Arrests made in Duke lacrosse case

News & Observer ^ | Apr 18, 2006 | Anne Blythe and Benjamin Niolet

[proud2beconservativeinNJ]

The police took pictures of them within days; if there had been scratches on them, they would have been arrested on the spot.

Howlin, media photos were taken of some of the Lacrosse players arriving with their shirts pulled over their heads and were dated as taken on March 23rd. If this is correct, that would place the photos and lab work a 9-10 days after the alleged incident. Fox news consultant pathologist(Baden? sp) stated evidence for scratches would be limited due to the normal healing that would take place for scratches over 10 days.

Please let me know if you have a different date for the Lacrosse team compliance for the photos other than March 23rd.

[Howlin]

Now, you are correct.

I wasn't clear enough, I guess.

If she had identified them by face, as her father said she did, and if they showed up with scratches, I can't imagine that they wouldn't have been arrested on the spot.

But from what I am hearing from the defense team today she only identified them a week ago and it was by the scratches on their arms, not their faces.

[TheSpottedOwl]

Maybe the dean should step down for allowing this to happen? Just a thought... ;-)

Oy vey! I hope that was sarcasm?

[Protect the Bill of Rights]

I have not seen that report, thanks Howlin

Curious...........
Alcohol related? NO
Drug related? No
Drug Activity? Not applicable

Is that standard? If the cop said she was passed out drunk, would that not be relevant just in case she was(GASP!) lying?

[Jezebelle]

She'll probably just ignore it or ridicule it.

[Jezebelle]

If Nifong manages to separate the trials and Finnerty is tried first, it will be difficult to get the false ID on Seligman in, for one thing. I have stated several times that the bad ID on Seligman taints the ID on Finnerty, but it won't be helpful unless they're tried together. So, that leaves us with looking at Finnerty's alibi as a separate issue. Eye witness alibi testimony can be tough to sustain, which is why I was asking if there was anything solid and irrefutable placing him away from the scene during the critical times.

[abb]

Pics now on Drudge...

[Jezebelle]

Thanks. They're all dark and I really can't see much of anything.

[Spunky]

wagglebee, you are correct. The North Carolina Statute says rape is defined as vaginal penetration by the male sex organ.

FORCIBLE ACTS 1

Vaginal Intercourse 2*

First Degree Rape (GS 14-27.2 (2), Class B1 felony (SOR Vaginal intercourse by force and without consent and (a) with use of a weapon, (b) inflicting serious injury, or (c) aided by others.

*2 Vaginal intercourse is defined by case law as the slightest penetration of the female sex organ by the male sex organ. State v. Summers, 92 NC App. 453, 374, SE2d 631 (1988), cent. den, 324 NC 341, 378 SE2nd 806 (1989)

but the two boys were also charged with First Degree Sexual offense which is described as such

Other Sexual Contact First Degree Sexual Offense (GS 14-27.4 (a) (2), Class B1 Felony (SOR) Sexual acts 3* (Not vaginal intercourse) by force and without consent and (a) with use of a weapon, (b) infliction serious injury, or (c) aided by others.

*3 "Sexual act" is defined by GS 14-27.1 (4) as " cunnilingus, fellatio, analingus, or anal intercourse," AS WELL AS "PENETRATION, HOWEVER SLIGHT, BY ANY OBJECT INTO THE GENITAL OR ANAL OPENING OF ANOTHER PERSON'S BODY."

From Here: North Carolina Statutes

I am not making any statement to the guilt or innocence of either parties involved, but I do have a question? Could it be possible that say, (if the girl was incapacitated) not knowing EXACTLY what happened to her the prosecutor brought both these charges and when/if no DNA pans out he can drop the First Degree Rape, but still charge the First Degree Offense?

connect, I pinged you because you seem to know a lot about law.

[TheSpottedOwl]

I heard or read that when Kim drove the accuser to the shopping center area, and after the security guard questioned them, her boyfriend/pimp, picked her up and took her to the hospital. I think this is when the "rape" took place. If the nurse/doctor insisted there was evidence of a recent sexual assult, why don't they take the boyfriend's DNA and compare it to what they found on her?

That is totally plausible. That would account for her "condition" and the unidentifiable DNA found on her person. The DA should be eating stone soup for this.

[Froufrou]

Spunk, I see how you got yer name! Good work, and I salute you for it! There's more here than meets the "Y."

;o)

[Howlin]

Crystal will be the one vilified,

Not in Durham, she won't.

Listen for the mantra: "Rich white boys bought their way out of it."

[Hatteras]

Of course that was sarcasm. Didn't you see the little winky face at the end?

I'm just having fun with the paradox of such a liberal school as Duke University being labeled as a haven for wealthy, racist children of privilege bent on raping and assaulting poor black working mothers.

I have no doubt that if this were a conservative school or military academy, the cry for heads to roll would be louder than Abu Grab and the panty pictures.

[Denver Ditdat]

Not to Classy Green Eyed Blonde, I hope...