[darbymcgill]

However, a reference to 20 assailants was made in a Duke police report on March 14.

The March 14th Duke Police report is by Christopher Day.. He is the officer who overheard a DPD officer talking about the case on the phone. He has no first hand knowledge that 20 assailants were claimed. We'll have to do better than that...

If there is a 20 person assault claim from someone who heard it from the AV's mouth, I haven't seen it yet. I'm not saying there isn't one, I just haven't seen or heard of one.

[GAgal]

After the confrontation yesterday, some reporters went to Linwood Wilson's office to ask him questions. Then, before Cheshire produced the police report of her claiming 5 attackers, Wilson was adament that her story had not changed. Now that he's been caught in a proven lie, he's backtracking with the "I was only disputing the 20 attackers statement." Most thinking people will see his excuse for what it is.

[Mike Nifong]

Linwood says that she did NOT change her story.

That was his contention yesterday.

Every statement and follow up he makes is more fodder for the Defense. It will also be in motions for a Change of Venue, which I'm sure the Durham judges will quash, but it'll be in the papers and may help to get the attention of the MSM.

[JLS]

We'll have to do better than that...

I don't think so. Why do we have to do better than a police officer repeating what another police officer said?

That is in fact the type of evidence, a police officer repeating what other police officers told him Mangum said, that Nifong presented to the grand jury.

BTW, this actually better than the grand jury testimony. The grand jury testimony might not all be admissible at trial as hearsay. But statements against your own interest, ie changing your story, is an exception to the hearsay rule. Now this report of 20 is not admissible against her later statements as the Duke officer did not hear it from her. But it is admissible against the DPD claiming she did not change her story.