Replies

PS..lets not forget, according to Dan Abram's there is a photo that clearly shows a face of a man's watch worn by a player, and it matches the time on that is time stamped on the photo.

I am not sure, but I think Mangum's own account has her getting there briefly before 12 midnight. DA is just trying to bluff.

I've heard several in the Media (especially on Fox-Greta) say, what a pity, she's been (gang)raped before. They say, if anything, it makes her even more of a sympathtic figure.

Well, when the N&O observer was finally forced to report the accuser's criminal record and they safely tucked in into the bottom of an obscure article, they thought it meant something back THEN.

This is what they said:

"Under a deal with prosecutors, the woman pleaded guilty to four misdemeanors: larceny, speeding to elude arrest, assault on a government official and driving while impaired, according to court records. She was required to serve three consecutive weekends in jail and was placed on two years' probation, which she served without incident.

According to public records in Durham County, the woman HAD NOT PREVIOUSLY REPORTED BEING A CRIME VICTIM."
Source: http://www.newsobserver.com/145/story/426021.html

Anyone that read one of the articles on this case in the N&O knows how strongly they felt that this woman was brutually raped. In fact, their editorials continually called on Duke university to take action in the face of the "Wall of Silence."

That last sentence about NOT PREVIOUSLY REPORTING BEING A CRIME VICTIM was meant to bolster the woman's account.

What will it take for Kimberly Guilfoyle, Susan Filan,
Alan Colmes, etc to stop slandering these kids on the air repeatedly? Wendy Murphy has called them Rapists on National TV.

PS..lets not forget, according to Dan Abram's there is a photo that clearly shows a face of a man's watch worn by a player, and it matches the time on that is time stamped on the photo.

I've seen it and it's not clear, but you could make a case that the wrist watch shows 12:00..

I don't have a copy, I think it was in the initial slide show on Abram's web site... I can't find it any more...

Funny thing about the photos I do have, most of them are cropped, the time is not the time on the photo... it's been added after the cropping, so you can't tell if it's been added or changed (photoshopped)...

What I can see it that any of the "supposed injuries" on the AV have been photoshopped off.. there are some other items which appear to have been altered as well, other than the AV's face...

Since the changes are so obvious, my guess is the defense altered the photos before releasing them so as to only give out the information they wanted out....