Skip to comments.
Live Thread - Reid Seligmann's testimony in Duke/Nifong Case [Mike Nifong Resigns on the stand]
Live Thread - Fox News
| 06-15-07
| Brytani
Posted on 06/15/2007 6:52:12 AM PDT by Brytani
I didn't see anything posted on this live testimony. Who's watching it and what are your thoughts?
TOPICS: Extended News; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: accusershouldhang; creep; disbarnifong; disbarred; duke; dukelax; durhamdirtbag; hangnifong; hashimnzinga; liefong; nifong; nifongnowonstand; oscarwinnernifong; prosecuteaccuser; rape; seligmann; toast
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140, 141-160, 161-180 ... 1,101-1,107 next last
To: Brytani
Condom may be a reason dna evidence might not be found.
Sorry Nifong, but DNA evidence WAS found and you hid it from the defense and the court.
141
posted on
06/15/2007 8:20:33 AM PDT
by
mware
(By all that you hold dear..on this good earth... I bid you stand! Men of the West!)
To: mware
“I sure would like to know what 46 name was on that document. It might say quite a lot about the case.”
Excuse me, but have you been living under a rock for the past 15 months? The 46 names were those of every non-black player on Duke’s 2006 Men’s Lacrosse Team — straight from the roster — whether they were in attendance at the team party or not.
To: Brytani
Nifongthink: There are many reasons why DNA might not be found, excluding that the rape never happened, of course.
Nifong is spinning that a condom might have been used. He fails to mention that DNA from numerous ‘other’ partners was found.
143
posted on
06/15/2007 8:22:30 AM PDT
by
TomGuy
To: LoneConservative
That’s good to hear - however, Sharpton should still be in prison over that case.
Btw, I don’t remember that time very well, what ever happened to the office who was wrongly accused?
144
posted on
06/15/2007 8:22:34 AM PDT
by
Brytani
(Keeper of the FR Loofah, Bath-cap and Rubber Duckie)
To: mware
So, according to Nifong, these “hooligans” were guilty because he presumed they’d practiced safe sex?
To: mware
Oh brother he's just making crap up here, the questioner asks him why he was talking about the possibility of a condom even though he has the report from the nurse saying no condom was used, and he says, oh, that's because I was responding to a hypothetical question of how could it be possible that no DNA would be found.
146
posted on
06/15/2007 8:23:07 AM PDT
by
jiggyboy
(Ten per cent of poll respondents are either lying or insane)
To: Guilty by Association
Now, now be nice. I was not hiding under a rock, it is just that I am not a legal eagle and all this stuff is confusing to me.
147
posted on
06/15/2007 8:23:34 AM PDT
by
mware
(By all that you hold dear..on this good earth... I bid you stand! Men of the West!)
To: TheSpottedOwl
Im betting that Nifong walks away without a scratch. If this was just a local story, this hearing would not be happening. Because of all the national attention, the Bar Association is going to sacrifice him for the "good of the cause."
To: TomGuy
This guy won’t take resonsibility to taking a p&ss this morning!!!
149
posted on
06/15/2007 8:23:55 AM PDT
by
Brytani
(Keeper of the FR Loofah, Bath-cap and Rubber Duckie)
To: TheSpottedOwl
Unfortunately that’s exactly what I think is going to happen.
150
posted on
06/15/2007 8:24:20 AM PDT
by
Brytani
(Keeper of the FR Loofah, Bath-cap and Rubber Duckie)
To: Brytani
Nifong: ‘I got confused or got carried away with my comments.’
[Uh, you think?????]
151
posted on
06/15/2007 8:24:48 AM PDT
by
TomGuy
To: Guilty by Association
152
posted on
06/15/2007 8:25:14 AM PDT
by
Sue Perkick
(And I hope that what I’ve done here today doesn’t force you to have a negative opinion of me….)
To: Sacajaweau
Unfortunately, our system of examining and cross examining rarely achieves "the whole truth".
No, but it works better than any other system devised to this point.
And then there's the wonderful "spouse exception" and of course "the 5th" which says "you don't have to tell us ANYTHING bad about you".
The spouse exception is a good thing. If I were married, I certainly wouldn't testify against my wife no matter what the law said about it. For that matter, I don't think I'd even testify against immediate family.
We have the 5th Amendment for a reason, as well. I trust that someone who is a member of FR doesn't need the merits of that Amendment and why it's a good thing explained in detail.
153
posted on
06/15/2007 8:26:25 AM PDT
by
JamesP81
(Romans 10:9)
To: Brytani
Just admitted this will go to the second phase because of his comments to the pres.
The DNA will get him disbarred if there is justice.
Oh dear what an unfortunte name for that police office given this case.
154
posted on
06/15/2007 8:26:31 AM PDT
by
mware
(By all that you hold dear..on this good earth... I bid you stand! Men of the West!)
To: mware
I’ve gone over the condom issue many MANY times on this forum. My education is in crime scene investigation, meaning I think I know a thing or two about DNA evidence and condom use.
Nifong is making a mockery over the use of condoms and collection of DNA material. If this case went down as Magnum claimed it did, it would be irrelevant as to the use of a condom or not. Sweat, hair, semen, blood, skin, saliva etc would have been found on her body. In fact, the onlything found was the semen of 3 (wasn’t that the final number) different men, much older then the estimated time of the claim attack.
Nifong should know better as a prosecutor and I’m sure he does, at least when an election isn’t in full swing.
155
posted on
06/15/2007 8:27:20 AM PDT
by
Brytani
(Keeper of the FR Loofah, Bath-cap and Rubber Duckie)
To: mware
OMG! I did not know that the “victim” was unable to identify anyone from the photos she was shown.
Oh, wait...she couldn’t identify them because it was a team photo. Ah, that clears it up ;-(
To: Brytani
Less than ideal. How about the fact that all the guys in the line up were from the Duke Lacross team.
157
posted on
06/15/2007 8:29:11 AM PDT
by
mware
(By all that you hold dear..on this good earth... I bid you stand! Men of the West!)
To: mware
Is a death threat considered a hate crime? If so why didn’t they arrest that radical SOB?
158
posted on
06/15/2007 8:29:30 AM PDT
by
Bitsy
To: Brytani
He is willing to take the hit for the comments to the press. It is the dna that is going to cost him and his attorney knows that.
159
posted on
06/15/2007 8:30:19 AM PDT
by
mware
(By all that you hold dear..on this good earth... I bid you stand! Men of the West!)
To: Bitsy
“Is a death threat considered a hate crime? If so why didnt they arrest that radical SOB?”
Well of course, because his ancestors were slaves of the white devil.
160
posted on
06/15/2007 8:31:19 AM PDT
by
EyeGuy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140, 141-160, 161-180 ... 1,101-1,107 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson