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 saw your post #358 after I had posted. Sorry.
What an ugly, base lie she has woven. I don't think she's afraid for her life, as she has floated. I think she can't be alone with her conscience. I believe the weight of this will eventually be her undoing. My only hope is that it is before it is too late for the boys.
The Hound of Heaven needs to be unleased on this young woman.
If I recall from the first DNA press conference, close the end a reporter asked if there was any DNA found in/on the AV. Mind you this is my recollection, I have most of the other stuff TIVO'd, but this one I don't. I think it was Cheshire who said something to the effect of "we don't know, we haven't seen the complete report yet".. I thought it odd at the time that there was no real follow-up to that. Could have been one of those "last question" moments.
I'll try to find the transcript or video of that meeting and re-listen.
If what you are saying is true, I would think that any cases decided on DNA and maybe other scientific evidence analyzed by the SBI would be in serious jeopardy of appeal.
If a representative of the state doesn't trust the results of its own scientific experts and those doubts are proved correct by this case, how can juries or judges be expected to trust them?
Open the flood gates....
Video of the first DNA defense press conterence:
http://www.wral.com/news/8600601/detail.html
Yep, it's like I remembered. Cheshire is very specific about there being no DNA on or in her that would indicate that CGM had sex. Thus the boyfriend's DNA was not found by the SBI.
"A sample that did not match the LAX players is exculpatory evidence. It would have been in the first report, imo.
What is the point of leaving it out, anyway? It will only look bad in court when it comes out that you left that out of the report."
Ah, but think of MF's motivation at that time. The primary was nearing...
I was agreeing with you right up to "thus".
We can disagree.
I see no valid argument there to protect the Felon on Parole - Carter.
The arguments were racially based. He even admitted in court to killing a woman for $15
If you read it close, I think:
We don't know that she EVER gave a description. We know she was asked earlier, we know how it was characterized by Himan in a question. But, we don't if she gave what we would call a description. What if she said 4 White Guys.
From Himan's sentence, that is entirely possible.
Okay, I'll rephrase. :-)
Thus, the SBI lab was unable to determine, from the vaginal swabs, whether or not the accuser had unprotected sex recently.
Doesn't sound much better for the SBI lab, does it?
Hey, I could certainly be wrong, it sure wouldn't be the first time. I just don't see any other way to read it at this point.
"At some point in their interviews and investigations, one or more of these officers asked (the accuser) to describe the men who she claims sexually assaulted her, and (she) provided some answer to that question," the motion filed by lawyers Bill Cotter and Wade Smith said.
Her "response to that question is critical to the defense of the case and the state may not withhold that evidence from the defendant."
Police: Girl made up rape story to avoid paying cab fare
http://www.rep-am.com/story.php?id=7399
What a tall tale. It can't be true because women never lie about rape.
is it possible that they want this gag order because Crystal is about to come clean?.....
".....SBI lab was unable to determine, from the vaginal swabs,..."
Given that SBI touts the STR method on its website (posted earlier), they SHOULD have been able to. Here is a bit on STR methods I found elsewhere written in plain english:
For human identification purposes, it is important to have DNA markers that exhibit the highest possible variation in order to discriminate between samples. It is often challenging to obtain PCR amplification products from forensic samples because either the DNA in those samples is degraded, or mixed, such as in a sexual assault case.
The smaller size of STR alleles make STR markers better candidates for use in forensic applications, in which degraded DNA is common. PCR amplification of degraded DNA samples can be better accomplished with smaller target product sizes.
http://www.dna-forensic.com/dna-str.html
The SBI lab didn't have CGM's DNA for comparison?
They were looking for her DNA on items taken from the bathroom as well.
They must have had a little bit of CGM in the lab.
We cannot know your jury make-up in advance, and while we want to think the jury will have several who will be stoppers, people do strange things when they are in the minority on a jury and they're getting outvoted. Especially if the case has racial overtones and half of the jurors are black.
Some jurors are weak and easily cave in. Some want to be liked. Some don't want to be thought racist by the black jury members or the community.
There is not one good reason to keep the case in Durham if you can move it. The defense needs the case moved, so that all the Durham politics that are hurting them will be neutralized. Moving the case to another venue is a no-brainer.
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.