Posted on 04/23/2006 11:30:44 AM PDT by freespirited
The Duke lacrosse team's rape scandal cuts deeply into this country's most tender places: race and class and gender. It reaffirms the unspoken fear that black women/white men/poor people/privileged people/victims/defendants can't get a fair shake under our legal system.
It's easy to have doubts about the ability of courts to resolve cases like this one, when you stop to consider that long after the court proceedings, hearings and investigations ended, we still have no idea what really happened between Kobe Bryant and his accuser; between Michael Jackson and his accuser; between Clarence Thomas and Anita Hill. If these legal processes are intended to be searches for the truth, why is there never any truth at the conclusion?
...what about all this physical evidence? That unambiguous, objective scientific evidence? Supporters of the Duke students say the lack of a DNA match exonerates them. Peter Neufeld of the Innocence Project says, "There's an old saying that the absence of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absence." Nurses say the injuries are consistent with rape. The boys say someone else raped her. Time-stamped photos suggest that the alleged victim was injured before she arrived at the party. Other photos suggest new injuries occurred while she was there. Lost fake fingernails in the bathroom suggest a fight. The lack of any DNA material under those nails suggests she never fought back. Photos say she was intoxicated upon arrival. The second stripper implies she was drugged at the party.
Pick your fact. Each of them can, it seems, be spun both ways. This case serves as yet another depressing reminder of all that is wrong with this country: Our sons are spoiled misogynistic bigots, and our colleges are hotbeds of polarizing identity politics. Race and gender and poverty still tear us apart...
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Even the craziest liberal at the Washington Post knows that military life is not for the spoiled.
"Lost fake fingernails in the bathroom suggest a fight. The lack of any DNA material under those nails suggests she never fought back."
I heard that photos show she was missing fingernails when she arrived at the party?
Washington Post is just irked, they want to pick the facts for us.
I must have missed this justice system "trial". When did it occur?
She graduated from Stanford Law School in 1996 (though she started Stanford in 1992), and even wrote an article "Supreme Court Beings and Other Myths" for her alumni magazine, where she talks about her philosophy of judicial coverage. While in law school, she was apparently active enough in the Jewish Law Student's Association such that she was mentioned in a national law student newsletter
Dahlia is a Canadian that lived in Israel for 3 Years.
Lithwick is Canadian in origin; despite living in the United States she remains a Canadian citizen to this day.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dahlia_Lithwick
She is a regular guest on The Al Franken Show
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dahlia_Lithwick
At Durham, just pick your suspects.
Professor Hill apparently never heard of a little thing called a Statute of Limitations.
In the spirit of "one good ad hominem deserves another", I would say that this article serves as yet another depressing reminder of all that is wrong with Dahlia Lithwick. Clearly her deranged screed is emblematic of the mental illness shared by all loathsome leftist harridans.
Note that calling names may feel very satisfying (how does it feel to be the target, Dahlia?), but it illuminates nothing about the substance of the issue. That such childishness seems to be just fine with the editors of the Washington Post is ultimately the most revealing thing about the article.
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.