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 ...
"sex workers/strippers/hookers"
Do they mean dancers?
Remember Judge Ito?
Assuming she dialed (919) 490-8444, why would the AV call a land line at 12:26 AM? Could it be a pager? (Obviously, not a call for help the N & O questions.)
Centerfold
2000 Bivins St
Durham, NC 27707-1404
(919) 490-8444
Find Neighbors
Save/Customize Listing in:
My AddressBook or Outlook
Map this location
Area Code Map
E-mail Listing to Friends
Local Time: 11:22 a.m.
Eastern Daylight Time
Phone Details
Line Type: Land Line
Provider: Verizon
http://www.whitepages.com/10001/search/ReversePhone?phone=919-490-8444
From your H-S opinion link:
Questions of character
Over the past few days, letters have offered support for Mike Nifong's character and integrity. While it may be true that he has conducted himself with character and integrity throughout his career as a prosecutor, his conduct in several instances through the course of the Duke drama belies that description. Does a man of integrity defend his words and actions by claiming to not be bound by the ethics rules of his profession prior to the time of indictment (as he did in his email to Susannah Meadows of Newsweek) when the very rules he cites appear to indicate otherwise? Does a man of character make public the private email and cell phone number of a journalist he has taken issue with as Nifong did? Does a man of integrity and character subject a woman to an obscenity laced, verbally abusive tirade as Nifong did to Kerry Sutton? Does a man of integrity or character instruct law enforcement officers to conduct a lineup in a manner that violates both the police department's own policies and the State of North Carolina's recommendations designed to protect the innocent? Does a man of integrity incite community outrage and racial strife by issuing statements such as: "The circumstances of the rape indicated a deep racial motivation for some of the things that were done." Does a man of integrity hint to a national publication that toxicology tests would indicate the presence of a date rape drug when he knows that no tests of the sort exist?
PHILIP WOOD
Durham
July 10, 2006
Sorry if this is a repost.
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/longisland/ny-liduke124814326jul12,0,4766953.story?coll=ny-linews-headlines
Quiet before the storm
Durham DA, focus of Duke controversy, remains tight-lipped as defense tries to undermine his case
BY JOSEPH MALLIA
Newsday Staff Writer
July 12, 2006
(excerpts)
Nifong, though, remains confident in the case, according to Durham Mayor Bill Bell.
"It would surprise me if he were not to proceed with the trial," Bell, 64, said. He believes Nifong's support in the city - with a population that is 46 percent white and 44 percent black - is steady.
"I just had a conversation with Mike and he feels strongly about the case," Bell said. "He wants to see it in the court. "
He said many in Durham remained disquieted by the accusations by a black woman, a student at nearby North Carolina Central University, that she was raped by three white men after dancing for hire at an off-campus Duke lacrosse team party the night of March 13-14, the mayor said. They want to see the facts of the case presented in a courtroom, he said.
Weak evidence?
Few who know Nifong well believe he'll be deterred by defense lawyers' public attacks on nearly 2,000 pages of evidence released so far, said Kerry Sutton, a Durham lawyer, who represents a player not accused in the case.
"I spoke with him a couple of days ago, and he is as confident as ever," said Sutton, whose client is Duke lacrosse player Matt Zash, of Massapequa.
(snip)
But Sutton sees the case as doomed by the mounting disclosures of apparently weak evidence. "I wish I knew what he's thinking," said Sutton. "I'd say I'm puzzled and disappointed. "
(snip)
One of Nifong's opponents in the Democratic primary campaign for district attorney in May, Durham lawyer Keith Bishop, said Nifong's public comments about the case may have had an effect on black voters.
"He got a majority of the African-American vote ... He found an approach to the black community," said Bishop, the only black candidate among the three on the May primary ballot. "In this town you generally need votes from both white and black to win. "
Bishop said that despite the weaknesses in the case, there's no reason to think Nifong is not doing his duty as a public servant and prosecutor.
"He's hard-nosed," Bishop said. "But he's honest and trustworthy. "
(snip)
But in an e-mail to Newsweek last month, he suggested that there may be damaging evidence that defense lawyers have failed to publicize. "What other documents did they not show you? " Nifong asked.
Nifong continued, "Is anyone surprised that the defense attorneys are spinning this case in such a way that things do not look good for the prosecution? Their job, after all, is to create reasonable doubt ... "
Nifong added, "The only people I have to persuade will be the twelve sitting on the jury, and if you want to know how I am going to do that, you will need to attend the trial."
///
Note to Newsday:
Abrmas of MSNBC has seen ALL pages of discovery.
Please add me to the Duke LAX ping list.
Many thanks
I was really disappointed when the Abrams report went off. I thought maybe the Tucker Carlson show would pick up where Abrams left off, but it is an entirely different format.
Any of the above or they could have bought them like some group did with Wesley Clark's cell phone records. Who am I kidding, reporters now days are to lazy to do their own footwork. Someone gave them to them. I say a defense attorneys or a mole in the police department with a conscience.
" There is nothing in evidence reviewed by The N&O or filed in court to indicate that Durham police investigated the call made at 12:26 a.m."
"That, to me, is simply astounding.."
That's the big story from the article.
The stench from the corrupt Durham legal system gets stronger every day.
There could be a Pultizer for the N&O if they did an investigative expose on the corruption in Durham.
But, apparently they lack the ability and the will.
Damn, we use AARP towing. Who knew?
Well, I doubt that DPD or their master, Nifong, reviewed it, but I also don't believe the N&O could find their faces with a mirror so that statement doesn't tell me much except that the defense hasn't yet made public all the information about the calls. The statement makes it sound like DPD's failure to investigate the calls was simply an oversight rather than by design. Nifong didn't want the phone records made available to the defense. Now, why might that be? I contend that the DPD DID look at the phone to see the times of the last calls made and made no report on it except a verbal report to Nifong, and this was probably done by Himan or one of the other DPD thugs central to this sham.
AARP? LOL!
But why not make some sort of attribution? That's SOP. It's the omission of any reference to a source that caught my attention. Not even an "undisclosed source" line.
That's why I don't think N&O got the records from the defense. The paper would have said it had. This looks mighty suspicious. I'm not sure exactly what I suspect, but this just doesn't seem right.
And what's funny as hell is that Melanie Sill insisted to me that they would not print, as did the Durham H-S, the fact that the strippers may have started the racial taunting because it could not be "properly sourced". The H-S sourced it as "according to defense lawyers". Ms. Sill said that the N&O rarely uses "anonymous" sources. Like the defense lawyers are not widely known. Actually they did use anonymous defense sources in their Easter Sunday puff piece on CGM. But whatever.
The N&O will say that their source in this case is the actual document without reference to who actually gave it to them.
Can you add me to the Duke ping list please? Thanks!
No lawyer worth his salt would proceed toward a criminal trial of his client in an effort to expose corruption or establish grounds for a civil suit if a viable maneuver to remove the client from criminal jeapordy is available. It would be highly unethical and would not serve justice nor the essential purpose for which the attorney was hired.
Are the records part of a defense motion that isn't out yet? The defense may not want it known that they are about to make the motion.
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.