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 state’s 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 Department’s 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 Attorney’s 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.
he has nop reason to lie.
should be:
She has no reason to lie.
(couldn't leave it w/o a correction, must be my neurotic side)
This is from Neff's piece in the News & Observer based on the Discovery documents:
"At 1:22 a.m. March 14, Sgt. John Shelton of the Durham Police Department was called to the Kroger supermarket on Hillsborough Road. A scantily clad woman was passed out in a Honda Accord and wouldn't get out of the car. Shelton got no response when he talked loudly to her, his notes on the encounter say."
http://www.newsobserver.com/141/story/468272.html
Kirk Osborn's Motion File Nos. 06 CRS 4334-356, Dated the 7th of June, (Affidavit of Counsel for the Defendant in support of Motion to Suppress Non-Testimonial Photographs), states on the first page that officers were called to Kroger on Hillsborough Road on March 14, 2006 at 1:22 a.m.
1:22 a.m.
_
Yes, I know when the call came in from Kroger. Not disputing that.
Shelton's report bears the same case number and it begins with the call from 610.
So Sutton could not have responded at 1:22 regarding a rape, even if it took her an hour to get to the ER and the AV was in fact there by the time Sutton arrived.
If Sutton responded at 1:22 to a call, it wasn't about a rape.
It's likely just a mistake, but I don't trust the DPD, so I'm suspicious.
ALERT ***_ ALERT *** _ ALERT *** _ ALERT ***
The charges have been changed against Elmostafa (Cabbie), he is now charged with aiding and abetting a 250 dollar theft.
I think this means that Nifong squeezed Hawkins (woman that plead guilty to the 3 year old 250 dollar theft) - and now she's changed her tune.
Elmostafa is getting royally screwed !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
_
http://dwb.newsobserver.com/news/ncwire_news/story/2992299p-9419145c.html
Cabbie charged with aiding
250 bucks versus Kim $ 25,000.00
Elmostafa has already paid more than that for his legal representation and loss of work for these ridiculous court appearances. Why wouldn't they just let the guy pay restitution, like they did Kim Roberts Pittman? Oh, she didn't pay it did she? LOL!
Link to new thread...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1684229/posts
I think the AA community has caught on and the "money" will come from Durham--for Precious, if they can prove she was intimidated to continue the case--Nifong lied about condoms and strangling when he knew this to not be true. He bribed Kim Roberts. The Duke 3 will also win civil suits (BIG ones). Durham and Duke will pay through the nose.
Is this considered a lesser charge?
I don't see a cause of action for the FA. She was used by a corrupt DA and Duke did nothing to stop it? What is Duke supposed to do? Duke has no control over the DA or DPD.
The FA started this entire thing by making false allegations. Who forced her to do that? No one.
YEs,
Aiding and abetting misdemeanor
instead of committing the misdemeanor
Yes, Lesser charge.
It won't be thrown out is there's an immaterial error or even an unimportant material error.
That dog ain't gonna hunt.
Thanks Mike.
As I suspected, the matter wasn't "continued" but rather a trial date was set. It may well get dismissed unless Nifong has a witness.
His witness was the woman that's already pled guilty.
She was arrested on July 7th.
She's in jail, but I'm sure she'll get favorable terms.
That's the way I read it anyway.
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.