Posted on 12/13/2006 1:36:38 PM PST by Howlin
A private laboratory hired by the prosecution in the Duke lacrosse case failed to report that it found DNA from multiple males in the accuser's body and underwear, according to a defense motion filed today. The lab, DNA Security of Burlington, found that the DNA did not match the three defendants, their lacrosse teammates or anyone else who submitted their DNA to police, including the accuser's boyfriend.
The new evidence emerged in thousands of documents handed over to the defense in October.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsobserver.com ...
You better leave NOW...........I think it's going to be a full house tomorrow!
Just ask the AM to remove the dups.
Now who told? ;^)
I normally get up at 0600. Frankly, I don't want to be in downtown Durham while it's still dark.
Well, there is that...
This is what you hope you paid an attorney to do. In actuality, it rarely occurs. At least this time, the paid-for service knocked it out of the park. Kudos to the defense team. May they never let down or lose interest. May we never let down or lose interest. May the Country wake up and take notice. May law enforcement understand that if they're going to go after people on a wing and a prayer, they'd better have a parachut and a direct line to the Almighty. In Jesus name I pray.
Here's the motion - http://www.newsobserver.com/content/news/story_graphics/20061214_motion.pdf
It's too bad they can't submit into evidence everything the newsobserver published all of the discrepancies the 'victim'-liar had a problem with. (the info in abb's triple post)
That motion is excellent reading!
Devastating, imo.
At Durham Access:
"Honey" -- "Brian had set it up"
the other girl took my money----
The Motion to Suppress In-court Identification is the first motion filed by the defense which would actually lead to the dismissal of the charges. The defense is asking for an evidentiary hearing on its motion. If the motion is granted, the illegal photo line-up identification could not be used and the accused would not be permitted to identify the accused in court as her alleged attackers. There would be no evidence whatsoever of guilt, so the charges would have to be dropped. Nifong will argue that "It's a matter for the Jury to decide". The court should grant the motion if the court finds the identification process in this case is so flawed and tainted that no in-court identification would be reliable as a matter of law. I'll bet this is set for hearin in January--maybe February.
It may not be quite as "explosive" as yesterday's motion, but it is very substantive and could lead to an early ending of the criminal cases.
Will there be cameras in the courtroom this time? If so, I do hope that they will film the whole hearing, not just snipets. I want to SEE his usual oh-so-jocular smike wiped off Nifong's face.
"Brian had set it up"
That jumped out at me as well. So little is reported about Brian's background, sans that half-assed article by Anne Blythe.
http://www.newsobserver.com/1185/story/443932.html
It's too bad they can't submit into evidence everything the newsobserver published all of the discrepancies the 'victim'-liar had a problem with. (the info in abb's triple post)
I'm sure they have that covered.
Looks like Crystal Man-Gumbo is a veritable soup of male DNA's.
Last night was quite amusing. Greta's good friend 'Ted' had a total meltdown because the term 'civil rights' was used in this case. After his head exploded on that count, he admitted that there has been misconduct by Nifong.
Ted needs to take a chill pill.
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.