http://www.newsobserver.com/559/story/539400.html
Published: Feb 04, 2007 12:30 AM
Modified: Feb 04, 2007 02:24 AM
Name the accuser? Here's your verdict
Ted Vaden, Staff Writer
Most readers don't want The N&O to name complainants in sex crime cases. But most do want the paper to name the accuser in the Duke lacrosse case.
That's the somewhat anomalous reading I got from an informal, unscientific survey of News & Observer readers last week. A number of you responded to my column in which I said the paper should not identify the accuser, unless she herself is charged (That's my opinion; N&O editors have not decided what to do.)
I asked members of the Reader Advisory Panel two questions:
1) Should The N&O identify the accuser if the case is resolved in favor of the Duke lacrosse players accused of sexual offense and kidnapping?
2) Do you agree or disagree with the paper's general policy of not naming complainants in sex crimes?
Of the 177 who answered the first question, two thirds (113) said The N&O should name the accuser. One third (59) said don't name her, and five weren't sure.
snip
http://washingtontimes.com/commentary/2007...00318-6438r.htm
The Washington Times
www.washingtontimes.com
Forum: Wronged and Nifonged
Published February 4, 2007
We now know of the gross abuse of prosecutorial power in the Duke rape case. Durham District Attorney Michael B. Nifong indicted three Duke University lacrosse players last April without any corroborative evidence. The only "evidence" was the conflicted testimony of the accuser, an escort service "stripper" who performed at a team party. Her testimony has been challenged by the other black female stripper performing that night. DNA from five men was found on specimens from the accuser's underpants, vagina and rectum -- but none of it belonged to the three defendants.
Mr. Nifong knew this before he indicted the trio and conspired with the director of the testing laboratory to conceal this exculpatory evidence from both the defense attorneys and the judge.
snip
How about printing in full their early interview that they editted to put Mangum in a more favorable light? This not names those claiming they were raped is meaningless as any can find out if they want.