 percent of our students do not graduate from high school (making the U.S. No. 17 in the world). We live in the midst of a social disaster where women's salaries for similar jobs are substantially less than men's (and, as of this year, starting to go down again, not up). We live in the midst of a social disaster where we do not have national health care or affordable childcare. And we live in a situation where a group of white athletes at a prominent university can get drunk and call out for a stripper the way they would a pizza.
Who is that exotic dancer? A single mother who takes off her clothes for hire partly to pay for tuition at a distinguished historically black college. Of course the lacrosse story makes Americans of conscience cringe.
There is also a different kind of social disaster in this incident, one that we didn't know about in April. I refer to a prosecutor who may well have acted unprofessionally, irresponsibly and unethically, possibly from the most cynical political motives. If it turns out that Mike Nifong has no evidence (as he insisted he did back in the spring), he will have betrayed the trust of an entire community and caused torment to these young men and their families. He will have added greater skepticism at every imaginable level to an already shaky legal system.
Nor is it only the lacrosse players who will be marked forever by this case. Will future rape victims dare to step forward after such a spectacle? Will African-Americans with legitimate grievances be willing to demand justice in the wake of this public debacle? On every level, this has been a social disaster.
That is why I signed the ad. It is an educator's job to bring the lessons of history to bear as we try to understand the full and on-going social implications of what happened long before March 13, 2006, and will continue long after. Studying this social disaster must be on the lesson plan for our future, no matter what happens next in this miserable incident.
(Cathy N. Davidson is Ruth F. DeVarney professor of English and interim director and professor of interdisciplinary studies, John Hope Franklin Humanities Institute at Duke University.)
She'll probably file a lawsuit against each of the 100 or so possible fathers for child support and each one will have to prove they aren't the father. Hell, it would be an interesting reality TV show
Once again someone needs to remind these dim bulbs that the lax players were not interested in black women and the fact that two showed up was probably part of the reason there was an incident.
You just talking like all the rest of them hooligans...
ROFLMAO!!!!!!!
On the other hand, most of my e-mail comes from right-wing "blog hooligans." These hateful, ranting and sometimes even threatening folks don't care about Duke or the lacrosse players. Their aim is to make academics and liberals look ridiculous and uncaring. They deliberately misrepresent the faculty and manipulate the feelings of those who care about the lacrosse players in order to foster their own demagogic political agenda. They contribute to the problem, not to the solution.
"make academics and liberals look ridiculous and uncaring"
Just about as hard as making the ocean look wet.
Anyone have a quick link to the statements where they didn't ask for black women?
Does anyone have the text of the actual ad readily to hand?
Prof. Davidson's missive is far too self-serving to be taken at face value. The "social disaster" she describes was a non-event, a fantasy of a disturbed young woman and a sociopath DA: The social disaster she was a party to is real and reflects a hatrid of individuals simply because of the color of their skin and their position in society, i.e. white athletes at a prestiguous school.
"We are in the midst of a social disaster where 18 percent of the American population lives below the poverty line and a disproportionate number of those are African-American. We live in the midst of a social disaster where 30 percent of our students do not graduate from high school (making the U.S. No. 17 in the world). We live in the midst of a social disaster where women's salaries for similar jobs are substantially less than men's (and, as of this year, starting to go down again, not up). We live in the midst of a social disaster where we do not have national health care or affordable childcare. And we live in a situation where a group of white athletes at a prominent university can get drunk and call out for a stripper the way they would a pizza. "
This author is uninformed on what genuine stats and careful analysis of those stats reveal about her "isms" in the above paragraph.
Reading between the lines? The Duke Boys still deserve to be fried. However, the author ellipses into castigating Nifong, a white man, for "wronging women" and possibly "minorities" through his handling of the case. Inserting this point, she uses it but only in order to give more "creedence" or additional heft to her theme of "social justice".
I was touched, recently, when one mother concluded our thoughtful exchange by noting that she still didn't like the ad, but hoped that her daughter would have the opportunity to take a class with me someday.
Additionally, she has construed this comment by the parent as a praise when instead it might have been meant otherwise. Obviously, the gang of 88 are not current and up to date with the types of education outside a structured environment newer generations have received and are reaching out for. My own student-aged offspring could have single-handedly made mincemeat of any such "social justice" arguments she'd have proferred in a classroom setting.
Overall, I give this article a grade of "D". Her analysis is overlong, overwrought, fraught with faulty logic. Her injection of ethos at very obvious points belies that she has any concern over fairness in the Duke case, specifically, but only in re "social justice". She reveals that as a member of the gang of 88, social justice to combat "social disaster" is her real and only concern, outside of "women's issues". She completely bombed the assignment, IMHO.
But she writes using complete sentence, no typos, and kept within the margins.
No kidding! And all that data might in fact reveal additionally a number of fascinating preferences, non-athletic, being granted at Duke in the classroom and in the hiring of 'professors'.
HUH? Welfaire, aide to single mothers, gadzillion scholarships for females, Emily's List.... yep, they do indeed have a hard time claiming ownership of their bodies in a society of a rape culture.
Maury Show next?
Distilled down to an easily digested phrase, Davidson's screed says the DukeLax thing is "fake but accurate."
You nailed it!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.