Duke To Reinstate Seligmann, Finnerty (DukeLax)

WTVD ^ | January 3, 2007 | Staff

[abb]

(01/03/07 -- DURHAM) - Duke lacrosse defendants Colin Finnerty and Reade Seligmann are both expected to be reinstated today as Duke students in good standing, two sources close to the case told ABC News. Also on abc11tv.com: Send us news tips | Desktop Alert | ABC11 AccuWeather | Pinpoint Traffic Defendant David Evans was allowed to graduate last spring, but underclassmen Seligmann and Finnerty were suspended from the University pending a resolution of the assault charges.

December 22, 2006, prosecutors dropped rape charges against the three Duke lacrosse players accused of attacking a stripper at a team party, but the three still face kidnapping and sexual offense charges.

According to court papers filed by District Attorney Mike Nifong, the accuser says she now does not know if she was penetrated during the alleged attack.

The accuser, a 28-year-old student at North Carolina Central University, has said three men raped her in a bathroom at a March 13 Duke lacrosse team party where she was hired to perform as a stripper.

The indicted players - Dave Evans, Collin Finnerty and Reade Seligmann - all say they are innocent, and their attorneys have consistently said no sex occurred at the party.

Evans graduated from Duke in May, the day before he was indicted. Sophomores Finnerty and Seligmann were suspended following their April 2006 indictments.

The Duke lacrosse team was also suspended from play, but was reinstated in June on a provisionary basis.

A press conference from defense attorneys is expected this afternoon.

Stay with abc11tv.com and ABC11 Eyewitness News for the latest on this developing story.

[Jezebelle]

He could even get run over in a crosswalk while crossing to the other side to go to a porn store. Under geezer's reasoning, he'd deserve it.

[Jezebelle]

Their reputations are damaged by the charges and the perp walk, not the party or hiring of strippers.

You entire argument is a fallacy because the "lumps" they are taking are not a result of hiring strippers for a spring break party. The lumps they are taking are the results of actions taken by other people with personal agendae in one case, staying out of jail/rehab; the other case about self-promotion to win an election.

[Jezebelle]

You're living proof that if someone works hard in school and stays in school, they'll do well. If they don't, they'll end up thinking like you and your buddies at DUh.

[Enterprise]

I love the smell of burning political correctness in the morning. Or the afternoon. Or the evening.

[Jezebelle]

Maybe he's a peeping geezer? Or a wienie wagger? Maybe he got caught with his pants down in an alley window-watching some stripper that he clandestinely followed home from a club and it made the local papers, and that's why he's fixated on this reputation/stripper thing.

Or maybe he just likes to be an asshat troll.

[gopheraj]

mark

[Red_Devil 232]

Newgeezer has Nifonged himself!

[Sue Perkick]

They're not even guilty of that. What showed up at the door was not what was requested.

[Jezebelle]

§ 7A‑66. Removal of district attorneys. The following are grounds for suspension of a district attorney or for his removal from office: (1) Mental or physical incapacity interfering with the performance of his duties which is, or is likely to become, permanent; (2) Willful misconduct in office; (3) Willful and persistent failure to perform his duties; (4) Habitual intemperance; (5) Conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude; (6) Conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice which brings the office into disrepute; or (7) Knowingly authorizing or permitting an assistant district attorney to commit any act constituting grounds for removal, as defined in subdivisions (1) through (6) hereof. A proceeding to suspend or remove a district attorney is commenced by filing with the clerk of superior court of the county where the district attorney resides a sworn affidavit charging the district attorney with one or more grounds for removal. The clerk shall immediately bring the matter to the attention of the senior regular resident superior court judge for the district or set of districts as defined in G.S. 7A‑41.1(a) in which the county is located who shall within 30 days either review and act on the charges or refer them for review and action within 30 days to another superior court judge residing in or regularly holding the courts of that district or set of districts. If the superior court judge upon review finds that the charges if true constitute grounds for suspension, and finds probable cause for believing that the charges are true, he may enter an order suspending the district attorney from performing the duties of his office until a final determination of the charges on the merits. During the suspension the salary of the district attorney continues. If the superior court judge finds that the charges if true do not constitute grounds for suspension or finds that no probable cause exists for believing that the charges are true, he shall dismiss the proceeding. If a hearing, with or without suspension, is ordered, the district attorney should receive immediate written notice of the proceedings and a true copy of the charges, and the matter shall be set for hearing not less than 10 days nor more than 30 days thereafter. The matter shall be set for hearing before the judge who originally examined the charges or before another regular superior court judge resident in or regularly holding the courts of that district or set of districts. The hearing shall be open to the public. All testimony shall be recorded. At the hearing the superior court judge shall hear evidence and make findings of fact and conclusions of law and if he finds that grounds for removal exist, he shall enter an order permanently removing the district attorney from office, and terminating his salary. If he finds that no grounds exist, he shall terminate the suspension, if any. http://www.ncleg.net/enactedlegislation/statutes/html/bysection/chapter_7a/gs_7a-66.html The district attorney may appeal from an order of removal to the Court of Appeals on the basis of error of law by the superior court judge. Pending decision of the case on appeal, the district attorney shall not perform any of the duties of his office. If, upon final determination, he is ordered reinstated either by the appellate division or by the superior court upon remand his salary shall be restored from the date of the original order of removal. (1967, c. 1049, s. 1; 1973, c. 47, s. 2; c. 148, s. 1; 1977, c. 21, ss. 1, 2; 1987 (Reg. Sess., 1988), c. 1037, s. 13.) See Paragraph 7: http://www.ncleg.net/enactedlegislation/statutes/html/bysection/chapter_15a/gs_15a-101.html § 15A‑101. Definitions. Unless the context clearly requires otherwise, the following words have the listed meanings: (1) Appeal. – When used in a general context, the term "appeal" also includes appellate review upon writ of certiorari. (1a) Attorney of Record. – An attorney who, under Article 4 of this Chapter, Entry and Withdrawal of Attorney in Criminal Case, has entered a criminal proceeding and has not withdrawn. (2) Clerk. – Any clerk of superior court, acting clerk, or assistant or deputy clerk. (3) District Court. – The District Court Division of the General Court of Justice. (4) District Attorney. – The person elected and currently serving as district attorney in his prosecutorial district. (4a) Entry of Judgment. – Judgment is entered when sentence is pronounced. Prayer for judgment continued upon payment of costs, without more, does not constitute the entry of judgment. (5) Judicial Official. – A magistrate, clerk, judge, or justice of the General Court of Justice. (6) Officer. – Law‑enforcement officer. (7) Prosecutor. – The district attorney, any assistant district attorney or any other attorney designated by the district attorney to act for the State or on behalf of the district attorney. (8) State. – The State of North Carolina, all land or water in respect to which the State of North Carolina has either exclusive or concurrent jurisdiction, and the airspace above that land or water. "Other state" means any state or territory of the United States, the District of Columbia or the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. (9) Superior Court. – The Superior Court Division of the General Court of Justice. (10) Superior Court Judge. – A superior court judge who has jurisdiction pursuant to G.S. 7A‑47.1 or G.S. 7A‑48 in the district or set of districts as defined in G.S. 7A‑41.1. (11) Vehicle. – Aircraft, watercraft, or landcraft or other conveyance. (1973, c. 1286, s. 1; 1975, c. 166, s. 2; 1977, c. 711, s. 19; 1987 (Reg. Sess., 1988), c. 1037, s. 52; 1997‑456, s. 27.)

[Jezebelle]

Dang, sorry about the size of that post. I meant to delete the irrelevant sections.

[TommyDale]

You are probably right. It just bothers me that someone would post the 2006 numbers which occurred BEFORE all this Nifong crap. We all know that several NC colleges and universities admission applications are DOWN since the bad publicity over the Duke case. It was not limited to Duke, but included Davidson and others.

[Redleg Duke]

Yeah, but where do they go to get their good names back?

[TommyDale]

"As for Nifong's prosecutorial history, he probably has done something like this before..."

I read here somewhere in the last two days that he did this in 1994, and even used the same line to the defense team, referring to them as "poultry" and that they were chickens to face him in court. The guy can't even come up with anything original!

[Carolinamom]

My favorite line: "The hearings shall be open to the public."

[united1000]

Actually I didn't. I had read it earlier and thought I'd post it here as everyone was talking about numbers......

[Carolinamom]

Duke has said that it is their policy to suspend students who have been charged w/a violent crime. The boys are still charged w/kidnapping and sexual assault...violent crimes.

In inviting them back as students in good standing, Duke is violating its own policy. Correct"

[Jane Austen]

You come across as narrow minded, as if you want only your view points to be expressed here.

[Jane Austen]

You are not in a position to tell anyone here to shut up and go elsewhere. This is not your Web site.

[Jane Austen]

It is irrelevant to the controversy over Nifong whether or not the players behaved badly (I sure would have raised hell if my sons hired a stripper). No one should be falsely accused and framed for rape, and this is what Nifong has done. His actions go beyond misconduct. He should not only be removed, he should be charged.

[Ready4Freddy]

As I mentioned earlier, united1000's post of the 2006 #'s will be very handy for comparison to post-Hoax applications. The article he/she posted came out in Feb, 2006, so we probably don't have too much longer to wait to see what the effect has been.

Good point on the effect on other NC universities - it stands to reason that many folks view this as a state-wide NC problem and not just one limited to Durham / JD 14.

You are probably right. It just bothers me that someone would post the 2006 numbers which occurred BEFORE all this Nifong crap. We all know that several NC colleges and universities admission applications are DOWN since the bad publicity over the Duke case. It was not limited to Duke, but included Davidson and others.