Posted on 01/15/2007 9:50:37 AM PST by freespirited
Forced by allegations of prosecutorial misconduct to recuse himself, the district attorney who drove the Duke lacrosse sexual-assault case could end up losing much more than the opportunity to try a case he still supports.
For Mike Nifong, the missteps of the past 10 months have the potential to end a career that started nearly 30 years ago.
"You don't easily recover from something like this," said James Coleman, a law professor at Duke University and a frequent Nifong critic. "That's what's so unfortunate about this. He had a career - a long career, a reputation of being an honest and fair prosecutor - and for some reason, his conduct in this case was inconsistent with that.
"It's just bizarre," he said. "This is the biggest case by far that he's handled, and he didn't do a very good job, and I think that's going to haunt him."
When Nifong asked the N.C. Attorney General's office Friday to take over the case of three lacrosse players accused of sexually assaulting a woman hired to strip at a team party, he was less than two weeks into his first full term as Durham County's elected district attorney.
Now he must defend himself against ethics charges that could lead to his disbarment. If N.C. Attorney General Roy Cooper dismisses the case against Dave Evans, Collin Finnerty and Reade Seligmann - and legal experts have said that there appears to be little evidence to support the charges - their families might try to file a civil lawsuit against Nifong.
If and when he returns to the courtroom, Nifong will have to rebuild a reputation tainted by the vast attention generated by the lacrosse case.
"Nothing happens in a vacuum," said Garry Frank, a district attorney in four North Carolina counties and the president of the N.C. Conference of District Attorneys. "It's something that he and his office will have to work through. It will be a challenge for him."
The conference offered Nifong assistance in September - an offer that went unanswered. Frank said that Nifong appeared surprised in December that his colleagues were concerned about his handling of the case. They later formally called on Nifong to recuse himself.
"Folks that have to do the things we do on a day-to-day basis quickly learn to take good advice when you can get it," Frank said.
A more immediate concern for Nifong is the pending ethics charges that accuse him of making misleading and inflammatory comments about the lacrosse team, including calling them "nothing but a bunch of hooligans." A hearing on those charges is scheduled for May.
John Banzhaf, a law professor at George Washington University, thinks that more ethics charges are forthcoming. The director of a private lab has said that he and Nifong agreed to keep out of a report given to the defense results of DNA testing that found genetic material from several unknown men on the accuser's body and underwear, and found that none of the DNA matched that of the three indicted players.
While the defense was eventually given the test results, as required by state law, it wasn't until months later.
Joseph Kennedy, a law professor at the University of North Carolina, said that the accuser's Dec. 21 interview with an investigator, in which she changed several key details in her description of the attack, is also a concern.
Among the changes, the accuser offered a new timeline that put the attack outside of the apparent alibi window established by Seligmann's attorneys. She also said she could no longer be sure that she was penetrated vaginally by a penis, which could have helped Nifong explain to a jury why there was no DNA evidence.
"It's just troubling that ... nine months after the event, there's an interview and the interview reveals this fact, which minimizes the importance of the evidence they didn't turn over," Kennedy said.
As a prosecutor, Nifong enjoys broad but not absolute immunity from civil litigation, and the families of the indicted players have hinted that they plan to sue. Asked in an interview with CBS' 60 Minutes what she would say to Nifong if they met, Evans' mother said, "Mr. Nifong, you've picked on the wrong families ... and you will pay every day for the rest of your life."
Some of Nifong's harshest critics have also suggested that he face criminal charges, but Kennedy said that those charges "should only be reserved for the most egregious types of misconduct. And it's too early to say whether this might be one of those cases."
Nifong has no plans to resign and is intent on carrying on with cases as the district attorney in Durham County, said his attorney, David Freedman.
I wonder if you are as miserable as you come accross?
That's not too far fetched, he was a draft dodger during Vietnam.
There's another prominent case besides this one that's bringing out the cockroaches, too. Where's the RAID when you need it?
Actually, those words weren't mine, and should have been italicized as a quote from the poster that I was replying to.
My words were encompassed solely by the last sentence of my post. Sorry for the mix-up.
Just as a thought, don't you think that just consequences should be somewhat proportionate to the actions? Do you actually consider that the nightmare that these boys have gone through, for no reason, is proportionate to hiring a stripper, or even using the N* word? Which these are the guys that did it.
And you seem to be in the wrong place and the wrong time with the wrong ideas.
And now that they have paid the consequences with $100,000, how about we let them off the hook and start with some consequences for the criminals, the stripper and the DA.
Being lied about, by the way, is not a "consequence" of anything that you may have done. All blame lies with the liar.
Hard to believe that you seem to be incapable of grasping this point.
The only way to "heal" that community is to cut out the cancer, Nifong, the stripper, numerous people associated with Duke university. Then some heavy chemo onth Jesse Jackson and the other race baiters.
I don't care if she accused 'little green men', if she hadn't made the accusation Nifong wouldn't be involved. She is just as guilty.
Beats anything I've ever seen.
Regrettably, there is no allowance in the law for hanging this SOB.
Hear, hear!
I should have read back before responding...sorry.
Oh yes. Very true.
Libs have such trouble with cause and effect. She now says she was not penetrated because the DNA evidence showed that these young men did not. The very DNA evidence that was withheld that has now come to light caused the effect of her changing her story (i.e. lying) once again with another story. Professor Kennedy, it does not strengthen the case it totally discredits the case.
She bears some of the blame, sure. But were it not for the grossly unreasonable actions of Nifong, there might have been no case, either. On the other hand, Nifong's actions suggest a strong disposition toward railroading innocent people that some other circumstance may well have occurred had this one not. It may never be possible to know, ultimately, how many people owe their freedom to CGM regardless of her intentions.
Nifong is toast he embarrased the gov. who appointed him,end of story.
In a perfect world, what you said would be so true....
I wonder what roven thinks should happen to the most unholy among all the players: Crystal.
I think this is also a big embarassment to the DNA laboratory. If I was a defense attorney, I would use this to question any DNA evidence from that lab. If they witheld information in this case, they may have done it is others.
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.