Posted on 05/09/2006 10:05:31 PM PDT by OakOak
By Ray Gronberg : The Herald-Sun gronberg@heraldsun.com May 9, 2006 : 10:53 pm ET
DURHAM -- A March 14 Duke Police Department report that downplayed gang-rape allegations against the school's lacrosse team stemmed from what a Duke officer overheard while listening to a Durham Police Department sergeant's cell phone conversation, City Manager Patrick Baker said Tuesday.
The Duke officer, Christopher Day, never actually spoke to the sergeant or conducted any follow-up inquiry before telling his superiors that the woman at the center of the case had changed her story several times, and that her allegations were unlikely to produce serious charges, Baker said.
(Excerpt) Read more at heraldsun.com ...
Well I think the players or rather their parent brought it on themselves in a way too. They sent their kids to a place where a significant fraction of the community hates their kid for the kid's race and sex and that fraction of the Duke community carries a weight probably greater than their numbers.
Sure hiring strippers is not in my [male] view as good a use of time as reading FR. But then again I am long make that decades past 20.
But sending your kid off to a place where many hate them for their race and sex is not in my view a good decision either.
She really is quite a scary woman.
______________________________________
Yep, it is amazing that any network would stoop to putting on this Grand Kleagle of the feminazi movement?
The have cut back on the Farakan types and when they have such an African-American nut on these days they often treat them as a nut. They would not put on a Klansman. Yet they treat Grand Kleagle Murphy as a legit person with legit views?
I'm thinking there are some "Yankee liberals" up there in Connecticut and New Jersey who have had the shock of their lives and who just may be "rethinking" their oft used attribute of "tolerance."
In the pecking order of dancer-stripper-prostitutes, the one who comes at midnight with another dancer to "put on a show" is more likely also a prostitute who expects to sell extra services upon arriving. These are not "pretty women." They're hardnosed, mean, cynical, and sometimes dangerous women who typically scheme and drug for a living.
There isn't anything about this case that suggests she was raped at the Duke house, except her word and an exam that may or may not bear up to cross-examination.
This may point to a Larger Problem relating to this case.
Think District Attorneys are honest?
Think they apply laws evenly to everyone?
This is the County Next door to Durham. This Assistant DA has been prosecuting people for open-containers and bouncing (worthless) checks. Please Read and notice the DA's Reaction:
http://www.newsobserver.com/100/story/437926.html
I wonder what she (Assistant DA) tells the Judge when someone is found speeding from a bank with a large amount of cash laying on the passenger seat - and he says someone gave me that cash to hold. And, I don't know his name. I can't tell you where to find him.
They'd throw the book at 'em!
The OJ prosecution team were rocket scientists by comparison to Nifong. Sure, Nifong is clever with machinations of process and timing, but that only lasts so long, but eventually the rubber meets the road. The OJ prosecution team actually had great evidence, just very poor witnesses, but that did not matter in the long run. No, the die was cast when Gil Garcetti moved the case from Brentwood to L.A., and filled the jury with racists from South Central just itchin' to get whitey. What better way than to let one of their own (no matter that OJ wouldn't be caught dead giving anybody from that 'hood the time of day) off the hook for killing two attractive young white people?
The same thing will happen in Durham if venue is not changed to a middle or affluent white venue. Since Nifong made this about race, the accused have a right to a jury of their peers, which, because of the race card already being inserted by Nifong, Shabazz, NCCU, and others, does not include any blacks, by definition of "peer."
Two? All I saw on with him regarding Duke was Susan Filan. Did I miss a segment? Who else was on? I was cooking and may have missed it.
I thought it was two..........but I wasn't "watching".......but I could have sworn I heard two women talking.
Of course, I could have confused shows; but he did call her a prostitute because he said, "I'm just saying what everybody is thinking," or something like that.
Tucker has been dead to rights throughout this and have nailed all of them one-by-one as they come on to argue the guilt of the players. he even had Wendy Murphy on the ropes a couple weeks ago, which was her last time on the show. Tucker has been tougher than anybody about this case, and has knocked his opponents down with one logical argument after another.
Yep, no doubt about it. He's been sharper and tougher than anybody else has since the beginning.
Agree with all of that in a vague sort of way, except about Tucker.
He hasn't worn the tie for a long time.
But I liked the tie, anyway.
READ THIS HEADLINE !
Then read story underneath
http://www.tampabays10.com/sports/sports_article.aspx?storyid=29355
Yep, and if you are going to send them there anyway, they need to be taught - make that "pounded into their thick skulls" - to never allow yourself to be put in a compromising situation, through truth or lies, by or with the enemy.
It may sound harsh, but as soon as the guys saw those women were black, they should have given them each $50 and said "Buh-bye", and never even let them in the door.
Yes. he made it very clear, and he's the only one who has made it clear that escort=hooker. Everybody else tiptoes around that huge, GLARING fact. Filan got more than she bargained for when she asked Tucker to explain how the accuser got those marks and injuries supposedly noted on the medical report, lol!
BECAUSE SHE IS A HOOKER!!
Tucker also made mention of the unfairness of smearing the players' names but never mentioning her name, and he thinks that should stop. I agree 100%. It's absurd.
Actually, Roberts said this a couple weeks ago. I think she's just trying to $tir up intere$t in her $tory.
** Check this out **
I think Mr. Nifong is LYING here
There are discussing FIRST 911 Call here, on APRIL 7th
(24 days AFTER the alleged attack)
Nifong has changed his tack and he's gone from saying the
first 911 call was corroboration of the mindset of the
lacrosse players on that night TO the first 911 Call, "as
far as I'm concerned, it has no direct bearing on the
situation".
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12135342/from/RL.4/
Why did he change his opinion on the first call?
Look how he answers the Question:
ABRAMS: Have you identified the person who made the
(first) 911-call?
NIFONG: To my knowledge I do not.
(same link as above)
This is 24 days after the alleged attack. Nifong signs
indictments against 2 players FIVE days later.
SMELLS TO ME.
No, what I was pointing out was the HEADLINE versus the article:
'Second dancer says she believes friend was raped by Duke players'
Body of Article:
"...she's convinced something more illegal happened than just underage drinking.
BUT Kim Roberts tells The Associated Press she can't back up a rape claim, because she wasn't in the bathroom where it allegedly happened."
ENDQUOTE
The TITLE is misleading
Ah yes!! An old Clintonoid trick. A non-denial denial. They were (are) experts at it...
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.