It's Time for Justice: Drop the charges vs. Duke lacrosse players

How far will DA Nifong set back race relations?
[Excerpt from Gaynor column quoting Taylor, October 23, 2006]

One would expect the Durham Committee on the Affairs of Black People to object to a rogue prosecutor and to resent Black voter manipulation by racial pandering. Yet the Committee, which had supported a Black candidate (Keith Bishop) in the Democrat primary, just endorsed Mr. Nifong in the general election.

The Committee's spokesperson, Lavonia Allison, insisted that quality-of-life issues explained its endorsement of Mr. Nifong. Ms, Allison added that the Committee urged voters to vote strictly Democratic, in the hope of having officials concerned with "the least among us as well as the most."

Stuart Taylor, Jr., America's top legal commentator and a lawyer who recognized the Duke case for what it was at the start, did not mince words about the damage the Committee did by endorsing Mr. Nifong:

"I believe that this endorsement and other support for Nifong by African-American leaders will come back to haunt African-American individuals, who are by far the most disproportionately numerous victims of prosecutorial and police misconduct in North Carolina and around the country.

"Nifong's grotesque abuses in a case involving well-off white kids who have already been proved innocent beyond any reasonable doubt could have had a powerful educational effect on well-off people like their parents, relatives, friends, and sympathizers.

"It could have taught such well-off people to guard against the abuse of police and prosecutorial power more generally, which goes on every day in hundreds if not thousands of cases that draw zero publicity. I have hoped to reinforce this education in a modest way in my book.

"Black leaders could have reinforced this education in a far more powerful way by standing on principle with other critics of Nifong — as they (and I) would no doubt be doing were Nifong persecuting black football players in this manner.

"Instead, the vast majority of black leaders — all those who have supported Nifong and many of those who have simply ignored or minimized his abuses — are teaching the rest of us that they don't give a damn about opposing injustice when the victims are white kids.

"As we see unfolding before our eyes the use against innocent white kids of the same police and prosecutorial powers that are more often used to ruin the lives of innocent black kids, black leaders are at best indifferent. Many are applauding.

"Some well-off whites will, I hope, continue to deplore such abuse of law enforcement power regardless of who the victims may be. I certainly will.

"But many will conclude that black leaders and those who support them are immoral and unjust people undeserving of sympathy when they or their children are persecuted by the Nifongs, Gottliebs, Himans and Claytons of this world. This is not only setting back race relations. It is setting back any hope of getting the prosecutorial-misconduct boot off the necks of innocent black kids."

http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/gaynor/061023

* The Committee is doing all the manipulating.

Interesting Read.....

http://www.duke.edu/web/dulug/list/840.html

Re: DULUG: GNOME! (fwd)
On Tue, 23 Mar 1999, Robert G. Brown wrote:

(snip)

Lastly, we come to Durham. Durham is the only _real_ city in
this whole area. Durham has some suburban areas, often annexed
thanks to the state's rather loose annexation laws that don't require
consent of the annexed, and a real inner city. Durham has always
been an industrial city, and looked down on by the other cities
for that reason. Durham is also where much of "the working class"
of Cary and Chapel Hill live. (UNC Housekeepers, Cary firefighters,
etc.) Why? Because it's the only city where there's cheap housing
available. (Cary only builds expensive housing-- Chapel Hill builds
expensive when it must, but generally prefers not to build at all)

Why is cheap housing available in Durham? Politics. Durham
has a much easier process to build, but the political dynamic
also plays into it. Durham, unlike the other cities, has politics
controlled by 4 PACs (Poltical Action Committees) It's often
possible to predict elections by counting the sponsorships of:

the People's Alliance, a left-liberal group with Chapel Hillian ideas.
Many of them live in the Watts Hospital neighborhood, where the homes are
surprisingly expensive for their size. They're generally well-to-do,
but that doesn't stop them from getting state money to keep their
neighborhood in shape. Their candidates tend to win, but they tend
to get betrayed on lots of issues, thanks to THE COMMITTEE (more on
that later)

the Durham Voter's Alliance, a moderate liberal group. Tends to
represent the swing opinion of the city, and their candidates tend
to win.

the Friends of Durham, a moderately conservative business-oriented
group. The losers in most elections. Often a candidate supported
by the Friends of Durham will face a candidate supported by the other
3, and lose big.

finally, the most powerful is the Durham Committee of the Affairs
of Black People. The Committee is the only mostly black PAC, and
in a city with the black population of Durham (defnitely higher
than other cities in the state), that means a lot. The Committee
does a great job getting the black voters of the city to vote
for their candidates. Their leadership consists of the black
leadership and business leaders of the town. (Like people on
the board of NC Mutual Life, the largest black-owned insurance
company in that nation) Since they're both large and effective
at turning out the vote, they're very strong. Generally liberal
in outlook, the Committee nearly always approves of development
as long as the Committee gets it's share of the pie. This may
take the form of deals with prominent Committee members (Ken
Spaulding, Lavonia Allison, NC Mutual Life, etc.) for financial
gain, promises to high black workers, renovations to black
communities, etc. This frustrates the People's Alliance especially,
because while nominally slow-growth, the Committee ends up favoring
most growth because most businesses, like Duke, know how to deal
with the Committee. Observe the Southpoint Mall, where People's
Alliance candidates, most also supported by the Committee,
voted for it, while most of those who voted against were not
supported by the People's Alliance, like Republican mayor
Nick Tennyson, who incidentally is a real estate developer.

[Excerpt from Cash Michaels at WTVD11 board;
insight into possible prosecution strategy].

But once the lion's share of the discovery evidence had been reviewed, it was clear that, as best we knew, there was no "smoking gun" evidence proving the case beyond a reasonable doubt.

Recently, Prof. Irv Joyner and atty Al McSurely suggested in my 60 Min. story that the DA hasn't shown his full deck by way of evidence. Folks immediately jumped on me saying I was promoting this viewpoint.

Wrong, so wrong. I was reporting this viewpoint, this perspective, if you will, because that's what I'm supposed to do.

I just got off the phone with Prof. Joyner because even a member of the defense team wrote me with his objections. Strangely enough, his objections actually backed up what Joyner was originally saying.

While state law mandates that all facts, physical evidence, reports, notes and everything else material be handed over to the defense, Joyner made clear that the prosecution's case (we're speaking generically here) is much, much more than that.

His "theory" of the case, based on his or the investigating officers' interpretation of the evidence, facts and /or crime scene/or sequence of events, is NOT discoverable under the law. In effect, the prosecutor's "spin" on the same set of discovery is totally his province, and that's rarely written down.

Therefore, the defense has no right to it under North Carolina law, according to Prof. Joyner.

How does he know? Because he recently had a case involving police officers that was appealed to the NC Court of Appeals, and they made that point clear in their 3-0 opinion.

How do I know?

Because at the Sept. 22 hearing, as you'll recall, Nifong advised the court that, based on the evidence, he has a new theory on how the rape occurred. Instead of the original 30 minutes, he's now saying the window was really 5-10 minutes.

The defense told the judge, "We want a copy of the state's theory."

Judge replied (not literally of course), "You're not entitled to it. Get lost!"

Now many of you are saying "BS," but Joyner warns that the law allows Nifong to make a horse race of this thing at trial just based on that exception. He has to convince a jury of his spin, his interpretation of the evidence.

Now this is perspective that should have been in that 60 Min. report, and Bradley could have pointed to other cases where everything seemed as cut and dry as this one, and turned out to be anything but in the end as a result.

Many of you have, I'm sure, heard the old saying, " In court, it's not about what the truth is, but who has the best lawyer."

Many of you are so emotionally invested in this case, when a reporter puts a different perspective on the table, you immediately assume he's doing so in opposition to you personally.

No, it's about covering this case from stem to stern.

Ask yourself this question? If the lack of evidence against the Duke Three is so compelling, and it is, then why are the defense attorneys, with all of the ammunition they've got, still micromanaging this case as if there was a ton of evidence against their clients?

Evans press conference. 60 Min. interview. Prospective juror survey. Manipulating the media. Filing a million motions to determine Nifong's case absent the evidence.

Because, depending on the makeup and mood of the jury, the defense knows the Nifong has an outside chance to sell whatever that theory is, and they don't want to take any chances, though they won't admit that publicly.

I'm not saying Nifong's ploy will work, or should work. Just telling folks, according to Prof. Joyner, what it is.

That's what that different, learned perspective apart from Prof. James Coleman, who I totally respect and regard, offers. Allowing all of us to see what could happen, and that it's not as open and shut as we think, lack of evidence notwithstanding.

As journalists, Ed Bradley and the 60 Min crew should have educated us to that. They didn't, and I rightfully criticized them for it.

So I'm telling you, and strangely enough, Mike Nifong already informed on Sept. 22. You didn't take him seriously, but the defense obviously is.

Why do you think Nifong has kept the accuser absolutely away from any of us in the press?* As under the gun as he is, even after 60 min., he still has wiggle room.

http://forums.go.com/abclocal/WTVD/thread?threadID=134470

* Why can't the press find her at the Platinum, or Teaser's, or Diamond Dogs?

http://www.timesdispatch.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=RTD%2FMGArticle%2FRTD_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1149191310900&path=!sports&s=1045855934844
Sorry saga is a story of excess
BOB LIPPER
TIMES-DISPATCH COLUMNIST
Tuesday, October 24, 2006

Duke lacrosse's 15 minutes of fame has now stretched to about a half-hour or so, and it's safe to say that no one involved in this slimy episode is remotely close to getting a star on Hollywood Boulevard any time soon.

Well, with the possible exception of Ed Bradley, I suppose.

Bradley and his CBS crew gave Duke lacrosse the full "60 Minutes" treatment two Sundays ago - the latest spotlight to shine on a team that's remained in the news since last March. That's when an alcohol-fueled party thrown by the squad resulted in three players being charged with raping a stripper hired to perform at the event.

(Memo to parents of college-age students: You have permission here to stop reading this column and send your kids a letter that reminds them to eat their veggies and spells out acceptable norms of social behavior.)

The "60 Minutes" segment featured defense-friendly interviews with the three players (they denied the charges) as well as the second stripper lined up for the fateful evening (she refuted her partner's allegations - basically a 180 from her original statements of last year).

All told, the package contributed to a news-cycle steamroller that's tilted the field against Durham prosecutor Mike Nifong in a fashion more radical than any Michigan State-Northwestern football game.

Nifong, who declined to share taped footage with Bradley, once was portrayed as righteous (if somewhat yappy) people's barrister representing the meek underclass against privileged preppies. Now he's being sized up as duplicitous pol, and his case - no apparent DNA evidence, for one thing - has begun to look as thin as a membrane.

That's where matters stand. Nifong is up for election in two weeks and says he's up for taking the case to court next spring ("There's no doubt in my mind that she was raped and assaulted at this location," he told a TV interviewer months ago) - and until he does or doesn't, everything else is opinion, spin and speculation.

Point being, it was wobbly territory to jump to conclusions last spring, and - this case's seeming weaknesses notwithstanding - it's shaky to jump to conclusions now.

Nifong either has legitimate grounds for pressing forward or he doesn't - and if he knows he doesn't, he should end the pretense. The accuser's story (more than one version has been reported) either stands or collapses. The players either did a terrible wrong or were terribly wronged. Let it all play out.

For now, we know that a lot of things - the lacrosse team, the house party, the accuser, the DA, the media (yeah, us) - were out of control last spring. And that another school paid dearly for its investment in College Sports Inc. And - in this particular instance - for harboring a group of serial troublemakers whose exploits were well known in the community.

"When I talk to the presidents of other universities, you know you can't imagine - or maybe you can imagine - how many other university leaders have come up to me, knowing how this particular mess landed on my doorstep and how easily it could've landed on someone else's," Duke's president, Richard Brodhead told Bradley during the telecast.

True enough, given the prevailing climate on college campuses nowadays - but the fact is it landed at Duke and festers there still. As for the team, now reinstated after being shut down by Brodhead last March, it recently concluded fall workouts with a day of exhibitions in Rockville Center, N.Y. The New York Times and other metropolitan dailies covered the event.

They weren't there for the faceoffs.

Contact staff writer Bob Lipper at blipper@timesdispatch.com or (804) 649-6555.

And for the record, here's what I wrote John Drescher

John-

Thank you for coming into the lion's den. I am a subscriber in Raleigh. Here's the thing. A lot of people read your early coverage and drew the conclusion "Oh! - three Duke lacrosse players raped a stripper" and, at that point, stopped paying attention. It didn't help that you sent out your columnists with the message that you'd reported it all before 60 Minutes did. The problem is that you reported it AFTER many people stopped paying attention.

Thank you for publishing this here. Even after the 60 Minutes report, which would have been unnecessary if you'd gotten it right, I still run into people who think the rape is an accomplished fact because they didn't see 60 Minutes. Could you go one step further and put this on a Sunday front page above the fold as was your initial coverage of these very questionable accusations?

Frankly, for me, they didn't pass the smell test from day one. It's your job to be skeptical especially of govenrment officials involved in an election campaign. Why were you so credulous? You seem to want us to believe that it's Mike Nifong's fault and the fault of defense lawyers for not talking to you. Read what's below and understand WHY the defense lawyers wouldn't talk to you.

Let me demonstrate what I'm talking about. As I am sure you well know, most readers are hurried and will read a headline and maybe the first two paragraphs. So things buried a the end of an article might as well not be there.

So I'm one of those headline-only readers, and appended is the story I would have gotten on the way to work every morning for the first four weeks or so. The way your coverage went it would be about April 22 before it really became clear that things were not as they seemed. I know many many people who had "checked out" by that point.

Did you hear the irrational rant of the woman at the panel discussion who went storming out. I notice you chose to not report on that. Your coverage has a certain segment of the population so convinced that a rape occurred that they'll not listen to anything else.

If these three laxers are NOT sent away for 20 years you're going to have a Rodney King kind of outcome in Durham. Are you prepared to take responsibility for that? By the way, that woman was the kind of juror that these three lax players will face. Mike Nifong's counting on it. Want to handicap their chances for a fair trial?

24 March "DNA tests ordered for Duke athletes"
("Durham police had 46 members of the Duke University lacrosse team DNA-tested Thursday in the suspected gang-rape of a woman at an off-campus party last week.")
25 March "Dancer gives details of ordeal"
(this horrible rape absolutely occurred - you preume facts not actually known - that a rape happended - and at the same time suppress the fact that she was also accusing Kim
Roberts of assisting and stealing the money. Right here at this point you could have cast doubt on the accuser's story. BUT YOU DIDN'T)
27 March "Team's silence is sickening" (R Sheehan)
("We know you know")
1 April "The sequence of events that led to allegations of a sexual assault"
1 April "Tension spreads in lacrosse case"
1 April "In lacrosse case, any charges 10 days away"
1 April "Two sides, one truth"
(No news so keep it in the public eye)
1 April "Any way you look at it, woman's situation was tragic "
(no matter what happened - men are bad)
2 April "Threats, rumors, incidents keep students uneasy Duke campus"
2 April "Incident imperils Duke's image"
(No actual news so stir the pot some more)
2 April "Searching for fairness in the Duke story"
("Outrage" has been the operative word to describe community sentiment in Durham in the past week. And justifiably so, if the allegations against members of the Duke men's lacrosse team are even close to true. The community has risen in angry protest against the ugly story of sexual assault, brutality and racism that has drawn national attention and tarnished Duke's blue-ribbon reputation.")
3 April "Lacrosse team out of control" R. Sheehan
(Ruth hasn't caught on yet)
5 April "Players' lawyers could divulge DNA test results"
(We have no news but we might get some soon)
5 April "Duke plans to address students' behavior"
(It's not just the lacrosse and baseball teams - it's every Duke student)
5 April "Father: Injuries were telling"
(Why would her father lie?)
6 April "Player in tussle in D.C."
(See - they're all hooligans)
6 April "Lacrosse coach, season out"
("Duke University lacrosse coach Mike Pressler resigned Wednesday, the same day a search warrant revealed new information about a lacrosse player's behavior and the rape investigation related to a lacrosse team party last month. Hours later, university President Richard Brodhead announced the appointment of five groups to investigate campus culture, student behavior and the lacrosse program. Brodhead also terminated all lacrosse activities immediately...")
6 April "Message spoke of 'killing' "
(Next time they'll rape AND kill the strippers. Note: I used to live in what is now Edens 2C. Haveing a team meeting in one of the tiny dorm rooms is absurd on the face of it.)
7 April "Suspects in rape share background of privilege"
(it's a bunch of preppy rich white guys)
7 April "Lacrosse coach won big on field"
(But was a loser elsewhere?)
7 April "Manager: Scanty info delayed search"
(You actually bought into this lame excuse?)
8 April " 'Stand up... challenge teammates' "
(Now Duke's an object lesson on what NOT to do)
8 April "Lacrosse legal strife erupts early"
(Finally you get in contact with the defense)
9 April "Team has swaggered for years"
(the team is out of control and has been for a long time)
9 April "Baseball team had wild side of its own, former players say"
(it's not just the lacrosse team)
9 April "Facts a casualty of frenzy"
(No excuse for getting it wrong say I)
10 April "Attorney: Party pics help players"
(Finally you start to find out that things are not as they seem)
10 April "Spotlight new place for Nifong"
(Finally you start to focus on Nifong)
11 April "News doesn't end investigation or heal wounds"
(How about: "No DNA match to accuser say defense lawyers")
11 April "DNA clears players, lawyers say; DA vows to continue inquiry"
(OK - one out of two)
12 April "The conflict on campus is big-time sports"
(A Duke professor's hit piece on athletics)
12 April "Ex-Clinton lawyer to counsel players' backers"
(You just had to drag in Bill Clinton to produce guilt by association)
12 April "Nifong cites attacker ID, says more tests pending"
(DNA that I promised would clear the innocent cleared everyone but I'm not stopping because I made her ID someone.)
12 April "DNA doesn't offer magic key to case"
(The N&O just had to back up Nifong's assertions that DNA is not required. Sock puppet much?)
13 April "If lying, take her to task"
(Ruth starts to get a clue)
14 April "DA's conduct draws retort"
(His opponents in a race criticize him)
14 April "The Latest"
(Lame headline. Was that the best you could do?)
15 April "Supporters standing by co-captains"
(So they DO have SOME people who like them)
15 April "Players facing uncertain future"
(Team members know jig is up and consider leaving)
15 April "Misplaced blame shelters students, but fails to protect them"
("including one member who shares sadistic sexual fantasies via e-mail, one composer of wounding racial harangues, 15 with North Carolina criminal records, and others operating under aliases" - let's make sure and review how rotten is the whole team)
15 April "Lawyers to seek rebuke for police"
(How about "Police try illegal scare tactics")
15 April "The law must watch its tongue"
(Lumping the defense in with publicity hound Mike Nifong)
16 April "Mother, dancer, accuser"
(you forgot prostitute, criminal, etc.)
16 April "More questions about the lacrosse story"
("The calls and e-mails started pouring in within hours of the DNA report last Monday. The words differed, but the message was the same: When is The News & Observer going to 'fess up that it got the Duke sexual assault story wrong? "How about a front-page apology to restore some of the damaged reputation your newspaper has caused for jumping to conclusions and assuming guilt!" one reader wrote." WE'RE STILL WAITING)
17 April "Grand jury could hear Duke case"
(Mike Nifong has to have his indictments before the primary)
17 April "Racist booklets blanket Durham"
(Where was your article and outrage about the "wanted poster", oh wait, you published it too.)
18 April "Two players indicted in Duke lacrosse case"
(Mike Nifong gets what he needs to make Victoria Peterson happy)
19 April "Key players in investigation"
("Mike Nifong: Durham's district attorney has been outspoken on the case, saying he is confident a woman was raped in the house where lacrosse team members met for a party. Over a 27-year career, Nifong has a reputation as a fierce prosecutor who cares more about fairness than winning. He is seeking election May 2," Mike cares more about fairness than winning - sure he does.)
19 April "Baker defends questioning of players"
(He's a lawyer is he?)
19 April "Suspects in rape share background of privilege"
(Nah, your coverage wasn't about class distinctions. You act like this article was an accident that slipped through your filter.)
19 April "Arrests bring new chapter"
(Who is this woman and why the heck do we care what she thinks)
19 April "2 arrested in lacrosse case; identity of 3rd person sought"
(Mike Nifong needs his trio of gang rapists)
19 April "Nifong's opponent takes a swing"
(And the N&O swings back for him)
19 April "Players' conduct had concerned Duke"
(Duke knew they were bad all along)
19 April "Seligmann's backers say he 'isn't a nasty player' "
(Well that's a left-handed compliment if I ever heard one, by the way "he's rich".)
19 April "Finnerty's exclusive neighborhood in shock"
("Exclusive"? This is not about class - not in the least. Who are you kidding?)
20 April "Lacrosse players, lawyers await results of second round of DNA testing"
(Nothing new - stir the pot - keep it in the public eye)
20 April "New tension cloaks team"
(No actual news - stir that pot)
21 April "Amid debris of scandal, Duke panels seek better days"
(Stir pot stir)
21 April "Arrest may put D.C. pact at risk"
(See he did it once he'll do it again.)
21 April "Accuser and her family value support"
(How sympathetic - except by this time "you know who" is out swinging from a pole - why didn't you find THAT out.)
21 April "Cab driver tells of fares"
(Oops - maybe Nifong indicted the wrong guys.)
22 April "DA changed bond status for second dancer"
(Ooops - maybe Nifong's up to something.)
22 April "DA on the spot for comments"
(Could it be his motives are impure?)
23 April "Duke alumni pensive, proud about lacrosse case reaction"
(What does this mean exactly?)
25 April "Lacrosse players face old charges"
(Maybe Nifong's a jerk after all)
26 April "Duke player has D.C. strife"
(Gee - I wonder why he was picked out of that flawed lineup? Did you make the connection?)
26 April "Residents brace for last classes day"
(Durham residents brace for spate of student riots - or not)
28 April "Panther group plans to visit Duke"
(Now look what you've done - you better hope the NBPs don't take justice into their own hands.)
28 April "Rape case is a factor"
(Ya think?)
28 April "Accuser made prior rape report"
(Finally - maybe she's part of the problem)
29 April "Alleva looks at discipline"
(Duke has a discipline problem)
29 April "Sports in crosshairs of campus debates"
("Let's face it, Duke has been trying to have it both ways for 20 years")
29 April "Report involved abuse at age 14"
(Further doubts)
30 April "DA, police to be 'tried,' too"
(Finally an article that the DA and police might be the problem)
30 April "Veteran sarge, novice detective"
(Finally you're catching on)

I couldn't leave these two out
2 August "Two Duke lacrosse DNA tests are positive"
(according to you the DNA proves they did it when in fact it was the opposite)
27 August "Cop says nurse found trauma in Duke case"
(the medical report supports a rape according to Gottleib about 4 months later. How about "Cop derelict in duty - fabricates report 4 months after the fact.)

http://www.dukechronicle.com/media/storage/paper884/news/2006/10/24/News/Indicted.Lax.Players.Could.Return-2384779.shtml?norewrite200610240808&sourcedomain=www.dukechronicle.com
Indicted lax players could return
Seligmann, Finnerty may be eligible if charges are dropped
Gregory Beaton
Posted: 10/24/06
Indicted members of the 2005-2006 men's lacrosse team Reade Seligmann and Collin Finnerty would likely be eligible to return to the program if felony charges against them are dropped, sources within the Department of Athletics and the Office of Student Affairs said Monday.

Several members of the athletics department, men's lacrosse head coach John Danowski and the team's captain all indicated Seligmann and Finnerty-who would be juniors-would be warmly accepted back in to the program, provided they are in good standing with the University and with the NCAA.

"Collin and Reade would be welcomed back with open arms, and that's something they're strongly considering," said team captain Ed Douglas, a redshirt senior. "We look forward to having them with us."

Seligmann and Finnerty completed their coursework for the spring semester and their NCAA eligibility should not be an issue, said Chris Kennedy, senior associate athletics director.

While criminal proceedings continue against the three indicted players-including David Evans, who graduated in the spring-Finnerty and Seligmann are not on Duke's campus this semester because of the school's policy regarding violent felony charges against its students.

Their status with the University will be re-evaluated once the criminal proceedings have reached their conclusion, said Stephen Bryan, associate dean of students and director of judicial affairs.

Once the legal process is resolved, it would be up to Seligmann and Finnerty whether or not to return. In a recent interview, Seligmann told "60 Minutes," "I can't imagine representing a school that didn't want to represent me."

"It's obviously going to be a very personal decision for both of those individuals, and I'd imagine it won't be an easy decision," Douglas said. "We understand that."

Duke's judicial process

In the hectic period after the first two indictments were issued against Seligmann and Finnerty April 17, school officials were not permitted to comment on the specifics of the two players' academic situations because of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act.

When the indictments were handed down, Larry Moneta, vice president for student affairs, said it was the school's policy to suspend students facing felony charges.

"Historically, it has been the University's practice to issue an interim suspension when a student is charged with a felony or when the student's presence on the campus may create an unsafe situation," Moneta said in a statement April 18.

Bryan said Monday this is the school's policy when charges of violent crimes are pressed against students.

According to key points of Duke's "Administrative Leave of Absence" policies and procedures provided by Michele Rasmussen, assistant dean of Trinity College, school policy only permits Interim Suspensions to last seven to 14 days.

When "it becomes apparent that external legal proceedings or other extenuating circumstances will prolong the period of Interim Suspension" past two weeks, students are placed on Administrative Leave and may work with their academic dean to finish coursework for that semester.

"Students on Administrative Leave may be allowed to come on to Duke's campus, depending on their particular situation and as long as the appropriate dean's office is notified and gives permission for the student to be here," Rasmussen wrote in an e-mail.

The University's policy for Administrative Leave says students may be under such status indefinitely, at which point they are permitted to enroll at another university.

"60 Minutes" reported Finnerty and Seligmann are both enrolled in coursework at colleges near their homes.

Once criminal proceedings are complete, students in good legal standing may contact the associate dean for judicial affairs and the school will decide whether to begin its own judicial process.

"If the student is returned to good standing, a retroactive notation of "Leave of Absence" will be posted on the Duke record to replace 'Administrative Leave of Absence,'" Rasmussen said.

Seligmann and Finnerty's status with the school will most likely remain unchanged until the legal case is resolved. The next court hearing is set for Friday, during which more "second setting" motions will be heard.

Superior Court Judge W. Osmond Smith has previously said he will not hear dismissal motions until the third setting, which will occur sometime between now and next spring, when the trial is expected to begin.

NCAA eligibility

Despite missing the fall semester at Duke, it would still be possible for Seligmann and Finnerty to be academically eligible by NCAA standards in the spring if the case does not move forward to trial.

"I can't respond specifically as to whether Collin or Reade would be immediately eligible," Jamie Pootrakul, the athletic department's director of compliance wrote in an e-mail. "But in general, in order to be eligible for practice and competition, a student-athlete must be enrolled in a full-time program leading toward a degree and must meet all progress-toward degree requirements."

The NCAA does have a "Missed Term exception," which allows student-athletes to "prorate some hours of actual attendance if they miss a complete term or consecutive terms at one time during collegiate enrollment," Pootrakul said. Seligmann and Finnerty would be likely candidates to take advantage of this exception, Kennedy said.

In addition to the missed term exception, Duke would be allowed to request a waiver of "progress-toward-degree rules" for "any circumstances the NCAA finds would warrant a waiver of the normal application of the rules, based on objective evidence," Pootrakul explained.

"I don't think there's going to be any eligibility issue," Kennedy said. "The only question is how long it'll take. If it stretches into spring and next fall, you would have to request some type of waiver. If this fall is the only term they miss it won't be a problem."

Danowski said he sees no problem in allowing the two back on the team.

"Why wouldn't they be?" he said. "If the school says they're academically eligible and they're athletically eligible, if and when the charges are dropped, we would welcome them back."

Preparing for the spring season

With Duke's first game of the 2007 season-a Feb. 24 home contest against Dartmouth-exactly four months away, the athletics department and the team are preparing for the increased attention the Blue Devils' games will likely garner.

Director of Athletics Joe Alleva said his department is reviewing safety measures for the spring to prevent any potential incidents, and he and others-including Aaron Graves, associate vice president for campus safety and security-will meet before the end of the semester to draft a more formal plan.

"My number one concern is for everyone's safety," Alleva said.

During the spring, members of the team and several members of the athletics department received death threats, Kennedy said, adding that student-athletes' safety was one of the primary concerns for cancelling the 2006 season.

The athletics department is considering all options-including an increased security presence or charging admission to games-to prevent potential incidents.

Alleva said he was not in favor of charging admission, and Kennedy said if that change were made, students would still be admitted free.

"The one thing I've learned through this whole thing is I don't know enough to anticipate anything," Kennedy said. "It would be foolish not to be concerned about security. We want to make [Koskinen Stadium] as tight as possible." © Copyright 2006 The Chronicle

http://www.dukechronicle.com/media/storage/paper884/news/2006/10/24/News/Experts.Say.Venue.Change.Unlikely-2384782.shtml?norewrite200610240809&sourcedomain=www.dukechronicle.com
Experts say venue change unlikely
Josh Chapin
Posted: 10/24/06
Defense attorneys for the three indicted lacrosse players have investigated in recent months whether it will be necessary to change the venue for the players' potential trial.

Although the trial may be moved out of Durham County, law experts say the process is difficult and unlikely in the ongoing case.

Some have expressed concern that Durham jurors will have preconceived notions about the defendants, preventing the players from receiving a fair trial, said Fred Williams, associate professor at North Carolina Central University's School of Law.

"This case has been subject to media scrutiny and it's going to be hard to go anywhere in North Carolina where anybody hasn't heard about the case," he said.

Defense attorney Woody Vann, who has defended the alleged victim in a previous matter, said he believes the likelihood of a venue change is low.

"I'd be surprised if they attempted a change of venue," Vann wrote in an e-mail. "I think there's a large part of the Durham population both black and white that believes no rape took place.... Whether they'd want to stand up and say that, I don't know."

George Fisher, Judge John Crown professor at Stanford Law School, said he thinks the larger issues of race and Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong's campaign agenda should also be considered when discussing a venue change.

"It appears that the local jury will have a lot going on in its mind," Fisher said. "The relations between the University and the community as well as the political prospects of the DA are local issues. Whatever resentment or approval people feel toward the DA, jurors elsewhere won't have on their minds."

The benefits of changing venue for the defendants, however, are not evident even though much of the Durham community is black and three white males are accused of raping a black female, Williams said.

"I would want to stay in Durham," he said. "While there are a greater number of blacks in Durham, the dynamics of this case are very different-there are all those associated with the Duke community that could be potential jurors."

The North Carolina Courts website states that in order to qualify for jury duty, a person must be registered to vote in Durham and have a driver's license with a Durham address, making a large number of Duke students ineligible.

Changing the venue of a trial is a difficult process, said Sara Beale, Charles L.B. Lowndes professor of law at Duke.

"The process of selecting a jury is the process of weeding those people out with a biased opinion," she said. "There are always people that can't be fair because they know someone involved with the case."

The positive aspects of moving the trial for the defense highly outweigh those for the prosecution, Williams said, although there may be detriments for both sides.

"A significant part of this community is made up of minorities-this is a chance to get back at the white folks,"

Williams said. "However, there is a potential for a community or group of people who don't like Nifong and who think that no rape occurred."

Whether or not a venue change does occur, the trial is still months away, said Neil Vidmar, Russell M. Robinson II Professor of law and professor of psychology.

"The data might surprise you-the community might not be as polarized as you think," he said. "However, it is premature to talk about a change in venue."

The indicted players' attorneys could not be reached for comment. © Copyright 2006 The Chronicle

http://www.dukechronicle.com/media/storage/paper884/news/2006/10/24/News/Voting.Activist.Urges.Student.Participation-2384787.shtml?norewrite200610240810&sourcedomain=www.dukechronicle.com
Voting activist urges student participation
Catherine Butsch
Posted: 10/24/06
When Jehmu Greene looks in the mirror, she sees a young college student who was once denied the right to vote.

Greene, former president of Rock the Vote and current national director of Project Vote, spoke Monday in the Gross Chemistry Building as part of Community Service Week and Campus Life's Election Affection.

During the talk, Greene urged students not only to register to vote but also to encourage their peers to register and to work against efforts to curtail the political voice of young people.

The American-born daughter of Liberian exiles, Greene said she attempted to exercise her right to vote as soon as she came of age.

"My family, as political exiles, made sure that politics was always part of the discussion in my household, so registering to vote was something I was absolutely going to do," Greene said.

While studying at the University of Texas at Austin, Greene was registered to vote by a fraternity. When she arrived at the polling place, however, a woman said Greene's name was not on the list.

"In that moment that woman took away a lot of my dreams," Greene said. "So it's really an honor to get to do the work that I do because it's all about making sure that other young people, other college students, don't have to go through the same experience that I did."

Greene served as president of Rock the Vote from 2003 to 2005. Rock the Vote is a non-profit, non-partisan organization that "engages youth in the political process by incorporating the entertainment community and youth culture into its activities," according to its website.

In the months before the 2004 presidential election, Rock the Vote registered 1.4 million new voters.

College-aged students' recent activism on issues such as Social Security and Darfur has attracted candidates' attention-something students should try to retain, Greene said.

"If we don't carry that through on Nov. 7 of this year, we will lose all of that momentum," she said. "We will lose all of that attention and respect."

After leaving Rock the Vote, Greene took over at Project Vote, an organization dedicated to facilitating voter engagement and participation in low-income and minority communities.

Greene said the government has discreetly worked to disenfranchise students, minorities and the poor.

"There are very specific efforts happening right now in this country to stop the votes of students from being cast and from being counted," she said.

At the University of Michigan, Greene once overheard the Michigan Secretary of State warn students against registering to vote, saying they would lose their car insurance and their scholarships, Greene said.

She has also fought recent legislation in some states that attempted to forbid non-profits to register voters.

"[Greene's speech] made me realize that we take a lot of rights for granted," freshman Elizabeth Malcolm said. "It really makes you want to spread that message to your peers."

Organizers of the event agreed.

"Civic engagement is so important and necessary," said senior Kyle White, one of the Community Service Center's student directors. "It's a responsibility you can't take lightly. [With Community Service Week this year] we're really trying to focus on community. Durham isn't just someplace outside the walls of Duke."

Greene said the speech's meager attendance-about 40 people-did not discourage her.

"I know you can look around this room and say 'Wow, there are so many empty seats,' but I don't see empty seats," Greene said. "I see every individual in this room who can turn 20 people into voters.... I see activists that have the ability to change the world at the push of a button."

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.