2nd Duke party dancer now questions doubts about accuser

Daily Comet & AP ^ | April 21, 2006 | ALLEN G. BREED

[Howlin]

Send me a ping. I'll be right over!

[Law is not justice but process]

" The case against the two accused players could fall apart before trial."

If they show the accuser was 100% certain that someone demonstrably innocent was one of her attackers, you can stick a fork in her. She is done. Any further in-court identifications by her would be suppressed as tainted by viewing all the pictures of the Lacrosse team members during the prior lineup. The judge would have no choice but to throw out subsequent in-court identifications. The only possible way the prosecution could salvage the case after that would be a DNA match.

Even a DNA match might not salvage it if the jury does not believe the accuser when she says it was rape. The defendants could still get up and argue it was consensual or sex for pay.

[Howlin]

Where HAVE you been? We've been missing you!

[Howlin]

Bless you for "translating" that!

[sissyjane]

Boy Howlin-you called that one correctly.

[pepperhead]

Humiliation has a cost don't you know. ;)

[Sacajaweau]

Wish someone would post a picture of her hair before the alleged rape and after the alleged rape.

And you're right, if you're bombed....you just take off both shoes (according to my best recollection of that evening long, long ago).

[GAgal]

http://www.wral.com/index.html

On the right

[Protect the Bill of Rights]

I have wondered why there are so many pictures....

Not just of the short show, mind you--but pictures of her leaving, of her being put in the car. Perhaps some of those pictures were taken because one of the 2 made a threat.

The defense has put alot out there. Stategery?
Maybe there is more they have not put out. If there is a video-maybe, just maybe it has something on it that exposes the strippers.

Drip, Drip, Drip and when the time is right, the damn breaks.

[PleaseNoMore]

The defendants could still get up and argue it was consensual or sex for pay.

Why would these boys want to do that. They have steadfastly maintained NOTHING sexual happened between any of them and this woman. Changing thei stories to consensual sex would doom them.

[ladyjane]

Just what they have gotten so far. Humiliation but nothing else.

Wrong.

Do you think Jesse Jackson is going to pay their tuition this semester? their lawyer bills? And what about their reputations?

[abb]

Shep babbling something about a secret witness. The jerdge will be on to discuss...

[PleaseNoMore]

You're welcome :O)

[sissyjane]

>>BTW, Michael Cardoza is on Fox right now, saying that for all intents and purposes, Kim Roberts is done as a witness for the prosecution because from today forward everybody will be saying "Is she saying that to enhance her payday."


Works for me. :-)<<

Works for me too, but I never thought I'd see the day when I agreed with Michael Cardoza. He used to make me so mad during the Peterson trial.

[bonfire]

Lots of family stuff going on. Death, illness, surgeries, college. etc. etc. Been trying to catch up on all the news!

[Swanks]

The defendants could still get up and argue it was consensual or sex for pay.

Or even using the same bathroom. She admits to being in the b.r. with Kim as a 2nd witness to that. In the very same b.r. where 40 players are milling about and drinking beer. (Gotta go). I'd say the odds of finding some lacrosse DNA on the ole' toilet seat is 100%.

[sissyjane]

>>Me too! Me too!

2000 rocks, LOL!<,

Woo--Hoo!!

[LWalk18]

Even a DNA match might not salvage it if the jury does not believe the accuser when she says it was rape. The defendants could still get up and argue it was consensual or sex for pay.

There is no possible way that after denying passionately for over a month that they even touched her that they could turn around and say they had consensual sex with her and be believed. If they had sex with her, they would have said so by now and put up a consensual sex defense, given her limited at best creditability they would have a good shot at the jury believing them.

[don'tbedenied]

Look for a May 1 surprise from the D.A..

Of course the indictment of the third guy. Maybe this time they'll indict someone who was actually at the party.
Nifong is knee deep in the big muddy, like the song says: "and the big fool says press on."

[Jay Gould]

I hope you're being facetious.
I don't think anyone who did not make the slur should be humiliated.
That's why I'm curious to know IF it happened and, if so, who made it.
There has been no response on this from anyone on the team or they're lawyers.
You would think, that with this being a racially charge incident, someone would say.
"My client made no racial slurs" or "My client heard no racial slurs"
No one is responding to this at all.