http://www.newsobserver.com/1185/story/523377.html
Criticism directed at Nifong and Duke
Anne Blythe, Staff Writer
DURHAM - After the most recent hearing on the Duke University lacrosse rape case, critics have ratcheted up the heat on District Attorney Mike Nifong.
Some fiery comments have been targeted at Duke University, too.
This week, U.S. Rep. Walter Jones, a Republican from Farmville, renewed his request for the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate Nifong's handling of the rape case against three former Duke lacrosse players.
Jones asked Alberto Gonzales, the U.S. attorney general, to review evidence from the hearing, in which the head of a private lab testified that Nifong and he agreed last spring not to report DNA results favorable to the accused.
Brian Meehan, director of DNA Security in Burlington, testified his lab found DNA from unidentified men in the underwear and body of the woman who said she was gang-raped at a lacrosse party in March.
North Carolina law requires prosecutors to hand over all evidence to defendants regardless of whether it has been requested.
The information was in a report that defense lawyers got only after asking for it during a court hearing.
State Rep. Stephen LaRoque, a Republican from Lenoir County, also weighed in. He endorsed Jones' call for a federal investigation and suggested a change in state law to allow prosecution of prosecutors who engage in professional misconduct.
Only the N.C. State Bar has the authority to punish incidents of legal misconduct. "That's like having the fox guard the henhouse," LaRoque said.
Jones' request won another endorsement this week from Friends of Duke University, a group of five people that monitors media reports and information on the Internet about the lacrosse case.
Spokesman Jason Trumpbour, a 1991 Duke law school graduate who lives in Parkton, Md., seems to have sparked a response from Duke administrators with his rant.
"The administration's silence about Mr. Nifong's continued assault on the civil liberties of Duke students appears to be having an unfortunate, if inevitable, effect," Trumpbour said in the group's statement, citing a 20 percent drop in early admissions applications. "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."
Hours after Trumpbour's statement was released, Duke sent a brief statement from President Richard Brodhead.
"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. As I told Ed Bradley during a '60 Minutes' interview last summer, given the concerns that have been raised, when it goes before a judge and jury the DA's case will be on trial just as much as our students will be. In the meanwhile, as I have said before, our students must be presumed innocent until proven otherwise."
Staff writer Anne Blythe can be reached at 932-8741 or ablythe@newsobserver.com.
http://www.newsobserver.com/579/story/523257.html
Shaky case
Questions about evidence and the investigation's handling lead to doubts about rape charges against former Duke lacrosse players
There's no question that members of last year's Duke University lacrosse team showed poor judgment in staging a rowdy spring break party that featured two dancers hired from escort services. But serious doubts continue to grow about the case that Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong has brought against three of the players who are accused of raping and assaulting one of the dancers.
Reports in The N&O concerning contradictory accounts by the alleged victim and flaws in how the case has been investigated have raised questions about Nifong's decision to press ahead with the prosecution. The latest such report cited court testimony Friday by Brian Meehan, director of a Burlington laboratory, to the effect that Nifong knew that DNA tests on evidence gathered from the accuser's body and underwear failed to implicate any of the Duke athletes.
Meehan said under Nifong's questioning that no one had asked him to conceal the lack of evidence from the players when other findings were released from the DNA testing that was performed last spring.
Yet Meehan didn't have to be asked to conceal anything if he and Nifong already had agreed that only certain information would be released, as Meehan claimed that they had. It was only in September, in response to requests by the defendants' lawyers, that the full report from Meehan's firm was made available to the lawyers.
Under state law, prosecutors are required to turn over to defense attorneys evidence favorable to the accused, who in this case are former Duke lacrosse players David Evans of Maryland, Colin Finnerty of New York and Reade Seligmann of New Jersey.
Biological evidence from the woman who says she was raped was retrieved within hours of the alleged assault at the team party. Nifong then obtained DNA samples from team members, asserting that the evidence would be pivotal. He went on to obtain indictments of Finnerty and Seligmann on charges of rape, kidnapping and sexual assault, even though state tests of those samples showed no connection between the defendants and the accuser.
In view of that, it's not unreasonable to wonder if Nifong arranged for the more sensitive tests offered by Meehan's lab in an attempt to bolster his prosecution. The results clearly didn't help, yet he went on to gain the indictment of Evans and otherwise has plowed ahead.
Meehan maintained in court that the test results showing no DNA from any of the defendants were withheld out of some concern for their privacy. Nifong also said they were "trying to avoid dragging any names through the mud." but certainly the trio's greater interest has been in having their names cleared.
Meanwhile, notes from Durham investigators show that the woman changed her story repeatedly during interviews with detectives. And detectives violated the department's own photo line-up policy when they had the woman identify the three players. What is the basis for Nifong's sustained belief that sexual crimes were committed by the three?
Nifong has enjoyed the benefit of the doubt from many members of the public over this case. But the more information that comes to light, the more questionable his conduct and judgment appear.
"State Rep. Stephen LaRoque, a Republican from Lenoir County, also weighed in. He endorsed Jones' call for a federal investigation and suggested a change in state law to allow prosecution of prosecutors who engage in professional misconduct.
Only the N.C. State Bar has the authority to punish incidents of legal misconduct. "That's like having the fox guard the henhouse," LaRoque said."
Another "Nifong being thrown overboard" splash. Finally, the NC legislature is starting to weigh in. It probably won't go anywhere, but then maybe it will.
"Jones' request won another endorsement this week from Friends of Duke University, a group of five people that monitors media reports and information on the Internet about the lacrosse case.
Spokesman Jason Trumpbour, a 1991 Duke law school graduate who lives in Parkton, Md., seems to have sparked a response from Duke administrators with his rant."
Rant? Blythe should be called on the carpet for this characterization of Trumpbour's letter. It should be pointed out to her that she and her ilk are a major part of what brought this case to where it is by gleefully boarding the Nifong bandwagon in the first place.