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
You're talking civil court proceedings mainly, not criminal court. Whole different ball game there. People lie like crazy in civil court and there are rarely any consequences for it. Family Law is about the worst because they're dealing with people's kids and pocketbooks. But, exactly, where was the corruption? Did your wife pay the judge off? Give the cop a blow job to change his testimony? What were the corrupt acts on the part of the court and the cop? Did you ever go to family court services? How old were your kids when this was going on?
And she will no choice except to take the stand.
I hate to even speculate about it, because the families might be holding that in reserve.
p.s. I assume you were innocent, since you weren't convicted, and because your ex sounds like a real loser. Coming in drunk at 6am with young kids in the home is not impressive.
Who in the hell do you think you're talking to?
What else Kim could have said?
It's probably something else.
That not the point. We all agree that the main goal is to get the criminal charges dismissed. What Howlin is suggesting is that the players and families will not be stop with a dismissal or not guilty verdict but will seek further vindication. That means civil court and exposing the full range of this hoax.
Not president Brodhead
Perhaps this has been discussed already, but can they have the arrest/charges removed from their record if found innocent by "findings of fact"? I read about this happening to someone after his case was dropped by a DA. The guy then went before a Superior Court Judge to plead his case.
Get a clue.
You should get one too.
Again, what do you think their chances are of being found not guilty if this goes on trial?
Right. He would not overtly demand perjury from her, and even Gottlieb probably would not. But there are certainly ways to make the point without coming out and saying it directly. You just raise a series of questions that set the person's mind in a certain direction, with no actual threats or promises.
Here's a little something to chew on: in serious cases, the DA nearly always has a meeting with the victim (for a variety of reasons). The fact that Liefong avoided meetings with Mangum and Kim is suggestive to me that he expected and directed certain things be done a certain way and wanted no possibility that he would be directly connected with those acts, hence the Gottlieb buffer. Clearly, Liefong and Gottlieb have an "understanding". How strong it is remains to be seen.
Look, I don't know WHO you are, but you're obviously not knowledgeable about these people, this case, and how the legal system works.
Reading your posts.
I've suggested numerous times that the boys file suit, possibly in their respective states, against Mangum and get her on record as to what all Nifong, Gottlieb and all the rest of them have said to her at various times with respect to her testimony, identifications and pursuit of the case. Then start an avalanche of subpoenas.
I am a duly sworn officer of the court; I'll be more than glad to serve them all.
Maybe your reading comprehension is lacking?
Cause I am pretty sure I am well aware of the facts of this case.
What exactly do you think I am not aware of?
I'm glad they sounded forceful. Sounds good. Hope they put it up on the WRAL site.
You're obviously not aware of the TYPE of people we're dealing with her.
These people ARE going to reclaim their reputations and lives -- and if they have to destroy Nifong to do it, so be it.
And for starters they NEED a trial to do it.
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.