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

Skip to comments.

A federal failure (DukeLax Frame)
The (Duke) Chronicle ^ | December 10, 2007 | Kristin Butler

Posted on 12/10/2007 8:33:37 AM PST by abb

Since its inception in 1870, the U.S. Department of Justice has had among its chief duties "to seek just punishment for those guilty of unlawful behavior" and "to ensure fair and impartial administration of justice for all Americans."

Within that context, it is very difficult to accept the Justice Department's Dec. 3 decision not to investigate modern America's highest-profile case of prosecutorial misconduct, also known as former Durham district attorney Mike Nifong's handling of the lacrosse case.

The justification for such an inquiry was undeniable: As Jim Cooney, the leader of Reade Seligmann's defense team, explained in an October 2007 letter, federal intervention is warranted because "the District Attorney is the chief law enforcement officer for Durham County [and it is] plain that [he will] not investigate himself." Furthermore, Cooney noted, "There was little that the Attorney General of North Carolina could do, since his jurisdiction is extremely limited and since he has no power to convene an investigative grand jury under North Carolina law."

And yet 11 months after the Seligmanns first asked investigators from the United States Attorney for New Jersey's office to look into official misconduct in Durham (Cooney noted that the Seligmanns contacted the New Jersey office because it appeared that the United States Attorney for the Middle District of North Carolina "could have a conflict in conducting an investigation into law enforcement authorities... with whom she is required to work and conduct investigations on a regular basis"), that inquiry has been shut down for what are plainly political concerns.

As Cooney took pains to point out, Assistant United States attorneys from New Jersey met with Reade Seligmann and his father "beginning in January and for several weeks and months thereafter" to collect "motions, transcripts and other pleadings that were part of the public record" from the family.

In fact, it wasn't until those assistant U.S. attorneys traveled to North Carolina for a September 2007 meeting with representatives from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Middle District of North Carolina and members of the N.C. attorney general's staff that the roadblocks began materializing.

First, the New Jersey investigators were informed upon their arrival in Raleigh that they had been "denied permission to even meet with the representatives of the Attorney General of North Carolina"-which was the primary reason for their long-scheduled visit in the first place.

Three months later, that process of official withdrawal has culminated in Acting U.S. Deputy Attorney General Craig Morford's Dec. 3 letter explaining that the feds believe North Carolina should have sole responsibility for "protecting the integrity of its judicial proceedings, holding Mr. Nifong accountable for his actions as an officer of its courts and vindicating the principles of justice under state law."

As Cooper has made abundantly clear, that decision effectively means that there will be no investigation at all. In particular, a statement released by his office noted that "it would be difficult to conduct additional investigation into this matter without federal participation" since state authorities cannot compel witnesses to testify or punish them for lying. And following the disintegration of Durham's Whichard committee-the body that was formed to study city police in the aftermath of last spring's woefully distorted Baker-Chalmers report-it's hard to imagine any other viable options.

That's why this sudden refusal to investigate Nifong's all-but-unprecedented violation of citizens' rights is so unusual-especially for the same agency that is widely known for bringing down former speaker of the House Jim Black, former secretary of agriculture Meg Scott Phipps and several state legislators convicted of official corruption.

As Cooney noted, the DOJ has a "significant and recent history of state and federal authorities joining together to investigate allegations of official corruption in North Carolina," and it does not lack justification for its involvement: Indeed, Congress has made it a crime for government officials to act "under color of state law with the intent [to deprive] United States citizens of their liberty."

Rather, what the agency lacks is the political backbone to do the kind of work that once made it a hero of the civil rights movement or the scourge of organized crime. Between officials' sham rationale-indeed, the Justice Department's position that "this matter involves the conduct of a state prosecutor applying state law in a state criminal trial... [and so] the State of North Carolina has the primary interests in this matter" is positively untenable when you realize that Attorney General Roy Cooper has personally requested federal intervention-and their behind-closed-doors political maneuverings, this decision will forever remain among the most shameful chapters of the DOJ's history.

Indeed, as Cooney made clear to The News & Observer, the feds are "not saying there aren't any crimes." They're simply saying that no official has the courage to investigate them.

Kristin Butler is a Trinity senior. This her final column of the semester.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; News/Current Events; US: North Carolina
KEYWORDS: abuseofpower; donutwatch; duke; dukelax; durham; nifong; nifongism; witchhunt
Very good column
1 posted on 12/10/2007 8:33:38 AM PST by abb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: abner; Alia; beyondashadow; Bitter Bierce; bjc; Bogeygolfer; BossLady; Brytani; bwteim; Carling; ..

ping


2 posted on 12/10/2007 8:34:15 AM PST by abb (The Dinosaur Media: A One-Way Medium in a Two-Way World)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: abb
Good read, but let me address this:

Since its inception in 1870, the U.S. Department of Justice has had among its chief duties "to seek just punishment for those guilty of unlawful behavior"

Fair enough, but does anyone find it disquieting that there isn't any mention of securing the rights of individual Americans? After all, that is what we have laws for. It's not just about catching the badguys; it's about ensuring the protection of rights for law abiding citizens as well.
3 posted on 12/10/2007 8:36:33 AM PST by JamesP81 ("I am against "zero tolerance" policies. It is a crutch for idiots." --FReeper Tenacious 1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: abb

Things that make you go hummm. What State/Federal interests are being protected?


4 posted on 12/10/2007 8:38:34 AM PST by Truth29
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: abb
That's why this sudden refusal to investigate Nifong's all-but-unprecedented violation of citizens' rights is so unusual

Doesn't strike me as unusual. These folks think that rules are for the little people only.
5 posted on 12/10/2007 8:39:06 AM PST by JamesP81 ("I am against "zero tolerance" policies. It is a crutch for idiots." --FReeper Tenacious 1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JamesP81
These folks think that rules are for the little people only.

It's worse than that. There are different rules for protected classes.

6 posted on 12/10/2007 8:43:12 AM PST by Jeff Chandler ("Liberals want to save the world for the children they aren't having." -Mark Steyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: JamesP81

Well, they are protecting the civil rights of pitbulls.

(Does not reflect my love for animals, just the crazy mixed up world of special interest driven prosecutions)


7 posted on 12/10/2007 8:48:03 AM PST by Protect the Bill of Rights (Durham, where bottom feeders go to die.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Protect the Bill of Rights

“civil rights of pitbulls”

I assume that you are talking about lawyers?


8 posted on 12/10/2007 9:04:00 AM PST by A Strict Constructionist (We have become an oligarchy not a Republic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: A Strict Constructionist

:-)


9 posted on 12/10/2007 9:07:42 AM PST by Protect the Bill of Rights (Durham, where bottom feeders go to die.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: abb
I've been asking since the defense announced that they have video of one of the accused players from an ATM far away from the scene, where the Feds were. Clearly an injustice was done here.

Can anyone here imagine that the feds would be silent if it was a white prosecutor and a white accuser railroading 3 black players with such OBVIOUS proof of wrongdoing on both prosecutorial and accusatorial bases?

Yeah, they'd be silent. Sure the would. ;(

10 posted on 12/10/2007 9:08:37 AM PST by HeartlandOfAmerica (The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: abb

You can certainly argue that the Justice Department should have intervened in this case, given the unwillingness of state authorities to do so.

But the pressure should be put on the state, from the governor on down. WHY is the state unable to mount an investigation? If the law forbids it, shouldn’t that law be changed?

It should be primarily the duty of states to police themselves, and of the Feds to intervene only when absolutely necessary. Maybe that applies to this case, but more pressure should be put on the North Carolina governor and legislature to fix their broken laws, as well.


11 posted on 12/10/2007 9:37:46 AM PST by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HeartlandOfAmerica

Good point.If the hypothetical situation you posited(3 black players wrongly accused)had taken place,i believe(correction:i’m sure)the feds would be in NC in droves along with the msm,and the usual hangers on like Jesse,Al,aclu,naacp......


12 posted on 12/10/2007 9:46:21 AM PST by Thombo2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: HeartlandOfAmerica
Nifong even engaged in a malicious prosecution of a black cab driver who supported the alibi of one of the accused lacrosse players.

The only benefit from the case it that it has taught Americans what our court system is really like. Being innocent is no defense.

13 posted on 12/10/2007 9:51:45 AM PST by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Chandler

All citizens are equal but some are more equal than others.


14 posted on 12/10/2007 9:54:40 AM PST by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: abb
Indeed, Congress has made it a crime for government officials to act "under color of state law with the intent [to deprive] United States citizens of their liberty."

Since it's not going to be invoked in this case, then it will never be invoked on behalf of a white man. So much for "equal protection under the law".

15 posted on 12/10/2007 11:08:42 AM PST by jiggyboy (Ten per cent of poll respondents are either lying or insane)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: abb
Well, having been there and done that, I can only say I had hoped for more in the Duke case, but really didn’t expect to get more. Just once — somewhere — I wish someone could fail to live up to my expectations.
16 posted on 12/10/2007 11:37:55 AM PST by Constitutions Grandchild
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: abb

I am of two minds on this. NC has taken some steps on this matter. They have disbarred Nifong. The jailed him for criminal contempt. But they have more they need to do. The real question is will they now indict Nifong.

They certainly have the laws and ability to do so. It is natural that they may want to pass the buck on to the Feds but they certainly can take care of a criminal in their own state.

As I have long maintained, the Alamance County DA, one Mr. Robert F. Johnson, could today get a grand jury indictment of Nifong on criminal conspiracy charges against Nifong and other for the criminal conspiracy they entered into in his juris diction. When Nifong, Gottlieb, Himan drove to Alamance County to meet with Meehan they entered DA Johnson’s juris diction and clearly from sworn testimony entered into a criminal conspiracy to defraud an NC court and deprive Evans, Finnerty and Seiligmann of their liberty. Nifong came to DA Johnson’s juris diction for the sole purpose of entering into a criminal conspiracy. Yet DA Johnson seeming welcomes criminals coming to Alamance County, NC to break the law? I wonder if any local residents have asked him about this. If anyone here wants to ask him, here is his address and phone number:

212 West Elm Street
Suite 200
Graham, NC 27253
(336) 438-1015

I wonder how often DA’s ignor sworn in court public testimony of crimes committed in their juris diction or if they only do it when if involves other DAs?

It would be interesting to see if the Feds would step in if Nifong were charged and then acquitted by an obviously racist jury in Durham? That is the more traditional situation for the Feds to step in.


17 posted on 12/10/2007 5:29:58 PM PST by JLS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

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