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 ...
Wow, that is some report you linked. That flier may end up costing Durham a good bit of money.
excellent point! And that justification for the DNA samples will be loom large in Court.
Nifong claimed the DNA to be the be-all and End-All, and when he was wrong he didn't change course - showing his bias and disregard for the evidence to all.
The Defense will attempt to dwell on that statement at trial for as along as they can. I wouldn't be surprised it that's not the last part of the closing argument too. In Nifong's own words.
Do they inbreed in Durham?
Just curious. Has anyone located any photos of the "boyfriend" or the two "drivers" that the accuser had sex with? And do any of these three happen to have a mustache?
I think her Boyfriend is more likely a Pimp and the drivers may just work for the pimp.
Every Newspaper in America knows who it is, just like they know the name of the AV, they just won't release it.
If her boyfriend had been a friend of the Duke team and was at the party (another white guy) and he had a record, we would've heard about it about 75 days ago. There is absolutely nothing keeping them from revealing his identity and record - that's public information in North Carolina.
Just like they had no rule, policy, or tradition to hide behind with Kim Roberts, but they didn't reveal her name or record either. The Defense lawyers forced their hand and Kim had a press conference.
I think Durham is in for a long nightmare. It would serve them right if each one of the lacrosse players filed individual lawsuits. I am sure that Durham would try to get them all together but the players should resist them.
"Nope the SBI said, we ran these tests and found NO MATCH."
As I already said, I am basing my theories on Cheshire's "no DNA at all" and "no indication of sex" comments regarding the SBI DNA report. I have been trying to theorize why he would have made those comments.
Obviously, no DNA would also mean no match as well.
No, I don't think anyone does. I did think exactly what you said - and that is if the descriptions didn't HURT the state's case, they probably wouldn't have been left out.
The fact they're missing makes me very curious.
"The results, the lawyers said, show that investigators collected no genetic material of any kind from the woman. "There was no DNA found in or on her that would indicate that she recently had any sex," Cheshire said."
The quote I am trying to theorize about. N & O Aprill 11th.
As you suggest, I am sure they have no proof that black players or coaches failed to be selected because they were black. My point in posting the article was to illustrate the nature of the thought process of some people. I find it rather scary.
I understand that is the quote you keep referring to. But we now know that is wrong per the link you provided. The question we have been discussing for almost a day now, is why was Cheshire wrong when he made that statement. So which are you opting for?
1. Did the defense not have all the information. ie Did Nifong not tell them of the DNA found on the swabs from Mangum?
2. Did the defense mispeak and say no DNA was found when they meant no DNA material that could be connected to Duke lacrosse players?
Thanks for the link.. I guess my recall is not as good as I thought..
In the first DNA press conference he says basically "there was nothing found in the vaginal swab to indicate she had any sex with anyone"
In the press conference for the 2nd DNA result when asked if there was DNA from others besides the BF, he states "on the vaginal, rectal and oral swabs there was no other genetic material that was matched to anyone, anywhere"
So, IMO the lawyers either misspoke in the first press conference or the report was incomplete... There would be no other reason to seek a second test.
I think the only cooperation that would have satisfied Nifong was a confession.
I am only theorizing.
Assuming that Cheshire misspoke with those strong statements gives me nothing to theorize about.
It is hard for me to believe Cheshire simply made an error. In the video, he consults another attorney before making the statement about there being no indication CGM had sex.
The lab report shuld make this clear, shouldn't it?
I agree we are all theorizing, but if the article you linked this morning is correct, we can throw out the idea that the state lab did not find DNA on the swabs. And you solved with that article the question of who knew to send the swabs to another lab.
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.