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.
I wonder how that works? If you go to say an NBA game and are arrested for an altercation after some player runs into the stand, do you know have a right for a trial by yourself or do you have to stand trial with the 3 time murder you happened to be sitting by at that game?
I would think one has a right to an INDIVIDUAL trial. I would think if the prosecution can say it is more efficient and cheaper to put on the evidence once AND SHOW IT WILL NOT SUBSTANTUALLY PREJUDICE YOU AS A DEFENDANT, they could move to join the trial. I would think such motions are generally granted but the right to an individual trial would I think logically under the US system belong to the defendant.
But this is NC so logic is probably out the window. BTW, remember Evans and his co-defendant in the noise ticket were tried by different judges.
Found it.
http://www.newsobserver.com/1185/story/441266.html
"After working out other defense requests, the judge agreed to move the case to the second setting in Durham's administrative system. Nifong told the judge that he intends to try all three cases together, which could slow the case against Seligmann."
Here's the video of the first hearing.
http://www.wral.com/dukelacrosseheadlines/9236151/detail.html
1). "May have" speaks for itself. It's a throw-away remark to diffuse people from claiming he's an insensitive lout calling the "victim" a liar.
2). Mostafa never said that at all. He originally said it was someone from the second group he picked up there who said it. he never said Reade said it.
3). Since there were no other signs of rape, the nurse thought the very slight symptoms of tenderness in those particular spot were pre-menstrual.
4). News to me. Since the search warrant for Collin's dorm room pertained to computer equipment, one would presume it was email or digital photos. If the allegations in the search warrant are of the quality in the other various warrants, they have little or no basis in fact whatsoever.
5). Hopefully Collin got rid of them, so as to not give the police an opportunity to make something out of nothing, and also to not have all of his personal property taken from him. I doubt if the person who posted this question would happily, freely and willingly allow the cops to saunter in and cart away every single piece of electronic equipment she owns, either. I have nothing to hide, but if I thought the cops were coming to take my property, I'd spirit it away, too.
6). Ask Mangum. Maybe she left some clothing in Kim's car. besides, just because something is listed in a search warrant it doesn't mean the cops expect to find it. Search warrants such as these are largely fishing expeditions. They write stuff into search warrants so that if they should stumble across something interesting, they want to have authority to take it.
7). Because it was being described by men, not women.
8). In the photos of her dancing, her hair is down. Thus, she took it down.
9). This is the first I heard of this. I'd like to know what the source of this information is. And, ultimately, the question should be addressed to Bissey. Gee, maybe he went back inside and didn't see it, if in fact it even occurred, which I've never seen nor read about anywhere, ever.
10). Maybe he stayed in the house, passed-out. Who knows? Who cares?
Never forget OJ. There couldn't have been more national attention and the jury couldn't have gone more off-base. It's all about skin color. A black jury will do the same in Durham.
Disgusting. These people are nothing but parasites.
You CANNOT be serious. Geez.
McKinney has been affiliated with the Panthers and other subversive groups for years. She's a psycho, and so are the people who voted for her.
Nifong did indeed claim she'd been beaten.
She discussed how much she had had to drink the night before at UNC, so the prior evening did indeed come up.
JUst more very obvious race bias.
New.
Exoneration for the Duke three is coming
http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/gaynor/060810
Regarding point number 5, I thought that several of the lacrosse team members moved out of the dorms for safety reasons. Don't know if he was one that moved, but it would be logical that if he moved out he took his computer with him. Until he was suspended he was probably still doing school work on it. He probably also took things like ipod, camera, etc as well. If it was the case that they moved out it is an easy explanation as to why nothing of the sort was found in the dorm room.
I won't ever forget OJ. Difference here is that these defendants can appeal regardless of what a Durham jury does. OJ couldn't be charged again (although he was found guilty in a civil suit). These parents will appeal all the way to the USSC if necessary---justice will intercede long before it gets to that level.
Himan probably told Nifong there was vaginal trauma after he spoke to the SANE nurse about the report on March 16th.
Nifong had good reason to believe there was vaginal trauma on the 16th, because Himan had heard about the SANE result on the phone from Levicy.
Wasn't the search the day after the indictments? Am I wrong? If so, he would have been suspended and would have "left the building" anyway.
That is true. He knew the day before he was arrested that it was going to happen and that suspension would follow. His attorney probably advised him to remove his belongings from the dorm room prior to that time if they hadn't already been removed.
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.