Mike Nifong
is a
Judicial Terrorist.
Posted on 12/15/2006 12:00:48 PM PST by nj_pilot
The head of a private DNA laboratory said under oath today that he and District Attorney Mike Nifong agreed not to report DNA results favorable to Duke lacrosse players charged with rape.
Brian Meehan, director of DNA Security of Burlington, said his lab found DNA from unidentified men in the underwear, pubic hair and rectum of the woman who said she was gang-raped at a lacrosse party in March. Nurses at Duke Hospital collected the samples a few hours after the alleged assault. Meehan said the DNA did not come from Reade Seligmann, David Evans, or Collin Finnerty, who have been charged with rape and sexual assault in the case.
Meehan struggled to say why he didn’t include the favorable evidence in a report dated May 12, almost a month after Seligmann and Finnerty had been indicted. He cited concerns about the privacy of the lacrosse players, his discussions at several meetings with Nifong, and the fact that he didn’t know whose DNA it was.
Under questioning by Jim Cooney, a defense attorney for Seligmann, Meehan admitted that his report violated his laboratory’s standards by not reporting results of all tests.
Did Nifong and his investigators know the results of all the DNA tests? Cooney asked.
“I believe so,” Meehan said.
“Did they know the test results excluded Reade Seligmann?” Cooney asked.
“I believe so,” Meehan said.
Was the failure to report these results the intentional decision of you and the district attorney? Cooney asked.
“Yes,” Meehan replied.
At that answer, several people in the packed courtroom clapped. Superior Court Judge W. Osmond Smith III warned the standing-room only crowd to be quiet or leave.
Meehan’s testimony differed from a statement Nifong made at the beginning of today’s hearing.
“The first I had heard of this particular situation was when I was served with this particular motion” on Wednesday, Nifong told the judge. After court, Nifong clarified his remarks to say that he knew about the DNA results.
"And we were trying to, just as Dr. Meehan said, trying to avoid dragging any names through the mud but at the same time his report made it clear that all the information was available if they wanted it and they have every word of it,” Nifong said.
Joseph B. Cheshire V, a lawyer for Evans, said he was troubled by today’s testimony.
“If any of the lacrosse players were excluded, they simply wouldn’t put it in the report,” he said. “It raises some troublesome questions about (Nifong), who has an obligation to disclose exculpatory evidence and turn it over to the defense.”
In a response to reports that the accuser in the Duke lacrosse case gave birth recently, UNC Health care issued a statement at about 1:30 p.m. saying that the woman is at UNC Hospitals for care related to her pregnancy but has not given birth.
Do I detect some desperation? Good Luck.
Too late...said a Hail Mary and took them out. BUT, I'll always remember that tip. Thanks!!
I remember beating rugs with that metal thing and the old broom and dustmop. I still have a dustmop.
Try a clean broom straw to test the bread's doneness.
You bet; I'm going to end up paying for this farce.
LOL
Aren't briefs, and statements before the court considered to be sworn statements? (I'm not a lawyer)
When the judge asked if the defense had received ALL of the evidence, and Nifong answers "yes" and he knows the answer is "no", isn't that a sworn statement by an officer of the court?
Isn't that obstruction of justice?
If Nifong carried the evidence to the lab, his name should be in the chain of evidence record and be subject to questioning, shouldn't he?
that should have "chain of custody"
That's OK, since they are just rich white boys, winners of life's lottery.
Looks like you're tired. Take a break. "Numbers" is on now so away I go. Nite all!!
Yup. When the parents of these kids are done...Well, it won't be pretty.
This case has the potential to cause a lot of distrust and lack of confidence in our legal system generally, on the part of tens of millions of Americans. But how many are even paying attention? Has the MSM given any attention to the latest developments? I get most of my news from FR and FNC...the brief times I have switched to one of the enemedia stations they are on some other topic.
The cops in the Rodney case were clearly subjected to double jeopardy, unless you honestly believe the writers of the Constitution intended for every offense to be defined several ways.
If you believe in the multiple definition theory, the Constitution is solid as a rock, and you are a grand supporter of the Constitution as George Bush Senior was.
If you believe the intent was not for multiple definitions, giving the concept of double jeopardy meaning, you can only hold those like Bush Senior in contempt, because their actions proved they had no respect for the Constitution.
Let's hear it. How about a call for a little "ABJ" time for Nifong!!!!
"Maybe that crafty mike nifong knows the DNA evidence is, um, crap, so he is trying through his own misconduct to have it rendered inadmissible?"
Too many wheels within wheels methinks. It's more likely that Nigfong is just plain stupid and got caught.
For the same reason Ted Kennedy is still a Senator.
The truth will set you free to go on your merry way if have not conscience or moral principals.
I would depend, but generally speaking, representations made to the court by an attorney wouldn't be considered sworn statements.
You do have an obligation not to lie to a court, but it's an ethical obligation that could result in disbarment. Again, this is outside my field of expertise, but I'm almost certain on this.
If you don't lie to the court, you generally don't ever have to think about these things... :-)
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.