Posted on 06/22/2006 2:23:47 AM PDT by abb
DURHAM -- District Attorney Mike Nifong plans to give defense lawyers at least 300 additional pages of information about the Duke University lacrosse rape case, adding to 1,298 pages of documentation surrendered previously.
Without describing their contents, Nifong said the new documents would be handed over during a preliminary hearing today for three recently indicted lacrosse players: Collin Finnerty, Reade Seligmann and David Evans.
The three are accused of raping, sodomizing and restraining an exotic dancer in a bathroom during an off-campus party at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd. in mid-March.
All are free under $400,000 bonds as they await a trial that, according to Nifong, might begin next spring.
None is expected to attend today's hearing.
In addition to a transfer of documents, the hearing will include a request from Seligmann's lawyers that his bond be lowered to roughly one-tenth its current level. The lawyers filed an affidavit in support of that request Wednesday.
Signed by Philip Seligmann, the defendant's father, the affidavit said that Seligmann had been recruited by every Ivy League university to play football or lacrosse, and that he accepted a 90-percent scholarship to be on the Duke lacrosse team.
"This case has taken an unbelievable and horrendous emotional toll on all my family, especially my wife," the elder Seligmann wrote. "We are committed as a family, along with Reade, to do everything necessary to restore our good name."
According to the affidavit, Seligmann's bail money was provided by a family friend whose "loss of income is substantial" as a result.
In a related matter, the News and Observer Publishing Co. moved Wednesday to make public certain documents -- reportedly pertaining to the alleged rape victim's medical records -- that were filed by defense lawyers under seal.
"In this case, the fact that there are charges of sexual assault is unfortunate and controversial -- either because a woman has been sexually violated or because the defendants have been wrongfully accused -- but neither is a justification for sealing a court proceeding," a lawyer for the newspaper wrote.
The lawyer, Hugh Stevens, also said the sealed documents raised questions about Nifong's handling of the case. He said that when the conduct of public officials is at issue, it is an added reason for making the pertinent files public.
Meanwhile, several defense lawyers predicted Wednesday that Nifong's latest 300-plus pages of documentation would do little to help him, since earlier paperwork -- in their view -- was more beneficial to the defense than the prosecution.
For example, attorneys Joe Cheshire and Brad Bannon have said the earlier documents showed a "very significant and disturbing deficiency" in Nifong's evidence.
Specifically, there were indications that Nifong began making public statements about the accuser's medical records even before they were in his possession, according to the two lawyers, who represent Evans.
Cheshire and Bannon said the District Attorney's Office subpoenaed the accuser's medical files from Duke Hospital on March 20 -- six days after the alleged rape.
However, the files were not printed out in compliance with the subpoena until March 30, and Police Investigator Benjamin Himan didn't pick them up until April 5, Cheshire and Bannon wrote in court paperwork last week.
But the lawyers said Nifong told a local television station on March 27 that he had no doubt the exotic dancer was raped, based on a "personal review" of her medical records. They quoted the district attorney as saying, "My reading of the report of the emergency room nurse would indicate that some type of sexual assault did in fact take place."
Citing the 1,298 pages of documentation given them by Nifong earlier, various defense lawyers also have contended there were numerous inconsistencies in the accuser's version of events, along with unacceptable omissions in a sworn affidavit prepared by police. The affidavit was used by Himan to obtain judicial permission for his evidence-gathering efforts.
Among other things, Himan failed to mention that a co-dancer had described the rape allegation as "a crock," even though she was with the accuser for all but about five minutes on the night in question, according to defense lawyers.
Nifong has bristled at that and other defense characterizations of his evidence, while attacking the national press corps for -- in his opinion -- blindly reporting the characterizations without checking their accuracy.
"Is anyone surprised that the defense attorneys are spinning this case in such a way that things do not look good for the prosecution?" Nifong wrote in an e-mail to Newsweek magazine last week.
"Their job, after all, is to create reasonable doubt, a task made all the easier by an uncritical national press corps desperate for any reportable detail, regardless of its veracity," the district attorney said.
The e-mail traffic was made public by Nifong on Monday.
URL for this article: http://www.herald-sun.com/durham/4-746370.html
Except that:
1) I would not be surprised if at least one of the victims, er defendants, in this case is a Dem.
2) I despise labels and boxes. I think it limits our ability to see people clearly and clearly divides us, which limits our ability to effect change. I would think most Dems actually aren't of the liberal wacko genre. That's why I used the term "grass roots."
3) You are correct, it is an "American" issue. I'm not sure how to get the attention of those that matter, or even "who" they might be.
Someone on another forum said Susan Filan has flipped again, and said on Abrams today she thinks Nifong has a strong case that the jury may accept.
Did anyone see that?
IMHO, Nifong's case is looking weaker every day.
There isn't anyway our D.A. would have let Himan appear in such duds. It's called respect for the court.
Thanks to everyone who live-blogged; I'd have missed out otherwise. . .
(and probably be feeling a lot better than I am right now after seeing Durham justice at work. . .)
Telling stories must run in the family.
The only part I heard was Susan commenting that everyone acted gentlemanly in court and that Nifong seemed confident and sure of his case.
They know they are being watched and I thought the judge was reasonable if still too believing in Nifong.
BTW, anyone who believes at hooker turned down $2,000,000 is dreaming.
Why were you so quick to assume the article was correct?
Especially one that has as many versions as this one.
Yeah, Susan Filan, GUEST on Abrams report (6-22-06) now thinks there may be something there.
What a F*(**(EE IDIOT!
She has seen the entire disovery file and Abrams has seen the entire DNA report, yet after the Judge and Nifongs demeanor - she has changed her tune.
She said the seriousness of the case means that it is likely Nifong has more.
How can these people be on Television? We are screwed as the American republic. I have ZERO respect for Susan Filan. Monday, Tues, Wednesday she is scared for our country because of this prosecution. THURSDAY - she really thinks Nifong may have much more.
I, for one, am to change the channel when I see Filan.
I wonder if letters from her fellow feminists caused her to move positions?
On Abrams all 4 guests agreed that NIFONG will NEVER drop the case.
They all agreed that NIFONG will do everything in his power to see this adjudicated. 4 Guests plus 1 host agreed the thing is going to trial.
I hope no one holds out any hope that any Durham Judge is going to seriously condsider the evidence.
Like, Long-time Durham Legal insider Woody Vann, said if he drops this case, there will be hell to pay in the black community. The Judges don't want hell to pay either. Plus, they're all cozy with Nifong.
Because Cash Michaels said so \sarcasm
This just in...
http://www.newsobserver.com/1185/story/453433.html
You never know when the bluster is just before the end. Nifong wants a way out. He has to find one. He was much different today.
So the question becomes how do those of us who see this sham for what it is make things turn?
Durham is corrupt to the core. Anyone with 1/2 brain knows that. Someone in Durham knows how these boys are being railroaded.
Someone inside the court system has to turn. But how? I cannot blame anyone for being afraid to come forward. I would be very scared. Waiting for someone to turn because it is the right thing to do is like waiting to win the lottery. It ain't gonna happen.
So how to put pressure on Durham to get someone to stand up, take notice & take action? Can it even be done?
in that teeny bathroom?
I would love to know what the "word on the street" is re: this case.
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.