Posted on 01/25/2007 8:03:11 PM PST by BerniesFriend
Abandoning The Duke Victim
By Alton Maddox Jr.
January 25th, 2007
.
For daring to pursue a Black woman's rape charges against white males Nifong is being driven out of town and the practise of law
A recent “editorial” in the Wall Street Journal was titled “The Michael Nifong Scandal.” This description defies logic.
A scandal has a moral connotation. It would apply to the pedophiles in the Catholic Church who masquerade as priests.
This term should have no relationship to a prosecutor seeking justice for a sexually abused woman of African ancestry. To be sure, a prosecutor charging white, privileged males for the sexual abuse of a Black woman is unprecedented. Thus, Durham District Attorney Michael Nifong is a traitor to the history and precepts of white supremacy.
In 400 years, no white man has ever gone to prison for raping a Black woman. Either Black women are not sexually attractive to white males or Black women find white men sexually irresistible. The former is untrue. See Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hennings. The latter is also untrue. See Melton A. McLaurin’s “Celia A Slave.”
On Sunday, “60 Minutes” claimed that the Duke rape case is “unraveling” before our eyes. This is also untrue. Instead, the legal system is destroying Michael Nifong before our very eyes. The North Carolina General Assembly and Congress are holding the hammers.
In only one other case, in American jurisprudence, has an attorney been destroyed amid a criminal proceeding. The New York Legislature and Congress were holding the hammers. This is a breach of the “separation of powers” doctrine.
It was People v. Sharpton wherein a grievance committee gave me the option of doing in my client, Rev. Al Sharpton or else. I chose “or else.” It would have been unethical to do otherwise. The hammer was designed to undermine Sharpton’s rights under the Sixth Amendment.
Only two attorneys in the history of American jurisprudence have ever sought to secure justice for Black females raped by white men. The modus operandi has been the same in both cases. In the Duke case, CBS-TV is leading the charge. In the Tawana Brawley case, CBS-TV also led the charge aided and abetted by the New York Times.
Blacks demonstrated in front of CBS headquarters for weeks while this criminal enterprise was engaging in media defamation against a fifteen-year-old girl, a victim of white terrorism and sexual abuse. It is in CBS’ genes.
Pre-trial publicity is not new to American jurisprudence. It is usually designed to poison the community against the accused before trial. A potential jury, therefore, sits as junior prosecutors. In the Duke case, prejudicial, pre-trial publicity is aimed at the victim. The media took the same approach in the Brawley case. Nifong did not indict those three Duke lacrosse players. A grand jury in Durham County, North Carolina indicted them. CBS should target the grand jury and review the grand jury minutes before recruiting a lynch mob for Nifong.
Since the indictments are still in play, a judge must believe that where there is smoke there must also be fire. Otherwise, the indictments, in the Duke case would have been dismissed months ago. A judge and not a prosecutor has the authority to dismiss an indictment.
Unlike the credibility issues in the Duke rape case, there was no eyewitness testimony and no scientific evidence including DNA to connect six boys to the rape of the Central Park jogger, Patricia Meili. Nonetheless, CBS was organizing a lynch mob against innocent boys. An admission alone is always insufficient to establish any crime beyond a reasonable doubt.
Yet, five of those six boys were falsely imprisoned for years and the New York Court of Appeals upheld those baseless convictions.
In order for an indictment to be dismissed, there must not only be insufficient evidence of the top count of the indictment but also the lack of evidence of lesser-included offenses. So far, the judicial system must believe that something happened. To be sure, something did happen.
Typically, there is always overcharging in the drafting of accusatory instruments. The mere fact that a count of the indictment is dismissed is not equivalent to pronouncing a suspect either legally or morally innocent. These players are certainly not choirboys and they are, at least, presumptive racists.
These players engaged in identity theft to secure the presence of two Black strippers for a KKK-type rally. They gave false names to the escort service. The escort service was never told that two Black females would have to perform before a white mob of drunken, racist hooligans. This is criminal fraud.
Strip joints employ bodyguards to protect strippers because it is well-known that a mob of drunken and unruly males will, biologically, take matters into their own hands. These females have civil claims in addition to criminal prosecutions. In addition, there is no question that these racist jocks hurled racist epithets at these women. The use of the word “nigger” to degrade a Black person is, in itself, an assault. This lewd atmosphere reeked of white terrorism and gave rise to sundry hate crimes.
The most important question in this case, based on biology, should be answered in a court of law. After the white lacrosse players watched this Black female shake her butt and private parts, in a sexually arousing fashion, did their white phalluses come to attention? Being full-blooded males, what made the phalluses come to “at ease?” In other words, what happened next? This is the answer that North Carolina is seeking to cover up.
The media and the defense lawyers in the Duke case have misled the public. In every lawsuit, there are two methods of proof: direct and circumstantial. Of the two methods of proof, circumstantial evidence is the strongest. No need exists for direct evidence in this case.
The complaining witness’ purportedly inconsistent statements are a reflection of problems of class and race in this society. In 1997, before a national television audience, Eliot Spitzer actually commanded Rev. Al Sharpton to change his story by boycotting his own defamation trial.
He did except when he was ordered to appear by the plaintiff, Steven Pagones. Attorney Johnnie Cochran, an ancestor, was the host of the Court-TV program. Sharpton was behaving the way any Black person is expected to behave in a white supremacist system.
When a Black woman accuses white men of rape, all bets are off. Warfare ensues. Anyone who seeks to protect a Black female victim had better prepare for a life of poverty. Gov. Spitzer and his mentor, Robert Abrams, are of this view in New York and no self-respecting Black female should support them.
Before the Civil War, courts routinely ruled that it was legally impossible for a white man to rape a Black woman. Today, through media and politics, most Blacks still embrace pre-Civil War law. This results from brainwashing. See “The Manchurian Candidate.” The only antidote to propaganda is critical thinking.
An effort is afoot to stop effective advocacy by Black lawyers. I need your support immediately to fight off impending disbarment in a protracted struggle. The federal litigation is on appeal. Please send any expression of support to UAM Legal Defense Fund, c/o Alton H. Maddox, Jr., 16 Court Street, Ste. 1901, Brooklyn, NY 11241. The struggle must continue. Asante sana. WHO WANTS TO BET THAT THE "ACCUSER" WILL SEE A DIME OF THAT 'DONATION'..
"Black Star News"?
barf alert i got sick reading that fiction
This guy has got to be insane.
On another website, I read a very trenchant observation: Why do white people bend over backwards to prove they're not racist to a person who is obviously bigoted?
The real Duke victims were abandoned from the beginning by race baiter Nifong!
Unless, of course, it is used by a Black person.
Tawana Brawley goes to college
By Michelle Malkin
Wednesday, April 7, 2004
Ever since self-defacing teenager Tawana Brawley smeared feces all over herself, scrawled "KKK" and "nigger" on her skin, climbed into a trash bag, and blamed it on racist cops in New York, America has been victimized by wannabe victims -- warped publicity-seekers so desperate for attention that they'll fake the hate by any means necessary.
Brawley (who now calls herself Maryam Muhammad) is all grown up. But her psychologically stunted heirs continue to soak up public sympathy and squander police resources. Recent media attention has focused on the pathetic case of Audrey Seiler, a 20-year-old sophomore at the University of Wisconsin at Madison who reportedly faked her own abduction and sent 150 cops on an intensive manhunt. The search ended when law enforcement authorities discovered Seiler in a marsh two miles from her home. A store surveillance tape revealed that Seiler herself had purchased a knife, duct tape and rope found at the "crime" scene.
Experts have compared Seiler to Brawley, but the analogy does not quite fit. There will always be lone troubled hoaxers like Seiler who abuse a community's compassion for bizarre personal gratification. What made the Brawley case truly distinct and despicable, however, was its underlying political agenda. Brawley and her race card-playing patrons, Al Sharpton, Alton Maddox and C. Vernon Mason, maliciously smeared innocent white men to falsely reinforce the notion of America as an unredeemable oppressor of females and minorities. This vicious strain of Tawana Brawleyism is alive and well on college campuses. In these educational temples of the perpetually aggrieved, rationality and truth have been recklessly sacrificed at the altar of diversity.
I've reported before on the hate crime hoax phenomenon at Arizona State University (where Muslim student Ahmad Saad Nasim faked assaults against himself to exploit the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks) and at the University of Mississippi (where black students falsely blamed racist vandalism against fellow black students on whites). The latest case of apparently manufactured racism involves left-wing academic Kerri Dunn. On March 9, the Claremont McKenna College visiting professor of psychology claimed she discovered anti-Semitic, anti-black, anti-woman epithets ("kike," "nigger lover" and "whore") spray-painted on her 1992 Honda Civic. The car's windows were smashed and the tires slashed. Dunn had been a vocal critic of other alleged racist incidents on campus. After she reported the incident, administrators and students rallied around Dunn; classes were cancelled at all five of the Claremont Colleges; local and federal authorities launched an investigation.
Things started smelling funny when so many students didn't even know what "kike" meant that the campus rabbi had to put out an explanatory press release. Dunn, for that matter, isn't even Jewish. She is a Catholic "considering" converting to Judaism. So how did Dunn's purported assailants know this? She explained that the attack -- which she called "a well-planned-out act of terrorism" -- must have been committed by her own students, who knew of her plans to convert. More irksome questions arose. How did the assailants know which car on the campus parking lot was hers? The students must have followed her, Dunn said. And what about the $1,700 in property she told police had been stolen, which mysteriously turned up in Dunn's possession? No explanation.
The final blow to Dunn's credibility came when Claremont police and the FBI concluded that Dunn the victim was also the victimizer. Giving new meaning to the phrase "auto vandalism," two witnesses told investigators that they saw Dunn drive her car -- adorned with the offending graffiti -- into a parking lot and smash the car's windows and slash the tires herself. Investigators and administrators say the witnesses are credible and (unlike Dunn) have no agenda.
As is typical in these cases, the perpetrator and her loyal supporters are in denial. Dunn, who was involved in past tangles with the law over shoplifting charges, blames the police for being irresponsible and "irreparably damag(ing) her reputation and emotional health." Minority students shrug at the fraud. "I'm not concerned with whether it's a hoax or not," said Pomona College junior Adam Briggs of the Pan-African Student Association.
Of course not. When it comes to smearing America, as Tawana Brawley taught us all so well, the end always justifies the manufactured means.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/MichelleMalkin/2004/04/07/tawana_brawley_goes_to_college
Baghdad Bob, now calling himself Alton Maddox Jr, continues to dwell in his make believe world, still completely oblivious to reality.
This guy is all over the place like a golf ball in a concrete room. He can't put two lucid sentences together. Kids, beware, this is your mind on drugs.
So the author was once a lawyer? Strange that he should write such a diatribe.
I'd comment, but where do you begin?
Okay, the black accuser should not be abandoned, she should be tried and sentenced.
Who cares about the evidence, I want those guys hung! /sarcasm
two words........Juanita Broaddrick
Ah... No. Wait, not just "no" but "HELL NO!" The author seems to be forgetting that our legal system is based on the presumption of innocence not the guilty "where there's smoke, there's fire" mentality of any accused must be guilty of something.
Typically, there is always overcharging in the drafting of accusatory instruments. The mere fact that a count of the indictment is dismissed is not equivalent to pronouncing a suspect either legally or morally innocent.
Yet the author seems ready to pronounce the suspect(s) guilty until proven innocent. Wrong legal system bud.
If the author of this rant isn't a racist, he'll certainly do until one comes along.
Consider the source. Alton Maddox.....scum of the earth.
Unless, of course, it is used by a Black person.
Yeah, if you're say, Dr. Dre you can put it in a "song" about 2 dozen times and use it to sell a million CDs...
For making such a blatantly racist, vicious provably false lie, this lawyer should be disbarred.
Oh, wait a minute - he was.
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.