Why are refusing to back up your claim that the peripheral players in the suit believed the accuser? Were you lying there, chaplain?
I've agreed from the beginning on protecting any legal rights that they have.
But you trash the one opportunity to get to the bottom of the lies and corruption in the case. You are siding with the lefties here, pal.
I've said I could less whether the whole pack of them score any outrage points, because the players' risky behavior is responsible for setting themselves up, and Duke's liberalism is nothing I'll cheer for.
You sure are doing your best to run interference for them.
Now, do I really need to read your link to arrive at those conclusions, or can I get there simply by reading this article?
The link was relevant to what follows in your post, not the above points. Your attempt to divert is transparent.
The info in 293 was from the player's perspective. It involves a nurse. From what we know of the stripper's behavior, that nurse could easily claim that she DID see all kinds of signs of intercourse....rough, mild, wild, you name it.
She could CLAIM anything. The fact is NC AG Roy Cooper flat out said there was no medical evidence to support the accuser. Nifong lied on mutiple occasions about findings of blunt force trauma consistent with rape. This nurse was to be his key medical witness. Once again, you enable a liar. What's that make you?
Are you serious about the Dukie liberal clientele? Do you really want proof that they sided with the accuser?
Wasn't that the subject of about every news report early on?
Frankly, I'm puzzled by the question. Why do you think the fired the coach? Why disband the team for that season? Why the public statements of supports for the stipper/ho and "raped" women, in general?
(and why use the word chaplain in conjunction with "lying" except to inflame?)