Posted on 10/11/2006 1:52:56 AM PDT by abb
DURHAM -- A CBS "60 Minutes" segment on the controversial Duke University lacrosse rape case is expected to air Sunday evening and will include interviews with all three indicted players and Kim Roberts Pittman, the second dancer at the party where the attack allegedly occurred.
CBS would not comment on the show. The network's normal practice is to withhold information about "60 Minutes" broadcasts until a few days in advance.
But Pittman's lawyer, Mark Simeon of Durham, confirmed Tuesday that his client was interviewed. But Simeon ended a telephone conversation before fielding a question about what Pittman told the interviewer.
An exotic dancer at the time, Pittman was with another dancer who claimed she was raped and sodomized by three lacrosse players during an off-campus party at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd. in mid-March.
Pittman since has been quoted as saying the rape charges were "a crock." She also told police in a March 22 handwritten statement that she and the accuser ended their performance when someone at the lacrosse party "brought out a broomstick and ... said he would use the broomstick on us."
"That statement made me uncomfortable and I felt like I wanted to leave," Pittman added. "I raised my voice to the boys and said the show was over."
Pittman said she then asked the alleged rape victim to leave the party with her. But she said the accuser "felt we could get more money and that we shouldn't leave yet."
According to Pittman, the accuser "began showing signs of intoxication" early in the dance performance and was "basically out of it" by the time it ended.
Pittman finally drove the other dancer to a Hillsborough Road grocery store, from which a 911 call was placed to police.
There is nothing about an alleged rape in Pittman's written statement, which is included in public-record court files.
All three defendants also were interviewed for the "60 Minutes" segment, sources told The Herald-Sun. The interviewer is veteran reporter Ed Bradley.
The three -- Collin Finnerty, Reade Seligmann and David Evans -- remain free under $100,000 bonds as they await a trial that is expected to occur next year. Each maintains he is innocent.
Neither they nor their families could be reached Tuesday for possible comment about the CBS show, and their attorneys had no comment.
Defense lawyers apparently will not appear on the television program. Neither will District Attorney Mike Nifong, who has been widely criticized for allegedly rushing to judgment in the case and making inflammatory public statements before he had sufficient evidence.
For the past four months, Nifong has not discussed the situation publicly. He was out of town on business and unreachable for comment Tuesday.
Benjamin Himan and Mark Gottlieb, police investigators in the lacrosse case, also could not be reached. But sources said the two had not been interviewed by "60 Minutes" as of Friday.
The Police Department repeatedly has declined to discuss the lacrosse incident.
It could not be determined Tuesday if a one-time driver for the alleged rape victim, Jarriel Lanier Johnson, was among those Bradley contacted.
"I have nothing to say about it," Johnson told The Herald-Sun by telephone before hanging up.
But Johnson gave police an April 6 handwritten statement about an "appointment," "a job" and a performance the accuser had at three different hotels in two days not long before the alleged rape.
Johnson also said she had sexual intercourse with him during the same time period.
URL for this article: http://www.heraldsun.com/durham/4-777449.html
Yeah, but so far nothing ever happens....
http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=local&id=4650588
LAX Defense Seeks Accuser's Statements
AP
(10/11/06 -- DURHAM) - Attorneys representing three Duke University lacrosse players charged with rape have again asked prosecutors for the details of any statements made by the accuser, as well as any additional notes and reports from investigators working the case.
In a letter sent to District Attorney Mike Nifong on Wednesday and included in the court file, attorneys Joseph Cheshire and Brad Bannon -- who represent charged player David Evans -- said the information was not included in 615 pages of evidence Nifong turned over to defense attorneys last month.
"We have made these requests time and time again," they wrote. "We understand and appreciate that this is not the only case in Durham and that you have an office to run. ... When, however, you chose to assume control over the investigation and prosecution of this case, you also accepted the attendant responsibilities of producing materials to which, you have acknowledged in court, we are entitled."
Nifong was out of town attending a district attorney's conference Wednesday and had not read the letter, said Sheila Eason, an assistant in Nifong's office.
In April, a grand jury indicted lacrosse players Reade Seligmann, 20, and Collin Finnerty, 20, on charges of rape, kidnapping and sexual offense. Evans, 23, was charged with the same crimes a month later. 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 lacrosse team party.
In the letter, the defense attorneys cited an April 11 meeting between Nifong, investigators and the accuser. Nifong said during a procedural court hearing last month that she made no statements and was asked no questions during that meeting.
The letter goes on to cite a court motion in which Nifong states the accuser told him she had not taken Ecstasy on the night of the party, and comments from the chairman of a local political action committee saying that Nifong said "he's the only one that's interviewed this victim."
"It is clear that you have spoken with (the accuser) about the facts of this case. ... It is equally clear that we still have no reports of any factual statements (the accuser) has made to you in the in the investigation and prosecution of this case, whether in the presence of others or not," the attorneys wrote.
The defense also said that it had not received any handwritten notes from Durham Police Investigator Benjamin Himan for his activities in the case after May 15; no reports from Himan after June 26; and no reports from Sgt. Mark Gottlieb since July 14. Defense attorneys also asked for any reports on the activities of Linwood Wilson, an investigator in Nifong's office.
Until a judge forces the issue, we can expect Nifong to continue to lie. Was Judge Smith copied on the letter? The article suggests a motion, bit only mentions the letter. Did I miss something?
I hope they treated him like a leper.
I found this partial article. Didn't want to pay for the whole thing.
In a case this complex, it is beyond credibility to believe that Nifong, who is going to personally prosecute this case, would not have any notes or reports. Once again, this smells.
I was in Vegas a couple of weeks ago. Some of the strippers advertise for 60 dollars to dance. When they get to the event, they get the money up front, and they usually come as a pair. Once they get the money up front, they say, "It's 60 dollars to get us here, but it will cost an additional 500 dollars for us to stay."
Well? Did you pay up or not? (LOL! Just kidding!)
Hee hee. It was a family vacation. I was told this information by my wife's cousin's daughter who lives and works in Vegas.
Not if the cops look the other way. I suppose she can decorate her ankle bracelet with some of the cheap trinkets she wears elsewhere on her ugly body and her customers won't notice.
We know from Kim's statements and excerpts from the AV's that each has accused the other of wanting to "stay to earn more money but I didn't want to".. Sounds like the first liar didn't have a chance. Then to hear Kim say "she didn't know how to make money on tips" is laughable.
Kim and the AV both admitted they got their $400 up front. Kim even stated the AV claimed to have her money after she was dragged to the car.
So what happened to the AV's $400 that DF gave her and what happened to the additional $1600 that the AV claimed was stolen from her in the original police report.
Methinks poor Kimmie's got some more splainin to do... I wonder if Ed asks her if she robbed the AV? In my opinion it will be a "tell" of how much he knows about the case if he even mentions the 12:53 to 1:20 interval. Even if he does ask, my guess is that Kim ain't saying nothing about the facts of the case. (Remember her "I ain't talkin bout none of that" mumble in her television premier?) She'll just be making more "unsubstantiated" claims similar to the ones Ms. Melanie refuses to publish.
There was a motion already filed on this subject matter a while back. The letter would be in furtherance of that same motion. A copy should have been sent to the court, or certainly will be soon if Liefong doesn't comply, which he won't.
Thanks bunches, LB. :>
Yeah, it smells because he wants a story concocted that fits around/explains away the defense's evidence of innocence.
There's no truth in advertising anymore.
My guess is that her lawyer made sure that question and others would not be asked prior to her appearing for the interview. Her appearance on the show will do nothing for this story since I am sure they didn't ask the questions that need to be asked of her. I hope they didn't pay her much for the interview because she isn't worth it.
This is being discussed over at Talk Left, but I think it bears repeating :
If Nifong says "he is the only person who has talked to the victim,” then that means that Gottlieb has NOT talked to the victim.
Ergo, what Gottlieb put into his 30-page report is a lie.
(I hope the defense takes note of this, too...)
This is the reverse of how it usually works. Normally, when someone gets arrested, the defense looks at all the reports and conducts a defense based on possible holes in the prosecutions case. In this case, it's the prosecution which seems to be looking to conduct a case based on possible weaknesses in the defense's case. It's amazing!
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.