Posted on 05/25/2006 5:04:51 AM PDT by 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.
(Excerpt) Read more at herald-sun.com ...
1)Our constitution grants to *defendants* the right to a fair trial,not accusers.
2)The NAACP's demand for a gag order indicates that there's something (or,better still,something more) out there that will seriously hurt this gal's credibility..or even subject her to charges (perjury,filing a false police report,etc).
>>wait a minute... the problem here is that this has been turned on it's head. This is not the alleged victim's trial and she has no right to a fair trial. It's the defendant(s) who have the right to a fair trial.<<
You're absolutely correct. Crystal is not a party to the case. She is a witness. The State and the three players are the parties. She is not entitled to a fair trial here because she is not on trial.
That an attorney is saying that "media coverage of the alleged rape may deprive the alleged victim of her legal rights to a fair trial" shows how far we have dumbed down a legal education and the legal standards in this country.
Also this stupid NAACO attorney claims "that [the players' attorneys] are violating the State Bar's rules of professional conduct that discourage comments outside court that are likely to prejudice a case." There is nothing to violate. The key word here is "discourage" -- there is no absolute prohibition. So where's the violation?
As for the NAACP requesting a gag order, the NAACP has no standing in this case.
This is just more nonsense!
Does that mean that,because there's not a black woman alive today who was a slave,there are no "capable" black women to be found in this country?
Get a load of this!!! Time for the Justice Dept to intervene before this gets any worse for these three boys.
They have absolutely NO legal standing to ask for this; it's PR, plain and simple.
"...OUR experiences...." = their unjustified justification for anything they say or do.
HUH?
The militant blacks have made it perfectly clear that they don't give a damn about truth and justice. To them, it always will be about hating whitey and race baiting.
NAACP? Whatever.
Thanks, great suggestion!
Where did you read that? I thought there was only one.
LOL - a little late for a gag order. The horses ass left the barn about 70 interviews ago.
By calling her "the victim" the NAACP is stating the accused perpetrators of this alleged crime are guilty and is doing its level best to see that they get judicially lynched. In fact, just about every bit of credible evidence that's come out shows conclusively that there wasn't even a crime and the "victim" is no victim at all. The real victims of this travesty are the three young men this whore and the NAACP are trying to get lynched.
You're welcome. I just read it;that's a real kicker.
Excellently put!
You're right. I mispoke.
Sorry. I shouldn't assume anyone watches MSNBC.
Dan Abrahm's on MSNBC has been poking fun at his prosecutor guests for sounding like defense attorney's
i.e.
We know about the Bruno Magli Shoes
We know about about the blood in the truck
We know about the fact that O.J. has no alibi
But... you don't know what will happen at trail.
*****
We know about the problems with the timeline
We know about the DNA that matches a boyfriend only
We know the other dancer was never in the bathroom during the assault
We know the AV has changed her story from 20 to 4 to 3, to not raped, to raped with Kim in the Bathroom, to not raped, to raped with Kim not in the Bathroom
But... you don't know what will happen at trail.
That was my reference.
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.