Friday, January 12, 2007

A Lawyer for Nifong

In the N&O, Anne Blythe has received a comment from David Freedman, the attorney who will represent Mike Nifong on ethics charges. On the April 19 Abrams Report, to recall, Freedman asserted,

You had a district attorney coming out and making potentially unethical statements, saying he believed a crime occurred, which he should not do. He should not be commenting on the evidence. He took an adversarial position from the start.

We had a situation recently in Winston-Salem that could have been racially divisive represented, Wake Forest, black football player, white female student. If the D.A. who was actually a former Duke lacrosse player himself, Jim O'Neill, had taken the position and come out strong like Mr. Nifong had that something definitely occurred and sort of played the race card, it would have been very racially divisive . . .

It's not the D.A.'s job to get a conviction. It's the D.A.'s job to make sure justice is done, to make the truth is found out and rather than rushing and doing indictments two weeks before the primary is held, he should carefully—and because once you charge someone with offenses like this—I do a number of sex offenses—once the charge is brought, that's something that will tar these two students the rest of their lives, whether the charges are dismissed, whether they're acquitted, there will always be questions about that and it's just a D.A. should take his time and make a careful determination and look at all of the evidence and if he hadn't taken such a strong stand, he would have been able to view this evidence and the timeline beforehand before making this—going to the grand jury.

As Blythe points out, very few attorneys have extensive experience in representing defendants before the state bar, so Nifong’s options presumably were limited.

Freedman told Blythe, “My opinion was just based on media reports," Freedman said. "As an experienced trial lawyer, I should know better than to base my comments just on what I had read.”

At first glance, this seems like a reasonable explanation for his statements. But in this specific context, it makes no sense. Freedman was being asked about the propriety of Nifong’s comments to the press.

From where else would he get information on what Nifong said? Nifong, after all, can’t credibly claim to have been misquoted, since many of these statements came on live national television.

In a follow-up e-mail to me, Freedman added that “I have had the opportunity to review numerous materials and I am no longer of the opinion I previously voiced.”

He didn’t say, however, what new information has some to light that has made him believe Nifong’s comments were not “potentially unethical,” or why a DA should not “take his time and make a careful determination and look at all of the evidence,” or why Nifong should have been “saying he believed a crime occurred.” I guess we’ll have to wait for the trial to hear Freedman’s explanation—which should be entertaining, if nothing else.

But then again, lots of people in Durham these days are reversing their old opinions. After all, 20 days before Freedman’s remarks, Nifong himself hypothesized, “One would wonder why one needs an attorney if one was not charged and had not done anything wrong.”

Lawyers, of course, represent people of whose acts or potential acts they disapprove all the time. Usually, however, people don’t hire lawyers whose own previous remarks could be used as the opening statement for the prosecution.

But then, as we all know, Mike Nifong operates according to his own rules.

110 comments:

Anonymous said...

Does the NC water affect attorneys or something?

Freedman is crazy to take this case at this point. Such statements by him materially and adversely affect his client's case. They will be used at the Hearing as an admission of Nifong's culpability.

Again - It's called a "conflict of interest." The fact that he would take this case before the body that closely examines such scenarios is shocking.

Run screaming, Freedman. This case is glowingly radioactive.

-Esquire-
-Maryland-

Anonymous said...

I think Nifong hiring a good lawyer may be the best thing that has happened in awhile in this case. A good lawyer will hopefully help him get back in touch with reality and work to help him position him as best as is possible. In my view, the first step would be to cut Nifong's losses by persuading him to drop this case. Just speculations, but if I were Nifong's attorney, that would be my first effort.

Anonymous said...

And in other news, Jeanine Pirro, former prosecutor in Westchester county, NY and Mark Gerragos, noted criminal defense attorney, stated on Fox News yesterday that the shenanigans of DA Lifong are de riguer everywhere in the U.S. IT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME!

Oh My God, please save us all.

james conrad said...

nah, i disagree, freemans a lawyer hired to defend.

Anonymous said...

“I have had the opportunity to review numerous materials and I am no longer of the opinion I previously voiced.”


Hmmmmm, things he likely "reviewed";

- Nifong's retainer check
- His own mortgage statement


-TW

Jerri Lynn Ward, J.D. said...

"In my view, the first step would be to cut Nifong's losses by persuading him to drop this case."

What a can of worms! Wouldn't dropping the case on the advice of his attorney in the bar action be further manipulation of the legal system? He can't play fast and loose with criminal prosecutions for personal reasons--NOW THAT THE SPOTLIGHT IS ON HIM.

I think that it would be okay for Freedman to advise him to recuse himself and his office in favor of a special prosecutor (however that works in NC). After all, Nifong has tons of conflicts of interest in continuing as prosecutor of this case--which his lawyer should be pointing out to him.

Anonymous said...

It sounds - from Freedman's new comments - that Nifongs defense is that he has been - extensively - misquoted ie that the quotes were only snippets of what he said, that they misrepresent the question he was asked etc.
Sounds a lot like what seems to have happened to the AV.
Paul

Anonymous said...

Is Freeman's retainer being paid by Nifong personally, or by the taxpayers of Durham (or the county)? It would be interesting to find out whether local government is starting to pay a monetary price for Nifong's malpractice. Ordinarily, I would think, Nifong would not be able to tap his office funds for a personal ethics defense.

Anonymous said...

At this stage Liefong probably thinks Attorney Freedman last name has siginificant meaning. Freed-Man

Anonymous said...

I would think his attorney could be called as a witness to determine what he may have known when he made comments about Nifong last year.

Anonymous said...

“I have had the opportunity to review numerous materials and I am no longer of the opinion I previously voiced.”


Hmmmmm, things he likely "reviewed";

- Nifong's retainer check
- His own mortgage statement

CLASSIC!!! And VERY true.

Anonymous said...

Up is down and down is up here in Wonderland!

Anonymous said...

An attorney who defends Nifong has a fool for a client!

gs said...

Well I'm sure Freedman gets handsomely paid. Just doing research on all those statements the ethics charges are on should be quite a lot of billable hours.

I hope Nifong got a discount, more ethics charges will be coming down from the bar.

Anonymous said...

"He didn’t say, however, what new information has come to light that has made him believe Nifong’s comments were not “potentially unethical,”

Here's the new information that came to light: Nifong's retainer check didn't bounce.

Anonymous said...

Nifong met with false accuser yesterday for hrs.

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/1134867/

Anonymous said...

to 3:10: thanks for the prompt update on breaking news...

Anonymous said...

WRAL SAYS, "The meeting was the first time that Nifong has met with the 28-year-old since allegations first arose that she was sexually assaulted by three Duke University lacrosse players"

FIRST TIME, OR FRIST TIME HE ASKED ANYTHIG OTHER THAN, HOW'S THE FAMILY?

Anonymous said...

My observation on ethic charges is that the lawyers who deal with them are experts on damage control - meaning that they persuade their client to accept the substance of the allegations (most of the time) and work to limit the damages at hand - meaning in most cases accepting some sort of censure that permits retention of a law license, or in more challenging cases, a period of suspension followed by a right to re-apply after a certain period of acceptable conduct. This would work all fine and well if Nifong's charges were to be limited to his public statements - but clearly the next shoes to drop will involve the conspiracy to withhold DNA evidence and Nifong's direction to subvert line-up processes. And because of the criminal liability that may obtain, Freedman will be in no position to have his client make any admission against interest on those serious charges. The smart thing for Nifong to do would be to simply resign, something, ironically, he does not need high priced counsel to do.

I do agree with 2:47 that a seasoned lawyer may help give this case a quick death - but nothing in Nifong's conduct reflects that he would actually listen to decent legal advice.

Anonymous said...

3 10
So now she knows she is being thrown to the wolves. Better get a lawyer.
Better yet go on TV tonight & blowup the whole frame.
That way she will likely stay out of jail.

Anonymous said...

stand by, here it comes...

Anonymous said...

Nifong starts to pay for his dirty deeds, pays for his own attorney,good its a start!

Goodness when will this FARCE ever end,it's so sickening that Nifong can get away with this stuff.

I will never look at the leadership(all levels) of this country in the same light ever again!

Corruption Rules!

gs said...

Nifong has now offically reviewed the accuser story first hand. He can no longer say he relied on others. He looked into her eyes and said "yes, I believe in the magical towel".

Anonymous said...

My bet: Freedman will own the house, boat and RV before this is over, and Diphthong will keep his pension with a 5 year suspension....

Anonymous said...

Welcome to trailer land Nifong !

Anonymous said...

Fox Breaking News just now:

"A Duke prof has resigned over decision to invite students back."

No details yet.


heh


Let's hope the remaining 87 follow this noble example!

Anonymous said...

The case will be dropped today or tomorrow.

Nifong will feign ignorance to FA's the credibility issues prior to December 21, and say he made every reasonable effort to confirm his newfound understanding of the 'credibility problem' today.

Case is gone -- only to avoid others having a look at the non-evidence...

Anonymous said...

Just a guess but I will bet the prof did not have tenure.

Anonymous said...

3:18
If nifong is disbarred in the next 3 years, he failed to get his 30yrs in.

If he is disbarred, he loses his job.
License is required to be a DA.

No gov agency will hire him even if he gets a license back in 5 yrs.

Anonymous said...

Oh my......this brings flashbacks to Gerragos. He basically stated on cable news, that Scott Peterson was guilty. Of course, that was BEFORE he represented him! So maybe, it's just "de rigeur" for Gerragos??

Sue

Anonymous said...

I don't see any news on the resignation -- just from comittees


DURHAM, N.C. -- A Duke University English professor has resigned from her committee assignments over the school's decision to invite two lacrosse players accused of sexual assault back to campus.

bill anderson said...

Freedman's problem, as K.C. pointed out, is that many of these statements were made on camera and were not quotes written by reporters using shorthand. We KNOW what Nifong said, we have the pictures of the "chokehold," and we have his quotes to ESPN about innocent people not needing attorneys.

Given all that, I obviously support Nifong's right to a vigorous defense, something that he ridiculed for others but apparently is going to need now. Yes, ironies abound, but at least Nifong is feeling some of the heat.

Anonymous said...

old news about the prof holloway. She just left the non paying commitee.

She didn't leave the school. She just has more free time now.

Hey said...

There are only so many experienced bar lawyers, and you really, really can't bring in someone from out of state. Nifong likely can't get people to return his calls. What's the likelihood that he'll pay you fully, since he's facing simply massive bills and penalties from forthcoming criminal and civil suits.

So the only or best option was to hire someone who denounced him to the media at the time of the statements. It's like OJ hiring Gloria Allred as a defence lawyer. Priceless.

bill anderson said...

By the way, I was on WBAL in Baltimore today discussing the lacrosse case. A good experience was had by all.

Anonymous said...

Bill Anderson is correct in that Nifong has the right to be represented by the competent attorney available.


Staples

Anonymous said...

In a related story:

Jesse Jackson announced that he will be paying all of Nifong's lawyer fees, even if it turns out he is declared guilty in court. He stated that no prosecutor should ever have to pay to defend themselves after falsely accusing 3 innocent men of raping a black stripper.

Have a happy MLK day Jesse Jackass.

A DisgrAce.

Anonymous said...

3 34
That is a joke, correct?


On another subject, how will people feel when Nifong takes the only way out.

Michael said...

re: 3:36

You mean he uses that chokehold on himself?

KC, can you reveal any more details about why Freedman contacted you? Or did you contact him? I realize that some lawyers like a challenge but Freedman sounds good enough to not need the business. Of course if he gets Nifong off, maybe he gets an easier time from the DA for future clients too.

Anonymous said...

3:35
"That is a joke, correct?"

Yes, of course Jackson is a joke.

Anonymous said...

Michael Gaynor has a good essay available:
Duke case: Is Ms. Mangum rewriting her story herself?

Anonymous said...

From the N&O

Venom has aftereffects for Duke
The two top administrators at Duke University met with faculty behind closed doors Thursday to discuss free speech and the boundaries of civility in what has become a poisonous climate of blogs, hateful letters and racist e-mail.

Anonymous said...

3:36

If this were Japan, he'd already have taken the only face-saving way out -- seppuku.

Vivian Thomas said...

Sure, Freedman's backpedaling makes perfect sense to me. He should have been getting the information about what Nifong had said to the press from the Bible or the Quaran or Dr. Seuss's secret diary.

I must say that the oblivion in which these characters exist is almost enough to make you think that you're dreaming or hallucinating. It's as if they believe the rest of the work to be perceptively or cognitively deficient in some significant way. Do they really believe that their actions are not nearly as transparent as they seem to be? Are they really that delusional?

locomotive breath said...

Paying for defense of Nifong?

Defense of State Employees, Medical Contractors and Local Sanitarians.

http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/HTML/ByArticle/Chapter_143/Article_31A.html

I assume Nifong is a state employee.
----------------------
§ 143‑300.4. Grounds for refusal of defense.

(a) The State shall refuse to provide for the defense of a civil or criminal action or proceeding brought against an employee or former employee if the State determines that:

(1) The act or omission was not within the scope and course of his employment as a State employee; or

(2) The employee or former employee acted or failed to act because of actual fraud, corruption, or actual malice on his part; or

(3) Defense of the action or proceeding by the State would create a conflict of interest between the State and the employee or former employee; or

(4) Defense of the action or proceeding would not be in the best interests of the State.

(b) The determinations required by subsection (a) of this section shall be made by the Attorney General.
----------------

So would Cooper give him up?

Anonymous said...

From today's story i the N7O about the Duke Administration calling a closed door meetign with faculty to discuss free speech, ettc.:

Holloway has written about her own family tragedy before. Her son, whom she adopted at 4 after he was abused in a series of foster homes, had mental illness. He was convicted of the rape and stabbing of a Raleigh schoolteacher and he died in 1999, shot dead when he escaped from a prison work detail.

Anonymous said...

Didn't Nifong say months ago that he couldn't interview the FA because then he might be called as a witness? What changed his mind?

BLACK STORM RISING MFER said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Rev. Al Sharpton said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
KC Johnson said...

I emailed Freedman to ask him for a comment. Sometimes though the Group of 88, at least any more . . .) people reply to me.

THE TRUTH said...

Praise be to Niffong. Through God his glory Niffong has delivered us from the evils of the white man.

Niffong, you are like Moses, lead us to the land of Milk and Money I mean honey.

Niffong with you all is blessed. Your wisdom and temperance has paved the way for all of us looking to make the headline news and talk shows.

Anonymous said...

How many more black women will be villified because people like these Duke boys can afford high priced lawyers to get off scott free.

If this was three black men on trial they would be sentenced and dead right now.

Anonymous said...

GOOD - THAT WOULD BE THREE LESS.

Suge Night said...

I hope niffong gets raped in prison

Anonymous said...

Does anyone have the story listed on the N&O website headlined ... Dowd and Holloway emails?

bill anderson said...

To 4:20:

What have the lawyers done that is out of line? It seems that the lawyers have dealt with evidence, and that is something that we are supposed to ignore?

Interestingly, the DNA evidence that the blacks in Durham are demanding be ignored is the same kind of evidence that got Darryl Hunt, a black man, freed from a wrongful conviction. Go to the Innocence Project and see all of the black males who have been exonerated because of DNA.

Why do blacks now demand that DNA evidence be ignored? Do you and other blacks want more wrongful convictions? Or did you believe that you were entitled to a guilty verdict, to quote Chan Hall, "Whether or not it happened"?

Anonymous said...

4:20

So injustice justifies injustice?

Anonymous said...

Any news from the NC NAACP or their case monitor, professor Joyner?

Wonder if Joyner is going to say recent events only make the case stronger.

This fine young woman's deserves her day in court !!! (yeah, as defendant, along with Diphthong)

CB said...

Not sure what will happen in criminal proceedings, but I have a pretty good idea that civil proceedings are a certainty:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/11/60minutes/main2352512.shtml

Most pertinent quote:

When asked what they would say to
Nifong if he were in the room, Rae Evans, the mother of indicted player David Evans, says, "I would say with a smile on my face, 'Mr. Nifong, you've picked on the wrong families … and you will pay every day for the rest of your life.'"


Standby, Nifong, heavy seas and nasty weather on the bow!

Chuck

pantapon rose said...

"Mr. Nifong, you've picked on the wrong families … and you will pay every day for the rest of your life."
- Rae Evans
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/11/60minutes/main2352512.shtml

Anonymous said...

from a non-lawyer/retired professor: I have been out of the loop since last night, and just skimming what has happened is mind-boggling. One thing that puzzles me about the past day's unfolding events is the following: would it make sense for Linwood's interview of the alleged victim to be videotaped? also if Nifong met with her in the past day, shouldn't that have been videotaped? There surely are questions about the credibility of Nifong, Linwood and the alleged victim, and if I were Linwood or Nifong, I would want it videotaped just to protect oneself (assuming you had nothing to hide).

Anonymous said...

Let Me Tell You a Little Something about Law & Order

"You know, I not only play a prosecutor on TV, I used to actually be one. So when I see something like the farce that’s playing out in North Carolina it makes my blood boil.
Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong, who brought the Duke Lacrosse players rape case, has violated just about every rule in the prosecutor’s book."

kbp said...

Thanks KC

I think everyone has a right to have an attorney represent them.

And I'll add that I'm extremely glad Mike Nifong has illustrated that right to all of us.

snicker!!!

Anonymous said...

Want to ask Linwood Wilson anythign about the case. Feel free to call or write:


Wilson, Linwood E
6910 Innesbrook Way
Durham, NC 27704
919-471-8950

Anonymous said...

I don't think that dropping the charges at that point would be the best course of action for Nifong.

The defense would immediatly claim that the reason for dropping the charges were known by him at least since December 21st, and the fact that he did not drop them at the same time he dropped the rape charge is a further proof of a misconduct pattern that has been so obvious since the beginning.

If I were his lawyer, I would recommend that he send someone to re-interview the accuser, and uses whatever new discrepancy is bound to show up during the interview as a ground to drop all charges.

It would make little difference to the public opinion, but it would at least give him an point to argue before the state bar

Anonymous said...

to 4:33--
Actually, I saw a quote from Irving Joyner somewhere within the last 24 hours (Herald Sun? maybe, can't remember)--he was answering a question about how Seligmann could still be charged (i.e., as an aider and abettor) even though it's now claimed that he did not assault the accuser. As such, it didn't seem like an especially outrageous remark--he wasn't really expressing an opinion on what happened or didn't, just addressing the legal point.

Anonymous said...

to 2:59

Except much of what he said is on video tape that can easily be run from beginning to end.

Anonymous said...

to lawyers from a non-lawyer/retired professor: How much would a lawyer like Friedman charge to represent Nifong? Hourly rate? estimate of total cost of existing charges? Will Nifong have to pay this for this out of his own pocket or will the state of NC have to pick up the bill?

Anonymous said...

JLS says...

Nifong met with Mangum yesterday according to WRAL:

http://www.wral.com/news/local/
story/1134867/

And he had her subpeonaed to the 5 Feb hearing? Is that standard practice or is it a sign he is worried she is planning not to show?

Anonymous said...

Nifong could drop the charges next week, claiming he spoke with the woman on Thu and after careful review , he felt he did not have a case any longer.

Anonymous said...

JLS says....

I live in an area of the south in a city around the size of the cities in this case. I am not an attorney but from working with them, I am of the understanding that the hourly rate here is usually $150 per hour. It is likley higher there but not as high as in DC and of course NYC.

Newyorkstateofmind said...

In agreement with Esquire 2:45

I love this! Nifong clearly has a sort of karmic attraction to conflicts of interest. Who better to hire to fend off conflict of interest charges...than an attorney who has a...conflict of interest in representing you! in connection with statements he reasonably, nay rightfully made about the shoddy legal approach at best, and crucifying "career-saving" vendetta at worst, that the DA in his jurisdiction has engaged in.

Anonymous said...

So nifong lent his campaign $30k (I doubt people are mailing in donations).

He now is paying for a lawyer to defend him against the bar.

Many lawsuits will be filed against him in the future. He will bleed money for years.

Anonymous said...

nifong just recused himself

Newyorkstateofmind said...

Hey 3:25

Yes, indeed it is rather as if OJ had hired Gloria Allred as his defense lawyer, or as if Al Sharpton had hired a White Aryan Resistance attorney to represent him against the civil charges in which he was found liable concerning the Tawana Brawley hoax.

duke09parent said...

I just made the connection in my head between the substance of the Wilson interview revealed in the supplementary motion to supress the i.d. and Nifong's motion to drop the charges of rape. Nifong's motion was the same day as Wilson's interview and was produced by these new fantasies of CGM, coached or not.

When I saw the WRAL story this afternoon about Nifong meeting with CGM for several hours yesterday (Thurs. 1/11) I thought for a moment that he was doing it as a pretext to dropping the case. But he had the new set of fantastic lies already when the motion was filed. He gave his NYTimes interview on 12/21 also, where he supposedly said if she withdrew the claim that any of the players assaulted her he would drop all the charges.

So yesterday's session with CGM must not have been a prelude to Nifong dropping the charges. It must have been his time to prepare her for the 2/5 hearing and serve her with the subpoena. I conclude he is not going to drop the charges on his own; Judge Smith will have to dismiss. I don't expect Nifong to put up much of a defense to the supression motion, though. As long as it is Smith who disposes of the case he can blame it all on CGM to the bar. He no longer cares about the voting public, because if he avoids disbarment he can stay in office long enough to collect his pension. He's never going to run for office again, anyway.

Feb. 5 will be CGM's "day in court" and it will be pitiful indeed. With the courtroom is packed it might be wise for Smith to withhold his ruling until he can release it in writing.

Anonymous said...

Bill A.. Just saw on the news Nifong has asked to rescue himself. What does this mean? What is going on? Was Freedman's first advice "Get out of this case"?

james conrad said...

lol, its all true, the man wants out...david freedman is already earning his retainer

Anonymous said...

Nifong just needed to have at least one interview with the liar on the record before skipping off. Check, got that one done.

Anonymous said...

JLS says...

Drudge has Nifong's recusal.

Anonymous said...

The AG would be nuts not to take Nifong up on the request.

Anonymous said...

Did Nifong do this at 5:00PM ET on Friday again? Its 2:19PM PT out here in Las Vegas. Think the smirking, giggles, sighs and snide remarks are gone now?

james conrad said...

RE: 5:20, yeah, and i fell for it AGAIN

bill anderson said...

I'm sure that Nifong's request did not originate with himself. The guy is incapable of shame and already is in hot water.

No prosecutor is going to bring this case to trial, period, end of sentence. Notice that he did it at about 5 p.m. Friday. Gee, wonder why?

Anonymous said...

DA in Duke Rape Case Asks to be Taken off Case

Anonymous said...

Nifong is circling the bowl.

gs said...

Not surprised. All Nifong wants to do is delay as long as possible. By recuse himself just weeks before Feb 5, He gets the new DA to ask the court for a delay to review the case.

Now a new DA will have to read the case file without laughing to hard, that he cries.

Jerri Lynn Ward, J.D. said...

Anon 5:13

"Bill A.. Just saw on the news Nifong has asked to rescue himself."

Is it possible he said "recuse" himself?

Newyorkstateofmind said...

Anon 4:58

When the defendant at least has hypothetical access to greenbacks, most defense lawyers in a high-profile case (and in a case with a potentially monied defendant) will charge by the hour. Were Nifong a guy with little access to money, potentially or otherwise, just a low-profile schmo, in a high-profile case, the attorney might just float the costs to garner publicity and potential media appearances. If he "believed" in the defendant's case (not to say he thought def. innocent or not liable, just that an interesting set of facts and potential publicity justified his attention to a non-monied case), he might also float the costs himself, for the most part.

Nifong is on the money end, and he will likely be spending considerable amounts to try to "mitigate his damages."

David Westerfield signed away his house to the defense in one of the most high-profile cases this century--the San Diego child kidnapping/murder case in which he was found guilty.

Anonymous said...

What goes around comes around, even words:

"And one would wonder why one needs an attorney if one was not charged and had not doing anything wrong."

- Mikey Nifong, the Durham DisgrAce

james conrad said...

re: newyork, wouldnt nifong be entitled to taxpayer funds to defend in performance of his work?

duke09parent said...

LOL. My theories @5:13 destroyed before I could even post them. Recusal reported at @5:11.

Anonymous said...

Nifong Meets With Duke Lacrosse Accuser

Good move !

Now he can claim that after discussing for the first time, with the accuser he decided in his wisdom that sufficient ground existed to doubt her credibility.

So what is left ? : Some carelessness in following up the case ? Sure be he is such a busy man whith so many cases at hand. You can't blame it on just his one case, after all he also had the triple murder case to deal with at the same time.

Nifong should keep following Freedman's advice, it's probably his best chance keep his pension.

Anonymous said...

Just watching courttv with a panel discussing Nifong recusing himself. John Boolan (Spelling?) still defending Nifong.

Newyorkstateofmind said...

Kudos to anon 5:22 for this post.

It looks preliminarily like Nifong has recused himself from this case. We'll have to see if this is actually true, and if so, whether the judge will let this be put in the lap of the DA's minions, which is what Nifong is requesting.

Anonymous said...

I hope his recusal doesn't cause the bar to go easy on him re: his behavior with the DNA evidence. He deserves to be kicked from the bar.

Anonymous said...

By LARA SETRAKIAN
ABC News Law & Justice Unit

Jan. 12, 2007— District Attorney Mike Nifong has requested that he have himself removed from prosecuting the Duke Lacrosse rape investigation, ABC News has learned.

A source close to the investigation said Nifong sent a letter to North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper asking his office to assume responsibility of the case.

Three Duke Lacrosse players, Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty, and David Evans were indicted in 2006 on charges of rape, sexual assault, and kidnapping.

The rape charges were dropped in December after the accuser could not recall key details of the alleged attack.

Anonymous said...

Don't we have television and radio interviews with Nifong? Misquoted indeed!!!!Love glowing radioactive. Freedman will be seen as sacing NC.

Anonymous said...

With Diphthong steppin aside, this case is completely dead.

No Diphthong can plan his defense.

Anonymous said...

Please don't crucify Crystal - Nifong will do so and she is as much a victum as the guys. He has used this poor, drunken, demented soul shamelessly.

Newyorkstateofmind said...

anon 3:51, thanks for the update.

Yes, various of Duke administrators are doubtless overcurious about this wacky principle called "free speech" which comes into play in the society at large, and especially on the Internet.

Just let them know that, at least for now, unlike in Canada and Britain, and increasingly in the rest of Europe, half less the rest of the world, full-bore and candid and even anonymous discussions about all kinds of issues, even ones with a racial implication or dimension, are perfectly legal in these 50 states, still known as the United States of America.

Jerri Lynn Ward, J.D. said...

jamesconrad said:

"re: newyork, wouldnt nifong be entitled to taxpayer funds to defend in performance of his work?"

I believe that there are occasions when goverment employees may not be entitled to government funds for their defense--such as when the employee goes outside the scope of his authority. No prosecutor has the authority to bring a wrongful prosecution.

I wonder if the County has some written policies as to when and how they will cover the defense expenses of its employees. It seems reasonable that wilful misconduct might be excluded.

Doesn't it seem that in fairness to the County's taxpayers, that the County Attorney would send Nifong some kind of "reservation of rights" letter saying that if Nifong is found guilty of misconduct, he would have to pay back any amounts paid by the County for his defense?

Anonymous said...

Has the fat lady begun singing....or is she just warming up?

Anonymous said...

Actually, the recusal could lengthen the proceedings – a lot.

Whoever takes over, cannot simply move to dismiss the charges without going over any evidence. To do so would indicate a decision made on news and blog coverage. The 2/5 hearing could be moved back months. The state of NC has to, at the very least, maintain the appearance that they have thoroughly gone over all case documents before taking any action.

It’s interesting to note that Nifong did not ask the judge to dismiss him from the case (if applicable in NC).

It will be interesting to see what Nifing’s predecessor does in relation to the 2/5 hearing. It will also be interesting to see what the judge does. Will Nifong’s successor move for a postponement and will the judge grant it? The judge could hold that such a postponement would unduly hurt the defendants, given the amount of time already taken by the case, through no fault of the defendants.

My guess is that the state of NC would secretly wish such a ruling and that the judge would then rule for the motion against the ID procedures. Then NC could say that without the ID they’re forced to drop the case.

By the way, I’m guessing that Nifong’s lawyer prevailed on him to recuse. He could easily see that his client was in the hole and digging like mad.

Newyorkstateofmind said...

anon 5:41

While we can't at this point know, and may never know, just what animated these rape charges (as has been pointed out on this blog, it may have been something as pathetic as simply avoiding an extended stay in the detox facility she was taken to), it is misplaced to say we should simply give CGM a pass. Few on this blog truly want to see her crucified; just held to account for her misguided, and possibly malicious, behavior.

She should be held no more to account, nor no less, than a camp commandant during the Holocaust, or an underling performing a hit in his function as a peon within a mob organization.

The only problem with these analogies is the latter individuals likely faced death were they have to attempted to avoid their role as cog in the bigger machine. CGM likely faced nothing more onerous than clean sheets and free meals at a detox facility for a couple of days max.

Cedarford said...

While it makes sense to hire a critic to defend you, because a critic has credibility of sorts (yes, Disciplinary Board members, I was critical of the DA's early remarks and that is why I, having considered them for 8 months..believe they are only at the wristslap level rather than a serious breech...)

What is the problem is it the other more serious stuff:

1. Conspiring with other law enforcement officers of the State of North Carolina (Himan, Gottlieb, possible Durham PD senior mamagement) to with hold exculpatory evidence from the Defense in a criminal case.

2. Engaging in fraud-based actions as a state officer related to Federal election tampering activities.

3. Acting willfully, under color of law, with members of the Durham law enforcement community to violate state and Federal laws and guidelines related to witness tampering, witness intimidation, and depriving suspects of civil liberties related to fraudulent ID procedures, grand jury tampering, and fraudulently obtained search warrants.

[Compounded with the sin of doing it in the spotlight of national media so the Lawyer's Good 'Ol Boy network can't cover it up or let Nifong&Co off ultra-easylike...]

Compared to the Big 3 problems, Freedman has a cakewalk on the 1st Nifong matter before the Bar.

Newyorkstateofmind said...

james conrad 5:27

As Jerri Lynn Ward, J.D. noted, much of what Nifong has done is apparently, and even transparently, outside the scope of his employment--the extrajudicial statements impugning the Duke Three being the most obvious example.

Other of his behavior, such as personally arranging the bogus lineup, is actually a borderline area, since, unlike blabbing to the media about the defendants guilt, which is totally against Bar ethics guidelines, DAs sometimes do get overinvolved in areas that are at least tangentially connected with legitimate functions in which they are involved.

On the one hand, supervising police lineups, particularly when in doing so you violate all the attendant guidelines, seems to put you way outside of scope of employment; on the other hand, what you are doing is still within the realm of what DAs do--getting involved sometimes with at least signing off on the legitimacy of a lineup, if not its actual arrangement.

Even more importantly, the de jure (theoretically legal) aspects to all this conflict with the de facto (practical) ones: The state may cover Nifong's expenses just to cover their own butts. They may well want him to have "the best defense possible," because the more he "twists in the wind," and looks like a lunatic, by extension so do they, and the whole Bar of North Carolina who is silently implicated in Nifong's misdeeds.

Cedarford said...

Anonymous - Please don't crucify Crystal - Nifong will do so and she is as much a victum as the guys. He has used this poor, drunken, demented soul shamelessly.

Yeah, yeah. Poor victim. As much a victim as the young men she falsely accused (twice now) and would not have so much as a eyeblink of regret about as she whored on.

Poor, poor, substance-abusing nickel blowjob giving, demented soul Crystal.....

My heart just fucking bleeds...

There would be logic to Anonymous's position if:

1. We are worried hammering one false accuser would discourage other false accusers from coming forth and giving cops and DAs something to do if things are slack and they don't have enough guilty people to work with.

2. Any Mother with children is absolutely immune from the consequences of crime. Because, punishing a criminal mother "would only hurt the children".

3. The poor, drunken, demented soul argument can be applied to all criminals and make them as big a victim as the people that attacked. Say after me: "Poor, drunken, demented soul who [burned down an apartment full of people, robbed two stores with a gun, tortured an animal for fun, stole my car, shot his wife and kids]". Now, if you exempt them as victims from repercussions as you seek to excuse the lying whore, you might have a point.

Otherwise, excuses for bottom feeders and a supposed obligation to love the predator as much as we love the innocent --is just so much milquetoast drivel from the kumbayah wings of secular progessivism and obsequious Christianity.

Anonymous said...

5:17PM Judge not, that you be not judged. Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.

Anonymous said...

Cedarford - are the same Cedarford that I see giving the Newshounds a good drubbing on occasion? If so, keep it up. I agree - there is a limit to how much sympathy one can have for CGM. I am sure money was her primary motive and I am not so sure that she won't make some (book deal, TV, etc.) I am sure the NYT will also be keen to interview her so they can spin the sad tale of how hard it is for a black woman to make it in this country and by the time they are done, I am sure she will be turned into a heroic figure who tried to better herself through dance - haha. What about her scholarship from Jesse "Shakedown" Jackson? Oh yes, and when are the people who put up wanted posters for the the Duke boys and marched around beating on pans going to apologize?