The piece noted the controversy surrounding the swearing-in, and notes that "the intense scrutiny he has received from the Duke University lacrosse case leave some wondering whether he will be able to finish the term."
Yet only one person is quoted in the article: one of the few defenders of Nifong remaining, Irving Joyner. Joyner is identified solely as an NCCU law professor. The article contains no mention that he is serving as the "case monitor" of the pro-accuser NAACP; nor is he identified as someone who has repeatedly over the last several months rationalized Nifong's handling of the case.
Joyner describes Nifong as under pressure from "three of the best defense attorneys in the state shooting after him" (with a vague insinuation they're doing something wrong), and the state bar. No mention of the Conference of DA's letter.
And what will Nifong's fate be? Joyner speaks as if he's reading from a Nifong press release:
"The State Bar is not the place you make an example of someone. The State Bar is there to protect the public and protect the profession and the protect the professionals within the bar," he said, adding that he would be surprised if the group moves for disbarment.Joyner is, of course, entitled to his opinion. But WRAL viewers are entitled to know of Joyner's biases.
Joyner said he doesn't see the lacrosse case as one that will ultimately define Nifong's career. Once the Duke case is dealt with, he said, Nifong will be judged on how he handles the everyday duties of his office.