[JamesP81]

These are all good points. Nevertheless, none of them make it OK for the state to destroy someone's financial situation just because they think he committed a crime.

I'm guessing that most FReepers must be pretty wealthy people from what I'm seeing. But for a poor guy like me, 5 grand for a lawyer would pretty much put me in a cardboard box for shelter. The state simply should not get away with something like that due to an honest mistake. It's that simple.

[cherry]

trust me....we'ver not rich.....5 grand would set us back ....

[Jezebelle]

You'd be entitled to a free attorney, in that case.

Believe it or not, most DAs don't bring charges frivolously or because they "think" someone committed a crime. They bring all manner of evidence to support the charges, and the role of the defense is to test that evidence.

The laws of NC, Liefong's pitiful career and aspirations, racist organizations and weak leadership at Duke and throughout the county made this all possible. The indicting grand jury requirement for threshold felonies coupled with no probable cause/pretrial hearing process and no Sixth Amendment protections are what has allowed this to go on this far. Liefong has no crime to prosecute, and only under such a system as they have in NC could such a non-case get to this point. The real legal issue underlying this that should be discussed separately from the defendants and the anti-white racial biases running Durham and the election and Liefong and Gottlieb and the whole nine yards is the fact that no crime occurred. It isn't that no crime occurred because these boys have alibis, and it isn't that no crime occurred because there is no other evidence against these boys. It's the fact that there is no evidence of a crime occurring at all, and that is the fatal flaw in this entire fiasco.