To be clear, NC still has Nol Pros, of course, like most states, but it no longer has Nol Pros with leave. Nevertheless, in view of what the racist treatment Reade received from the New Black Panthers at court yesterday portends, a Nol Pros would be an outright dangerous resolution for the boys, and is exactly why I think this pathetically evil little man Nifong will give Nol Pros strong consideration when push comes to shove and trial is upon him.
p.s. forgive any errors in posting or protocol I may have made - this is the first new thread I've opened.
This amounts to an "ankle bracelet". A legal shackle. This is indeed draconian and unjust.
In my usually "unique" way of looking at matters, this caught my attention:
Feb 26, 2003, Duke U: Civil rights activist argues for reparations as remedy--snips:
Society in America today is like a 100-yard dash in which two groups are running, said lawyer, lobbyist and civil rights activist Randall Robinson. "One group runs, and the second group, you shoot them in the knees and say, 'Run! You can catch up!' But you can never catch up because great crimes have never been addressed," he said.
The crime is 246 years of slavery that has yet to be remedied, said Robinson, the keynote speaker of the Black History Month Celebration that culminated with last night's event in Page Auditorium. The speech was sponsored by the Black Student Alliance, the Duke chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and the Reginaldo Howard Scholars
"The worst crime you can commit to any human beings is to strip them of any memory of themselves and to lead them to believe they have no story," said Robinson, the founder of TransAfrica, an advocacy group for people of African descent. "Since no one knows [what has happened] for African Americans, they can't explain their current condition. For white Americans, they can't explain their current advantage [and so it ends up] explained in languages of racism." ---end snips
Translation: Nifong and the Liberal Lobbies at Duke declare the Duke LAX boys GUILTY before evidence, before discovery. The boys are to have no memory of themselves or even be encouraged to declare their innocence. FA cannot explain her current advantages (low penalties, automatically believed), and so the MSM declares the Duke Boys guilty "explained in the Languages of racism". As reparations droid Robinson has said: "One group runs, and the second group, you shoot them in the knees and say, 'Run! You can catch up!' But you can never catch up because great crimes have never been addressed," he said.
The first group would be FA/Nifong, the second group is the Duke Boys. The crimes against them will never be addressed. They were declared GUILTY before innocent. If Nifong goes for the legal "stall" will the ancestors of the Duke Boys be in hoc for "286 years"?
Sounds absurd. But coming from the left, and Nifong is a lefty, this is exactly how this case has been going; along the usual lefty lines of a revenge cabal.
And in re Duke Itself, the cabal consists of a humongous percentage of Lefty/Democrat Professors to the tune of: the political affiliation of faculty [at Duke]from several departments, including history, literature, sociology and English... the departments had a ratio of 32-to-0, 11-to-0, 9-to-0 and 18-to-1, respectively, in favor of registered Democrats over Republicans.
According to other articles, The Intifada Comes to Duke--snips:
the annual conference of the Palestine Solidarity Movement (PSM). The PSM is an umbrella organization that connects various U.S. and Canadian groups; its yearly gathering offers an opportunity for the constituent elements to establish a visible presence on a prestigious university campus and plan strategy and tactics for a movement dedicated to delegitimizing the state of Israel. Over the last several years, the convocation has been held at Ohio State, the University of Michigan, and the University of California at Berkeley. This past October, it was the turn of Duke University.
Duke’s president Richard Brodhead had only just assumed office last summer when the university announced that it would be hosting the PSM conference in the fall. Because the organizers had followed the proper procedures for mounting such an event, Brodhead explained, the decision to grant approval was an “easy one.” After all, the university was only reaffirming “the importance of the principle of free expression.”
But Brodhead himself, moving beyond his previous stance of avowed neutrality in the name of free expression, issued what amounted to an outright endorsement of the conference.
Another, less practical workshop—“Segregation, Apartheid, and Zionism Are Crimes Against Humanity!”—was led by Bob Brown, a veteran of the Black Power movement of the 1960’s. Brown’s theoretical discourse consisted mostly of unsubstantiated personal anecdotes and random invective. Thus, he reminisced about meeting Saddam Hussein’s spokesman Tariq Aziz in Baghdad in 1974; alleged that Condoleezza Rice’s father had tried to force him to marry her some years back; and referred to the Six-Day war, in which Israel fought off the armies of Egypt, Jordan, and Syria, as “the Jew war of ’67.”
Still other sessions were devoted to such subjects as “Jewish dissent,” the ethics of suicide bombing and kindred forms of “resistance,” and miscellaneous other topics. Charles Carlson’s workshop, “The Cause of the Conflict: How Judaized-Christians Enable War,” was inexplicably cancelled.
After three days of meetings, the conference came to a close. “It’s a good thing we did here,” announced the university’s vice president for public affairs, John Burness, setting the tone for a chorus of self-applause. In its own post-mortem roundup, the student-run Chronicle, which had endorsed the PSM’s official refusal to denounce Palestinian terrorism, lauded the university administration for “masterfully” handling the affair and reported with great satisfaction that the “overall tone of the weekend was one of discussion and learning.” Looking to the future, the paper urged upon Duke a positive responsibility “to continue the dialogue the Palestine Solidarity Movement conference initiated.”
But whatever hopes the Jewish campus organizations held out for civil dialogue were rapidly dashed. Representatives of the PSM refused to sign the Joint Israel Initiative, objecting in particular to its condemnation of violence. Not only that, but in the aftermath of the conference, even as the open anti-Semitism on display there was going entirely without censure, Duke’s Jewish organizations themselves—and Jews in general—became the object of furious attack.
The first salvo was an article in the Chronicle by one of its columnists, a Duke senior named Philip Kurian. Headlined “The Jews,” it denounced Jews as “the most privileged ‘minority’ group” in the United States and in particular bemoaned the “shocking overrepresentation” of Jews in academia. Replete with references to the “powerful Jewish establishment” and “exorbitant Jewish privilege in the United States,” the article went on to characterize Jews as a phony minority that can “renounce their difference by taking off the yarmulke.”
Reverting to his by now standard mantra, Brodhead stressed again that the central issue was the importance of “education through dialogue.” “I am grateful,” he wrote, “to the many individuals and groups who helped turn last week’s Palestine Solidarity Movement conference into a peaceful and constructive event,” and “proud to be at a school where difficult matters are dealt with in such a mature and constructive way.”
It is all but impossible to imagine the president of Duke offering a similar encomium to, say, a conference of neo-Nazi rabble-rousers on his campus, or defending a parade of speakers dilating on the “diseased” history of, say, American blacks. It is in fact impossible to imagine Duke agreeing to host such debased goings-on in the first place. In that sense, the administration’s appeals to free expression and dialogue were the purest disingenuousness.
Moreover, and whether or not a university has a duty to license the unfettered expression on its campus of every venomous notion under the sun, the real issue at Duke was always the refusal of the licensing authorities to call such notions by their proper names—in this case, bald anti-Semitism and incitement to the murder of innocents. That refusal on the part of the university and its president, a mark not of “constructive” liberality but of cowardice and complicity, is what led infallibly to the post-conference outbreak of anti-Jewish hatred. Once the guardians of the citadel granted permission to open the gates, is it any surprise that the marauding hordes came storming through?
*******************
I know, I know.."Alia? What's all this gotta do with Jezebelle's thread?"
I'm providing an insight into the temperature, culture, and players surrounding this case, and how and why, and to what possible purpose the "legal stall" technique might be applied and used in this case.
Oh! And there's more on other "interesting Duke bylaws"...Prof arrested for pot [Duke professor charged for Son's crime]--snips:
French and his wife were charged with maintaining a house for selling marijuana after the couple's son allegedly sold the substance to a police officer. Their son was also charged with possession of other drugs.
The University's personnel policy manual states: "Employees as citizens are responsible for knowing about and complying with the provisions of state and federal law that make it a crime to possess, sell, deliver, or manufacture controlled substances. Any member of the University Community who violates the law is subject to prosecution by civil authorities as well as to disciplinary proceedings by the University."
Durham.. Duke...mostly liberal professors... Hm. And only one arrest.. Hmm..
I guess this would also eliminate any suits against the DA or at least narrow any chance of these boys winning a case.
Eyewitness News Looks at Party Photos (snipping from alrea's post):
(04/18/06 -- DURHAM) - Eyewitness News and the ABC News law-and-justice unit are getting a chance to examine time-stamped photos taken inside the home on the night of the controversial Duke lacrosse party.
The photos are believed to be authentic and taken by one of the students at the March 13 party. The time stamps on the photos appear to be accurate. Pictures of a wristwatch magnified for clarity correspond with the time on the photos. The players are sitting on three couches in a semicircle with the dancers in the middle.
11:02 p.m.: The first picture shows at least 10 students hanging out in a living room, apparently waiting for the dancers to arrive. Most of the students appear to be drinking. By the number of people in this photo, it appears only a fraction of the 47 lacrosse team members are there.
12 a.m.: This is the first picture of the strippers. Students are watching the show, but not grabbing or attempting to touch the women. Bruises are clearly visible on the legs and thighs of the alleged victim.
12:00:40 a.m.: Another picture taken 40 seconds later shows bruises on the accuser's knees. Her right knee appears to have an open cut.
12:03:57 p.m.: About four minutes after arriving, a picture shows the strippers leaving the room. The photo clearly shows that the alleged victim left behind one of her shoes.
Between 12:10 a.m. and 12:30 a.m.: No photos were taken between this time.
12:30:12 a.m.: The next photo shows the alleged victim on the back porch, carrying what appears to be her purse and a makeup bag. Her clothes are intact.
12:30:47 a.m.: A photo taken 30 seconds later shows the alleged victim on the porch and she appears to smile.
12:31:26 a.m.: But 30 seconds after that, a photo shows the alleged victim stumbling down the back steps of the house.
12:37:58 a.m.: A series of photos are taken, all showing the woman lying on her left side on the back porch, seemingly passed out or asleep. She had visible cuts on her legs and buttocks that did not appear in the previous photos.
The cuts may be from falling. The cuts on her buttocks line up with the edge of a screen door she may have hit on the way down.
12:41 a.m.: The final photo shows the accuser and the second dancer in a black car. The accuser is in the passengers seat.
Many of the photos taken on the back porch show pink splotches, which the defense says is undried nail polish. They claim the accuser was polishing her nails in the bathroom between 12:10 a.m. and 12:30 a.m. - - not being raped.
Have any civil rights of the boys been violated? If so, 18 USC Sec. 242 might be worth a little attention from defense....it might be the pathway to Federal Court and a looksee by the FBI.
http://uscode.house.gov/uscode-cgi/fastweb.exe?getdoc+uscview+t17t20+269+0++%28%29%20%20AN