Posted on 08/11/2006 1:18:59 PM PDT by abb
Thursday, August 10, 2006 Dear Friends and Neighbors,
The Committee to Recall Nifong - Vote Cheek was formed on August 9, 2006 as a political action committee to campaign for Lewis Cheek in the upcoming election for District Attorney. While Mr. Cheek has declined to campaign for this office, and has stated that he will not accept the position if elected, we believe that this election, and the referendum on Mr. Nifong that it has become, is not about politics but rather about Durham and what Durham stands for.
The Committee to Recall Nifong - Vote Cheek (RNVC) is not comprised of politicians in any way, shape or form. The people who have organized and will direct this campaign over the next few months have no personal political ambitions and no affiliation with any of the parties involved in the drama that has shed such a bad light on the community of Durham. RNVC is not a movement born of political ambition, nor is it only about the Duke drama. RNVC does not campaign on its own behalf, nor on behalf of any person with ambitions to be the District Attorney of Durham County. RNVC will campaign on behalf of the entire Durham community, save one.
Our movement was born in Durham homes by Durham citizens and for the Durham community. This Durham community, to which the participants in RNVC proudly belong, has become the target of nationwide ridicule and scorn. Durham County has been manipulated, deceived and divided by inflammatory, ambition-serving words uttered by the man entrusted to protect it. RNVC believes that the role of the District Attorney should be that of a protector, and not that of a divider. RNVC believes that the community deserves a District Attorney that inspires trust and not fear. It is the fear of Mr. Nifong and distrust of his words, motives and competency for office that has inspired this movement.
If one of our daughters were the victim of a violent crime, we do not want the person pursuing justice on her behalf to be one who compromises the pursuit of justice either by serving his own self interests, or by his own failure and unwillingness to follow procedure. If one of our sons were to be accused falsely, we do not want a District Attorney who would see those false accusations as an opportunity to defeat a bitter rival in a primary election. We believe that our justice system must not be compromised by misdeed or willful mistakes.
We believe that our district attorney must be one who allows a thorough investigation to precede his public proclamation of guilt or innocence. We believe that indictments should be brought based on evidence at hand, and not evidence hoped for. We believe our District Attorney must value procedure, due process, the rulings of our states Supreme Court and the constitution this nation was built on. We believe that our District Attorney must not be allowed to interject himself into a Police investigation in such away that he instructs them to disregard the recommendations of the North Carolina Actual Innocence Commission, as approved by the NC Supreme Court. We believe that our District Attorney must not be a man who manipulates our law enforcement investigators into violating the Departments own written policies simply to secure indictment before election.
We have heard Mr. Nifong ask Durham to consider the entirety of his career in the District Attorneys office. We fail to see the relevancy of his performance in lesser roles within the office as an indicator of how he will perform when holding the power of the Office of District Attorney. We ask all of Durham to instead inspect his actions, his words and his motives while he has briefly served as District Attorney. We believe it is far more relevant to this referendum to inspect his conduct, questionable ethics and lack of performance in the short time that he has held the extensive powers and responsibilities of District Attorney.
Of all that we believe in, and of all that we ask of our community, with regard to this referendum on Mr. Nifong, what we hold most dearly is the notion that we all must speak. We believe this election is what the Durham that we love is about and, as such, requires a true and full measure of consideration by each of its citizens. We ask that Durham show, not only to Mr. Nifong, but also to Governor Easley and to the nation that watches, that Durham cares, that Durham has pride and, most importantly, that Durham has a voice.
We ask that you add your voice to ours.
BUMP
It's her word against Nifong's. Your guess is as good as mine.
She is already being held by
the DA imcommunicado?
Anybody check the jail for
relatives lately?
Nifong's boxcar is Fiction?
There are bigger fish to fry.
Get out your scorecards.
Just like 10 years ago, she thought they would go away as soon as she got out from under the hold the cops had on her that morning at Duke. Whoops, she never counted on Nifong. The big thing in this right now is Cash Michaels. He has appointed himself spokesman for the "black community" which includes Precious. Money signs are all over his postings in other forums. Go read them. He wants money for Precious. Now, I never said that I thought they had any legal claim to any but since when has that ever stopped people like this from trying. And many times bogus claims are settled just to get them to go away, we all know that.
My daughter has not only TAs, but TAs who cannot speak English.
Also, the "black community" in this farce ended up looking really bad.
Maybe this is why they were unable to find out how much restitution Kim paid (hard counting to zero), they were too busy trying to find something, anything on the poor cab driver. We already no that they can't do 2 things at the same time (gang violence or duke hooligans)
jennyd, I see that trying to have a reasonable discussion with you is totally pointless. Have a good day.
The only lawsuits against Durham County or Duke that would be realistic at this time would be filed by the boys, not Mangum. Sure, she can file, but she has to prove damages and in order to prove that, she has to prove the incident happened. If the "black community" is bailing out on her and Nifong in the criminal case, they will be hard-pressed to justify backing her in a civil suit.
Good God, the N&O is still trying to save Nifong's and Mangum's butts.
"Scenes from the Party: (Clockwise from left) A shoe left on the back porch of the house; the accuser racing out of the house with one shoe; a close-up of the accuser; the accuser getting in a car outside the party"
Newsweek's May 1 description of the photos.
A shoe left on the back porch?
Racing out of the house with one shoe?
Getting in a car?
Apparently the case against the two officers charged for the "Rodney King South" incident have had their hearing put off for a few weeks :
http://www.newsobserver.com/145/story/470960.htm
"Two Durham police officers charged with misdemeanor assault last month after a fight outside a sports bar have five more weeks until they are due in court.
"The simple assault cases against Gary P. Lee, 38, and Scott Tanner, 33, were continued in a Wake County court Monday until Sept. 25."
No mention of the bald guy.
N & O BIAS . &&& N & O BIAS *** N & O BIAS +++
I don't think this was caught yet:
If you remember a couple weeks back, the
News & Observer ran the races of the AV and the
suspect in the Blincos beating. They also
printed that racial epiteths were reportedly used by
Police IN THEIR ON-LINE VERSION.
The Paper version was cleansed of all such damaging
information.
Well, Lookie what happened today. The following was
ommitted from the Print version!
"According to notes taken by Investigator Benjamin Himan, Wilson said that NIFONG WANTED TO BE TOLD when the taxi driver was arrested.
The prosecutor's office or police collected evidence on Elmostafa that included his insurance and driving history, several years' worth of drug tests -- all of which were negative -- and a criminal record check......"
"The case against Elmostafa is at least the second time in which a witness involved in the lacrosse case received personal attention from Nifong.
The second woman hired to dance at the party was arrested on a probation violation immediately after she gave a statement to investigators. Nifong personally signed paperwork that changed KIM ROBERTS' bail status, which FREED HER from having to pay a $1,875 balance to her bail bondsman.
Nifong said the change was routine and denied it had anything to do with the lacrosse
case."
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.