I'm sure you are correct on that in general, (it could be property, employment, privacy or any number of issues) but specifically on this criminal case, please tell me what rights protected under the constitution have been violated to date. My point on a potential conviction in this case is that is where their constitutional rights would have been violated considering all the shenanigans Nifong has pulled up to this point. To date, I can't see where any of their "rights" have been violated. Sure it is unfair to them, but my constitution does not have a "fair" clause in it.
The Defendants have all been arrested.
I'll bet it has a due process clause and an equal protection clause, though. Nifong clearly, under color of law, made statements to the press which violated the canons of ethics and he conspired to secrete exculpatory evidence. It is certainly arguable that these acts amounted to a violation of the defendants' civil rights, especially considering the corrupt putridity of Nifong's motives in all this.
The USSC has ruled that the format used by Nifong to get his identifications, which led to the indictments are unconstitutional. That was a deliberate act on his part, not an oversight. The deliberateness of the act moves it from oversight to need only be undone at trial or on appeal. But when done deliberately, it is part of a scheme to indict on false pretenses known to the prosecutor at the time. That is not just an ethics violation. It is a criminal violation. Deliberately withholding exculpatory evidence, even if it's only deemed impeachable evidence, is a violation of Brady. When done without malice or deviousness - intent - and just through misfeasance, it is reversible at trial or on appeal. When done intentionally - malfeasance - it is a crime. When two or more people conspire to commit a crime, such as obstruction of justice, under color of authority, it is a criminal violation of the civil rights of the person it was aimed at because it is a denial of due process and equal protection by scheme or design, and that holds true except the conspiracy if only one person was involved. And this is happening in a case in which there was no crime at all.
You should read this case and learn just what all has transpired here before you share anymore of your idiotic ramblings and insults with those who know much more than you do about this diabolical plan of a man to get elected on the backs of three white boys by conjuring a false accusation from a black woman who was trying to avoid jail on the backs of three white boys. Nifong was 20 points behind in the polls and about to lose his job, so he took control of the accuser and ran with her hallucinatory, drastically fluctuating claims in order to get ahead by raising support from local black racists because he knew they would support him since he was railroading whitey into long prison sentences for them, much to their great satisfaction.