Posted on 09/22/2006 1:20:40 PM PDT by Howlin
Three Duke lacrosse players took five to 10 minutes to sexually assault a woman hired to perform as a stripper at a team party, and not the 30 minutes she originally described to investigators, a prosecutor said Friday. "When something happens to you that is really awful, it can seem like it takes place longer than it actually takes," District Attorney Mike Nifong said.
Nifong's comments came as Superior Court Judge W. Osmond Smith III denied a defense request that prosecutors provide a detailed accounting of the alleged assault, including the exact time, place and type of sexual act the accuser said each defendant committed.
A grand jury has indicted three lacrosse players _ Reade Seligmann, 20; Collin Finnerty, 19; and David Evans, 23 _ on charges of rape, kidnapping and sexual offense. The accuser, a student at nearby North Carolina Central University, told police she was raped in a bathroom by three men at a March 13 off-campus party. Defense attorneys have strongly proclaimed the players' innocence.
Kirk Osborn, who represents Seligmann, said the defense needed the "bill of particulars" because the accuser has told several different versions of the alleged assault, and his client has a right to know which version prosecutors will present at trial. In search and arrest warrants issued early in the investigation, police stated the accuser told investigators she was assaulted for 30 minutes.
Nifong said he is not required to state the exact time of the alleged attack, but offered that authorities believe it took place between 11:30 p.m. on March 13, when the accuser arrived at the party, and 12:55 a.m. on March 14, when police arrived and found no one at the house.
Friday's hearing was the first since Smith was appointed to take over the case, and it was scheduled to continue Friday afternoon.
Before the hearing began, Nifong gave defense lawyers 615 pages of evidence, a compact disc and a cassette tape. He said it 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 that tested the DNA of the players and notes from a mental health facility where police took the accuser after the party.
Ding! Ding! Ding!
We have a winner!
Over worked...common complaint of social service workers, which Nifong used to be.
bump
Could they be on back order? I got a few of the first run, which were simply blue bands with the message imprinted. I had to wait a couple of weeks for the second run, which has the message color-filled with white print.
Now THAT is a revealing datum ... 'scuse me while I spit.
I spoke to the A.G. for North Carolina today and someone from Durham N.C. will have to file a complaint. They will not listen to an out of towner. He said no one has come forward with one. I spoke to him for over an hour I had a lot to tell him about Nifong and his mouth.
9:32 PM, September 22, 2006
(I'm not the above poster)
I suspect the AG's or his office is lying about not having gotten any complaints about Nifong from Durham. There is no way for you to know of course and he was counting on that.
Gretta had a segment on the hearing today. Ted was on the panel. I think Feiger was also. There were two other attorneys who I did not recognize and since I am working tonight did not have time to write down their names.
1. The guest attorneys generally agreed that the request for the DNA information was tweaking Nifong. Only one seemed to understand that the defense might want to know who else Mangum had sexual DNA on her that day since she likely lied to Nifong about it for weeks about having had sex with anyone around that time and this can be used at trial to attack her credibility. [As an aside, is Nifong possibly the only one in the room not to figure out Mangum is a hooker?]
2. One who I did not know openned by responding to Gretta's question that yes he was, as an ex-prosecutor and current defense attorney, very concerned that Nifong was taking so long to get the discovery out and have the trial. Ted chimed in with his theory that the defense is making a mistake putting out their information which he claims gives Nifong an advantage. Ted is clueless that the defense may have only given out SOME of their evidence.
3. Ted takes up the rest of the segment by chiming in that the defense with their push polling is being unethical. He does not even mention the polling but starts ranting aobut unethical defense attorneys and Gretta has to go back and explain what he is bathering on about to the viewers. Everyone else on the panel laughs at him pointing out over and over and over that the cure is to not let Mrs. Nifong or anyone else polled on the jury. This goes round and round and round with Ted claiming outrage and everyone else repeating why he is wrong, asking what ethical cannon this violates, asking can they not have mock trials either, saying the DA can poll too, etc. This basically wasted the second half of the segment.
ooooohhh.. I want color-filled ones! Shoot!
I am merely saying that's all Nifong has ... a weak Sane report and the AV's "word."
But maggie, the question is WHICH word? She seems to keep changing them....
Or should I say, Nifong is changing them for her?
Again ... I agree.
This is all Nifong has; a weak SANE report and the AV's weak testimony.
He's prosecuting on her "word."
Any psych majors here? What is driving Nifong? Sure, he wanted to keep his job as DA and ran with this case prior to the primary. Why does he persist, and can he stop himself? Is he delusional? Does he really believe a) Crystal; b) he can win; c) this does not affect his reputation? What will happen to him if a) he loses the election; b) he loses the case; c) he realizes what he's done? Mind you, I don't give a flying fig what happens to him or his wife. I do feel sorry for the kids, though. Inquiring minds want to know..... [Hee. I just had a vision of a front page story on the NE - "Nifong caught in affair with FA!" - sorry]
continued thanks for the pings.
It is sad,
Summer's over;
School is back in session;
and Nifongs's mishandling resumes.
DUKE LACROSSE 2006 INNOCENT! #6, #13, #45
I think you're right.
I think:
1. Nifong originally was merely trying to win that primary.
2. Now he is trying to win the general AND AVOID PROSECUTION.
Nifong might get out of this case now if he could. But he knows now that he has taken on some people who want more than charges dropped with their names smeared. They want vindication and he likely understands one form of vindication for them would be his sorry butt in prison.
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.