http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/1506245/
I watched some of it. Basically, his attorneys said he was a neophyte at dealing with the media, he was an “old school” prosecutor not used to doing things the “new way” (which new way has been in effect for more than a dozen years), and that he did not intend for any bad effects to happen, but that he made mistakes and he was negligent in some ways. His attorneys also said he may not have known what was in the professional ethics code, but he followed the ethical rules anyway (I forgot how they stated this).
Basically, Nifong made some unintentional mistakes, some of which were due to negligence, and most of which were due to naivete (dealing with the media) or the fault of others (the media, the DNA place).
He sure never thought the way he handled the case would help his campaign.
Remember that Nifong’s attorneys didn’t have much to work with in defending him. That’s always a bummer for a defense attorney.
It’s hard to defend Nifong because he’s guilty as hell. Not stupid, not incompetent, not naive. He knew this case, if handled “right” would only benefit him and his political ambitions.
I just hope the bar has more integrity then Nifong and those who covered for his actions.