Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Protect the Bill of Rights
Good starting list but I suspect there are many more behind the scenes. A couple that come to mind (sorry I can't recall names and to lazy to look them up this morning) are the officer involved with crime stoppers that helped to put the "wanted poster" together and the officer that dictated that all investigators report to Nifong. The second is really curious. Where did this order emanate from? Chalmers, Baker or Nifong?
295 posted on 10/29/2006 10:04:56 AM PST by Hogeye13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 284 | View Replies ]


To: Hogeye13

I was doing a bit more reviewing and saw that the search warrant dated 3/16 mentioned electronic data devices, and memos, etc.

It is very possible they found that email prior to the 27th when Gottlieb said a "confidential source" gave it to him.

Maybe Gottlieb is telling the truth (for once). That confidential source could be anyone.

Who has the most to gain?
When exactly did Nifong take over the investigation.
Who exactly would have access to what was seized on the 16th? Official and unofficial access.

Are there any connections between anyone in the Duke IT Dept and the DA's office? Would they message remain on a server? I truly do not know.

Always more questions than answers.

Nifong and Gottlieb are high on the list, but I cannot discount the Durham Power Brokers.


Nifong took over the investigation.
Baker spoke for Chalmers.

Two very odd actions in the same case.


296 posted on 10/29/2006 10:16:07 AM PST by Protect the Bill of Rights
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 295 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson