Posted on 04/11/2006 8:28:30 PM PDT by Asceticon
The Durham County district attorney said today that the woman who accused three Duke lacrosse players of raping her at an off-campus party last month had identified at least one of them in a photo montage last week........... "There was no identification of any member of that lacrosse team until last week," the district attorney, Michael B. Nifong, said at an informational meeting today attended by more than 400 people at North Carolina Central University, where the woman was a student. He was answering a question about why no one has been arrested.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Rape of a drunk is still rape; indeed it's a special catgegory of non-forcible rape. However, if she was dead drunk that night there's a good chance her intoxication would have made it impossible for her to identify anybody for any reason. In other words, it profoundly undermines her credibility as a witness, just as wearing a blindfold would.
Here's the scenario that I'm guessing.... she goes to this party and then leaves. Her pimp beats her up and rapes her (is it rape if it's your pimp?) and sends her back to get those rich white boys. That's when she shows up at the door grinning and high. They let her in (what were they thinking?) she goes into the bathroom and pulls off a few of her fake nails. Hey three of mine popped off while I was watching law and order last night. I saw a female prosecutor on O'Reily last night screaming about "she lost her fingernails fighting them off." Oh pullleeze.
Bingo! He's trying to create an OJ Simpson trial referencing the Rodney King trial. The evidence won't matter. Durham is 50/50 black/white. So he gets a jury that looks like that.
The black jurors hate "white" Duke just like the Simpson jurors hated the LAPD. It won't be hard to convince them in the absence of evidence. Some of the white jurors also hate Duke, but maybe also distrust blacks, and it will be harder but not very hard to convince them.
So now we're down to the remaining white jurors who don't hate Duke, one of whom may hate black people, who are willing to listen to the evidence and find the purported rape victim not credible. They, however, will be terrified for their own personal safety not to mention a general insurrection. So they'll knuckle under and vote to convict. The accused goes free only if one juror has the backbone to stand firm and look at the evidence.
I hate being so pessimistic about human nature and cultural stereotypes. Given the DA's behavior, I've been predicting a change in venue all along.
I agree 100 percent. And it's going to happening right in front of our eyes.
There was no sex of any kind.
He keeps referring to having been in this business a long time. How many rape cases have been tried by the esteemed Durham DA? Anyone know?
Even the players who were not at the party?
For the last five years at least, rape and murder cases in Durham County have been handled by Freda Black, of the Michael Peterson trial fame ("Pure T Filth"); as soon as the press picked up this story, he announced HE would be trying this one. (That was four weeks ago -- so you can tell how long he's been planning to take this to trial, regardless of what the DNA tests might have shown.)
To show what a glory hog he is, as soon as he was appointed to office, he took Freda Black's parking space away from her and took it for himself -- a parking space closest to the building that was specifically given to her for her SAFETY because she DOES handle the rape and murder trials and is a single woman, coming and going to work at all hours. But he HAD to have it.
I appreciate the information on everything you provide. So are you saying he's NEVER tried a rape case?
I am not sure; I just know that when he announced he was going to try this case, everybody in the press said it was very unusual for him to do that.
I think they were all at the party.
I can't imagine any trial will take place in Durham, no matter who the prosecutor is.
I wondered about that; but if they try to move it, the town will go bezerk, claiming they CAN be objective. Right.
What is the mood of the town? Will Duke recover? This has been so awful on so many levels..
Does anyone know if the accuser is still on probation for her 2002 offenses? Defense lawyer Bill Thomas suggested the accuser made up the assault because she was afraid of being charged with public drunkenness (I guess by the police who answered the "intoxicated woman" 911 call from the Kroger guard). I wonder if such a charge would have violated her probation?
Objective? Yesterday's forum showed how objective they are.
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.