Posted on 10/27/2006 12:36:17 PM PDT by Arec Barrwin
Prosecutor Yet to Interview Rape Accuser Oct 27 2:56 PM US/Eastern
By AARON BEARD Associated Press Writer
DURHAM, N.C.
The district attorney prosecuting three Duke lacrosse players accused of raping a woman at a team party said during a court hearing Friday that he still hasn't interviewed the accuser about the facts of the case.
"I've had conversations with (the accuser) about how she's doing. I've had conversations with (the accuser) about her seeing her kids," Mike Nifong said. "I haven't talked with her about the facts of that night. ... We're not at that stage yet."
Nifong made the statement in response to a defense request for any statements the woman has made about the case.
"I understand the answer may not be the answer they want but it's the true answer. That's all I can give them," the prosecutor said after the hourlong hearing.
Defense lawyers said outside court that they found Nifong's statement surprising.
"One of the most interesting things to me of course is Mr. Nifong did admit that he in fact has basically never talked to this woman and has absolutely no idea what her story is, and yet he has chosen to continue to go forward with this case," defense lawyer Joseph Cheshire said.
Nifong said none of his assistants have discussed the case with the woman either and only have spoken with her to monitor her well-being. They have left the investigation of the case to police, he said.
Attorneys for indicted player Dave Evans wrote in a letter to Nifong earlier this month that they believed he had talked with the accuser based on a court motion in which Nifong stated the woman told him she had not taken the drug Ecstasy on the night of the March 13 team party for which she was hired to perform as a stripper.
In response to a claim by a lawyer for an unindicted player, Nifong said he called the accuser to ask her whether she had used the drug.
"She said, 'I've never taken Ecstasy,'" Nifong said. "That was the extent of the conversation because that's all I had to know."
Nifong said he met with the accuser and an investigator on April 11, but didn't discuss details of the case because the woman was "too traumatized." Nifong said the woman didn't make eye contact with him and often seemed on the verge of crying. Their discussion centered around how the case would develop, he said.
"She probably did not speak 15 words during the meeting," Nifong said.
Evans, 23, of Bethesda, Md., was charged in May with rape, kidnapping and sexual offense. A month earlier, a grand jury indicted players Reade Seligmann, 20, of Essex Fells, N.J., and Collin Finnerty, 20, of Garden City, N.Y., on the same charges. The accuser, a student at nearby North Carolina Central University, told police she was raped in a bathroom by three men at the off-campus party.
The players' lawyers have strongly proclaimed their innocence.
I heard a poll on the radio the other day.
Seems that this idiot is on his way to a resounding victory Nov. 7.
Lessee. They talked about the weather, they talked about her kids, they talked about her kids kids, they talked about his grandaddy's coon dog, they talked about the poles down at the strip joint she works at but he hasn't talked to her about the "rape"?
What is his case based on? Hastily scribbled notes taken while waiting for the next nascar race? I can't believe he's the DA.
/rant off
One of the worst travesties of justice I have heard about. With our legal system, that kind of thing can happen to anyone. At least the Duke lacrosse players haven't yet been sent to prison.
Nifong is the accuser's attorney, and the N.C. taxpayers are paying for her "defense".
Except that in court today Nifong confirmed that he took over as chief investigator on March 24.
Even if the DA is "representing" the accuser, the accuser probably has her own atty as well.
The result of this revelation means that this prosecutor has not done due diligence on the first step in a prosecution; verify the facts.
It would appear that his manner of response simply accepted, at face value, whatever the accuser said.
How can the people of the jurisdiction he works for get him out of office? As soon as they do, they need to look into the rest of the prosecutions he has handled.
I've seen no news or reference to her having an attorney. Have you?
No, but not everybody is Amber Frye with a high-class, show-off atty, either.
According to K C Johnson, North Carolina has no legal means to rein in a rogue DA except by him losing an election. (In other states the Governor, the Attorney General or sometimes the Supreme Court can do it.) If the electorate approves of the rogue DA then he's in and there's nothing anyone in government can do about it.
There's a prior thread here
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1726850/posts?page=118#118
And the one before that is full of good stuff too
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/1721830/posts?page=682
I'm recalling from way back that both the accuser and Kim Roberts have lawyers. There is no role for them in the criminal trial of the lax players, but I bet they're going to need them in their own criminal trial later.
So when is this rogue DA up for election again?
If she does have an attorney, wouldn't he have been w/her when she met w/Nifong?
"So when is this rogue DA up for election again?"
Nov. 7; and the polls show he will probably win. He knows his electorate.
The people of the State of North Carolina should be ashamed. This is a racial prosecution to gain political favor. African Americans charged with crimes that NEVER OCCURRED would still not be under indictment. This is a wake-up call for America and North Carolina.
You're right about Woody Van. But I'm not talking about him. I thought she was also mixed up with a civil trial lawyer. I could be wrong. Of course, he's the wrong kind to defend her against criminal charges.
ping
Well, you seem to be telling me that there might be something positive coming from this DA - after November 7th.
Maybe he will drop the case after the election; after he has gotten all he can get out of it - his election victory.
At least that will be positive for the defendents.
If he does that, the defendents should start a public speaking and fundraising tour for a suit against the DA for wrongful prosecution. It does not matter that he did not take it all the way to court.
They should be able to show (from the real evidence) that he (1)has for some time not had enough evidence to prosecute the case and (2)that he delayed that admission for his own political gain and (3)his false attempt to prosecute them amounted to slander by a public official.
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.