I’m not familiar with the
--Abrams Report, 18 May 2006
There was evidence of DNA of Seligmann [sic]
who lived in that house [sic].
--Tucker, 7 August 2006
Among the dozens of talking heads who have appeared on the lacrosse case, three stand out: Nancy Grace, a demagogue who contends that everyone charged is automatically guilty; the ready-to-slander Wendy Murphy; and a heretofore obscure
The first two were on the case from the start, but Goslee didn’t make her first appearance until late April. Mike Nifong’s case was already showing signs of imploding; anyone with half a brain wouldn’t enthusiastically defend him. Goslee, however, was willing, even eager, to do so.
A graduate of
During her three-month run as a commentator, Goslee distinguished herself for making transparently absurd comments on the law.
27 April: The victim in this case, I mean she has been brutally assaulted. And to hold her testimony even at this time to hard and fast specific time periods I think is a little unfair . . . . For God’s sakes this poor woman may still be wallowing under a cloud.A flustered Dan Abrams replied, “So you would rather that we just say you know what, she’s making this allegation. Let’s not get into specifics here.”
The same day, defense attorney Yale Galanter pointed to Reade Seligmann’s alibi, noting that “phone records do not lie. Bank records do not lie.” Goslee was not deterred: “I’m not so sure about that.”
The 6th amendment right to a speedy trial was not a favorite of Goslee’s.
18 May: I’m just so perplexed as to why this particular case wants—the defense wants to rush it through . . . If they don’t need more time, perhaps the state’s attorney needs more time.
The release of Kim Roberts’ statement—which showed a version of events consistent with that of the captains’ statement and utterly inconsistent with that of the accuser—did not perturb Goslee.
9 June: You know, one of the problems you guys attach is consistency and inconsistency.
This person who described herself as a former prosecutor articulated an extraordinarily low bar for the standard a prosecutor should employ in deciding whether or not to move forward with a case.
19 June: If you can’t call her a liar, then maybe there’s some credibility . . . to what she’s saying even though she’s inconsistent.
As noted in one of the header quotes, Goslee admitted early on in the case that she didn’t know
24 May: How many times do you go to court, even though you’re required by law . . . to give up the exculpatory evidence, you are never going to reveal everything you have.
23 June: If you look at the resolve of Nifong, who is a seasoned prosecutor . . . they simply had not turned over everything, because you never give up everything.
And, when all else failed, the former federal prosecutor cited conspiracy theories.
7 August: I remember reading a story that the accuser’s mother said that she was a little concerned that the DNA didn’t show up because it was actually tested by some of the people involved at
. I’m not saying that’s the case. That’s what the mother of the accuser has said. Duke University
To a greater extent than any other TV commentator, Goslee displayed an almost reverential attitude toward Nifong.
9 May: I think Mike Nifong, I think he’s a pretty smart guy. And . . . while he may not have a real hot smoking gun, I think he knows much more than we know.
18 May: I think that Mr. Nifong is doing actually a great job.
24 May: In the long run, we’re going to see and you know we keep saying it, it may not be a smoking gun, but I think there’s some seriously incriminating evidence.
5 June: Listen. No, he would not . . . have indicted these guys [without evidence]. He’s not a neophyte prosecutor.
19 June: I talk to people—lots of people almost daily from
Durham[Goslee lives in ] and they are not outraged. They are not upset. Maryland
Much like Wendy Murphy, Goslee proved ready, willing, and able to invent evidence or make wholly unfounded speculation to substantiate Nifong’s case.
8 May: She’s been obviously brutally beaten and there were obvious bruises on her.
In fact, the SANE nurse-in-training’s report said that the accuser had non-bleeding scratches on her heel and knee. As this fact publicly emerged, Goslee simply changed her theory, making the fantastic claim that as the “complexion of the victim in this case who was raped is a dark complected African American woman,” medical personnel (in a city that’s 38 percent African-American) would not have known how to detect bruises on the accuser.
8 May: I think as this case continues to develop, Dan, I think we’re going to see maybe— there may be other women who are coming forward on Duke and other campuses around the country.
No grounds for this speculation, of course, existed.
24 May: You have physicians who are saying that the incident or the allegation she’s made, they’re consistent with being raped.
In fact, no physician had said any such thing.
5 June: All of those gentlemen that were in that house that night when that rape occurred, somebody else knows something . . . Other guys in that house that night knows something . . . And they may be withholding evidence.
No grounds for this speculation, of course, existed.
7 August: She he was offered $2 million, Tucker. And why would she be offered $2 million by the Duke alumni if nothing happened?
In fact, the accuser had unequivocally denied this assertion to
Even broken clocks are accurate twice a day, and occasionally Goslee would stumble onto a pertinent question. When she did so, however, she proved unable to process the information.
5 June: If there were no vaginal tears, what was the basis of the indictment for the original medical examination . . . her examination was consistent with . . . forcible rape?
19 June: Why is [Nifong] prosecuting a case if he has no evidence?
In the end, Goslee was undone by her habit of simply inventing evidence to substantiate Nifong’s claims. A few minutes after she made the bizarre assertion about Reade Seligmann’s DNA quoted in the header, show host Tucker Carlson broke into another segment:
I just want to make something absolutely clear. In our conversation with Georgia Goslee a moment ago about the Duke rape hoax, she alleged—or appeared to allege; she was speaking pretty quickly—that Reade Seligman’s DNA . . . was either found on the victim or at the scene.
As I attempted to make clear, that is completely untrue. And it is completely untrue. So I just want to make totally clear, Reade Seligman’s DNA was not found, so far as we know, anyway—so far as anybody knows—on the accuser. Totally false.
It appears as if this invented claim was the final straw for Goslee’s career as a cable news commentator. A Lexis/Nexis search indicates that she has not made a case-related appearance since August 7.
[Update, 9.34am: A commenter notes that, contrary to my last remark, Goslee resurfaced! She was on the "Lineup," on FOX, a couple of weeks back. The transcript didn't appear in my Lexis search. As far as I know, MSNBC hasn't used her again.]