Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

'60 Minutes' interviews Duke lacrosse defendants (DukeLax Ping)
Durham Herald-Sun ^ | October 11, 2006 | John Stevenson

Posted on 10/11/2006 1:52:56 AM PDT by abb

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 321-340341-360361-380 ... 801-814 next last
To: RecallMoran

LOL! Luvvit! I can't stand that woman - makes me gag.


341 posted on 10/13/2006 12:46:01 PM PDT by Jezebelle (Our tax dollars are paying the ACLU to sue the Christ out of us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 304 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

That kind of news definitely comforts him, and I would not be surprised if he and his mates might lurk here from now on. I also told him the story about a friend of our family who is a bit older than him but played HS lax in the Catholic schools in Jersey and played against him for one year. He told me that Reade was a great kid and had a great reputation (even though he was a big stud lax player). When I told him that he said "awesome" and smiled. He's doing well and appreciates all the support.


342 posted on 10/13/2006 12:48:12 PM PDT by Pharmboy (Every single day provides at least one new reason to hate the mainstream media...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 339 | View Replies]

To: VRWCtaz

I hope at some point she rats him out for giving her a deal in exchange for her "cooperation" on the Duke case. Probably won't happen until after he loses the election - IF he loses the election.


343 posted on 10/13/2006 12:48:46 PM PDT by Jezebelle (Our tax dollars are paying the ACLU to sue the Christ out of us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 305 | View Replies]

To: RecallMoran

To your #1: You're absolutely correct in your interpretation of that segment, up to and including the fact that Kim is going to throw Nifong under the bus. (Look for her to be attacked by the black community in Durham.)

As to #2, my husband said the exact same thing! He doesn't watch much TV and only agrees to it being "on" so I'll eat dinner with him at night.......LOL. He was FLOORED!


344 posted on 10/13/2006 12:53:25 PM PDT by Howlin (Why Won't Nancy Pelosi Let Louis Freeh Investigate the Page Scandal?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 245 | View Replies]

To: Sue Perkick
Never thought I'd ever say it but I'm looking forward to 60 Minutes.

I'm going to put up a separate LIVE THREAD for that one!

345 posted on 10/13/2006 12:54:25 PM PDT by Howlin (Why Won't Nancy Pelosi Let Louis Freeh Investigate the Page Scandal?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 248 | View Replies]

To: darbymcgill

Maybe she kept asking it because she knew the boys wanted their money back - some of them did, anyway - and since Mangum was falling apart and didn't have all of her stuff and she (Kim) was mad at the boys, she wanted to know that they didn't take Mangum's money back.

Or she ripped Mangum off. But I don't see where advancing a complaint call against the boys that she wasn't going to show up for - maybe watched from down the street - would give her cover for ripping Mangum off. The only person she would have to worry about is Mangum's pimp, and he isn't going to be privy to the 911 call. I think the 911 call was unrelated and just done for spite because she was mad.


346 posted on 10/13/2006 12:54:53 PM PDT by Jezebelle (Our tax dollars are paying the ACLU to sue the Christ out of us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 307 | View Replies]

To: Jezebelle

The one thing that I cannot figure out is that first phone call.

You would have thought a call like that would have been make by the fake accuser.


347 posted on 10/13/2006 12:57:41 PM PDT by Howlin (Why Won't Nancy Pelosi Let Louis Freeh Investigate the Page Scandal?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 346 | View Replies]

To: Jezebelle
That could very well happen in the course of a future civil action.
348 posted on 10/13/2006 12:58:38 PM PDT by VRWCtaz ("Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness." - Thomas Paine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 343 | View Replies]

To: abb
He says neither investigators from the prosecutor's office nor police have questioned him about the night of the alleged crime since he was picked out of a line-up by the accuser

Why would they want to talk to him AFTER the fact when they didn't care to talk to him BEFORE the fact?

349 posted on 10/13/2006 12:58:54 PM PDT by Howlin (Why Won't Nancy Pelosi Let Louis Freeh Investigate the Page Scandal?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 340 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

Please ping me to that thread.


350 posted on 10/13/2006 1:00:40 PM PDT by VRWCtaz ("Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness." - Thomas Paine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies]

To: VRWCtaz

Glad to!


351 posted on 10/13/2006 1:01:37 PM PDT by Howlin (Why Won't Nancy Pelosi Let Louis Freeh Investigate the Page Scandal?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 350 | View Replies]

To: ltc8k6

Well, Mangum wasn't raped, so Kim didn't help with a rape. If someone said I helped with a rape, it would piss me off big time. I'd be ballistic, in fact.

The simple fact that Mangum said this and Kim wasn't indicted for aiding the felonies the boys have been charged with says a lot about what Nifong really believes - which is that he, too, knows there was no rape.


352 posted on 10/13/2006 1:07:34 PM PDT by Jezebelle (Our tax dollars are paying the ACLU to sue the Christ out of us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 313 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

Me too!! Thanks in advance.


353 posted on 10/13/2006 1:08:15 PM PDT by bjc (Check the data!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 351 | View Replies]

To: bjc

You're added!


354 posted on 10/13/2006 1:10:10 PM PDT by Howlin (Why Won't Nancy Pelosi Let Louis Freeh Investigate the Page Scandal?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 353 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

Oh absolutely!


355 posted on 10/13/2006 1:11:48 PM PDT by Sue Perkick (The true gospel is a call to self-denial. It is not a call to self-fulfillment..John MacArthur)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies]

To: abb

Kim has some street smarts, but in any sophisticated sort of way. If she did, she'd never have sent that email and she'd never have wavered on the truth. The truth puts her in a better light than her lies and manipulations have. A calm woman quietly telling the truth with her head held high would have been a better image than that which she has presented thus far.

If you've read Kim's letter to the public relations group in NY, you can see that she is not an uneducated guttersnipe. Her grammar, punctuation, vocabulary and sentence structure are quite good. She didn't need to go down the road of acting and looking like trash. That was a mistake and it wasn't "smart." She's obviously trying to rehabilitate that image. That IS smart.


356 posted on 10/13/2006 1:13:58 PM PDT by Jezebelle (Our tax dollars are paying the ACLU to sue the Christ out of us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 314 | View Replies]

To: Pharmboy

The scary thing is that the guys could have been less clean cut - with a few more black marks in their backgrounds and a few less connected parents - and it would have been easier for Nifong to get them railroaded. The real issue here is how easy it is for a DA to corrupt our entire LE process for his/her own nefarious purposes. Let's hope some good will come of exposing the fragility of the system. It is episodes like this that makes me anxious about my support for capital punishment.


357 posted on 10/13/2006 1:14:06 PM PDT by bjc (Check the data!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 342 | View Replies]

To: Fido969

Then why did CBS promote her?


358 posted on 10/13/2006 1:15:06 PM PDT by Jezebelle (Our tax dollars are paying the ACLU to sue the Christ out of us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 316 | View Replies]

To: abb

"Roberts, who danced at the same party as the accuser where the alleged incident took place, told "60 Minutes" correspondent Ed Bradley in an interview that she didn't help the accuser get dressed after the alleged incident, nor was she physically separated from the accuser by the Duke lacrosse players at any time. The accuser said in her police statement that both occurred."

Huh? I don't remember anything about Kim telling the cops she helped Mangum get dressed after the alleged incident. Kim told the cops nothing happened to Mangum and that the story was a crock. As for being separated, she said they were never separated except once for less than 5 minutes.


359 posted on 10/13/2006 1:35:44 PM PDT by Jezebelle (Our tax dollars are paying the ACLU to sue the Christ out of us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 318 | View Replies]

To: Jezebelle
The simple fact that Mangum said this and Kim wasn't indicted for aiding the felonies the boys have been charged with says a lot about what Nifong really believes - which is that he, too, knows there was no rape.

no, No, NO. There you go again slipping back into your investigator mode about this like it is a criminal invesstigation. The reason that Roberts was not indicted was that indicting her would NOT get Nifong any votes and might well cost him votes. This was only about votes.

Nifong has no personal opinion about whether a crime took place. He is just going with Mangum's story. He has avoided all of the evidence and testimony in this situation so he would not be forced to form an opinion that he fears would be against his political interest. That is why the defendants have never been interviewed even before they were indicted. That is why he sometimes claims not to have talked to Mangum about her story. That is why he has not talked to Pittman. That is why in one motion the defense asked the judge to direct Nifong to read his own evidence file.
360 posted on 10/13/2006 1:36:22 PM PDT by JLS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 352 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 321-340341-360361-380 ... 801-814 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson