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

To: Mad-Margaret
And they deny that Nifong did anything intentionally unethical.

The problem with that particular "defense" is that the very specific allegations of the amended complaint will, if properly supported at trial with readily-available evidence from several sources, effectively preclude Nifong from employing any stratagem along the lines of "Well, I didn't mean to do it." For that reason, and due to the likelihood that any trial will be televised, I am beginning to think, as do several others on this thread and elsewhere, that a negotiated consent judgment which involves more than a mere reprimand or censure as the penalty is a significant possibility.

171 posted on 01/24/2007 8:50:01 PM PST by Bitter Bierce
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies ]


To: Bitter Bierce
KC Johnson's take on the ethics charges:

http://durhamwonderland.blogspot.com/2007/01/some-reactions-to-expanded-ethics.html

172 posted on 01/24/2007 9:21:51 PM PST by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies ]

To: Bitter Bierce

Today's events changed my mind. I'm no longer in the "he'll get only a reprimand" camp. Count me in your group now.

What on earth will his attorneys submit in his defense?


174 posted on 01/24/2007 9:38:26 PM PST by Mad-Margaret
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies ]

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