Posted on 01/04/2007 8:11:42 AM PST by maggief
Chapel Hill WRAL has confirmed that the accuser in the Duke lacrosse case gave birth at UNC Hospitals on Wednesday.
Sources tell WRAL the woman had the baby by Cesarean section. She was not due until February.
(Excerpt) Read more at wral.com ...
http://durhamwonderland.blogspot.com/2006/10/seligmann-speaks-out.html
There's some very bad mojo in Durham.
When doing individual searches (Kristiana Bennett and Denita Smith), I noted both worked on the Echo, both English majors, and both worked on a black "academic" committee together; but those items didn't show up when I did joint name searches. Maybe they participated at different times?
Another Echo reporter talked with local escort services and found that it is unusual for adult entertainers to work without bodyguards or bouncers.
(Bold mine) Who is that other reporter?
Confirmed what we knew about the strippers having no escort.
Now what about that white car?
Oh yeah, did I mention that Brian Taylor drives around some very important people at NCCU?
Thanks, Alia.
Curtis looks like the quintessential Marxism-spouting hag.
I hope she spends a fortune on legal fees.
Curtis looks like the quintessential Marxism-spouting hag.
I read the legal doc - she just folded so quickly, just like a rat scurrying away under a bright light.
Don't get bogged down in evaluating the strength of the Dowd claims in the abstract (and a firm of the reputation of Poyner Spruill would not be involved in filing frivolous claims). The case, and others like it, will not be thrown out before substantial discovery is allowed, and discovery is what Duke cannot tolerate. Each bit of information, no matter how small, will be cross-referenced with everything else that can be learned. Then smart men and women will use that palette of information to paint a picture. And very little will be confidential.
Large law firms with complex litigation capabilities are awesome machines. They move slowly, at great cost, and their targets are never the same afterwards, win, lose or draw. Duke will pay anything to end this yesterday. I'm a retired general counsel and that's my opinion.
http://z9.invisionfree.com/LieStoppers_Board/index.php?showtopic=1246&view=findpost&p=7254525
Bet she hopes Susan Sarandon will play her in the movie.
On the flip side
Does the profession decide the fate
By Larisha Stone, Echo Staff Writer, Campus Echo NCCU April 5, 2006.
Students of both N.C. Central University and Duke University have a lot to say about the role the victims profession plays in the alleged assault.
Did the victim ask for it? some wonder.
The overwhelming response is no, but there are some students who have mixed feelings.
Criminal justice senior Christopher Bridges gave a scenario.
If someone told me not to go to the edge of a cliff because the rocks were loose, I would avoid the cliff as much as possible, he said.
A rational person would walk far away from the cliff to avoid danger. If you do go near the cliff, youre tempting fate. If you fall off the cliff, then fate got you.
Junior nursing student at Duke University Bridgette Moynahan feels that no woman deserves to be raped, no matter what.
Women have a hard time claiming ownership of their bodies in a society of rape culture, she said.
If she was lying naked on the sidewalk, she deserves to be helped, not taken advantage of.
Media outlets have claimed that the victim worked for an escort service.
A representative of A Better Service Escort Service claims that there is no way that that could be true.
They say she was a dancer, but worked for an escort service, the representative said.
Dancers work for entertainment services and theres a difference. Why was she there without a bouncer? She went there with no one. She didnt deserve it, but she was a fool, the representative continued to say.
Wes Ray, owner of Bare Minimum Limousine and Entertainment Service has been in the entertainment business for 11 years. He gave further insight.
The entertainers never went unassisted. Male security met clients at the door.
He said that he never had a problem with disruption or disrespect of his dancers at Duke University functions, but he did add that if those boys called an escort service, they knew they had a better chance of getting more than entertainment.
http://www.nccu.edu/campus/echo/archive11-0506/c-flip.html
Full Name CURTIS, KIMBERLEY FOSTER |
Mailing Name KIMBERLEY FOSTER CURTIS |
Date of Birth 1956-01-10 00:00:00 |
Birth Location OC |
Gender Female |
Race WHITE |
Ethnicity NOT HISPANIC or NOT LATINO |
Resident Street Address 1305 WATTS ST |
Resident City-State-Zip Code DURHAM NC 27701 |
Mail Address 1 1305 WATTS ST |
Mail Address 2 |
Mail Address 3 |
Mail Address 4 |
Mail City-State-Zip Code DURHAM NC 27701 |
Full Phone Number |
Drivers License No. |
Voter Reg. No. 000000595819 |
Registration Date 1988-10-04 00:00:00 |
County DURHAM |
Status Code A |
Voter Status ACTIVE |
Reason AV |
Voter Status Reason VERIFIED |
Absent N |
Party DEMOCRATIC |
Precinct WATTS STREET SCHOOL |
Municipality DURHAM |
Ward WARD 1 |
Congressional District 4TH CONGRESS |
Superior Court 14B SUPERIOR COURT |
Judicial District 14TH JUDICIAL |
NC Senate 20TH SENATE |
NC House 30TH HOUSE |
County Commission |
Township |
School District SCHOOL 2A |
Fire District |
Water District |
Sewer District |
Sanitation District |
Rescue District |
Munic. District |
Dist. 1 14TH PROSECUTORIAL |
Dist. 2 |
Confidential N |
Age Age 41 - 65 |
||
Above information as provided by state - below is our annotations | |||
|
Address (click to find others) 1305 WATTS ST |
||
City/State/Zip (click to find others) DURHAM NC 27701-1134 |
|
County Durham |
County Description DURHAM |
Election ID 19 |
Election Date 1991-10-08 00:00:00 |
Election Label 10/08/1991 |
Election Description 1991 MUNICIPAL PRIMARY |
Voting Method Legacy |
Voted Party Code |
Voted Party Description |
Precinct Label |
Precinct Description |
County Durham |
County Description DURHAM |
Election ID 20 |
Election Date 1991-11-05 00:00:00 |
Election Label 11/05/1991 |
Election Description 1991 MUNICIPAL ELECTION |
Voting Method Legacy |
Voted Party Code |
Voted Party Description |
Precinct Label |
Precinct Description |
County Durham |
County Description DURHAM |
Election ID 21 |
Election Date 1992-05-05 00:00:00 |
Election Label 05/05/1992 |
Election Description 1992 PRIMARY |
Voting Method Legacy |
Voted Party Code |
Voted Party Description |
Precinct Label |
Precinct Description |
County Durham |
County Description DURHAM |
Election ID 23 |
Election Date 1992-11-03 00:00:00 |
Election Label 11/03/1992 |
Election Description 1992 GENERAL ELECTION |
Voting Method Legacy |
Voted Party Code |
Voted Party Description |
Precinct Label |
Precinct Description |
County Durham |
County Description DURHAM |
Election ID 24 |
Election Date 1993-10-05 00:00:00 |
Election Label 10/05/1993 |
Election Description 1993 MUNICIPAL PRIMARY |
Voting Method Legacy |
Voted Party Code |
Voted Party Description |
Precinct Label |
Precinct Description |
County Durham |
County Description DURHAM |
Election ID 25 |
Election Date 1993-11-02 00:00:00 |
Election Label 11/02/1993 |
Election Description 1993 GENERAL ELECTION |
Voting Method Legacy |
Voted Party Code |
Voted Party Description |
Precinct Label |
Precinct Description |
County Durham |
County Description DURHAM |
Election ID 28 |
Election Date 1994-11-08 00:00:00 |
Election Label 11/08/1994 |
Election Description 1994 GENERAL ELECTION |
Voting Method Legacy |
Voted Party Code |
Voted Party Description |
Precinct Label |
Precinct Description |
County Durham |
County Description DURHAM |
Election ID 29 |
Election Date 1995-10-10 00:00:00 |
Election Label 10/10/1995 |
Election Description 1995 MUNICIPAL PRIMARY |
Voting Method Legacy |
Voted Party Code |
Voted Party Description |
Precinct Label |
Precinct Description |
County Durham |
County Description DURHAM |
Election ID 30 |
Election Date 1995-11-07 00:00:00 |
Election Label 11/07/1995 |
Election Description 1995 MUNICIPAL ELECTION |
Voting Method Legacy |
Voted Party Code |
Voted Party Description |
Precinct Label |
Precinct Description |
County Durham |
County Description DURHAM |
Election ID 31 |
Election Date 1996-05-07 00:00:00 |
Election Label 05/07/1996 |
Election Description 1996 PRIMARY |
Voting Method ABSENTEE |
Voted Party Code |
Voted Party Description |
Precinct Label |
Precinct Description |
County Durham |
County Description DURHAM |
Election ID 34 |
Election Date 1997-10-07 00:00:00 |
Election Label 10/07/1997 |
Election Description 1997 MUNICIPAL PRIMARY |
Voting Method Legacy |
Voted Party Code |
Voted Party Description |
Precinct Label |
Precinct Description |
County Durham |
County Description DURHAM |
Election ID 35 |
Election Date 1997-11-04 00:00:00 |
Election Label 11/04/1997 |
Election Description 1997 MUNCIPAL ELECTION |
Voting Method Legacy |
Voted Party Code |
Voted Party Description |
Precinct Label |
Precinct Description |
County Durham |
County Description DURHAM |
Election ID 36 |
Election Date 1998-05-05 00:00:00 |
Election Label 05/05/1998 |
Election Description 1998 PRIMARY |
Voting Method Legacy |
Voted Party Code |
Voted Party Description |
Precinct Label |
Precinct Description |
County Durham |
County Description DURHAM |
Election ID 38 |
Election Date 1998-11-03 00:00:00 |
Election Label 11/03/1998 |
Election Description 1998 GENERAL ELECTION |
Voting Method Legacy |
Voted Party Code |
Voted Party Description |
Precinct Label |
Precinct Description |
County Durham |
County Description DURHAM |
Election ID 39 |
Election Date 1998-12-08 00:00:00 |
Election Label 12/08/1998 |
Election Description 1998 SPECIAL ELECTION |
Voting Method Legacy |
Voted Party Code |
Voted Party Description |
Precinct Label |
Precinct Description |
County Durham |
County Description DURHAM |
Election ID 43 |
Election Date 2000-05-02 00:00:00 |
Election Label 05/02/2000 |
Election Description 2000 PRIMARY |
Voting Method IN-PERSON |
Voted Party Code DEM |
Voted Party Description DEMOCRATIC |
Precinct Label |
Precinct Description |
County Durham |
County Description DURHAM |
Election ID 47 |
Election Date 2001-11-06 00:00:00 |
Election Label 11/06/2001 |
Election Description 2001 MUNICIPAL ELECTION |
Voting Method PROV |
Voted Party Code |
Voted Party Description |
Precinct Label 02 |
Precinct Description WATTS STREET SCHOOL |
County Durham |
County Description DURHAM |
Election ID 48 |
Election Date 2002-09-10 00:00:00 |
Election Label 09/10/2002 |
Election Description 09/10/2002 PRIMARY |
Voting Method IN-PERSON |
Voted Party Code DEM |
Voted Party Description DEMOCRATIC |
Precinct Label 02 |
Precinct Description WATTS STREET SCHOOL |
County Durham |
County Description DURHAM |
Election ID 50 |
Election Date 2002-11-05 00:00:00 |
Election Label 11/05/2002 |
Election Description 11/05/2002 GENERAL |
Voting Method IN-PERSON |
Voted Party Code DEM |
Voted Party Description DEMOCRATIC |
Precinct Label 02 |
Precinct Description WATTS STREET SCHOOL |
County Durham |
County Description DURHAM |
Election ID 51 |
Election Date 2003-10-07 00:00:00 |
Election Label 10/07/2003 |
Election Description 2003 MUNICIPAL PRIMARY |
Voting Method IN-PERSON |
Voted Party Code |
Voted Party Description |
Precinct Label 02 |
Precinct Description WATTS STREET SCHOOL |
County Durham |
County Description DURHAM |
Election ID 52 |
Election Date 2003-11-04 00:00:00 |
Election Label 11/04/2003 |
Election Description 2003 MUNICIPAL GENERAL |
Voting Method ABSENTEE |
Voted Party Code |
Voted Party Description |
Precinct Label 02 |
Precinct Description WATTS STREET SCHOOL |
Yup, probably a pro ballplayer, rich govt. official, or celebrity from her locale.
Wow if this is true and it sounds like it is, if I read the article right that Duke reivse their grades upward, then this is a huge scandle in its own right. And someone may get fired over it.
I wonder what a search of her political donations reported to the federal elections commision would reveal?
Of course she is not very bright. If she were bright and thought things out, she would find she could not hold the views she wants to hold.
If she is really a visiting prof, I would guess Duke will terminate her immediately. Which in academics might not get rid of her for a year.
I agree too with whomever said she should be removed from the classroom immediately. You know that is what Duke would do, if some prof starting failing black students for no good reason.
I just read the complaint against Duke and Kim Curtis. It is well crafted.
The damage amount include acutal and punitive damages and all say in EXCESS of $10,000. This is likely require to file by NC tort law, but that means the plaintiffs may be asking for any amount more. I would guess they will ask for in the 7 or 8 figure range.
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.