'Go Ahead, Put Marks on Me' (GMA Interview w/Kim

Second Dancer Claims Alleged Duke Lacrosse Rape Victim Said to Bruise Her By CHRIS FRANCESCANI and EAMON McNIFF ABC News Law & Justice Unit

Oct. 30, 2006 — - The second dancer in the Duke rape case has said for the first time that the accuser told her to "go ahead, put marks on me'' after the alleged attack.

Dancer Kim Roberts made the new allegation -- which she has not shared with authorities -- in an interview with Chris Cuomo that will air today on "Good Morning America."

Roberts' allegation comes in the wake of Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong's admission in court last week that he has not yet interviewed the accuser "about the facts of that night."

As she drove the accuser from the March 2006 Duke lacrosse party, Roberts told ABC News the woman was clearly impaired and "talking crazy." Roberts said she tried several different times to get the accuser out of her car.

"The trip in that car from the house … went from happy to crazy,'' Roberts told Cuomo. "I tried all different ways to get through to her.

"I tried to be funny and nice," she continued. "Then I tried to, you know, be stern with her. … We're kind of circling around, and as we're doing that, my last-ditch attempt to get her out of the car, I start to kind of, you know, push and prod her, you know."

"I … push on her leg. I kind of push on her arm," Roberts said. "And clear as a bell, it's the only thing I heard clear as a bell out of her was, she said -- she pretty much had her head down, but she said plain as day -- 'Go ahead put marks on me. That's what I want, go ahead.' ''

Roberts said the comments "chilled me to the bone, and I decided right then and there to go to the authorities."

Roberts was not aware at the time of any rape allegations, which were first made by the accuser after police had arrived and taken the woman to a crisis center.

"It is something that has been weighing on my heart, and I worry that maybe I won't be called to trial,'' Roberts told Cuomo, as she reached for a tissue. "Because all of, so many of her, so much of [the accuser's] statement differs from mine and I, I might not help the prosecution at all as a witness.''

Roberts became visibly upset as she described the accuser's comments for the first time, at one point stopping the interview.

"Because I think it's gonna make people rush to judgment,'' she replied. "It's gonna make them stop listening. … And I don't like this at all. It's gonna make-- It's gonna make people not listen and I, I'm sure you're probably not even going to play this. It's gonna make people not listen to any other part of the story. It's gonna make people so judgmental, it's gonna solidify their opinions so much, that they're not gonna want to hear the other aspects of the case, which I think are just as important.''

Roberts' attorney, Mark Simeon, said she never shared what she says were the accuser's final comments with police, not realizing their significance at the time. He said she would be willing to take a lie detector test about the new information.

Three Duke lacrosse players -- Dave Evans, Colin Finnerty and Reade Seligmann -- were charged last spring with rape and kidnapping for the alleged attack on the exotic dancer, who had been hired by the men to perform at the off-campus party. All three men have vigorously declared their innocence, inside and outside of court.

Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifong did not return a call over the weekend for comment.

One legal expert who has followed the case closely from the start said the new information is a clear blow to an already embattled prosecution team.

"To have witnesses appear on a media program revealing information that the prosecutor doesn't know is stunningly inappropriate,'' said Linda Fairstein, who headed the Manhattan District Attorney's Sex Crimes Unit for more than two decades.

Roberts has proven to be a somewhat unpredictable character in a case with a seemingly bottomless supply of surprises.

She has said consistently that she doesn't know whether or not a rape occurred. But she has characterized the evening's events differently to different people.

On March 20, when police first contacted her a week after the alleged attack, she called the rape allegation a "crock'' and said that she was with the woman for all but "less than five minutes.''

A month later, in an Associated Press interview, she indicated that she believed there had been an attack.

"I was not in the bathroom when it happened, so I can't say a rape occurred -- and I never will. … In all honesty, I think they're guilty. … Somebody did something besides underage drinking. That's my honest-to-God impression."

Then, on June 14, in an interview with National Public Radio, she said she was "unsure'' of how much time passed when the alleged victim got out of her car and went back into the house to get her purse.

"I can never say a rape did or did not occur. That's for the courts to decide. I didn't see it happen, you know? But what I can say is that there was opportunity and it could have happened.''

Simeon told ABC News that she has never shared this new information with authorities simply because she was never asked.

"She hasn't spoken to authorities beyond that very first [March 20] interview that police conducted,'' Simeon said. "She's never met with the DA and has never been called back for a follow-up interview.''

Simeon said she told him she felt her complete story was damaging to both the prosecution and the defense's cases, and as such she believes she may not be called to the witness stand at all.

Nifong, who is seeking reelection next month, stunned defense attorneys in court last week when he said that he has yet to interview the accuser "about the facts of that night.''

"I've had conversations with [the accuser] about how she's doing,'' Nifong said. "I've had conversations with her about seeing her kids. I haven't talked with her about the facts of that night. … We're not at that stage yet.''

The prosecutor made the comment in response to a request from defense attorneys for any statements the accuser has made about the case.

Nifong said that only police have interviewed the accuser, and that none of his assistants have discussed the case with the woman either.

The highly-charged case has sparked an intense, bitter rivalry between Nifong and defense attorneys.

In September, he similarly surprised defense attorneys when he said in court that the attack, which the accuser told police took about 30 minutes, had in fact been only "five to 10 minutes.''

"When something happens to you that is really awful, it can seem like it takes place longer than it actually takes.''

Fairstein, widely considered a pioneer in the field of sex crimes prosecution, said Roberts' allegations do not bode well for either her own credibility or for the district attorney's office.

"In terms of any prosecution, it's troubling when a witness who has been interviewed many times comes up with a completely new statement,'' Fairstein told ABC News. "At some point in a prosecutorial interview, she would have been asked to give them anything she knew, any scrap of information that she had.''

Fairstein told ABC News she was shocked to learn last week that Nifong has yet to interview the accuser.

"That is just against the progress that's been made in this very specialized field,'' she said. "It belies anything a prosecutor would do before making charges. There was no need to rush to the charging judgment in this case. … This whole train should have been slowed down and everybody interviewed before charging decisions. To have witnesses appear on a media program revealing information that the prosecutor doesn't know is stunningly inappropriate.''

"I wonder why Nifong contributed $600
to the Durham Committee on the Affairs
of Black People on July 31st?

Does anyone know what an "advertizing table" is? "

Advertising table: a list or compilation of candidates
names used to promote or advertise said names.

The Committee's version is also known as the special
completed sample ballot, a paper identical to the official
ballot with 'suggested' choices printed in RED ink.

Tens of thousands are secretly printed, sometimes on
election eve, and then handed out to all voters in the 20
key black precincts, by Committee and NAACP paid
poll workers.

These ballots take the confusion out of voting- all you
do is match it to the official ballot and put your marks on it.

This tried and true method has been used by the Committee
for over 70 years. To quote NCCU law professor Irving Joyner,

"Within the African-American community, none of the three running
are widely known [primary]. African-Americans, in large part, rely
on what the Durham Committee decides."

"We've got a good machine going, and good folks doing it." - former
committee chairman Ken Spaulding.

"Without the committee, I would hate to even speculate what Durham
would be like," - Delores Rogers, committee activist.

Ex-candidate backs Cheek in DA race

By John Stevenson, The Herald-Sun
November 3, 2006 11:06 pm

DURHAM -- Durham's turbulent district attorney race took another twist Friday, with former assistant prosecutor Freda Black throwing her support behind Lewis Cheek and write-in candidate Steve Monks blasting him as a "spoiler."

Black, now a lawyer in private practice, was an unsuccessful district attorney candidate in the May Democratic primary.

On Friday, she threw her support behind Cheek, a county commissioner, and asked people who voted for her to do the same in an effort to oust incumbent Mike Nifong.

"I ask that you, the 10,000 voters who supported me in May, to vote for Lewis Cheek," Black said in a prepared statement. "Any concerns about who the governor might appoint will not matter if, when you wake up on November 8th, Mike Nifong received more votes than Lewis Cheek."

The governor would be involved because Cheek has said he would not serve if elected.

Black was a veteran prosecutor in Durham and was influential three years ago in the first-degree murder conviction of novelist Michael Peterson, now serving a life prison sentence for killing his wife.

But Nifong asked her to leave shortly after the governor appointed him as district attorney when Jim Hardin Jr. became a judge. The reasons have never been made public

Black said she didn't know why she was let go. Nifong, a prosecutor here for 27 years who is under fire for his handling of the Duke lacrosse rape case, has said he couldn't discuss the situation because it was a private personnel matter.

The names of Nifong and Cheek will be printed on Tuesday's ballot. Monks' name will not appear because too few petitioners asked that it be put there. But voters can cast a ballot for Monks, the chairman of the county Republican Party who is running unaffiliated, by writing in his name.

If Cheek wins the election and keeps his pledge not to serve, Gov. Mike Easley would have to appoint a replacement for him. Cheek has said responsibilities to partners and employees make it impractical for him to leave his private law firm.

Monks said last week that if Cheek would change his mind and serve if elected, Monks would support him in an effort to give the anti-Nifong faction a better chance of success.

But Cheek reiterated in a news conference Thursday that he would not take the job.

In a Friday news conference, Monks said Cheek is "a candidate in name only, and he is the spoiler here. A vote for Cheek assures the election of Mike Nifong. A vote for Steve Monks is the first step to improving the public image and the very real problems of our criminal justice system."

Monks downplayed suggestions that a write-in candidate cannot win.

"That is nonsense," he said.

U.S. congressional candidates, he said, were successful in five of nine contests in which they ran.

"All it takes is a motivated and informed electorate," Monks said.

He said Nifong has brought "national and international embarrassment" to Durham through his handling of the highly publicized lacrosse rape case.

So why should voters let the governor choose yet another chief prosecutor, he asked.

"I reject the caretaker mentality of letting someone else, in this instance the lame-duck governor, decide who will be our district attorney," Monks said. "Giving the power to the governor to again appoint our DA solves none of our problems and reinforces the perception of incompetence in Durham."

Meanwhile, Cheek supporters released a new poll Friday in which 70 of 300 respondents said they didn't think Nifong had handled the lacrosse case well, while 155 indicated he had mishandled it and should be replaced.

Seventy four answered that they didn't know.

The Washington-area pollster who conducted the survey, Keith Frederick, said Friday that the findings had a margin of error of plus- or minus- 5.6 percent. There was also a one-in-20 chance that the findings weren't a true reflection of the sentiments of the 300 participants.

Frederick said the survey initially targeted 3,000 people whom pollsters judged were likely voters because they'd cast ballots in the last two general general elections.

"This is an election where there isn't going to be a lot going on to draw people out," he said, noting that there are no major national or statewide races on the ballot. "The best predictor of [who] votes Tuesday is past votes. So we took people who vote on a regular basis."

Pollsters conducted the survey by phone Thursday night and called "in the neighborhood of about 2,000" people, Frederick said. They stopped when they got 300 responses.

The results were not weighted to compensate for any discrepancies between the demographics of the sample and those of Durham in general, Frederick said, adding that a poll of likely voters would normally have more women and fewer blacks in it than a general survey.

Frederick said the poll was commissioned by Ethical Durham, a political action committee that has endorsed Cheek and spearheaded a voter registration drive on the Duke campus.

Ninety-eight of the respondents said they were most likely to support Nifong in Tuesday's election, while 97 went for Cheek, 15 opted for Monks and 91 were undecided.

In another question, 141 people said Cheek's refusal to serve as district attorney made no difference to them. However, 66 said they were likely to vote against Cheek for that reason. Eighty were undecided.

An earlier poll commissioned by The News & Observer and WRAL-TV showed Nifong with a commanding 40-plus percent of voter support for Tuesday's election. Cheek was in the mid-20-percent range, while Monks bottomed out between 2 and 3 percent. The remainder were undecided.

Frederick, the Ethical Durham pollster, said the contact with the group was Stefanie Sparks, an assistant women's lacrosse coach at Duke who is also a paralegal for -- and sister-in-law of -- Bob Ekstrand, a Durham lawyer who represents several unindicted men's lacrosse players.

Ekstrand, a Duke alumnus, has been an active behind-the-scenes player in the continuing controversy over the case.

Staff writer Ray Gronberg contributed to this report.
URL for this article: http://www.heraldsun.com/durham/4-784765.html

http://www.newsobserver.com/100/story/506296.html
Durham DA race is blurry picture
Nifong opponents have complicated decisions

Benjamin Niolet, Staff Writer
DURHAM - It's hard to find someone in Durham who does not have an opinion on Mike Nifong.

For those who support the 28-year veteran Durham prosecutor, the choice on the Nov. 7 ballot is simple: fill in the oval next to the Democrat's name. But for those who disapprove of Nifong, things are more complicated.

They can pick Lewis Cheek, a Democratic County commissioner on the ballot as an unaffiliated candidate. Cheek says he is an alternative to Nifong but promises that he will not accept the job if he gets the most votes.

Or voters can select Steve Monks, the chairman of the county's Republican Party. Monks' name doesn't appear on the ballot but has to be written in on a blank line. Unlike, Cheek, Monks says he will take the job.

The election, like no other in recent memory, is perhaps appropriate in a year in which the Durham County prosecutor is a household name across the county. The publicity is fueled by the rape case against three Duke University lacrosse players who are charged with raping an escort service dancer hired for a March team party.

With the case as a backdrop, Nifong beat two challengers in a May primary. By the end of the summer, defense lawyers in the case had stepped up pressure against Nifong and news reports exposed weaknesses in the prosecutor's case. Nifong's critics took particular offense to holes in the case in light of Nifong's early statements to the media in which he denounced lacrosse players and said he was confident a sexual assault occurred.

Nifong has said he still believes the woman's story and plans to continue the case.

For Nifong's challengers, the campaign has become a referendum on Nifong. The prosecutor has tried to emphasize his other duties, including running an office that deals with more than 50,000 new cases a year.

"He's been doing it for a long time," said Jason Idilbi, 24, a law student at UNC-Chapel Hill. Idilbi, said he voted for Nifong at the Board of Elections on Friday. "All Duke lacrosse controversy aside, I think he's been doing a good job."

Nifong told a group of Rotary and Kiwanis club members at an October luncheon that the lacrosse case should be tried exactly because of the controversy surrounding it.

"If a case is of such significance that people in the community are divided or up in arms over the existence of that case, then that in and of itself is an indication that a case needs to be tried," Nifong said.

But to voter Sheila Dukes, the case seems to get worse and worse. The 53-year-old secretary said she voted for Cheek on Friday.

"It's the only way to get Nifong out," she said. "The more we hear, it seems like the less it was handled correctly."

Cheek, who got on the ballot through a petition drive, has promised that if he gets the most votes he will not serve. The governor would then have to appoint a district attorney for a two-year term. Cheek said he would vote for himself and has encouraged anyone unhappy with Nifong's behavior in the lacrosse case to do the same, despite the uncertainty of that vote. The election, he said, is a choice for each voter.

"You know your own opinion of what kind of job Mr. Nifong has done," Cheek said at a news conference. "Do you prefer that to a gubernatorial appointment?"

At least one person voted for Cheek and meant it.

"I think he would be a better person. Maybe he'll change his mind," said Nicole Brooks, 30, who works for Durham County Social Services.

Brooks said she met Cheek a few years ago and was impressed with him. She only heard that Monks was running a day or two before, she said.

Monks said at a Monday news conference that he thinks his candidacy is the best way to replace Nifong.

"They don't want to vote for a candidate who will not serve," Monks said.

Early voting at the Board of Elections ends today at 1 p.m.
Staff writer Benjamin Niolet can be reached at 919-956-2404 or bniolet@newsobserver.com.

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.