Joe Cheshire, a defense attorney for Duke University lacrosse players at the center of a rape investigation, said the latest tests show no conclusive match to any of the lacrosse players' DNA. (ABC News
Posted on 05/13/2006 9:30:51 AM PDT by SkyPilot
May 13, 2006 — The second round of DNA test results in the Duke University rape investigation show "no conclusive match'' to any lacrosse players, defense attorneys said, but a vaginal swab of the alleged rape victim produced DNA from a "single male source'' — a man not on the lacrosse team who did not attend a March 13 party that was the site of the alleged rape.
Joe Cheshire, a defense attorney for Duke University lacrosse players at the center of a rape investigation, said the latest tests show no conclusive match to any of the lacrosse players' DNA. (ABC News
Defense attorney Joe Chesire declined to identify the mystery man or his connection to the alleged victim, but ABC News' Law and Justice Unit has learned that the unnamed source of the DNA is the alleged victim's "boyfriend," according to her mother.
ABC News is withholding the name of the man because he is apparently not a target of the investigation. Records indicate that Durham, N.C., police gave the "boyfriend'' a cheek swab to collect DNA on May 3, ABC News' Law and Justice Unit has learned exclusively.
It is unclear if or how the first DNA tests missed what appears to be the only foreign genetic material found on the alleged victim's body, defense attorneys said. Two Duke lacrosse players were indicted more than two weeks before the cheek swab was taken from the "boyfriend."
It is also unclear whether the alleged victim had sex with the "boyfriend" the night she claims to have been raped by three Duke lacrosse players. DNA experts tell ABC News that genetic traces of semen can remain in the body up to six days after intercouse.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
Which is not much. She screamed rape by 4 ( or 20) players, claimed no other sex prior or after. And the only DNA found was the boyfriend. If that's good news, this case is over.
Ping to Howlin--He's at it again.
Face it. You've had your "semen on the blue dress" moment at FR.
IIRC the election was May 2nd.
Say what, who!
I've been at lacrosse games all day and I'm a little behind. I've read up as much as I can and I still am weak on one point. Did they swab the boyfriend to get an ID so that he is "known to the police" or did the police already have a dna record for him?
See post #239 for a good explaination.
Here you go:
I hope you noticed how easy it was to find that the pros were actually gambling on the odds of different kinds of DNA outcomes.
No, it's not trollish at all. And in the context of the "xoxo" commentary, it all makes sense.
Folks who haven't followed the "xoxo" quasi-thread probably don't have a clue. In fact, I'd almost forgotten about them until today when another poster brought them back into the discussion, and given the article about gambling on DNA outcomes, "xoxo" didn't seem so cryptic as before ~ "just a game", eh?!
Besides, finding evidence that the whole thing was a set-up to discredit one or more Lacrosse players, and that the local prosecutor, Nifong, was also involved in a professional gambling scheme, would clear all the members and provide a basis for DOJ involvement.
Does anyone here have a bias against allowing the Duke lacrosse team members having revenge for this?
Don't know. Could be either.
Before you accuse anyone of being a liar it is highly encouraged that you read through ALL of the relevant posts and threads, which in this particular case go back over 2 months.
You are hijacking the thread into a discussion of your personal sense of confusion.
Ok because I thought I something about him being swabbed and last night I thought that he was "known." But I guess it really is either.
I do fink it amusing that the media keeps saying that semen was found from "a man" etc. Duh.
fink=think and find typed together (apparently)
;>) LOL! Duh is right!!
Okay, now I better understand what you are saying. No, I don't think there's a connection here between the Duke case and the Delay and Libby cases. You could claim there are prosecutorial witch hunts in all three but, the political motivation in the Duke case does not appear to be anti-Republican.
Nifong is simply being a populist, responding to what he thinks the public wants (the crowd marching with candles and banging pots), etc. The problem, of course, is you can't easily make what's popular into what is legal - that is, if facts still play a role in deciding the case. More and more, I wonder if our legal system even cares about facts, only outcomes.
bttt
xoxo suggested nothing about gambling. You're on your own with that.
No, I wouldn't call this behavior "anti-republican" but I would call it leftist. It has to do with redistribution of wealth/justice/esteem which is the sole goal of the far left. They have out of control prosecutors supported by an embittered populist faction attempting to destroy what they perceive as the dominate culture.
No dear-you are hijacking the thread with your wild and unsubstantiated gambling theories.
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.