Posted on 04/19/2006 4:37:00 AM PDT by MindBender26
Breaking overnight from Chris Cummo at ABC GMA:
Case against at least one Duke defemdant unraveling fast.
Defendant Seiligman went to bank ATM while rape supposedly happening.
12:02 Time stamped photos show girl arriving. Girl leaves, comes back, call friends on cell phone does other things. 12:19 Seiligman calls cab dispatcher 12:24 Seiligman takes cab to bank miles away, uses ATM card (photos show it is him.) 12:42 after walking back to dorm, Seiligman uses security card to enter dorm. Does not leave.
Also, Seiligman was never interviewed by cops. DA seeking reelection simply took "Dancers" word that he raped her.
Nancy Grace and probably the prosecution will say that the large tip is a textbook example of trying to make yourself rememberable when staging an alibi. There will certainly be some sort of link to Scott Peterson.
Good advice, connect.
He's always struck me as rather clownish as the panel jokes around with each other. There was no collegiality going on last night. Williams was barely holding himself together.
He hears the silence howling --
catches angels as they fall.
And the all-time winner
has got him by the balls.
Has it occured to anyone that this is probably not this lady's first dance.....I suspect the defense could find any number of parties she has danced at.....and anyone who thinks those gals only dance at those parties....is unbelievably naive..
You can be sure that if this case goes to trial the defense team will find out everything they need to know about Miss Crystal......
LOL!
What do you think you are doing regarding the timeline? I am giving reasonable doubt scenarios. Apparently you need a refresher course on how jurisprudence (supposedly) works in this country. And don't think for a second that the defense won't ask these questions to Crystal Mangum when she takes the stand. I'd also ask her why her clothes aren't tattered and she is smiling into the camera while talking on the cell phone.
Thanks for setting me straight about "Ted Williams"....for a minute I thought he had come back from being a "frosty"...besides the Red Sox don't need him...(grins)
Is this just another attack on the straight, white, christian male by people who are not SWCM's?
I agree completely. Nifong has to swing for the fences, however, and this is one tiny thing he can try to work into his developing misadventure.
Uttering is often used in a legal sense to mean creating and distributing (usually with intent to defraud, etc.)
Common charge is "Uttering a negotiable instrument without funds to cover presentment for payment of such negotiable instrument" for a NSF check.
Whats really funny is Nifong refused to even look at the exculpatory photos. Had he done so, he could have chosen a suspect that was actually there. LOL
My intuition tells me that in the end (perhaps months from now), Nifong and the dancer will be the big losers in this incident.
But in those 22 minutes, woman is doing many other things, and there are time stamped photos of her doing them.
Also known as Crystal Gail Mangum (just to piss off the feminists who believe even liars get protection while falsely accusing while males)....
Then you agree that there are holes in the time-line defense, otherwise scenarios are unnecessary.
Didn't the cabbie say a $25 tip and fare? I though he meant total.
Early tee time...
Didn't I read that the AV was more skilled in one-on-one's than dancing?
More info here:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/17/pzn.01.html
JOSEPH CHESHIRE, DEFENSE ATTORNEY:
(snip)
CHESHIRE: Paula, well, first of all, let me say this for a living -- let me say this about what this woman does for a living.
Anybody that knows what she does for a living and the reality of what she does for a living knows that she could have received those injuries any time before 12:00 that evening. Now, as -- as this trial goes on, we will be able to discover exactly where she is. But the fact that she may have had sex with somebody after 6:00 or before 6:00 would mean, if she went to the hospital, they would show that she had -- quote -- "injuries," which is a word I don't like, but a medical condition, or things in her body, consistent with the fact that she may have had sex with somebody.
That does not prove that she...
ZAHN: Are you talking about consensual sex with somebody else, or do you think she was attacked by...
CHESHIRE: Oh, I -- I -- I...
ZAHN: ... some man not on the lacrosse team?
CHESHIRE: I don't think she was raped at all. I -- I don't think there's any evidence that she was raped at all.
ZAHN: I want to know why you think this woman, who you claim to know an awful lot about, would have made up this story... CHESHIRE: Oh, I -- I -- I...
ZAHN: ... and turned her life upside down.
CHESHIRE: I'm -- I'm not -- I'm not going to -- and turned her life upside down? How about the life of this entire community? How about the life of all these boys? How about the life of the university? How about the life of the racial relations in the city of Durham?
ZAHN: Well, what's in it for her?
CHESHIRE: I mean, I'm really -- I -- I have to tell you the truth.
Well, I mean, I could give you all kind of things that are in it for -- for her. I -- I don't know exactly what was in her that night, but she was clearly under the influence of something very strong when she got to the party.
ZAHN: Mr. Cheshire, you said you and your team know an awful lot about this woman, about her background, and this story will not stand up in court. What do you mean by that? What do you know?
CHESHIRE: Well, I'm -- I'm not going to say or share what we know about her. Obviously, we have done a lot of work on her.
And, when someone makes an accusation, that accusation has to stand up to the actual physical facts of what happened. First of all, hers will not stand up to the actual physical facts.
Secondly, you pointed out that they need to have no motivation to lie. I believe that the lawyers in this case will be able to show, on cross-examination and on the presentation of evidence, that she did have a motive to lie.
ZAHN: So, you can't clarify for us tonight what you think that motivation is, based on the research you have done in her background?
CHESHIRE: No.
And -- and I wouldn't do that. It would be wrong for me to do that at this point in time. We haven't tried to try this case in the public opinion. We have just said that these boys are not guilty, in response to what the prosecutor has done. But those things will come out in court. And, when the public sees her cross-examination, and sees her answers, and finds out about that motivation, it will prove what we have been saying all along. And that is that no rape happened in that house.
(snip)
That doesn't make any sense. Scenarios are used to explain datapoints.
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.