Posted on 05/22/2006 4:05:16 PM PDT by zaxxon
Lawyers representing one of three Duke University lacrosse players charged with rape want details about any toxicology tests performed on the accuser, asking in a motion filed Monday whether such evidence even exists.
"No such toxicology report, if it exists, was provided to the defense," wrote attorneys Kirk Osborn and Ernest Conner, referring to nearly 1,300 pages of evidence prosecutors provided to defense attorneys last week. The attorneys represent Reade Seligmann, one of three lacrosse players charged with raping a woman hired to perform as a stripper at a March 13 team party.
Seligmann's attorneys want a judge to order prosecutors to provide any reports "generated from blood, urine or other biological samples" collected from the accuser. In the motion, they cited a story published in Newsweek earlier this month that said District Attorney Mike Nifong "hinted" such tests would reveal the presence of a date-rape drug.
Authorities have said a doctor and specially trained nurse performed a physical exam on the accuser that found evidence of sexual assault. But the nurse who filled out a report on that exam indicted no toxicology tests were performed, according to the defense motion.
Nifong declined to comment.
(Excerpt) Read more at abclocal.go.com ...
Mr. RecallMoran, litigator, says litigators always make the biggest show over the things they have the most discomfort around. Hence Nifong sneering and guffawing at Reade's alibi. My question is, if all litigators know this, isn't it counterproductive. He says it's for the jury, stupid (or press).
Susan said maybe that happened on the way out to the car.
My point was that the lacrosse players were lambasted for allegedly using a phony name, rendering all their other statements likely false. So here, the prostitute is using a false name but, nobody cares!!!!!!!!! Its different!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Allred: Back to the victim is being tried in the court of public opinion. Calling for a trial again.
Crier says likely no trial.
Cryer says she'd be surprised if it went to trial...
Idiots like Allred don't get it, or just ignore it. We don't indict and try people because we have a a he said she said. We indict and try people when a seasoned honest professional forms the conclusion that an individual is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. So, if it is up in the air by all accounts, a coin flip, you don't have a trial.
Could it have been any more obvious how painful it was for the Newsweek reporterette and Catherine Cryer to discuss the actual evidence?
The Newsweek reporteretter looked like she was going to Puke. She couldn't find the words. Catherine Cryer had to apologize for thinking the thoughts.
this entire episode is an outrage. The News Heads can't even call this great injustice what it is. Their allegiances prevent it
How about Allred stepping up to the plate and saying if they are found innocent she will pay the defendants legal bills. She does want a trial right?
"Highly unlikely?" "Looks solidly?" Sorry, you're really stretching here, Mike.
All we know is that the SANE "doctor" told the policeman that Crystal told the doctors she had been raped. It's possible Crystal declined the test, but it's also just as possible the nurse applied the criteria based on HER OWN observations of Crystal during her examination of her, and did not observe any of the triggering criteria, and did not do a tox screen.
So, Catherine has changed her tune? Can't watch-retired hubbie has remote-(of course).
Yup. CC says there's no case...
Groping:
on Abrams, they said according to police documents that the AV said at one point she was NOT raped, but dragged out of the car and across the front lawn and in that process she was groped by many men.
The neighbor who witnessed all that never said any such thing. The women were "talked" into returning to the house. The AV claims she was dragged and she said she had an argument with Nikky. She also stated she was dragged back in and Nikky remained in the car. This contradicts her own story, because they stated on Abrams that the AV said the argument with Nikky was because Nikky wanted to go back in and the AV did not. So why then would Nikky remain in the car?
The neighbor, and I believe Roberts, says they both went back in together.
First time I had watch CC on this case. Want to bet on what Grace has to say tonight?
I think NG's on vacation. Wasn't on the air last nite...
If that is true I would say medical personnel used very bad judgement.
The policeman that found the woman and reported her passed out drunk has a conversation with the SANE personnel. They disregard that report on her condition and decide to NOT do a TOX report?
Possible, but unlikely in my opinion.
I wrote to Tucker Carlson about her as well. Tucker@msnbc.com
Megan Kendell on Hannity just said that she agrees all this exculpatory evidence is good for the defense but, "If she takes the stand and looks the jury in the eye, and gives details and says "THIS happened to me" and the jury believes her, she can still win.
Hannity replied that the prosecution doesn't have to prove it 51%, he has to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.
Kendell said that if Nifong is removed then the Attorney General himself would have to try the case.
Which is why he postponed a trial to 2007.
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.