Posted on 05/28/2006 9:59:32 AM PDT by Perdogg
She's become a caricature of a prosecutor. Whatever she once was, she is no longer. Sjhe's imprudent, rude, and lacks any insightful legal thought.
My understanding is that he was out of state and that fact was already known to Nifong and/or DPD.
LOL! <:
Maggief,
I'm sure it was a rhetorical question.
Just a comment though: I'd bet that Kim was let out of jail only AFTER she agreed to cooperate and be a state's witness.
As we know, she was arrested 8 days after the party. She didn't respond to repeated requests from the Durham and Duke Police departments for the 911 caller to come forward. She spent several hours in jail after being arrested (8 days later). Kim has been on the run, Kim signed an agreement for restitution and then didn't pay one red cent, seems she never intended on paying that money back. They find Kim, Kim doesn't like Cops. She may have taken some of Crystal's stuff that night and she's not talking - she's exercising her rights. Nifong or one of the investigators tell her what she has to do to get out of jail and Kim jumps on it. Days later, Kim gets an attorney that's interested in representing her and Crystal civilly. Mark Simeon calls Nifong and talks about the election and how he can address some black groups he's speaking in front of just a day or two before the election. Nifong agrees that Kim (who's been on the Lam) is not a flight risk and drops her bond-bail requirements to save Kim money. A Judge pencil-whips the request by Nifong.
Kim Roberts steals $25,000.00, files a false report (911 call), lies to a Police Officer (how the AV got in her car),
violates her restitution agreement, violates her parole conditions repeatedly, and is fugitive from the state for months - and she spends 2 hours in Jail.
Don't try this at home!
I have been out of town lately myself. What's the deal with the missing Police Chief in Durham? I keep seeing references to him "missing", but never hear an actual story.
Nifongery in action, no doubt. She's been Nifonged. Or is it Nifongated?
Nifongery in action, no doubt. She's been Nifonged. Or is it Nifongated?
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
NIFelony ?
Excellent catch, Gagal. Thanks!
You have to at some point "notice" the other side about your experts or the judge could exclude them. This leads to both sides often "noticing" the other side with every possible expert they have including lots that ultimately are not called. [Heck I have beens subpeanoed in a case I have never heard of by an attorney I have never met. I had done work for the firm in the past. Ultimately I never did any work on that case and never was deposed.]
The thing of it is, in the scheme of possible racial epithets, that one is pretty mild.
Excellent analysis of the partial potential witness list I put up.
"Again, why is the presupposition that the defense is lying?"
Because the accuser is a black woman, and there's nothing the media loves more than a black victim, especially a woman. conversely, the media abhors black criminals. They almost completely refuse to publish photos of black criminals.
Half the time O'Reilly is blowing smoke about stuff he knoews nothing about. I think in this case he's getting what little info he has from other media and his buddy Whorealdo who is, of course, sympathetic to the accuser, or at least wants to appear to be so, in order to advance his leftist, multi-cultural bona fides.
O'Reilly should either get in formed or STFU. It's as bad as people who know nothing about issues or candidates being given a ballot - they do a lot of damage to innocent people.
I certainly agree that Nifong has made it hard to trust him. But I think it naturally will quiet down some this summer unless there are more bombshells about the first two lineups.
Nifongulation? Nifongerism?
Houston Baker resigned? I thought I had heard that before, but never saw an article confirming it.
Is it true he resigned? If so, that's a boon to Duke.
Column in Dallas Morning News...
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/viewpoints/stories/DN-dbrooks_31edi.ART.State.Edition1.1874382f.html
Too quick to throw stones at Duke U
DAVID BROOKS says he, among many, misjudged the lacrosse rape case
12:00 AM CDT on Wednesday, May 31, 2006
Witch hunts go in stages. First frenzy, when everybody damns the souls of people they don't know. Then confusion, as the first wave of contradictory facts comes in. Then deafening silence, as everybody studiously ignores the vicious slanders they uttered during the moment of maximum hysteria.
But now that we know more about the Duke University lacrosse team, simple decency requires that we return to that scandal, if only to correct the slurs that were uttered by millions of people, including me.
We know now that the Duke lacrosse players are not the dumb jocks they were portrayed to be. The team has a 100 percent graduation rate. Over the past five years, 146 members of the team made the Atlantic Coast Conference Academic Honor Roll, twice as many as any other ACC lacrosse team. According to the faculty report written by law professor James E. Coleman and others – which stands out as the one carefully researched and intellectually honest piece of work in this whole mess – "The lacrosse team's academic performance generally is one of the best among all Duke athletic teams."
We also know that the lacrosse players are not the amoral goons of popular legend. The current and former black members of the team are "extremely positive" about the support they received. The coach of the women's lacrosse team says relations between the men and women are respectful and supportive.
The male lacrosse players "volunteered for numerous community service activities," the report says, including reading programs, mentoring programs, the Special Olympics and Katrina relief.
We also know, as the Coleman report makes clear, that lacrosse team members drank heavily and that when they did, they behaved irresponsibly. Of the 14 cases of "alcohol-unsafe" behavior reported at Duke in the fall of 2005, three involved lacrosse players.
Team members were caught playing drinking games, publicly urinating and hitting golf balls at buildings. The report notes that their behavior was deplorable, but adds: "Their reported conduct has not involved fighting, sexual assault or harassment, or racist behavior."
We also know that the events of March 13 are anything but clear-cut. In the National Journal, Stuart Taylor has written devastating essays on the weak case of the prosecutor, Mike Nifong. Citing the lack of DNA evidence, the seemingly exculpatory digital photos and the testimony of a taxi driver, Mr. Taylor estimates that there is an 85 percent chance the players are innocent.
Now, with the distance of time, a few things are clear. There may have been a rape that night, but it didn't grow out of a culture of depravity, and it can't be explained by the sweeping sociological theories that were tossed about with such wild abandon.
Furthermore, when you look at the hyperpoliticized assertions made by Jesse Jackson, Houston Baker and dozens of activists and professors, you see how mighty social causes like the civil rights movement, feminism and the labor movement have spun off a series of narrow social prejudices among the privileged class.
The members of the lacrosse team were male, mostly white and mostly members of the suburban bourgeois middle class. For many on the tenured left, bashing people like that is all that's left of their once-great activism.
And maybe the saddest part of the whole reaction is not the rush to judgment at the start, but the unwillingness by so many to face the truth now that the more complicated reality has emerged.
David Brooks is a columnist for The New York Times.
I am now of the firm opinion, oh yes -- Kim started that taunting stuff.
Moved to Vanderbilt...
http://www.vanderbilt.edu/news/releases/2006/5/25/five-prominent-african-american-literature-scholars-to-move-to-vanderbilt-hortense-spillers-houston-baker-among-new-hires
It sounds like the defense is affirmatively claiming the report indicates no such injuries existed.
The defense is and has been on a roll. I like to think they'd be smart enough to not try to claim a report says something specifically when it's really a case of absence of information. There is a very big difference.
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.