Friday, January 12, 2007

The Theater of the Absurd

The enormity of the attempted frame was exceeded only by its blatant nature. Less than a day after defense attorneys revealed the full story on which Nifong has now based his case, it’s worth considering some of the loose ends that the frame either failed to fit or ignored entirely.

1.) “No Name” Finnerty

One of the most bizarre aspects of the new story is the assertion that Collin Finnerty did not match any of the pseudonyms the accuser alleged that her attackers used. In the myriad, mutually contradictory tales she thus far has told, she’s never made such a claim.

In fact, however, a discrepancy exists between Investigator Linwood Wilson’s written “notes” and the typed report that he presented. As page 6 of the defense motion reveals, Wilson has the following handwritten item in his notes: “Matt=Finnerty.” In his typed report, Wilson excluded this item.

Why this inherently absurd claim? It’s not hard to discern. Here’s the accuser’s sole description of “Matt,” from her March 16 interview with Himan: “heavyset, short hair cut, 260-270.”

Many descriptions could be made of Finnerty—tall, lanky, quiet, a New Yorker, freckled, etc. But even Nifong couldn’t sell a description of Finnerty as “heavyset” and between 260 and 270 pounds. Better, it seems Nifong and Wilson decided, to have him be Collin “No Name” Finnerty.

Of course, if Finnerty is neither Brett, nor Adam, nor Matt—the three people the accuser alleges did things to her—how can he still be indicted?

2.) What happened between 12.00 and around 12.50?

In the new, Nifongian, version of events, the “attack” had concluded by midnight. Yet every piece of evidence in this case suggests that the two dancers departed the house sometime between 12.45 and 12.50am. What occurred during this 45-to-50 minute period?

Nifong doesn’t say. Apparently, his argument is that we all should just forget about this inconvenient fact.

3.) What of the Photos and the Cell-phone Records?

There’s still no way of determining how the accuser, 265 days after the fact, suddenly and for the first time remembered specific times from the evening in question—i.e, that the “rape” occurred at 11.40pm.

The implicit assertion by Nifong—since he considered the accuser’s new version of events as credible enough to sustain sexual assault and kidnapping charges—is that the time on the time-stamped photos was altered.

Leave aside, for a moment, the absurdity of this argument: that the player who took the photos (and at least one player whose watch was photographed) altered the time of the photos before anyone knew what the case timeline would be; and that some of the state’s leading defense attorneys have asserted to the court that the photos are accurate.

Let’s take Nifong’s version of the “truth” at face value. As the defense motion points out, to do so, you’d have to believe that the accuser was chatting on the phone as she performed her dance and as she “fled” to the car. Yet we have photos of the dance and its immediate aftermath—and the accuser isn’t on the phone.

How does the “minister of justice” interpret the discrepancy between the accuser’s latest version of events and the cellphone records/photos? Nifong doesn’t say. Apparently, his argument is that we all should just forget about this inconvenient fact.

4.) What of Jason Bissey?

In the new, Nifongian version of events, Jason Bissey, the next-door neighbor who by his own account bitterly disliked the lacrosse players, gave false testimony on their behalf. Before anyone knew what specific times would be important to establish the alibis of those Nifong targeted, Bissey gave a statement to police. His statement corresponded almost exactly with the timeline offered by Kim Roberts, the lacrosse players, and all available electronic evidence. Bissey stated:

At approximately 11:50 p.m., I saw from porch that a car had been stopped directly in front of 610, and noted that two young women, both appearing to be African-American, were walking from the direction of the car and proceeding to the back-yard entrance of 610. One of the two [the accuser] was dressed in an extremely short tan skirt and was wearing high heels. Her hair was pinned up above her ears. The other women was more conservatively dressed in pants and a sweater or blouse of some sort, and her hair was shoulder-length and curly. The two women briefly spoke with one of the men who was in the back yard . . . At this point no one was outside of 610 besides the two young women . . .

I saw the women enter 610 together. After a moment, I remember quite specifically noting that it was Midnight. The reason I know it was Midnight is because I looked at my cell phone and noted the time. At approximately 12:05 a.m. on Tuesday, I re-entered by house and took a shower . . . [Later,] I noted that the skimpily dressed women had exited the car, saying something to the effect that she would go back into 610 to retrieve her shoe. She seemed agitated, but not hysterical. I left the front door open so that I could hear if the situation flared up again. I would estimate that the young women left the car at around 12:30am.

In an interview with the New York Times that first appeared last night, Bissey reiterated his position, asserting, “I’m absolutely certain. I had looked at my cellphone, and I was sure they had gone into the house at 12. I had assumed that’s when they first got there. But I can’t say for sure that was the first time they showed up. It seemed to me that it was. They had been talking calmly, and it seemed to me they were just fine.” Bissey gave no indication that anyone from the Nifong office had spoken to him to double-check regarding the veracity of the accuser's latest new version of events.

How does the “minister of justice” interpret Bissey’s statement? Nifong doesn’t say. Apparently, his argument is that we all should just forget about this inconvenient fact.

5.) What Happened to the Shoe?

Liestoppers perceptively noticed another bizarre element of the new version of events. Shown a photo of herself at the door, the accuser now claims that this photo took place at the time of her arrival (which, in the new version and contrary to all available evidence, she states came at around 11.10).

Before constructing this story, Linwood Wilson appears not to have looked closely enough at the photo, since the accuser was shoeless. So, in the new version of events, the accuser traveled to the party wearing only one shoe.

Why, then, did she seek later on in the evening to return to the house to find her shoe--an event noticed by both Bissey and Kim Roberts? Nifong doesn’t say. Apparently, his argument is that we all should just forget about this inconvenient fact.

6.) Best of the Fray

The response yesterday to the motion triggered some superb comments—some funny, some serious, all fully cognizant of the extent of the farce the Linwood Wilson-orchestrated statement reveals. Among the best of the comments from DIW readers:

You would think after all of the lies that have come out of Durham during the last 10 months, that nothing would surprise me. Yet, I read this and still find myself astounded by the gall of this DA. Does he think we are all idiots? This "new" statement is simply absurd!! Honestly, has he lost his mind? It would be laughable if it didn't involve these three men's lives and make a mockery out of the entire American justice system.

---------

I think the damages owed to the players just went up by a few million.

---------

And, my personal favorite:

The Accuser was witnessed entering Sesame Street at approximately 11:40 where (according to her testimony) she was immediately raped by Mr. Cookie Monster, Mr. Snuffleupagus and Mr. The Grouch.

In later statements the Accuser changed her statements and named Mr. von Count, Mr. Elmo and Mr. Bert (no last name given) to reflect the fact that no one can see Mr. Snuffleupagus, the lack of cookie evidence on the scene and the obvious preference of rectal intrusion by one of the defendants.

7.) Nifong's Attorney

Nifong’s trial before the Disciplinary Hearing Committee is currently scheduled for May 11. According to WRAL, he has hired an attorney named David Freedman of Winston-Salem.

As Friends of Duke's Jason Trumpbour has pointed out, Nifong's own attorney described him as behaving in an unethical fashion, on April 19. Appearing on the Abrams Report, Freedman asserted,

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

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

Instead, he listened to the evidence. He let everyone be interviewed. We were all able to meet in a more congenial fashion and after a careful determination they determined that there was no charges that needed to be brought. Nobody was hurt. Nobody's face was plastered all over the front of “USA Today”...

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

Durham is Wonderland.

145 comments:

Anonymous said...

KC - Just curious, from a fan.

Is there some reason why so many of your consistenly brilliant posts are time-stamped at exactly 12:01?

KC Johnson said...

I figure the timing of the daily posts can provide some consistency to an otherwise chaotic case . . .

Anonymous said...

Is that true about Bert?

KC Johnson said...

Ask Ernie.

Anonymous said...

KC: This has risen to subornation of perjury. Nifong would have to absolutely crazy to put this woman on the stand and to actually ask her questions. If he thinks he has problem with NC Bar Counsel now, he hasn't seen anything yet. The Judge may pull the plug just to save him from himself.

Any thoughts?

-Esquire-
-Maryland-

Anonymous said...

Reading Wilson's typed notes on the WRAL site, I was astounded that he posed a mere 13 questions after her incredible tale. I was also mesmerized at how a woman can so easily and graphically describe what she alleges happened to her. It reads like she is speaking from notes on a card. You'll have to read it for yourself because I can't bring myself to type it.
PS If you still enjoy Sesame Street, you're too young to read it.

Anonymous said...

A repost from the other thread to start the day in fine fashion
--------------
GPrestonian said...
I'll take 'Irony' for $100, Alex

Regarding defendant Nifong's recently-hired attorney -

From Jason T on LS:

"How ironic. David Freedman was a guest on MSNBC early on and was critical of Nifong's conduct in general and his extrajudicial statements in particular:"

DAVID FREEDMAN, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, that everything has been mishandled from the start. You had a district attorney coming out and making potentially unethical statements, saying he believed a crime occurred, which he should not do. He should not be commenting on the evidence. He took an adversarial position from the start.

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

Instead, he listened to the evidence. He let everyone be interviewed. We were all able to meet in a more congenial fashion and after a careful determination they determined that there was no charges that needed to be brought. Nobody was hurt. Nobody's face was plastered all over the front of “USA Today”...

Anonymous said...

JLS says....

This story is so clearly a product of Nifong and his faux Christian investigator that it almost is funny to read people attribute it to Mangum. What I can not figure out for sure what they think they are going to get out of it?

1. Are they planning to use it to discredit Mangum and drop the charges.

2. Is the claim that Seligmann did not specifically do anything to her an attempt to turn him to testify against Evans and Finnerty in exchange for dropping the charges against him? [These fools are dumb enough to think they might get this.]

3. Or do they really believe such a transparently fake story to fit the known facts is going to save them? And were they so stupid that they did not think that the defense had save anything back like Seligmann's cell phone records to throw this time line out?

What an utter bunch of morons Nifong and his gang are.

wayne fontes said...

I would have thought that somewhere during his three hour interview with the NYT Nifong might have mentioned that precious had completely changed her story. I can only assume that he was hoping to get to the JAN 2 swearing in before the news broke.

Just in Mickey hired a lawyer.

GPrestonian said...

12:10am Anon:

Thanks, I had considered re-posting it here.

Link to Freedman's comments:

'The Abrams Report' for April 19

Anonymous said...

if the case went to trial would the accuser get up and perjure herself with iteration x of the lie? If so, who/ how can she be prosecuted? I for one would like to see that play out so she can go to jail.

texasyank said...

Please, please, PLEASE check out Duff Wilson's latest piece in the Times. This is the very definition of a "row-back": updating an earlier account with evidence one chose to ignore earlier, with no admission one chose to ignore said evidence.

Duff's piece gives great prominence to Reade's ironclad alibi: the photos, timestamps, witnesses, etc. Though Duff summarizes FOUR different pieces of exculpatory evidence in one throwaway sentence, he at least makes reference. Fair enough . . .

Until one considers the Great Thumbsucking, Navel-gazing, We-Settle-It-All-Here piece in the Times some months ago, which made no mention of the same evidence that was easily at hand, that in fact the defense attorneys were screaming for anyone to consider, since Nifong wouldn't.

When pressed in late summer by Stuart Taylor from Slate, Duff admitted, yeah, yeah, it might have been better to "throw in" those pieces of exculpatory information (throw in? throw in? Are you f&*^ing kidding me?). When I read Taylor's account, I moved on a swivel. Oh my, I thought. McMartin II, Tawana II, Scottsboro II.

So now Duff Wilson wants to make a full account. Thanks but no thanks.

Anonymous said...

Bill A...Please tell us the lawyer is Boulton or Woody.

chris said...

I thought innocent people didn't need attorneys. I guess we now know why you hired a defense attorney, at least you're true to your word with that statement.

Anonymous said...

JLS says...

re: 12:25

To me it is most important that Nifong pay a huge price. He is the DA. We should expect more from our DAs than hookers.

Anonymous said...

JLS says....

re 12:29

WRAL's site says: "He [Nifong] has hired Winston-Salem attorney David Freedman to defend him. Freedman has represented other attorneys in State Bar matters."

Anonymous said...

First of all, this is one of the best blogs I've ever read. I can't make it through my work day without checking in.

The missing shoe problem that someone at LS noticed really shows how the power of many can outweight the ignorance of a few.

The last people holding this conspiracy to frame the LAX 3 don't have nearly the resources (or the truth more importantly) to match the thousands who have joined this crusade for their freedom. There is no way Linwood or Nifong or their team would have ever noticed the missing shoe detail to further the hoax.

I think ultimately one of the many things you'll be able to write about in your book KC, will be the incredible resources a blog can summon up for a cause that crosses across many ideological barriers in the cause of justice.

GPrestonian said...

12:32 JLS:

'We should expect more from our DAs than hookers."

Is Nifong handing out hookers now?

Anonymous said...

Why won't the feds act now?

Anonymous said...

OMG - just used the link to the April 20th interview on Adams Report - Nifong lifted the entire statement from Susan Filan. She states " could have been seven minutes - when something realy awful happens to you and etc,etc. Check it out- Nifong did not even give her credit.What a dirt ball.

Michael said...

re: 12:06

The FA is claiming that the object was Rubber Duckie.

I've read about the awesome power of the state but at the moment, we're seeing the awesome power of the bloggers. When you have hundreds or thousands of eyeballs looking at every piece of evidence, every document; when you have the collective memories of huge numbers of people and the huge memory of the internet, it's a pretty awesome force when it is focused.

That piece on the shoe is brilliant. I saw the picture earlier today but I didn't understand what it was showing.

You have three or four people trying to concoct a story without all of the defense evidence and it gets ripped to shreds within an hour of becoming public on the internet. It's like a massive parallel processing effort to find the inconsistencies.

I have a feeling that Nifong
doesn't understand the Blog shadow movement and that he wonders why his crap gets desconstructed so quickly. The media clearly isn't smart enough to do this. So who is putting this stuff out there?

Anonymous said...

JLS says....

gprestonian, there was that 1996 investigation of prostitution in he DPD??? But no I just think we should expect more of certain people than others in society.

Anonymous said...

Link is at 12;24AM under Abrams report of Aprtil 19th - Can kSusan sue him for quoting her without permission?

Anonymous said...

Finnerty:
Doesn't fit description
Isn't picked from lineup till 3rd try
No DNA Found (FA states no condoms were used)
Has alibi
FA doesn't know for sure that she was assaulted with a penis because
"she could not see it..."
If she couldn't see WHAT it was that assaulted her, how did she see WHO it was? How is it that Finnerty is blamed when she couldn't see who or what it was?
The FA states Dave is behind her and the next thing she says is Dave ejaculated in her face...either she's a contortionist or she can't tell the difference between her a-- and her face

Chicago said...

What amazes me is that so many people in Nifong's office continue to be willing to fall on their sword for him. Gottlieb, Meehan, Linwood Wilson....ALL of them seem to have no problem at all contributing to this injustice. Does anyone in that office have any ethics at all? Why do all these people enable him? Does no one challenge him? Are they all afraid of him? Are they all going to turn on him at once? I am amazed no one from Nifong's office has come forward or spoken out. Perhaps some have done things behind closed doors we will find out about in time. However, for now it seems like he has a whole army of people in his office more than willing to hide the truth.

I wonder if many of them live paycheck to paycheck and can not afford to be unemployed for even a day. That is very sad.

I can only imagine the looks they give each other as he walks by and the tension in that office when he is around.

Blog Hooligan said...

KC Johnson said...

Ask Ernie.

12:06 AM


Best post ever.

GPrestonian said...

12:50am Anon:

Are you sure Filan said it first? When did defendant Nifong back away from the original rape time by claiming it could have been shorter>

Anonymous said...

Everyone is reacting just as Nifong/Liefong/Diphthong/Far Gone/So Wrong/SoonToBeLongGOne...

He must want the case thrown out based on the obvious problems with the many versions of the AV/FA's story...

Before he is removed from the case and the total lack of evidence exposes the hoax as all of his making ...

Gunslinger said...

"Nifong’s trial before the Disciplinary Hearing Committee is currently scheduled for May 11. According to WRAL, he has hired an attorney named David Freeman of Winston-Salem."

Well, after all, needless consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.

Anonymous said...

JLS says...

Re: Chicago

Isn't it amazing that no one wants to blow the whistler on this clown. I guess they see the case coming apart anyway and would hate to be fire the last week before he is gone.

Of course we can hope that someone in Nifong's office or the DPD is talking to the Justice department. Meehan has apparently decided not to go down with the bad ship Nifong and is talking, I just hope to authorities.

Anonymous said...

"I wonder if many of them live paycheck to paycheck and can not afford to be unemployed for even a day. That is very sad."



A bit elitist, no?

Butt kissing is a fact of life to folks living paycheck-to-paycheck with no immediately obvious means of replacing the twice-weekly paycheck.

Fortunately, most such Americans are not forced to kiss ass to an immoral, evil man willing to imprison innocent citizens to retain his pension.

But your snotty condescension is duly noted.

Anonymous said...

What could worse for Nifong than to have someone(e.g. the judge or the governor) take him off the case?

New eyes come in a see he has zippo, ziltch, nada...

The shit will fly.

But what if the court says no case with no lineup. This AV does not have the credibility to make the ID.

Nifong can still pretentd he was just doing his best to represent a citizen's complaint against the duke 3...

A retire, happily ever after.... or become a judge.

Anonymous said...

1:04AM Read it for yourself 12:24AM has a link to the Adams report transcript of April 19 - original statement of Filan. Nifong said it to the judge in court at the September hearing. Remember he asked the judge to take offical note "that when something really awful happens to you, etc, etc".

Chicago said...

Snyone else notice that all the contact info has been pulled off of Linwood Wilson's website for his singing quartet. Funny.

GPrestonian said...

12:50 & 1:36am Anon:

"Nifong lifted the entire statement from Susan Filan. She states " could have been seven minutes - when something realy awful happens to you and etc,etc."

Check it out

Anonymous said...

Well, I am pleased to announce
40th Anniversary TOUR
Spokesmen In Concert

Linwood Wilson singing Bass in his next appearance

February 11 Wake Forest, NC 5:00 PM Private Dinner

Spokesmen In Concert
Woodland Baptist Church map
5:00 Valentine Dinner - sponsored by Keenagers

Woodland Baptist Church
190 Woodland Church Road
Wake Forest, NC 27587

Get your Tickets early! Maybe Linwood will give us a few hints on interviewing?

Anonymous said...

1:04 Just realized you are also 12:24 - read the entire transcript of the show - not just freeman.

Newyorkstateofmind said...

Maryland Esquire: Interesting angle your thoughts on the potential for Nifong to be considered to be suborning perjury should he put CGM on the stand. The "knowingly" element to suborning (in this case, on the part of Nifong) may prove difficult to show, legally anyway, as absurd as that may sound (in the real world of Nifong's machinations, it wouldn't surprise me if he has CGM memorizing lines of potential testimony with cue cards). The judge may end up pulling the plug on Nifong's direct examination of CGM if CGM starts to mix up her stories, or testify in such a way that there is no clear narrative at all. Or, more typically, the judge may let her rant on, however inconsistent her statements may be, under the theory that the jury can always discount her veracity.

The biggest risk to Nifong from CGM I believe still is that she will break down on the stand, and tell the judge, the court, the world, that Nifong coached her and pushed her through this whole nonsense ever since the election. His license will be toast, and he may even be looking at jail time (richly deserved I should say).

In any case, I still don't see this case going to a jury (and I believe Nifong himself is one of the parties who definitely does not want to see CGM actually on the witness stand testifying); don't think it's going to survive the 2/5 motion to exclude the line-up.

Anonymous said...

I'm wondering, as I lurk here in Wonderland:

1.Do you have to be a blogger to qualify as a "blog hooligan?"

2.Can you be a "blog hooligan" if you just lurk around on a blog without posting comments?

3.What if you post in the comments section of a blog once every month or two? Is that enough to be "blog hooligan?"

4.Must you be associated with a blog that discusses/dissects/critiques aspects of the lacrosse case to be a "blog hooligan?"

5.How about if you lurk on blogs without posting on them but write letters to Gonzales, Brodhead, Steele, Burness, etc etc etc., calling for accountability? Are you then a Hooligan?

"Hoping to be Hooligan"

"Want to be Hip Hooligan"

"What does it take.....to be a Hooligan?"

GPrestionian said...

1:42am Anon:

Thanks, I did. Good catch!! I was concentrating on Freedman's comments.

See my 1:38am also.

Anonymous said...

According to FA, Reade did not commit any sexual acts at all, therefore, Reade could not have been ADAM or MATT at the time FA claims she was sexually assaulted.

Finnerty had no name, so he could not have been MATT at the time FA claims she was sexually assaulted

Dave would have had to be DAN, ADAM, MATT & BRETT committing 2 and sometimes 3 rapes (depending on her story)as 4 different men since she describes what each did at the time of her sexual assault
And how much time did he have to do all of this on his own and leave no signs of DNA?

Michael said...

The FA seems to have a great memory. Perhaps she could describe what the defendents were wearing
that night.

Anonymous said...

at 42, I still enjoy Sesame Street and even with my well below average IQ, I can still tell you that Linwood's "notes" are absolute bullsh!t

Anonymous said...

12:49 AM said...

Why won't the feds act now?


For that matter why is the NC bar and Judge Smith dragging their feet? This case should have been over after the first DNA test came back negative. The longer they let Nifong get away with this the more they are part of the problem.

Newyorkstateofmind said...

Love all the "Power to Bloggers" acclaim. KC's construction of this site as a freewheeling forum where anonymity is fine and only the crudest posts get removed has made this the most powerful blog I have ever been associated with. As several bloggers have noted, we ourselves have pieced together so many of the absurdities and inconsistencies to this circus-cum-case, and at this point regardless of what spin various MSM outlets deign to put on the latest events, we all know the most detailed and cogent analysis of what is going on can be found here, supplemented by other blogs and even some MSM articles, which with the power of web linking and cutting and pasting we can make available to readers here in any case.

There is a ratings of nations I saw online sometime ago by the relative freedom of their Internets for open-ended inquiries like this one. The US is actually not no. 1 worldwide, but we are among the top group.

May we all work toward keeping this country free of the sort of censorship which Internet users in Britain and even Canada face, where bloggers who engage in discussions such as these find their sites shut down, and some of their bloggers even subject to criminal charges, for violating various thought-crime statutes a la "racial harmony laws," which forbid utterances or words exchanged in any forum (i.e., pretty much anywhere outside your bedroom with your windows closed) where such words may incite "racial animus."

http://www.bc.edu/schools/
law/lawreviews/meta-elements/
journals/bctwj/23_2/01_TXT.htm

See above site for an idea of what cutting-edge leftists have in mind when they decide to censure speech on the Internet; here, their goal is simply to shut down the show The Sopranos.

Brave New World is coming...but it is not here yet...and I intend to enjoy my blogging in the meantime.

GPrestonian said...

2:27am Newyorkstateofmind:

...circus-cum-case..."

No pun intended...

Newyorkstateofmind said...

12:49 and 2:27: This case is testament to just how powerful individual prosecutors are. Once they get a grand jury indictment (the only meaningful check by the way to preventing this sort of railroading), they have tremendous pre-trial leeway, as this case shows. And even without meaningful evidence (the McMartin preschool case comes to mind), prosecutors sometimes can still talk judges into allowing their case to go forward, beating back motions to dismiss or supress evidence on the part of defense attorneys.

Some states, such as California, have speedy trial guarantees, under which for example, a given trial may need to be held within 60 days of a defendant's arraignment. Anyone know what the NC statute is in this area? Nifong's year-long pretrial maneuvers clearly violate any meaningful commitment to these defendants getting a speedy trial. The rationale for speedy trials is among other things, that if the prosecution really doesn't have a case, then at least the defendants can move on with their lives once the case implodes in the pre-trial phase. Here, the Duke Three will have waited almost 10 months to get their lives moving away from this atrocity, and that's assuming they get a case dismissal shortly afte 2/5.

Newyorkstateofmind said...

1:48 your "blog hooligan" riff was quite entertaining.

Anonymous said...

to be honest i was afraid these boys might fry
have to accept 3 to 5
but after seeing the latest
omg
these people in durham are stupid
if they think this will fly
even the most nasty nifong supporters
are falling back on the
now they know
ONLY A LITTLE
what black people face
so im certain about the lacrosse boys
what im fearful is groups like the naacp
leaving behind hard fought gains
like da and police accountabilty
and change of venue in racial polorized cases
that is a change for the worse
but it intense my friends
terrorism
child molestation
rape
if a person or persons charged with these crimes
have to be treated differant?

TC said...

Just a SWAG, but I'd bet that lifong is going to be depending on the defense to destroy this lying stripper on the 5th!

The judge dismisses all charges and Lifong actually thinks he will be protected and exonerated!

If lifong aint already toast, I predict the first tar, feathering and being run out of town on a rail in the last 100 yrs.

Since it will be happening to at least one rich white male, the community should be very happy!

Anonymous said...

Who is the ADA on the case with Nifong.


That person needs to be held accountable.

Gregory said...

Chicago & Anonymous at 3:34:

If an attorney in my jurisdiction is aware of another attorney's violation of laws or ethical rules, and that attorney does not report it, they are, themselves, in violation of ethical rules! For not reporting the ethical violation!

Doesn't North Carolina have a similar practice or ethical rule? It is like bystander/Good Samaritan law, as it places an emphasis on policing the profession on people who have the greatest opportunity to detect violations.

In the Duke Frame-up, there is certainly a moral obligation to report violations, but I don't know if there is any written-down ethical obligation. Anyone?

If North Carolina does not have such a practice or rule, then it is another case of the "gottas."

North Carolina has gotta change its Grand Jury procedures.

North Carolina has gotta place some restriction on the unfettered power of DA's to falsely charge and prosecute.

North Carolina has gotta change the docketing system to put it back in the hands of the Judges.

North Carolina media has gotta change its handling of the rape shield policy in certain cases.

North Carolina has gotta add a functioning "Speedy Trial" law to the books.

And on and on.

K.C. Johnson, keep up the best blog ever!!!

Anonymous said...

2:55 AM
"what im fearful is groups like the naacp leaving behind hard fought gains"...

The NAACP has carefully and consciously chosen this path to follow, what to believe, and to take a public position against the 3 apparently on skin color alone. So be it.

However, I hope that the overall minority community does not pay a horrible price for this. What a shame that so many let this formerly great organization speak for them now.

Anonymous said...

Michael said...

re: 12:06

The FA is claiming that the object was Rubber Duckie.

---------------

On the Seasame Stree theme:

Rubber Duckie you're the one.. you make bathtime so much fun... Rubber duckie I'm awfully fond of you.

Anonymous said...

There a few follow-up questions that are so obvious and basic that it is hard for me to imagine why a competant investigator would not have asked Crystal:
"How do you know or specifically recall the time you arrived at the house? How do you know or recall the specific time the rape began and ended? How do you know and recall the specific time when you left the house? and What happened between the time the rape ended at 12:00 p.m. and the time Kim called 911 about one hour later?"
The neighbor, for example, is able to give an exact time when the dancer arrived because he specifically looked at his cell phone, but is only able to give an estimate of their departure, which appears to be off by about 30 minutes.

Anonymous said...

This prosecution is ugly, chaotic, pathetic, outrageous, downright crazy...but if such a completely loony case can survive in the system for this long, why such certainty it can't survive to trial? Because trying it would be unjust, nonsensical, evil? Uh-huh. Hate to say it, but maybe folks had better brace themselves.

balding.lawyer said...

Mr. Nifong now has to cope with this latest variant of his endless trial problems because he violated advice on the first page of Trial Practice 101, which is that a lawyer, before bringing an action should first take a detailed statement from the complainant, both as a later memory-aid and to make a veracity assessment. His latest self-created dilemma was summed up by Sir Walter Scott when he penned' "O what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive." It's hard for even an honest complainant to keep a complicated story straight in multiple retellings over a period of time, much less one which changes in response to obvious inconsistencies.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps somone can explain why Nifong has not filed written responses to the defense motions.
And, even if NC law does not require a prosecutor to file a response,why is the judge not ordering the DA to do so? (Believe me, the judge has the power to do this).
Somebody should be throwing the spotlight on the judges in this case. Why these judges are not outraged that Nifong has repeatedly lied to them is inexplicale

westernblot said...

Re#2above
I think we are now asked to believe that she was raped and strangeled at 11:40 and then performed her "dance" at about 12Midnight.
Is that correct?

Anonymous said...

The distinguishing characteristic of this blog is that there are some powerful minds at work here.

Prof. Johnson is obviously brilliant and many, many contributors are too. (I am not being hyperbolic and I am not including myself in that esteemed group). Yet I must humbly confess that I do think that much of this high iq thing is Dukie-related.

These remarkable minds are nowhere more clearly evident than in the hilarious posts which pop up in the midst of the absurd and tragic.

The Sesame Street posts have reached an all-time high. It is a gift to be able to start the day with a belly laugh! Thanks!!!!! Don't stop now. You're just hitting your stride.

Who are you????

bill anderson said...

This truly is the Theater of the Absurd, without the intellect. Linwood Wilson deserves to be in the dock as well, since he has written obviously false reports and is conspiring with Crystal to weave story after story to keep this case going.

In a note to Kemp, tell you friend that he needs to add this stuff to the Bar's charges, too: Encouraging his investigative staff to make up stories out of whole cloth.

By the way, in his article today in the Herald-Sun, John Stevenson says that Reade would still be on the hook if it could be shown that he took part "in the assault."

What assault? It seems as though Stevenson to the bitter end is STILL tying to carry Fong's water. I think he is carrying some other stuff coming from Fong, as well.

Anonymous said...

The "high iq thing is Dukie related"? Please. I received my degrees from the University of Virginia. Many of us who post here have no affiliation whatsoever with Duke. We are just outraged at the injustice being done to three of Duke's students.

The Dude said...

I can't stop laughing. Great work again KC.

Nifong and his Inv.(L. wilson) interviewed CGM on 12-21-06. Did anyone in their office ever think to interview ms. roberts at any time? Don't they want to ascertain if the AV's "new" version is true?

they have to be 100% incompetent to think Ms. roberts is not going to be called by the Defense. They never took a statement from her to validate the original versions of AV's story. Now they think Robert's is going to "help them". roberts is the only person who can verfiy that NOTHING TOOK PLACE on DIQ.

Has anyone ever heard the saying "a lawyer doesn't ask a question that he/she doesn't already know the answer to"! It doesn't matter how many names, people, accusations are made. It seems Ms. robert's will provide a timeline(cell phone, also) and prove that no one assaulted anybody.

Further, roberts was the person making the deal with Dan before anyone else got there. She could certainly say yes or no to the identity of each person involved in the incident. She was sober and could possibly say the 6'5" defendant was not involved. She probably met Evans since he lived there. Could have exonerated. She could verify Reade wasn't present at that time. Has anyone bothered to check?

Your post is excellent. Are we to forget? I don't think the Defense attorneys are going to forget anything. I would not be suprised they have a full statement from ms. Roberts. They have no way to present same until the AV speaks in court. I hope CGM reams Nifong a new one. She may be a "piece of work" but she didn't start the hoax. He did.

guy in durham said...

Anon 1:41,

"Well, I am pleased to announce
40th Anniversary TOUR
Spokesmen In Concert"


If that's the same Linwood Wilson, all I can say is, OMFG. I wonder how he squares his amorality with "winning souls to Christ?"

What a surprise! Like most religious fanatics, he's an unprincipled piece of excrement. Scary, scary cracker.

guy in durham said...

6:40,

"Yet I must humbly confess that I do think that much of this high iq thing is Dukie-related."

Careful, there. They wouldn't have let me into Duke if I had Terry Sanford duct-taped to a chair with a shotgun under his chin.

Anonymous said...

The very talented defense lawyers, with an assist from the blogs, are playing three-dimensional chess. The prosecutor and his hair brained investigators are playing two-dimensional chess. It's just a matter of time. The prosecution itself is proving the impossibility of the alleged crime!

bill anderson said...

In regard to Linwood Wilson, I went to the website of his gospel singing group and left the message via email that St. Paul wrote that liars will not inherit the Kingdom of Heaven.

However, I do believe we can do without the "religious fanatic" comments that were posted. Some of us on this blog are Christians, and do not appreciate being called pieces of human excrement. Wilson does not need any help from the Lord to make him lie, since the Scriptures say that lies come from the Pit of Hell.

I see no point in 7:24 attacking the rest of us.

Anonymous said...

I for one, completely agree with 7 24.

That's just the way it is guys.

Anonymous said...

7:13,
Kim Roberts has made it clear she knows nothing about any attack. Plus she is not a credible witness anyway because of her felony conviction.

Anonymous said...

Finnerty has never stated what his alibi was/is - just that he has one. I have always presumed that his times did not line up with Seligmann's and this was part of the reason for not releasing it (Along with the need to avoid the prosocution getting a redo on the "facts" - not that that would ever happen). How long will they continue to sit on his alibi? When did he get to the party?

Jeff Z. said...

I LOVE the comment above about innocent people not needing attorneys: I hope a journalist (if they ever get a chance) puts that one to Nifong. That was perhaps (and it's hard to choose) the most ridiculous of Nifong's early-case assertions. nN terms of his choice of attorneys, it may seem curious, but he is clearly trying to bolster his credibility by choosing a critic as his counsel. His counsel will surely make the argument, yes, Nifong made mistakes, but they don't technically qualify as disbarment-level conduct. I think he faces an enormous uphill battle which only grows steeper with each passing day.

I, too, wonder if others in the office worked closely with Nifong on this. I know, as a former prosecutor, that it would be very, very difficult to do, but I think given the sheer scope of this conspiracy, an assistant DA would have an ethical obligation, if they knew about the non-disclosed exculpatory evidence, to go above his or her bosses' head and report it. Obviously, a young ada is far less culpable than Nifong, but at least the DNA evidence should have raised a screaming red flag.

I am still waiting for just one day to pass by where there is not a new monumental bombshell emanating from this case and its context. I guess I should stop holding my breath.

I just hope that the suffering of these three kids results in something possitive. At the very least: (1) Curtis is fired, fined, and never works in academia again; (2) Duke alumni really see the type of shoddy scholarship and character of professors that has been invited on campus in recent years in the name of "diversity" and demand for the worst of the non-tenured 88 to be fired (probably impossible for the tenured profs unless they engaged in grade retaliation); (3) the students protest by refusing to take any classes from the gang of 88; (4) the three wrongly accused players receive an apology from Nifong and the "victim", their records are expunged, and their defense expenses reimbursed; (5) any grade given to any lacrosse player by any gang of 88 member can be converted to pass at that player's option; (6) Pressler gets a great job somewhere and beats Duke in the NCAA tournament; (7) Broadhead resigns under pressure; and (8) and most importantly, Nifong is put in jail as a lesson to other DA's who might choose to exploit race and class for their own ends.

I'd add a false accusation prosecution against the victim, but I think, although she is culpable, that anything that potentially could be viewed as an excuse for the biggest villain here -- Nifong -- should probably be avoided. Better to make sure the big fish sinks than a guppy drowns.

Anonymous said...

Will Nifong have to pay for his attorney or will the taxpayers of North Carolina be forced to pick up the tab?

Anonymous said...

7:05

That's good. There are dukie-like people all over the place....including Mr. Jefferson's U.

TombZ said...

7:24 & 7:50 -

Apparently, even in the midst of this outrage, it's still safe to attack Christians.

Attack Linwood Wilson all you want - he's earned it - and yes, his hypocrisy is stunning, but your comments expose you as someone who is driving down the average IQ of this blog.

Are you a Group of 88 infiltrator?

Anonymous said...

7:30,


You were just an under-achiever. Obviously.

Anonymous said...

tombz
Nope

Anonymous said...

tombz
I assure u I despise the Gang of 88 as much as u. Probably more.

Anonymous said...

To 2:41 AM--
Earlier on there was a discussion of speedy trial laws (when, I think, Seligmann's attorneys filed a motion asking for an expedited trial schedule which was denied by the judge who heard it--it was before the current judge was assigned to the case) and informed posters said that North Carolina does not have a specific speedy trial requirement. Seems like that might be a good reform for the legislature to consider in the wake of this case (among others).

To 8:03, re Finnerty's alibi--
There may be a number of reasons why Finnerty and his attorneys have not specifically stated his alibi. Often defense attorneys prefer not to go public with such information, for the very reason we've seen in response to Seligmann's alibi--that the prosecution tries to undercut or discredit supporting witnesses (like the cab driver) or recast the "facts" to make them fit with the alibi evidence (like the accuser's new "timeline"). Finnerty and his lawyers may have wanted to hold their evidence in reserve for this reason. It's also possible that Finnerty's evidence relies on witnesses who saw him or wiere with him, rather than documents, and thus they have chosen to keep it back in order to protect those witnesses from harassment by the press or by the police and DA. Given the DA's obvious unwillingness to consider Seligmann's ID evidence, the Finnerty team may have concluded that they had very little to gain and much to lose by making the specifics public.

Anonymous said...

He must want the case thrown out based on the obvious problems with the many versions of the AV/FA's story...

Before he is removed from the case and the total lack of evidence exposes the hoax as all of his making ...

1:05 AM


Nifing may be thinking, "Damn, how many diiferent lies do I have to get this woman to tell before somebody stops me??

Anonymous said...

Sorry--at 8:29 I of course meant "were" with him, not "wiere" (haven't had coffee yet)

Anonymous said...

"Finnerty has never stated what his alibi was/is - just that he has one. I have always presumed that his times did not line up with Seligmann's and this was part of the reason for not releasing it (Along with the need to avoid the prosocution getting a redo on the "facts" - not that that would ever happen). How long will they continue to sit on his alibi? When did he get to the party?"
It is actually very unusual for a defendant to release the details of his alibi beyond what is required to provide a "notice of allibi". The only reason to disclose the details of an allibi would be to convince the prosecutor to drop charges. The downside of disclosing is that its gives the accuser an opportunity to "fix" her story as indeed has happened here. The defense attorneys would be insane to present anymore allibi evidence prior to the trial.

Anonymous said...

I think Irving Joyner and the N.A.A.C.P. should be looking into why african americans are killing other african americans as in the killing of an honor student at N.C.C.U. instead of wasting their time Monitoring this hoax.

Anonymous said...

Nifong has hired an attorney and is spending some of his own money. I LOVE IT !!!

Anonymous said...

7:05- My IQ comment had nothing at all to do with Duke. I attended a much lesser university than UVA or Duke. My point, apparently not well made, was that the latest version of events presented by the naked Emperor's footman was so fraudulent that anybody could see thru it, even the youngest of Sesame Street fans

balding.lawyer said...

If this were a normal case, the state would have filed a motion setting out the period during which the crime allegedly occurred and asking that the defendants advise whether they intend to present a defense of alibi. A defendant responding affirmatively then has to reveal where he/she claims to have been at the time of the alleged crime. This advance notice allow the state to investigate prior to trial the asserted alibi and not be ambushed in the middle of a trial. Even though in this matter the period during which the crime is alleged to have occurred is a moving target, Mr. Nifong still could have requested, perhaps successfully, notice of alibi. It is odd that he would not have done so unless alibi proof would be of no consequence to him.

Anonymous said...

"North Carolina General Statute 14-225 False reports to law enforcement agencies or officers
Any person who shall willfully make or cause to be made to a law enforcement agency or officer any false, misleading or unfounded report, for the purpose of interfering with the operation of a law enforcement agency, or to hinder or obstruct any law enforcement officer in the performance of his duty, shall be guilty of a Class 2 misdemeanor."

It seems the Accuser her can (and should) be charged with a Class 2 misdemeanor - in addition to any other charges she may owe. Either her April handwritten statement and statements to the police during the lineup were false, or the December 21st statement was false. They cannot be reconciled, and therefore one (or more) of them must be false.

res ipsa loquitor

Anonymous said...

Is someone seriously can't figure out why Collin has not released his alibi evidence? With the accuser's story changing like it did, why would Collin release his alibi evidence?

Anonymous said...

KC said Yesterday:If AG Gonzales doesn’t intervene now, it’s hard to imagine what more he could need.

Lets just hope and pray that Mr G gets into town today.

I think we are all at bursting point with frustration for the DOJ or someone in authority to arrive and clean up the Durham Doggy Doo...quickly.

Henry Wilt

Anonymous said...

8:03 AM,

It seems like we heard early on about Finnerty being at a Mexican Restaurant, or some such. Then any mention of a Finnerty alibi went by the boards. Does Finnerty have an ace in the hole? I don't blame Seligmann's lawyer for putting Seligmann's alibi on the table (I probably would have done the same), but he might have been better off if he had kept it hidden. Still, it's hard to tell. Thanks in part to the alibi, we have Nifong going through story-changing contortions that make Harry Houdini look like a stiff-jointed piker caught in a sub-zero blizzard.

bill anderson said...

To 9:03 AM:

No doubt, the written statement of April, which is mutually exclusive with the latest Nifong/Wilson/Mangum version, was the basis of the indictment. Now, we are surmising that, since no written record exists of the grand jury proceedings of that day.

However, since it was the only account of the events that police and Nifong had in their possession, it would have to be the basis of the indictment.

Now we have a totally different set of stories that conflict with the original version (or versions). Thus, either Nifong indicted on information that no longer is considered factual by his office, or he is trying to tell us that two stories that conflict with each other are equally true.

All of this reminds me of a road race in which I ran in 1980. The year before, the times on this course were exceedingly fast. For the 1980 race, the starting line was moved back a considerable distance, at least 1/10 of a mile. When I asked one of the race officials about the length of the newly-lengthened course, he replied, "The course last year was 10K, and the course this year is 10K."

Since the two courses clearly were NOT the same length, he was trying to foist a logical absurdity upon me. We see Nifong and Wilson trying to do the same thing.

bill anderson said...

The larger issue is whether or not the authorities in North Carolina take action on the people who have been pushing these lies, Nifong, Wilson, and the Durham Police.

If the authorities fail to take any action at all, or if there is just a small wrist slap given to Nifong, then we know that basically the "justice" system of North Carolina consists of an armed gang that does what it want when it wants to do it.

We need to keep the heat on these people, because they will do everything they can to protect Nifong unless we constantly expose their deeds. I see them as an armed gang, but even gangsters do not like bad publicity.

Anonymous said...

Just a note: at http://www.flickr.com you can find photos of the potbangers protests, etc, by typing in keywords such as "duke" "lax" "lacrosse" "rape" ""durham" etc. Some of the photos are pathetically hilarious, since the photographers thought they were capturing an admirable event. Must register to leave comments for photos (which is worth it). Some of them only leave the messages from March and April, and try to quickly delete all the later comments from once the truth was revealed.

The Dude said...

7:57

Your response is a contradiction in terms. I said that ms. roberts is a witness to everything that happened or did not happen. she was there first and left with the AV. Prior convictions do nothing to her credability in this matter. She will be called as a Defense witness. She will be asked who questioned her about DIQ and verification of AV's story. What is Nifong going to do?

He can't call her a liar. She hasn't spoken yet. His own staff didn't think it neccessary to speak with her. When all concerned hear from Ms. roberts that there was no bathroom incident and that AV was doing her nails in the bathroom while trying to think of a way to get more money from the Boys, all hell will break loose.

Further, Roberts can't say that something happened because they have her phone calls to 911 from the scene and the store parking lot. No assault or rape mentioned.
What ever she says, as long as it is a verification that no assault took place, she will be consistent.

The AV has a record. Does that make her "not credible?".

Anonymous said...

Texasyank,
What a pleasure to read Duff Wilson's article. Finally, he has the story right. My only quibble is in the last paragraph where he discusses the use of the white towel that the accuser now claims was used to clean up everything including what she spat on the the floor...I just wish Mr. Wilson had mentioned that the towel did not contain any of the accuser's DNA as one would expect had it actually been used to clean up her spittle. Otherwise, it seemed like a perfect backrow to me. I'd give it a 9.6.
I must be missing something. It is just not clear to me, yet, that Linwood Wilson did anything on December 21 other than record the accuser's new fact pattern. If this accuser has been anything, she has been consistently inconsistent. (Loved juxtaposing Duff Wilson's detailing of her inconsistencies in this morning's article with his efforts to gloss over the glaring inconsistencies in his August article). SHE may have thought she was helping her case by telling this new story, but any halfway clear thinking person would know that the already mangled case just took another stunning blow with this report. This is great for the defense and hopefully makes the issue of ever having to cross examine the accuser moot. She has made mincemeat of herself.

Observer

Kent said...

KC,
In the interest of accuracy you have misprinted Mr. Nifong's Bar Complaint attorney. He is Mr. David Freedman Esq. (not Freeman) of the esteemed Law Firm of Crumpler, Parker Freedman & Witt of Winston Salem NC.
http://www.cfpwlaw.com/attorneys/dbf.html
Just a little detail, sorry to step on the Piss Ants while The Elephants are stampeding... Keep Up the GREAT WORK !

bill anderson said...

Observer,

Didn't you know that the white towel is a "magic" towel, one that magically wipes off DNA as it picks up irrelevant DNA.

I always had thought that the towel actually buttressed the defense. We see Nifong trying to use this one, all with his own version of events. This is beyond the Theater of the Absurd!

Anonymous said...

The only more absurd turn could be Nifong getting some tattered remnants of a case in front of a jury comprised of Holloway, Davidson, J58, Joyner, Burness, Steele, Dean Sue, name your local Durham racist potbanger Marxist or enabler now engaged in CYA.

Logic be damned. He can get a conviction from a Durm jury, woe betide us all, should it come to that. sic semper tyrannis

Anonymous said...

I am sure KC will get to this later, but the Newsobserver published the following e-mail exchange between Patricia Dowd and Karla Holloway.

FROM NEWSOBSERVER
-----------------
The following e-mails were exchanged between Patricia Dowd, mother of Duke University Lacrosse player Kyle Dowd, and Duke faculty member Karla Holloway.
The e-mail from Dowd questioned Holloway's motives for speaking out about the lacrosse case in a September article in an online publication.

Holloway's son, who is central to the e-mail, was adopted at age 4 after he was abused in a series of foster homes. He also had mental illness. He was later convicted of the rape and stabbing of a Raleigh schoolteacher. He died in 1999, shot dead when he escaped from a prison work detail. Holloway has written about the events.

In an interview Thursday, Dowd asked that her e-mail be read and considered in its entirety.

Begin forwarded message:

November 6, 2006

Prof. Holloway,

I am the mother of a Duke Lacrosse player. After reading your article in September, I penned a response. I held off sending it, to see if my thoughts would change as my anger subsided. Unfortunately, my anger has not subsided. I do not want to prejudge you as those who prejudged the innocent Duke Three and the entire lacrosse team. Therefore, I respectfully request you respond to my letter so I may better understand why you would write such a vile article. Below is my response to your article.

I sit and ponder, how could any woman be so cruel and callous, and judge a whole class of individuals without any facts. What was more puzzling and definitely more alarming was that you had a son convicted of rape and attempted murder, and who was going to be tried for the murder of two others. It has always been my belief that educators not only had a moral obligation but a duty to have an open mind and to encourage your students to do the same. I teach History to high school students. Clearly, you do not understand this obligation. My first reaction was to attack, but what would be the sense. I wondered, do you attack our sons, because you feel guilt for your own failures as a mother? Do you attack our sons, because you are so selfish that you cannot stand the thought of our sons leading successful lives, when your son did not and can not? Do you attack our sons to justify your own short comings? Do you attack our sons because it's easier than looking yourself in the mirror? Do you attack our sons because they are innocent and your son was not? The answer may be yes to all of those questions. How sad for you that you have been reduced to a pathetic, heartless individual. While people with souls and hearts, would suffer and wallow in their own pain for a while, when the dust settles, they would fight to turn a tragic situation into something positive. Instead, you are so self centered, you have made yourself the victim in your son's death and in the Duke hoax.

"We all leave footprints in the sand, the question is, will we be a big heal, or a great soul." - Source Unknown

This week I was touched by two families who have suffered the worst imaginable loss in any parent's life, the loss of a child. One was Rachel Scott, age 17, the first person killed at Columbine, the second was Louis Acompora, age 14, killed while playing the game he loved, lacrosse, by a syndrome known as commotio cordis. What struck me is that both these remarkable young individuals were able to leave a lasting legacy that has and will continue to touch million of hearts and souls. Rachel Scott's legacy has been the formation of Rachael's Challenge which challenges us and inspires us all to do random acts of kindness. Louis Acompora's foundation has saved countless individuals by making defibulators available in schools and other public areas.

Though I cannot compare the loss of a child, with the loss of a child's trust in the kindness and goodness of man, I wrestle with what will be the legacy of our sons and our families as we emerge from this travesty of justice. Rachel Scott said, "Look hard enough and you'll always find a light." So I have challenged myself to find "my light".

At this time the path is dim for I have not let go of the anger and rage I feel against Nifong for creating and continuing this hoax for his own personal and political gain; against the Duke administration for abandoning our sons, even today as the evidence clearly shows their innocence, and using the lacrosse team and Coach Pressler as the scapegoats in a feeble attempt to protect Duke's reputation; against some of the Duke faculty for condemning and harassing our sons without a scintilla of evidence to further their own philosophical agendas; and against [accuser's name withheld] for not having the courage to end this charade by telling the truth.

However, I also recognize that to find the light I must choose forgiveness. Forgiveness does not mean I do not want Nifong disbarred or Duke to walk away without an apology to our sons. Forgiveness is just the ceasing to feel resentment and anger. I am not there today, but I am at a point that I must consider the possibility that there is a "light", for if I do not, I will find myself like you, Professor Holloway, a sad, bitter, resentful woman, attempting to squash the dreams of others because after your own personal tragedy you were not able to find your "light" and therefore have no dreams of your own.

When Colin, Reade and Dave are exonerated, what will be our legacy? I believe these three courageous young men will be great souls. They have showed us over the past six months how to handle adversity with class and dignity that is beyond their years. Each one of these young men will leave lasting imprints on all those they touch. They will have entered the eye of a hurricane and come out to tell others abut it. The legacy of the lacrosse team will be that of "truth". We will not stop, no matter what, in our quest to let the world know the truth of what transpired on March 13/14, the lacrosse team has stood steadfast in the events that occurred, even after being vilified publicly.

But what will my legacy be? I need to find a goal, as do many of the mothers and fathers of the lacrosse team, so we will be able to try to make sense out of something that has no sense. It may be a crusade to protect the "accused's" identity in rape cases much like the accuser's. Sadly, even when the young men are exonerated, there will still be many who will characterize the lacrosse team as "rapists". There will still be whispers. Many still want to turn a blind eye to the facts. Without any evidence the Durham Police Department, put our son's pictures on a "Wanted Poster" and published it in main stream national media for days. Colin, Reade and Dave's pictures, continue to be shown in the mainstream media. I hope I am able to emerge from this travesty with a vision to make the choice to make a change to protect other innocent young men.

I live the negative impact of this hoax daily knowing the three families live it greater than I do. I hope that one day I have the strength to choose to make a positive impact for if I don't, I may waste my life, like you, Prof. Holloway, wallowing in self pity. You are a big heal in the sand, I chose to be a great soul.

The Scott and Acompora families will be my inspiration! They will lead me to my light. You have also inspired me, of what I choose not to become.

Patricia Dowd Mother of Duke Lacrosse Player, Kyle Dowd

Nov. 6, 2006

Dear Patricia Dowd,

Indeed, you should have held off sending it. Your letter reflects nothing so much as an impoverished spirit and intellect. What a shame, for you, and your family.

Karla FC Holloway

All rights reserved. This copyrighted material may not be published, broadcast or redistributed in any manner.

Anonymous said...

Bill: Have you seen the blog on the NYTimes story? My comment is number 19. Even crazy New York is condemning Nifong by and large.

http://news.blogs.nytimes.com/?p=126

Anonymous said...

I might have heard there are "CSI: Durham" and "Law and Order: *Special* Victims Unit" proposals making the rounds in Dreamland.

Anonymous said...

we sure seem to be a little angry this morning kant.

Anonymous said...

I'm surprised that there hasn't been comment or discussion of the incredibly shoddy documentation of Linwood's interview of the AV. Meager, sketchy notes and then a typed summary using a quality of English composition that my 10 year-old could exceed.

I'm not a lawyer, but wouldn't a simple deposition in a run-of-the-mill civil case require a verbatim transcript recorded contemporaneously by a court reporter or a video recording? Nifong has admitted that the whole case hangs on the AV's word here, yet there's no effort to ultimately document what she says. I wonder why...

Earl Hofert said...

Two thoughts:

1) How many cigarettes is a former DA worth in the pokey?

2) Karla Holloway, along with Kim Curtis, is a snake.

One silver lining that can be gleaned from this whole hellacious farce is the exposure of these campus leftists as not only malignant, but dangerous too. I'm sure a lot of students, parents, and alumni would beforehand dismiss the G88 types as harmless nutjobs that teach Mickey Mouse classes, write unreadable (and unread) journal articles, and are eminently ignorable. Well, now we know they aren't so harmless, aren't simply a minor nuisance, and can't be ignored. It's time for the people that love Duke to clean house.

I think Karla Holloway will be moving to Vanderbilt soon. What a boon for that institution!

duke09parent said...

Re the Dowd/Holloway exchange. Holy S___. Dowd's letter was a little excessive, but what a bitter response. I hope the Chronicle gets permission from N&O (if they hold the copyright) to run it. The whole campus should see this.

GPrestonian said...

3:58 Gregory:

"If an attorney in my jurisdiction is aware of another attorney's violation of laws or ethical rules, and that attorney does not report it, they are, themselves, in violation of ethical rules! For not reporting the ethical violation!"

Gregory, and others - weren't the reports several weeks ago to the effect that the NC AG had received >400 letters and the NC State Bar 'at least' 17?

There may well be requirements to report others' violations, but not necessarily in a Letter to the Editor or on the 6 o'clock news.

If we could just know what's been going on behind the scenes! Not Nifong's machinations, but the conversations that have been taking place at the NC State Bar, among the Judges & other NC DAs, and meetings w/ Nifong telling him to kncok it off. I think w'd be surprised how many people have been after defendant Nifong - they just didn't / couldn't make it public.

Anonymous said...

KC you're amazing with your command of the detail! My brain is going into meltdown trying to process all of it!

Anonymous said...

KC and others,

If you want to see an example of the theater of the absurd, go to this link, http://www.newsobserver.com/1185/story/531318.html, and read the email exchange between Mrs. O'Dowd and Karla Holloway. Duke's Board of Trustees (and all "elite" institutions) need to conduct a review of the unqualified faculty that somehow seem to find a position because of their political correctness vs. their academic qualifications.

Anonymous said...

Michael @ 12:51 AM is absolutely right. The Pajamahadeen is quite a force to be reckoned with and serves to keep the MainStream Media's lies in check. We got Dan Rather fired. Liars beware. The Pajamahadeen lurks.

Anonymous said...

No matter how many times the FA changes her story, bottom line is that 5 men's DNA was found on her and NONE of it matched the 3 LAX boys

Anonymous said...

Was a statement taken from CGM's "driver"?

Anonymous said...

Paraphrasing here...Ann Coulter said that their was more semen in the FA than in a refrigerator at a fertility clinic! Hilarious.

Anonymous said...

Mrs. Dowd,
Bravo for your uplifting piece.
To Ms. Holloway, who admitedly I do not know but, from her letter it can be implied that she is an irrelevant person, in a self involved irrelevent pseudo pursuit, searching for relevance in a world that has passed her and her anger by. I would want my children to be exposed to her ilk only for the life lesson that this is someone you do not ever want to emulate...but certainly not for 40k per year !
Ditto for the Lunatic fringe called the Group of 88.
We are only in the 4th Inning of this game and the end will come on this sad episode only when the egregious nature of the Duke President and certain 'Faculty Memebers' have been called to account in the expectant Civil Suits. Then we can start to drain the swamp of these completely irrelevent people .

Michael said...

I was totally stunned by Hollaway's response to Mrs. Dowd's letter. A total lack of class and concern. Maybe someone could post her ratemyprofessor.com comments.

Where is the civility to someone spending the equivalent of more than half the median gross income of families in the US for your institution?

Regarding Rathergate, I did
some of the research into old typewriters and more current technology during Rathergate. In Rathergate, you had a lot of computer science, software and hardware guys looking at the documents. The MSM managers didn't have the expertise to understand what the bloggers were saying and got steamrolled.

Anonymous said...

Well, I am no fan of Karla Holloway, and her response was certainly bitter--but I'm not sure it's realistic to expect ANYONE to respond thoughtfully and graciously to a letter that calls her a "pathetic, heartless individual," a "big heal [sic--I think she meant "heel"] in the sand," and "what I choose not to become," at the same time invoking what must be the most painful and difficult experience of her life. This must have been an incredibly hurtful letter to receive; whether or not one thinks it was justified it's just not realistic to expect any other sort of response, and I don't think republishing it in the Chronicle would have the effect Duke09Parent anticipates--many might find the original letter as personal and cruel, or more so, than the response.

Anonymous said...

Look Hollaway is a self-centered creep. Witness her equating the attacks by the blog hooligans with the false indictment. However, Dowd's letter was savage. She took the knife, put it in, and turned it. I am not saying she was wrong, I am just saying that its purpose was not to invoke a reasoned response but to inflict pain, public pain. Hollaway's response is what I would expect and certainly more measured that Mr. Charlotte's Web, Houston Baker

Anonymous said...

This morning, I tried to post a comment on the NYT "reader comments board" underneath Duff's Wilson's article. I wrote that NYT's coverage has been abysmally bad and biased against the defendants. (I also wrote that people should check out Durham in Wonderland.)

Guess what? The NYT "Moderator" censored my comments, and it never made to the board.

Staples

Anonymous said...

I think this latest attempt by the Durham police deparment, the accuser and Mike Nifong is so inexcusable and so far over the line that they all need to be jailed.

The idea that after nine months her detailed descriptions of who did what, and the fact that she alleged Reade Seligman forced her to perform oral sex on her, that a 'white towel' now appears in her story is unbelievable, it is Kafkaesque, in fact.

I don't know if I have ever seen such a blatant attempt to frame innocent men and continue to create new garbage statements that cannot stand up.

It is impossible that she was raped between 11:40 and midnight since she was on her cell phone during that time, it is also impossible that the neighbor who looked at his watch is wrong about when she went into the house.

If it didn't show such a terrible fissure in our system of justice that anyone would try and perpetrate such an obvious hoax as this new statement is, it would be laugh out loud funny. The fact that the police and Nifong want to use this newest worthless statement in their continuing attempt to persecute innocent college students is repugnant

Gprestonian said...

10:43 Anon:

The Durham PD isn't involved in this latest fiasco (at least that we know of). Linwood Wilson is in the DA's office - hired to collect on old traffic tickets(??), now defendant Nifong's right-hand-man & investigator. Patronage at its finest.

You bring up a good question tho - when is the last time that the DPD was involved in this case? Submission of investigative reports, press conferences, etc? I'm not excusing their early culpability, but it has been quite some time, hasn't it?

Michael said...

re: 10:31

I've worked in Corporate Customer Support a few decades ago where customers could be less than polite when their large-scale systems were down.

As a professional, my job was to make the customer happy and provide results, even if that meant working for a few days without sleep. And to always treat
the customer respectfully.

Mrs. Dowd was a parent and, if you will, a customer. Professionals deal with customers professionally. Even if the customers are difficult.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Newyorkstateofmind said...

Staples 10:36

Quite telling that the NYT forum censured your comments. Doubtless the NYT web mavens would like to live in an America where all truly "inconvenient truths," i.e., those generated by someone other than Al Gore and Michael Moore, or at least no one whose views would be considered to the "right" of these distinghuished gentlemen, would not make it into any public forum.

Do they have a policy against anonymous postings by the way?

Or do they lay out by way of an internal link on the site any guidelines for how comments are supposed to be framed?

Anonymous said...

impoverished spirit and intellect.

Well it should be clear that Karla would be quite familiar with an impoverished spirit and intellect. She know of what she speaks, as she stares at one every morning in her bathroom mirror.

I am glad she responded just as I expected she would. No contrition and not a scintilla of compassion.

Anonymous said...

Re Michael at 10:51:
I see your point, though I'd find it more convincing if this exchange had come up in the context of a direct "customer service" relationship--for example, if Mrs. Dowd's son had been taking a class from Ms. Holloway, or if Ms. Holloway was herself in a "customer service" position at Duke, such as in the Dean of Students' office or the like. In an ideal world, we'd all like to be able to remain polite in the face of anger--but it's pretty hard sometimes.

Anonymous said...

In a December 2005 drive-by shooting on the 2100 block of Charles Street,(CGM the FA lived at 2111 Charles Street) shots were fired at a group of girls, just curious what the age group of these girls was and what they were doing at the time ,does anybody know? http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/122453/

Anonymous said...

Where is Nifong? Shouldn't he have dropped all charges by now?

Anonymous said...

I just can't stop thinking about what Karla Haulaway, Baker, the 88, the NAACP, the "New" BP's, Sharpton, Jackson, etc... would be doing if the race roles were reversed. Imagine a white escort with the DNA of 5 unidentified men inside her proposing these various versions of her rape by three black men AND the case NOT GOING AWAY. I'm sure we would have Louis planning a million man march in Durham in Wonderland. The disingeuous nature of there persistent statements is mind boggling.

Anonymous said...

nystateofmind 11:04

According to the NYT:

"Comments are moderated and will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive. They may be edited for length and clarity. For more information" (then refers to membership agreement)

My comments were on-topic, and "not abusive." It was short and clear. Yet, my comments got zapped.

NYT has two boxes that one needs to fill in if you want to comment: (1) name (can be penname); (2) e-mail address.

Staples

Michael said...

re: 10:51

In large corporations, you
reflect the company in your
business dealings and on your
personal time (though these
two are becoming the same
thing more and more).

In my case, customers were
paying my then employer lots
of money for high-level service. I'd guess that parents consider that they're paying a lot for quality service too.

In a company, an employee
can go to their manager if
they have a customer and
the manager can then arbitrate with a difficult
customer or put in another
customer service person that
is better able to deal with a difficult customer.

If you want an interesting
exercise, call up Dell customer support (home) and try to get them mad at you. You'll get someone from India and you can say anything that you want to over the phone and you'll be very hard-pressed to get the person on the other end of the phone to raise their temper. Same deal with Verizon DSL customer service representatives.

These people appreciate the fact that they have a job when there are so many others in their country that don't.

Kilgore said...

While I clearly side with Dowd and do think it is a good point that she is in some sense a "customer" I also think that her bringing up Holloway's dead son is way out of line.

Anonymous said...

What has the paternity testing showed? Who's the daddy?

Newyorkstateofmind said...

Earl Hofert 10:06

Your comments bring to mind one more piece to this outrage that needs to be worked on:

a campus-wide boycott of all classes that all of the G88 teach.

As I relate elsewhere on another thread, even civil actions against those who've instigated and enabled this persecution are likely to be bundled by the Duke Administration into a series of settlements, to the effect that very few, and possibly no actions will be able to drag individuals responsible for some of the most harm into civil court.

Alternatively, if individual Duke parents sue individuals within the G88, and within the Duke Administration, or even the G88 as a group, and refuse to allow the attorney representing them to settle any of their claims--which BTW will like all settlements seal all discussions and matters in connection with the settlement case, with the stipulation that there is "no admission of wrongdoing,"--then one could see an open-court accounting by some of the miscreants afterall. We'll have to see how this all plays out.

As for a campuswide boycott of all the G88 classes, Duke must have guidelines on how many students must register for a given class, for that class to be held. If a bunch of G88'ers find their rosters so thin that they can't actually field their classes, then Duke will have to set up a special system for them to keep them on payroll. Which system can then be blogged and monitored to further embarrass the mavens at Duke who don't support their own students, while enabling the worst tendencies of their Mandarin professors.

The potential problem with this whole plan is that it is contingent on Duke's leftists students not enrolling in the very classes which make up the bulk of classes they would take anyway:

e.g., Facial Makeup for the Transgendered, Or How Troy Got "His'n'Her" Groove Back.

Any thoughts anyone?

Anonymous said...

Prof. Holloway's writings speak volumns about her political agenda as well as her racism. It is a useless task to think that reasoned arguments will change the minds of any members of the Group of 88. Dowd never expected her letter to become public knowledge and with that the reference to the son of Prof. Holloway. Regardless of what any of us believe to be true of Holloway, the references to her son, his life and demise and a comparison to the sons of the lacrosse families and their future successes were low blows at best. Holloway, like most adoptive parents, seek to improve the lives of their children and take on those risks attendant with adopting foster children. It simply cannot be said that Holloway failed as a parent because of the child's failure. Very often children succeed despite the failures of their parents. In many respects the letter is unfortunate.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 10:31 is right.

Karla Holloway response was not great, but no one is going to answer kindly to the type of letter she received. Don't get me wrong, I don't feel bad for Holloway, her behaviour did bring this kind of anger. But in the end these two women were in a fight(e-mail fight but still a fight) not a discussion. Blaming Holloway for her response is like blaming someone for throwing the third punch in a fight. The first punch was from Holloway, the second punch the letter from Ms. Dowd (well ok this migh be more than a punch , she really opened a can of whoopass on Holloway ), the 3rd puch was from Holloway in defense of the severe trashing she recieved. The reason I don't feel so bad for Holloway is that she started the fight but it looks like Ms Dowd is going to finish it.

Anonymous said...

KC, your "my [sic] personal favorite" reminds me of Dickens's similar redundancy, "Our Mutual [sic] Friend." Of course, you should have written "a personal fav"

9:03--it's res ipso loquitur

re N suborning perjury: CGM has no credibility now, so how would her "testimony" implicate N?

11:45--boycott 88's classes?--absolutely! should also concentrate on defunding BS studies and ending quotas for students and faculty

re "class of individuals"--the lacresse players do not constitute a "class"

I'm going to visit Duke's site and examine their Chinese and Japanese oriented pedagogy

Guess what argument I'll be making?

Roman Polanski

Anonymous said...

Why aren't the accusations of rape considered sexual harassment?

The faculty involved in pot banging should be drummed out of the school on sexual harassment charges.

Imagine a group of professors calling for female students to confess to whoring themselves out and pot banging in front of their house that they are sluts.

That would be sexual harassment and people would be sued and jobs would be lost.

You figure it out.

Newyorkstateofmind said...

Staples 11:21

Thanks for the input on the NYT forum. That they so actively disallow comments that so clearly meet their own guidelines makes their nixing your comments that much more egregious. It's the totalitarian temptation in full display: not simply disregarding speech they don't like, or even "editing" it (which under the pen of MSM'ers can mean mangling or even reversing the original meaning), but simply killing it.

Makes me appreciate the freedoms we have on this blog, along with the impact I know we're having, that much more.

Newyorkstateofmind said...

Just a mini-monograph on the question of why the Feds haven't intervened in this situation as of yet. I've addressed this elsewhere on this blog, but here follows a synopsis of why any Fed action (at least meaningful intervention, as opposed to a "feel-good PR ploy") is unlikely:

States and the Feds are considered separate jurisdictions, and even on many matters, separate sovereigns, going back to the tradeoff Federalists at the Founding offered to States to get them to join a new union. It has for centuries been considered a major province of states that they largely dictate what is in their penal codes regarding such matters as commonlaw crimes--garden variety crimes--like rape and robbery and burglary. The Feds are very reluctant as a result of this arrangement to intrude into how a particular state handles its affairs around the issue of commonlaw crimes. The "violence against women" act of several years ago was struck down as unconstitutional mostly on the grounds that it violated state prerogatives to regulate sex crimes in their respective states.

So the Feds need a hook--a piece of legislation--to hang, that is justify, any intervention in this case. If the defendants were black, or from a place like Iran where the "national origin" status of the perps. might subject them to mistreatment from locals, the Feds could--and I believe would--intervene under color of the 14th Amendment and/or other legislation or Constitutional Amendments.

Given the multiple layers of Federal bureaucracy and overreach, hypothetically there is some legal framework that would still justify intervention; personally, I don't know of any.

If the defendants were actually in jail, the Feds could not even issue a habeas corpus motion, because these motions are more attendant to cases--like the Guantanamo terrorists--who are being held indefinitely without sufficiently specific charges being accounted as to why they are being held. Habeas corpus would still not apply, as absurd as this case is, because the charges against the defendants (however absurd) are specific, and the trial date is set and upcoming (however successful Nifong was in setting it months beyond recognition).

In short, the Feds need a legal hook to cover any intervention they might do, else if they try to get involved as simply a way of acknowledging "they feel the Duke Three's pain," without trying to issue edicts to get Nifong sidelined, they risk seeming ineffectual and irrelevant.

Hence their silence so far, and hence the likelihood of their continued silence.

Anonymous said...

Just noticed that all of the contact information for Linwood's music group, The SpokesmenQuartet, has been deleted. Ya think they may be getting some calls asking about ethics? Sad actually. Looks like a a good quartet.

Anonymous said...

Re: Holloway/Dowd e-mail exchange,
Well at the risk of being very trite, "People who live in glass houses should not throw stones." Given her family history, WHAT compelled Ms. Holloway to address the LAX case at all, much less in such an in your face, public fashion with her essay, Group of 88 ad, and initial acceptance of the chair for the campus committee? I do not believe we have standing to launch the kind of attack Mrs. Dowd launched, but I do believe she was within her rights to do so. Most Mama Bears and plenty of Papa Bears, I believe, would agree.

Observer

Anonymous said...

RP has an interesting post about AAAS on Coleman Report thread. Posted around 1;30.

Anonymous said...

Mama bear... LOL, I know the fairy tail, but is using the words in this context new? I have never seen the expression used in such a context prior to this blog! I know a bunch of acedemic type read this blog so maybe someone knows ?

Anonymous said...

i read the investigative report..it sounds like they were playing twister in the bathroom...

Anonymous said...

It's awful to imagine the agony and trauma that Holloway must have endured because of her son. And Mrs. Dowd's e-mail was way over the top in my opinion; her son's still alive, after all. But Observer's right. If your own son is a multiple rapist and killer, simple good sense and good taste would dictate that you don't go around self-righteously accusing others of the same crime and pontificating about its deplorable social implications.

Anonymous said...

One option open to Nifong when his case appears before the ethics board is to plead insanity.

Anonymous said...

While this may seem off subject, I think it speaks to the larger issue and what is causing us to blog on this article: it's neo-racism. Haven’t we learned that racism just doesn’t work? Look what happen to the NAZI’s? What about the KKK? So, I find it ironic that we now find some African-Americans in positions of power or influence, victims of racism; and those who curry their support, have now become active racist themselves. I believe they feel it’s a fitting form of reparation to subject some whites to the same injustices they or their ancestors experienced. They somehow think this reverse hatred will right past or present wrongs. This neo-racism highlighted by the jury in the OJ Simpson trail and most recently seen with the Duke legal case is becoming tiresome and many are starting to say enough is enough, as they begin to realize that racism is not just a “white thing” perpetrated on blacks and other minorities. I take comfort that the general public is now starting to recognize these racists. As an opponent of all racism, I think if we’re going to coexists as a society we need to get over the race thing and come together as one. Instead of following the tenants of Adolph Hitler and David Duke, on the eve of Dr Martin Luther King’s birthday, I think these racists within the African-American community and those who support them, need to listen to another King who said "People, I just want to say, you know, can we all get along?"