Posted on 07/12/2006 1:52:14 AM PDT by abb
Phone use spans time of team party
In the middle of a Duke lacrosse party where a dancer said she was gang-raped for 30 minutes, a call was placed from her cell phone to a Durham escort service.
The 12:26 a.m. call to the service, Centerfold, lasted one minute, according to a copy of her cell phone bill reviewed by The News & Observer. It is unclear whether the call was a request for another job, a cry for help or something else, or even whether the accuser made the call herself.
But the accuser's phone records add some details to the chronology of the March 13 party, a drunken spring break bash that spawned a national controversy.
Neither prosecutors nor defense lawyers would discuss the phone records Tuesday. Neither the accuser nor a second dancer at the party could be reached, nor could representatives of Centerfold. Police Chief Steve Chalmers was out of town; his spokeswoman said he would not discuss the case.
Three players have been charged with first-degree rape, sexual offense and kidnapping: Reade Seligmann, 20, of Essex Fells, N.J.; Collin Finnerty, 19, of Garden City, N.Y.; and Dave Evans, 23, of Bethesda, Md. Lawyers for the players have proclaimed their clients' innocence and said no rape or sex occurred at the house at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd.
District Attorney Mike Nifong, whose handling of the case has undergone national scrutiny, has been adamant that the woman was raped at the party. Nifong has not given a precise timeline of when he thinks an assault occurred.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsobserver.com ...
"Where did I read (or I thought I did) that somewhere the Police said they showed her pictures of people they believed were at the party."
That's in the line-up transcript.
"I sat down with the victim in the briefing room at the conference table and explained to her we were going to sit in the far side of the room at the desk and look at people we had reason to believe attended the party. I told her when she sat down she would only be able to see a screen on the monitor showing the introduction of the presentation. I explained to her during the time she was looking at each picture she should merely tell me who she remembered seeing at the party. I explained to her it was very important not to say anyone was present at the party if they were not, or say they were if she could not recall they were present. I also told her it was important to tell us if she recalled seeing a particular individual at the party and to let us know how she recalled seeing them from that night, what they were doing, and any type of interactions she may have had or observed with a particular individual."
http://www.wral.com/slideshow/news/9141851/detail.html?qs=;s=2;w=480
IN REF TO THE LINEUP:
You know what I think that is? The reason for the squirrely wording that JLS pointed out?
I think it was worded like that to minimize RISK. If the AV didn't ID anyone - then Nifong would NOT have produced the information - and, if caught he would've contended it was not an ID lineup. He was hedging his bets, IMO.
The wording, as JLS pointed out, is describing an attempt to ID the attendees of the Party. This was 3 weeks after the crime and they still don't know who was at the party? Unlikely. I think Nifong wanted an ID Lineup WITHOUT having an ID lineup. The weasel words were constructed so that Nifong could contend that No ID Lineup was conducted. This also explains why the City Manager, the Police Chief, Nifong and others have said that they did NOT violate any procedures in regard to the lineup.
The problem for Nifong - is that he didn't follow it up with another lineup that adhered to the rules governing such procedures. Or did they - and we don't know about it? Wasn't there a report saying there was 6 lineups in all?
If Nifong didn't do a proper lineup with fillers - executed by someone not in the investigation - then I don't see how his argument holds water.
If a guy goes to the Police station to talk about the parking problem in his neighborhood and vandalism to his car - and he changes the suspect and tells the Police her murdered someone 2 years ago. The Traffic cop asks him a couple questions about it - and then the guy asks for a lawyer saying he doens't want to answer any more questions.
Would it be a valid defense to say that he was speaking to a traffic cop in a meeting to discuss parking issues?
Good Catch JLS! There is no doubt that Nifong is claiming this wasn't a Line-up.
"Nifong suggested.... INSTEAD of doing a lineup or photographic array, we would MERELY ask the victim to look at each picture and see if she recalled seeing the individuals at the party."
If you remember when Crystal came to the station and asked for her possessions back - Himan brought her in and started asking her questions. He asked her if she could describe the suspects further and she said that she could NOT.
IMO, Nifong did NOT want to risk her NOT picking anyone in the lineup - that would be the death knell to the case.
IMO, Nifong couched this so he'd have cover to claim that it was NOT a lineup and he'd never disclose the occurance if she was unable to pick out anyone. Since she did what they asked and she picked out some guys - they use the same argument to explain the non-adherence to mandated and established policies. It wasn't an ID lineup - so we weren't required to follow those procedures. The idea was suggested by Nifong too.
I think Nifong would have to follow this up with a ID lineup done correctly and according to procedure for his argument to be worth anything.
Is there time for another lineup?
Publicized lineup . . . ................. 4/4
First DNA results; back on ......4/10
Election Forum at NCCU ...... 4/11
Nifong signs two indictments.....4/12
Pinging the DukeLax List with New Information...
Durham police chief will retire in 2007
http://www.newsobserver.com/100/story/460506.html
NCCU's ex-chief leaves Ky. job
http://www.newsobserver.com/100/story/460512.html
Duke isn't lax in search
http://www.newsobserver.com/102/story/460474.html
Ex-NCCU chief resigns at University of Kentucky
http://www.heraldsun.com/durham/4-752464.html
Thanks abb !
Barf Alert. And they probably can't even see the irony...
Cry of innocence
http://www.newsobserver.com/579/story/459901.html
Thank you.
Reviewing the transcript of the 4/4 Lineup -
This what the Defense is going to say, Sgt Gottlieb
displayed 46 images of LAX players - and he NEVER ONCE asked - 'Was he at the Party?'
He did ask, however, around 40 times - Do you recognize him?
So, was this Lineup to Identify whom was at Party OR to Identify the assailants?
Nifong has to lose on this - unless it's one of THOSE Judges.
Abb,
Yeah. The left arm says the DNA doesn't matter and the Right says that it's the key to unlocking cases.
Where's the consistency on the Media's part with the Fresno Football team and the 11 year old girl!
Now he's off the porch trying to run with the big dogs, and he'll be eaten alive.
If the wanted to find out whom attended the party - why were only 46 white LAX players' images shown to Crystal?
I heard with me own ears that the Black Player had attended the party - but didn't stay to the very end.
Here in the News & Obswerver, the black player's father DECLINED to say if his son was at the party:
"Even though my son was never implicated, he's a part of that team and feels the stress and strain as well," said Sherwood, 52, an elementary school teacher who lives in Freeport, N.Y.
Sherwood, who played goalie for the Duke lacrosse team from 1972 to 1975 and thinks he was the school's first black lacrosse player and assistant coach, has DECLINED TO SAY whether his son was at the March 13 team party. He said his son has felt unique pressure because both he and the accuser are black."
Now to me, if he didn't attend the party - there would be no reason to DECLINE to answer the question. Early on, I distinctly remember hearing one of the Cable shows that he had attended, but was one of the players that left before the women departed.
AND every single report (all 3 million) reported from that the Black player wasn't tested because the woman stated her attackers were white - not because he didn't attend the party.
And I've read about 3 places where Nifong and Himan acknowledge there were at least 2 NON-Lacrosse players at the Party.
So, why weren't, at a minimum, these 3 guys in the lineup if the goal was to determine whom really attended the party?
One source on Non-players at Party:
"Defense attorneys also noted that two people at the party who aren't on the lacrosse team weren't included in the photos shown to the woman. Those two people also have never submitted DNA samples to authorities for testing, attorneys said."
http://www.nbc17.com/news/8885627/detail.html
For those who may have missed earlier...
Durham police chief will retire in 2007
Low profile during inquiry drew heat
Samiha Khanna, Staff Writer
DURHAM - After 3 1/2 years as Durham's police chief, Steve Chalmers plans to leave his post in another 18 months.
Chalmers, who has remained stoic during criticism over his low profile during the Duke lacrosse team rape investigation, said in a recent interview that his last days leading the police force will be in December 2007.
City officials said Thursday that they knew Chalmers, 52, was nearing retirement but that he had not previously given them a timeline. He has been a Durham officer since 1975.
"I've been working real hard to put some things in place," Chalmers said. "We've gone through what I consider to be my final reorganization [of the department]."
In the past year, Chalmers has revamped the top-level administration of the department, including naming a deputy chief, a position that had long been absent. Chalmers also reorganized management of community and grant-funded programs. Under his leadership, membership in such crime-prevention groups as Partners Against Crime and the Citizen Observer Patrol, an intensive neighborhood watch, has flourished.
Nearly 30 officers have been allocated to attack the city's gang problem by working on special units, and the department has begun to offer salary bonuses to officers who speak a second language, to recruit police who can work with residents who don't speak English.
But Chalmers has remained quiet over the past four months as defense lawyers and critics repeatedly questioned the lacrosse rape investigation.
"It's that I made a conscious decision that I would not ... try this case out in the media," Chalmers said. "Anyone responding to 'You did this wrong,' or 'Why did you do this?' No. We're not going to talk about it."
As District Attorney Mike Nifong began a series of national media appearances in March, Chalmers was in and out of the office, tending to his gravely ill mother.
The chief later was notably absent at a Durham City Council work session, in which council members asked to be briefed about the case.
Officials instead were briefed on behalf of Chalmers by City Manager Patrick Baker, who said the chief had been in regular contact.
"I was a little surprised with [the chief's] absence, but I felt the city manager did a good job in presenting the police and the city's response," council member Eugene Brown said Thursday.
Council members Diane Catotti and Howard Clement said they support Chalmers' reservations.
"It was wise on the chief's part to refrain from getting into the fray," Clement said.
Chalmers' lack of public commentary on the rape investigation contrasts with his history of addressing the community during other trying incidents.
When four young men were killed inside a South Durham townhouse in November, the chief publicly assured the community that officers were working double-time on the case, though arrests are still to come.
When homicides mounted at the end of 2005, Chalmers was informing the public on his department's efforts to address gang and youth violence.
But the public's safety is not the concern with the Duke case, he said.
"We had no one going around randomly shooting people; we had no homicides," Chalmers said. "We had one group of people who decided they were going to have a party. ... The community has never been concerned about public safety as it relates to [the Duke case.]"
Some residents have disagreed.
"[The chief is] the mouthpiece of the Police Department, and he does need to be visible in a case like this ... regardless of how much he can say," Lisa Brockmeier, who lives near the Trinity Park house where the rape allegedly took place, said in April.
Staff writer Samiha Khanna can be reached at 956-2468 or skhanna@newsobserver.com.
There are several striking differences between the two cases. First, the Fresno case involves an 11 year-old girl who lacks the guile, deviousness and malevolence that a 28 year-old is capable of. Second, Nifong is desperate to be elected in a jurisdiction that is 45% black while the Fresno County DA is a very popular shoe-in for re-election. She doesn't "need" the case. Third, there's no apparent motive for this child to lie, as there clearly is with the alleged victim in the Duke case.
Mt approach to the two cases, or any other case, doesn't vary, but I've examined enough of them to recognize an anomaly when I see one, and that's what the Duke case is.
As for the difference in media attention, the answer is obvious.
Something is very, very wrong inside Durham. Chalmers knows it.
Agreed.
Nifong stated he will attempt to try them separately. If he succeeds in that effort, it is very bad for the boys. logic dictates that they should be tried together since Nifong alleges they acted in concert and simultaneously - it was all one act that they assisted each other in, according to what Nifong has said previously. Nevertheless, he will attempt to try them separately, giving him three bites at the apple if he succeeds.
In view of the Duke case, this is a major "gag me" story. And you're right - it is replete with ironies.
Very astute point.
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.