Posted on 08/09/2006 9:18:34 AM PDT by flixxx
There is a scandal now brewing in the Duke lacrosse case. I'm not even sure whether to call it a rape case anymore. You're about to see why.
Consistent with the procedure in North Carolina and elsewhere, the prosecution has to turn over its evidence to the defense to prepare for trial. There's still more to come, but the bulk of what has been turned over is troubling enough. It suggests a failure to follow standard procedure that is rather mind-boggling.
Consider: The District Attorney went to the grand jury for an indictment before he even performed DNA tests (it turns out there was no match). One of the investigators was still collecting prices for DNA tests while the DA was giving interviews. He announced to the press that he was certain that a rape had taken place before excluding the possibility that the woman's physical symptoms were the result of sex with another man (turns out she'd had sex with her boyfriend within the preceding 24 hours). They were still investigating the woman's whereabouts during the 24 hours leading up to the party, and they had already been to the grand jury. The prosecutor relied on a photographic identification procedure that reportedly violated the standards of his own department. If the discovery is any indication, his case is sitting on quicksand.
None of this means the woman is lying. But at the very least, standard procedure should have been to await the results of tests, and then, given the results, the inconsistencies in the woman's statements, the fact that at least one of the boys seems to have an airtight alibi, investigate further before indicting anyone.
Instead, the train had already left the station.
It doesn't matter anymore why the DA was so determined to indict. His critics will say it was just because he was thinking about his political career. His supporters will say he really believed her, and that a District Attorney has every right to be responsive to the community that elects him. My guess is he really did believe her, but it certainly didn't hurt that he needed to. And one thing is clear: He's not going to change his mind now.
That means this case is going to trial, unless a judge steps in to stop it, which is something that rarely happens.
And of this you can be sure: No good will come of it. Trials do not tend to be healing experiences. Sides dig in. Things get more contentious, not less. Tempers are bound to flare. Reliving the evening in living color is not likely to be pretty. Hearing the racial epithets again, rereading the e-mails, all of that will not improve race relations, even if it has nothing to do with whether a rape happened or not.
Even before that, there will be the questions of who serves on the jury and what counts as a jury of their peers. Shall we start counting how many minorities there are, how many "Duke" people, how many of "us" and how many of "them"?
If she takes the stand, she'll be slaughtered on cross.
If she doesn't, the prosecution doesn't have a chance.
No one will be convinced that the case was handled fairly.
If even one of the boys is convicted, there will be outrage in the Duke community.
If they're all acquitted, there will be outrage in the black community that three white boys got away with rape.
Conservatives will be outraged that three boys' lives were ruined because an ambitious prosecutor believed a lying "slut" (as in the nuts and sluts defense), which will be played to a fare-thee-well.
Victims rights advocates like me will be depressed because we will worry, rightly, about all the messages being sent to legitimate victims.
And what would have happened if the District Attorney had waited to go to the grand jury, followed the identification procedure, let the test results come in, found out about the boyfriend and investigated enough to learn that one of the suspects had an airtight alibi? He might have decided not to file charges at all, or not to file them against these three young men.
There are reasons you follow procedures. In general, they are there to spare outrage.
The testimony about "what she did" could be about performances and sexual activity. That would be a basis for finding out why she had vaginal swelling, and that it was not related to the previous day's activities.
That is not exactly correct. She also said she hit her head on a sink. She did not register that complaint at Duke. It happened after she left there. It probably happened around the time that she jumped out of the car so she could go to the bathroom. It was probably happening at that time. The door post of the car was probably the actual culprit.
Re: Re: Cash Back Thursday Morning Author: cashmichaels reply 2BJust:
--excerpt--
Here's the perspective from the AA community - we haven't trusted Nifong from the beginning, and beyond securing three indictments, he's shown US little else. But as an elected official, he maintains that he has evidence proving his case, yet unseen.
In my story coming out this afternoon (I'll peep this much since he said it publicly on my TV show Sunday), Durham Police Chief Chalmers was asked directly if he had confidence in his Duke case investigators and the evidence they have gathered.
Chief Chalmers said,"âOh certainly. Theyâve had my full support from the start. Theyâve had the full support of the city manager. As Iâve indicated, weâll have our day in court, and I think this is when we really need to step forth and basically reveal our investigation of what has taken place.â
So we have the DA, the police chief, the police chief speaking for his boss - the city manager. Plus, we have at least two conservative members of the Durham City Council who, if they didn't concur, would be putting pressure on their employee, the city manager, to have this thing scuttled some way, some how, because quiet as it's kept, Duke U scares people here.
So as damaging as the discovery evidence is to the crediblity of all involved in this case, key officials, as recently as this week, are saying we haven't seen everything yet.
While those of you can't understand why this case hasn't been dropped yet, the Black community is holding its breath, wondering if ALL of these officials are lying through their collective teeth, and why, unless they, in fact, do have something.
Defense attorneys (when they were talking to me recently) insist that based on their read, Nifong can't have anything, and lied from the very beginning.
The police chief, who ordinarily is no fool given the problems Durham clearly has, says wait and see.
As a journalist, I can't pull a "Dan Abrams" and declare this case over until authorities put it all out there, and they say they haven't, if we're to interpret Chalmers' remarks accurately.
So this isn't simply a matter of "supporting AV" for the Black community, because truth be told, there is palpable anger, particularly among older members of our community, about how she was earning her living. Make no mistake.
We are in a mode where, even critics like yourselves, are forced to watch this process play out, like it or not. Clearly, and I do document this in my story this week, from the beginning both Nifong and Durham PD told the public one thing, knowing what they were saying simply wasn't true.
http://forums.go.com/abclocal/WTVD/thread?threadID=126353
I believe is Nifong, when speaking to the officer had meant vaginal trauma he would have said it. The female officer would have probably laughed out loud at the suggestion.
Yet the AV is truthful? Mind boggling.
Heck at least Charlotte is doing more than chantng wait until the trial. I enjoyed your responses on the CTV thread. Here are mine:
1. Anytime a woman swears a complaint of rape, a crime was committed. Either she was raped or she filed a false sworn statement. So Osbourne is necessarily correct.
2. The taxis driver's trips to the Buchanan house were not important things to remember when he made them. He naturally has an imperfect memory. But it is backed up by objective evidence. Saying she is just a stripper is not evidence of rape so it does not matter who said it. [I guess I will have to read further in the thread to see if the claimed changes in the driver's statements are backed up by facts. ] [This is basically you answer in different words.] Men are not as concerned with hair color as women.
3. Tenderness in the breast and abdomin are also signs of PMS as women commentators on various shows have mentioned. [Did we get a link to this tenderness being found at Duke.] Is Charlotte confounding her condition at Duke and at UNC?
4. Why at this stage of this case would anyone believe ANYTHING from the application for a warrant. They have been caught lying on one. Why should we believe they did not on this warrant application?
5. They were removed because by this time the police and DA's office had revealed themselves as bad acters in this matter. The lacrosse players cooperated as long as the authorities were fair. When they decided not to be fair, then the information from the lacrosse players naturally dried up.
6. Well you have seen her arrival photos. How much clothing could she have lost? Perhaps, she lied to the police? [This is also me agreeing with your answer.]
7. Who knows why MSM people looking at photos saw something different than Charlotte. What she was actually wearing not press reports is what matters.
8. Mangum was wearing next to nothing. She did a strip show. Her hair was down but her clothing were not ripped or askew. Ergo she took the hair down and there was no struggle.
9. Strippers in the car, show over, Bissey turns to go inside his house and never sees what she almost hits backing up several hundred yards. Had he heard two cars colliding, he would have turned back I am sure.
10. Likely the yelling and name calling or someone tripping over him woke him up and he went to sleep someplace more comfortable.
As stated before, someone at Duke would have had to break federal law in order for Nifong to know about diffuse edema on the 4th of April. I have personal knowledge of the handling of medical information at Duke. I don't believe that happened. While he might lie to the unsuspecting news media about what he might or might not know, he wouldn't have lied to the officer who would have known it was a lie.
She is what she is. 3 types of sex and no DNA match to the boys? Apparently Nifong has never had sex.
And if she had had sex with or without a sex toy in the last 24 hours, who could get on the stand and testify that she did not have vaginal swelling prior to the lacrosse party?
For that matter given that she had had sex and sex with a sex toy within hours of the lacrosse party, who could testify that she either did or did not have vaginal swelling prior to the lacrosse party?
It is on the rise amongst democrats.........
_ _ __ __ __ __ Here's another example of the Media's Double Standard
An ex Ohio-state football star that was drafted by the Denver Broncos, evaded Police in his SUV, after a chase, there was a struggle and Maurice Clarett was found to have half a bottle of Vodka, 3 or 4 assault guns, he was wearing a bullet vest.
Well, the very first time the N&O reports this (today) they put a long article by the AP on the front page of the Sports Section. The article is titled: Bronocos EXPRESS CONCERN for Clarrett.
The article goes on to say whole how promising he was, and how something must have been very wrong for Maurice to have ended up with all those assault weapons and a bullet proof vest on. When Police attempted to use a stun-gun to subdue the fighting Clarett, the stun-gun was ineffective due to his bullet proof vest. Bascially, in the article, it's one person after another saying what a tragedy this is and how he's not that kind of person. Previous to this incident, Clarett was awaiting trial on charges that he robbed two people at gunpoint.
Remember, they haven't reported yet on what he did wrong! If you turn the pages - on page 4C of the sports section - there's the article detailing what happened.
So, on the front page goes an article expressing concern for this "nice kid", and on Page 4C readers see, for the very first time, why Clarett was arrested.
Clarett was suspended from Ohio State in his junior season for problems with the law. Then a month or so ago he was charged with the robbery at gunpoint, and now this incident.
Question:
Can a Law Enforcement Officer (or DA) get a verbal report without a release or subpoena in an active investigation?
Obviously, the poster is insinuating that her hair was not pinned up later due to a struggle and a crime.
How do you attack someone violently - pull their hair out of a
it's prepared position - and then leave no evidence that the person was there? No hairs - not a one. The hair shafts would actually show that they were broken too.
For that matter given that she had had sex and sex with a sex toy within hours of the lacrosse party, who could testify that she either did or did not have vaginal swelling prior to the lacrosse party?
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
It appears she also had sex with Brian Taylor within an hour or two of that party also.
Taylor doesn't say if they had sex, and isn't asked, but he does say they in his apartment and she was modeling lingerie outfits for him and that she showered there.
Crystal later gives Taylor's name as a possible source of the semen found in her.
+
They are not supposed to be able to receive anything verbally. They can subpoena the information and receive it in writing. This protects Duke, the LEO and the patient. Verbal reports are hard to document. And you know the old game where one person tells the next person in line a story and by the time it gets to the tenth person the story does not even resemble what was said first.
Thanks for the information. My understanding is exactly the opposite, and I seem to recall Nifong stating at one of the earlier hearings that he intended to separate the trials. Do you have anything definitive to support your information? I really would like to get to the bottom of this question.
My understanding is that Collin has several witnesses and some documentation of where he was. I expect the defense is keeping those witnesses under wraps so that they are not harrassed by Nifong, his corrupt minions or the media. Further, they should want to prevent the details of what the witnesses testimony might be from getting "out there" for investigation, nitpicking and speculation.
My understanding is that they are supposed to all be tried together.
Either they all did it or they all didn't do it, according to the allegation.
Jez, seems I recall at the first hearing, Nifong indicated he wanted to try them together. I'll look in the archives to see what I can find...
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.