Skip to comments.
Recall Nifong - Vote Cheek (DukeLax Developments)
RecallNifong.com ^
| August 10, 2006
| Staff
Posted on 08/11/2006 1:18:59 PM PDT by abb
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 321-340, 341-360, 361-380, 381-393 last
To: Mike Nifong
What was she arrested for on July 7?
381
posted on
08/15/2006 3:43:09 PM PDT
by
Jezebelle
(Our tax dollars are paying the ACLU to sue the Christ out of us.)
To: SarahUSC
Exactly. Duke didn't stop her from making false allegations and she will sue Duke for that? That is totally loony.
382
posted on
08/15/2006 3:46:39 PM PDT
by
jennyd
To: don'tbedenied
With all due respect you need read more and post less...
If you would take the time to read the whole discussion you will find that I never referred to the three false accusers as ones she would go after. My interest in this was because of the setup by Cash Michaels and his writing. He has self appointed himself spokesman for the "black community" and it has all the markings of the approach for the FA to get money. I never said I thought she would win but appearances from all Cash Michaels statements are that they want money.
To: Hogeye13
"three false accusers"
should have read....three falsely accused
To: abb
Thanks for the pings!
My computer was "fried" in a lightning storm on July 22nd, and I have to catch up on everything! I ordered a new one today. Can't wait to get it! In the meantime, trips to the library are getting tedious. Thanks again!
385
posted on
08/15/2006 4:41:16 PM PDT
by
toldyou
To: SarahUSC
As Jezebelle said earlier there is no cause of action for reparations, but if you will read the list of supporters of the FA and the names behind some of the papers Cash Michaels writes for you will find a lot of supporters of this also.
Sarah, if you will read all that I have written about this subject you will see that I agree with you. She doesn't have a cause of action. All I am trying to say is if you will research what Cash Michaels has said all along you can easily see what they are trying to setup. The FA has "suffered" and someone is going to have to pay her money in their view. And it is very likely if she files against Durham County who the DA represents and DPD, knowing the makeup of who controls each, one or both of them might pay her off. Stranger things have happened in the world of civil lawsuits. In the world of civil law anyone can file a suit, just like in the world of criminal a DA can indict a ham sandwich.
And I have also stated that this probably only happens if the DA drops the charges. If it goes to trial he simply brushes himself off and walks away saying "I tried, but the evidence didn't support the charges" or something similar.
In all honesty, in reading some of Cash Michaels writing, at this point it appears he is actually hoping the DA drops the charges. This from the man that has wanted a trial all along to view all the evidence. With this change in attitude the only thing that makes sense is the desire for money which he has publically stated he wants for the FA.
To: Hogeye13
I'm sorry if I haven't read all of your posts on the subject. I'm not sure if I'm following you here, are you suggesting that Cash Michaels is setting up the FA to get money, apparently via a lawsuit, from someone? Who would be the defendants, Durham and Nifong? Wouldn't it be difficult to make a case given the FA started this with a series of lies?
To: don'tbedenied
I appreciate your more reasonable response. Yes it probably would be difficult to make a case, but why would that matter to this group. Think reparations. No case or cause of action there but they sure want money. It is hard to say who they might target for suit. In my first statement I named Nifong and Duke. Added DPD later. Heck, they might even include everyone that posts on the FR LAX forums.
With as many stories as the FA has told it wouldn't be hard to come up with one more.
Hypothetically, what if her next story, to file a suit with, is that she wanted to come clean before indictments but Nifong and DPD forced her to stick with the case. You and I and most here would be skeptical of this but do you think that they could find 12 jurors to believe her in Durham. Just remember OJ.
Again, the point that I have been trying to make is that even though there is not a case here, it does not lessen the desire for money for the FA and would not stop them from trying. Success in the matter is another story.
To: Hogeye13
One little change to previous post. I think in a civil case they might only need 9 out of 12 jurors to agree. Makes it even easier in Durham.
To: Jezebelle
Jezebelle,
(This is MY read ):
She was let our early on Parole. Part of that Parole is to submit to warrantless searches.
Somehow DPD came to search and find a Stolen Item on 6-30-06.
On 07-21-06, a Judge apparently ruled. She was convicted of Possession of Stolen Goods - BUT, she (even with her extensive record) only got two months and she was allowed to serve it concurrently with they rest of the time she faced on the earlier charge (that she violated probation on).
Looks Extra Sweet. 60 days served concurrently with an attrocious record like hers. She truly is a career criminal.
My take anyway.
390
posted on
08/15/2006 6:42:56 PM PDT
by
Mike Nifong
(Somebody Stop Me !)
To: Mike Nifong
Let out early on parole for what? The shoplifting three years ago? People don't get state prison time for shoplifting, and you have to have been sentenced to state prison in order to be on parole. Something isn't adding up. If she violated parole by being in possession of stolen goods, and a parole violation was charged, she would have been sent back to prison where terms are at least one year, not 60 days. This information isn't making sense. Or are you talking about probation? Or was she originally charged and convicted of a felony (sometimes shoplift can be charged as burglary, which is a felony)?
Concurrent sentences aren't uncommon, especially if there are young children at home and/or it's a non-violent crime.
More info is needed in order to evaluate what's going on and what really happened.
391
posted on
08/15/2006 7:26:48 PM PDT
by
Jezebelle
(Our tax dollars are paying the ACLU to sue the Christ out of us.)
To: TommyDale
Some phony reason can be given by the DA to "continue" a case just to force a person to miss work, school or whatever as a way to beat them down to submission. This is a dirty tactic used by the system against working people here. I don't think it is just a NC tactic.
392
posted on
08/16/2006 2:09:20 AM PDT
by
pepperhead
(Kennedy's float, Mary Jo's don't!)
To: pepperhead
"I don't think it is just a NC tactic." Oh, I'm sure it is done anywhere when allowed. It is abused here in NC.
393
posted on
08/16/2006 5:22:09 AM PDT
by
TommyDale
(It's time to dismiss the Duke fake rape case, Mr. Nifong!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 321-340, 341-360, 361-380, 381-393 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson