Posted on 12/18/2006 4:44:22 PM PST by abb
My mistake. I thought he was a law professor, although I knew he was at CUNY. Is that Anderson fellow who posts at KC's place (or is it Liestoppers?) a law professor? Or is Coleman the only law professor we've heard significantly from in this case?
The parents, the falsely accused, and the attorneys for the accused should hold a press conference announcing a formal complaint to the NC Bar Association. Use the power of the press and public opinion to force the "self regulating" profession to police itself.
It is time for legislation setting up citizens committes to review attorney misconduct cases. The courts and the bar association are like Congress -- the fox watching the henhouse. Very few attorneys are ever disbarred. Most citizen complaints to the bar association go to the circular file. In this case the publicity that could be generated might actually force the bar to act.
In reality I doubt the attorneys for the accused would participate in such a public relations maneuver. After all, they have to face their "peers" everyday in the courtroom.
That is just outrageous. Make the boys move out because the NBBP was on its way? I have heard it all. Brodhead is just a miserbale, evil little (bleep).
When this is over, do the boys want to return to Duke? If not, the boys should be preparing suit against Duke. Heck, they should have already filed by now.
I agree 100% with all you said.
Attorneys from another jurisdiction could step in, though, and file further complaints on behalf of the boys. I would like to see somebody from the judiciary step up, but that doesn't seem likely, at least not in NC.
Nope Anderson is an economist like me. Michael Gaynor is an attorney but from his bio not a law prof. So you may be right that Prof. Coleman is the main law prof we have heard from along with Jason Trumpbour of UM-BC and Friend of Duke.
Her name is Crystal Mangum.
Pass it on.
Thanks for the pingage.
The water is starting to boil...
Greta has a replacement host tonight.
A NEW PANEL; no Ted, no Bernie, the two fools.
[snip]
The panel agrees - this is a total subversion of justice. Case must be tossed.
Vann says he will be shocked if the lineup is not tossed.
"You seem to be claiming that your work as some functionary in immigration (by the way, it's called "ICE" now) after working as some functionary in some other federal bureaucracy is real LE. It is not."
I wish to clear up another misstatement on the part of one of our posters. I do not work for CIS or ICE. I work in immigration law for a private firm. I am not impersonating a federal officer, and I choose to believe the poster simply jumped to a conclusion that was unwarranted.
I make no claims as to having any further responsibility for the current immigration situation or the current fluidity of the immigration laws, although our firm is very much involved in the attempt to reach an equitable solution for current Americans as well as immigrants with regard to overall policy.
I applaud the poster for her knowledge of the various branches of government and law enforcement with regard to immigration. Everyone in America should be aware that many of us are working diligently to come up with a solution to another troubling situation about which a vast majority of Americans are concerned.
Thank you.
Everytime I hear her speak it reminds me of someone dragging their nails across the blackboard.
I hadn't come across Trumpbour in all this, and have not heard of him before. I guess I missed those threads. I'll catch him the next time.
I didn't know you are an economist. That explains a lot. ;>
"I hadn't come across Trumpbour in all this"
Tumpbour is the spokesman for Friends of Duke University
Their latest press release today :
Friends of Duke University
Date: December 18, 2006
Contact Information:
Jason Trumpbour, Spokesperson
Congressman Jones’ Request
"The Friends of Duke University enthusiastically endorses Congressman Walter Jones’ call for the Justice Department to open an inquiry into the misconduct of Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong.
(snip)
"Figures released last week indicated that early admissions applications for the Class of 2011 plunged by nearly 20 percent from last year’s total, to the lowest amount in nearly a decade. Surely any prospective parent would have to think twice about sending a son or daughter to an institution whose leadership has stood aside as a local prosecutor targets students through procedurally improper actions.
(snip)
"As the January 2 deadline for admissions applications approaches, it would be highly unfortunate for the administration, through its silence, to suggest to prospective Duke parents that a congressman has more concern with Duke students receiving due process than does their own institution.
Our Group and Its Mission
"The Friends of Duke University consists of alumni, parents, faculty and friends of Duke who are deeply concerned about the University’s response to the lacrosse case. We want to ensure fair and equitable treatment for Reade Seligmann, Colin Finnerty and David Evans and feel that the University itself has not done enough to pursue such treatment.
"Although we have been happy to take a leadership role in speaking out on behalf of these falsely accused students, we have done so with the recognition that our efforts have largely gone toward filling a vacuum left by Duke’s own leadership. We believe Duke University needs to stand up for its students and for itself."
You probably have come across Trumpbour but not by name early on in this. He is at University of MD- Balitmore County and a Duke grad who posted not under his name some early analysis in the case. He started commenting under his name after some time. But I bet if we looked up some of his early analysis you probably saw it. I know it was posted on some I guess May or June thread many times.
And yes, being an economist certainly explains at least in part how one thinks about certain issue.
Powerful stuff, and a nice shot across Brodhead's bow.
Thanks for the info on who Trumpbour is. I will be paying more attention to him and his organizations future input.
I would love to have been a fly on the wall when Brodhead read this. :>
I totally agree with you, but the problem is the "victim" will have no money to obtain in a lawsuit, and I wish but don't know whether she could do prison time from filing a false claim. Any suit(s) against her, of course, will be branded as racist.
As for Nifong, it seems I remember somebody on Fox said he can't be sued due to his position. I don't know what the law is on that, or whether he can be disbarred for misconduct. The whole thing is outrageous.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=18550
The Worst Continues to Worsen
by Thomas Sowell
Posted Dec 19, 2006
In his book "The Great Crash 1929," John Kenneth Galbraith said: "The worst continued to worsen." The same can be said of the Duke University "rape" case and District Attorney Michael Nifong.
After all this time, it finally came out in court last week that the DNA samples collected from the underwear and private parts of the alleged victim contained DNA from other men -- but none from the Duke lacrosse players who were accused of raping her.
The head of the DNA testing laboratory testified in court under oath that both he and Nifong knew this and kept it secret.
You think that is incredible? How about a statement made afterwards by District Attorney Nifong that he didn't say anything about this publicly because he was "trying to avoid dragging any names through the mud"?
He certainly did not avoid dragging the names of the Duke lacrosse players through the mud. He not only denounced them, they were paraded in handcuffs in front of the national media. Their pictures were on every television news program across the country.
If these young men get completely exonerated, this episode will still follow them the rest of their lives. Yet they have not been convicted of anything and have not even gone to trial -- which is scheduled for next spring, if it ever takes place.
Indeed, they have not even been interviewed by the police or by the District Attorney who issued denunciations of these white lacrosse players when he was running for office and making a play for the black vote.
Nor has the District Attorney interviewed the woman who claimed to have been raped. In a "he said, she said" situation, anyone interested in the credibility of the two sides would at least have tried to find out what specifically they claimed.
But that is only if you care about the truth, rather than the politics of the situation. Politically, the District Attorney had a black woman who claimed that white men had raped her. That's all he needed to get elected.
Nifong has shown from day one what he was interested in. Showing the "rape" victim only photographs of white Duke lacrosse players was a violation of the basic principles of a lineup.
People who are known to be innocent are included in lineups just to test the credibility of whoever is identifying those picked out as guilty.
If you pick out somebody who was known to be overseas at the time, there goes your credibility. But District Attorney Nifong was not about to risk having the accuser's credibility tested, and certainly not before his election.
All the evidence that has come out has pointed the other way. One of the alleged rapists has a paper trail that shows he wasn't even there when he was supposed to be raping the "exotic dancer."
A black cab driver says he was with him, going to a bank's ATM to get some money -- and bank records show him there at the time when he was supposed to be committing rape.
When confronted with the fact that DNA tests failed to show that any of the Duke lacrosse players' DNA was present on the "exotic dancer," Nifong said that they could have used condoms.
Every part of your body has DNA that is left wherever you have had bodily contact. When you shake someone's hand, you leave your DNA. Each Duke student would have to have had a giant condom covering his whole body to avoid leaving DNA on someone he raped.
Far more is involved in this case than the misdeeds of one District Attorney. There is a segment of the black community -- a small segment, we can hope -- that figures it is payback time for all the black men who have been railroaded to jail on trumped-up charges involving the rape of white women.
The local branch of the NAACP, an organization which fought against such injustices in times past, has thrown its weight behind those who are trying to railroad three white students, who were not even born when these other injustices occurred.
Winston Churchill once said, "If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost." Nowhere is that more true than when dealing with the explosive mixture of race and politics.
Nifong deserves to be removed from office and disbarred. If he gets away with all this, it will be a blank check for every prosecutor in the country to abuse the powers of the office.
Group to Duke: Join bid for DA inquiry
BY RAY GRONBERG, The Herald-Sun
December 18, 2006 11:24 pm
DURHAM -- Supporters of the three Duke lacrosse rape defendants on Monday asked university officials to join U.S. Rep. Walter Jones in calling for a federal civil-rights investigation of District Attorney Mike Nifong's handling of the case.
The group Friends of Duke University said that while that wouldn't force Duke President Richard Brodhead or other administrators to take a position about the guilt or innocence of the accused men, it would support "the undeniable proposition that public information suggests there is a sufficient likelihood of civil-rights violations" to merit U.S. Department of Justice scrutiny.
Speaking up is also imperative because the public-relations damage the case has inflicted on Duke is damaging the school's standing with potential applicants, the group said in news release posted on its Web site, friendsofdukeuniversity.blogspot.com, and e-mailed to reporters.
Noting that Duke's early-admission applicants dropped by 20 percent this fall, the group said "any prospective parent would have to think twice about sending a son or daughter to an institution whose leadership has stood aside as a local prosecutor targets students through procedurally improper actions."
Duke officials reacted by issuing a statement from Brodhead that repeated that his stance that the legal process has to run its course.
"Under American law, the legal system is the place to establish the facts and bring a case to a just resolution," Brodhead said. "For that reason, it is of the essence that everyone involved in the legal system act fairly in pursuing the truth and protecting the rights of the individuals involved."
He noted that he'd also said that when the case "goes before a judge and jury, the DA's case will be on trial just as much as our students will be," and that until a jury says otherwise, the defendants must be presumed innocent.
Asked specifically whether Duke would link itself to calls for a federal civil-rights investigation, university public-relations chief John Burness said, "I don't think we're planning to do that at the moment."
A spokesman for Friends of Duke University, Maryland lawyer and Duke alumnus Jason Trumpbour, criticized Brodhead's statement.
The president's response "contains absolutely nothing new, and it studiously avoids the central issue," Trumpbour said. "It speaks on one hand of a belief in the system, and yet the fundamental problem we and others have been pointing out is that the system has not been working. You can't have it both ways. You can't express your belief in the system and at the same time ignore substantial and compelling evidence that the system isn't working."
Trumpbour's group issued its request four days after Jones, a Farmville Republican, asked the Bush administration to intervene.
The congressman said Nifong may have denied defendants David Evans, Collin Finnerty and Reade Seligmann their rights by directing Durham police to show their accuser a photo lineup that only included Duke lacrosse players, and by making prejudicial comments to the press.
U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales told Fox News over the weekend that Jones' request "is being evaluated" by the Department of Justice, but he declined to say whether the agency might launch an investigation.
Trumpbour's group said the revelations late last week that prosecutors withheld DNA test results from the defense highlighted an additional violation of the defendants' constitutional rights. The results in question showed that the accuser had the DNA of several men -- uncharged and unconnected to the case -- on or in her underwear and body cavities.
In addition to wanting a federal investigation, the group wants Nifong removed from the Duke case and replaced with a special prosecutor, Trumpbour said.
It believes the accuser's allegations were false and "would never have been handed over from police to the prosecutors" absent Nifong's intervention, he said.
Nifong didn't return a phone call seeking his reaction to Brodhead and Trumpbour's comments. He's rarely answered media inquiries about the lacrosse case since the late spring.
URL for this article: http://www.heraldsun.com/durham/4-800827.cfm
Allow judicial process to work
The Herald-Sun
December 18, 2006 5:35 pm
There is immense pressure building in the Duke lacrosse case. The pressure is to toss out the rape charges against three players, and it's coming from the players' families, their defense lawyers and their many supporters on campus and across the country. It is directed against anyone who thinks the case should be decided in a court of law, not the court of public opinion, and it has two basic targets -- the accuser and District Attorney Mike Nifong.
Let's consider the case against Nifong. There is no question the DA has made mistakes in handling this hot potato of a case. He said things he shouldn't have, such as calling the players "hooligans" and wrongly predicting DNA tests would implicate them. He gave too many media interviews at the start, a mistake he has corrected by falling competely silent except in court. Now the defense lawyers have made up the slack, taking every opportunity to spin their case in public.
One serious problem for Nifong is his inexplicable use of a lineup in which the accuser was asked to choose the assailants from a group of photos that included only lacrosse players. That flawed process led her to identify the three players who are now indicted. Such a fundamental misstep may well come back to haunt Nifong.
And as we learned in court Friday, the director of a DNA lab in Burlington at first withheld results showing the accuser had DNA from other men -- not the lacrosse players -- in her underwear and on her pubic hair. The defense is trying to imply a conspiracy existed between Nifong and lab director Brian Meehan to keep the results secret. But those alleging prosecutorial misconduct have to deal with a simple fact -- Nifong did turn over the data. Defense lawyers' only real complaint is that they had to fight to get it.
Nor did Nifong explain the information sufficiently, defense attorney Joe Cheshire complained. "We had to try to discover what it meant," he said. Sorry, but we don't think a judge will dismiss the case because Nifong didn't provide Cliffs Notes.
Of course, Friday's DNA revelation was as much about the accuser as it was about Nifong. We may find the results disturbing, but let's remember what we're supposed to know about rape cases. Rape is still a crime even if if the accuser was provocatively dressed or if she was a stripper. Rape is still a crime if the accuser had consensual sex with other people. We know she is not a paragon of virtue. But that does not rule out rape.
The biggest elephants in the room are still sitting there -- the accuser's charges and the players' presumption of innocent until proven guilty. Yes, there is information that may cast doubt on whether a crime was committed. But is it enough to outweigh the accusation? That's for the courts to decide. There have also been instances of, at a minimum, prosecutorial sloppiness. But are they enough to toss the case?
That's for a judge to decide, as part of the judicial process, which should be allowed to work.
URL for this article: http://www.heraldsun.com/opinion/hsedits/56-800699.cfm
Nifong's misconduct should be investigated
I certainly hope the North Carolina legislature opens an investigation into the actions of Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong and his prosecution of the Duke lacrosse players. Overzealous prosecutors like him have railroaded many innocent persons into prisons. His past prosecutions need to be investigated for improper conduct and even withholding evidence from defendants.
I also hope the legislature will allow Nifong, Durham and the state to be personally sued by the defendants for the improper actions of Nifong after they are found innocent. One wonders what agenda drives a person like Nifong to push a non-case with such zest.
Is it a book or a run for the state legislature?
John Kitz
Lancaster, Ohio
December 19, 2006
Put Nifong in prison
District Attorney Mike Nifong should be put in prison for trying to send three innocent men to jail. He would then know how it feels to be railroaded.
This woman has been found out, yet he still pursues this case. They should be locked in the same cell together, him for using the case to get the black vote, and her for extortion.
Black citizens should get on the DA. He's an example of the widespread injustice in America, which is usually directed toward blacks. The problem is they seem to want revenge on whites instead of justice. That makes them as bad as the rogues in uniform and Nifong. Two wrongs don't make a right.
Deborah Evans
Oak Hill, W. Va.
December 19, 2006
http://www.heraldsun.com/opinion/hsletters/
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.