Posted on 06/16/2007 1:28:45 PM PDT by stinkerpot65
Edited on 06/16/2007 4:05:02 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
Nifong Accepts Disbarment David Freedman, Mike Nifong's attorney, has just announced that Nifong has accepted that disbarment is an "appropriate" penalty, and has accepted both disbarment and waived the right to appeal.
(AP) RALEIGH, N.C. District Attorney Mike Nifong will be disbarred for his disastrous prosecution of three Duke University lacrosse players falsely accused of rape, a disciplinary committee decided Saturday. Even the veteran prosecutor said the punishment was appropriate.
"This matter has been a fiasco. There's no doubt about it," said committee chairman F. Lane Williamson.
Nifong sat motionless, one hand resting over his mouth, as Williamson recounted how he engaged in dishonest and deceitful conduct. He said Nifong's early comments about the case — which included a confident proclamation that he wouldn't allow Durham to become known for "a bunch of lacrosse players from Duke raping a black girl" — were purposefully designed to boost his campaign for district attorney.
"At the time he was facing a primary, and yes, he was politically naive," Williamson said. "But we can draw no other conclusion that those initial statements he made were to further his political ambitions."
Nifong will not appeal the punishment, his lawyer said.
"He hopes this helps restore some of the confidence in the criminal justice system of North Carolina," said attorney David Freedman.
"On one hand, it's very devastating. On the other hand, he's been going through this process for a long time, so you always have some semblance of relief when the process is over with regardless of the outcome."
The North Carolina State Bar charged Nifong with breaking several rules of professional conduct, including lying to both the court and bar investigators and withholding critical DNA test results from the players' defense attorneys.
The committee, after deliberating for a little more than an hour on Saturday, unanimously agreed with the bar on almost every charge — including the most serious allegations — that Nifong's actions involved "dishonesty, fraud, deceit and misrepresentation."
State Bar prosecutor Douglas Brocker told the committee that as Nifong investigated the allegations that a stripper was raped and beaten at a March 2006 party thrown by Duke's lacrosse team, he charged "forward toward condemnation and injustice," weaving a "web of deception that has continued up through this hearing."
"Mr. Nifong did not act as a minister of justice, but as a minister of injustice," Brocker said.
The verdicts and the punishment did not appear to surprise Nifong, who acknowledged during sometimes tearful testimony Friday that he would likely be punished for getting "carried away a little bit" when talking about the case.
During Saturday's closing arguments, Williamson repeatedly interrupted Nifong's attorney, Dudley Witt, as he discussed the DNA testing.
Williamson questioned why it took several months for the defense to get DNA test results that found genetic material from several men in the accuser's underwear and body, but none from any lacrosse player.
"It wasn't just one little oversight," Williamson said later. "This was conduct over an extended period in a very high-profile case."
Aware of those test results, Nifong pressed ahead with the case anyway and won indictments against Dave Evans, Reade Seligmann and Collin Finnerty. State prosecutors later concluded the three players were "innocent" victims of a rogue prosecutor's "tragic rush to accuse."
Nifong made "multiple, egregious mistakes" as he pursued the charges, but not intentionally, his attorney said in closing statements.
"It didn't click," Witt said as he tried to explain one of his client's errors. "His mind is just his mind. That's the way it works. It just didn't click."
Brocker said Nifong had to have known he was making improper comments to reporters. Nifong said he regretted some of his statements, including a confident proclamation that he wouldn't allow Durham to become known for "a bunch of lacrosse players from Duke raping a black girl."
He also focused on when Nifong learned about the full extent of the DNA test results and when he shared that information with the defense.
Nifong gave defense attorneys an initial report on the DNA testing in May 2006 that said private lab DNA Security Inc. had been unable to find a conclusive match between the accuser and any lacrosse players.
But lab director Brian Meehan testified this week that he told Nifong as early as April 10, 2006 — a week before Seligmann and Finnerty were indicted — about the more detailed test results.
Nifong testified that when he gave the defense the initial report, he "believed at the time that I had given them everything."
The disciplinary hearing committee had the choice of suspending Nifong's law license or taking it away entirely.
Nifong told the panel hearing the case Friday that he would resign from his post as Durham County district attorney over his handling of the rape charges.
The players' attorneys have pledged to seek criminal contempt charges next week in Durham.
Actually, I was responding to another poster and what I considered a snarky comment by him. The three young men won’t be in a partying mood for a very long time, if ever.
You’re right though about the baby boomer generation. The me generation has run many institutions into the ground, and the rest of us are paying for it. Many don’t believe in God, His commandments, personal responsibility, or duty.
Notice that I didn’t say all people from that generation, just enough to gum up the works.
ditto
Here’s how I think this will work. Some very good lawyers will sit down with each of the victims and present their options. The main claim is a civil right claim against Durham County government. The boys lost a year. That has a value. What is it? Put yourself in the jury box. Assume that you are Joe Lunchbox, a minority blue color Durham resident. Plaintiff is a white college boy with a bright future. How much do you give him for his year of hell? Million? Probably not.
Punitive damages are controlled by recent Sup Ct. cases limiting them to a small multiple of compensatory damages, but in no event more than is reasonably necessary to discourage the conduct in the future. There’s the rub. And guess who has to bless it? The judge, not the jury. the judge works for the county. Does he open the cash register for this case? He’s probably seen worse that never made it to court.
Nifong has nothing and his net worth is less than the court costs will be. The Duke case is a long shot. Liability is a big issue and they will fight to the death not to pay.
Now the case will take 5 years including appeals. So there is a young man who can go on with his life and put this mess behind him or stay involved for 5 years and maybe get a million or two. deduct attorneys fees, taxes (some of the damages will be taxable) and you have a pretty hard choice.
Pray that the boys make the hard choice and sue everyone involved. I think its a toss up.
“Now what about the 88 “professors” who were part of the lynch mob?”I don’t think they could be held culpable. They were largely going on what a rogue lying district attorney was saying.
I seriously doubt that that is a defense. First, because they rushed to sanction the innocent 3 - and indeed the whole lacrosse team - without a trial. They were vigilantes. Secondly, There should be no difficulty proving actual malice, and proving that the slander was perpetrated in reckless disregard for the truth. If the plaintiff can prove that, he can successfully sue even if he is a politician "in the public eye."That finding of actual innocence, not merely lack of adequate evidence for proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, puts everyone who rushed to judgment in legal jeopardy, IMHO.
Note: I am not a lawyer - I don't even play one on TV.
Except that any action will probably take place at the state level, which means that the GOB network in Durham won’t apply nearly as much.
This is just Bar discipline, not the justice system. One of the defense attornies said they were filing a motion for sanctions before the court where the false statements were made and that could bring civil or criminal sanctions, i.e. jail time, if the court finds that Nifong lied to the court.
Is it unethical for this “Bar discipline group” not to initiate some action if they believe crimes were committed?
Aren’t you supposed to be putting the finishing touches on that terrific sermon for tomorrow?
“Will the DNC now put him in the Party leadership?”
He’ll give one of the keynote addresses at the convention. Right after Al Sharpton.
I am.
1 Kings 20:28
Look it up.
This prosecutor erred beyond imagination. If there had been a two-party system in Durham, he might have been more cautious. As it was, he expected liberals to defend anything he did.
Good text!
Unfortunately I have little faith that he won’t “rise again” from this “setback” to his political career.
Shouldn't they bear some of this brunt of this farce?
The God of The Mountain is the God of the Valley
The God of the Mega-Church is the God of the micro-Church
The God of the Sainted Christian is the God of the Everyman Christian
The God of Super-Christian Dad is the God of MiniMe Christian Dad
A lengthy prison sentence would be a good start..
He’s going to cost the state and county and city a bundle
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.