"But Assistant District Attorney Tracey Cline, who prosecuted Lofton, said Tuesday that inconsistencies in a victim's story should come as no surprise to anyone."
Remember Tracey Cline? She was the prosecutor in the Leon Brown case :
http://www.monkeytime.org/archive/September2002.html#durhamDNA
"9.20.02 - Ok, you tell me if this doesn't sound weird: There's a trial going on right now in Durham, according to the Herald-Sun, in which DNA samples taken from a man accused of rape don't match DNA samples taken from inside the victim. This unusual fact has not stopped the Durham District Attorney's office from prosecuting the man, whose name is Leon Brown. Brown's defense lawyer, Douglas Simons, claimed in his opening statement that there was incriminating evidence against someone else - the victim's cousin:
[Simons] told jurors that Brown voluntarily gave DNA samples that did not match samples from the victim. Nor did pubic hairs surrendered by Brown match...In addition, the victim initially told authorities that she thought her white cousin was the intruder, according to Simons. When the cousin was arrested, duct tape and other incriminating items were found in his car and on his property...District Attorney Jim Hardin Jr. gave the cousin "complete immunity" to testify against Brown, Simons told jurors. "He wanted a deal," Simons said of the cousin. "He got it."
"Defense attorneys say all kinds of things, of course - only some of them true - so we have to be careful here. But let's see if we have this right: The white cousin who was initially fingered by the rape victim strikes a deal for immunity with the D.A. in order to testify against a black guy whose DNA doesn't match the DNA found inside the victim? Is that really what this article is telling us? It's difficult to understand why the guy being charged with rape is apparently not the one whose semen was found inside the victim. Prosecutor Tracey Cline told the jury that her evidence will be sufficient to convince them that Brown was the rapist. We'll see if they agree; the trial is expected to end this week.
http://www.monkeytime.org/archive/October2002.html#durhamDNA2
"10.2.02 - Update on that Durham rape trial where the DNA from the man being prosecuted by District Attorney Jim Hardin's office didn't match the facts of the case. The Herald-Sun's John Stevenson followed up last week; the suspect, who'd spent a full year in jail awaiting trial, was completely acquitted of all charges. That's not all. The jury foreman, Howard Williams, Jr., had extremely harsh words for the prosecution, describing the trial as "a waste of time":
"We all wondered what we were doing there," he said of himself and fellow jurors. "The evidence was nonexistent. We're very comfortable with the decision we made. I can't understand why that man spent a year in jail when there was no evidence whatsoever against him. It made no sense to us. Where's the justice?"
"Surely something's wrong when a jury foreman calls out the D.A.'s office for locking someone up for a year with "no evidence whatsoever." Given the strange deal-making in the case, is it fair to wonder what on earth prosecutor Tracey Cline - who still insists she had the right man - was thinking? And is it fair to wonder - without engaging in moronic cop-bashing - how often this kind of thing happens in Durham, or in other Triangle jurisdictions? I think it is."
Typical Durham (and evidently Wake County, too) merry-go-round.
"An accuser can give five different stories, but if all of them indicate she was raped, it's got to go to a jury," said Vann."
If it goes to a trial and it is shown the accuser is lying,
then that's perjury, and she gets prison time.
Do those who are clamoring for a trial realize this?
The maximum penalty for making a false claim to police is $1000 fine and 200 hours community service. Prison is an altogether different story.
Does the accuser really want to face prison time for lying?
"District Attorney Jim Hardin"
And for those of you who might be just joining us, about 19 months ago, Easley appointed Hardin to be a judge (gak!). Easley then appointed Nifong Durham DA to fill Hardin's former spot. Easley has a lot to answer for and is never going to have to either.
Another out-of-control prosecutor that should be charged with misconduct instead of continuing to take a paycheck from the government.
I have said many times....we are shocked, outraged. But this is standard MO in Durham.
Nifong is getting away with it because the DA's office has always gotten away with it.
Sadly, this might be the first time people outside of Durham took note.