The Herald-Sun's editorial on Nov. 9 regarding the Duke lacrosse rape case was absolutely stunning. I am glad that you are setting the record straight after all this time. For over 200 years, Americans have been under the false impression that in the American system of justice, it was the prosecutor's responsibility for proving, beyond a reasonable doubt, that a defendant was guilty.
Apparently we have had it wrong all along. Now we know that it is the defendant's responsibility for proving their innocence, thanks to your insight when you say, "it would be better for the players to have an opportunity to prove their innocence at trial."
You, your paper and your unwavering support of a corrupt district attorney are a disgrace. I am one of many people I know that are thankful that they no longer live in Durham.
November 14, 2006
It's worth remembering, of course, that the H-S isn't the only actor in the case to articulate this unusual conception of due process: Duke president Richard Brodhead likewise proclaimed that a trial would present an opportunity “for our students to be proved innocent.”
In Wonderland, it seems, the normal rules are upside down.