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.
Thought crime that maybe was committed by a teammate.
Thanks....I saved it this time.
:-)
That's come up before. That's what teeth are for. But since it never happened she couldn't bite.
Oh Howlin, she fought like a Tigress but when the one nail came off from scratching, she quit. She realized her efforts were futile and if she didn't resist maybe it would all be over sooner. /sarc
She was doing her nails in that bathroom.
Judge Napolitano is still insisting that Nifong must have 'something." HA
If she had had a nightmare, awoken, screaming she'd been raped, been shown only a tableu of every players on the DUKE LACROSSE team, and fingered 3, and had those 3 been brought up on charges of rape, sexual assault, kidnapping.
In short form, these three guys "stold" the FA's peaceful sleep causing her untold trauma.
They are being indicted on the basis of Crystal Magnum's "thoughts".
Nap: "Your client may say something that could be used against him later."
Right, Nappy. Like Nifong is going to use the TRUTH against David Evans.
yeah, that must be it.
She was doing her nails in that bathroom.
That brings up an interesting point...did the LEO examine and test tissues in that waste can....when I do my nails I use tissues to wipe of polish and polish remover...I'm sure she had to do the same especially using glue...
I swear, if I hear much more about "What's in Nifong's back pocket" and "We don't know what he has," I may use profanity for the first time in my life.
In theory yes, but I think that is very unlikely given the version of events offered by the defense. I think that would make sense only if (1) the photo lineup is ruled unconstitutional and excluded and (2) the photo lineup is ruled to have tainted an in-court identification and therefore the AV would not be permitted to identify Evans in court (as I said, I don't think those rulings ultimately will be made here); in that situation, then, the ONLY identifying link is the DNA evidence, and it would make sense to seek to exclude the DNA evidence, because that would likely result in the entire case simply being dismissed against Evans (with no evidence of identification by the AV or by the DNA, a motion for dismissal should be granted).
If the case against Evans goes to trial, the DNA results HELP Evans more than hurt him, so I will be surprised if Evans' lawyers seek to have the DNA thrown out in that cirucmstance.
Judge N presumes overmuch. It appears to be a minimal, absolutely minumal amount of a ragtag case that Nifong put to a GJ just eager to do whatever he wants.
Napolitano also say the accused shouldn't say anything.
If I was innocent, I'd be shouting it from the rooftops until someone listened...
"She was doing her nails in that bathroom."
Didn't some of the pictures of her leaving show smears of reddish nail polish on the railing outside the house? FRESH polish. I think I read that somewhere here. Sure, you get gang raped and then do your nails before you leave..... I don't THINK so.
pattyjo
Me too...
Yes, they did.
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.