The D.A.'s Tough Day
Some issues of relevance from yesterday's court hearing:
http://durhamwonderland.blogspot.com/2006/09/das-tough-day.html
Unfortunately for Nifong, shortening the time of the alleged attack only undermines what remained of his credibility. Time-stamped photos show the dance ending at 12.04am, a timeline reinforced by the accusers cellphone records and the neighbors statement. The second dancers statement, corroborated by that of the neighbor and most of the accusers myriad and mutually contradictory versions, has the dancers proceeding from the dances conclusion to the bathroom for an unspecified period of time, and from there to the car, where one of the players persuaded them to return to the party. Unless the D.A. is now contending that these developments occurred with the two dancers effectively in a full sprint, both Seligmann and (it appears) Finnerty had departed the house before the window for even a 5-minute attack opens, while Seligmann well before that time was on the phone.
Spurning defense demands for a bill of particulars, the district attorney announced, Were not required to report the exact time an offense took place. Speaking directly to Osborn, Nifong continued, Out of his clients whole life, we have given him an hour and a half that he has to account for.
Setting aside the fact that Osborn has already done precisely that, Nifongs comment reflects his belief that the defense carries the burden of proof. To quote Wendy McElroys recent article,
The assumption that a defendant is innocent until proven guilty has been reversed. Seligmann is assumed to be guilty. But more than this. It is as though Seligmann is not allowed to prove his innocence no matter how much evidence he produces.
Its easy to see the Nifong distraction for yesterdays hearing: his bizarre obsession with defense attorneys routine decision to poll 300 Durham County residents about the case. What, then, is the bombshell evidence he expects? I suppose well learn in a few days, but for now, my money is on the DNA. Defense lawyers want complete information about the second round of DNA testing, with a suggestion that there might be additional matches to people other than lacrosse players (no matches with the accuser) and the accusers three admitted sexual partners in the week before the party (one match, of three). If additional DNA exists, and that DNA belongs to someone not yet tested, then the accuser concealed information about her number of sexual partners in the days before the party.