Posted on 06/12/2006 4:27:33 AM PDT by Perdogg
DURHAM, N.C., June 9 — When a woman hired to dance at a Duke University lacrosse team party claimed that members of the team raped her, Michael B. Nifong, the district attorney for Durham County, responded with an aggressive, unflinching and very public investigation.
"There's no doubt in my mind that she was raped and assaulted at this location," Mr. Nifong said on national television after the case surfaced in March. Mr. Nifong called other lacrosse players "hooligans" who had aided, abetted or covered up for the rapists. Local police officers seemed equally certain that they had a horrific crime to solve.
But in the intervening months, the case has come to appear far less robust. Three players have been indicted, but evidence that has surfaced, much of it turned over to defense lawyers by prosecutors and then filed in court with defense motions, has thrown the woman's claims into doubt. Mr. Nifong, so vocal at first, has refused to speak publicly about the case since the beginning of April.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
I found a problem with Jarriel Johnson's statement.
As bad as the sex was that he reported, and all their consecutive afternoon to morning Johns, it may be worse.
I posted earlier (maybe 2 days ago) how Jarriel was leaving things out of his statement (that he became angry with her, and what caused him to become angry with her) and he also never mentions getting any booze or stopping to buy cigarettes (none, but he does mentions eating Chinese?).
I read his statement carefully. There's a problem.
He starts his chronologically ordered statement with the activities of Friday, March 10th at 1:50 pm.
If you follow through that statement (and he leaves no room for this kind of gap), it ends on Sunday. His statement ends on Sunday, not by him dating it or indicating that, but by his working his way through the days without interruption (took AV home and then I drove to my parents and got there at 7:00 am and went to sleep, Crystal called me at 2:00 pm that afternoon and ask me to come pick her up ; kinda thing). Well, he ends his statement (by following his exact description) on Sunday, BUT he's describing the day of the party, which was Monday night. His statement puts him squarely on Sunday, but he's describing Monday's events. He calls her that night (when his cell phone doesn't work) and tells her that he can't drive her. She tells him that she'll get Brian Taylor to drive her. He then states that early the next morning, the Escort Agency calls him and asks him if he drove Crystal. He says No, and they hang up on him.
THIS MEANS AN ENTIRE DAY's WORTH OF SEX IS LEFT OUT OF HIS STATEMENT - and it's a weekend day too - a bumper crop for activity.
Reading the Motions, in my opinion, this was not lost on the Defense team, and they're not happy about it:
The motion says:
On March 21, 2006 ( AV ) reported to the Durham Police Station with her "driver," Jarriel Johnson, to pick up her belongings. On this date, ( AV ) told Investigtor Himan that prior to going to 610 N. Buchanan, she earlier had a function at a hotel room with a couple where she performed using a vibrator, which clearly could have caused sign or symptoms of vaginal penetration. Had investigator Himan BOTHERED to interview Jarriel Johnson at that time (a task the Durham Police Department DID NOT ACCOMPLISH UNTIL April 6, 2006), he would have discovered sooner that ( AV ) was involved in some sexual manner with AT LEAST FOUR different men ......
Back to my comments, If interviewed earlier (and he was at the station) Jarriel Johnson may have gave the defense another 12-16 hours of Crystal meeting paying customers in hotel rooms.
They certainly would NOT have wanted to interview a witness that would help their cause nearly a month after the events.
So they get their people interviewed early when memories are fresh. And they get around to people with information regarding her sexual activities nearly a month later.
Remember on March 21, the DA and investigators knew she was doing hotel jobs, knew she had a driver, and knew she had an earlier paying job at a hotel - and they had the man they (the Police) referred to as as her driver sitting in front of them. Those facts taken together, make it hard to explain why they waited almost 3 weeks to get a statement from Jarriel Johnson
marked
(Gotta clean the house-had 4 15 year old boys spending the night. Even when they try to pick up after themselves there is still much work to do,LOL)
Good catch. The probabilities of the AV ever taking the witness stand have to be less than the US winning the World Cup!
What the AV was doing prior to the LAX party is clearly an important piece in the puzzle. I suspect that the defense team has been diligently identifying all the Johns involved.
This case screams "prosecutorial misconduct". The question is who is going to call Nifong on it.
See post #100.
DURHAM - A prominent Duke University law professor says District Attorney Mike Nifong should ask the state attorney general for a special prosecutor to handle the rape case against the three lacrosse players.
James Coleman, the Duke law professor who led the university's investigation of the lacrosse program, says evidence presented by defense lawyers has made him question whether District Attorney Mike Nifong is too personally invested in the case.
The general silence of the Duke Law School faculty has been stunning. The failure of the talk shows to get any of them to open up is also bemusing. It seems to me that this faculty, save apparently Prof. Coleman, together with the Duke Administration have been party to this travesty.
Parents should vote with their wallets and lets these guys twist slowly in the wind. It would be great to find a reliable source of information on acceptance rates at all the Duke schools.
Re: Duke Law School Faculty... All you have to know is who signs their paychecks. That's who's side they'll be on...
Durham lead fear widens
More tests turn up tainted water
Michael Biesecker, Staff Writer
DURHAM - Public health officials are concerned that Durham may have a citywide problem with its drinking water. Samples taken from 11 homes near where a child was poisoned show levels of lead higher than federal safety standards allow (snip)
Subsequent tests found lead in the tap water of the child's former home at 837 parts per billion -- nearly 60 times the federal limit of 15 parts per billion.
(snip)
A May 19 media release said the city had "confirmed that elevated levels of lead detected in the water is an isolated incident and confined to the pipes/plumbing in the Penrith apartment complex where the child formerly lived."
Asked about that declaration of safety Monday, Adcock said further testing is NOW "prudent."
"Eleven out of 19 is concerning," he conceded. "If it were my house, yes, I would be concerned."
http://www.newsobserver.com/150/story/450089.html
Lead in the Tap Water, Mercury exposure, hostages at Day Care Centers, Police shot someone last night, but the City Manager (Patrick Baker) is tied up micromanaging this Duke Case. It doesn't smell right, doesn't smell right at all.
Holy Crap! The people at the News & Observer are boiliing over. They have public opinion blogs on their site and they are very liberal is allowing people to post and they have strict policies about removing posts, etc - it has to meet certain established criteria.
I haven't seen them enter the fray over opinions, the stuff stays up 5 days and is taken down kind of thing.
I saw this today from the EDITOR of the News and Observer, Melanie Sill:
comment from: Melanie Sill [Member] · http://www.newsobserver.com
06/12/06 at 09:21
Thanks for the comments. Rather than my spending time moving comments from the post below, those interested in seeing other comments on Duke posted over the weekend can read the post on our new LOCAL OBITUARIES feature below. And if you have anything to say on the new "Life Stories" column, which debuted Sunday, please do.
WOW! Looks like an admission the story is DEAD once it didn't match the their Template. This, from an otherwise accomodating group (regarding the blogs).
Here's another problem with Jarriel's statement compared to the AV's post event declaration.
Remember the DNA test that came back positive, but not for a Duke player. She was asked who it could possibley be and she gives up her drivers and her BF as those with whom she had unprotected sex iimmediately prior to the party.
We even have admissions from Brian and Jarriel that they had sex with her, one on Sunday and one on Monday.
But if you look at the added paragraph of Jarriel's statement, he says he reviewed his date book and her really didn't have sex with the AV the weekend b4 the party, he had done her the previous week end.
I don't think the cops had the second DNA results when Jarriel made that statement, did they? I wonder if the AV knew he denied having sex with her and if she hung him out to dry by claiming they did? I wonder if Jarriel knew that the AV had given him up as a donor before he revised his written statement?.... ouch....
His statement date was 4/6, so the 2nd round came later - as you said.
See Post 108 and all the problems Durham has and see the comments about PATRICK BAKER at the bottom.
If there's anyone out there that doesn't think there's something else going on in this case, some corruption, ulterior motives, duplicity, or worse:
"Baker said he has never received any indication that the woman said she was raped by 20 men OR THAT SHE CHANGED HER STORY.
"I have no idea where that came from," Baker said. "I've had a lot of conversations with the investigators in this case and with officials at Duke, and at no time did anyone indicate the accuser changed her story. If that were true, I'm sure someone would have mentioned it to me.""
http://www.newsobserver.com/122/story/437920.html
Baker is involved in this thing, and Police Chief Chalmers has been quoted in the paper involved in other cases during this time period. Chalmers has not be away or on leave the whole time, unless he's giving quotes on crimes - and keeping current on them while on leave.
Popping in & out while I get some work done.
Jarriel does not have a record.
Remember the DNA: "known to the Durham Police Dept" per Cheshire..
Yes, the boyfriend is Murchison, who is known, and the DNA belongs to him.
But, Jarriel is having sex with her in his statement and I don't think anyone believes that Taylor didn't have some type of Sex with her. If Taylor is telling the truth about time of arrival, etc. - and we accept that she performed for a couple earlier that night, then Murchison may have drove her to that vibrator - couple thing. Murchison could have had sex with her after that, before, (or during).
Remember the Mapquest, one Matthew Murchison lives 2 minutes (120 seconds) away from the AV's residence. He could've popped over any time, and I'm sure he did.
Or popped in (sometimes I am so juvenile, LOL!)
When you're done cleaning (and cracking! lol), check out
POST 112
The guy that drives a Range Rover and oversees the city water.
I don't blame him. If I had committed as much prosecutor misconduct as he has up to now, I would be invoking my Fifth Amendment rights too.
At least not under that name...All the others use aliases, why wouldn't he? Especially since he is in the exotic dancer/escort/prostitution industry?
Patrick Baker talking sh!% regarding Duke's report that the accuser was changing her story:
""I find it ODD the state of mind of the whole Police Department appears to have been accepted with no effort to verify that was indeed the case," Baker said."
http://www.newsobserver.com/122/story/437920.html
No Effort to Verify: So, if they would've asked Baker, he would've told them the accuser did NOT change her story.
He's trying to control the story.
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.