Replies

Nifong also tried to BS the court about the cell phone. At first, he denied that he had possession of a cell phone, then later said that the police did not review it (which would be stunningly incompetent). My impression is that Nifong was trying to be too cute for words (as in he personally did not have it, and would only admit its existence when specifically queried about police possession). What a scoundrel.

Two former prosecutors withheld evidence in a trial that sent a man to death row, and they only got a written reprimand as a result. There seems to be something very wrong in the NC system.

http://www.newsobserver.com/208/story/244539.html

I'm sure if by some miracle Nifong is ever called to account for his decisions in this case, he too will call his missteps uninternational.

Nifong also tried to BS the court about the cell phone. At first, he denied that he had possession of a cell phone, then later said that the police did not review it (which would be stunningly incompetent).

Yeah all the feminazi/race baiter commentators speculating that Nifong must have something else, some bombshell maybe be surprised when it ends up that he had this cell phone and it turns out to be a defense bombshell in this case.

BTW, this cell phone tells you everything you need to know about this case:

1. Mangum dropped it outside when she fell and apparently did not miss it.

2. The police were not particularly interested in finding it. They took their time getting a warrant to search showing their level of belief of the woman.

3. Nifong after taking over the investigation was apparently not interested in what evidence this cell phone might contain.

4. The defense is demanding to see what it says. Can you imagine a case where the defense is so confident it demands the police look at a cell phone that if there were a rape might contain pictures or textmessages about it.

This cell phone encapsulates the entire case. An out of it stripper drops a cell phone. The police taking her accusation seriously but not believing it takes their time to search for the cell phone. A DA rushing to indict does not bother to check it for evidence one way or the other. [Or maybe he did and knows it hurts his case?] Defendents who know they are completely innocent demand it be looked at because they know any evidence in the cell phone can only help them.

Durham cops and prosecutors are quite aware of what an investigative tool a cellphone and its data is....

Raleigh, NC – News & Observer, December 16, 2001
Petersons' phone calls studied
Husband's attorney asks news media not to make assumptions
By AISLING SWIFT, Staff Writer

DURHAM - Police seized telephone and cellular phone records belonging to Kathleen and Mike Peterson to analyze incoming and outgoing calls during a two-week period before and after her death, according to search warrants made public Saturday. The search, conducted by Detective D.W. Addison and returned Saturday afternoon to Magistrate Jackie Henderson, was conducted Friday and involved calls from 12:01 a.m. Nov. 26 through 12:01 a.m. Wednesday -- three days after Kathleen Peterson was found dead at the bottom of a roughly 20-step back staircase in her Forest Hills estate.

Friends, family and Mike Peterson's attorneys, Kerry Sutton and Barry Winston, call Kathleen Peterson's death a tragic accident, while warrants filed Friday show police have now branded the investigation a murder probe. Addison's affidavit says investigators are looking for the duration of calls from the Petersons' home phone and three cellular phones as well as determining whether the calls were incoming or outgoing. The significance of Nov. 26 isn't detailed, and the calls aren't required to be detailed on an inventory list so what police learned isn't known.

Kerry-Sutton-in-the-news article here:

http://suttonlawoffice.com/_wsn/page10.html