Saturday, April 28, 2007

Wilson and the Prosecutors

Duff Wilson, New York Times, August 25, 2006:
The dancers stopped. An argument ensued. Using a racial epithet, someone yelled that they had asked for white dancers, not black ones. That much is agreed. It was 12:04 a.m. March 14. [emphasis added]
Report of the Attorney General, April 27, 2007:

Both dancers were in the car at 12:42 a.m. After the accusing witness was placed in “Nikki’s” car, [well after both Reade Seligmann and Collin Finnerty had left the premises,] “Nikki” yelled a sexually and racially based comment at a group of party attendees standing across the street near the wall to East Campus at the university. One or more of the party responded with racial epithets. After this exchange, “Nikki” drove away with the accusing witness in her car.

As his former boss observed, Wilson isnt an incompetent locker-room hack who was in over his head” on this story. The logical alternative, then: Wilson and Times editors chose to slant the record to bolster Nifongs version of events, and then refused to correct factual errors.

82 comments:

Anonymous said...

How has truth faired in Durham today? Any report from the event that was scheduled? How many attended, other than Victoria Peterson?

Anonymous said...

This was posted on another
thread :

Anonymous said...

Colin Finnerty's picture and name were on the front page of NYT April 5, 6 hours after Mangum identified him. Did the DA's office(a crime as charges had not been filed yet) or Mangum release his identity? Why would she only tell the NYT? Did they compensate her?

Apr 28, 2007 1:26:00 AM


Did someone in Durham use media contacts to deliberately set up a firestorm? Is that ethical? Is that illegal, if done by the DPD or DA's office?

Why did Nifong spend hours talking with Duff before the infamous Times hit piece?

What connection was there between Nifong's office and anyone at the Times, and to what extent is the Times culpable of deliberately fanning the flames of the hoax?

Sarah D said...

Even in his article today, Duff slightly misquotes the line, by leaving out the fact that Kim "yelled" the comment, and that it was "one or more" of the players who used racial epithets.

He says" "The report said the second dancer then made a racial and sexual comment about the young men, who responded with racial epithets." which give the impression (deliberately?) of a chorus of racial slurs. Hence his reporting has clearly not improved.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/28/us/28duk...rts&oref=slogin

Anonymous said...

Although so many of the NC leftist and/or liberal online blogs have been trying to ignore the lacrosse/Nifong story since the truth came out (ignoring it for the obvious reasons), I believe there's an underlying thunderous rumble growing and they'll all be forced to face it eventually. After all, how can they go on comfortably accepting the revelations on the Durham Police dept.? What innocent (generally minority) people in Durham might be unjustly in prison right now? That's what- oh, so ironically- this case has revealed.

Anonymous said...

If you compare Duff Wilson's article in the times today from the title to his manipulation as much as he could of the report content, he still can't tell all of the facts. The Times should just pay for the AP accounts. I'd feel I was reading something truthful. The AP si once again complete, fair, truthful and ethical. The list would be longer in positive adjectives for the AP and just the opposite for the Times. It's a good thing the AP is picked up across the country by many papers for print.

Anonymous said...

Hugh Grant is collecting from three tabloid or papers for printed inaccurate libel statement - Hope this happens with the big guys an HuffPost, etc

Anonymous said...

You've got to be kidding me.

The AP is as biased as they come.

Gary Packwood said...

anonymous 2:41 said...
...Did someone in Durham use media contacts to deliberately set up a firestorm? Is that ethical? Is that illegal, if done by the DPD or DA's office?
...Why did Nifong spend hours talking with Duff before the infamous Times hit piece?
...What connection was there between Nifong's office and anyone at the Times, and to what extent is the Times culpable of deliberately fanning the flames of the hoax?
::
I'm trying hard to imagine anyone in Durham outside of Duke having any reason to have contact with The NYT.
Duke has all the media contacts and Dean Sue at Duke had all the details since she is sitting on the CrimeStoppers Board. Dean Sue has to know everyone at the Durham Police Department.
Also, with respect to fanning the flames, journalists just love to 'ramp' up the verbiage when a well known and private university takes a hit...especially if private university has a $4+B endowment and tuition is $40+ thousand per year.
Wealthy white college boys in a helmet sport gang raping a black girl doesn't make any sense in the first place and therefore the story will be picked up and quoted by every little newspaper from Tulsa to Topeka. I think those types of stories are called ...Say what???
::
GP

Anonymous said...

Anybody watch O'Reilly last night?
He had Wendy Murphy on again (re another case), and she threw an exasperated eye-rolling gag when he mentioned the AG report. Why does Fox continue to keep her?

William Jockusch said...

Fox news wants to make liberals look like idiots. Keeping Wendy Murphy on fits in with this agenda perfectly.

Anonymous said...

Oh, good point. But she hurts my
eyes.

Anonymous said...

Duff'a story today is all facts, sir, just the facts. I just found them, and forgot the facts I found this summer.

KC the Times is an embarrassment to New Yorkers, couldn't ask them to change their name to the West Side Rag?

Kemp

Anonymous said...

A fact conveniently ignored by the 88 identy-studies fraudsters at Duke is that that Kim Roberts threw the first sexual and racial epithet when she called one of the players a "little-dicked white boy".

The labeling of the entire LAX team as racist for the exchange of racial slurs that followed was just one more monumental distortion of the facts by these intellectual giants of Academia.

Mike in Nevada

Sarah D said...

Mike in Nevada (3:43:00 PM) makes a good point, perhaps, being educators, the G88 can explain what quality Kim Roberts has which entitles her to a free ticket to use racial epithets without censure, which they refuse to extend to those she deliberately provoked.

Anonymous said...

To 3:18,

The Liestopper discussion board has a new thread on Wendy's reappearance if you’re interested.

Anonymous said...

What "quality" does Kim Roberts have that entitles her to freely use racial slurs without being subject to criticism? Why, she has black skin, of course. If you're black in the US, you can say anything you want (including using racist and derogatory words like the "N" word and the "ho" word), and it's okay. But if you're white, like Imus or the Duke fellas, you have limited free speech rights.

Apparently you haven't yet been indoctrinated in this well-established double-standard. You must be a foreigner. Welcome to the U.S. (By the way, if you're a Mexican and you're here illegally and using a stolen identity and driving on our roads without a license and committing any number of other crimes, that's okay too. Just another double standard we tolerate here).

jamil hussein said...

The AP si once again complete, fair, truthful and ethical.

now this is funny. al-AP is just like New York Times. Its international coverage is even worse. Just google Jamil Hussein and AP.

It is unfortunate that both Reuters and AP are controlled by far-left gang88 types who photoshop pictures (to look US/Israel look bad), fabricate stories (Jamil H, Lebanon war, Gaza "massacres" etc) and in general, mislead as much as possible.

It is crucial that we have free speech and talk radios, Fox News and blogs (at least until Hillary takes office, dems have openly stated that they want to shut down Fox News, talk radio and blogs.) Also, supreme court stated last week that talk radio is indeed allowed to talk. Far left liberals and their activist judges in Seattle tried to shut down local radio station (where 2 hosts asked people to oppose local tax hike).

Jack said...

Interesting that in today's NYT article, every important person in this case was referred to by name, except the accuser.

Anonymous said...

What is Duke's obligation to it's students? With so much talk of lawsuits, is the University really liable, vulnerable to civil suits? Can they be held liable for encouraging an unsafe condition? Does the concept of in loco parentis still apply in this day and age?

Anonymous said...

Given the inaccuracy of the August story that Duff did it seems that there are only two reasons for it:

Bias

Hackwork


If the New York Times denies Hackwork then we are left with Bias. This seems to flow logically so how can the NY Times defend itself?

joe sweet said...

Let's see, the NYT hit job on the Duke 3 was an ongoing, deliberate attempt to smear and distort, but to my knowledge no NYT apologies followed AG Cooper's announcement of the Duke 3's innocence. Without multi-million dollar legal representation, coupled with a handful of persistent, reasoned bloggers, the Liefong/Mangum rape of justice case would have gone to trial. With a carefully hand-picked jury, the Duke 3 could well have ended up in jail for 25-30 years.

Don Imus makes a horrific attempt at a little 'hood humor, and the Sharpton/Jackson shaketown team lead an MSM-driven lynch mob that ends his career. Forget all the good Imus has done in his life, and forget the far too numerous mea culpas he expressed over his comments, the race baiters have spoken, and the girly-men from companies like GM and Staples went running to hide under their bosses' skirts while pulling their sponsorships from the "old white guy" Imus.

These are not works of fiction, and send a clear message to seekers of truth and justice that we had better stay informed and involved. In these two cases, we won one and lost one, and without a doubt these kinds of idealogical assaults will continue. Without overstating the obvious, the NYT and other members of the MSM are carefully slanting the news to the left. Fox News is constantly blasted by their counterparts for all attempts at presenting the truth, because the truth doesn't fit their world view.

Short of a miracle, the left will have a president in the White House following the next election. It will be interesting to see how we deal with terrorists acts, so-called white male privilege, government-sponsored health care, gun control, abortion on demand, and taxation. If you think you lost the simple freedom to listen to Don Imus, it may well be "that we've only just begun."

Anonymous said...

To 5:11:00

I asked similar questions weeks ago of the tort lawyers on the blog but got no response.

I remember the following from law school. Under the doctrine of "respondeat superior" an employer is responsible for the acts of its employee if the unlawful act fall within the scope of the employees duties. Such acts might include libel and slander.

I remember that it is possible to slander an entire group if the group is so small as to cast dispersion on its individual members.

I recall a law school case where an employer was held liable where a driver punched and kicked another motorist. The court said that the punch was within scope, but the kick was not.

Questions. Was the publishing of the ad in the Chronicle within the scope of the professors' employment? Did any member of the G88 make comments to students during class periods? If so, would those statements be in scope? Is there some kind of intervening protection for universities under the First Amendment?

My area is tax, so I know just enough about torts to be dangerous. Would any of you tort lawyer like to opine with respect to whether there is potential liability for the university for the acts of its professors?

Mike in Nevada

Anonymous said...

Why do you continue to rant about the New York Times? If I were an tort attorney, I would be planning my case. 33% of 100 Million is, well, you do the math. Was the NYT false? Was it reckless? Did it show disregard for the truth? The critical elements of libel are really evident. And it's about time someone took down the NYT. It would be justice for all the things they've written in the past...

Anonymous said...

David Boardman, Wilson's old boss doesn't want to get into the facts of the case or Wilson's coverage.
Why does that not surprise me?
Wilson's 30 year career and many awards proves the advantages of towing the PC line.

james conrad said...

the NYT's, much like my hometown paper the WASH POST have fallen on bad times. their ad revenue falling, ditto the stock price, not to mention circulation. add in the 24/7 instant analysis of the WEB which exposes factual errors as well as bias, these once great newspapers are fast becomming tabloids. they still have some genuine stars, john burns and george will come immediately to mind but they are few and far between these days. the fact is, the world of news has changed thanks to the WEB and newspapers in general have yet to come to grips with this new reality. their collective snobby and grumpy 'tude toward this new reality is getting tiresome.

Jamil hussein said...

Does anybody know when is the next DA appreciation week in Durham?

Should we ask this from Durham Police spokesperson Kammie Michael ? Maybe I'll stop by..

Anonymous said...

KC - Are you aware that a blogger named Newport at Liestoppers is claiming, you emailed him privately and told him you were going after Nurse Tara again? This smack of persecution and petty.
One of the Ks is writing snicker - grins - I told you so in spite of knowing that Nifong made the medical statement of 3/29 and the report was not published until a day later and picked up in April?
You can ban me obviously if you want, but to continue to harrass this nurse and not go after the big boys is appalling.

jamil hussein said...

That feminazi certainly deserves her 15 minute of fame (and being fired). She should seek employment with Angry Studies.

Anonymous said...

Speaking of Durham Wonderland......
Get a load of this fantasy affair.

DURHAM HOSTS NATIONAL MARCH AGAINST SEXUAL VIOLENCE, WEEK OF APRIL 19-25, 2007
The Wilmington Journal
Originally posted 4/24/2007

In the aftermath of the NC State Attorney�s Office dramatic decision to drop charges in the Duke lacrosse alleged sexual assault case, a national march and rally is being planned for Durham on April 28 to protest the prevalence of sexual violence in the community.

�The National Day of Truthtelling� is geared towards �creating a world without sexual violence,� organizers say.

�We want to create a world free from sexual violence and all forms of oppression,� they say on their website http://truthtelling.communityserver.com/. �This world will be full of the safety, possibility, dignity, justice, and peace that all people deserve.�

The site continues, �We believe that ending rape culture begins with a vision of the world without sexual violence. We believe that to get to this world, we will have to tell the truth in a culture that encourages silence about sexual violence. Our vision for the Day of Truthtelling is that in the place of these disempowering silences, we will create healing, loving, transformative spaces where we can celebrate and honor each person�s humanity and the power of community.�

�Meet us in Durham to speak, teach, learn, demonstrate, and tell the truth.�

Local organizers confirm that the controversial yearlong Duke Three case made Durham the most likely place to hold the national demonstration.

Activists from across the country are expected to come to Durham to participate.

The morning demonstration begins at 10 a.m. at W.D. Hill Center at 1308 Fayetteville Street in Durham. The march follows.

Sponsors for the event include the North Carolina Coalition Against Sexual Assault, Ubuntu, Men Against Rape Culture, SpiritHouse, Raleigh Fight Imperialism Stand Together, Southerners on New Ground, Independent Voices, Black Workers for Justice, and Freedom Road Socialist Organization/OSCL.

Endorsing organizations include the Carolina Women�s Center, Compassion Ministries of Durham; Durham Crisis Response Center; Durham Literacy Center; Durham�s People�s Alliance; the Know Book Store; Men Can Stop Rape; NC Chapter of Muslim American Society Freedom Foundation; NCSU Students for a Democratic Society; Orange County Rape Crisis Center; Triangle Area Green Party; UNC�s Feminist Students United; UNC-Chapel Hill�s Leadership and Anti-Violence Awareness; and UNC-Chapel Hill Students for a Democratic Society.

bill anderson said...

Remember, the NY Times is where people think Jayson Blair is a great reporter, Judith Miller is a great investigator, and Paul Krugman is a great economist.

When a newspaper has such low standards, there is not much one can do except read it and laugh. And then use it to line the birdcage.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Anderson,

Why would you think NYT respected Jayson Blair?

I work there, and I knew he was always considered a joke, much like Duke AAAS faculty.

Anonymous said...

7:28: I hear this is all sponsored by the "Something Happened" Coalition, and will feature keynote speaker Crystal Gail Mangum, who will speak of the importance of telling multiple conflicting stories when attempting to frame innocent bystandeers with rape/kidnapping charges.

AG Michael Nifong will speak of the "choke hold" that certain "hooligan" bloggers have in false rape cases that can have a potentially negative bearing on a retiring AG's pension.

Police Chief Chalmers will speak of the importance of "under the radar" leadership during an extended credibility crisis involving your Department, amid allegations of civil rights violations against students from out of town.

Tara Levicey will speak on new studies that show a remarkable link between public urination and the incidence of rape.

Don Imus was not invited to speak.

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

With all the possible issues out their in Durham, including the obvious corruption and now cover-up, the NYT is absent. One of the most remarkable is the current scurrying over the line-up. Now Durham says, as Mike Nifong said at the time, that the line-up is not a line-up. Leave aside the monumental point that constitutional rights don't depend upon names. (For example, if police burst into your house and rifle through your cabinets, they can't avoid a fourth amendment violation by calling it a tea party instead of a search.) The non lineup was the ONLY evidence linking the defendants to the crime. If we now accept (ha ha)that it was not a line-up, many hard questions arise. If the DPD knew at the time that it was not a line-up, why were the three defendants arrested? If they knew it was not a line-up, why did they continue to assist Nifong and make public statements in support when they knew, if their current statements are to be believed, that the three defendants were arrested following an identificaiton procedure that they knew was not a line up? I mean, this is a per se constutional violation. These three defendants were, according to the police department, arrested without probable cause as the only reason they were arrested was through the use of a procedure that was not intended to identify them.

Why isn't the NYT times asking these questions.

Also, the great anger here against the times and others is that they all knew, after the DNA tests came back, that the defendants were innocent of the crimes charged. Nonetheless, they continued to persecute them for what they were or what they were imagined to have done. Why doesn't the times look at the "sociology" of the supporters and their stereotypes?


The reasons are obvious. They don't a s___ as it doesn't fit the agenda.

You know, compare the times to Ruth Sheehan. I was outraged by her columns and thought they were irresponsible. However, I never thought she didn't believe what she wrote and she had the courage to confront her own prejudices and come clean. The NYTimes not only wont acknowledge its own prejudices, its writers just don't care.


I am as mad as ever.

streeeetwise

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

Duff Wilson and the New York Times should be sued by the three families. The depositions would be enlightening.

bill anderson said...

Mr. Anderson,

Why would you think NYT respected Jayson Blair?

I work there, and I knew he was always considered a joke, much like Duke AAAS faculty.

Apr 28, 2007 8:23:00 PM


Fair question. From what I could tell, it was the publisher and the top brass there who made the fawning comments about Blair.

I suspect you are right in that the adults who worked there were wise to Blair's antics, but I was referring to the top people at the Times, and should have made myself more clear.

But I don't take back my comments about Paul Krugman. By the way, for all of his "tax the rich" talk, when I asked him a question at the 2004 Southern Economic Association meetings in New Orleans (he was a speaker), I got an interesting answer.

My question was a paraphrase of this: Since you are critical of any cut in top income tax rates, do you advocate going back to the 70 percent top rate that existed before 1981?

Krugman's reply: "No, those rates were insane." "Insane" was HIS term, not mine.

Anonymous said...

Bill Anderson:

I have a suggestion: why don't we tax the escorts? They are reputed to charge as much per hour as lawyers, but how much of their income actually gets reported?

The now famous DC madame is a case in point.

Anonymous said...

Bill Anderson,

The Times is a lot like other liberal organizations: they wink at black failure all the while screaming that whites are the root cause thereof.

Give me a break.

Anonymous said...

The "truthtelling" march today was deliberately routed right past 610 N. Buchanan, with this address specifically marked on the route map. Even at the last minute, they might have chosen to take another route -- why could they possibly want to reinforce any association with this whole sham?

The only apparent answer is that they just can't let it go -- that they want to believe so strongly that, even now, they can't get beyond "something happened". This really says something.


This is from the website for this event:

Some people have asked if this event is a reaction to the dropping of the charges in the Duke Lacrosse case. Absolutely not: work on building this important day began in January - long before the charges were dropped. It is important to us that this day not be simplified as a reaction to the Duke Lacrosse case, because ending sexual violence is about more than any one high-profile case – all rapes deserve outrage.

Note how careful they are not to admit that this was a hoax -- they can't even admit this as a possibility, let alone the reality.
In fact, my reading is that they still explicitly label this as a rape. This is similar to the NC NAACP website -- rather than preserve any pretense of being grounded in fact, they are beholden to an ideology and an agenda. This "case" makes both of these groups very public and very stark hypocrites.

Even they themselves must see this, but they are extremist and thus, reality can't be allowed to interject itself. Disgusting.

Anonymous said...

"He asked for two white dancers to come to 610 N. Buchanan Blvd. at 11 p.m. to
entertain for a small bachelor party at the house."



This seems to be the most important new piece of information released by the AG.

It was widely and repeatedly reported throughout the media/blogosphere that the Lax players had requested one white stripper and one Hispanic stripper.

Yet the AG undeniably, explicitly states that a captain of the racist lacrosse players asked for two white dancers.

If one embraces the veracity of the AG's report as a means to conclude that a sexual assault did not literally occur, then one must also embrace the unfortunate truth that the lacrosse players are racists.

bill anderson said...

Bill Anderson:

I have a suggestion: why don't we tax the escorts? They are reputed to charge as much per hour as lawyers, but how much of their income actually gets reported?

The now famous DC madame is a case in point.

Apr 28, 2007 9:15:00 PM


I wish we could put those smileys like they do on the LS Board. There are lots of professions in which prostitute's pay would be quite appropriate.

bill anderson said...

Yet the AG undeniably, explicitly states that a captain of the racist lacrosse players asked for two white dancers.

If one embraces the veracity of the AG's report as a means to conclude that a sexual assault did not literally occur, then one must also embrace the unfortunate truth that the lacrosse players are racists.

Apr 28, 2007 9:34:00 PM


Excuse me, how does that "prove" the "unfortunate truth" that they are racists. From what I remember, they were called racists because they had black dancers.

So, had they requested black dancers, they would have been racists, since they were wanting to prove some sort of "white superiority," which is what some of the G88 were saying.

No, you simply are an ass. You are one of these people who conclude something first, and then look for facts to prove your point. Had they requested black dancers, you still would be calling them racists.

Thus, I call you an ass.

Anonymous said...


If one embraces the veracity of the AG's report as a means to conclude that a sexual assault did not literally occur, then one must also embrace the unfortunate truth that the lacrosse players are racists.


I guess that we must conclude that they are homophobic as well, since they did not ask for both male and female strippers.

hman said...

To 6:59 Re: Levicy.
A long time ago I made an effort to explain the fact that this fight was serious, on a level that civilians might struggle to understand. The multible enablers of this evil hoax worked for a long time to ruin the lives of three entirely innocent young men for patently evil and petty reasons. That alone made it Serious. That was a capitol S.
They started this fight to the death; they do not get to say when it is over. (A. Hitler understands this now -sitting in his corner of hell).
Apparently however you do not. T. Levicy took sides in this fight very early on and has passed up a long series of opportunities to repair the damage that her out-of-doors buulshit comments to the cops did at the start of this. So, give her a break?? Like, she gave the innocent guys a break?
See, no one who has ever been fu.cked with the way the LAX three were (and many,many others in the wings) will Ever get over something like this, ever feel like backing off, or giving mercy, or not pulling the trigger over and over until the job is done on the extremely evil pigs who do this sort of things... Instead, the rest of these many lives will be dedicated to Setting Things Right. Overlook the bloodshed; it will stop-eventually.
There is nothing more irreversible than an accusation of sexual mis-behaviour. Like I said, it is very un-wise to start something you cannot control.
Have a nice day...

Anonymous said...

Further yet, when 2 black dancers arrived instead of the white ones requested, the players accepted them. This would seem to fly in the face of the claim that they were racist.

I'm curious....why wouldn't the focus be on the players being sexist?

Could it be that it is natural for men to be sexually aroused by women? Could it also be that white men are naturally sexually aroused by white women?

Strippers of both sexes are hired daily. Sometimes some men would prefer to watch male dancers instead of females. This is not a crime either, but I personally find it distasteful. I will not judge a person by thier sexual preferences, be it toward race, gender, or ethnic origin. I have my tastes as well, I hardly think that could classify me as a sexist or a racist.

But thank you for shopping at K-Mart

Anonymous said...

For the sake of the trolls invading this board....

Can I get an amen from everybodyto the following statement?

"Rape is a vulgar and inexcusable crime that simply cannot be justified under any circumstances".

I don't believe anyone posting on this board disagrees with this statement, but I also don't believe it is the issue. Can I assume that everyone agrees?

Anonymous said...

Unfortunately, I think to Duff that something is "agreed" as a "fact" if that he's got two or more sources to back it up.

It has no bearing on him if those two sources are repeating the same rumor or outright lie.

Anonymous said...

Early on before charges "justiceforher" put up a web site with the players names and pictures, calling for them to be castrated. It was advertised on Google.(right hand side) Same motif as New Black Panthers who later came to campus. They were allowed to assemble & march-tried to march on campus but Duke stopped them. They had concealed weapons-police found them-but they were not charge by DA's office for illegally carrying concelaed weapon.

Anonymous said...

Early on a web site "justiceforher"
put up pictures,address, names of team calling for them to be castrated. This was advertised on Google(right hand side)Same web motif as New Black Panthers who later marched across from campus-Duke kept them off campus. Police found concealed weapons on them,contrary to agreement with Nifong, but they were not charged.

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

Well,Duke Hospital, Duke Managers and Supervisors, the NC Board of Nursing and many Health Care Professionals - other than nurses Peggy Perfect- have no problem witht his nurse. Loved your first paragraph.

Gary Packwood said...

Anonymous 10:47 said...
...For the sake of the trolls invading this board....
...Can I get an amen from everybody to the following statement?
..."Rape is a vulgar and inexcusable crime that simply cannot be justified under any circumstances".
...I don't believe anyone posting on this board disagrees with this statement, but I also don't believe it is the issue. Can I assume that everyone agrees?
::
This is very good content. Thanks
Amen from me!
The case is no longer about rape or racism or sexism.
It is about a hoax with many people involved.
It is also about professors and staff members marching and pot banging and ...demonstrating that three throw away people (David, Reade and Collin) were about to be to be thrown under the bus in order to advance agendas which still are...Racism and/or Sexism...in the whole wide world.
What is going to happen to those people on campus who demonstrated that they do believe in throw away people?
::
GP

Anonymous said...

There is no case - the boys were found INNOCENT and charges dropped.

Anonymous said...

As far as Wendy Murphy goes, I am personally changing the channel anytime she comes on, and boycotting any show that repeatedly uses her. The main stream media, both left and right, have lost all my repsect.

Mrs. Former Prosecutor said...

bill anderson 9:51:

You've noted the contradiction that anonymous 9:34 stepped into regarding the race of the strippers/dancers: either way, the Duke guys are "proven" to be racists.

To the NCCU students, Black Panthers, Al Sharpton, NYT, et al: The Duke lacrosse team were racists because they had black strippers, and were thus continuing the age old "oppression" and abuse of black women by white men. Oh wait, they didn't want black strippers? Then they're dissing on our black sisters, single mothers who just want to make a buck.

To Anon 9:34 and his ilk: they were racists because they didn't want black strippers, thus showing their dislike/disdain for black people generally.

Good grief. I haven't seen this much illogic and twisty argumentation since the women's forum at law school.

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

Thanks to Gary Packwood. I appreciate the amen.

The issue here is not that rape is excused or overlooked for any reason. The issue is that just because the word rape is used, does not mean that somebody must be held accountable.

Whatever charges are leveled against a Defendant, must be scrutinized, and probable cause must be demonstrated before a charge is issued.

Because those people who post on this board, are outraged by the injustice of the LAX scam, does not make them sexist, racist, or influenced by any other specific agenda.

I think we can safely say that rape is inexcusable....no matter who the perpetrator, and no matter who the victim. Can we get past that part, and also say that crying wolf is no better?

Anonymous said...

The case is over - a desire to chew this thing into infinity is different that the Lax Case.

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

Anon @ 11:49 Said:

"The case is over - a desire to chew this thing into infinity is different that the Lax Case."

If you truly feel this way...why do you continue to read, and post on this blog.
I'm going to continue to chew on this thing til it starts to taste a little better...

As for you, I have two suggestions

Spit or swallow

Anonymous said...

anon @ 11:52

Yes I do agree, and you have fully understood my point. Thanks for making it clear to everybody else

Anon @ 11:49
Durham Dweller

Gary Packwood said...

Mrs. Former Prosecutor 11:37 said...
...Good grief. I haven't seen this much illogic and twisty argumentation since the women's forum at law school.
::
In a weaker moment when I was very young, I volunteered to facilitate a meeting where teachers were trying come to a joint decision concerning (1) The Coffee Fund (2) The Flower Fund and (3) The Copy Machine Budget.
Comments during that meeting were not so different from comments I read here...but I seem to remember more outrage.
I was invited back to do the Parking Space discussion but I declined :-)
::
GP

Bella said...

Anonymous said at9:34...

'"He asked for two white dancers to come to 610 N. Buchanan Blvd. at 11 p.m. to entertain for a small bachelor party at the house."
This seems to be the most important new piece of information released by the AG.'

THIS is the most important piece of information? CGM's multiple conflicting stories, the obvious incompetency (at best) of the DPD, the alibis and phone records, new information about videos taken at the party...none of this matters as mush as the request for two white dancers? I have to second Bill's opinion...you're an ass.

According to your logic, I'm racist because I only ever dated men of a certain ethnicity (my Samoan husband can attest to this), thus discriminating against other ethnicities. But wait, is it not racist because he's not white? What if I'm not white? Is it only the white men asking for white dancers that bothers you?? Would it also be racist if black men had requested black dancers?

Mrs. Former Prosecutor said...

Yes, we all agree rape is bad. So are robbery, child abuse, and aggravated assault. Every crime of personal violence has one person (or more) wreaking forceful harm on another or others. It's blatantly obvious it's all bad.

Filing a false report, or crying rape (or burglary, or child abuse, etc.) falsely is an attempt to hijack the power of the government and turn it against the innocent. The harm of this is less blatant. The only thing that can prevent it is the integrity and scrupulousness of the government itself. ONLY the honesty of the DA's office and police can prevent false charges from being filed. Defense lawyers can help, but they don't make any of the decisions to apply the awesome, overwhelming power of the goverment against an individual citizen.

And while suffering from an individual criminal attack is bad, think how bad it would be for everyone, all across the country, if we were (like some countries) at the mercy of corrupt complaining witnesses, who with a well-connected complaint to a police authority, could dump us into a nightmare where we have to fight the well-funded might of the system? If we ever reach that stage, our country is through. This is something the "no woman lies about rape" club will never ever understand.

Mrs. Former Prosecutor said...

To Gary Packwood, 12:01 a.m:

Yes, I'll argue here any day, but leave me OUT of the parking battle.

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

Ms. Former Prosecutor,

While I am in full agreement with your statements....there can not be a "however" attached to your expression that "rape is bad".

What the "something happened in that house" crowd is now saying, is that not only don't we appreciate the fact that a black woman "could have conceivably been raped", but we don't have a full understanding that rape does actually happen and we are indifferent toward it. This is why this case ended up this way, because, when race and social status are introduced to the picture, we fail to focus on the rape (that never happened).

And this is why we must have a day of truth telling in Durham, to explain that there is a portion of the community that didn't focus on the rape (that never happened), and instead defended innocent people because they were persecuted because of thier race and social status.

All we need to do is to agree that rape is inexcusable.

If they want to interject that the "thought " of a white raping a black is the issue...then they become racists...because we believe that rape is always inexcusable.

Anonymous said...

11:54 Wow - I make a comment and you come out like gangbusters, ranting and raving. Chew it all you want - Kc is done in June and I will depart with him. .

Anonymous said...

12:04

You're wrong. The best way to prevent future Panties episodes is to create a statute that makes what she did a felony with a minimum 10-year prison sentence.

That's a message underclass sociopaths like Panties will understand. Anything else is bullshit.

Anonymous said...

12:24

I like it--the Panties statute.

Anyone notice how fat she is?

She nasty.

Anonymous said...

Anon @ 12:04 Said:

11:54 Wow - I make a comment and you come out like gangbusters, ranting and raving. Chew it all you want - Kc is done in June and I will depart with him. .

Apr 29, 2007 12:22:00 AM

So...you are going to hang in there til June? Sounds like you aren't spitting or swallowing....you are going to chew on it like the rest of us. If K.C. goes away in June, I'll continue chewing if things haven't changed. I live in Durham, and I could easily be the victim of this system. It is our constitutional (and god-given) duty to challenge injustice.

Many of the facts of this case that have brought "some" justice to light, have been introduced in this very blog. Because people shared thoughts opinions and most of all "facts".

Just because the charges have been dropped doesn't mean that justice has been done.

The charges were dropped because facts came to light that the accused had been railroaded. Now the railroad workers must pay for thier corruption.

The case is not over, but at least thier are three families that can rest at night having a little bit of faith that "injustice" can be defeated.

Anonymous said...

What do you care?

Anonymous said...

BTW, the only one going down is Nifong and only because he exposed the NC Justice system to the world. I fully support getting the big guys - In the words of Larry the Cable guy "get her done"

Anonymous said...

What do I care?

I care that this could have been me, my neighbor, my family. Praise the lord because none of us have the means to defend ourselves the way the Duke 3 did.

If it had been me (I don't attend strip-parties), I would have been forced to accept a plea bargain that would put me in jail for 10 + years for a crime I didn't commit, because the alternative would be thirty years.

What are you doing for the next ten years?

Anonymous said...

well, I am seventy with a heart condition and recovering from surgery, being alive works for me -I meant what do you care what I do in connection to this blog d

Anonymous said...

I really don't care what you do with this blog. But if you are truly tired of hearing people chewing this topic endlessly when you feel the case is over, then perhaps you don't appreciate the fact that thirty years to a 20 year old is more than the time he has spent in this world. I am quite a bit better than thirty years old, and at the age of twenty, I made my share of mis-steps. I am very thankful that my minor infractions weren't held up to the world as a case of class warfare, and would still be behind bars as a result. My daughter would never had been born, and I would not have attained the successes I enjoy.

If we accept that this case is over....this will happen again tommorow...because guess what?, Nifong is still D.A.

If we fail to condemn his actions (along with the actions of his enablers), somebody else will take his place tommorrow, and they will bring with them new enablers.

So I will chew this thing until eternity if it isn't corrected before then. I understand your age and medical condition, so you probably don't have thirty years that you can commit to spending behind bars...I might just have those years in front of me....I don't think I will consider spending them behind bars because I fit a convenient profile that might help somebody get elected. So I'll not call this case closed just yet...Justice has not yet been served.

Anonymous said...

I think if I have learned anything from Duke Lax, it is never agree to plea bargin if you are innocent - go down fighting with your public defender if necessary -If you did it, make the best deal you can plea bargaining.

Anonymous said...

Of course, we all did. Fifty years ago, mothers received a form with baby's footprints right after delivery. My nursing classmates - including me made fake IDs with one.

Anonymous said...

The Boys wanted white girls is new information? I posted that 8 months ago on LS and I think here. It was common knowledge on campus.

Where have you trolls been the last 8 months, planning a lynching?

Kemp

Anonymous said...

Kemp - why are you joining the name calling? I am aware of the danges of alcohol use and your bar buddy was never entertaining to me. but no one called you names for writing about him/her. To disagree does not deserve disrespect.

Anonymous said...

Someone mentioned the horror
of rape - in a much earlier
thread, someone else
differentiated between the
types of rape. And there
are differences. Big
differences.

But as someone said: the issue
here is not rape - except for
the rape of justice, and the
emotional rape of the boys.

And those will likely be different
than the type that future
ex-Prosecutor Nifong might
experience.