Posted on 11/27/2008 9:07:52 PM PST by MitchellC
A man charged with the second-degree rape of a then-freshman in February 2007 was arrested on the same charges Nov. 14.
Michael Burch, a Durham resident, is currently being held in Durham County Jail on $1.85 million bond, Durham Police Department clerks said.
Burch also faces charges of first-degree sexual offense and felony aiding and abetting, for crimes which allegedly occurred June 21, said Candy Clark, an administrative assistant in the Durham County District Attorney's Office. He is scheduled to appear in Criminal District Court Dec. 8 before a grand jury.
Michael Burch
Burch, who is not a Duke student, was arrested in February 2007 for allegedly raping a then-18-year-old freshman at around 3 a.m. Feb. 11, 2007 at an off-campus party at 405 Gattis St. The party was hosted by members of Phi Beta Sigma Fraternity, Inc., and police had found marijuana, cocaine and Oxycontin in the house.
Burch was held on a $50,000 bond and released from jail the same day.
"The disparity between $50,000 and [the new bond of] $1.85 million is just so negligent in our minds," the first victim's father said Monday. "[My daughter] was validated, but unfortunately my question to the initial judges is, 'How come my 18-year-old daughter knew better than you?'"
The victim's father said he feels there was an injustice in the difference between the bond amount for the three wrongly indicted members of the 2006 men's lacrosse team and Burch's bond in 2007.
"We feel eschewed because the Duke lacrosse players had to post $400,000 and this individual had to post $50,000," he said. "From a racial aspect, on the outside looking in, [it seems they thought] 'four white kids from the North let's make it $400,000 and for a black guy let's make it $50,000.' A crime is a crime."
Durham County Magistrate Joseph Payne issued Burch's bond in 2007, and Magistrate J.E. Willard issued his current bond, court clerks said.
Burch was originally scheduled to appear in North Carolina Superior Court Nov. 10 for the alleged Gattis St. rape, but the court date was rescheduled to Jan. 20 at the victim's request. Her father said they wished to delay the case so that it would not impede her school work.
The student left Duke after the incident to recuperate because she was scared that the suspect was on the streets, her father said.
Durham Assistant District Attorney Janice Paul, who is representing the student, was unavailable for comment.
That scumbag has dead eyes.
This is one of the most poorly written articles I’ve ever read.
FMCDH(BITS)
I guess there wouldn’t be too many men left if we followed my recommendation of exiling all men with tattoos or piercings.
FWIW, this article in the college paper gave more info about the case than either of the two city newspapers or the local TV stations.
One of those papers has yet even to report the second arrest.
When you consider that this case is almost a mirror image of the Duke lacrosse case; and then look at how this case has almost been totally (even deliberately) ignored by the media, the feminists, and everyone else,
you have to be grateful that at least that someone mentioned it at all.
BTW, what does FMCDH(BITS) mean?
If anyone still had any doubts that the Duke lacrosse case was not about rape, but about race,gender,and class, this case proves it; because absolutely nobody in Durham or at Duke (faculty or Administration) care in the least that a Duke student was allegedly raped.
There are no marches, no vigils, no banging pots, no “Take Back the Night” rallies, no angry clergymen, no talking heads on TV—
for almost the same exact circumstances.
The lacrosse case was just a vehicle to advance everyone’s agendas (and guilt or innocence didn’t matter).
“Some cases are just too important for innocence to be allowed as a defense.”
I thought the same thing when I read it. It’s convoluted, but as another Freeper said, at least the writer didn’t try to dance around or ignore the facts like the “pros” are apparently doing with the story.
“because absolutely nobody in Durham or at Duke (faculty or Administration) care in the least that a Duke student was allegedly raped.”
What would happen if everyone in the US were to become comopletely informed regarding crime statistics? That is, everyone knew how many people of which races are raped, robbed, killed, beaten, etc., by people of which races.
Hell man, many freepers are in denial. Go to any Little Rock Animal thread and watch the racially supersensitive preen. Facts don't matter as long as they can wax about how bigoted we all are for seeing the obvious for what it is.
Btw...I ain't just seeing it for what it is, I'm living it. Reality has made me race conscious...and not in a warm and fuzzy way.
From My Cold Dead Hands
Blood In The Streets.
I call it situational analysis, help you avoid being a victim.
Maybe they should cross check his DNA with the 73 different individuals they found on Crystal Mangum’s underwear.
Thanks.
Is that an individual thing, or...?
“Little Rock Animal”
?
Demographics of the high-crime vs low-crime cities, according to city-data.com:
High-crime:
New Orleans: Black (67.3%); White Non-Hispanic (26.6%); Hispanic (3.1%)
Camden: Black (53.3%); Hispanic (38.8%); Other race (22.8%)’ White Non-Hispanic (7.1%).
Detroit: Black (81.6%); White Non-Hispanic (10.5%); Hispanic (5.0%)
St. Louis: Black (51.2%); White Non-Hispanic (42.9%); Hispanic (2.0%)
Oakland: Black (35.7%); White Non-Hispanic (23.5%); Hispanic (21.9%); Other race (11.7%);Chinese (8.0%)
Low-Crime:
Ramapo, NY: White Non-Hispanic (68.1%); Black (17.0%); Hispanic (8.2%)
Mission Viejo: White Non-Hispanic (76.0%); Hispanic (12.1%); Black (1.1%)
O’Fallon, MO: White Non-Hispanic (94.4%); Black (2.2%); Hispanic (1.5%
Newton, MA: White Non-Hispanic (86.4%); Chinese (4.8%); Hispanic (2.5%); Black (2.0%)
Does anyone remember that “reasonable bail” is based on assuring the appearance of the accused for trial, not on the crime itself?
That it is not supposed to be (though often is) a means of keeping a “presumed innocent until proved guilty” alleged perpetrator locked up ‘for the public safty’?
That in cases where locking up is justified, that a simple "remand" order from the judge is available?
That said, throw away the key until time to execute him.
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.