Posted on 05/25/2006 5:04:51 AM PDT by abb
It should never get that far.
Correct, and that decision would have been Nifong's, not the lab's. They gave the results to Nifong. He is required by law to let those tested know if there was a match, but he may not be required to give them the complete report at that time, but later with the complete discovery package if charges are nevertheless filed, and it looks like that's just what he did.
Because they would again ask her whom all she'd had sex with in the five days prior to the rape kit being administered.
The names did not come from a database. They came from Mangum.
That doesn't sound right. It's a constitutional right of the defendant to a jury trial. He can waive that right, usually, and opt for a bench trial.
I agree with all of that, except the part of the SANE nurse serving as a de facto advocate of sorts. The system has victim's advocates, some specializing in rape, serving a separate function from the SANE nurse. The rest of what you say is dead on correct.
I very sincerely hope you are right, Sir. I will not judge anything but the sin, I took an oath to love the sinner. Unfortunately, I don't know how to help the ones really hurting here, that's why I watch the posts and news. I pray for the families and the boys. I truly know what they are going through and it was our faith that brought us safe and the grace of Himself that has healed our child. I'm still paying the bills, but the hurt is almost gone and it's been three years. I just panic when I see it happening elsewhere and can't throw myself in front of the bus to stop it.
LOL!!! :>
The North Carolina Constitution provides there is a right to a jury trial. It's found at Section 24:
Sec. 24. Right of jury trial in criminal cases.
No person shall be convicted of any crime but by the unanimous verdict of a jury in open court. The General Assembly may, however, provide for other means of trial for misdemeanors, with the right of appeal for trial de novo.
http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/Legislation/constitution/article1.html
ROFLMAO!!!!! :>
How utterly in bad taste.
No doubts their "peepul" in Durham requested this.
Thanks for the ping. Got catching up to do.
Were I Bob Bennet, I'd be grinning into my tea cup over this latest antic by the "we love Nifong" gang.
in most states that is true, but my understanding is that nc is different. i could be wrong but i looked briefly at that issue and was surprised at the answer.
The NAACP and their "Apostles" were right up front in the media from the get-go, fanning the flames. And now they want to play "indignant damsel" games?
It could be that in NC the prosecutor has to agree to the bench trial as well. I'll see what I can find.
About a year or so back, they were requested to open certain files as concerns Homeland Security. Two lawyers did. The remainder of the ACLU went hysterical.
Having suffered from an ill-informed jury in a commercial case where the judge all but threw out the jury verdict based on the facts, I would tend to go with a bench trial - if there was no way to ensure that the jury was going to be knowledgeable enough and objective enough to evaluate the evidence. In this case, there is a real risk of a runaway jury. The judge would be unlikely to ignore the preponderance of the evidence.
A partner in a law firm subsequently told me that there is roughly a 30% chance that a jury will come to a conclusion not supported by the preponderance of evidence in a case. That is one scary number if you are innocent - but not bad odds if you are guilty but can appeal to the jury's sympathy in some way. Law firms with strong but complex cases hate jury trials.
The tough issue here is that NiFong appears to have friends on the bench.
This is why I suspect the defense wants this case thrown out. Our judicial system has too many wild cards.
I never knew NC law was even freakier than Louisiana law...
The defendant in a felony case in North Carolina has a right to a jury trial and it is a right he can waive, in favor of a bench trial.
It's found in the North Carolina Constitution at section 24, and in North Carolina General Statutes at Rule 39, and also in subchapter XII, article 71.
http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/enactedlegislation/statutes/html/bysection/chapter_1a/gs_1a-1,_rule_39.html
http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/enactedlegislation/statutes/html/bysection/chapter_15a/gs_15a-1201.html
I think there was one, not three, semen deposits discovered in swabbing for the rape kit. There was no match to the lax players, so Mangum was questioned again as to whom all she had sex with within five days prior to the alleged rape. She gave three names as possibilities. All three gave a sample. One was a match. That concluded the question. When the rape kit is administered, alleged victims are asked who all they had sex with during the five days prior to the alleged incident. In order for Nifong to have been so confident that he would get a match to one or more lax players, Mangum would have to have said there was no sex with anyone else, and I recall it being reported early on that she said she did not have sex for three weeks prior, but I don't know how solid a fact that is. At any rate, when semen was found that didn't come from any of the lax players, she was re-contacted and asked who all it might have come from.
What's really important about this at this particualr time is not so much that she had sex with her boyfriend closely prior to the alleged incident, but that she had sex with at least three, if not eight, other men and, most importantly, that Nifong knew this when he sought the indictments.
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.