Employee kept notes of interaction with accuser (Nifong Caught Lying Again)

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.

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.

new...

http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/news/local/15584219.htm
Defense in Duke lacrosse case complains DA slow to share evidence
AARON BEARD
Associated Press

DURHAM, N.C. - Lawyers representing three former Duke lacrosse players charged with rape complained again Friday about the slow pace with which they said prosecutors are sharing evidence.

"There is a pattern that has developed ... that we don't get discovery unless a court date is set and we're here before a judge," said defense attorney Brad Bannon, who represents defendant David Evans.

Just before Friday's previously scheduled hearing, District Attorney Mike Nifong gave defense lawyers 615 pages of evidence, a compact disc and a cassette tape. Prosecution evidence must be shared with the defense under North Carolina's discovery laws.

Nifong said the evidence provided Friday included much of what was requested by defense lawyers, who had asked for handwritten notes from police officers involved with the case, reports outlining procedures used at the labs who tested the DNA of the players and notes from a mental health facility where police took the accuser after a March 13 lacrosse team party where she was hired to perform as a stripper.

The woman, a student at nearby North Carolina Central University, later told police she was raped in a bathroom by three men at the off-campus party.

Nifong responded by telling Superior Court Judge W. Osmond Smith III that he is now personally handling discovery issues in his office.

"We're providing in good faith what we can in these circumstances," Nifong said. "Despite the feelings of some people, this is not the only case in Durham."

Evans, who has graduated from Duke, and underclassmen Reade Seligmann and Collin Finnerty were indicted on charges of rape, kidnapping and sexual offense. Defense attorneys have strongly proclaimed their clients' innocence.

http://www.newsobserver.com/1185/story/489469.html

By Anne Blythe, Staff Writer
Superior Court Judge W. Osmond Smith III refused today to order prosecutors to give a defense lawyer a more precise timeline and description of the gang rape alleged in the Duke lacrosse case.

Kirk Osborn, the Chapel Hill lawyer representing Reade Seligmann, one of three lacrosse players charged in the case, says Seligmann can account for his whereabouts from 12:05 to 12:46 on the morning of the incident. In requests for search warrants and DNA testing, prosecutors have said that the offense happened in a 30-minute period between the night of March 13 and the morning of March 14, but have been no more specific.

Osborn said during a pretrial hearing today that he was afraid of being ambushed in court by prosecutors alleging that the incident happened in a wider time frame.

But in arguments before the judge, District Attorney Mike Nifong said the whole incident probably happened in five to 10 minutes. He also said that the accuser arrived at a Duke lacrosse team party close to 11:30 p.m. March 13 and that when police went to the house at 12:55 a.m., no one was there. But he refused to be more precise about when the offense supposedly happened.

Nifong also argued that defense lawyers had all the evidence in the case and also could cross-examine the accuser, who would "most certainly testify."

As part of disclosure of that evidence, Nifong today handed over 1,600 pages of evidence, one CD-ROM and one cassette tape. Defense lawyers now have 2,465 pages of evidence provided by the prosecution.

Nifong also harangued the lawyers for seeking more information about DNA testing of the three lacrosse players who have been charged ? David Evans, Collin Finnerty and Seligmann.

The defense lawyers want to know more about who did the testing and how it was done, and also about DNA evidence that supposedly belonged to people other than Duke lacrosse players. But 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 the process 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 Judge Smith 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.

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.

Evans, Finnerty and Seligmann each face charges of first-degree rape, kidnapping and sexual offense.

The hearing today was the first appearance before Judge Smith, who was assigned in the summer to preside over the case.

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.