Thursday, January 25, 2007

Nifong's Legacy of Misconduct

Some reactions to the expanded ethics charges filed yesterday by the State Bar:

1.) These charges suggest that the Bar’s intent is to strip Nifong of his license.

From the AP story:

  • UNC law professor Joseph Kennedy: “If these allegations are true and if they don’t justify disbarment, then I’m not sure what does. It’s hard for me to imagine a more serious set of allegations against a prosecutor.”
  • Duke law professor Thomas Metzloff: The new charges “have significantly increased the chances for a serious sanction, possibly including suspension or disbarment.”

2.) Joe Neff is prescient.

In a December 24 N&O story, Neff and Ben Niolet analyzed Nifong’s ever-changing explanations as to why he didn’t turn over exculpatory DNA evidence to the defense. The district attorney had just given an interview to the New York Times suggesting that his heavy workload led to an oversight on his part.

But this excuse, Neff calculated, “was Nifong’s third explanation why he did not turn over the evidence.” Nifong previously had claimed he hadn’t heard about the matter prior to a December 13 defense motion; and then made the extraordinary claim that “we were trying to, just as Dr. Meehan said, trying to avoid dragging any names through the mud.”

The Bar noticed Nifong’s evasions as well—and added a fourth. On December 28, in a letter to the Bar, the D.A. returned to justification #2—a desire to protect privacy rights.

Yet, as paragraph 283 of the amended complaint noted, Meehan’s report listed the names and DNA profiles of two lacrosse players not then indicted (Dave Evans and Kevin Coleman), plus the names of all lacrosse players who had contributed DNA specimens.

In an extraordinary move, the Bar used that information to deem Nifong’s response not only unpersuasive but an ethical violation in and of itself. Nifong’s December 28 assertions that privacy concerns explained his approach to not turning over the DNA test results, the amended complaint argued, “were knowingly false statements of material fact made in connection with a disciplinary matter.”

[In an article published in today's Times, Duff Wilson (writing under the sole byline, alas) paraphrases Nifong's December Times interview to offer yet another explanation for his withholding the evidence. "In an interview last month," writes Wilson, "Mr. Nifong agreed that the DNA results had been potentially exculpatory, but said they had not seemed important to him because he was no longer then pursuing the case on the basis of DNA evidence."

The original article had mentioned the first point, but not the second. In any case, the distinction is irrelevant--the Open Discovery statute requires turning over all evidence, whether or not the prosecution considers it exculpatory. And if Nifong were no longer then pursuing the case on the basis of DNA evidence, how to explain the May decision to indict Dave Evans?]

3.) Nifong’s false representations to the court over the past several months were damning.

Nifong, the amended complaint makes clear, does not deny that Dr. Meehan told him of the exculpatory DNA evidence. That admission alone contradicted multiple written or oral statements by Nifong to various judges in the case.

On May 18, Nifong wrote, “The State is not aware of any additional material or information which may be exculpatory in nature with respect to the Defendant.” At the hearing where he stood idly by as a hate group member threatened Reade Seligmann, Nifong also Judge Ronald Stephens, “I’ve turned over everything I have.”

On June 22, Nifong again deceived the gullible Stephens, who wanted to make sure that he had discussed with Dr. Meehan nothing other than the contents of Meehan’s report. “That’s pretty much correct, your Honor.”

On September 22, Nifong deceived the new judge, Osmond Smith.

  • Smith: “So you represent there are no other statements?”
  • Nifong: “No other statements. No other statements made to me.”

4.) The breadth of the ethics complaint was surprising.

On the surface, the amended complaint dealt only with the Nifong-Meehan conspiracy and Nifong’s false representations of the duo’s agreement. But at least two other paragraphs of the amended complaint touched upon additional questionable behavior by Nifong.

Paragraph 205 noted that Nifong “sought and obtained these indictments [against Seligmann and Finnerty] . . . despite his office’s prior representation in the application for the NTO [non-testimonial order] that the ‘DNA evidence will immediately rule out any innocent persons.’”

Paragraph 206 added that Nifong “repeatedly refused offers from counsel for the players who were eventually indicted to consider evidence and information that they contended either provided an alibi or otherwise demonstrated that their clients did not commit any crime.”

These moves hinted at other ethical violations, specifically a violation of Rule 3.8, comment 2, which states that “a prosecutor should not intentionally avoid pursuit of evidence merely because he or she believes it will damage the prosecutor’s case or aid the accused.”

The Bar didn’t need these two paragraphs to make its case in today’s amended complaint; but they provided a compelling reminder of Nifong’s general aura of misconduct.

5.) The amended complaint made several subtle, interesting points.

The complaint cast a negative light on Nifong’s disparate approaches to similar issues. For instance, the Bar noted, when the defense requested the underlying data and complete file from Dr. Meehan, the D.A. accused defense attorneys of seeking a “witch hunt list.” He read a letter into the record from Meehan expressing privacy concerns. He complained about the excessive cost of the move.

Yet, as the Bar observed, when the defense requested the identical material from the SBI, Nifong “raised no such concerns or objections.” Could it have been that Nifong had something to hide in the Meehan material?

On a second point, the amended complaint argued that Nifong committed a “continuing violation” of the Open Discovery statute up to the very second that AG Roy Cooper took over the case.

As paragraph 255 explains, “Even when Nifong ultimately provided the underlying documents and materials on October 27, he did not provide the Duke Defendants a complete report from DSI setting forth the results of all its tests and examinations, including the potentially exculpatory DNA test results.”

On a third point, Nifong’s non-testimonial order ultimately backfired on him. At the time, it served the D.A.’s purpose to have the 46 lacrosse players engage in a “perp walk” before tipped-off media representatives.

But because the defense accepted the non-testimonial order, by law, Nifong was required to hand over to the players or their attorneys a “copy of any reports of test results as soon as the reports are available.” Nifong, of course, didn’t do so.

6.) There’s no longer much mystery to why Inv. Linwood Wilson picked December 21 to interview the accuser for the first time.

The amended complaint states that the initial grievance letter from the Bar about Nifong’s withholding the DNA evidence arrived on December 20. “Coincidentally,” Nifong decided to have the accuser interviewed the next day, when she produced a story that downplayed the significance of the DNA evidence that Nifong had withheld.

7.) The closing section underscores the extent of the Bar’s concerns.

The complaint traces a “systematic abuse of prosecutorial discretion in the underlying criminal cases,” accusing Nifong of having “engaged in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.”

It asserts that Nifong committed professional misconduct, violating Rule 8.4(d) of the bar’s ethics code. Comment 4 of the rule clarifies: “A showing of actual prejudice to the administration of justice is not required to establish a violation of paragraph (d). Rather, it must only be shown that the act had a reasonable likelihood of prejudicing the administration of justice.” And, as Comment 6 outlines, “Lawyers holding public office assume legal responsibilities going beyond those of other citizens. A lawyer’s abuse of public office can suggest an inability to fulfill the professional role of lawyers.”

The amended report paints a picture of a prosecutor who has flagrantly violated multiple rules of professional conduct over a period of many months, and showed no indication that his behavior was going to let up in any way even as he turned the case over to the attorney general.

How can Nifong possibly not take a leave of absence as District Attorney until these charges are resolved?


1 – 200 of 265   Newer›   Newest»
Anonymous said...

As subtle as a sledgehammer.

The fact that they considered his pathetic excuses as a lie to Bar Counsel is the most damning thing I took out of this.


GPrestonian said...

And Freedman said today that it's not intentional or willfull...

291 paragraphs says otherwise.

Anonymous said...

JLS says....

I guess Nifong was so cocky he decided he was not guity and thus did not hire an attorney. Thus added on an extra ethics charge.

I would think the bar takes lying to the bar very seriously.

BTW, in the quad murder case where Nifong just said he gave up all the discovery, would you guess the defense attorneys got him on the record on that one too? The reason he needs to step aside as Prof. Johnson says is that it is hard to imagine he can actually do the business of the people of Durham Co as things stand now.

M. Simon said...

To defuse the poltics in Durham Nifong has to do jail time.

There has to be no doubt that he fooled people.

Anonymous said...

Another sad story, only this guy went to prison and while no one lied, prosecuters admit they "were just doing their job."

Anonymous said...

What's a "NTO" ?

Anonymous said...

It is shameful that the Justice Department refuses to investigate this case. Three lacrosse players remain charged with felonies in a case with no evidence against them and overwhelming evidence that they didn't commit the crimes. Among other things, the players' civil rights have been violated. Write your local congressperson and demand action from the sleepy and lethargic attorney general.

Anonymous said...

All agree that Nifong is a bad guy who did bad things.

But given that he almost certainly will be disbarred, will lose his source of future income, will fail to fully vest in his pension and will spend his entire life savings on legal fees (if not legal judgments), is it possible to feel some pity for this man?

I do.

Not everyone is as bright and as capable as many (most? almost all?) posters on DIW.

He got in over his head - and got destroyed.

He is most assuredly THE villian in the Duke Hoax Case, but is he not also a hapless, unfortunate victim of his own villainous?

Chicago said...

I must say, Kemper was spot on with his predictions. Kudos to him once again.

Joe Bingham said...

I agree. Can't help to feel bad for him, if only because he has a family who will probably be shamed by this for the rest of their lives. That'd hurt.

Not another good way for it to end, but once he's punished, I hope people don't go out of their way to rub it in his face.

Chicago said...

How the hell can anyone charged with anything as small as a speeding ticket feel confident in the legal system in Durham with Nifong still in office? As KC pointed out, he MUST take a leave or the entire Durham County judicial system is a joke. Nifong's credibitility is weaker than CGM's credibility at this point. Linwood Wilson needs to be in line for an investigation next.

luke said...

"What's a "NTO"?"

It's a Non-Testimonial Order. It allows law enforcement officials to take physical evidence (photographs, fingerprints, hair samples, dna, saliva samples, etc.) from those individuals specified in the order, but not to conduct interviews of those individuals. It is obtained upon a showing of cause in an application before the Court.

Anonymous said...

JLS says....

NTO is I believe NonTestimonial Order. The probably illegal order for the DNA of all white members of the Duke lacrosse team.

They were cooperating and did not challenge it, but it is likely had they challenged it, it would have been quashed as overly broad.

SteelTruth said...

My wish is not to hijack the current discussion in any way...

i am reposting this from the previous 'comment thread'...


the people and resources of this thread can save a life...

Cedarford can lead the way...

Bill Anderson...please read this story

i'm sure the link didn't is the lead story on right now...

genarlow wilson...great athlete, good student...sentenced to 10 years with no parole for consensual oral sex with a 15 year old when he was 17...

the story is too outrageous for me to type correctly...

it has so many prosecutorial parallels to the duke case...

good thing is we can save this kid, i think...

the prosecutor is quoted as saying that he has the power to end the travesty tomorrow...LET"S MAKE HIM!!!

it could be the first great act accomplished by the DIW bloggers...

we have the power on this board...c'mon esquire...

i want US to save this kid...

please organize an effort cedarford or anyone competent and i'm sure the posters will do the rest...


i humbly thank you...all of you, steeltruth

Anonymous said...

Election Fraud ! Twice !

Don't forget who Nifong

is working for.

Chicago said...


You have to be shitting me??? You have sympathy for Nifong. How about the lives of Reade, Collin and Dave and their families.

Feel bad for Nifong's kid, his wife, hell, feel bad for his dog. But I wouldn't piss on Nifong if he was on fire.

SteelTruth said...

This is more on the ESPN story...again my apologies for the thread hijack...i just want this info to be in the beginning of the new thread...thanks...

Jim said...

What the dear god hell? I'd be happy to link Genarlow's story, steeltruth.

If the facts are as the ESPN reporter detailed them, this is truly an outrage.

11:21 PM
Anonymous said...


I've been following that case. It was in Georgia I believe. The statute does not make a four year difference in age in application (In MD for instance, It's 14/18, 15/19, 16/20). He was sent to prison for a mandatory minimum of ten years.

Awful miscarriage of justice. In that one, Daddy Warbucks was angry because his daughter was dating a Black kid. GA will do nothing, and the Jury was horrified after the convicted him. They had no clue he would go to prison for ten years.

Let me know what I can do.


11:24 PM
Anonymous said...

By the way, the term in legal circles for this madness is "overcriminalization." The situation where everything imaginable is criminalized.

Thus, perfectly sane police officers have to patrol the local 7/11 to make sure kids under 18 are not getting cigarettes, prosecuting seniors dating sophomores in HS, investigating pranks as felonies.

It starts getting absurd. It takes away from stopping the murders going on around the corner. Common sense goes down the drain together with police resources.

Something to think about folks.


11:31 PM
Jim said...

A 17 year old gets ten years for getting a blowie? And the DA won't do anything about it until the kid crawls for mercy?

I break the law every day. Multiple times every day. I exceed speed limits, I fail to fully stop at stop signs, I've even been known to snitch a grape at the grocery store to see how good they are.

Under Genarlow rules, I ought to be in the cell next to him.

11:45 PM

Anonymous said...

JLS says...

I can not feel the least bit of sorrow for Nifong. Had he truly believed Mangum was raped, I could feel sorry for him.

He defrauded the public to win an election. He stole an election. He corrupted the criminal justice system to steal an election. That is an unforgiveable act in my view.

And it needs to be strongly punished to warn all prosecutors that they are subject to the law too. To warn them they are not devine right kings.

Anonymous said...

Both Nifong and Precious should do a minimum of ten years each. The fact that they won't reflects sadly on our legal system. I have absolutely no sympathy for either of them. Just imagine what could have gone down if the boys couldn't afford proper counsel.


GPrestonian said...

12:28 steeltruth:

"My wish is not to hijack the current discussion in any way..."

Please quit doing it, then. Two posts on the prior thread was plenty.

Anonymous said...

Steeltruth -

I read the article. What can we do?

Anonymous said...

JLS says...

The Georgia case is an outrage and that it can not easily be fixed is due to another outrage the Leo Frank case which was quite similar to the this case except that there was a person actually murdered.

SteelTruth said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

JLS says....

Sorry the correct spelling is Leo FrankS.

Joe Bingham said...

A weakness we Christians have, feeling compassion for scummy guys. Doesn't mean I don't think he should be punished--I don't think he should ever practice again, and he should probably spend 10 or so years in jail.

Tom from California said...

I am a California attorney. I can assure you that the most serious allegations in the complaint are the alleged false statements to the Bar. Even worse, although it is not explicitly stated, the Bar Committee has almost certainly concluded that Nifong considers them idiots Triers of fact can be expected to show little mercy when they conclude that they have been lied to. Attorneys can be expected to show none whatsoever if they conclude that the lie is so incredible as to insult their intelligence. Aside from the insult, the Bar is almost certainly going to conclude that Nifong should be disbarred for pure stupidity in thinking that his expanation would be accepted by the Bar. Way to go Nifong, piss off the Bar and at the same time convince the Bar Committee that you are way too stupid to be permitted to retain your law license.

Guaunyu said...

"How can Nifong possibly not take a leave of absence as District Attorney until these charges are resolved?"

Okay, I realize it's a rhetorical question, but the answer is: b/c he was, is and ever shall be an unethical crapweasel whose only interest is self-interest.

GPrestonian said...

12:34am Anon:

"Steeltruth -

I read the article. What can we do?

1) - start another blog.

2) - please quit spamming this one.

GPrestonian said...

12:40am tom from california:

"Way to go Nifong, piss off the Bar and at the same time convince the Bar Committee that you are way too stupid to be permitted to retain your law license."

He had a fool for a client...

Anonymous said...

"How can he not take a leave of absence?" I have no doubt Nifong will figure out a way. The entire durham County legas system is a joke - through out the country and the world. It has been for many months. Correct me if I am wrong, but does not Nifong receive part of his pension - just not the full amount<

Anonymous said...

The VERY interesting part of the charges leveled by the NC Bar is that Nifong took actions to influence the course of the investigation outside of the duties of the DA. This single statement opens him up for civil actions, notwithstanding the normal immunity from civil suits DA's have by statute. AT A MINIMUM he would be liable for costs for all the legal and investigative work the defense had to do to pry the DNA evidence out of Meehan, from the time it SHOULD have been given to the defense, until the day they actually received it. And that's just compensatory damages. Punitive damages would add to that...then all the parents could start to sue for the mental anguish they suffered during that time.....

I don't know how much personal liability insurance Nifong carries, but it WON'T be enough......

Anonymous said...


Nifong's in this mess because he's dishonest, not because the case is complicated.

And, yes, feel sorry for his son.

But Nifong deserves no sympathy. He chose this pathway and he is unrepentent. He would still be persecuting if the bar hadn't stepped in to bring a halt to it.

Anonymous said...

A lot of the prejudicial statements in the state bar complaint were made before the DNA results came back.

Still, if the DNA results had supported the charges, and the prejudical statements were the only instances of misconduct, I bet the state bar would not have lifted a finger against Nifong for those statements alone.

So my take on his journey to infamy is that the instant uproar encouraged him to seize the case as a campaign issue, and he gambled on the DNA tests confident that his pandering wouldn't be challenged if the tests incriminated any player. Then, when the test results backfired, and he had one last chance to cut his losses and do the right thing, he went all-in and opted for the stonewall-and-coverup strategy that worked so well for the White House in Watergate.

There's almost nothing you can do or say that can't be made worse by a coverup. When will they learn?

Dave in CA

Joe Bingham said...

I don't think granting personal sympathy is necessarily a question of deserts.

Vitruvius said...

The Bar Turns

J. Heywood's "Dialog of Proverbs", in 1546, records: "II. iv. G4V - Treade a worme on the tayle, and it must turne agayne".

Nathan Bailey's "Dictionary of Proverbs", in 1917, notes - see

"This proverb is generally used by persons who have received gross insults and injuries from others (which they have for some time borne with patience) to excuse their being at last transported to some warmth of resentment and passion.

'Habet & musca splenum', say the Romans."

PrattAlumnus said...

To (Yesterday's) 7:28;

I'm a little behind the 8 ball on this one but I think it's critical that those of us who support the players don't start out on a witch hunt of our own.

Dr. Gustafson has openly and candidly discussed the his thoughts on the case in his blog with no agenda of his own. Not many people have been willing to do that. To condemn him for his failure to see things exactly as you do is, simply put, wrong.

Since his introspective June 24th posting he has been nothing but supportive of the players. His earlier statements were largely warranted at the time and his comments about the group of 88 are well thought out (scroll to the bottom).

The courage he has displayed in his blog and letters to the editor is something that deserves nothing but respect.


"Those who fight monsters..."

Anonymous said...

One possible outcome...It will be announced that Nifong has bipolar disorder. Prostate cancer and other traumas have stressed the man to the breaking point. He was hypomanic early last spring, then suffered long intervals of paranoia through January of '07 when Mr Freedman recognized the need for medical attention. Nifong's therapeutic regimen includes lithium and several major tranquilizers. The disabled Nifong will qualify for Medicare, Medicaid, welfare, food stamps, and we tax payers will support him for the rest of his life.


The Drill SGT said...



1. I thought this line was nearly Clintonian. Nifong also Judge Ronald Stephens, “I’ve turned over everything I have.” Meaning, I got Meehan to exclude the info from his report, so I don't have the exculpatory evidence. I note that the Bar group cited him for not documenting the Meehan meeting and turned the memo over as well.

2. I've always been struck by the fact that Nifong was completely uninterested in the sources of the 4-5 male DNA samples found on a woman who had not had sex in the last week. The Bar seemed to be as well, “a prosecutor should not intentionally avoid pursuit of evidence merely because he or she believes it will damage the prosecutor’s case or aid the accused.”

Hey said...

The only non-criminal explanation for his conduct is incompetence. Pleading THAT in front of the Bar is not designed to keep one's law license nor to maintain one's position as DA. Every other case he ever touched is now blessed in front of the appeals courts.

This guy needs to go down hard and very publicly. DAs need to take the highroad because getting caught taking a shortcut in one case has the danger of invalidating every case they've ever worked on, and releasing tens, hundreds, or maybe thousands of criminals because of their stupid, selfish act in one (hopefully, good lord I hope so for everyone's sake) case.

I'm really, really hard line law & order, and chafe at cases being tossed for questionable warrants. But the problem is that there are some procedures that are overly intricate for no compelling reason outside of Warren or Berger's sensibilities, and then there are procedures that exist to protect the police and prosecutor from lying or crappy complainants and witnesses. Bending the rules for national security investigations is one thing; it's an attempt to save large numbers of lives and mostly revolves around looser warrant standards and how to deal with spies, saboteurs, and enemy agents. Bending the rules after the fact against civillians, especially when there's no necessity to have the information immediately, creates infinite problems for everyone in the justice system.

Seeing Nifong and all involved go down will serve as an excellent lesson to all law enforcement and prosecutors in the US. Ramparts was good, but unfocused thanks to the number of people and cases involved. Nifong has a simple set of facts, a tight focus on a small group of people, and a horde of well funded and well connected people going after all those responsible. Look to see a new LPGA event, "The JP Morgan: Mike Nifong is a lying, cheating, no good sack of sh*t Open".

Hey said...

As to sympathy, etc. Sorry for his son that his dad is such an atrocious man who would do such vile things in pursuit of another 3 years of pension eligibility. No sympathy for him or his wife. His wife was an advisor and supporter throughout the case, so she bears responsibility too.

Mike has an option. There is an honorable way out of this. Take a bottle of whiskey, a .45, and go park the car in a secluded space. Save the family and the city the shame and agony of maintaining this charade.

Anonymous said...

Sympathy for the Devil? I think not. And before you say that I am going too far in calling Nifong the Devil, consider that he was trying his absolute best to send three 20-ish year olds - that appeared by all rights and evidence he had collected to be innocent - to 30+ years in prison. And why? To be re-elected. To keep his job, he was willing to effectively END the life of three other people.

If that is not evil, what is? Blatant disregard for his fellow humans. The man is a menace, and he deserves all that now looks like it is coming to him.

Here's my advice to you: any time, now or in the future, you feel pity for Nifong, just remember what the three lacrosse players would be going through at that moment. Then remember that Nifong was willing to do all of this and much, much worse to these three guys for nothing more than a pension check.

Cedarford said...

KC Johnson - Another thing I noticed the Bar did was go out of their way to describe violations not just of Bar rules, relevant NC General Statutes - but also the US Constitution.
Which is interesting to me because I would think the Bar would not want the Feds coming in...but they appear to be saying in addition to Bar and NC GS concerns, there are Constitutional matters relating to Nifongs conduct that are out of the scope of the Bar's disciplinary powers.

Joe Bingham - I agree. Can't help to feel bad for him, if only because he has a family who will probably be shamed by this for the rest of their lives. That'd hurt.

Not another good way for it to end, but once he's punished, I hope people don't go out of their way to rub it in his face.

I strongly disagree. Part of criminal actions is you risk society's lasting you a murderer, arsonist, or crooked DA. And most people don't feel sorry in the least for "the bank robber's family, etc." the crook put them in that position, not society.

And in Nifong's case, I imagine his activist wife, Cy Gurney, was far more likely to be cheering him on in his media spotlight and DA actions rather than telling him to get a grip.

Unless Nifong turns out to be mentally ill, I wish him nothing but decades of misery. What he tried inflicting on others..

And that goes for the false accuser, Mangum, who all too many seem determined to see as a tragic mother figure in need of "comfort, help, getting her life back together". To be she is a skank bitch who is now on her 3rd false accusation who cared not in the least about the pain her lies cost so many. I hope she stays just as she is...the rest of her life..along with jail time and poverty.

Anonymous said...

Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 10:52:42 -0800 (PST)
From: Ted Kerin <>
Subject: [DurhamResponds-discuss] State Bar Files Additional Charges Against
1 OK 19 lines Text
2 Shown 308 lines Text

As many of us expected, the State Bar has filed
additional charges against Mike Nifong for ethical
violations, including his conduct in the withholding
of DNA evidence.

I have never expected, and still do not expect, any
severe punishment against Nifong -- we'll see. But,
regardless of the outcome re: his factual guilt, I
suggest that the filing of these charges lays to rest
any argument that Nifong had some alleged right to
withhold DNA evidence, or any right to lie to judges
about it. To suggest otherwise, would be to say that
the Ethics Committee of the Bar does not understand
its own rules.

Anonymous said...

I don't view compassion as a Christian weakness, but as a strength. One can feel compassion for a man like Nifong, who has effectively destroyed his life, without condoning or excusing his bad actions. Christ taught that we will be judged according to the same standards we use to judge others. Speaking for myself, I would prefer to be judged by someone who, while they may abhor my bad acts, still has compassion for me as a flawed human being.

To the poster who suggested that the "honorable" thing for Nifong now would be to commit suicide, I strongly disagree. I can't think of anything more dishonorable than to do something that would bring more shame and pain to his children. Americans tend to be very forgiving towards people who admit their wrongdoing and show genuine remorse. In my opinion, that would be the best thing for Nifong to do now.

GPrestonian said...


Here's another stunner:

Paragraph 289:

Nifong also represented in his responses to the Grievance Committee that, in his statements to the Court at the beginning of the December 15 hearing referred to in paragraphs 264-265 above, he was referring not to the existence of the potentially exculpatory DNA test result but to the Duke Defendants' purported allegation that an intentional attempt had been made to conceal such evidence from them.

Paragraph 290:

Counsel for the Duke Defendants did not allege any intentional attempt conceal the potentially exculpatory evidence from them in either their December 13 motion to compel or their remark's to the Court prior to Nifong's comments.

He just can't keep up with his lies. Can you imagine Nifong trying to come up with an appropriate response to the GC, working feverishly, late at night, without benefit of counsel?

Hope he didn't have an ADA or two over to help him...

Anonymous said...

1:40 AM said, "[T]here is an honorable way out of this. Take a bottle of whiskey, a .45, and go park the car in a secluded space. Save the family and the city the shame and agony of maintaining this charade."

Suicide may be painless and bring on many changes, but it is not honorable. Because of his duties to his son and the rest of mankind, the honorable way out for Nifong is to (1) admit his wrongdoing, (2) ask for forgiveness (especially from the accused players' families and his own son), (3) take his punishment like a man, and (4) try to make something of the rest of his life. Chuck Colson comes to mind; although for my money, Colson's wrongdoing pales in comparison to Nifong's malfeasance.

I hope the rest of us take this opportunity to think about the importance of our votes for prosecutors (or the people who appoint prosecutors, as appropriate). Such votes will continue to be very important long after Nifong is but a faint memory.

Cochise's Enchilada

Joe Bingham said...


I was going for irony with the reference to compassion as a "weakness."


I'm with you.

bella said...

anonymous said...
State Bar Files Additional Charges Against
1 OK 19 lines Text
2 Shown 308 lines Text

As many of us expected, the State Bar has filed
additional charges against Mike Nifong for ethical
violations, including his conduct in the withholding
of DNA evidence.

I have never expected, and still do not expect, any
severe punishment against Nifong -- we'll see. But,
regardless of the outcome re: his factual guilt, I
suggest that the filing of these charges lays to rest
any argument that Nifong had some alleged right to
withhold DNA evidence, or any right to lie to judges
about it. To suggest otherwise, would be to say that
the Ethics Committee of the Bar does not understand
its own rules.


While I'm pretty sure the Ethics Committee understands it's own rules, this idiot doesn't appear to understand the meaning of ethics. He had the right to lie? Yeah, that SCREAMS ethical to me.

Anonymous said...

>But given that he almost certainly will be disbarred, will lose his source of future income, will fail to fully vest in his pension and will spend his entire life savings on legal fees (if not legal judgments), is it possible to feel some pity for this man?<

Compassion is an admirable trait. I understand your feeling for Nifong possibly losing his job and pension. But, I think you need to step back and look at the reality of what Nifong did and why.

Had his scheme succeeded, he would have successfully framed three innocent young men of crimes that he knew they did not commit. These young men would have spent decades in jail, their reputations ruined, their families disgraced and shamed, known as the families whose boys were the racists who raped a black girl. There would be no one feeling sorry for these innocent men. Nifong did all these for one reason: to save his own job.

So, you will have to understand why not many people are sorry that this man will lose his job. He hasn't yet. He is still a district prosecutor; being paid for a job that he retained by trying to put innocent people in jail. While he is still earning his pay check, these innocent men's legal bills are mounting. Even if he loses his job, he would just be back in square one, with the added benefit of being paid for months for a job that he does not deserve.

And he would still walk away without having to reimburse these men’s for their legal fees.

Anonymous said...

Two things: Nifong's lies to Bar Counsel are hardly his worst actions, and the fact that it is unprecedented for the Bar to take this sort of action while a case is ongoing does not, in fact, speak well of the Bar.

Is the unprecedented nature of the Bar's actions because there's been such a shortage of obviously unethical behavior in NC prosecutions? Or perhaps, in the past, the Bar just hasn't wanted to taint ongoing cases? Imagine that logic...not wanting to compromise a prosecution by indicating too soon that a prosecution has been compromised.

In fact, in the past this Bar has allowed unethical actions by prosecutors without complaining during the trial, and without doing a thing afterwards. And the aftermath of the lawyer's unethical behavior? Promotion.

But right now the Bar seems chock-full of ethics, so the world is almost perfect. Just one tiny, niggling problem remains: the time it is taking to drop those silly remaining charges. That should not have taken two days. Perhaps a little politics is involved? Okay, Durham voters, now you have the reason to hold your heads high again: you didn't vote as an irrational race-baited block; devious Nifong would have fooled anyone. So can we finally...let these people go?

Joe Bingham said...

One group of people we haven't talked about who should really be humiliated in this case...

Durham (majority) voters. Yeesh, what a pack of fools. Unbelievable.

They're half the reason I'm not going to Duke next year. (The other half? The administration.)

Anonymous said...

Nifong's lies to the Grievance Committee tell me he's completely lost control of this thing. He can't even keep all his lies straight anymore. Every time he tries to explain his way out of something he gets tripped up and digs himself in deeper.

This doesn't bode well for Precious. If Nifong can't keep his stories straight there's no reason to think she can either and if she ever does hit the stand she should disintegrate nicely.

Joe Bingham said...

Even though I'm sure these charges will be dropped, I bet the thought of having Precious on the stand would make any defense attorney salivate.

M. Simon said...


I'm with you.


M. Simon said...

anon. 2:18AM,

Jewish compassion is better.

1. Nifong must repent.
2. He must do what he can to right the wrongs he has done.
3. He must ask for forgiveness from those he has wronged.
4. He may be forgiven.

M. Simon said...


Are you Jewish?


M. Simon said...

I think a live Nifong would be a good idea.

There has to be a lot he could talk about.

Anonymous said...

KC Said,
Paragraph 206 added that Nifong “repeatedly refused offers from counsel for the players who were eventually indicted to consider evidence and information that they contended either provided an alibi or otherwise demonstrated that their clients did not commit any crime.”

These moves hinted at other ethical violations, specifically a violation of Rule 3.8, comment 2, which states that “a prosecutor should not intentionally avoid pursuit of evidence merely because he or she believes it will damage the prosecutor’s case or aid the accused.”

The purpose of the amended complaint against Nifong is not to tell the new DA, Roy Cooper, how to run his investigation, but if I were Cooper I'd make sure I didn't make the same 'mistakes' that Nifong did. All of Nifong's sins of commission and omission, spelled out with a fair amount of detail by the bar, will most certainly not be made by Cooper, (not that Cooper wouldn't do so in the absence of the amended complaint.)

Anonymous said...

For the 290 or so acts - disbarment
Fr attempting to send innocents to jail for 30 years - 10 years

westernblot said...

Again the case against Nifong is over. Hopefully the boys' nightmare will end by this weekend.

I sense the enablers will be forgtten.

Anonymous said...


The appropriate Christian response to Nifong's evil isn't compassion, it's prayer.

The time for compassion, i.e.sympathic consciousness of another's distress with a desire to alleviate it (Webster), is when Nifong realizes his need of coompassion and repents.

He has continued in rebellion and defiance. Therefore, compassion for him is a displaced emotion.

It is one thing to be sad for Nifong's evil choices; to pray for him as some people I know are doing and quite another to have compassion for him.

When he realizes the error of his ways compassion is appropriate.

There are many Biblical examples of evil where God did not exhibit compassion toward an individual because they weren't repentent. But, always, when they came to realize their error, when they were broken and repentent, He did.

God has mercy on us as sinners but when a person chooses to immerse themselves in evil, dogmatically rejecting help to leave it, as Nifong has done, there is no desire on God's part to alleviate that person's distress. In fact, the desire is to leave them in distress so that they may finally, through discomfort, come to their senses and repent.

The waste of human life is a sad thing, but those who continue in evil so extreme as to take the life of another (BTK killer, Nifong, both of whom took lives of other people for their own purposes, and yes, Nifong was killing many people) aren't offered compassion in the Bible until they repent.

The Lord still loves them, He loves us all, and as Christians we feel the same. But the most loving thing to do in this instance with Nifong is to withhold compassion until he has repented and admitted his wrongdoing to himself and others, so that he can receive forgiveness and restoration. Restoration will include paying his debt to society.

Anonymous said...

Isn't this obstruction of justice?

Will he therefore be charged with a felony outside the Bar proceeding?

Would that obstruction charge be in addition to any possible civil action?

Anonymous said...

Can we assume that Precious Mangum will be interviewed re the Ethics Complaint? Although Precious may have had her own reasons for her initial complaint, it seems likely that Nifong or his minions led/pressured her later story changes.

Anonymous said...

Your last question KC is one we are all asking. How can the State allow him to remain in office when such serious charges are pending against him. How can any defendant believe that he is getting a fair trial with Nifong.

bill anderson said...

To those who say they feel sympathy for Nifong, I can understand. One of my favorite books is Phillip Yancey's "What's So Amazing about Grace?" and it deals with issues of forgiveness.

The book makes a good point, however, and that is that people with full hands cannot accept or even seek grace. Nifong continues to insist (1) he did nothing wrong, (2) it is all the fault of the defense, and (3) the three young men probably are rapists and they certaintly assaulted Precious.

There is no remorse, no admission of wrongdoing, no nothing. It is "I had a great case and I want to pursue it, but those evil defense attorneys won't let me do it." We can feel sympathy, but Nifong cannot accept sympathy or grace with that kind of an attitude.

As for the Times, it seems that Duff is back to his old ways, covering for Nifong with his "DNA didn't matter anymore." That is an ASTOUNDING quote, just astounding, and it goes to the heart of the deception here. We are dealing with lies piled on top of lies, and we cannot forget that.

Second, the Times BURIED the story, and that is after its many front-page stories insisting that the three young men are rapists. I think I understand what is going on there, and it is called CYA.

Gotta go make breakfast for the kids....

Anonymous said...

Chicago said: I must say, Kemper was spot on with his predictions. Kudos to him once again.

Go back and read Kemper's comments at La Shawn Barber's website in April and May. He predicted the case would go away at the first May hearing, and then repeatedly thereafter.

A stopped clock is right twice a day.

Vivian Thomas said...

I'm wondering. What does a national laughing stock who's flushed his livelihood down the drain with, presumably, half a dozen strains of DNA, which were dripping out of the prostitute which you exploited, do with his time?

Wonder if he'll be able to get his government pension issued in packs of cigarettes and accommodation upgrades at Club Fed.

Anonymous said...

6 54
Are you for real???

Kilgore said...

Feel sorry for Nifong? Maybe a little. I have a great deal more worry and empathy for his previous victims we know nothing about. Probably men who didn't have the resources to fight against him and who are now in jail due to his arrogance and twisted thinking.

His actions clearly show patterns of disregard for others once HE has made up his mind. How many innocent men and women are incarcerated due to this man?

Anonymous said...

Sometimes you have to fall on your sword. This is one of those times. Give that man a .45.

GS said...

If Nifog was smart he would just hand in his law license and resign. Tell everyone he is retiring, and move to Florida.

He is just building up his legal bills. You would think his lawyers will tell him it's over.

Anonymous said...

After watching AA's follow Nifong like sheep I find myself somewhat desensitized to their concerns.

bill anderson said...

In reading about the Genarlow Wilson case, we have to remember some things:

1. He has a lot of supporters in the mainstream media, and they have been supportive from the beginning;
2. The three Duke students had NO supporters in the mainstream media, and these media people went out of their way to portray them as rapists;
3. The only people other than the attorneys who stuck up for the Duke students were in the blogosphere; the mainstream media, including ESPN and "Something Happened" Sports Illustrated all were salivating over Reade, Collin, and David getting 60 years in prison.

Thus, while the Wilson case IS a miscarriage of justice, keep in mind that there are a number of people working on his behalf. If it were not for the blogosphere and the writings of Joe Neff, Nifong would still be prosecuting the case instead of being prosecuted himself.

As for the Wilson case, this is what I call a "Mr. Bumble Moment" ("If that be the law, sir, then the law is a ass.") It is the problem when the government tries to criminalize consensual sexual relations, and when prosecutors abuse their positions.

Now, everyone admits Wilson had sex with the girl, but we also have to look at the MENS REA situation. Mens Rea USED to be the bedrock of criminal law in this country, and it basically means that the person who committed the crime KNEW he was committing a crime and did it anyway.

I seriously doubt that Wilson knew that he was involved in a technical violation of the law. That is VERY important here, as I can guarantee you that the prosecutor understood that but decided it was politically feasible to prosecute, anyway.

Second, when we get into mandatory sentences, injustices abound. It was the conservatives who sought to throw harsh, mandatory sentences into crimes because "everyone knows that judges are a bunch of squishy liberals who let hardened criminals out of jail and onto our streets" or something like that. BAD EXAMPLES MAKE FOR BAD LAW. (Sorry about the all caps, but I STILL cannot make the html tags work.)

On the other hand, liberals and leftist feminists have been all too happy to pursue the politics of rape and to throw in harsh, mandatory sentences for actions that clearly do not fall into any realistic "rape" category. But, then, people like Wendy Murphy hold that women NEVER lie about rape, and that DNA should NEVER be a factor, UNLESS IT POINTS TOWARD GUILT.

Anyway, this comment is too long for this thread, but I will have to write about this one in an upcoming LRC article. I hope I have made my ideas clear.

Clarencedarrow said...

There's an old saying in public accounting "You can deal with a crook and you can deal with a stupid person; but there is no way that you can deal with a stupid crook" That about sums up Nifong. He is a stupid crook, expecting any repentance from him is a futile exercise. Given the pain he has caused, the millions of taxpayer dollars he has wasted (not to mention the impending law suits) this man deserves to be pilloried. Grace is accorded to those who admit their sins-you will never see that from Nifong. He's just flat evil.

Anonymous said...

GPrestonian said...

"He had a fool for a client..."

To which I would add a couple more oldies-but-goodies:

"As ye sow, so shall ye reap."


"He that troubleth his own house, shall inherit the wind."

Anonymous said...

Pratt Alumnus, we all appreciate the support and fine writing done by Dr. Gustafson on the case. However, there are some who feel he simply cannot be challenged. He has become the sacred cow of some sites because he is deemed to be validating their existence because he is a Duke faculty member. His rationale for defending any of the Group of 88 is certainly a perplexing one. However, he has a perfect right to do it and we who disagree have a perfect right to challenge him without a slap on the wrist from site moderators.

Anonymous said...

The gullible Stephens Hahh!

I think Nifong's mentor was more than gullible and if he isn't eventually brought down himself. Stephens will do what he can to rescue Nifong. Wait and see. Even if he is disbarred Stephens will give him a job in his court doing something paralegal.

Michael said...

On the Wilson case, I believe that their Legislature is looking to fix the problem with their specific law as there was no intention that this apply to minors.

BTW, KC is calling them like he sees them. I was a bit surprised and then amused to see the adjectives that he applied to the judges in the case.

I also think that Kemp did a great job in communicating what he had access to. It was the closest thing to inside info generally available.

There are many comments on why Nifong can't see, even in his current state of jeopardy. I can understand stubborn. But this is really STUBBORN. And it is really very similar to the G88 and Admin.

Is admitting being wrong really that bad?

AMac said...

anonymous 8:14am --

When many members of a group display bad behavior and most others stay quiet, it's natural to look for the stand-up people.

In the case of the Duke faculty, there are Coleman, Kimel, Baldwin, Gustafson, and Munger. Then December added 17 Economics letter-signers.

That's it, to my knowledge.

Gustafson isn't any more sacred or any more of a cow than you or me. But he's shown himself to be a person of integrity.

DWPittelli said...

What really blows my mind isn't Nifong's evil willingness to put career ambition ahead of honest administration of justice. I believe I have seen that from AGs in New York and Massachusetts, who have since become, or come fairly close to becoming, governors in their respective states.

What does blow my mind is that Nifong apparently had no "exit strategy" -- no wind-down after the May 2, 2006 primary. If he had interviewed the "victim" a couple weeks after the primary, and cleaned up his act then, he would almost certainly still have won the November election, and almost certainly not be in any serious trouble now.

But he had to stick with it, to "make sure" of an election already won, just as Nixon had to send burglars against his Democratic enemies, even though his '72 victory was all but assured.

In each case, this sort of stupid judgement from a man who was not stupid by any reasonable standard, could only be the action of a paranoid and megalomaniacal man. Power corrupts, and this corruption is generally mediated through these personality traits.

Anonymous said...

"How can Nifong possibly not take a leave of absence as District Attorney until these charges are resolved?"

It's not that simple.

Mr. Nifong had enablers in his office.

He bears primary responsibility, but his office needs investigating.

They are not all bad, but they are not all good either.

Michael J. Gaynor

Anonymous said...

"How can Nifong possibly not take a leave of absence as District Attorney until these charges are resolved?"

It's not that simple.

Mr. Nifong had enablers in his office.

He bears primary responsibility, but his office needs investigating.

They are not all bad, but they are not all good either.

Michael J. Gaynor

Anonymous said...

In response to the individual who "feels bad" for Nifong because he got in over his head:

No pity. None. He chose the job. He has the power of life and death in his hands. He has destroyed these lives through his actions.

You think he's some sort of innocent babe in the woods? He's going to lose his PENSION? Boo hoo. He decided to let political considerations rule over justice. He was willing to sacrifice a few stranger's lives, their LIVES, so he could live a life as a big-shot powerful prosecutor.

He had zero, zero compassion for them. Zero care for their futures, their families, their dreams. Willing to destroy them all, just to get elected.

That's a sociopath, buddy. Get a clue. You want to cry for someone? Plenty of people in this world deserve it. Not Nifong.

I am sure you think you are taking a "reasonable" stance. But it's a pose, it's idiotic, and it is plain wrong.

AMac said...

Bill Anderson 7:06am --

You note how Phil Yancey's book describes why Nifong is unready for 'forgiveness.' He insists (1) he did nothing wrong, (2) it's all the fault of the defense, and (3) the three young men probably are rapists and certainly assaulted Precious.

A similar whine is still being bottled by the vocal Hard Left faculty. (1) There was nothing wrong with the Listening Statement and the attacks on the players, (2) it's all the fault of bloggers and nasty emailers, and (3) whatever those three young men and their accomplices did was bad enough.

Not my call, but that "deny everything" posture might make forgiveness and reconciliation a bit more difficult.

Mitch said...

Anonymous, you're missing an important point. Nifong has wrongly enlisted the coercive power of the state against innocent citizens, and done it in the interest of increasing his own power and stature. If that doesn't scare you, or indicate that it is a crime to be taken very seriously indeed, then you need to think about it a little harder. The investigation of Sergey Kirov's murder comes to mind.

May I suggest that the good people of North Carolina who feel any sympathy at all for Nifong send him some ham sandwiches? He can eat them if he is in financial trouble, or indict them if he isn't.

Anonymous said...

8:14 Sorry, but the implications of your theory would have to allow metaphorical wrist slaps too.

Anonymous said...

To the person who felt bad for Nifong because he wouldn't vest in his pension, don't. In North Carolina, state employees or those who participate in the state retirement system such as judges and DA's/ ADA/s vest after 5 years. From his bio, he has worked as an ADA full-time since 1979. If I am reading the benefits handbook correctly, since he has more than 24 years of service and is over age 50, he gets unreduced benefits. In other words, he gets his FULL retirement.

Anonymous said...

Nifong had to have help from other ADA's. Its time for you to come foward.We know you know. I could be wrong but I think that whole DA office is corrupt.

Anonymous said...

I thought we were further along as a species than Mike Nifong's behavior indicates.

The Drill SGT said...

Anonymous said...
To the person who felt bad for Nifong because he wouldn't vest in his pension, don't. ... In other words, he gets his FULL retirement.
9:15 AM

so is the incentive, that like the Feds, the ultimate payout is driven by the salary in the 3 highest years, and he wants 3 years of DA time?

DukeEgr93 said...

sacred cow? I suppose I could moo if someone would like me to.

As it stands, I am quite sure that the moderators at LS and at FODU, the two boards to which I post, understand the value of impassioned discourse and argument. The last couple days on FODU, three of us have been going back and forth about the O'Reilly piece. I believe and truly hope the folks who disagree with me in no way feel like they have to restrain themselves.

On the other hand, as mentioned a couple days ago by a FODU moderator to someone questioning the openness of FODU and my "role" in getting him kicked off, "you did not get banned from the FODU board because of your views on Karla Holloway. You got banned because you registered under at least 13 different names posting as 13 different people and causing a great deal of trouble on the board."

Terry said...

Anyone know if Nifong can use public funds to defend himself since the ethics charges involve actions that occurred during the course of his job as DA?

Anonymous said...

Isn't the worst thing the fact that still to this day, today in fact, on Good Morning America, his lawyer says in so many words, that he still believes he did the right thing, e.g. he still thinks the three players are guilty of an immaculate gang rape???

I might have some sympathy for him if he said that based on the initial information he had he believed a crime had been committed but that now, in hindsight, he wishes he had taken the investigation further, wishes he had listened to the defense alibi information, etc.

But this is not what he says, this is a man who will willingly put three clearly innocent young men in prison for 20 years only to save face and prevent him from having to admit he was wrong.

That is truly disgusting.

Anonymous said...

I think Nifong didnt drop the case after his election because it became personal with the bloggers.

Anonymous said...

Forgiveness is only available to those who address their wrongs and make sincere attempts to be accountable for their actions. Such is not the case with Nifong.

This being said, based on my experience in legal practice, Nifong's attorney in one way or another has started the painful process of getting Nifong to see the facts at hand and persuade him to resign from the Bar. Now, this may not entirely stop the Bar inquiry, but it would take a great deal of steam out of it and give Nifong a way out of the Bar Counsel charges without adding to the considerable harm to himself and others he has already caused. The reality is that he cannot now perform his job - and he is more than just ineffective and incompetent - he is truly harmful to the public interest. Hopefully his lawyer is getting him to see the light - this happens more slowly than is often desired.

madder than a hornet said...

It is comforting to know that the TRUTH continues to emerge. I hope the rush to judgment crowd of last Spring is keeping up with this story.

The media has kept it alive because fongu's lying is so outrageous. The Group of 88 has been an aide in giving the media dogs something to sink their teeth into.

The lax family knew fong was lying always! Thank you other friends who believed us.

Anonymous said...

I feel no sympathy for Mike Nifong.

He's devastated? About to lose his career?

Well, perhaps if he hadn't used an obviously false claim of rape to further his poltical career, been so incompetant as to be unable or unwilling to write a single motion save for the one about the telephone polling [which was going to be denied obviously since well heeled defenses in high profile cases always do polling], and had further damned himself by telling outright, verifiable lies about evidence in the case then perhaps he would not be devasted today.

Anonymous said...

Freda Black must be laughing her a** off somewhere.

Michael said...

There's a really moving and well-written piece this morning at the LS blog site by a female graduate of Duke and former Lacrosse Player.

Only Race Matters: A Duke Woman Speaks About A Disturbing Aspect of the University’s Response to the Lacrosse Scandal

As far as forgiveness goes, the motives were money and power and that's not well received. King David killed a friend to get his wife but he repented immediately on being confronted. And he lost a son for it. Mr. Nifong was confronted quite some time ago and is still in denial.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Gaynor is correct, BTW. The entire office, Nifongs ADA's, are also liable for anything they knew about and failed to report.

The State needs to clean out the office and start over.


Anonymous said...

dukeerg93 - I posted earlier that you have made an outstanding contribution to the discourse on this case; however, you are treated with kid gloves on matters relating to the Group of 88. For the record, I am not the person who you suggested registered 13 different time under 13 different names. Unfortunately, I do not have that kind of free time. I am occasional poster and a daily observer and I stand by my observation.

Anonymous said...

I hadn't seen this before. Here's his lawyer making a public statement.

Anonymous said...

Let's keep the protestations of sympathy for Nifong or "look at how compassionate I am, I feel for Nifong" pleas on ice at least until all charges are dismissed against the 3 lacrosse players (and he resigns as DA). Especially in light of his strong, persistent, and unequivocal public expression of the guilt of these three men through today.

See for an article today where Nifong's attorney expresses clearly yet again that Nifong maintains their guilt and would still puruse the case even with the benefit of hindsight. Maybe Nifong thinks the NAACP will hire him as a receptionist once he's paroled.

Anonymous said...

I'm wondering how long the AG will take to review the case, I can't see the Feb. 5th hearing going on as scheduled. How great would it be for Nifong to be facing charges after the three boys have been cleared!

bill anderson said...


Immaculate gang rape? What an INCREDIBLE choice of words! You have outdone all of us on that one, and I congratulate you. Yes, that is a perfect description of the non-rape.

Anonymous said...

I'm thinking only the NAACP might be willing to hire him after this is all over, or maybe he can get a job at the alleged victim's college.

Anonymous said...

With any luck the families of the accused will see to making Mike "What Me Worry" Nifong's existance a living hell for years to come.

As for Crystal Gail Mangum, she is just one of hundreds of promiscuous women here in Durham and will blend right back into her natural mileau. When she finishes her "education" at NCCU she will be able to support her many children with a fine job in government - perhaps even run for Mayor in the future. She is at least as moral as Bill Bell. Heck, if she takes a class in law enforcement she could be the chief of police. The most recent candidates have all had to contend with charges that they beat their spouses. She won't have that problem.

This city gets what it deserves and one trip downtown proves that. Open air drug markets, rampant gang crime, a disarmed populace preyed upon by armed thugs, and a police force that makes Barney Fife look competent and intelligent. Abandon all hope ye who enter here.

M. Simon said...

John Wayne said, life is tough, and it's tougher when you're stupid.

Michael said...

["He's devastated. It's very upsetting to be attacked … it's like he's public enemy number one," said David Freedman, Nifong's attorney. "Here's a man who's trying to do his job as an elected DA in Durham County. He's always held himself up as an ethical individual … it's a bit of a surprise."]

That he can't see that this is what he's done to the Duke 3 and probably to many others is ironic.

[But Nifong still has his supporters. After leaving the State Bar courtroom, he was approached by a stranger while walking down the street.

According to Freedman, the middle-aged woman looked up, called out to Nifong, ran toward him and hugged him.

"We're praying for you," she said.

Nifong denies having knowingly lied or purposely hid evidence in the Duke case. And even after everything that has happened, he does not regret filing charges against three Duke lacrosse players.]

I can't imaging being Freedman working with someone so delusional.

Anonymous said...

It would be really great if there were a link to a cast-of-characters chart, next to the "Case Narrative" link on the main page. Does anyone know if such a chart exists? If not, it would be really helpful to create one, perhaps with the name of each "character", a small picture, a one-line synopsis of the role they played, and lines showing the relationships between them.

Perhaps each entry could even be linked to a brief entry with a bit more information.

bill anderson said...

Amac is right. It is not that people must take revenge, but rather that if there is to be "healing" (as people say they want to happen), some people have to admit wrongdoing.

So far, we see Nifong basically giving everyone, including the Bar, the finger. His "I would do it all over again" comments are really arrogant, given that the Bar complaint itself questions the validity of the indictments. And what he told the NY Times -- that the DNA really was not relevant to anyone since Nifong himself had declared it not to be important -- really took the cake.

That is why I cannot feel sorry for Nifong. He is determined to try to lie his way out of this predicament, and then expect the rest of us to believe him. And, by the way, since Nifong's supporters, like the Evil Wendy Murphy, are always telling us that what comes from the defense is nothing but "spin," are we to assume that what comes from Fong's lawyers ALSO is "spin"?

Anonymous said...

Mike Nifong will go to his grave saying that the alleged victim was really raped, err sexually assaulted, by the three boys, or somebody else in the house that night. He will not only never admit he lied repeatedly, misled the public about his evidence and conspired to hide potentially exculpatory evidence from the defense.

That level of stubborness and ideology driven thinking does not belong in an elected official at any level of government.

DukeEgr93 said...

9:42 - if such is the case, as reflected in, "However, there are some who feel he simply cannot be challenged," other than a particular instance involving the aforementioned "Group of 13:1" I am not sure to what you refer, but if need be would be willing to talk to mods to disabuse them of the notion that I'm somehow off-limits. On the flip side, I won't tell them how to run their board with respect to some of the trolls that have and continue to disrupt them.

Anonymous said...

The only possible defense can be pure incompetance, he doesn't know what exculpatory means, he never read the bar's ethical conduct policy but has seen every episode of Law and Order and all its spinoffs.

hman said...

Re: Forgiveness, Compassion, etc.
Human beings really are not meant to be strict vegetarians or pacifists. When we are young, many of us like to have extended conversations about alternatives. I see this as a good thing. It means that we do not expect to enjoy slaughtering animals or slaying enemies. Like I said, this a good thing.
But there comes a time when those things must be done. It is better, by far, if they are done by folks who would rather not be doing them and are determined to keep their dignity and self respect thru it all.
M. Nifong has at every stage in this affair been as far from a helpless victim as one can get in this life. He made each decision knowing exactly what was at stake for his victims. He had (or thought he had) almost complete exemption from any personal liability regarding any fall-out from his decisions. IOWs, society had provided him with extra-ordinary resourses for be free to do the right thing regardless of popular clamour or outside pressure.
Compassion? The fight is not over yet. Those kids are still in danger and if Nifong stays in his job there will be others.
No. There is nothing for it but to get the job done right, wash the blood off, and try to comfort the survivors.

Chicago said...

Did anyone notice on the WRAl video when Bifong was walking into court and a few black people stopped him on the street and kind of gave him what appeared to be a vote of confidence. That is absurd if that is what was going on. Furthermore, it is just tragic. It seems some black people in the RDU area would still like to see 3 innocent young men go to jail because they are white. That is EXACTLY why a change of venue is needed, but I do not see this going to trial.

M. Simon said...


Anonymous said...


The black community has blinders on, why else would Cash Michaels still be selling his 'she deserves her day in court' line?

They are inculcated with the cult of victimology that says they are always on the short end of the stick and that white society will always triump over them using its power and money.

In a sad way, Durham does deserve Mike Nifong, they would be justly rewarded if he was able to continue as DA in his rule of incompetance and arrogance.

The black community, much like Mike Nifong, will never move beyond 'something happened' in that house and never admit the charges were false from the beginning.

Anonymous said...

I too feel sorry for Nifong. Seeing that clip of him walking around in his pajamas reminded me of the man on trial in N.Y. If your reading this post my advise to you would be go to work in your pajamas and plead insanity.good luck.

Anonymous said...

Bill Anderson,

The general rule under U.S. law is that "ignorance of the law or a mistake of law is no defense to criminal prosecution." See Cheek v. United States, 498 U.S. 192 (1991). Wikepedia. I do not think that is a new cocnept. You might be confusing the mens rea idea with the general problem of overcriminalization. Overcriminalization leads to unfairness, among other things, because it leads to citizens committing crimes without knowing or suspecting that their conduct has been made unlawful. Nevertheless, those citizens will have the requisite mens rea if they merely intend to commit the act that has been criminalized, regardless of whether they knew the act was a crime.

I doubt that you would want a criminal justice system in which a person would never be guilty unless he knew his act was unlawful. For example, would you want "gee, judge, I had no idea 5 drinks would make my blood alcohol level so high," to be a defense to a DWI charge.

Cochise's Enchilada

Anonymous said...

to terry at 925 from a non-lawyer/retired professor: You ask if Nifong can shift his legal costs to the state. If you go to the News Observer article today, "Nifong goes on the defense", go to the second page of the article under The Players. It states that Nifong may ask the state to pick up his bill "...since he was acting in a public capacity." Sorry I don't know how to link this.

Anonymous said...

Don't forget Precious started this and played a pivotal role in this travesty. She could have stopped it at any time. Pressure should be put on her to tell the truth. She should not be protected by rape shield laws when it has now been discovered the liar she is.

Gayle Miller said...

"All agree that Nifong is a bad guy who did bad things.

But given that he almost certainly will be disbarred, will lose his source of future income, will fail to fully vest in his pension and will spend his entire life savings on legal fees (if not legal judgments), is it possible to feel some pity for this man?"

No, Anonymous, I do not. Mike Nifong has long promoted himself as having an exceptionally high IQ and definitely sought special treatment because he is so "brilliant". He cannot have it both ways and now claim that he isn't all that knowledgeable. The man knew precisely what he was doing every step of the way and he went ahead and did it anyway!

Care to consider HOW MANY of Nifong's prosecutions are going to be reviewed extensively in the next year or so and the cost to the State of North Carolina and the City and County of Durham for doing so. How many other innocent people have been used by this cynical creature to further his own aims?

No - he deserves all the calumny that can be heaped upon him and all of the poor opinion that is held of his skills - and more.

Let's spare a moment for the families of those three innocent young men whose lives have probably been forever tainted by Nifong's illlicit behavior. Let's even spare a moment for the lying accuser who was encouraged in her insanity by Nifong. What of her mental health and how much has he aided and abetted her descent into further pathology? The woman has three children - what of their futures?

Sorry - Nifong doesn't get anything from my but a chant for his happiness - and for those who understand the tenets of Buddhism - they will understand what that means.

Ralph Phelan said...

"Mike has an option. There is an honorable way out of this. Take a bottle of whiskey, a .45, and go park the car in a secluded space. Save the family and the city the shame and agony of maintaining this charade."

If he does, would the falsely accused still be able to sue his estate for legal fees and other damages?

Anonymous said...

I find it odd that no one has mentioned re opening any of his previous 300 felony trial records, did he win any of them I wonder?

I agree that the woman deserves blame and prosecution for filing a false complaint, but I also believe that Nifong and the police heavily pressured appears she was trying to get out of it by not identifying anyone in the first two rounds, but when they brought her down to the station, broke their own rules and basically told her 'pick someone' and we will indict them, she folded.

We also don't know the extend of her mental history or how unstable she really is, we do know that whatever it is the judge gave it to the defense, which is very and correctly rare in rape cases. Nor do we know the extend of her probable substance abuse problems, only that they seem documented in her medical history to some extent.

I by no means give her a pass, but the true evil here has been done by Mike Nifong. It should have been clear as soon as the DNA results did not tabulate with her story of oral sex, ejaculation and no condom that she was lying. The case should have ended right there.

"We have here a woman who has been victimized her entire life in one way or another and I feel for her very strongly, but I must dismiss all charges in the interest of justice because while we may never know everything that occured at the infamous party, there is no evidence that could lead to a successful prosecution of any players."

Case closed.

But, Mr. Nifong chose the gamblers route and he's now paying the price.

Anonymous said...

One hateful, greedy opportunist exposed and shamed, 88 to go.

Anonymous said...

I feel pity for anyone whose life has been as completely destroyed as Nifong's even if it is by his own doing. Nevertheless, I think that it is extremely important for the legal system that he pay the full price of his misconduct. Prosecutor are trusted with enormous power as is made evident in this case. When they abuse their power, they undermine the integrity of the criminal justice system as is also made evident in this case.
I also feel greater empathy for the defendants' in this case.

Anonymous said...

To 10:24 ... What does that mean, she was victimized her entire life?

Anonymous said...

I'm sorry, he still says he would indict the boys knowing what he knows now, including the utterly ridiculous December 21st do-over statement that is even more full of holes than the first several versions she gave.

He is not deserving of any pity. This is a guy, that if the NC bar had not stepped in, would be fast at work trying to doctor up the rest of the statements, maybe try to find something on the neighbor in order to arrest/pressure/discredit him so that the 11:10 story was sellable to a jury.

Anonymous said...

Nifong is not a child. I have no pity for him in terms of what is going to happen, because experienced attorneys should know better. The people I pity are the three Defendants, whose lives have been changed forever because of Nifong's actions, and who clearly committed no crime.


Anonymous said...

I am out of the country, but I do remember posting earlier


He's toast, Fed next


ventanar7 said...

Interesting comments on Christian compassion and Nifong.

My $.02 worth, as a self-described Christian who is not accepted as such by many others:

The Christian is required to forgive individual insults, leaving the protection of society at large to "the powers that be."

The Christian is not prohibited from using violent means to defend himself and others from an immediate threat. However, he has a duty to retreat when this is possible, and he must cease the use of violence as soon as the threat recedes. He must not allow his motivation to change from protecting the innocent to seeking vengeance on the guilty.

The Christian magistrate must likewise enforce the law out of a desire to protect the innocent and deter future wrongdoing rather than to seek vengeance. I personally do not believe this precludes passing the sentence of death when there is no reasonable hope that the criminal will ever cease to be a grave threat to those around him.

It follows that the Christian executioner must carry out the sentence of the court without malice towards the condemned.

In my opinion, the Christian is indeed required to feel sympathy for Nifong as a human being -- while simultaneously upholding what will likely be a decision to disbar him and thereby pronounce shipwreck on his life.

Destroying someone you sympathize with, and even love as a fellow human being -- because there is no other way to protect the innocent -- is an exceedingly hard thing. The temptation to make it easier, either by refusing your duty or by doing your duty with hatred, is powerful. It's no wonder G.K. Chesterton once wrote that "The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting. It has been found difficult, and left untried."

Anonymous said...

Don't forget......

The three students aren't the only one that got screwed.,0,1199500.column?coll=orl-sports-col

It's BRODHEAD'S turn to pay a price now. Then the gang of 88

Anonymous said...

For those of you filled with pity and compassion, here is my list of Nifong's misdeeds.

-Lied about the extent of the woman's injuries.
-Lied about the team's willingness to talk to investigators.
-Called the team 'hooligans'
-Injected race into the case by his comments
-Refused to meet with defense attorneys.
-Refused to view alibi evidence.
-Lied about the possible use of a date rape drug.
-Lied about the possible use of condoms in direct contradiction to the woman's own story.
-Failed to directly interview the woman for almost a year.
-Harrassed and falsly prosecuted the taxi driver.
-Harrassed Dave Evans by prosecuting for a noise violation. Let's remember his roommate was acquitted yet he was convicted.
-Falsely told the public that the defense team was misrepresenting the DNA results.
-Lied about the DNA results.
-Conspired to keep the DNA results from the defense team.
-Offered Kim Roberts a sweatheart deal on her other criminal charge.
-Failed to investigate the woman's activiites in and around the alleged attack, e.g. he should not have needed 60 Minutes to tell him she was back stripping in 2 weeks.
-Lied to the court and the bar about the DNA evidence

My goodness, these are the acts of a monster, something out of Kalfa or Orwell. This man deserves nothing but scorn and condemnation.

bill anderson said...

Cochise's Enchilada:

I am familiar with the "ignorance of the law" business, but the point still remains that this was a technical violation of the law. Furthermore, if the court holds that you and I are to know every inch of every law in this country, then that tells me that the court is evil as well. What kind of people pile on laws that we cannot keep track of, then demand that we know everything?

Things like mandatory minimums as well as judges not informing juries of all of their options are part of the larger problem. The jury system means that citizens ultimately are supposed to have some check on the law "professionals." This no longer is the case, and the jury's reaction -- that they did not know that a guilty verdict would bring on a mandatory 10-year sentence -- tells me that the jurors also were deliberately misinformed, or the judge and others withheld important information from them.

No, this is not the same as what Nifong did, but the results are the same. So, I understand your point of view, and I cannot condone the debauchery that took place with the young man, but I don't think it was a real crime.

Interesting, isn't it, that the same media that tells us that Reade, Collin and David are rapists because there was drinking and hiring of strippers are the same media that refuse to make any moral issues of these teenage kids having sex and videotaping it? Double standard?

Anonymous said...

This will tick everyone off.

Anonymous said...

Acc/ to ABC Nifong's recusal letter included the following: "I was not able prior to this week to discuss these [conflict of interest] developments with the victim because of the precariousness of her personal health due to complications in her pregnancy." The victim? Question is whether Nifong is more arrogant than stupid or more stupid than arrogant.

Anonymous said...

procedural questions for lawyers about the disciplinary hearing from a non-lawyer/retired professor: In the News Observer story today, under the sidebar titled "How it works", it states that they follow rules of civil cases. Each side can depose witnesses under oath etc. One question I have is does this bar disciplinary body have subpoena power. For instance, can either side require Linwood Wilson be deposed? Secondly,for a finding of the equivalent of guilty as charged, what standard of proof is required? Also under the side bar in the same article under The Players, it mentions that Nifong could ask the state to pay his legal fees since he was acting in a public capacity. Any thoughts about how this issue might play out. Thanks.

Anonymous said...

Of course the ADAs were complicit. They pumped the guy and in the end they will betray him. They should be branded for life as a Nifong assistant.

Here is the list per Findlaw and the Durham DA website. Send them a fax (not anonymously) asking them to take an ethical stand.

* I have posted this before--->
You should contact the assistant DAs directly and ask them what ethical basis they have to continue employment in a corrupt organization. They are not conscripts. Their mass resignation would have endded this farce months ago. The fax number is (919) 560-3220. Don't send anonymous or threatening faxes.


Armstrong, Elizabeth J.
Black, Freda B.
Cline, Tracey E.
Dornfried, James P.
Froehling, Elizabeth A.
Garrell, Thomas Mitchell
Hardin, James E. Jr.
McGirt, Emanuel Dubois
Nifong, Michael B.
Paul, Janice Perrin
Saacks, David J.
Waters, Marvin R.
Williams, Lisa Anderson

Per the official web sit of the Durham DAs office they are:
Assistant District Attorneys
Luke Bumm
Ashley Cannon
Tracey Cline
C. Destine Couch
Jim Dornfried
Stormy Ellis
Mitchell Garrell
Tim Gould
Frances Miranda-Watkins
Kendra Montgomery-Blinn
Dale A. Morrill
Fungai Muzorewa-Bennett
Jan Paul
Shamieka Rhinehart
David Saacks
Dave Shick
Phyllis Tranchese
Doretta Walker
Michelle Williams
Carolyn Winfrey

Anonymous said...

Havent' at least 8 ADA's already resigned since Nifong took over?

As far as I can tell, as an outsider, the Durham system is corrupt to the core, police, DAs, ADAs, lawyers, mayor, judges.

This farce would never have been allowed to continue unless every single branch of the government was complicit, a decent judge would never have let 11 months go by with only one hearing scheduled on the defense motions.

The only reason the bar has taken this strong step is because of the media coverage and the deep pockets of the defendants. If the woman had happened to pick some players that were there on scholarship from middle class families with no financial resources, forget it. We'd be moving to the OJ trial phase next.

Anonymous said...

Anyone who feels sorry for Nifong consider this -

Do you doubt that he would have given false DNA from the boys to the lab if he had thought of it or been able to.

In that case they would have had no way out. Why should he?

Anonymous said...

"One question I have is does this bar disciplinary body have subpoena power. For instance, can either side require Linwood Wilson be deposed?"


Anonymous said...

I don't doubt it. The only thing that prevented him from directing evidence be planted was his arrogance.

Since he already "knew" the woman, who he never interviewed about the allegations, was telling the truth, so he "knew" the DNA would be found right where she said it should be he didn't think it necessary to plant evidence.

The treatment of the taxi driver and his blatant lies about the woman's rape exam results should show he is not above evidence planting.

AMac said...

A few weeks ago, a D-i-W commenter (I don't recall who) speculated that Nifong's key decision took place back in March, when he looked like the loser in the upcoming primary.

Nifong may have thought that when Escort Service exotics are the life of a bachelor party, one thing often leads to another. With forensic tests pending, it seemed like a good bet that some DNA evidence of some physical contact would come to light. Then it would be a case of "he said-she said" as to whether the contact was consensual or coerced.

Recalling how the ground was prepared by the rush-to-judgment media, potbangers, and Group of 88, there's little doubt about how this scenario would have ended. Evidence proving consensuality would have been trampled; one or more players would have done hard time. Mike Nifong would be a hero to the Wendy Murphys and Cash Michaels of the world.

For only $5 million or so, the falsely accused are dodgine this bullet. Given the sensitivity of DNA testing, the absence of checks and balances from the criminal justice system and the ethics of people like Gottleib and Meehan: Nifong's March gamble doesn't look so outlandish.

Anonymous said...

Freedman says this morning that Mike the Knifong, if he had it to do all over again, would bring the rape charges because he truly believes that a rape occurred. Freakin' incredible! God Almighty I detest this jerk. He is going down so hard that it will register on the Richter scale. What unbridled arrogance and defiance this pathetic little man exudes!

Anonymous said...

What did Nifong do when charged with initial violations of the NC ethics code? He voluntarily recused himself from the case with, nonetheless, self serving explanations and statements. Will he go to a hearing before the Bar Commission on the charges as they now currently stand? Not if his lawyer can work out a deal for Nifong to avoid a disbarment decision by surrendering his license for a limited time without pleading guilty to the charges, thus leaving him free to make the same self serving statements totally without remorse for what he has wrought! I hope the Bar will insist on hearing the facts on all the charges, or accept a plea of guilty on all charges, followed in either event by the ultimate penalty-disbarment! Just don't assume in advance, as some have done, that disbarment is as certain as it should be.

Anonymous said...


That is true, I suspect he knew she was an escort, probable prostitute and he figured he had a consensual sex defense on his hands and with the Duke hate rampant in Durham and the race issue he knew he had a probable winner on his hands.

But what explains the continued stubbornness? Was he always intending the drop the case at some point, post election or is he truly so deluded that he was banking on a racist jury to win his case?

I don't believe he has any secret evidence, and given that he's now fighting for his career, any evidence that supports that a rape happened at all would have been leaked by now.

He would have been humiliated in a legal court and most likely his witness would have told an entirely new, even more preposterous set of stories on the stand when confronted wtih the hard facts making ALL of her stories impossible.

The idea that someone who is both incompetant, unethical AND a nut could hold the office of district attorney is most troubling.

AMac said...

anonymous 11:17am --

> But what explains [Nifong's] continued stubbornness?

The First Law of Holes -- when you're in one, stop digging -- is bitter medicine for many people. Concerning holes and the Hoax, Nifong is merely Exhibit A.

luke said...

I know that in California, when it comes to the sentencing portion by the State Bar Court, there are factors in mitigation and factors in aggravation considered. Mitigating factors include candor with the Bar; aggravating factors include the absence of remorse. Hmmm, I wonder how one would apply those factors here if the Disciplinary Hearing Commission finds against Nifong...

Anonymous said...

My biggest fear is that this is the classic carrot stick ploy on behalf of the bar.

If Nifong resigns as DA they may not follow through with the case.

He could be allowed to retire from the practice of law, his license in tact and his life somewhat intact.

I also hope that the defense team do move forward with civil suits againt Durham and against the false accuser.

I would like to see her on the stand trying to explain away her many contradictory and impossible stories.

Agit8or said...

Is there not, at least, an appearance of a criminal conspiracy involving Nifong, "victim", ADA's, DPD, and his investigator? I haven't seen this possibility addressed in any blog or message board. Sure seems an avenue to explore.

Anonymous said...

Why They Hate

As several posters today have noted the need to move on to address the enablers, I hope that I may be excused for posting off-topic. I am a former Duke faculty member, as KC can vouch (I recently wrote to him and supplied a few anecdotes). I know the academic leftist mind-set, and hence can comment on some of the deeper reasons for the hatred exhibited by the 88 toward the lacrosse team as well as the Duke student body more generally.

Certainly the basic facts that the lacrosse players are white, male, and “privileged” counts against them, but that doesn’t explain the rage. Many of the 88 themselves, after all, are white, male, and well-off. (Although I suppose that as “politically correct” radicals, they essentially become honorary “non-white non-males”).

The athletes’ initial sin is their failure to accept indoctrination. Here they are, surrounded by these “great minds,” yet they refuse to accept the true doctrine as professed by their professors! For the largest contingent of the 88, the poststructuralists, this is a rather abstract issue, as it is unlikely that they have had lacrosse players in their classes. It is a different matter, however, for Duke’s non-postmodern radicals (the historians, in general.) For them, it is a bitter disappointment that their teaching of the history of oppression fails to turn most of their students into committed leftists.

A deeper reason for the hate stems from the students’ likely future occupations. Most of the letter-signers are Marxists at some level, and hence hope for the overthrow of our political and economic systems. Many if not most of the lacrosse players are headed for the financial heart of that system, aiming to work in firms such as investment banks. They are therefore the class enemy – and for Marxists, class struggle is ultimately what it is all about.

At a personal (yet never-acknowledged) level, much of the hatred stems from high school socialization. Most radical professors (although by no means all), belonged to socially marginal, “intellectual” cliques. They felt superior to the jocks, yet the jocks remained socially dominant, irking them to no end. Most future radicals were nerdy but desperate to be considered “cool.” As a result, they cloaked themselves with the cachet of radicalism. It still makes them feel young and edgy. But the gambit has never fully worked, and the nerds are still jealous of the jocks. They are even jealous sexually. The fact that Duke undergraduate women would want to “hook-up” with these hooligans – why the very thought repels! (hence the Anne Allison class). Radical professors are also jealous of the culture of fun (“work hard, play hard”) prevalent at schools such as Duke. Academics, in general, don’t have much fun. As a result, they direct much of their neo-puritanical fury at student drinking.

Finally, the radical profs hate the Duke students in general for their moderate, relatively disengaged liberalism. Duke students, on average, are not conservative. Socially and culturally, they lean left; economically, they are more centrist -- but overall they tend to vote for the Democratic party. Professorial radicals, far from being “extreme liberals,” are actually extreme anti-liberals, and are thus closer to right-wing anti-liberal extremists than they are to garden-variety liberals. Most of the 88 openly disdain liberalism. Fred Jameson – the biggest star of the Duke humanities – has justified Heidegger’s Nazi affiliation by claiming that Nazism was in some ways preferable to liberalism. In the late1990s, the Nazi philosopher Carl Schmitt was all the rage in the Duke literature department. Why? -- largely because of his animus against liberalism.

Anti-Leftist Liberal

jim said...

amac - 11:08

I posted something like that here a couple weeks ago, but others may have also.

My hypothesis was that Nifong saw this case as his best and maybe only shot at winning the contested primary. His premise would have been that any DNA from ANY person inside the woman that had been in that frat house that night would have been enough for his purposes, no matter what the later results of the case.

That is, it would become "he-said--she-said" consensual arguments pitting rich white college athletes against poor exploited black single mom. IOW, a politically rich high target environment. Even if the accused all eventually went free, the real winner would always be Nifong.

He then seized that strategy and made all those vote-getting public statements ahead of the DNA results that he took the precautions of getting from a private lab so as to have options for himself later. The results were doubtless a shock, but he may have felt that he had already crossed his Rubicon. Meanwhile, the political gains he had made were undeniable.

So, if he had not crossed his Rubicon, he did it then by suppressing the evidence - possibly quite grateful for his foresight in his choice of lab and specificity of his instructions to it - and continuing on that same path.

I would offer:

- that he decided that he could not win the primary w/o this case,

- that he felt he was in too deep later, when the DNA results came in, having already said what he did,

- that, in his hubris and the deep outpouring of the community, he felt he could manage whatever came later, as any conviction would stave off the Board,

- that he could get the case to a court and gain substantial civil immunity simply by getting it there, even if all charges but one were dropped or dismissed and that remaining single one came back not guilty,

- that he could obfuscate enough and try the case enough in the court of public opinion as to escape sanctions, and

- that the hidden lab results and their significance and timing would not come to light.

westernblot said...

An interesting post which I feel qualified to comment on.

While I agree with much of what you say I do not think it excuses the 88 in any way.

I was not a jock and I was not popular in college and probably would not have been "liked" by the lacrosse boys. I probably would not have liked them.

However the distance between those feelings and being involved in framing them for a serious crime boggles the mind.

Anonymous said...

My father is a marxist retired professor; he is as left as they come, believe me, and he thinks the Duke players are innocent and is outraged by the flagrant prosecutorial misconduct.

Please don't lump all liberals into the same category.

I am a liberal and I am almost always supportive of the alleged rape victim and I absolutely believe rape victims are treated terribly by our system.

Yet, I have believed the Duke players were innocent from the moment they said IN ADVANCE of the DNA tests that no DNA would be found and when it was clear they were using a 'no sex' not a 'consensual sex with a ho' defense.

Anonymous said...

I would also argue that the problem isn't liberal or conservative but of being dedicated to an ideology over and above any facts. The square peg must always be fit into the round hole of dogma.

I know you don't like to interject politics onto this blog, but my opinion is that Mike Nifong and the Group of 88 are no different from the neocons and the current occupant of the White House. Both groups are completely driven by ideology and personal belief, facts be damned.

This is a malady that affects both ends of the spectrum, liberal and conservative.

AMac said...

Anti-Leftist Liberal 11:34am --

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

It would help us understand your point of view if you could offer a little background. How long ago you left Duke, what area you studied, whether you were on the tenure track.

Your description of "honorary non-white non-male" white male radical profs brings "I am Charlotte Simmons'" "Professor Quat" to mind. What brought you to conclude that many of Duke's lefty faculty look at things the way you describe?


Jim 11:37am --

Thanks for weighing in. Your earlier comment was the one that had stuck with me.

Anonymous said...

From the looks of Nifong, I hope Cy has him on suicide watch.

Anonymous said...

What is more intellectually lazy than taking sides based on races, rather than evidence? Is there any doubt that is what the 88 leftizos did in this case?

Anonymous said...

The NC lawyers take lying to the bar a lot more seriously than denying a citizen their civil rights.

Clarencedarrow said...

Another case of prosecution gone wild is the case of Dr. Anna Pou and two nurses in New Orleans. You people ought to see that one.

Anonymous said...


Excellents points overall.

One caveat re high school socialization: How do we explain Peter Wood?

Peter Woods appears to have both a jock (in lacrosse) and a heavy weight scholar at Harvard College.

Anonymous said...

Crystal will not show at the 2/5 hearing. Hopefully, this case can be put to rest at that time. Exhaustion has set in .

Anonymous said...

I tend to think the Feb. hearing will be cancelled, the AG's office isn't going to want charges that they rushed through the case file before dismissing charges, they will take several weeks, re interview everyone before dropping all charges.

Anonymous said...

Nifong recused himself to prevent this case from going to the judge on Feb.05.

Anonymous said...

Nifong will get a book deal out of it.probably co-written w/Duff Wilson...or Wendy Murphy...or Cash Michaels...or Karla Holloway.maybe he could join Linwood Wilson's singing group.they could call themselves Commandment-10!

Anonymous said...

Can anyone looking at Peter Wood call him a Jock? If he was, men put the gym at the head of your need-to-do list. Can this hearing be cancelled due to the AG office investagating the case. Is that an another civil rights violation for the guys? Lie its not their fault, the DA screwed up.

Anonymous said...

Cy, completely disgusted with her wretched little husband, vows to never let him do it on a gurney again.

Anonymous said...

Cochise's Tortilla said:

The general rule under U.S. law is that "ignorance of the law or a mistake of law is no defense to criminal prosecution." See Cheek v. United States, 498 U.S. 192 (1991). Wikepedia. I do not think that is a new cocnept. You might be confusing the mens rea idea with the general problem of overcriminalization. Overcriminalization leads to unfairness, among other things, because it leads to citizens committing crimes without knowing or suspecting that their conduct has been made unlawful. Nevertheless, those citizens will have the requisite mens rea if they merely intend to commit the act that has been criminalized, regardless of whether they knew the act was a crime.

Indeed. Moreover, a reasonable person is going to know, in many cases, that their actions are wrong, especially if they hurt someone.

And while it might seem foolish to criminalize the behavior of two hormone charged young people, parents want their daughters protected from those evil males who will fuck anything that moves, err, where's my meds.

Anonymous said...

Let's face it, even a racist, Duke hating, whitey hating Durham jury would have a hard time convicting these boys.

How is she going to account for saying Kim helped in her rape and was torn apart from her?

How is she going to account for being sure about penisis for 10 months and then unsure?

How is she going to account for why no DNA from any players was found in her oral swab but DNA from an unindentified male was found there?

How is she going to explain her level 10 pain, not being able to walk and yet on the strip pole?

How is she going to explain that she was sure Reade orally raped her and ejaculated in her mouth and now she is sure he never touched her?

How is she going to explain, in her Dec. 20 story, what she was doing at the house for an hour after her 'rape'? Why she danced after her 'rape'? How to explain the phone calls made during her rape, especially the one asking for directions when now she says she was already at the house??

For that matter, how is she going to explain the change in the time of the 'rape'?

I firmly believe the defense has the information about her to prove she was working as a prostitute and I also believe that evidence would have to be admitted since it would go to show a reason to lie to police.

Honestly, I have to wonder if even Cash Michaels himself would be able to pretend that 'something' happened to this liar in a trial.

Anonymous said...

Peter Woods appears to have both a jock (in lacrosse) and a heavy weight scholar at Harvard College.

What, you mean that Peter Woods is a raging polygamist homosexual?

Sitting Bull's Tortilla.

Anonymous said...

Whenever I start to feel sorry for Nifong, I remember the taxi driver. How Nifong, Wilson and the DPD handled that is INDEED the work of people who must be held accountable.

Anonymous said...

Reality Check:
Jeffery Toobin's New Yorker article "Killer Instincts" describes how a Pima County [AZ] prosecutor fabricated evidence to secure death-row convictions. Ken Peasley was disbarred, and the Arizona Supreme Court noted that his actions "could not have been more harmful to the justice system." The defense attorney who brought the charges against Peasley was rewarded for his efforts by being shunned by the Tucson legal community and Peasely is now collecting his pension and waiting out his time so that he can reapply to the bar in four years. Will the NC legal community treat Nifong any differently?

Anonymous said...

My biggest fear is that when the AG drops the charges they will give Nifong some cover and use language that indicates a rape 'might' or 'could' have occured, but just cannot be proven, rather than say truthfully the evidence supports the view that no crime whatsoever took place.

If the AG gives Nifong that kind of cover then the bar could easily let him resign give him a sanction and close the door on the ugly mess hoping that no one takes the step of suing the city and putting the two lying detectives on the stand to commit perjury.

Anonymous said...

Anybody that hasn't seen this article on ESPN needs to read this article:

Outrageous Injustice: Genarlow Wilson, Honor Student and Football Star Had Consensual Sex With a Fellow Teenager. What Happenned to Him Next Was a Crime.

The south needs a major wake up call!

Anonymous said...

12:23 AM
"is it possible to feel some pity for this man?

Perhaps you fail to appreciate the full devastation of the False Accusation.

For here, you can invent any crime, then point your finger at anyone.

Now, add a willing local Police Department. These exist, trust me. They really don't care that much.

From there, enjoy the ride, for at most, you might face a misdemeanor wrist slap.

You, fellow citizen, possess extreme power at your fingertips. The only obstacles are your conscience, expensive-but-worth-every-penny defense attorneys, and with some great luck, an ethical prosecutor.

As a prosecutor, Nifong committed crimes that threaten you, me, and everyone praying for protections from the Criminal "Justice" industry. The False Accusation is the Big Kahuna that undermines everything.

My pity is extended to all innocent people wrongly accused, tried, incarcerated and/or financially ruined. Mike Nifong will be treated royally with all the due process that he is still criminally denying 3 innocent individuals.

Anonymous said...

I am sick of hearing about this 'injustice'

The kid and his lawyer knew he had legally commited the crime, whether or not we or anyone agrees that consensual sex between teenagers should be a crime.

He and his lawywer gambled on jury nullification and they lost. This young man is also no paragon of virtue. Does he deserve to be in jail for 10 years? No. But it is his own fault for not taking the plea agreement that was offered him since he is guilty of the crime and his lawyer knew the statute however wrongly called for mandatory 10 years.

Please get over it or take it to another blog.

Anonymous said...


"Commandment 9" would be the better name. That's the 'shalt not bear false witness' one...

Anonymous said...

Agree to the plea agreement, and label yourself as a pedophile for the rest of your life... easier said than done

Anonymous said...

12:32 - I agree that this is a different form of injustice entirely than what has taken place in the Duke case, but a fundamental principle of our criminal justice system is to seek justice. And we lose confidence in the system when justice is not done. And while I agree Mr. Wilson's case is not a good candidate for this board, I do think that most principled people would concede that 10 years in jail for a teenage sexcapade is out of line.

Anonymous said...

The other boys did it and got on with their lives.

And it's also worth remembering that the 17 year old girl at that 'party' alleged gang rape, not consensual sex, though she did not win her case...because of course she voluntarily went with the guys and got herself drunk...

Sorry, I am not buying what you are selling on this boy. His lawyer gave him bad advice and he's paying for it. Don't blame the DA, this was no malicious prosecution, this was a disgusting group sex/gang rape/gang bang episode that anyone would be utterly ashamed to have participated in, the DA prosecuted his case beccause quite frankly, given the Georgia statute at the time, it was a slam dunk win.

Anonymous said...


I agree, but the blame for that lies with the Georgia legislature, not the district attorney that prosecuted the case.

Mr. Wilson was offered a good plea deal and he rejected it. The fact that he clearly was guilty under the statute, however ridiculous it was, was crystal clear.

I personally think statuory rape charges when the minor clearly says the sex was consensual not coerced and the minor is 15 or older are a waste of the taxpayers money. I would much rather see real, forcible rapes prosecuted.

But, it doesn't change the fact that Mr. Wilson and his lawyer knew he was guilty under the law since all that had to be proven was that the sex act occured for him to be guilty, consent was irrelevant from the legal perspective. Like I said, he gambled, he lost. He's paying now for his stupidity.

Anonymous said...

12:47: "this was no malicious prosecution, this was a disgusting group sex/gang rape/gang bang episode that anyone would be utterly ashamed to have participated in"

You sound like people who defend the Duke accuser by saying that throwing a team party, allowing underage drinking, and hiring two stippers was a disgusting act - so they deserve what they got.

Anonymous said...

In that case the statue is at error

Anonymous said...

One of the girls said she was gang raped, the boys said it was consensual, she said she was too intoxicated to resist.

There is NO COMPARISSON between the admitted group sex and alleged gang rape that went on at Mr. Wilson's party and the Duke party.

No one had sex with the stripper, so the two cases cannot be compared.

The 17 year old girl said and says she did not consent to group sex or sex with anyone, no one denied they had sex with her, only that she consented.

There is no comparison to hiring a stripper that you don't touch, rape or have sex with and having group sex with a 15 year old and having group sex with an allegedly passed out 17 year old.

None. Zero. move on

Anonymous said...

I'd appreciate it if people would please stop referring to Nifong as the devil. He's a run-of-the-mill thug, just like his fair Precious.

1 reason Durham has Nifong is the low pay for DAs. If the pay were more substantial, perhaps Durham could be blessed with someone with more intelligence and integrity.

Needless to say, it's also true that stupid criminals like Precious and Nifong are indeed stupid.


bill anderson said...

I just read through the Bar's compliant again, and it is even more devastating than I had originally thought. The real problem for Nifong is that his false statements are in writing, and they definitely conflict with established court documents.

There are transcripts made for each of the hearings, so Nifong cannot allege that something was said in those hearings that was not said. Yet, that is what he has done.

My sense is that the committee is going to recommend he be disbarred. I really cannot imagine anything else being the case. The original complaint must just have gained him a reprimand, but the DNA business says that the guy is dirty, and everyone knows it.

I also found it interesting that the Bar's complaint attempts to undermine the indictments themselves. That is significant in that the lawyers of the state are saying the very charges against the young men are bogus. That will give the AG more cover to drop everything, I believe.

Anonymous said...

I think there is no question the AG will drop all charges.

Anonymous said...

How much does a N.C. D.A. make a year? How does is pension structured?

Anonymous said...

I can't see how Nifong can get around hiding exculpatory evidence since Meehan already has thrown him under the bus by saying under oath that he told Nifong of ALL the results and that they agreed together to omit those results from the report.

But, I have learned never to under estimate the lengths that Mike Nifong will go to, or the level of ridiculousness he will embrace. His response to the bar complaint should be very excellent fiction.

Anonymous said...

4:27 Joe Bingham

So, you won't attend Duke because of the administration.

When do you enroll at Slippery Rock Teachers College?


Anonymous said...

"I'd appreciate it if people would please stop referring to Nifong as the devil."

I think its fair to call Nifong the devil, he did put the lacrosse players & families through a living hell

Anonymous said...

Amateurs built the ark. Professionals built the Titanic.
I want Nifong to go down with his ship.

huesofblue said...


Spending 2 (and possibly 10) years in jail for something that shouldn’t even be a crime is a grave injustice. The ESPN article says:

“But because of an archaic Georgia law, it was a misdemeanor for teenagers less than three years apart to have sexual intercourse, but a felony for the same kids to have oral sex.”

The prosecutor’s offer of a five-year plea to a felony sex crime was ridiculous. Offering a plea to the misdemeanor described above would have made loads more sense. I agree that the kid took a gamble and lost, but the injustice is that he had to take that gamble to begin with.

Prosecutors have discretion for a reason, and I think this Georgia prosecutor abused his as surely as Mike Nifong. He tried these kids for rape when they had video proving it was consensual! if that’s not Nifongian behavior I don’t know what is. The bullsh*t charge that this kid is in jail for is the equivalent of the trumped up kidnapping charge in the Duke case. It would be like the special prosecutor saying, “there’s no evidence of rape or sexual assault, but carrying her back to the car against he will meets the technical definition of kidnapping, so we’re going to prosecute them and offer a 5 year plea deal.” Would you tell the Duke kids to take the plea?

Anonymous said...

Thank you'all for your comments on my post. I am sorry to say, however, that I am not courageous enough to reveal more about my identity: I have children to feed, and there are plenty of radicals at my present university who would be happy to destroy my career.

Peter Wood is an exception in many ways. He is no postmodernist, and on many issues he opposes the 88.

Not all Duke marxists signed the letters. I'm not sure if that was because they have a modicum of integrity or whether it was due to the rifts that exist within the academic far-left. Some classical marxists focus on class rather than race and gender and hence tend to disdain the multiculturalist postmodernists.

Nothing excuses the behavior of the 88. But virtually ALL Duke faculty members owe a big apology. What excuses them? Like me, many simply lack the courage. The enemy, after all, is both powerful (on campus) and extreme vindictive.

Duke's Frederic Jameson has written that Mao's big mistake was to rein in the Red Guards before they could enact the "ultimate consequences" of the Cultural Revolution. Think about that position in light of what the Red Guards actually did to politically incorrect Chinese professors.

Anti-Leftist Liberal

jim said...

And now for something completely different.

And maybe not.

I find the "out of the frying pan and into the fire" decision-making by Nifong to possibly parallel that of General Galtieri (military ruler of Argentina) when he elected to invade the Falklands in 1982. (Yes, okay, so I'm a history nerd to some extent!)

Galtieri was beset by a number of internal domestic issues and saw seizing the Falklands (Las Malvinas to them) as a sure way to gain popular support.

It worked. He was a hero.

Until Britain took them back.


- resigned three days later,

- served three years in prison for military incompetence, and

- with the loss of his ability to control little things like investigations, was later arrested for crimes while in power. (He would die before trial)

(Sci-fi buffs may also recall the premise of Weber's "The Short Victorious War")

Anonymous said...

It was statutory rape under Georgia law at the time period.

Maybe the prosecutor believed the 17 year old girl WAS gang raped, and maybe he believed that a drunk 15 year old girl was not LEGALLY CAPABLE of giving consent to perform oral sex on mulitple boys.

There is again, for the last time, no comparing a case where the law was clearly broken, where no one disputes that sex took place, and where a credible allegation of gang rape was made and the Duke case where there isn't an iota of evidence that any sex of any kind, legal or illegal, took place.

Anonymous said...

Resident Attorneys--------HELP!

Can we analyze what Nifong did?

1. Not reporting exculpatory DNA results
2. Entering into a conspiracy with Meehan to conceal those results
3. Intentionally violating the boys' constitutional rights in the lineup procedure
4. Publicly prejudging the boys
5. Failing to listen to valid defense attorney statements
6. Not bothering to interview an obviously deranged complainant

Counsel, you add all this up, and what do you get? I know what the sum is.

The sum is that this scumbag tried to destroy these young men.

And you guys are talking about Bar sanctions.

Excuse me while I barf!

Nifong should be going to jail for a long time for his vicious muggings.

Why isn't he?

Roman Polanski

Anonymous said...

Nifong's comment via his mouthpiece today is that he could not interview the accuser due to pregnancy complications.

Why do I think that may be baloney as well. D-I-W may want to look into that assertion.

I am sure his only regret is that he did not plant physical evidence. He planted everything else.

Anonymous said...

What's the deal on the paternity test?

I assume they will legally only be able to match it up against the three players DNA, and not that of her boyfriend or any of the other four male DNA samples they have on file.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 265   Newer› Newest»