[supercat]

I may be the only person who feels this way -- no problem -- but I think the case MUST go to trial, Crystal must appear on the stand for cross-examination, the case must be aired in a completely open forum to the black community and this has got to be a major shot across the bow of anyone who will try to play the system.

Is there any reason why having Crystal take the stand in a trial against Finnerty et al. is better than having her take the stand in a trial against Nifong?

[Sue Perkick]

I tell you one thing, I'd pay admission to see Crystal questioned by Joseph Cheshire. Guarantee it would be worth the price.

[Constitutions Grandchild]

None, whatsoever. It has to be done somewhere. She must be "interviewed" or "cross-examined" somewhere in a public forum -- not just the media.

[Jezebelle]

No defense attorney worth a damn puts his client on trial to clear his name. Any trial is always a serious risk of jeopardy for the client and should be avoided whenever possible. There are other ways of clearing the client's name and we are seeing this happening now. We probably will never see Mangum testify, at least not in the case against the boys, and the defense clearly knows that. That's why there is such an all-out attack on what Nifong has done - he's conduct makes him ripe for it, and it's the best AVAILABLE way of getting the truth out.