Accused Denied Due Process in Duke Lacrosse Case?
By Wendy McElroy, Tuesday, September 19, 2006
Do the principles of justice still operate in American courtrooms?
The Duke Lacrosse case, in which three white male students are accused of raping a black woman last March, is also a case about race, class conflict and political ambition. For me, the case has become a litmus test for the American justice system.
I believe the accused are blatantly innocent and that the prosecuting District Attorney Mike Nifong is acting with willful disregard for both the evidence in the case and the Constitutional rights of the accused. In this case, I believe the legal system is the enemy of justice...and nakedly so. -jump-
In its original intent, therefore, due process was not meant to protect an accused like Seligmann from his accuser so much as to protect him from tyrannical and abusive officials. I believe both adjectives apply to Nifong from whom Seligmann deserves constitutional protection.*
Instead, a trial is likely to occur. If it does, the trial will undermine what the Preamble to the Bill of Rights declares to be the specific purpose of that document: to extend "the ground of public confidence in the Government."
As long as Nifong is the face of government, I find no reason for public confidence.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,214584,00.html
* Could their home states protect them from
extradition to the Criminal Dungeon of Durham?