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

To: Ken H

I think Gottlieb is going to have some explaining to do. The first thing that jumped out at me in the NYT article is what Mike has been saying on here. The descriptions! They are so far and away different from what Himan has. I don't think they can be reconciled. Someone is wrong and I think it's Gottlieb.

The proof is - according to Gottlieb's notes one of the perps is tall, lean, blond and baby-faced. Hmm. Who could that be? Maybe....Finnerty? And yet they never thought to put Finnerty in any of the two photo line-ups they did prior to the final one. Why? That makes no sense unless the accuser never gave that description in the first place. I think Gottlieb fabricated it but he went a little too far. He really laid it on and it would be comical if this weren't so serious.


37 posted on 08/25/2006 2:36:25 AM PDT by SarahUSC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies ]


To: All

Another pile of bullshat from Barry Saunders.

The real scoop for Dukies
http://www.newsobserver.com/134/story/478839.html


38 posted on 08/25/2006 2:43:51 AM PDT by abb (The Dinosaur Media: A One-Way Medium in a Two-Way World)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

To: SarahUSC
It's getting noticed--

http://liestoppers.blogspot.com/2006/08/enough-from-duff.html

41 posted on 08/25/2006 3:03:24 AM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

To: SarahUSC
Two Durham officers charged with assault

"..Police had placed a total of five officers on administrative duty after a cook at Blinco's sports bar in Raleigh said he exchanged words -- including some racial slurs -- with the passenger of a black truck as it sped away from the restaurant July 20.

Among the five were Sgt. Mark Gottlieb, the supervisor of the Duke lacrosse rape investigation, and Officer Richard Clayton, who reports to Gottlieb and has assisted with the Duke case. .."

42 posted on 08/25/2006 3:04:29 AM PDT by Anti-Bubba182
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

To: SarahUSC

I can see the cross of Gottlieb on just the descriptions now:

Defense: Mr. Gottlieb are you saying that Mr.Hinman made up those weights and heights he attributes to Ms. Mangum?

Gottlieb: No? [I don't see how he can say yes.]

Defense: Then you must not have missed that part of the conversation where she gave specific weights?

Gottlieb: Yes.

Defense: Did you not listen to Ms. Mangum because she is the type of person you call racial slurs?

Nifong: Objection.

Defense: Withdrawn

Defense: Mr. Gottlieb did you possibly miss what Ms. Mangum specifically said about weights because you tired having been out late the night before yelling racial slurs at cooks?

Nifong: Objection.

Defense: Withdrawn, sorry that was a few days after you wrote up your report.

Nifong: Object and request that the jury be instructed to ignor the defense counsels comments.

Judge: The jury is to ignor the questions the defense counsel withdrew and his comment while withdrawing. Counselor lets move this on.

Defense: Mr. Gottlieb you don't have any explannation for missing the detailed weights in Ms. Mangums statement that Mr.Hinman heard and put in his report that he wrote up much closer to the actual time the two of you talked to Ms. Mangum, do you?

Gottlieb: No.


48 posted on 08/25/2006 3:32:37 AM PDT by JLS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

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