Posted on 04/18/2006 3:26:57 AM PDT by Mad-Margaret
DURHAM -- A day after a grand jury indicted two Duke University lacrosse players in connection with a reported rape, two men emerged from a sheriff's deputy vehicle and were led, handcuffed, into the magistrates office at the Durham County Jail at 4:54 a.m. today.
The arrests stem from a party that began March 13. The accuser, who is a mother of two, an N.C. Central University student and an escort service dancer, told police March 14 that she was sexually assaulted by three men in a bathroom at an off-campus house shared by three lacrosse team captains. The accuser is black; she said her rapists were white.
Defense lawyers said players maintained that there was no sex at all. They said the accuser concocted the story, that she was drunk and injured late March 13 when she arrived at the three-bedroom house at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd.
"... Two young men have been charged with crimes they did not commit. This is a tragedy," Bob Ekstrand, who represents team players, said Monday in a prepared statement. "For the two young men, an ordeal lies ahead. They do not face it alone; they face it with the love of family and friends and strengthened by the truth. They are both innocent."
Superior Court Judge Ronald Stephens sealed a manila envelope containing the indictments shortly after the grand jury finished its business Monday. The judge cited a state law that requires everyone involved in a case, including witnesses, to keep the indictment secret until a suspect is arrested.
Last month, a judge ordered DNA tests on the team's 46 white players; he excluded the only black team member. The players' attorneys say the tests showed none of the players' genetic material on or in the woman.
Nifong, bolstered by a medical exam that found injuries on the woman consistent with sexual assault, says he is confident that she was assaulted in the university-owned house. Nifong said last week at a forum at NCCU that the accuser identified at least one of her attackers.
Until Sunday night, the only other witness, the second woman hired to dance at the party, had remained silent. In television interviews, she told her story.
The woman's attorney, Mark Simeon of Durham, declined Monday to make her available for an interview. She spoke on the MSNBC cable news network, which did not identify her and showed her in silhouette. Simeon confirmed that it was his client on MSNBC.
The woman told MSNBC that she did not witness a rape and does not know whether one occurred.
The woman said she arrived thinking that she would be dancing at a bachelor party of 15 people. She was not expecting a party of lacrosse players, many of whom she said were in a drunken stupor. The woman said she was infuriated to learn that some players photographed her dancing.
The accuser did not appear to be on drugs or to have been drinking when she arrived, the second dancer said. She was "absolutely fine and in control of herself."
When the accuser left, less than an hour after she arrived, she was incoherent and stumbling, the second dancer said.
"She couldn't really walk on her own," the woman said. "She really couldn't get her thoughts together enough to answer any questions. ... She was a different person than I met at the beginning."
The second woman said she was the person who called 911 as the party was breaking up, to complain that some lacrosse players had used racial slurs. "The boys hollered the 'N' word," she said. "I was upset and called 911."
She said she pretended to be a passer-by because she didn't want people in her life to know about her job as an escort service dancer.
It is unclear how that woman's story would affect the case. Players' attorneys have said she would only help them. By day's end Monday, Nifong left without talking to reporters; it remains unclear what evidence he has.
Throughout Monday, there were many more reporters on the sixth floor of the courthouse than the 18 members of the grand jury panel. Reporters tracked the district attorney's movements in minute detail. Just after noon, Nifong emerged from his office and walked across the hallway to the bathroom.
Reporters surrounded the bathroom door in a crowd that included five television cameras, three still photographers, sound men with boom microphones and at least a dozen print reporters. At the sound of flushing, the group tensed, raised cameras and prepared. Nifong did not emerge with news.
"I no longer get to go anywhere in my community without people knowing who I am," said Nifong, who faces two challengers in a primary election May 2. Staff writer Anne Blythe can be reached at 932-8741 or ablythe@newsobserver.com.
She alleged that someone stole some of her fat?
This is too funny!
Because I have pointed out the obvious....that the police would know more than the public...then I have been labelled as a liar, a troll, and now I am "emotional".
Thanks for the giggles.
Good day to you also.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=2387151
Not quite. 15 of them have had brushes with the law before. The kids assault charge can be dropped after 25 hrs community service in DC. Ain't that serious. Not enough to pressure him on.
In the pre-civil rights era, white DAs and judges were often extremely harsh towards blacks accused of crimes against whites for fear of voter backlash and the lynch mob. The tables have turned with regard to racial power, but the underlying issue is race, whether with the Scottsboro Boys in the 1930s or the Duke lacrosse players in the 2000s.
NO! That was ACCUSED after a fight, but I don't think it was proved.
He was NOT found guilty of that.
you have freepmail
How about using an object???
Remember the heros - also athletes I believe - from New Jersey and young retarded girl???
LaCross is a sport for young upperclass brats who think their money and parents' position empowers them to use other people of a lesser sort - black or white - as their needs require.
I can't believe the responses I'm reading in this post.
But time will bear out the facts.
There are no charges anymore from that incident and he did community service.
There are no charges anymore from that incident and he did community service.
Clearly, she's not interested in the facts.
As was seen in the OJ trial, a jury that is sympathetic to the defendant can acquit even in the face of extreme evidence of guilt
The question is, can a jury whose make up has them being hostile to the defendants vote to convict even in the absence of credible evidence?
There is nothing to "turn against."
I don't think he'll fall for it but I think that's part of their thought process. Also, when they want to bring up the accuser's past the DA will say that his past is also fair game.
"If you're going to hurt someone, you'd better make sure they're the same race as you."
..appears to me there's been some 'trolling' or 'shopping around' for any embarrassing items in the boys past, and bingo!...they found one, so he is identified as the perp..... has to be guilty!
You are here for nothing other reason than to cause disruption on this thread.
We've gotten along just fine without you before. And we sure don't need you now.
Since when was the son of a fireman considered upperclass?
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.