Don't vote for Nifong
Let's for argument sake give District Attorney Mike Nifong the benefit of the doubt that he is not prosecuting this lacrosse case for political gain. Let's say it's true that he is not. Then what we have is a buffoon acting as our DA and that is even worse. After making comments like: "Wonder why one would need an attorney if one was not charged and had not done anything wrong?", Nifong also called the players hooligans and said he believed there had been a crime committed. Had he not made these remarks, Nifong might have had the political freedom to back down following the negative DNA tests. That's right, two negative tests. Now we have the revelation this week that Nifong, after all these months, admits he has never spoken to the accuser about the alleged rape. Anyone who votes for Nifong is just as guilty as the people in Washington, D.C., who voted for Marion Barry for mayor after he was released from jail for drugs. Vote to recall Mike Nifong.
Wayne Gooch
Durham
October 31, 2006
http://www.heraldsun.com/opinion/hsletters/
http://www.newsobserver.com/1185/story/504607.html
DA's foes raising more
Durham incumbent lags in amount of money brought in
Benjamin Niolet and Anne Blythe, Staff Writers
DURHAM - The two campaigns trying to unseat District Attorney Mike Nifong each beat the embattled prosecutor at the fundraising game.
Write-in candidate Steve Monks raised the most money of any single political action committee in the three-month reporting period from July 1 to Oct. 21. Monks raised $15,703 in individual contributions. A committee on behalf of Lewis Cheek also raised $14,596, with more than half of that amount coming from out of state donors.
Nifong raised $10,614 during the period with most of his largest checks coming from lawyers in the Triangle. He had a head start on his opponents since Nifong already had nearly $2,000 when the period started. He also has name-recognition that money can't buy.
Third quarter campaign finance reports were due Monday. The reports show a busy fundraising season in the district attorney race, a campaign fueled by criticism over cases pending against three Duke University lacrosse players who are accused of raping an escort service dancer at a party.
The election is unusual both for its intensity -- district attorney contests normally pit a long-serving incumbent against a hopeless challenger -- but also for the unusual ballot lineup. Nifong is on the ballot as a Democrat. Monks is a write-in candidate. Cheek, a Democratic county commissioner, got on the ballot as an independent through a petition drive. But Cheek has said that if elected, he would not serve, and if he turns down the job, the governor would appoint a prosecutor for a two-year term.
The fundraising season has been a marathon for Nifong who fought a hotly contested primary against two opponents in May. He won, and with no Republicans in the primary Nifong seemed to have locked in re-election. But after the primary, weaknesses in the lacrosse case emerged. Criticism grew over his handling of the case and his actions in pushing it forward. National media attention has drawn passionate observers across the country.
Each campaign raised at least $2,500 from contributors who donated amounts smaller than $100, the threshold for which donors have to be named under state law. But the list of Cheek's donors who gave more than $100 shows the interest and resonance the lacrosse case has generated throughout the nation. The Committee to Recall Nifong-Vote Cheek received checks from 50 donors with out-of-state addresses. Those checks amounted to more than $8,000.
Ernest Isenstadt, a retired federal prosecutor who lives in McLean, Va., contributed $1,000 in two payments during August. His daughter went to Duke University. He became interested in the case while she was at school and has followed it since. Neither he nor his daughter has any connection to the lacrosse team, he said.
"I'm deeply concerned about the behavior of Mr. Nifong," Isenstadt said. "It's just unlike anything I've seen in my experience."
Julie Linehan, Nifong's campaign chairwoman, said she was not concerned that the other campaigns had raised more money during the past quarter. The other candidates might need to spend more, she said, to get the name recognition.
She was disturbed by the number of checks from out-of-town contributors to the Recall Nifong-Vote Cheek campaign.
"That tells me that supporters of Duke just want to oust Mike Nifong, and I question their commitment to Durham in general," Linehan said. "How much have they contributed to poor people here?"
Durham residents Anne and John McMahon, each gave $2,500 to Monks in September. She is a retired health care consultant, and he is former chairman of the Duke Board of Trustees and former president of the American Hospital Association.
"We were very upset by the damage that was done by Mike Nifong to this community and Duke University," Anne McMahon said Monday night. "When we learned that Mr. Cheek would not serve if elected, we thought the best candidate would be Mr. Monks."
Monks said he has to contend with low name recognition and the fact that his name is not on the ballot.
"I need the extra money to overcome all the obstacles that I've got," Monks said. "When people get into that voting booth and they're thinking, 'God, I want to get rid of Mike,' I think a person who's really thought about it would be inclined to vote for me," Monks said.
Two other political action committees working for Cheek raised more than $7,400 during the period, according to finance reports. One of those committees, Ethical Durham, donated $2,000 to the Committee to Recall Nifong-Vote Cheek.
Staff writer Benjamin Niolet can be reached at 919-956-2404 or bniolet@newsobserver.com.