Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Nifong a Topic at State Bar Council (and Feds Decline to Act for Now)
Eyewitness News 11 ^ | 1/16/07

Posted on 01/16/2007 10:03:31 AM PST by freespirited

This week Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong could be slapped with more charges related to his handling of the Duke Lacrosse case.

This week the State Bar Council will be holding its quarterly meetings in Raleigh. During this time, the agency could add ethics charges against the Durham district attorney.

Nifong recused himself from the Duke Lacrosse case shortly after the state bar filed an ethics complaint against him last month. He's accused of misconduct for statements he made to the media last spring.

In a letter obtained by Eyewitness News, defense attorney, Joe Cheshire requested to meet with Nifong in March about the statements.

"I do not understand why you will reportedly speak to the media in such certain, condemning terms before all the evidence is in, but you will not have the courtesy to meet or even speak with a representative of someone you have publicly condemned," Cheshire stated in the letter.

Nifong could also face additional charges for withholding DNA evidence that was favorable to the accused players. Evidence that is now in the hands of the state's Attorney General.

"We accept these cases with our eyes wide open to the evidence, but with blinders on for all other distractions," Roy Cooper said.

The State Bar Council meets today.

The council will decide this spring if his public comments about the case were a violation of the professional rules of conduct. Nifong's ethics meeting is scheduled for May.

No Federal Probe

The U.S. Attorney General's office has responded to Congressman Walter Jones' request for a federal probe of the Duke Lacrosse Case.

In a letter delivered Thursday, Alberto Gonzales' office wrote that it would be, "Premature to initiate a federal investigation pending a criminal trial."

This means the Attorney General will not be getting involved in the case at this time.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: dnaevidence; dukelax; nifong
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240241-260261-280 ... 541-546 next last
To: xoxoxox

What's needed right now, and I am trying to be helpful to CNN here -- Is for Otter and John Belushi to crash the interview.


241 posted on 01/16/2007 5:58:37 PM PST by Alia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 240 | View Replies]

To: Alia

Under what theory of law is this a federal issue?


242 posted on 01/16/2007 5:59:12 PM PST by tomcorn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 233 | View Replies]

To: tomcorn

I suggest you read the thread, and ask those who are demanding the DOJ step in. It wasn't me.


243 posted on 01/16/2007 6:01:34 PM PST by Alia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 242 | View Replies]

To: Alia

Show's over--wasn't too bad.

Great visuals. Can't wait for
the first CGM interview.


244 posted on 01/16/2007 6:02:57 PM PST by xoxoxox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 241 | View Replies]

To: xoxoxox

Wonder if Jakki will do her makeup and hair like she does for all the girls?


245 posted on 01/16/2007 6:03:38 PM PST by Protect the Bill of Rights
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 244 | View Replies]

To: Ditto
As a Conservative, I'm not real anxious to see the Feds jumping into state legal issues

As a Libertarian concerned about the damage that can be done by overweening officials at all levels, I am eager for the Feds to keep states on the right side of the constitution. It is an ethics violation for a prosecutor to prosecute when he lacks clear and convincing evidence and even more so when it is clear that there is exculpatory evidence. Every day of delay is another day of $500 / hr legal expenses that can ruin a defendant. Given the expenses of a defense it is a violation of due process to expect someone to pay for his defense when he is clearly innocent.

There is no state right to prosecute the innocent.

246 posted on 01/16/2007 6:05:05 PM PST by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: xoxoxox; Mad-Margaret
Can't wait for the first CGM interview.

Guess she played her hand at a "celebrityness grab" better than Kim? :P

Thank you for the sums of this interview, xoxoxox and Mad-Margaret.

247 posted on 01/16/2007 6:07:16 PM PST by Alia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 244 | View Replies]

To: Protect the Bill of Rights

Jakki is yet to be up on the screen with Paula?


248 posted on 01/16/2007 6:08:14 PM PST by Alia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 245 | View Replies]

To: Alia

Don't hold your breath! This is Jakki telling us that Crystal has representation, will be speaking out, and must pull herself up by her boot straps.

I want my hour back.


249 posted on 01/16/2007 6:10:06 PM PST by Mad-Margaret
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 239 | View Replies]

To: Alia


There is a certain irony in people who alledge they are conservatives but suddenly see imaginary federal authority in a state case. If is the State of North Carolina's responsibility to discipline Mr. Nifong for the scandalous manner in which he has handled this case. The Scandal, however, remains a state issue and has no federal jurisdiction.

Let us eschew making federal mountains out of what should have been a county molehill.


250 posted on 01/16/2007 6:11:29 PM PST by tomcorn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 243 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
Contrary to TV fiction they are not supposed to win at all costs.

They represent the people. Their job is every bit as much to leave those citizens alone for whom there is insufficient evidence to assure a clear conviction as it is to secure conviction of the clearly guilty. A DA looking at someone cross-eyed can set him back $100,000 in legal fees. There is much more at stake than just a "fair" trial. The trial is unfair if it never should have happened in the first place.

251 posted on 01/16/2007 6:11:45 PM PST by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Mad-Margaret
I can't give that hour back to you. Instead, I give you my keen appreciation for keeping me safe from nerve damage and chronic ugly visual flashbacks.

Thank you, Mad-Margaret. My family thanks you.

252 posted on 01/16/2007 6:11:58 PM PST by Alia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 249 | View Replies]

To: tomcorn

Great post.


253 posted on 01/16/2007 6:13:16 PM PST by Alia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 250 | View Replies]

To: Alia

Time for antacids for me...


254 posted on 01/16/2007 6:15:33 PM PST by abb (The Dinosaur Media: A One-Way Medium in a Two-Way World)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 253 | View Replies]

To: Alia; maggief

maggief, I can't find my
"jakki brushin' her teeth picture!"


255 posted on 01/16/2007 6:17:30 PM PST by Protect the Bill of Rights
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 248 | View Replies]

To: abb

You watched it too, abb... Bless you. And May that antacid, WITH WATER (remember), work immediately.


256 posted on 01/16/2007 6:18:42 PM PST by Alia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 254 | View Replies]

To: Ditto
Do you want to be able to appeal your traffic tickets to the Supreme Court?

I would love to see some "ticket factories" in Virginia shut down by the Supreme Court, for instance.

257 posted on 01/16/2007 6:23:42 PM PST by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: Ditto
Only if these guys were unjustly convicted could the Feds be empowered to act.

When the LA Police Officers were duly acquitted in the Rodney King case, the Feds couldn't wait to jump in with charges of "denying civil rights," ran them through a kangaroo court, and locked up the cops for many a year. The Feds are 'empowered' to act any damn time they feel like it and don't kid yourself otherwise.

258 posted on 01/16/2007 6:24:21 PM PST by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Protect the Bill of Rights

maggief, I can't find my
"jakki brushin' her teeth picture!"


I haven't seen one of her brushing her teeth. I have one of her at her dressing table. I still have all those photos at my profile for quick use by anyone, anytime.


259 posted on 01/16/2007 6:26:42 PM PST by JoanOfArk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 255 | View Replies]

To: Ditto
You want some Federal bureaucrat looking over every state court's shoulder?

Neither the AG nor the justices of the SC are "some federal bureaucrat."

260 posted on 01/16/2007 6:27:35 PM PST by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240241-260261-280 ... 541-546 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson