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.
No, it isn't. It's odd. I think we will hear more about this. Has the AG enlisted the assistance of the FBI?
Maybe, or they could be doing a CYA, or the AG could be doing a CYA.
...I meant the state AG could be doing a CYA.
It's not SOP as far as anything I've ever seen. The FBI is hardly likely to volunteer to just schlep boxes for Cooper.
Something's afoot.
SBI would make much more sense, based on what we know. But the thing is, the FBI rarely says what they're doing. They just do it. It's hard to know just yet.
The feds don't have to take a position in the case just to investigate, and they usually don't announce when they're doing an investigation, so it's hard to know.
Maybe we'll get clarification on whether it really was the FBI or if the report is wrong and it should have stated SBI.
Breathtaking.
Is this an example of their one collective Cranial Lobe on overtime?
I've got a news flash for Mr. Weber. The NC legal system embarrassed itself through its structure that makes such things as what happened here readily possible.
WOW, Abb! Thank you!
Thanks, mewzilla.
Federal law is clear about the criminal aspects of violating civil rights. There is nothing comparable in NC law.
I don't know enough about qualifying for class-status in civil suits to have an informed opinion on whether they would qualify or not. My instincts tell me no because of the disparity of damages among the players, but I really don't know.
And if they ARE suffering because of this case, they're the biggest bunch of candy asses to come down the pike in years.
So tell me where the Duke players have beeen denied any of that or the right to due process.
Of course it is. It's the malevolent backlash of sore losers. I really don't see how more undignified these people can become nor how more hateful they can be toward the students. I notice this all started again when it became clear the boys would not be returning to Duke.
GAWD! Glad I didn't watch Zahn.
Correct on both points, but until there is some punishment inflected on these accused because of those violations, it is not a Civil Rights violation.
That is a matter for civil resolution and it seems to me these players will have a very strong case against the Durham authorities. As a Libertarian, you should be more cautious of invoking the Federal hammer.
They were acquitted in the state court because a politically motivated prosecutor over reached on the charges -- attempted homicide -- instead of bringing charges for the actual crime -- aggravated assault. The DA could not prove attempted homicide which would have had a 20 year sentence and the jury rightly acquitted. The Feds stepped in afterward with a Civil Rights charge and won conviction. If the state had not over reached and convicted them of aggravated assault, they would have spent more time in the slammer than what they did.
The point was that you weren't talking about the right amendment in the first place. The Fourth Amendment was the one you chose, which has to do with unreasonable search and seizure. The Sixth is speedy trial, right to confront witnesses and have counsel and the Fifth is double jeopardy, due process and the right not to incriminate oneself.
Both you and Nifong need to quit running your mouths long enough to read the BoR, figure out which one is which, and struggle to learn what they mean.
Opinion -- but the AG has tens of thousands of bureaucrats reporting to him who do all the work and according to whispers, at least some of the SC justices rely more on the word of a bunch of nameless clerks for their opinions.
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.