Posted on 05/15/2006 7:14:12 AM PDT by pissant
DURHAM - A Durham grand jury is scheduled to meet today, and the session could mean new charges in the investigation of a reported rape at a Duke lacrosse team party.
Two of the team's players were indicted in April on charges of first degree rape, first degree sex offense and first degree kidnapping. They are accused of assaulting an escort service dancer in a bathroom of a house at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd. Their lawyers say the men are innocent, and lawyers representing dozens of team members say that no sex or assault occurred at the March 13 party.
But the woman says she was attacked by three men, and Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong said he has been working on bringing charges against a third person.
WHAT WILL HAPPEN TODAY? If Nifong decides to submit the case, police investigators and possibly other witnesses will try to convince grand jurors in a secret session that the state has probable cause to bring a case forward. Grand jurors will hear only the prosecution's side of the case. The standard required for a true bill of indictment is far lower than the beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard required for a conviction.
IF INDICTMENTS ARE ISSUED, WHEN WILL THEY BECOME PUBLIC? On April 17, a judge ordered the indictments in the lacrosse case sealed. The names of the players who were indicted were not released until 5 a.m. the next day when the players surrendered at the Durham County jail. If Nifong again requests that the indictments be sealed, the law allows a judge to keep them secret until the person is arrested or appears in court.
WHEN WILL ALL THE EVIDENCE BE REVEALED? State law requires prosecutors to turn over all of their case files to defense lawyers, but nothing requires the evidence to be turned over to the public. In open court hearings, lawyers often discuss some of the evidence, but the state's case may not be revealed until trial. No trial dates have been set. When a report on the DNA testing is complete, Nifong is required by law to turn it over to all 46 members of the lacrosse team who submitted DNA samples.
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT? The cases against Reade William Seligmann, 20, of Essex Fells, N.J., and Collin Finnerty, 19, of Garden City, N.Y., are moving forward. Finnerty has a court date in June. Seligmann is scheduled to appear in court Thursday. His attorney, Kirk Osborn, has filed a series of motions challenging Nifong's handling of the case and asking a judge to bar the prosecutor from further involvement.
So have I, but not under a spotlight like this, covered by media. Many,many a case has been dropped due to lack of evidence or credible witnesses.
Discovery is Thursday, and if he comes up empty, I be willing to put down a hefty wager this thing will end prematurely.
I will correct you every time you post this. She is not a victim until her case is proven. Until then, she is an accuser.
You really haven't kept up with this case, have you?
Rape is about power.
Now see there marajade, you are mistaken. I did not provide links to any FR threads that I posted to you.
Thats only in your mind.
You assumed that you knew what it was like other things that you assume.
The test will be if she's testifying under oath, we'll see if they do.
My standard is that nothing will be considered as evidence as to guilt or innocence until presented in court.
____________________________________________
So by your standard OJ was innocent. There is a far far more tenuous DNA connection here, so by your standard these guys are even more innocent?
I'm checking in. Hopefully our daily know-nothing guest is gone by sun rise.
Marjade isn't clear on the whole 'presumption of innocence' thing.
And the accuser made a false rape claim some 13 years ago. Against three men.
That speaks to her character. Boy howdy, does it ever!
the dancer committed assualt against a cop
she stole a car. She has a problem with liquor or drugs.
but, you want to talk about noise violations and a gay comment.
you bought the story from the beginning and its easier to believe you weren't fooled than to accept the facts. its easier to explain away all the inconsistencies than to change your thinking
"So have I, but not under a spotlight like this, covered by media."
I have. And one was a former state school's chief who was assaulted by her husband and felt the state shouldn't of charged him with DV and the state did anyway without her testimony.
We'll see what happens in Court.
I remember the poster from threads a couple of years ago and nothing has changed.
Sounds like a sleeper troll to me.
Where in any post of mine have I stated the defendants were guilty?
I pray that all of you that are sane will still be sane at daybreak :^)
you are just repeating what Nancy Grace and Whendy Murphy said tonight. they said that exact thing.
lets see if they testify
I'll watch Kimberly fishface or Whendy broomstick if I want to hear those opinions.
if there is no evidence against them: their lawyer may not mount a defense. it seems there is no there there
I think Susan Filan called Nifong's refusal to listen to Evans or see his exculpatory evidence "scary".
Nifong will surely be asked about Cheshire's claim that he wouldn't hear Dave's story or look at the photos showing he didn't have a mustache that night or ever. I'll be interested in what he says.
So now I'm a femnazi. Funny, my husband doesn't feel that I am.
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.