Posted on 08/24/2006 8:01:43 PM PDT by Perdogg
DURHAM, N.C. — On March 21, a week after an African-American woman charged that she had been raped by three white Duke University lacrosse players, the police sergeant supervising the investigation met with the sexual-assault nurse who had examined the woman in the emergency room. The sergeant, Mark D. Gottlieb, reviewed the medical report, which did not say much: some swelling, no visible bruises.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
I agree. The story fell off the media radar screen, but hopefully this breathes some life back into the story.
Oh, no doubt. But why? For the trial if it ever comes? Or the lawsuits, which will for sure come?
ONe problem the record does not show those "internal" tests revealed any damage.
From the Liberal NYT:
"The sergeant, Mark D. Gottlieb, reviewed the medical report, which did not say much: some swelling, no visible bruises."
Why wasn't any of this in the record? This is like an urban legend. Did the people working on this woman read the papers - read about her terrible injuries her father described on local Television and recall the incident incorrectly?
The Record has none of this.
The notes are CYA for all fronts. Nifong can now say that he was relying on Gottlieb for all information, and Gottlieb can argue with Himan, the medical staffs, etc. about what was said months ago. The most favorable reading to Nifong is that the notes support probable cause but not conviction. It gives Nifong a decent press moment but will pass quickly because there is no substance and way too many contradictions and inconsistencies. Ultimately, he can defend himself before the bar and in court by shifting all blame to Gottlieb. I doubt it will help very much. For example, it is hard to believe that medical staffs would prepare such benign written reports but describe far more serious injuries.
In the end, Gottlieb's notes will help the defense because they are so clearly contrived that it will bolster the argument that the case was a canard. In most other states, the charges would have never been brought or would have been dismissed but NC has some strange procedures.
I'm familiar with that case and the officer was completely cleared. THe driver and passengers in the car were high and tried to skip a bill. The officer followed them outside, they ran to the car. When the officer told them to stop, the driver turned the car, increased speed and went right after him. The investigation found that the officer and eyewitness versions of events never wavered but the kids in the car told shifting and conflicting stories. The physical evidence backed up the officer, e.g. bullet trajectory through the front window, tire tracks showing speed and direction, etc.
It was a terrible event but no fault of the officer.
Interesting that the NYT and the Herald Sun this morning mentioned the blogging. They know. And we know they know...
There you went and put a moral judgment into her condition ~ the woman is certifiably nuts. Nothing more. Nothing less.
No doubt she had a prescription for the muscle relaxant.
I do not want that particular officer employed by any of the local police departments in this area.
You guys who whitewashed his behavior and error in judgment have endangered us all.
BTW, I don't want any of you guys in on the whitewash hanging around here either. Go find somebody else's neighborhood to screw with. I'll be damned if I'll let this area turn into a fetid third-world hell-hole like some of you people think you've just gotta' have.
The physical evidence was compelling, and the investigation conducted was lengthy and comprehensive. The officer and event was scrutinized to a fair thee well, and the conclusion was that the driver tried to run over the cop. This event happened in an extremely liberal area, so the presumption (at least publicly) is that the cop was in the wrong. The investigation and evidence proved otherwise.
this case will hurt Democrats in North Carolina SO bad that you can bet it will get downplayed. Serious interests are considering weighing in. Right now the legions of Liberal, Socialist activists living in the Triangle area are having trouble breathing and they know they will be on the grill for the duration. They're attention turns to peace marches next spring.
Meanwhile, in nearby South Carolina :
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1690344/posts
"Almost 20 percent of the female cadets at The Citadel ( a public, coeducational college established as the Military College of South Carolina in 1842) last spring reported they had been sexually assaulted since enrolling at the military college, according to results of a survey released by the school Wednesday.
"Approximately 4 percent of the male cadets also reported being sexually assaulted since joining the formerly all-male school, according to the results of the survey.
( ... )
"All the women and about 30 percent of the men were asked to complete the anonymous online survey, says Citadel spokesperson Charlene Gunnells. Of those, 114 women and 487 men responded.
The reported sexual assaults included unwanted touching, but 16 of the 27 incidents reported by women and 15 of the 23 reported by men involved unwanted sexual penetration or oral sex."
Let's see the Newsweek cover already!!
Gottlieb's report will help the defense if this debacle ever goes to trial because of its internal inconsistencies, contradictions, lateness and convenient and easily discredited explanations (as you point out, the report is consistent with incorrect media reports, not actual records).
Actually, my first reaction when reading the NYT story is that Nifong or someone in his office wrote it for Gottlieb. Only a lawyer could produce a 33 page typewritten report, based upon 3 pages of handwritten reports, that attempts to plug every hole in a legal case and sounds like a legal brief. Police reports are factual, and Gottlieb's is very argumentative.
From the Herald-Sun today:
"Officials say some thought is being given to using a large
and relatively lavish federal courtroom on the second floor
of Durham's main downtown post office. The room once was
used for federal trials but has rarely been used in recent years."
Nice pictures of building here:
http://dclibrary.net/prod1/ncc/photoarch/f123.htm
Boy these people are planning ahead. Bread and circuses
for us peasants.
Gives everyone time for more investigatin. At the current rate
nobody gets the Pulitzer. The students are back at The Chronicle.
Look to them for best reportage. Beat the corporate hacks anyday.
I still think the defense should demand all copies of the report file and access to the machine(s) on which Gottlieb typed this document. Is this possible? Can they impugn the basis of a police report by showing that it was fabricated. For example, if the file was clean, i.e., no edits, no earlier versions, no multiple modifications and none were visible on the computer, etc., then there is is a strong argument that this report was totally fabricated.
Is Gottlieb's report a sworn statement?
That's a good question. I don't know the answer to that.
Some more bloggery (is that a word?) here:
http://www.reason.com/hitandrun/2006/08/the_question_of.shtml#015292
http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2006/08/the_times_on_th.html
http://drmelissaclouthier.blogspot.com/2006/08/duke-rape-details-are-duds.html
http://betsyspage.blogspot.com/2006/08/rereading-duke-rape-story-in-nyt.html
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.