Posted on 07/31/2006 7:21:54 PM PDT by jmoo
click on the 'Find it here' .pdf to see the ABN campaign press release.
"The Finnety's opinions should not play into this one way or the other."
The players been stereotyped. They must break the stereotype so that the public sees them as human beings, not cardboard cutouts of their favorite villains.
Agree.
I disagree ONLY if this case does go to trial. I feel the time to break the stereotype is in the courtroom. Preferably, close to the end. This info has to stick in the jury's mind... negate all the hatred they have been fed by the prosecution. JMHO. If there is a trial, the public opinion is of little use. It's the jury opinion that matters.
You are buying into the left's game if you start defending yourself by trying to show you are really a nice PC family. You might have to at trial. It is foolish to fall into that trap now.
But maybe they are Democrats. Not that anyone deserves to be railroaded which is why I am following this, but if they are Dims, perhaps they should learn from this experience.
Who cares if they're democrats or republicans. What do you want them to learn? They didn't make the argument you object to, a writer did. A conservative writer, actually.
I agree that they've been stereotyped as white, rich, elite and spoiled. I think Collin has had it the worst too. Unfortunately, alot of people in the community the Finnertys have helped won't care about their charitable contributions which is sad. Charity like that is admirable.
I remember Susan Filan saying the AV described "spitting DNA" (or something like that). It was on the Situation with Tucker Carlson on Monday June 19. I could not find a transcript.
This was my immediate reaction. White Duke students from elitist neighborhoods and prep school backgrounds would never touch these girls. Is that a politically incorrect thing to say? Absolutely--but it's true. MSM can't have it both ways. Are they elites or not?---privileged kids know a stripper isn't safe and even if drunk out of their minds (although how inebriated would one have to be to find this woman attractive?), they'd find a condom. Just my opinion.
So you figure the writer went out an researched the families involved and this argument was not fed to him? I am less sure about that.
What I want them to learn is that if they are Dims they are involved with a bunch of people who hate them and their children and who would sacrifice their child in a heartbeat. They should learn not to be Dims. That should learn that the party of slavery, the party of Jim Crow, the party of segregation, is still very race oriented, it is just who they favor has changed.
My naive notions of things having changed are so off base-are we really any different from the attitudes of the 60's and are we just better at PC cover up?
I doubt he knows them. I think he's just giving his opinion. The whole point of the article was that in the writer's opinion Collin's family has been making mistakes. They haven't revealed Collin's alibi like Reade's family has and they haven't had Collin make a statement like Dave has. He seems to want Collin to say something - which would presumably include the comments about charitable contributions etc.
I still don't see what difference it makes whether they're rebublicans or democrats but FWIW Garden City is a republican town.
I'm not getting what you're saying. When the Finnertys were on the Today show they didn't say - well, our son is innocent because we've made alot of charitable contributions. They said he's innocent because he has an airtight alibi and because after seeing what is apparently the prosecution's entire case, there isn't a shred of credible evidence against him. They also said he's a good kid and wouldn't do something like that.
Okay. On the last one - they're his parents. Of course they're going to say he is a good kid. But the first two speak to the heart of the case.
I think you're taking a writer's opinion and words and attributing it to the Finnerty family and I'm not sure that's fair.
Today's stories.
Monks to run for DA if funds come
http://www.heraldsun.com/durham/4-758008.html
By John Stevenson : The Herald-Sun
jstevenson@heraldsun.com
Aug 2, 2006 : 8:31 pm ET
DURHAM -- Lawyer Steve Monks announced Wednesday he will run as a write-in candidate for district attorney if he raises at least $50,000 in campaign funds, and he pledged to rethink the Duke University lacrosse rape case if elected.
"I would re-discuss the matter with the person who reported it," he said, referring to an exotic dancer who claimed three Duke lacrosse players sexually assaulted her at 610 North Buchanan Blvd. in mid-March.
Monks said such a discussion "would not be nice for her, but it's necessary."
After the discussion, it would probably take him about 30 days to decide whether or not to keep the case alive, Monks said during an afternoon news conference.
"I'm not a racist," he said. "Whatever decision I make will be colorblind and just."
The accuser in the rape case is black. All three indicted suspects are white: Collin Finnerty, Reade Seligmann and David Evans.
Defense lawyers contend, based on documentation received from District Attorney Mike Nifong, that the alleged victim gave various inconsistent and contradictory stories about the incident, that there was no DNA evidence to connect any lacrosse players to a rape and that at least one player had an airtight alibi.
Nifong had no comment on Monks' remarks Wednesday.
Monks is chairman of the Durham County Republican Party, but he would be an unaffiliated candidate if he chose to run for district attorney on a write-in basis.
He mounted a whirlwind petition drive in June but did not obtain enough signatures to have his name printed on the November ballot.
Another attorney who did acquire the requisite number of signatures, County Commissioner Lewis Cheek, announced last week he would not campaign for the chief prosecutor's job and would not serve if elected. His name will be on the ballot anyway.
Cheek said that if he wins the election, he will step aside and let the governor appoint a district attorney.
Monks complained Wednesday that Cheek's petition drive had torpedoed his own drive, since many voters didn't want to provide signatures for both men.
"Don't run if you're not going to run," Monks said, referring to Cheek's long-drawn-out uncertainty about whether to campaign.
"Don't try to keep me or any qualified person off [the ballot] if you're not going to go the full mile," Monks added. "I don't know if it's dirty politics or not, but I don't want it to happen again."
Now, some Cheek supporters want Monks to side with them in the hopes of ousting Nifong and forcing the governor to choose a new district attorney, according to Monks.
But Monks said he could not support that effort.
"I would like to see the political process work," he said. "That means the voters pick who their DA is."
Cheek could not immediately be reached for comment Wednesday.
Monks said he considered himself to be "more qualified than our current DA," even though Nifong has worked in the local District Attorney's Office for 28 years, receiving a gubernatorial appointment to head the agency last year.
"Just because you've been a teacher for 28 years doesn't mean you're best qualified to be principal," Monks quipped.
Monks added that, during his career, he has tried more than 200 cases and has administered an office of 12 attorneys.
Check 'none of the above'
http://www.heraldsun.com/opinion/hsletters/
District Attorney Mike Nifong was quoted in his most recent press conference as saying, "Obviously, there were some things we hoped we would have as evidence that we ended up not having."
I know this will sound naive to many but isn't it amazing that our foot-in-mouth DA can continue to freely admit his bias in this infamous "case" and not be removed from it? And that also goes for whomever the "we" is.
Is it beyond hope that our DA would hope to find the truth? Would you want this man to have any role in you or a loved one possibly being behind bars? On the November ballot for DA we will now have a choice between a person who will not run and a person who might publicly judge and slander you and then let you innocently rot in jail rather than admit he was wrong.
Can we have "none of the above" on the ballot?
TIM GABRIEL
Durham
August 3, 2006
Monks to Continue DA Campaign
http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=local&id=4425561
A peek at prejudice
http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/special_packages/sunday_review/15184170.htm
You are correct! And that was only 1 guy
She spit out the DNA on the rug in the bathroom.
Her DNA isn't on it and same goes for the men indicted.
The many swabs of her face, mouth, chest, and neck - No DNA matching any of the 46 players.
How do we go about putting heat on Titus to investigage this leak by Nifong being a violation of his gag order?
This may not be what you guys are discussing, but:
1) I think that, from what we've already seen of Nifong and Drive By Media, that if you reveal your alibi - you run the Risk of having them adjust their theory to fit your evidence - and the media doesn't like these guys. The Media would bend over backwards to pick apart Finnerty's story - yet, they won't even send someone to court to record the events at Kim Robert's hearing. They won't report on how disparate the handling of Roberts case has been in Durham.
If it was my kid, I wouldn't expose him by providing his alibi. Isn't this exactly why Nifong hasn't provided a timeline, and other fundamental facts?
2) I believe Finnerty is the player that is at risk - by far. This trial is not about gang-rape or rape or sexual assault. The media won't cover the facts, but they'll float rumors as facts - like the woman recovering from a horrible broomstick attack. I don't think - AT ANY POINT - not even in the middle of the trial - the media will report passinately or convincingly on the lack of evidence. I've seen it before. If Finnerty is convicted, it'll be: "The system works," and "we didn't sit in that jury room," and "like it or not, this is our system," or "we must respect their decision." Of course, when they disagree with verdicts they go crazy and cite irrelevant cases to make their points.
On Court TV, there were people from both sides coming out of the wall to say that Finnerty only has himself to blame in his Georgetown conviction. 10 days later, we have the Bald guy - a person of significant responsibility, and it's "Oh, technically, it's assault - but you don't really charge people when do that. And the case at Blinco's was worse than the Georgetown tussle.
I really believe that people just do not understand how they are influenced - and to what degree - by media coverage. They hear Anderson Cooper and others on TV saying that this or that was the right decision. They will tune out a poster - or discount them, but they are affected by the media. They, possibly unconsciously, attribute weight to the opinions of the people on TV.
Anyway, I think Finnerty is in trouble, because I don't think is about Gang-rape, rape, or sexual assault. I think this will be about hate, privilege, arrogance, history, payback, and stereotypes.
I've heard too many people say publicly that the woman may be lying - BUT they know those boys were up to No good, and they know something happened - and that they would convict on that basis alone. The media didn't, to my knowledge, provide us with a transcript of the NCCU campaign event just days before the indictment. On local TV and mostly radio they played the statements made by the young, black student at NCCU. They ranged from they are guilty - we know that - why aren't they in prison to we know they have bad intentions and we've all had similar experiences with Duke Students, now it's time for them to be held accountable.
Many tied crimes 150 years ago to this case. Many spoke about how have they treated us.
Mike, from day one I've said this is a trial by media. It always will be. WE have to win it in the court of public opinion.
Our strategy? ATTACK. Repeat. ATTACK.
In my opinion, anyway...
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.