Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Duke Case: Failure of Procedure
newsmax ^ | Wednesday, Aug. 9, 2006 | Susan Estrich

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.


TOPICS: Local News
KEYWORDS: duke; dukelax; durhamdirtbag; lacrosse; lax
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 321-334 next last
To: Mad-Margaret

You've found a sane judge in NC???


61 posted on 08/09/2006 11:54:21 AM PDT by stands2reason (ANAGRAM for the day: Socialist twaddle == Tact is disallowed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: SirJohnBarleycorn
Occasionally, but no study has ever found that women lie about rape any more often than men lie about other crimes.

The point is Estrogen is defending to the death the "women don't lie about rape" canard. As such, Estrogen's "no study" claim is itself a lie.

41% false accusation rate - Eugene J. Kanin, Ph.D.

27% false accusation rate - Charles P. McDowell, Ph.D.

72% false accusation rate - Ontario Incidence Study (OIS)

25% false accusation rate - FBI study of DNA used to establish innocence.

It is amazing that the "women don't lie about rape" lie gets repeated again and again, even though it has been thouroughly debunked.

62 posted on 08/09/2006 11:59:24 AM PDT by Fido969 (Don't tread on me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: SirJohnBarleycorn
Aug 7, 2006 : 10:18 pm ET

DURHAM -- A Durham woman was arrested for falsely accusing a man of rape, according to arrest warrants.

Nona LaTrece Marshall, of 3004 Ivy Wood Lane, allegedly accused a man of raping her on April 24, warrants said.

The accused man was charged with first-degree kidnapping, assault by pointing a gun, assault on a female and first-degree rape, according to warrants. His bond was set at $100,000, warrants said.

Marshall was charged with one count of making a false police report, a Class 2 misdemeanor punishable by 30 days of community service up to a $1,000 fine.

She was held at the Durham County Jail in lieu of $25,000 bond and is scheduled to appear Aug. 30 in Durham County District Court.

http://www.heraldsun.com/durham/4-759259.html
63 posted on 08/09/2006 12:08:07 PM PDT by maggief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: stands2reason

You are right in that SE does mention inconsistencies in her statements - but you wouldn't guess from her statement that it included variations in the number of alleged rapists (varying fromm 3 to 20!) nor does she mention that her prior activities included sex acts for pay. In fact the latter is studiously avoided as is the AVs role as a stripper.


64 posted on 08/09/2006 12:10:22 PM PDT by bjc (Check the data!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: RSmithOpt

I gave Susan a pass of sorts in April. I realized her bias because she was a rape victim.

I figured it would take a while for her to come around. She is getting there.


65 posted on 08/09/2006 12:14:32 PM PDT by Protect the Bill of Rights
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Neverforget01
Can Wendy and Nancy be far behind?

I don't think so. In spite of everything, I think Susan is basically a nice person.

Wendy and Nancy are rabid man-haters.

66 posted on 08/09/2006 12:16:20 PM PDT by Protect the Bill of Rights
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: CondorFlight

I think Nifong, as much as he is corrupt is also a political animal. He will have to dismiss the charges before the election in order to hold on to his office, if that chance still exists. It will happen before the election during the height of football season. When does Duke play UNC? Probably during halftime of that game when noone is paying attention. Or maybe when Duke is playing a road game. Like maybe Fla. State or Boston College. JMO.


67 posted on 08/09/2006 12:18:39 PM PDT by Hogeye13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: stands2reason

I can't stop thinking about Campaign Finance Reform.

Everybody was so sure SCOTUS would strike it down.

I do not think the charges will be dropped. Even if I was 200% sure they would be dropped, CFR would still be floating around in my brain as a perfect example of what happens when we all "know" someone will do the right thing.

We must be relentless.


68 posted on 08/09/2006 12:21:25 PM PDT by Protect the Bill of Rights
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Protect the Bill of Rights
We must be relentless

I couldn't agree more. Just as the Swiftboaters helped voters wake up to the real Kerry story, folks on the internet must not let the corruption in Durham swallow up three innocent young men.

69 posted on 08/09/2006 12:41:00 PM PDT by Neverforget01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: darbymcgill

Excellent, I'm going to borrow it.


70 posted on 08/09/2006 12:44:53 PM PDT by ltc8k6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: flixxx

Actually this is Estrich reacting to what we now know was the incorrect date story in the N&O. She may well back away from this.


71 posted on 08/09/2006 12:44:55 PM PDT by JLS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Protect the Bill of Rights
We should all give her a pass in that aspect, as that's completely understandable from one human (emotional creature) to another, but not professional. However, I do hope Susan refuses to ever give herself a pass as a 'good lawyer', or even a 'decent legal expert' to comment in the major media concerning suspects accused of such a crime.

Undoubtedly guilty of 'a serious conflict of interests' to have thought herself not to be emotionally involved to report on such.

Durham and Durham co. along with the NC government is heavily Dem, not to mention the local newspapers, which are sickeningly Liberal.

72 posted on 08/09/2006 12:49:44 PM PDT by RSmithOpt (Liberalism: Highway to Hell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Mad-Margaret
but I'll take December 21

Certainly this needs to be done when Duke in not in session. It could in theory be done the next hearing this month, but if not December looks pretty favorable.

The only fly in the ointment with December is that Seligmann and Finnerty are suspended. But this may be a moot issue if each is transfering anyway.
73 posted on 08/09/2006 12:53:40 PM PDT by JLS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: JLS
"Actually this is Estrich reacting to what we now know was the incorrect date story in the N&O. She may well back away from this."


Gee whiz are you following this? "The incorrect date story" actually cuts Nifong some slack because it postulates that Nifong indicted the Lax players while he was still investigating the swelling in CGM vaginal area. In fact with the correct date it becomes apparent that Nifong knew the answer (sex show with a vibrato) and indicted them anyhow. If anything Estrich and everyone else should be more vocal.
74 posted on 08/09/2006 12:56:37 PM PDT by don'tbedenied
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: RSmithOpt

Understood and I do agree.


75 posted on 08/09/2006 12:57:53 PM PDT by Protect the Bill of Rights
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: maggief
Marshall was charged with one count of making a false police report, a Class 2 misdemeanor punishable by 30 days of community service up to a $1,000 fine.

They should have picked up "The False One" while they were at it. And isn't it sad that someone could get someone charged with all of that and only be punished by serving 30 days in jail and a $1,000 fine.

76 posted on 08/09/2006 12:57:58 PM PDT by pepperhead (Kennedy's float, Mary Jo's don't!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: don'tbedenied

sex show with a vibrato, while an interesting concept should have read "vibrator"


77 posted on 08/09/2006 12:59:56 PM PDT by don'tbedenied
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: don'tbedenied
Gee whiz are you following this?

I don't know, are you? You are still buying into the N&O's view of what the injuries Nifong was asking about.
78 posted on 08/09/2006 1:03:22 PM PDT by JLS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: JLS

What other injuries did she have, JLS?


79 posted on 08/09/2006 1:07:06 PM PDT by ltc8k6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Protect the Bill of Rights

My gut tells me the NCPTB have a 50/50 chance of conviction as of now, and if it goes to trial, 75/25.

I'm no psychic, but I'm pretty good at odds making if I have enough data.

It makes me sick to my stomach.


80 posted on 08/09/2006 1:08:47 PM PDT by stands2reason (ANAGRAM for the day: Socialist twaddle == Tact is disallowed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 321-334 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson