Detective got tough with Duke students (Herr Gottlieb's Record)

DURHAM - If three Duke University lacrosse players face a jury this spring, defense attorneys likely will take aim at Sgt. Mark Gottlieb, the Durham police officer who supervised the investigation into the March 13 party at which an escort service dancer says she was raped.

The 43-year-old detective could be the prosecution's most important witness aside from the dancer herself.

In recent weeks, an attorney for one of the lacrosse players questioned the plausibility of Gottlieb's case notes, provided to the defense as evidence. Attorneys also have criticized Gottlieb for not following the Durham Police Department's guidelines in a photo lineup that he showed the accuser.

Members of the defense team are now closely examining the arrests Gottlieb made before the rape case. Records show that the sergeant arrested a disproportionate number of Duke students, all on misdemeanor violations such as carrying an open beer on a public sidewalk or violating the city's noise ordinance.

Such charges usually earn an offender a pink ticket such as those issued for speeding. But court records show Gottlieb often arrested Duke students on such charges, taking them to jail in handcuffs.

Reached by telephone, Gottlieb declined to be interviewed for this story. A department spokesman said this week the sergeant is on leave, though what kind was not disclosed.

Some residents of neighborhoods where Gottlieb worked and victims' advocates say that the sergeant is a dedicated and fair officer.

A native of Ohio, Gottlieb is married and the father of young twins. The couple is expecting another child soon. Over the past 18 years, Gottlieb has worked as a paramedic in Wake and Durham counties, as well as a Durham police officer.

A barrel-chested man, Gottlieb tends to walk with his shoulders back and chin up. Among his colleagues, he is known as outspoken and sometimes headstrong. In a 2005 court affidavit that noted his qualifications, Gottlieb listed several community colleges he has attended and professional certifications. The affidavit did not mention an academic degree beyond high school.

Gottlieb got the lacrosse case weeks after serving 10 months as a patrol shift supervisor in police District 2, which includes about a quarter of the city. The district has neighborhoods as disparate as the crime-ridden Oxford Manor public housing complex and Trinity Park -- the blocks of historic homes across from a low stone wall rimming Duke's East Campus.

From May 2005 to February 2006, the period during which Gottlieb was a patrol supervisor in the district, court and police records examined by The News & Observer show that Gottlieb arrested 28 people. Twenty were Duke students, including a quarterback of the football team and the sister of a men's lacrosse player. At least 15 of the Duke students were taken to jail.

In comparison, the three other squad supervisors working in District 2 during the same 10 months -- Sgts. Dale Gunter, John Shelton and Paul Daye -- tallied a combined 64 arrests. Two were Duke students. Both were taken to jail.

Gottlieb often treated Duke students and nonstudents differently. For example, Gottlieb in 2004 wrote a young man a citation for illegally carrying a concealed .45-caliber handgun and possessing less than a half-ounce of marijuana, but records indicate he wasn't taken to jail. He was not a Duke student.

Trinity Park residents have long complained to university and city officials about the boisterous parties thrown by the students who live there. That spurred Duke in February to buy a dozen rental properties in the neighborhood, including the house where the lacrosse team threw its spring break bash two weeks later.

The Durham police officers who responded to 911 calls about the parties were sometimes on the receiving end of defiance and disrespectful taunts. Trinity Park resident Ellen Dagenhart praised Gottlieb's get-tough tactics as a direct response to community concerns about disruptive, drunken behavior.

"There were a lot of homeowners and taxpayers who were calling the cops saying, 'Please come and make yourself seen,' " said Dagenhart, who has known Gottlieb for years. "Anyone who's seen kids passed out in a puddle of vomit is certainly happy to see the police show up. You can't blame Mark Gottlieb for that."

Durham City Manager Patrick Baker said that cracking down on Trinity Park partying was a priority for police last year.

The police department's official policy gives officers discretion in whether to transport someone to the lockup downtown. Factors other than just the "elements of the crime" can be considered, such as whether the suspect is belligerent.

"Our general order, it basically gives the officer room to use his or her own judgment," said Cpl. David Addison, a police spokesman.

But a standing order encourages officers to use alternatives to arrests for misdemeanors, including the use of written citations because of "jail overcrowding, crowded court dockets, staffing problems and the intrusiveness involved in a physical arrest."

On Oct. 8, Gottlieb and officers he supervised responded to a call about a rowdy student at a duplex at 203 Watts St. -- a Trinity Park address familiar to the police as a party house.

In an affidavit, Gottlieb wrote that officers arrived about 6:30 p.m. and told partygoers to be quiet. After the police left, party-goers urinated on neighbor Lee Coggins' home and threw a beer bottle in her direction that shattered on the sidewalk, Gottlieb wrote.

Police obtained a search warrant, and Gottlieb's squad entered the duplex at 3:19 a.m. They seized three beer kegs -- one empty -- and "beer bong tubing." On the wall was what Gottlieb described as a "stolen Duke flag." A Duke flag had been reported stolen from an administrative building on campus the previous spring.

Five students there were arrested by Gottlieb for violating the city's noise ordinance and alcohol-related misdemeanors. Another housemate, Mike Kenney, was arrested the next day.

Kenney, then 21, was charged with a noise ordinance violation and possession of an open container of alcohol on public property and taken to jail. Two days later, records show, Kenney was arrested a second time and taken to jail on charges of possession of stolen property. The flag had been in his room.

When the case went to trial in January, Gottlieb testified that in the wake of rowdy parties in Trinity Park, the department's policy was to take alcohol-related violations seriously. But the judge threw out the charges against Kenney, citing a lack of evidence.

Glen Bachman, Kenney's attorney, successfully argued that Gottlieb couldn't prove the college senior was home during the party or that the flag in his room was the same flag that had been stolen.

Coggins, the woman who called police about the party at the duplex, said Gottlieb's actions seemed responsive and professional. He doesn't have a vendetta against Duke students, she said.

"It's not like he's hanging out at their house waiting for them to do something," Coggins said.

Kathy Summerlee, Kenney's mother and a lawyer in Minnesota, called the arrest and prosecution of her son "frivolous."

Though the charges were thrown out, Kenney could have faced suspension if convicted. He graduated from Duke in May and now is looking for a job, she said.

"It was clear to all of us that the police were feeling a lot of pressure to make a difference in the behavior in that neighborhood," Summerlee said this week. "I think there was a lot of damage done in this process. It cost us money. It cost us a lot of worry. It rearranged Mike's life."

Still, some in Trinity Park cite Gottlieb as a dedicated officer. He prides himself on being a victim's advocate, often recounting stories from his years as a domestic violence investigator.

Dagenhart said she remembers seeing him at a vigil for domestic violence victims.

"This was not something he had to do as a part of his job," she said. "It's something he did as someone who cared. I know he cares about Durham. It's not just a job for him."

(News researchers David Raynor and Denise Jones contributed to this report.) Staff writer Michael Biesecker can be reached at 956-2421 or mbieseck@newsobserver.com. News researchers David Raynor and Denise Jones contributed to this report.

I view is slightly different.

1. I would put Nifong first. He found out about this case and then went about finding cops to lie about. He used it for purely political purposes. My view is that Nifong did not worry about Duke's reaction. He only worried about that primary. He cares about himself and nothing else.

2. Duke might be involve in anti-trust violations as you indicate. That is they might be buying up Trinity Park rental homes, to sell them to people who will not rent them out, not just to make nice to the Trinty Park complainers who are shocked let me tell you shocked that they buy in next to a college and discovered they had college students living around them, but to also fill up their dorms. If you are right, this is a FEDERAL crime Duke was committing. That is the were conspiring to make themselves a monopolist in the rental housing market by buying out competitors and taking those units out of the rental housing market. Again this if true is a Federal crime.

3. The cops were going to make nothing of this case. None of them believed Mangum. Then after Nifong found out about it, he turned to certain dirty cops he knew to help him with this case. So I would not blame DPD in general. Without Nifong, they would have soon put this allegation in the not believeable file.

I can't even imagine how painful this is for parents whose kids chose Duke last year over other first rate schools only to find themselves in this rat's nest with no light at the end of the tunnel. Please be assured that there are many, many people supportive of you and your daughter, and recognize Brodhead, Nifong, et al as scalawags and con artists who are advancing themselves at the expense of people like your daughter. Shame on them; you mention tha your daughter is helping with the campaign to defeat Nifong. ANother constructive idea is to get pot-bangers outside of Brodhead's house demanding his resignation. How about that media event -- a few hundred students protesting Brodhead demanding his resignation while the cameras roll

Stay strong, and know that many posters here are supportive and sympathetic.

3. The cops were going to make nothing of this case. None of them believed Mangum. Then after Nifong found out about it, he turned to certain dirty cops he knew to help him with this case. So I would not blame DPD in general.
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;

I agree. The beat Cops used the same determinants that they've used their entire career to assess her credibility. And I believe they determined that she was a problem child saying anything that was expedient.

IMO, due to a disfunctional Durham, Nifong got involved in the case in the investigation phase - where he has no business. The case was heaven sent and Nifong used it to achieve his personal goals.

I think Durham is an incestual, corrupt mess. It seems everything is inter-related. We have the City Manager inserting himself into the case and making multiple public statements that the woman never changed her story - and offering that he would know. He even stated how closely he was working with investigators on the case. We have a City Councilmen proclaiming them guility and predicting their Daddy's will get them off days into the investigation.
The, Mayor, for God's sake claims to know specifics that will be revealed at the right time. An investigator for the DA's office, interrupts a National press conference by the Defense attorneys to say that the woman never changed her story - and he had personally read the entire case file!

Early on in this thing, the Durham City Council urged a vote in support of Patrick Baker's handing of the Duke Rape incident - and multiple members took to the airwaves to express public support for his specific handling of the Duke case.

Someone else called it the Perfect Storm and I agree. IMO, if there were Honest people running Durham - you wouldn't have so many people willing to violate laws, processes, procedures, and go before National Cameras to defend others that have evidently done that same thing.

To me, common sense dictates that these people were comfortable in this position and doing these things. It strains credulity to think that this is the first time these people have crossed the line.

I wonder if these guys hang out at Blinco's.
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;

Remember, the DPD went to pains to publicly say their were others (including DPD) at Blinco's that didn't even know the other group was there. Highly unlikely in that small place.

Makes one wonder why they were so quick to make those public statements when they wouldn't answer any other questions on the subject.

I do wonder if this is where 60 Minutes is going. A report on a rape hoax isn' really their thing. They leave that to cable shows; but local corruption that (1) caused a huge national sensation and (2)is now dedicated to covering it up, ah now you're talking 60 Minutes language. I laid out in an earlier post a possible theory that, if true, implicates Nifong, Gottlieb, Brodhead, elected officials, the DPD and Lord only knows who else as being duplicitous. Just a theory that is supported by strong evidence. For example, what if 60 Minutes got hold of authentic (!) correspondence showing Duke knew and encouraged the violent crackdown on students? or that all these shady characters knew the charges were bogus but had ulterior motives for pursuing this mess?

There really is no other good reason for 60 Minutes to be interested in this debacle unless it was targeting one of the principle players. The question is who?

The issue of student voting was briefly discussed on these threads some months ago, IIRC. I would have no idea how to go about finding it, but FR has been alert to this for a while. The numbers show they could make the difference:

Results of May 2 primary--

Mike Nifong- 11,168 45%
Freda Black- 10,269 42%
Keith Bishop-- 3,288 13%

http://abclocal.go.com/three/wtvd/election/race190.htm

Thanks, RM. My student, of course, did not make their decision recently. Graduation looms this year. But knowing what I know, I still would not have asked my student to change their decision. And yes, it was my student's decision. My only job was to support that decision. And I do. As I have stated many times, I am in awe of the university and the education it provides.

I cannot understand those whose answer to a problem is to tear down the institution. What possible good does damaging a really fine university serve? I would still rather have a doctor who's a Duke grad than a doctor who graduated from my local state u. And it's a good one. I think many of us - conservatives and liberals alike - graduated from a left-leaning institution. I mean, education and liberalism pretty much go hand in hand. I am sure there are some really fine conservative folks who call Duke their alma mater, and Harvard, and Princeton, etc. I would also like to point out that only 5% of Duke profs signed the infamous letter. By condeming the entire university, one is no better than those who condemned the entire lax team. It just makes no sense to me.

Yes, I can understand the frustration with the administration. Some are more upset than others. I can recall early on in this mess where my student told me that many of the students were upset with Brodhead because he didn't do more sooner - they wanted the team's heads! So, in that perspective, Brodhead's early reaction was extremely restrained. And McFayden's email, regardless of how it was meant, was extremely upsetting for many of the female students. Once the DNA results were out, the general Duke student (read: non-athlete) backed-off. Certainly I wish we would see more support from the school at this point. It is not only frustrating, but also disappointing. However, this is not the time to dwell on or deal with that. We still have three young men who need our support and efforts to reverse the wrong that is being done.

"The question is who?"

you have to ask?....since when does the MSM ever, ever go after fellow leftists?....they don't.....

it killed them to even report on Ira Einhorn or whatever that murderer's name was.....

but If I was to guess, I would say they are looking for any chance at all to bash some conservative, Republican family member of the LAX team, if there are any....

never, ever trust the MSM to be even-handed...

I wasn't aware that anyone here was being used by anyone else. I thought we all wanted the same thing: an end to the misjustice being suffered by David, Reade and Collin.

I don't know Evans, Finnerty nor Seligmann nor do I pretend on the internet that I do by calling them by their first names. They are pretty much irrelevant to me. What I want is an out of control DA to get his due. I want the Durham justic system fixed for anyone who might become entangled in it.

Dukie07 said in post 197 [bold added]I don't much care for the current government in this country, but I'm not going to jump ship.

Well I do not really know how to take your statement above. It could mean you are very traditional and thing the government is heading too far left. Or it could mean, and I think this is more likely, that you do not care for President Bush and the GOP Congress because they are at least somewhat more conservative than the Dims.

If I took it right and you are don't like our national government because they are too conservative for you, YOU ARE USING THIS SITE. You are using this site because on most liberal sites, the Lacrosse 3 are hated for being white males and assumed guilty. On many liberal sites you get the CourtTV message board and so you are left with conservative sites for real discussion of this case.

Now if this is the case, I said I am willing to accept someone like you using us. But I posted the welcome message to you. This is a conservative site. You should not be surprised that many of us here are conservative. We see the problem as much much broader than a mistake being made in the case of three men accused. We see a systematic problem with the racist and sexist Dimocrat party favoring certain groups and raising a huge stink to get special rights for groups based on the group members voting Dimocrat. We, INCLUDING ME, say lots of other things you would not agree with perhaps on threads on lots of topics here.

If you are here only for this one topic and generally disagree with us, you should be polite and tread carefully not every one is as welcoming of lefties using this site for one issue here or there. If you are don't like the government because you think the GOP and President Bush are too liberal, then you are not using this site.

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.