Posted on 10/11/2006 1:52:56 AM PDT by abb
DURHAM -- A CBS "60 Minutes" segment on the controversial Duke University lacrosse rape case is expected to air Sunday evening and will include interviews with all three indicted players and Kim Roberts Pittman, the second dancer at the party where the attack allegedly occurred.
CBS would not comment on the show. The network's normal practice is to withhold information about "60 Minutes" broadcasts until a few days in advance.
But Pittman's lawyer, Mark Simeon of Durham, confirmed Tuesday that his client was interviewed. But Simeon ended a telephone conversation before fielding a question about what Pittman told the interviewer.
An exotic dancer at the time, Pittman was with another dancer who claimed she was raped and sodomized by three lacrosse players during an off-campus party at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd. in mid-March.
Pittman since has been quoted as saying the rape charges were "a crock." She also told police in a March 22 handwritten statement that she and the accuser ended their performance when someone at the lacrosse party "brought out a broomstick and ... said he would use the broomstick on us."
"That statement made me uncomfortable and I felt like I wanted to leave," Pittman added. "I raised my voice to the boys and said the show was over."
Pittman said she then asked the alleged rape victim to leave the party with her. But she said the accuser "felt we could get more money and that we shouldn't leave yet."
According to Pittman, the accuser "began showing signs of intoxication" early in the dance performance and was "basically out of it" by the time it ended.
Pittman finally drove the other dancer to a Hillsborough Road grocery store, from which a 911 call was placed to police.
There is nothing about an alleged rape in Pittman's written statement, which is included in public-record court files.
All three defendants also were interviewed for the "60 Minutes" segment, sources told The Herald-Sun. The interviewer is veteran reporter Ed Bradley.
The three -- Collin Finnerty, Reade Seligmann and David Evans -- remain free under $100,000 bonds as they await a trial that is expected to occur next year. Each maintains he is innocent.
Neither they nor their families could be reached Tuesday for possible comment about the CBS show, and their attorneys had no comment.
Defense lawyers apparently will not appear on the television program. Neither will District Attorney Mike Nifong, who has been widely criticized for allegedly rushing to judgment in the case and making inflammatory public statements before he had sufficient evidence.
For the past four months, Nifong has not discussed the situation publicly. He was out of town on business and unreachable for comment Tuesday.
Benjamin Himan and Mark Gottlieb, police investigators in the lacrosse case, also could not be reached. But sources said the two had not been interviewed by "60 Minutes" as of Friday.
The Police Department repeatedly has declined to discuss the lacrosse incident.
It could not be determined Tuesday if a one-time driver for the alleged rape victim, Jarriel Lanier Johnson, was among those Bradley contacted.
"I have nothing to say about it," Johnson told The Herald-Sun by telephone before hanging up.
But Johnson gave police an April 6 handwritten statement about an "appointment," "a job" and a performance the accuser had at three different hotels in two days not long before the alleged rape.
Johnson also said she had sexual intercourse with him during the same time period.
URL for this article: http://www.heraldsun.com/durham/4-777449.html
I too am skeptical about 60 mins. Of course two of these players are from the greater NYC area so maybe they have an in at 60 mins.
It will be interesting to see or hear about. I too don't normally watch networks that go with clearly forged documents.
All 60 minutes needs to do is be fair, and Nifong will be damaged by the story.
There are a lot of people out there who believe silence indicates guilt. Not true of course but it's just the way it is. Some people only know what the MSM has told them. It may help get the truth out there. A lot of them have no idea what the evidence is (or is NOT) in this case.
Michael Gaynor has been saying for a while that the boys should be proclaiming their innocence at every opportunity. Similar to DE's very powerful "fantastic lies" statement. His thoughts are that they shouldn't be hiding behind their lawyers if they have nothing to hide and supposedly the "truth" on their side...
Looks like he now may be getting his wish..
I haven't been following this case as closely as I did for the first three months....that was every single day. But I did read recently (on FR) that Nifong has narrowed down the "rape," to taking place in five minutes. Could it be because of all the evidence the defense has shown regarding the time of the boys' actual presence at the house?
In other words, can the defense give out too much information and Nifong take this and spin it to his advantage before the trial, or does the defense have to disclose every single thing before the trial?
Obviously I don't know how the law works!
I would have felt better about this interview if they didn't interview Lil' Kim..........
Agree 100%, and well said, Darby.
One note about Abrams: He came to fully disbelieve Mangum and Kim. Didn't he seem to accept the "n-----r" claim early on? I doubt if he still believes that.
The cook may have been encouraged to leave by the owner because he didn't want to lose the business of the DPD heavy drinkers, or the cook may have been intimidated by the notion of the DPD guys showing up there again. Or, maybe some black-owned business offered him a better job. That would be a novel move for blacks because they rarely help each other, but the local grapevine news and notoriety of hiring him would be a plus for such a business. Or maybe Jesse Jackasson gave him a job. ;>
The fact that Nifong refused to participate is slightly encouraging that the report isn't favorable to the prosecution, but that's tea leaves-reading.
They could gain quite a bit if they're presented favorably, but I don't trust 60M to do that.
Yep, and they could also use Nifong's absence from participation as an excuse to present his side for him ostensibly in the "interest of fairness."
Nifong declined to participate? Hmm. I didn't know that. It sounds like good news. Then again, I don't see how Nifong could risk it. He'd get asked alot of questions and he doesn't have answers for any of them. How could he possibly explain his conduct?
Yes, and didn't Blather become part of 60M after his butt got booted from news anchor? There's nothing connected with any of the drive-by media that I trust, least of all CBS.
If the boys get a fair shake from 60M, I'll believe it when I see it.
I'm a little bit conflicted. It has been so many years since I last watched 60 Minutes that I literally do not remember when it was. Maybe 20 years ago...at least 15. I hate to break that streak, but I'm seriously thinking about doing so.
What I find interesting at this point is the negative tone of this article toward the FA and the DA. The paper seems to be plowing the field to prepare for a scathing (or at least negative) report. Does the paper know something, or is it just in the "just in case" mode?
I have a very hard time expecting anything fair and balanced from 60 Minutes. You would never go broke in betting against any use of journalistic integrity where that bunch is involved.
Well, maybe they'll be against the Fong?
The Fong is under the gag order as are the defense attorneys.
It wouldn't bother me a bit if they did their ususal hit job and did it on Nifong. Even if it were "unfair" he'd deserve it. When someone won't talk to them they say stuff like "Mike Nifong refused our request for an on camera interview" (arched eyebrow). I too am skeptical that they'll do this, but given the strong lax team connection to the NY power centers they just might.
Pinging DukeLax List
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/10/11/60minutes/main2082140.shtml
Duke Lacrosse Players Speak Out
Accuser's Dancing Partner On That Night Also Speaks
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.