Posted on 05/25/2006 5:04:51 AM PDT by abb
DURHAM -- A lawyer with the state NAACP said the civil rights organization intends to seek a gag order in the Duke lacrosse case, and a journalist who participated in a forum with him on Wednesday said media coverage of the alleged rape may deprive the alleged victim of her legal rights to a fair trial.
Al McSurely, an attorney who chairs the Legal Redress Committee for the state National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, said he generally respects the defense attorneys in the case as colleagues. But they are violating the State Bar's rules of professional conduct that discourage comments outside court that are likely to prejudice a case, he said.
The NAACP will try to intervene in the case to file a "quiet zone/let's let justice work" motion. That is otherwise known as a gag order, he acknowledged, although he said he doesn't like that term.
McSurely's comments came amid the first-ever Durham Conference on the Moral Challenges of our Culture at First Presbyterian Church downtown. The session gave the approximately 150 people who attended a chance to hear a series of talks and discuss among themselves sexual and domestic violence, racism, class distinctions and the media.
(Excerpt) Read more at herald-sun.com ...
I don't worry about a Durham jury convicting, because all won't vote to convict. But I can see one or two stubborn racist jurors holding out to purposefully cause a mistrial, and deny the white suspects an acquital.
I'm not sure why you think the defense would be entitled to the full report at the time the SBI results came back, since their clients weren't under indictment. If someone is tested, LE has to give that person (suspect) the results as they pertain to that person, but I don't believe that suspect is entitled to the full report in terms of other findings and results as to other suspects tested. The reason this is even coming up at all is because we have an indictment of some suspects for whom there was no match. The remaining parts of the report that don't pertain to a particular suspect are part of an ongoing investigation and surely should not be divulged to somebody who was a "maybe" because that person can then pass that information on to the public or even a party that the relieved suspect knows is guilty but whose name hasn't come into play as another possible suspect. If a truly guilty party knew there was no viable semen sample taken from the victim, then he knows he can deny any sexual activity rather than getting into a "he said, she said" dispute that it was consensual if he's ever named and tested, for instance.
Lord knows I despise Nifong, but I would have to agree that not giving the full report at that point was the proper thing to do if the prosecutor wants to protect an investigation. I don't say that was Nifong's motive for not giving the full report, but as a policy matter, it's the only thing that makes sense so I don't view it as sandbagging. The sandbagging came with the identifications and the indictments that fly in the face of the DNA results.
If Gil Garcetti wasn't such a coward, he wouldn't have moved that trial to downtown L.A.. He would have left it in Brentwood. Garcetti alone is responsible for OJ walking. he was never going to get a conviction with that jury pool, period. Garcetti ran up a white flag at the outset, and his unwillingness to seek the death penalty just made it worse. He must have thought he had a better chance of getting a guilty verdict without the DP, but that was a sucker's bet - the suggestion of a silent bargain. He lost that case before the first day of trial.
What happened to investigating a crime before a blanket accusation of guilt is made? Wasn't it 'Alice in Wonderland' in which the verdict came before the trial, and the accuser acted as jury and jury?"
Thank you, Mr. Alex Charns, for doing this. On behalf of all past and all future victims of the "trial by media and special interest groupies".
A line was published here a couple of weeks ago. The news article was published in the Raleigh News & Observer in 1992. Then District Attorney (now Judge Stephens, yes the same one that is sitting in on this case!) called the SBI in to investigate, because the Durham Police could not investigate themselves.
lol. I remember the spate of "pop psychology" books of the 70s and 80s -- that it was important to be engaged an into "office gossip". The same liberals now consider it a crime worse than RAPE! ;>
Excellent point, GAgal.
The boyfriend was swabbed on May 3 - the day AFTER the primary. I think Nifong feared the press learning before the primary that non-player semen was recovered by the SANE, and the focus becoming Mister X instead of soon to be indicted Seligmann and Finnerty.
Yes, she did. But, it sure seems the description was not helpful.
Or it was more of her detailed lies and purposefully misheld.
If it was the latter, I'm sure it is unlawful and sanctions could be sought.
I understand what you are saying.
But, I'm not sure I'm buying the News Corpse version that Rape victims change their stories.
Drug addicts change their stories too. People that have been incarcerated and then find themselves headed to jail again, change their stories too. People that are lying change their stories.
The truth has one version.
Exactly. Good point!
Won't take any spinning at all to convince the minority community forever it was done by Whites in Power.
A somewhat pertinent article...
Police: Girl made up rape story to avoid paying cab fare
http://www.rep-am.com/story.php?id=7399
One impediment to erasing the "she said she was raped by 20 men" is Duke PD officer Christopher Day, who heard Durham PD officer Sgt. Shelton (per Baker) say that in his phone report to his watch commander (per Baker). Day's account appeared in the Duke committe report which Baker vowed to invetigate.
After interviewing all the officers at DMC that night, Baker never disavowed the "20 men" aspect, maybe because he is in no position to pressure Officer Day to change his story.
The chief superior court judge is Orlando Hudson, who presided over the Michael Peterson trial. He is AA and seemed to me eminently fair. If he took the case, I think his decisions, whatever they were, would be respected by all sides.
I have already answered the question. Your #3 only partially matches my opinion of what happened, therefore I chose none of your options.
See the enclosed article:
BlackAthlete Sports Network-www.blackathlete.net
BASN BLACKBOX
Women's Lacrosse Sameole Sameole
By
May 26, 2006
WOMEN'S
LACROSSE
SAMEOLE SAMEOLE
NCAA CHAMPIONSHIP
PROVES IT 'PERFECTLY'
AND DUKE WOMEN'S
INSULTING GESTURE
THIS WEEKEND
Question
what do Duke's men's & women's
Lacrosse teams share in common ?
Both have ONE African American player
and now both have insulted
African Americans
The Duke women who will play in the NCAA Division I Lacrosse Championship Final 4 today in Boston have decided to wear INNOCENT arm bands during the game in "support" of the Duke men's lacrosse team.
Of course it's inappropriate. But are you surprised that Duke University President Richard Brodhead has no problem with it. Well President Brodhead there are 3 men's players under indictment for a major crime and until and unless they are acquitted of all charges this gesture is an INSULT to African Americans.
But why be surprised by the Institutional Racism we have already documented at Duke University so well exemplified by the make up of their athletics program and specifically here the lacrosse program.
Surprise Surprise
Just as the now suspended Duke men's lacrosse team has just ONE African American on its 47 member roster and NO Blacks on its coaching staff, the women's team now playing in the National Championship in the Semi-final round in Boston has all of ONE African American player on its 31 player roster and NO Blacks on its coaching staff.
We made the point in an earlier Box had the Duke men's team had a significant number of African Americans on their teams, it would have been impossible for the white team members to then go out to have "fun" humiliating Black women hiring them to "dance" for them, of course as they NEVER hired White Women to do.
Well in the very same way IF the women's team had a reasonable number of African Americans on its team they NEVER would have decided to wear INNOCENT arm bands in their championship games in support of the WHITE men on the Duke lacrosse team humiliating BLACK women.
IF the Duke Administration led by President Brodhead was not Lily White as noted in an independent review after the lacrosse team incident in March, Duke would NEVER have allowed these women to use the lacrosse field and the national championships to make a clearly "political" statement and very publicly.
But it isn't only Duke
and guess what .....
Of the FOUR NCAA women's teams in the Final 4 Duke's is to make a mockery of it more "integrated" (sic) than TWO of the other 4. Great Notre Dame University and lacrosse powerhouse Northwestern both have NO African Americans at all on their teams, and yes the fourth team Dartmouth has "tied" Duke for the honors of having ONE African American on theirs.
And here is another Fact
of the 16 members of the
Coaching Staffs of
ALL 4 teams
there are NO Black coaches
Whatsoever
And to wrap it all up
of the 112 players
who will take the Field
Friday night in Boston
exactly TWO of them
are African American
What Racism ???
Whenever you want to reach us with comments
or better yet an idea for a topic for the Box .......
blackbox@blackathlete.net
Well, you could be right, and we are all just speculating.
I would think Cheshire would be livid if he knew that Nifong knew after the first round, that CGM had sex with one of several men. I would think Cheshire would have been hollering about it not being in the first report.
I can't imagine why Cheshire would not tell the media that Nifong withheld such exculpatory evidence from the defense.
And so it begins.....retribution is trickling out and it's about time!
I think Cheshire would have been trumpeting the fact that Nifong knew for a long time that CGM had sex around the time of the incident, and that Nifong withheld the info from the first DNA report.
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.