Replies

Maybe you don't understand what a "trial" is. It is not the filing of charges against a defendant. A trial is when a jury is selected and the evidence is presented to that jury. The Duke lacrosse case never to the trial level. It was dismissed before trial. Then an ethics investigation found that Nifong had intentionally prosecuted innocent young men. He was criminally charged. That is what should happen to the prosecutors in the Zimmerman case. And, as I said before, if the Duke case had gone to trial, it would have been just like the Zimmerman case has been.

In case you want to refresh your memory as to what happened,

One of those contradictions forced Mr. Nifong to drop the rape charges in December. The woman, who had repeatedly said she endured violent penile penetration, suddenly said she could no longer be sure what had penetrated her. This came after it had been revealed that sophisticated DNA tests found no traces from any of the three defendants — or any other Duke lacrosse player — on her body or clothes. DNA from other men, however, was found.

Mr. Nifong at first vowed to proceed with the remaining charges of kidnapping and sexual offense. But in January, facing ethics charges and mounting criticism from editorial pages and bloggers, he asked Mr. Cooper to take over the case. Mr. Cooper said he and his staff spent three months reinvestigating the case, interviewing Mr. Nifong, police investigators, defense lawyers, the accuser and other witnesses.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/12/us/12duke.html?pagewanted=all