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'm sure that Himan either embellished what little Levicy told him and his notes are basically accurate, or Levicy told him everything and Himan's notes are inaccurate to cover for Levicy.
Either way, after the 16th, Nifong would have thought he had a report coming that confirmed a sexual assault had taken place.
Isn't it a felony to do that? Even I wouldn't believe it was a coincidence that he just happened to empty his room out just in time.
He would be obstructing justice.
Also, I don't know of any law that says that what the police are looking for in a search warrant has to be there when they do the search. If it ain't there, it ain't there, and they can't make you produce it from another location without a separate search warrant specific to that location.
The only way it could be considered that would be if they advised the attorney and/or the client that they were coming with a search warrant and were watching the dorm room to make sure nothing is removed. Prior warning might establish a charge for removing things. The day before the arrest he might have been under the impression that after arrest he would not be allowed back in the dorm room. Therefore get your belongings out before you are locked out. I doubt that there was any forewarning of the impending search by the police.
I still don't believe Levicy told Himan anything. If she did and it can be documented she is in deep dodo.
I seem to recall that the lax players had moved from Edens prior to that anyway (which was, of course, why Collin's stuff wasn't there); but I could be wrong. I can check with my student later. Certainly the dorm was locked to outsiders (meaning, only Edens residents could gain access - ususally your Duke Card will gain you access to most any building). Ugh. This just brings back how awful that time was for the students.....
There are people that still say OJ is innocent.
Ted Vaden speaks
http://blogs.newsobserver.com/readers/index.php?title=the_lacrosse_story_error&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1#comments
Comment from: Ted Vaden [Member] · www.newsobserver.com
08/10/06 at 17:14
Thanks for your responses, everyone. I'll try to address some of the questions and points:
1.Re the WTVD broadcast, it was their reporter, not Ted Vaden, who said The N&O got the date and "other key information" wrong. The broadcast got four other facts wrong, including my name and that of Melanie Sill. I called WTVD on that, and they made a correction last night.
2. Some questioned this phrase, from my blog: "But it could affect readers' perceptions of the accuracy of the rest of the article and, potentially, of the newspaper's future reporting on this emotionally charged story." I don't think there is anything startling here -- I'm simply saying that starting a story with erroneous information could affect perceptions of the rest of the story and of our future reporting on the lacrosse issue. I think that's reflected in the comment of "Jayson Blair" above (I wish people would use their real names.).
3. I have read Robert K.C. Johnson's blogs and John in Carolina. Thanks for bringing those to my attention.
4. Several commentators suggest that I'm an "apologist" for Nifong and a "rubber stamp" for The N&O's reporting. I've written two previous columns on the lacrosse issue, shortly after it broke (April 2, April 16). The firstSearching for fairness in the Duke story was critical of The N&O's interview with the accuser. The secondMore questions about the lacrosse story took issue with the paper's coverage of the lacrosse players, including a story and headline describing the team as "swaggering" and publication of the so-called "vigilante poster," which I called "inappropriate."
Thank you for taking the time to make comments.
Ted Vaden
Plus that information was inaccurate - someone is liable.
There was NO trauma. Someone has to be held accountable.
The way young Himan (Gottlieb's understudy) left so much out of the affidavits and probable cause justifications, I think it'll turn out that the nurse said diffuse edema of the vaginal walls - nothing else noted.
Just a hunch, but consider all the other data in this case.
Woody Vann said on Greta's show that the cases are separate and Nifong would have to make a motion to join them.
At the hearing where Reade was present there was a discussion about moving his case to second setting. Nifong said it didn't really matter since he intended to make a motion to join the cases and by moving to second setting Reade would not get a quicker trial date.
I think he's going to have witnesses for the entire night. His father told Sean Hannity that multiple people can testify to where he was every minute from the time he left his dorm to the time he got back.
I don't think Collin removed evidence, which is what #5 of those 10 questions implies.
I am saying that if Collin knew he was being investigated and moved his computers to remove evidence, then he'd be guilty of a crime.
A crime for which Nifong is strangely silent about, because it doesn't exist.
I didn't. I'm the type of person who actually would go to the door and ask to use that bathroom.
Problem was the vacant house.
:)
Handy links to bookmark.
http://www.newsobserver.com/news/crime_safety/duke_lacrosse
http://www.wral.com/dukelacrosseheadlines/index.html
I don't think Collin removed evidence either. "Removing evidence" implies that there was something incriminating on his computer and I don't believe that.
I think he left the dorm and took his computer with him which is what anyone would do if they were re-locating.
The question is, why did Nifong wait until after the indictments came down to search Collin's room? Once the accuser ID'd him he would have had probable cause to search his room. I think the answer is he knew he wouldn't find anything in there anyway.
Sarah, I agree completely and never meant to say that he did remove evidence. He took his personal belongings prior to the warrant being served. No crime there at all.
Regarding Nifongs motives, I believe it could be considered harassment such as arresting the cabbie, sending detectives to the dorm trying to talk to players that he new were represented by attorneys and other things that have been done. I think he a vindictive little man and I use the term man loosely. I don't think he could possibly expect that anything would be found at that time since the players would automatically be suspended and have to leave the campus unless he is just stupid. Now that I think about it.....
He's certainly shown what seems to be an open willingness to abuse his position. The cabbie thing really irked me. The woman involved had told them he had nothing to do with it. It looked like intimidation to me. At least the attempt. Sending the detectives, the poster, the press conferences. It's a long list. And I hope it ALL comes back to bite him on his backside.
Oh, I know you weren't saying anything like he removed evidence. He just moved out.
I wonder why Nifong bothered at all. If he had really been looking for something he would have looked alot sooner. I think he knew there was nothing to find. What did they take out of there? A newspaper article and a letter? What a score.
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.