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.
NY and NC are one party consent states so the poll discussion with Nifong's wife could be recorded, per CTV.
BTW, abb, just wanted to say how much you are appreciated for keeping us all up-to-date. Thanks.
I don't have access to Court TV right now. Somebody please post a synopsis.
Not much so far ... CTV states that Nifong's survey motion may require a separate hearing.
(And one wonder's why the courts are bogged down.)
The reporter spoke on camera about what she had seen in court. She said it looked to be a long day - they were arguing all the motions. More discovery turned over - no way to know if it contained any new information. She opined the judge seemed to be attentive and engaged.
It is just this kind of reporting of no substance that is why I do not like us not seeing this hearing.
I want to know:
1. What motions are being argued.
2. What arguments are being made.
3. How Nifong is misbehaving.
And lots of other details.
I agree. I wish it were televised. But at least LieStoppers has someone there...
The reporter is probably someone who isn't really up on the case, and who has just been called upon to report it as just another story--hence, he/she will likely miss a lot of important details.
I can't imagine, for example, that the reporter covering the Elmostafa trial didn't get the name of the presiding judge
(and didn't remember it??) nor the name of the security guard who testified.
This just in...
http://www.newsobserver.com/1185/story/489469.html
Evidence handed over in Duke lacrosse case
By Anne Blythe, Staff Writer
DURHAM -- District Attorney Mike Nifong handed over three packets of evidence to defense lawyers in the Duke lacrosse rape case this morning.
During a pretrial hearing in Durham County Superior Court, Nifong also harangued the lawyers for seeking more information about DNA testing of the three lacrosse players charged with raping a dancer in March.
The lawyers want to know more about who did the testing and how it was done. Nifong said it was ironic that the attorneys now want the "typical witch hunt list" to cast doubt on how the DNA was tested.
Nifong noted that this summer, when the lawyers got the test results, "they called press conferences and told everybody that the DNA had exonerated their clients."
Nifong said that the State Bureau of Investigation could produce much of the information the attorneys want and that a private lab used in the testing could, too, but that it could cost the state $4,035.
Brad Bannon, a lawyer representing one of the players, objected to Nifong's mention of cost. He said it was the state that ordered the second round of testing at the private lab.
"We did not make the choice of doing the second round of testing in this case; the state did," Bannon said. "We are entitled to the information we are asking for, no matter how much it costs."
The hearing comes after a flurry of action this week by the prosecution and defense.
On Wednesday, Nifong asked Superior Court Judge W. Osmond Smith III to put all the defense lawyers under oath and ask them to explain their involvement in a phone survey that has been conducted in Durham. He called the survey a "thinly disguised" attempt to influence jurors.
Two days earlier, defense lawyers asked the judge to order Nifong to give a more precise timeline of when the alleged gang-rape occurred. They also asked Nifong to designate which of two bathrooms at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd. was the supposed site of the incident, and to designate which sexual act each defendant allegedly committed.
David Evans, Collin Finnerty and Reade Seligmann each face charges of first-degree rape, kidnapping and sexual offense.
In his motion, Nifong said the phone poll violated the state ethics rules that govern lawyers' behavior. Lawyers for the lacrosse players had accused Nifong of ethical violations, citing his public statements about the case and accusing him of using the case to win an election.
The hearing today was the first appearance before Judge Smith, who was assigned in the summer to preside over the case.
Staff writer Anne Blythe can be reached at 932-8741 or
I hope Judge Smith doesn't tolerate Nifong's "haranguing".
That should have been included in the indictment.
I've never been interviewed like that without being told it was recorded; I wonder if Mrs. Nifong will agree to having her "tape" replayed for us all so we can see who is telling the truth.
Ponytail retard Ron Kuby anchoring on CourtTV. Gag...
What is that all about?
See post #201, Howlin.
He really is incompetent and should be removed.
Well that might explain the "typical witch hunt list" remark. And it is funny he is complaining about the cost of getting the information on second test that was never needed to begin with.
That is not true.
MY relative works at that lab......LOL.
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.