http://www.newsobserver.com/1185/story/497626.html
Defense wants report on accuser
Attorneys for an indicted lacrosse player ask Nifong about what the accuser told him
Accused players on '60 Minutes'
CBS' "60 Minutes" will feature the three Duke lacrosse players accused of raping a dancer earlier this year. The program will be aired at 7 p.m. Sunday.
CBS reporter Ed Bradley interviewed Collin Finnerty, Reade Seligmann and Dave Evans, all of whom are free on bail. Kim Roberts, an exotic dancer who accompanied the accuser to the 610 N. Buchanan Blvd. house where the rape allegedly occurred, will also be interviewed, a "60 Minutes" spokesman said.
The news show did not interview the accuser, said Kevin Tedesco, the spokesman.
Benjamin Niolet, Staff Writer
DURHAM - Attorneys for an indicted Duke University lacrosse player want to know what a woman told District Attorney Mike Nifong about her allegations of rape at a March party.
Attorneys for Dave Evans sent a letter to Nifong on Wednesday saying that they are entitled to a report of anything the woman told the district attorney about the night the woman said she was raped by three Duke lacrosse players. The letter, signed by lawyers Joseph B. Cheshire V and Bradley Bannon and filed in court, seeks to pin Nifong down on whether he has heard the accuser tell her story.
The attorneys for the players have highlighted several inconsistent accounts from the woman as evidence that her accusations are false.
Nifong was out of town at a conference and could not be reached.
Evidence turned over to the defense contains a reference to a single meeting between Nifong and the accuser.
On April 11, Nifong met with investigators and the woman. He told a judge last month that she said nothing at that meeting, in part because she was still too traumatized from whatever happened at the March 13 party. The day after that meeting, Nifong told a judge that he intended to indict the first two lacrosse players.
The News & Observer generally does not identify complaining witnesses in sexual assault cases.
Nifong acknowledged in court that if the woman said anything to him about the facts of the case, the defense would be entitled to a written report of her statements. He has given nothing to the defense that documents any further meetings between the prosecutor and the accuser. But in the letter, the lawyers say a motion Nifong himself filed shows that he has talked to her and not given the defense the report of her statements that he is required by law to turn over.
In a motion filed Sept. 20, Nifong wrote that the woman told him she had never voluntarily taken the drug ecstasy.
The lawyers also cited a story the Durham Herald-Sun published this week that said the chairman of a political organization told the newspaper that Nifong had said he was the "only one that's interviewed this victim."
In an interview with The News & Observer, David Smith, chairman of the Friends of Durham, said Nifong did not say much about the case when he sat for an interview with members of the group.
"What he said was he is the only person who has talked to the victim," Smith said.
The letter that the defense filed Wednesday states that Nifong's own motion and the recollection of Smith show that Nifong has talked to the woman.
The Friends of Durham ultimately decided to make no endorsement in the district attorney election that includes Nifong, write-in candidate Steve Monks and Durham County Commissioner Lewis Cheek, who is on the ballot but has said he will not accept the job if elected.
In his campaign for the November election, Nifong has reminded voters that throughout his career, he has opened his entire files to defense lawyers, something that was not required by law until 2004. But the lawyers in the lacrosse case have accused him in court of waiting until the last possible moment to turn over evidence.
"We understand and appreciate that this is not the only case in Durham and that you have an office to run," the lawyers wrote in the letter. "... When, however, you chose to assume control over the investigation and prosecution of this case, you also accepted the attendant responsibilities of producing the materials to which, you have acknowledged in court, we are entitled."
The letter also requests handwritten notes taken by the investigators in the case.
Staff writer Benjamin Niolet can be reached at 956-2404 or bniolet@newsobserver.com.
http://www.blackathlete.net/artman/publish/article_02444.shtml
Re-visiting Two More Higher Profile Cases In Collegiate Sports
by Gregory Moore, gmoore@blackathlete.net
published on Oct 12, 2006
The next story that hasn’t received much attention is the Duke lacrosse story. This story has been a firestorm in the beginning but the embers are barely burning since the story first broke.
The latest news lines of this story are the following: Suspects not getting due process, DA says attack took ten minutes, Witness sentenced in unrelated case.
So what do we know about this case since it was last visited? Exactly what I put in those headline blurbs. According to various op/eds, the suspects in the case may not be getting due process in this case.
On Fox.com, one commentator wrote: 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.
How naked? Consider one of the suspects, Reade Seligmann. He is scheduled to be tried on three felony charges despite overwhelming evidence of his innocence: exculpatory DNA tests, a corroborated alibi, a string of contradictory statements by his accuser and an irredeemably tainted I.D.
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.
Those words were written by Wendy McElroy, the editor of ifeminists.com and a research fellow for The Independent Institute in Oakland, Calif. That is the words from one person but Ms. McElroy may be echoing the voice of many others in the Durham area.
In another story, the District Attorney says that the attack took all of ten minutes. District Attorney Mike Nifong is being quoted by the Associated Press saying, “When something happens to you that is really awful, it can seem like it takes place longer than it actually takes.”
Here is more of the AP story as reported by CBS News’s website: 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.
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.
The defense has said those DNA tests failed to find a conclusive match between the three players and the accuser.
Defense attorneys also provided the judge with a description of the procedures used by a polling company they hired to survey Durham residents about the case. Nifong has asked the court to stop the polling, but the defense insists it is harmless.
"It's like taking a teaspoon and dipping it into the swimming pool. We just want to see what the teaspoon will reveal," said Wade Smith, an attorney for Colin Finnerty.
So what can we make of this story and the feelings down in Durham? How about it’s a mess that isn’t going to be fixed anytime soon?
I got an e-mail from a defense lawyer when the story first broke out and he told me that as things went along, I would probably be singing a different tune as to whether a crime was committed or not. Well as far as I’m concerned, something inappropriate went on in that house and at least three Duke players knew what happened.
Now whether they want to fess up and tell the world, that’s a different story. I’m not going to say that the victim is some angel because she isn’t but I’m not going to portray her as just another piece of human trash that had to use her body to make money either. People do things for different reasons.
But this case has been dragging for quite some time and it is quite interesting to read the bits and pieces of an embattled DA trying to win a case that may not be very winnable in the end.
This story will continue to be watched as well as there are some social implications that will probably come forth and need to be addressed. Stay tuned folks. It’s going to be very interesting indeed.