Posted on 10/18/2006 2:45:47 PM PDT by zaxxon
The charges against the Duke lacrosse players should be dropped immediately, and the people demanding the dismissal the loudest and most forcefully should be the very people who have made a living allegedly fighting against racial injustice.
I've said this before, but it's worth saying again: Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton should be in Durham, N.C., today, promising civil disobedience until the charges are dropped and prosecutor Mike Nifong resigns.
Ed Bradley and "60 Minutes" should never be mistaken for Thurgood Marshall and the Supreme Court. Bradley is just a TV reporter and "60 Minutes" is just a TV show, but you couldn't help but be moved by the story they aired Sunday night about the Duke lacrosse rape allegations.
The three accused players gave their first interviews, and two of them claimed they had airtight, documented alibis. The accuser's one-night sidekick, Kim Roberts, seems to have settled on telling the truth rather than trying to spin the story for fame or money. She contradicted several of the statements the accuser gave to police.
(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...
It's not so much a matter of there being direct evidence that Liefong is pressuring Mangum as it is a matter of reasonably deducing it from a collection of other facts.
Perhaps he sees a greater likelihood of a judicial dismissal with this judge, which lets him off the hook to some extent, coupled with the fact that he did get the indictments, especially if Mangum recants at an opportune time or announces through counsel that she will not testify due to emotional distress or mental illness.
But most likely there is something going on behind the scenes relating to your question that we are simply unaware of right now.
http://www.webcommentary.com/asp/ShowArticle.asp?id=gaynorm&date=061023
Best Duke Case Defense: The Three's Obvious Innocence
Michael J. Gaynor
Panel analyzes lax coverage
Audience challenges media's role, tense discussion ensues
Ashley Dean, The Chronicle, 10/23/06
A panel about the media's ongoing coverage of the lacrosse scandal sparked heated discussion between audience members and panel members at the School of Law Friday afternoon.
The panel, titled "Why rape allegations against men's lacrosse players became a national story on race, class and crime," included six members of the local and national media, as well as Duke Law Professor James Coleman, chair of the University committee that examined the lacrosse program last spring.
Moderator Frank Stasio, host of "The State of Things" on WUNC Radio, said the lacrosse story took on "American mythic proportions" soon after initial news coverage began.
Many audience members-including alumni, staff, bloggers and lacrosse players' parents who handed out buttons that read "Innocent until proven innocent"-said the media overemphasized issues of race, gender, class and privilege.
Several said the press presumed the guilt of the players following the exotic dancer's rape allegations last March.
"You screwed up the story," one audience member told the panelists.
Duke-Durham divide
Jerry Footlick, former senior editor of Newsweek and author of a book detailing how colleges deal with public crises, noted that the case became "a perfect storm" in the eyes of the media and the American public.
"This wasn't just a story about a woman claiming to be raped," said Susannah Meadows, Trinity '95 and senior writer for Newsweek.
The incident's divisive elements of race and class were immediately discernible, but the storyline was perpetuated following the national media's attention, said Bob Ashley, Trinity '70, editor of The Herald-Sun.
John Drescher, M.A. '88 and managing editor of the Raleigh News & Observer, said he felt his paper overemphasized the class issue, especially early in the case.
Senior Seyward Darby, 2005-2006 editor of The Chronicle and current editorial page managing editor, said the national media often sensationalized the alleged divisions on campus.
"The only thing that's truly dividing us right now is power lines from your trucks," Darby said she thought at the time about the media's presence on campus.
Meadows said a significant moment in the characterization of the case came when a student from North Carolina Central University told her that even if David Evans, Trinity '06, Collin Finnerty and Reade Seligmann were not guilty, they should go to jail to make up for past wrongs.
Role of media
Panelists also discussed the role some have said the media played in perpetuating the case and molding public opinion.
"I tend to think the media coverage on this whole thing has been what you'd expect," said Jay Bilas, Trinity '86 and J.D. '92 as well as an ESPN analyst. "It's an evolving story and you see minds change."
One audience member criticized the media for having had "the will to believe the lurid and false story in the beginning," though Meadows said Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong's early actions may have unwittingly influenced reporters.
"I think what made this case so extraordinary is that you had a public official saying, 'I am sure this person has been raped,'" Meadows said. "We expect our public officials to know what they are talking about."
Bilas mentioned the large role bloggers have also played in the coverage of the case.
"Some of these blogs have gained their own credibility in investigating the investigation," he said.
An attendee said he was surprised by the "joviality and lightheartedness" of the discussion and asked whether the media has taken responsibility for lives ruined in the aftermath of the case.
"I don't take responsibility for the fall-out of a story," Stasio said. "But I do take responsibility for our coverage."
Ashley said he stands by the Herald-Sun's reporting, noting that the paper is one of the smallest news organizations, but one of the most heavily involved.
"Every single day we're reporting an incomplete version of events," he said. "There are a lot of chapters in this that have not yet been written."
Footlick said he doubts the case will make it to trial, but added that if it does and Evans, Finnerty and Seligmann are acquitted, he does not think their lives will have been ruined.
Representations of accuser and accused
Other attendees questioned the media's characterization of the accuser as the "victim," rather than the "alleged victim."
This thought was broached in the discussion when the mother of a member of the 2005-2006 lacrosse team took issue with Stasio's reference to the accuser as a survivor.
"Can you say 'alleged survivor?'" asked the mother, who wished to remain anonymous. "That's very different from saying 'survivor.'"
Coleman described the portrayal of the accuser and defendants as "asymmetrical," noting that the alleged victim's name has remained unreported, but the three indicted players have had their names and pictures splashed across television programs and the covers of national magazines.
One audience member asked why Newsweek's cover had included mug shots of the indicted players, but a later article about Nifong did not receive similar treatment. Meadows said she was not involved in the cover-shot decisions.
Meadows added that she too was disturbed by the unbalanced coverage in the media at times.
Audience response
The event, sponsored by the Duke Chronicle Alumni Network, Duke Magazine and the DeWitt Wallace Center for Media and Democracy, was the first in a two-part program discussing contentious topics in current media.
Although the audience members at the lacrosse panel did not all agree with the way the case was covered, many said they thought the panel provided insight into the media's role and representation.
"I thought the panel was excellent," said the lacrosse player's mother. "I didn't get to ask the other question I wanted, which was, 'Why is it sometimes so obvious certain newspapers are biased, even when they say they're not?'"
KC Johnson, writer of the Durham-in-Wonderland blog, noted on his website the panel's lack of a blogger. Darla Miles, a reporter with WTVD, Raleigh's ABC News affiliate, said she felt the discussion could have benefited from a representative from the local or national broadcast media.
"The local TV reporters, I believe, were in the throngs of it everyday," Miles said.
Though the audience members seemed largely in support of the team, some criticized the lack of coverage about Nifong's conduct. Drescher noted the Raleigh News and Observer has worked over the past three years to expose prosecutorial misconduct.
During the discussion, the lacrosse player's parents also said University officials told their sons not to tell anyone, including family, about the situation last March.
"We're all afraid for our boys," the mother said after the panel.
http://media.www.dukechronicle.com/media/storage/
paper884/news/2006/10/23/News/Panel.Analyzes.Lax.
Coverage-2382138.shtml?sourcedomain=www.dukechronicle.
com&MIIHost=media.collegepublisher.com
[For the record]
Y'all want a new thread on this story or shall I just ping it on this thread?
Pinging the DukeLax list with a fresh story on Friday's panel discussion...
Good analysis. I learned something, and that's always a good thing (the bit about him applying early and hard pressure on the boys expecting a plea).
http://media.www.dukechronicle.com/media/storage/paper884/news/2006/10/23/Letters/Da.Column.Misses.Important.Points-2382158.shtml?sourcedomain=www.dukechronicle.com&MIIHost=media.collegepublisher.com
DA column misses important points
Osagie Ighile
Posted: 10/23/06
Although I understand James Zou's argument from his Oct. 20 column "Do not vote," I disagree with some of his main assertions.
First is the assertion that those who oppose Nifong are voting purely out of personal grudge and spite. I'm not saying these feeling might not be involved in people's decisions, but it is Nifong's dereliction of duty in his handling of the lacrosse case that has motivated his opposition and also produced these grudges and feelings of spite. And although I didn't watch the "60 Minutes" program, I read the transcript, and I think from it and the past six months, it is obvious that Nifong has behaved in a way unbecoming of his position.
By the way, I consider his actions-ruining the lives of three Duke students, making unsubstantiated inflammatory remarks, disregarding federal, state and local police procedural guidelines while still not owning up to his mistakes-to be a little bit more than "one sensational incident."
Secondly, the idea that a vote for Cheek is a negative vote is wrong. A vote for Cheek or the other challenger, Steve Monks (don't forget him), is a vote for change. Saying that because Cheek does not want the job makes voting for him futile is also erroneous because if Cheek win and quits immediately, the governor will have to appoint a DA, and many people have more faith in the governor choosing a competent DA than in Nifong's credibility as DA. The "Do not vote" column in the end is doing what it claims others are. It is short-changing the public by suggesting that by virtue of the supposed de-personalization of the political process, the public has two choices: vote Nifong or don't vote (a.k.a. vote Nifong).
Osagie Ighile
Trinity '09
FYI, here's the James Zou column referred to in that letter to the editor - http://www.dukechronicle.com/media/storage/paper884/news/2006/10/20/Columns/Do.Not.Vote-2379824.shtml?norewrite200610230936&sourcedomain=www.dukechronicle.com
BET Poll:
By BET.com News Staff
Posted Oct. 23, 2006 – Over the past several days, new questions have surfaced about the credibility of the dancer who accused members of the Duke University Lacrosse Team of raping her. Three former teammates professed their innocence to CBS’s “60 Minutes,” while a second dancer suggested the alleged victim had lied.
Last week, we asked, "In light of the investigation by '60 Minutes,' what should be the impact of this new report?"
And here's how you voted:
About 41 percent of you said, "The Duke alleged rape case should be further investigated."
About 33 percent of you said, "The Duke alleged rape case should be dropped because of lack of evidence."
About 26 percent of you said, "The Duke alleged rape case should continue to trial."
The panel, titled "Why rape allegations against men's lacrosse players became a national story on race, class and crime," answered its titled question with the presence of the Duke University student newspaper Chronicle alumni most culpable for a journalistic mess of their own making, seated at the table.
The university's OWN journalism alumni 'screwed up the story'.
---- Ashley ' 70, and the HERALD-SUN
--- Drescher ' 88, and the NEWS & OBSERVER
--- Meadows ' 95 and NEWSWEEK magazine.
The idea that they may have had a better handle on the story because they knew Duke was the first mistake.
Any unaquainted outsider would have been better able to see through the hysteria and lies being spewed forth on the campus and downtown.
Noticeably absent was Applebome ' 70, from THE NEW YORK TIMES,
or the circle of imcompetent story-telling would have been complete.
The student editor Darby, gets a pass, since she wasn' t a professional.
Where were Abrams ' 85 and MSNBC
or Feinstein ' 76 , ex-WASHINGTON POST?
Putting NPR's Stasio in as moderator guaranteed this panel was merely a public relations stunt.
** And these people STILL don't get the story. They really don't.
What this story needs is a good Criminal Reporter willing to shake the rats
up downtown and nothing else.
They can start with a trip to the Platinum.
I don't get the difference between
"The Duke alleged rape case should be further investigated."
and
"The Duke alleged rape case should continue to trial."
That being said, it's semi-encouraging that one third of the readership of BET's (unscientific) poll has come to the conclusion "The Duke alleged rape case should be dropped because of lack of evidence."
Great analysis!
Thanks! Keep in mind though, that's it's just my opinion.
Feinstein and Abrams are two obvious choices for additions to the panel. I feel they had the maximum number of people that was practical. Who would you have removed?
As much as I liked Bilas' performance it's not really his "beat". I would say the same about Feinstein. They are more straight "sports" reporters (despite Bilas' J.D.)
Here's what Feinstein said back in May
http://articles.news.aol.com/sports/_a/dukes-handling-of-lacrosse-mess-has-been/20041202125109990001
Unlike so many media people, there's not a thing in this article he'd have to change. I'm sure he'll have a book out on it at some time in the future. Maybe he can get Brodhead the negative attention he deserves.
I, frankly, I would have substituted Abrams for Bilas or perhaps Footlick. And if you could have gotten K.C. Johnson, I would have subbed Johnson and Abrams for Bilas and Footlick.
To be fair, however, we don't know who was invited and couldn't make it.
Had it been investigated in the first place, it would not exist now.
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.