Posted on 04/19/2006 1:25:09 PM PDT by ghost of nixon
April 19, 2006 — On Monday, they were indicted for allegedly raping and kidnapping a 27-year-old woman at an off-campus party. On Tuesday, they turned themselves in and were released from custody after posting a $400,000 bond. For Duke University sophomore lacrosse players Collin Finnerty and Reade Seligmann, a long legal battle has just begun.
Over the last few days, sources close to the defense have given ABC News an exclusive look at the evidence behind one player's alleged alibi — evidence that includes electronic records, photographs and witness statements. If that material is authentic, it could prove that it was practically impossible for him to rape, kidnap or assault the alleged victim.
Seligmann's argument is simple: He is innocent and he has an alibi. He attended the party that night, but documents, photos and witness testimony show that he wasn't there long enough or at the right time to attack the alleged victim.
Around midnight the night of March 13, Seligmann was already at the party when two women hired from a local escort agency arrived to dance for the boys — $400 each for a two-hour performance. A series of time-stamped photographs viewed by ABC News show the girls dancing at midnight and at 12:02 a.m.
By 12:24 a.m., a receipt reviewed by ABC indicates that Seligmann's ATM card was used at a nearby Wachovia bank. In a written statement to the defense also reviewed by ABC, a cabdriver confirms picking up Seligmann and a friend a block and a half from the party, and driving them to the bank. By 12:25 a.m., he was making a phone call to a girlfriend out of state.
What did Seligmann do after leaving the bank? The taxi driver remembers taking him to a drive-thru fast-food restaurant and then dropping him off at his dorm. Duke University records show that Seligmann's card was used to gain entry at 12:46 a.m. (excerpt)
bttt
Nice to be considered guilty of a fabricated crime until you can prove yourself innocent. /sarcasm
What does an ironclad alibi matter when the D.A.'s reelection is at stake? Nifong belongs in the slammer more than any Duke lacrosse player
>>>Would a DA normally check stuff like this before indicting?>>>
Not if it's election year and it's a poor black woman accusing rich white boys.
Only if you are an ethical DA. If you are the scumbag public servant type pandering to the electorate, then no.
A DA who didn't want to look like an idiot probably would.
No. In fact, that would be unusual.
The DA is apparantly prosecuting on the word of the alleged victim.
The defense attorneys are going to make this DA look like the utter fool he is.
Everyone knows its not the nature of the evidence its the seriousness of the charge. (sarc)
This DA was not elected, he was just promoted when the actual DA quit. He is up for election in a few months. Lets hope the voters kick his stupid butt out.
You would think, but the DA has not even had the time to interview the suspect before indicting him.
But like most liberal democrats, embarrassment doesn't affect those without a conscience or morals.
How can this be an "ABC NEWS EXCLUSIVE" when it's been discussed here all day on FR?
Close to an election. The DA needs a big conviction to run on. Same thing Ronnie Earle is doing. This is why prosecutors shouldn't be elected: the judiciary is NOT a political branch of government.
They'll probably say the same things they said about Tawana Brawley.
My guess is that the DA drops the charges after the election. With some type of claim about the "victim" not wanting to go through the ordeal of trial.
“No 'jususs... no peace!”
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.