Well, considering that they went door to door last night advising the residents that there had been threats of driveby shootings, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised.
It would be odd to remove the house numbers and LEAVE the fingernails, wouldn't it?
From this new AP story, the house is now vacant.
http://apnews.myway.com//article/20060402/D8GNL0CG0.html
Further, it alludes, but is not quite clear to me, that Duke University is the actual owner of the house.
I've been curious as to why the full street address has been prominent in this story when usually the press is more coy (i.e. "610 N. Buchanan" instead of "the 600th block of N. Buchanan"). Normally, they protect the actual address much the way they protect the identity of the victim. That's just one aspect to this I find odd. It might be because it's not owned by an individual but rather by the college so they don't feel the need to guard the identity of the house. But the true owners might.
This AP story also takes a "more than meets the eye" approach yet without declaring sides. It does seem as if they are being sympathetic to Duke in a way they wouldn't be to, say, a Republican office-holder.
It also mentions a Duke wrestler who has been 'assured' that no rape took place.
You know, it could very well be that the dancer showed up, heard some racial slurs, decided to stop the show, went to the car, was told if she left she wouldn't be paid, was persuaded to go back and finished but made up her mind she was going to get back at these students by screaming rape and leaving some evidence behind (like the fake fingernails).
If the neighbor is correct about the "cotton shirt" line which allegedly happened on her first trip back to the car, I could see that this could have been part of her plan.