Posted on 02/27/2007 9:43:42 AM PST by abb
02/27/07 -- DURHAM) - New motions have been filed in the Duke Lacrosse sex assault case.
Defense attorneys for Collin Finnery, Reade Seligmann and David Evans filed the 39-page motion at the Durham Courthouse Tuesday morning. In it defense attorneys for the three former Duke Lacrosse players say the prosecution is still holding out on potentially-explosive DNA evidence.
The DNA was taken in a rape kit the morning after the now-infamous lacrosse party on March 13, 2006 where the accuser says she was gang raped.
This new filing says they've not been given all the DNA evidence that excludes their clients but includes more unrelated male DNA.
Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong dropped rape charges against Collin Finnerty, Reade Seligmann and David Evans last December. All three defendants still face kidnapping and sexual offense charges.
Another thing - Nifong may have thought he would have more ability to control the presentation of the test results through a private lab trying to get government business than he would with the state lab so he may have asked for very limited testing from SBI and then, when he learned the results, whisked the samples away to the private lab.
Duke Chronicle does some investigative reporting on Linwood:
"I think we've made it pretty clear what we think about the work that Mr. Wilson has done to this point," Cheshire said. "If we have to litigate it, we will."
http://media.www.dukechronicle.com/media/storage/paper884/news/2007/02/28/News/Defense.Questions.Lax.Investigator-2748304.shtml
So why was the head of the lab's DNA on the evidence? He doesn't wear gloves? How did they know it was his?
Because people who work in labs have to handle the actual samples, so there's a slight chance of contamination by the technician's DNA. I don't know for sure, but it would make sense for lab workers who handle the actual physical samples to have their DNA profiles on hand at the lab for exclusionary purposes. These profiles of course would not go into a governmental database but would be kept on site as a working tool and most likely be deleted from their in-house system when that technician leaves employment. My recollection of Meehan's testimony was that there was a match from one sample to his DNA in the form of one skin cell but I don't remember him testifying that they took a sample from him at the time to test, so it seemed as though his profile was already available there to them. Yes, I'm certain he wore gloves. The comparison would have been for exclusionary purposes and his cell would not have presented as the actual sample under review. At any rate, a DNA lab technician's DNA on file at a lab would not go into any outside database.
You can probably find a fuller answer to your question by researching DNA lab procedures for technicians who handle samples.
Nifong Attorneys: DA Didn't Intentionally Violate Ethics Rules
Durham — Attorneys for Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifong tell the State Bar he did not intentionally violate ethics rules when prosecuting the Duke lacrosse case.
Nifong on Wednesday filed a written response to ethics complaints levied against him by the North Carolina State Bar in connection with the Duke lacrosse sexual assault case.
The embattled prosecutor had no comment Wednesday afternoon and referred all questions to his lawyers.
Attorneys for Nifong also tell WRAL they will file a motion to dismiss some charges that Nifong withheld exculpatory evidence from defense attorneys representing the charged Duke lacrosse players.
Earlier this year, the State Bar amended an earlier ethics complaint against Nifong alleging he withheld DNA evidence and misrepresented the truth to the judge in the case.
The original complaint, filed in December, accuses Nifong of violating professional conduct rules by making misleading and inflammatory comments about the athletes under suspicion.
The case stems from a March 2006 incident in which a woman claims she was sexually assaulted at an off-campus party, where she was hired to perform as an exotic dancer, by three members of the Duke lacrosse team.
A grand jury later indicted lacrosse players Collin Finnerty, 20, Reade Seligmann, 20, and David Evans, 23, on charges of first-degree kidnapping, rape and sexual assault. Nifong dropped rape charges against all three suspects in December after the accuser wavered in key details of her story.
Less than a month later, Nifong, having come under intense scrutiny for his handling of the case, asked the North Carolina Attorney General's Office to appoint a special prosecutor to take over.
"He feels, as a result of the accusations against him, that he would be a distraction and he wants to make sure the accuser receives a fair trial," Nifong's attorney, David Freedman said on Jan. 12. "He still believes in the case. He just believes his continued presence would hurt her."
In February, Durham resident Elizabeth Brewer filed a civil complaint against Nifong that basically mirrors the State Bar's complaint. It is the first complaint from a Durham citizen asking that Nifong be removed from office.
Senior Resident Superior Court Judge Orlando Hudson, however, issued a stay on the complaint until after the State Bar hearing is completed.
Nifong told WRAL on Feb. 9 that he looks forward to defending himself against the charges, which could lead to his disbarment. He added that there is more to the Duke lacrosse case than what the media has reported.
"I wish everyone would withhold judgment until they hear the evidence, as well as my response," he said.
http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/1217557/
"...DNA lab procedures for technicians who handle samples."
It all sounds sensible enough, but the line of reasoning jumps the track upon mention of the word "procedures" in the case of DNA Security!
;)
"He feels, as a result of the accusations against him, that he would be a distraction and he wants to make sure the accuser receives a fair trial..."
The statement above -- by Nifong's attorney, David Freedman -- illustrates a profound misunderstanding of our legal system.
All together now:
ACCUSERS AREN'T ENTITLED TO A FAIR TRIAL!
Would one of the enterprising legal eagles among us care to enlighten the good Mr. Freedman?
"He added that there is more to the Duke lacrosse case than what the media has reported."
I'll be really, really curious to know what more there is. After this farce, it had better be the proverbial "smoking gun," in hand standing over the body in the presence of witnesses, caught on tape, with audio and a signed, notarized confession or I, for one, shall be skeptical.
He knows very well what the purpose of a trial is. He's still pandering and trying to make it sound like Nifong was motivated by wanting to bring justice for a sistuh rather than get himself elected by using the case to garner the black vote. Ignorant people, such as those who voted for him because they hoped and thought he was going to get whitey for them, will believe the statement because they're uneducated racists.
6775. The latest on Duke la X team. [old message board posting].
by p*****, 4/16/06 9:48 ET
"From a Duke alum who lives in NC.Story is it was the girls 3rd gig of the night.Not bad at $400 per show.2nd stop was at a black frat house where these girls hung out longer then they should have.It got pretty rough for the black girl & she was pis$ed,neither got any $.They got to the La X house very late & though pretty wasted,did there act.Heard it wasn`t one of their better shows.Well, my friend said take it from there."
* *
Since it is obvious after ONE YEAR, no elected or public official or media
in this town can tell the truth, we will have to rely on message boards.
There is nothing in the record which would negate this story. In fact, it
may be the reason a certain chancellor at a historically black state university
is high-tailing it down to Florida. Next to go, the missing police chief.
I believe you have it right as to the DNA evidence although it might have been that Meehan could not be excluded from one of the fragments, ie not a complete match. And it could have come from dander or other tiny cells that fell from him into a sample.
It may have been dander, which I think is a type of skin cell, but whatever it actually was, it was believed to be one cell. I don't know how full the match was but, as you say, he couldn't be excluded as the source of that cell, which puts the odds of it being someone else's well into the hundred millions is my guess.
My understanding in this area is quite limited, but I do know they're able to tell the difference between a cell that is a contaminant to an established sample versus a cell that partly or wholly constituted the original sample because of the way the samples are prepared before the extraction series for testing is done and the way they're prepared for retention after the extraction series is done. It should not happen, but identifying it (to a lab worker) is really more of a housekeeping measure so that all is accounted for. Contamination plays hell with juries, though, even though it doesn't degrade the original sample.
Did the chief attend NCCU as an undergrad? Is NCCU his alma mater?
Sadly, I must agree; and the explanation you gave is the exact message that must be broadcast far and wide.
Well actually I can not imagine one could broadcast further or wider than getting Nifong used as a term for proscutorial abuse in Federal Court opinions and dissents. So I believe that the battle of public opinion has been won.
However the Scottsboro boys won the battle of national public opinion too, but spent years in prison. So what needs to be done now is for NC to put an end to this.
And if anyone ever needs a reason not to vote Dim now it is shown by this case. As they were in the 1930s here in Alabama, the Dims today are captured by racists. The only reason Nifong sought an indictment and the only reason that the special prosecutors have not already dismissed this case is that the Dim party is captured by racists [and sexists] and Dim politicians must placate these racists.
The News & Observer, July 14, 2002, Chalmers' work ethic praised, Author: Aisling Swift; Staff Writer- excerpts-
Durham -- When supporters of Durham police Lt. Col. Steve Chalmers look at his 27-year career, they wonder why there was any need to look outside the department for a new chief. After all, they say, Chalmers has been acting chief since Feb. 1, he was former chief Teresa Chambers' handpicked successor, he grew up in Durham and knows the city, the department and the issues.
"He knows the people in the community," said Jackie Wagstaff, a former city council member who is now executive director of North-East Central Durham Community Services Center. "He probably knows everyone who is arrested.* That gives him a heads up."
Chalmers joined what was then the Durham Public Safety Department in 1975, and within two years he became a detective and quickly rose through the ranks, working in all areas of the department. Since last year, he ascended rapidly from major to lieutenant colonel and deputy chief to acting chief.
Education: Graduated from Hillside High School in 1971; earned bachelor's degree in political science from N.C. Agricultural and Technical State University, 1975; graduated from Durham's Public Safety Academy in November 1975.
* Chalmers grew up in Crystal's hood, Southeast Durham, and attended same high school, Hillside. Last summer, he announced his retirement plans, 18-months ahead of time. The Durham city council recently instructed city manager Patrick Baker to speed up the search process for a new chief. He remains one of the enigmas of the LAX scam, frame-conspiracy and election fraud debacle.
In TV interview, Easley again criticizes Nifong
From Staff Reports, N&O, Mar 02, 2007
Gov. Mike Easley talked politics this week with PBS talk show host Charlie Rose, a North Carolina native. Easley, a former prosecutor, was asked about one of North Carolina’s most talked about prosecutors over the past year — Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong.
In January, Easley told a New York University crowd that picking Nifong to be Durham’s district attorney was the worst appointment of his career.
On The Charlie Rose Show that aired Wednesday, Feb. 28, he elaborated on that appointment.
A portion of the script from that show follows:
CHARLIE ROSE: Speaking of legal issues, the lacrosse team. Some of the players who were first accused of rape, and there was a prosecutor over there, Nifong I think his name was.
MICHAEL EASLEY: That’s right.
CHARLIE ROSE: He was appointed by you?
MICHAEL EASLEY: He was appointed acting DA by me. The district attorney, a very good district attorney, I appointed judge, and I wanted someone who wasn’t going to run, that was a long-term prosecutor, just to hold the office together until somebody was elected. And our staff interviewed him. He said he wasn’t going to run, and we didn’t think he would. And then he got out and started running.
There’s a totally different standard you set for somebody who is going to be the elected district attorney and get into politics, and then there’s somebody who you want just to run the office. Because when you get out there and start making political comments, it requires a whole lot of different talent, a whole lot of different skills that obviously he didn’t have. And he would not have been appointed had we known he was going to run.
That case is now with the attorney general’s office. He turned it over to the attorney general. It’s with a good team there.
CHARLIE ROSE: He was forced to turn it over to the attorney general, wasn’t he?
MICHAEL EASLEY: No, he ...
CHARLIE ROSE: He volunteered to do that.
MICHAEL EASLEY: Well, he was under a lot of pressure, though. You’re correct about that. He voluntarily did it, but -- volunteered to do it, but ...
CHARLIE ROSE: He handed over the prosecution to someone else. And the rape charges have been ...
MICHAEL EASLEY: They’re under investigation.
CHARLIE ROSE: Under investigation.
MICHAEL EASLEY: Right now. What’s happened is the prosecution team at the attorney general’s office who I know is very, very competent. They’re looking at it, giving a whole fresh look, and they’ll make a determination. And if it is a good case, they’ll try it; if it is not, they’ll dismiss it and be done with it. But I can tell you, the crowd that has it now is going to do the right thing.
CHARLIE ROSE: The prosecutorial team.
MICHAEL EASLEY: Yes.
CHARLIE ROSE: Yes. Because they’ve got some very good defense attorneys there, too.
MICHAEL EASLEY: They do.
CHARLIE ROSE: From the North Carolina Bar.
MICHAEL EASLEY: And what’s unfortunate about it is, once a prosecutor says the wrong thing or says something that they shouldn’t say, then it’s on. I mean, the fight’s on. The defense attorneys don’t have a lot of choice but to defend their clients. So then the whole thing is getting tried in the press, and everybody loses on that. It looks bad for the team. It looks bad for Duke. It looks bad for the state. It looks bad for the judicial system. And that’s why you want somebody who understands the media ...
CHARLIE ROSE: Fair to say you would not have appointed him if you had it to do over?
MICHAEL EASLEY: That’s correct. I would voluntarily not appoint him, just as he voluntarily turned the case over to the attorney general.
http://www.newsobserver.com/1185/story/548945.html
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.