http://www.heraldsun.com/opinion/hsletters/
Racism at Duke
I write to urge your newspaper to take a deep look at the racism that has come to the surface regarding the Duke lacrosse case, in particular threats being directed toward many of the African-American professors at the university. The lacrosse case has been a very divisive issue, but it seems it has also given the opportunity for hate to rise to the surface in the form of nasty racially driven threats. This is a very serious situation that has led many highly respected and extremely intelligent African-American professors feeling attacked and threatened. It has pushed us back to places from where we thought we had evolved long ago.
Larry Smith
Durham
January 19, 2007
Nifong is dangerous
As a retired New York state police officer, I am troubled by the Duke lacrosse case. It makes me wonder what made the police and prosecutor think they could get away with such conduct. My opinion is that they have probably gotten away with such conduct in previous matters.
It makes me wonder how many people have been wrongfully arrested and prosecuted in the past. How many people have been so poor that they had no resources to fight wrongful charges? This case has me and others fearful of even considering Duke for their children's education. Parents would be crazy to send their children into District Attorney Mike Nifong's jurisdiction.
J. Troy
Ronkonkoma, N.Y.
January 19, 2007
Brodhead, Nifong must go
To the previous letters calling for the resignations of District Attorney Mike Nifong and Duke University President Richard Brodhead, I would enthusiastically agree, and add a call for discipline against the 88 faculty members at Duke who, in their muddled political correctness, joined Nifong and his lynch mob in declaring the three young men guilty before even the facts of the case were known.
I too am an academician and a liberal, and I consider it unconscionable that a group with such influence in their setting would abandon the fundamental concepts of law. Also I read Editor Bob Ashley's comments on your editorial fairness in "Editor and Publisher," and I would ask the editorial staff to be held accountable as well. Not assessing Nifong's prosecutorial abuses with a critical eye (from the standpoint of accepted human decency, that is) is equivalent to commenting that the Abu Ghraib abuses "could be problematical, and result in some investigation activity."
Editorials have to take a stand, not just rehash the reporting!
Lawrence McKamy
Topeka, Ks.
January 19, 2007
Accuser, Nifong should apologize to LAX players
It is apparent to me that the accuser in the Duke LAX case is a compulsive liar. She has no idea what happened to her. She has changed her story so many times. All of us have lost count of how many times she has changed her story. I just cannot see how you can build a case on a victim who keeps changing her story.
In the meantime, she has ruined the lives of three young men. I hope she plans on publicly apologizing to these young men. They certainly deserve it. I urge District Attorney Mike Nifong to drop all the charges against these three young men. I am not a lawyer, but he has lost this case already. There is no jury in the country that would believe this woman.
Cindy Wrenn
Yorktown, Va.
January 19, 2007
The Herald-Sun
Impeach Nifong
Golly. What a concept. After dragging the Duke lacrosse players through the mud for months, District Attorney Mike Nifong finally decided to stop dragging his feet and interview the person who accused them. (At least I think she accused them -- she changed her story so many times that I'm not quite certain.)
How do we get this guy impeached?
Sue Roth
Durham
January 19, 2007
http://www.newsobserver.com/114/story/533943.html
N&O
Coman may be no prize
Barry Saunders
Chill, homes. Before y'all start the victory dance over the fact that Mike Nifong is no longer prosecuting the Duke lacrosse sexual assault case, it's important to look at who is prosecuting it.
snip
Pardon me, but isn't this the same Attorney General's Office that has overseen such judicial travesties as the Alan Gell case?
snip
"I'm very comfortable with Jim Coman," he [Cheshire] said. "I've tried many cases with him. He's tough and he's gruff, and I don't always agree with him, but he's always been professional. ... The Gell case and this one are different. In that one, he was confronted with the fact that [evidence of innocence] was withheld by the previous DA."
Eliciting sympathy for Nifong ranks in difficulty up there with trying to raise money -- at Fort Bragg -- for Osama bin Laden.
Sure, it appears likely that he has committed enough misdeeds in the lacrosse case -- possibly withholding evidence, making prejudicial statements -- to justify punishment.
You've got to feel, though, that he might have to pay for the sins of other misbehavin', underpunished prosecutors.
snip
The Bar has charged Nifong with misconduct, an unprecedented charge that is almost laughable when you consider how the bar typically handles misbehavin' prosecutors.
While you might be tempted to give Coman a pass for being a good soldier and arguing a dog of a case regarding Gell, he deserves no slack for what he did when Hoke and Graves were hauled before the State Bar's disciplinary committee: Coman argued that they'd done nothing wrong and that he would have withheld the evidence, too.
Knowing that Coman is loyal to his colleagues is admirable; knowing that he is loyal to the law would be even more so.