Gag order sought in lacrosse case (NAACP Wants Gag Order)

Durham Herald-Sun ^ | May 25, 2006 | PAUL BONNER

[abb]

DURHAM -- A lawyer with the state NAACP said the civil rights organization intends to seek a gag order in the Duke lacrosse case, and a journalist who participated in a forum with him on Wednesday said media coverage of the alleged rape may deprive the alleged victim of her legal rights to a fair trial.

Al McSurely, an attorney who chairs the Legal Redress Committee for the state National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, said he generally respects the defense attorneys in the case as colleagues. But they are violating the State Bar's rules of professional conduct that discourage comments outside court that are likely to prejudice a case, he said.

The NAACP will try to intervene in the case to file a "quiet zone/let's let justice work" motion. That is otherwise known as a gag order, he acknowledged, although he said he doesn't like that term.

McSurely's comments came amid the first-ever Durham Conference on the Moral Challenges of our Culture at First Presbyterian Church downtown. The session gave the approximately 150 people who attended a chance to hear a series of talks and discuss among themselves sexual and domestic violence, racism, class distinctions and the media.

[nonliberal]

If I were one of the accused, even against my attorney's advice, I would be blasting the DA every time someone put a microphone in my face.

[nonliberal]

If I were one of the accused, even against my attorney's advice, I would be blasting the DA every time someone put a microphone in my face.

[Guenevere]

...and they only shut down the dissenting voices when those dissenting voices are supporting the defense position and are finally being heard by the media and nation.

Those boys deserve their side being highlighted....it's about time!

[unixfox]

...media coverage of the alleged rape may deprive the alleged victim of her legal rights to a fair trial.

Good, put her on the stand.

[mware]

The gag should have been from the first day. The prosecutor went out and made all sorts of allegations against the players.

[Protect the Bill of Rights]

"quiet zone/let's let justice work"

Make sure we use our inside voices boys and girls.

Do they really think we are a bunch of first graders????

[Jezebelle]

Did somebody amend the constitution by adding something to the Bill of Rights while I slept? Where is there a guarantee that an alleged victim has a right to a fair trial? The entire concept presupposes the guilt of the accused.

[Sacajaweau]

Every attorney knows it's all about timing. The Bar will eventually take care of NiFong.

Even Bubba got disbarred and if he couldn't get out of it, who can? But even Bubba's was a deal.....No civil court suits related to offenses during his Presidency AFTER he leaves office.

I think we might see the same condition attached to NiFong's disbarment.

[abb]

George Orwell was a prophet, lol....

[Sacajaweau]

It wouldn't gag the press and remember, "They have confidential sources". NiFong didn't have to go to a mike. He did it for political gain. Not arresting them would have caused a riot. Caught in his own web!!

[bjc]

Is there a listing somewhere of the estimated 70 appearances that Nifong made at or around the time of the indictments?

Two more questions:
Where is the "outfit" that the alleged victim was wearing the night of the alleged incident?
Where is Kim's car? Do we have a picture of it?

[bwteim]

Nifong should have had a gag placed on him a long time ago in order to ensure that justice will take its course.

[TBBBO]

Concerning the ACLU, see yesterday's Best of the Web from the Wall Street Journal. Go to:

www.opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110008421

Citing:

www.nytimes.com/2006/05/24/us/24aclu.html?ex=1306123200&en=cd8a5fd1f6941a5d&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

"The American Civil Liberties Union is weighing new standards that would discourage its board members from publicly criticizing the organization's policies and internal administration," reports the New York Times:

"Where an individual director disagrees with a board position on matters of civil liberties policy, the director should refrain from publicly highlighting the fact of such disagreement," the committee that compiled the standards wrote in its proposals.

"Directors should remember that there is always a material prospect that public airing of the disagreement will affect the A.C.L.U. adversely in terms of public support and fund-raising," the proposals state.

Given the organization's longtime commitment to defending free speech, some former board members were shocked by the proposals.

No kidding! The ACLU champions "whistleblowers" who reveal national-security secrets, but there are limits. When free speech threatens ACLU fund-raising efforts, why that just goes too far.

Amusingly, the Times couldn't find anyone who would speak in defense of the proposed policy. This is as close as anyone would come:

Anthony D. Romero, the A.C.L.U.'s executive director, said that he had not yet read the proposals and that it would be premature to discuss them before the board reviews them at its June meeting. . . .

Lawrence A. Hamermesh, chairman of the committee, which was formed to define rights and responsibilities of board members, also said it was too early to discuss the proposals, as did Alison Steiner, a committee member who filed a dissent against some recommendations. . . .

Susan Herman, a Brooklyn Law School professor who serves on the board, said board members and others were jumping to conclusions.

"No one is arguing that board members have no right to disagree or express their own point of view," Ms. Herman said. "Many of us simply think that in exercising that right, board members should also consider their fiduciary duty to the A.C.L.U. and its process ideals."

On a different subject but a similar theme, check out this passage from a Times report on Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's commencement address at Boston College, which prompted some hippies to protest:

The campus African-American, Hispanic, Asian, and Native American organization sent a letter to the administration asking that it "stop touting Secretary Rice's race and gender [sic] as justification for her invitation."

Of course, if the members of the campus African-American, Hispanic, Asian, and Native American organization didn't want to go to a school with a commitment to diversity, they should have thought of that before enrolling at BC. (Hat tip: Tom Maguire.)

Hypocrisy, La Rochefoucauld observed, is the tribute that vice pays to virtue. The left loves to point out instances in which conservative moralists fail to abide by their ideals. This, however, is a human failing, not a left- or

[rwilson99]

It's another example of prosecutors sounding like defense attorneys, or in this case racist defense attorneys sounding like prosecutors.

[TBBBO]

Sorry. The full last paragraph of my previous post should have been:

"Hypocrisy, La Rochefoucauld observed, is the tribute that vice pays to virtue. The left loves to point out instances in which conservative moralists fail to abide by their ideals. This, however, is a human failing, not a left- or right one."

[Jezebelle]

Huh?

[The Electrician]

The NAACP will try to intervene in the case to file a "quiet zone/let's let justice work" motion. That is otherwise known as a gag order, he acknowledged, although he said he doesn't like that term.

There they go again. The NAACP is always standing up for the victims of crime. Remember the strong support that they gave to the victims in the OJ murder case. Um, well, no, they gave their strong support to the perpetrator in that case. Never mind...

[Carolinamom]

What are you talking about?

[TommyDale]

I think it's high time the Justice Dept. take a trip to Durham.

I wonder if anyone has requested it.

[alwaysconservative]

Thanks for the info! That's what I truly hate about the left (the party of supposed tolerance and diversity): if they find out they disagree with you, they try to shut you up.