Well, we may be seeing some toying from the defense. Since Nifong intimated to the press that a date-rape drug was used, and now there's no document turned over to support that, and Nifong said he gave the defense everything, one rationally concludes that not everything was turned over. After all, the suggestion that a date-rape drug was used indicates there is a tox report, but no tox report was forthcoming. Thus, one must conclude that not all documents were turned over. But Nifong said he gave them everything. So, which is it, Nifong? Were you lying about the date-rape drug? Or were you lying when you said you turned everything over? The two statements cannot co-exist in truth.
Nifong was relying on Kim's testimony regarding the date rape drug. He already knew there was no tox screen done when he made the drug comments. He is relying on Kim, and he will do so at trial, imo.
Note the statement below from Nifong. Note how he has already changed Kim's "1 and a half drinks" to "a few sips." Kim said CGM drank half of hers and all of Kim's.
I believe his total evidence for a drug was Kim's testimony, and it still is. He will use her in the trial as his date-rape drug evidence, imo. He had to have already known that he had no tox report to work with.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12357584/site/newsweek/
"When asked about the alleged victim’s evident intoxication the night of the party, District Attorney Mike Nifong told NEWSWEEK several weeks ago that her impaired state was not necessarily voluntary. Refusing to speak about the evidence in this case specifically, Nifong, in retrospect, now appears to have been offering a clue: “What does it mean that she was intoxicated?” said Nifong. “Just as an example--speaking hypothetically--if I had a witness who saw her right before this and she was not intoxicated, and then I had a witness who said that she was given a drink at the party and after taking a few sips of that drink acted in a particular way, that could be evidence of something other than intoxication, or at least other than voluntary intoxication,” Nifong told NEWSWEEK. “There are many explanations for someone appearing to be intoxicated,” he said. Asked if he had any evidence suggesting this scenario took place the night of the alleged rape, Nifong responded, “I don’t have any evidence that I want to talk to you about right now.” Still speaking hypothetically, he went on to say that depending on the circumstances, an alleged victim’s intoxication might make her a more credible witness."