Posted on 09/18/2006 5:19:53 PM PDT by abb
DURHAM - One of three people who saw the accuser in the Duke lacrosse rape case at the crisis center where she first reported being sexually assaulted kept notes of her observations, defense lawyers said in a motion filed in court today.
In the early hours of March 14, the accuser was taken to Durham Access Center because she reportedly met the criteria for involuntary commitment, defense lawyer Brad Bannon wrote in the motion filed in Durham County Court today.
While there for 40 minutes, the accuser interacted with three women on the center's staff, the motion says.
Gerri Lomuriel Wilkes, who was working at the center the morning the accuser came in, took hand-written notes of her observations, according to the motion.
Kirk Osborn, the lawyer representing Reade Seligmann, one of three lacrosse players accused in the case, found out about the notes while interviewing Wilkes, the motion says.
Defense lawyers are asking that the notes be turned over to them.
District Attorney Mike Nifong has told defense lawyers during discovery hearings that no notes were made at the center, that only a log existed from there.
In previous documents handed over to defense lawyers, there is no evidence that police tried to contact Wilkes about that morning.
Also, defense lawyers are asking the state for a bill of particulars in which they hope to get a more precise timeline of the alleged offenses and find out which bathroom at 610 N. Buchanan the gang-rape allegedly occurred.
They also are asking the state to specify which "sexual act" each defendant is accused of committing. Staff writer Anne Blythe can be reached at 932-8741 or ablythe@newsobserver.com.
This was on the local news tonight!
"The rat primary isn't the general election. "
Might as well be in that town.
L
At this point, someone would have to remind me if there was something, anything, about this case that Nifong HASN'T lied about.
I pray that this hell be over quickly for them.
The surveyor spoke to Nifong's wife, Cy Gurney for an hour, according to an affidavit included with the motion. The first question was something like
Riiight. And this "professional" who SHOULD know plenty about elections and laws, stays on the line for ONE HOUR to chit-chat on this subject?
No way, Jose. Not buyin'.
So let's do some math. In a city of Durham's size, how many phone calls would you have to make, at one hour each, to substantially influence public opinion? And what would that cost?
I agree I doubt a "professional" would spend a hour chit-chating on a push poll or a legitimate poll. I think Nifong's wife is as big of liar as he is.
You know, in normal circumstances, I would strongly disagree with you. Sounds like tinfoil hat time. What kind of a lunatic would concoct something like this? However, to ask the question is to answer it.
Wanna bet this is another gross exaggeration/distortion from the Fong (if not an outright lie) to give himself something to badmouth defense counsel while he is getting beaten about the head and shoulders? He's done it many times before in this case (fake DNA results, chokehold. condoms, etc.)
Simple response from defense: We did not commission such a survey and will put a stop to any acivity like that. We request that Mr. Nifong produce his telephone records so we can determine who made that call and conduct a full review. If the judge refuses, request that Mrs. Fong appear under oath so we can ask her about it.
One other thing in addition to the above post: The questions asked were straightforward and fair. There is nothing misleading or inappropriate to ask if the lineup procedure was fair, or any of hte other questions asked. Nifong's problem is that he has no answer for any of them.
Right, the costs would be too high. The object of a push poll isn't to spend a hour on the phone. Unless Nifong can show other people where being polled, I think it is more likely that some reporter called his house looking for info.
Nifong still hiding behind the skirts?
Now his wife is fighting his battles?
When will we hear from Mamma Nifong?
For those who missed sister Susan's two cents...
http://www.newsobserver.com/580/story/453491.html
I have known Mike Nifong for 51 years and know him to be a man of the highest integrity. For 27 years, he has been dedicated to protecting the people of Durham. He is exceptionally bright and has been a very successful prosecutor. At any time, he could have switched to the other side, that of defense attorney, where the big money is made. But his conscience would not let him do so. He has chosen to remain as a public servant to the people of Durham. He is well respected by the legal community of Durham, and includes as his friends many judges and defense attorneys.
Mike has been vilified recently in The N&O, by Duke University and by the multimillion dollar defense team of the accused young men. Those of us who know Mike well believe in him rather than in the never-ending negative stories that have run in the media.
Only the accuser and the accused know the real truth. It is time to stop attacking the prosecutor and to let the case play out in court. It is up to a jury, one that has all of the evidence to weigh, to decide who is telling the truth and to determine what the verdict will be.
Susan Nifong
Raleigh
(Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong is the writer's brother.)
//
This also tells us that Nifong may be pushing the panic button for Friday's hearing. One article suggests taht the defense informed the Fong about it in August, though that part is unclear. The Fong is desparate for any ammunition for Friday to defend against the beating he is due. SInce he has no evidence to support his theory, and the defense holds all the cards, he is trying to come up with something to put him in a position to say "the defendants are bigger poo-poo heads than me!"
Friday will be a circus.
Nifong is unbelievable. The defense told him about this in August. I can't believe the nerve he has to suggest that the defense is trying to affect the opinions of potential jurors after all the song and dance he pulled last spring.
I don't buy that this phone call lasted an hour either.
A second motion filed Wednesday by Nifong asks the court to pay for a toxicology test for the drug Ecstasy that was done on a hair sample from the accuser.
In the motion, Nifong said he was told in April by a defense attorney representing an unindicted player that the accuser was on Ecstasy the night of the party, but that the accuser has said she never knowingly took the drug, also known as MDMA.
The motion did not disclose the results of the tests, which were conducted July 24 and faxed to Durham investigators two days later.
http://www.heraldsun.com/state/6-771569.html
A defense attorney probably speculated that the AV might have been on X, and Nifong ran with it as if it were an admission, costing Durham thousands more duckets.
Since he's so convinced she was on a date rape drug (HA!) why didn't he test for that? Technically, I don't think ecstacy is a date rape drug.
The defense says that it had the right to conduct the survey and told Nifong about it in August. The survey was aimed at 300 random people.
Defense attorneys say they had the right to conduct the poll because they felt their clients' right to a fair trial was threatened by Nifong's public comments in the days after the alleged rape. (from abc11tv article)
That said, what are the odds that Mike Nifong's wife would be one of the 300 random selections? (I ballparked it at about 1 in 300)
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.