Saturday, June 16, 2007

Nifong Inconsistencies

Notes that Nifong offered many different stories to explain his DNA coverup.

Nifong, therefore, has no credibility on this issue. Wholly inconsistent to claim, as Nifong has done, that he never reviewed the May 12 report.

These were "intentionally false representations."

21 comments:

Anonymous said...

nut just reckless but intentional.

Anonymous said...

Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.

That means...be prepared for NO disbarrment. Although deserved, it is NOT going to happen.

Anonymous said...

I say he goes down.
Will anything else save the legal system in NC.

Anonymous said...

Good commentary on WRAL.

Anonymous said...

sorry. by "goes down", i mean dibarred.

Anonymous said...

KC Are they going to get the UBUNTU person to do interpretive dance with the with closing arguments of the defence... If not they should. Please ask them if you can.

Anonymous said...

Why did he drag his kid to court?

Anonymous said...

10:49 Because he's so selfish/narcissistic.

In some ways, this is a a tragedy in the classic sense; Nifond is the epitome of hubris.

Anonymous said...

Nifong's tears and false contrition can only be a clue of a deal (or one other thing, read on). Remove your emotion and ask yourself how can contrition and "something happened" coexist in a healthy mind? That leaves a mental disorder as the only other possibility in addition to the back room deal possibility.

Anonymous said...

10:49 -- Because (a) he has no shame and (b) he has this delusion that he can leverage his kid to reduce his punishment.

Anonymous said...

"Why did he drag his kid to court?"

To help consumate his deal.

Anonymous said...

Intentionality is the key point: if the Bar finds he acted intentionally, they will be hard pressed not to disbar him. On the other hand, if they cannot be satisfied he acted intentionally, look for a longish (3-5 year) suspension.

A finding that Nifong acted intentionally will also cook Nifong for civil suits and open him up to criminal charges.

My guess is that the Bar will not be able to bring themselves to conclude he acted intentionally.

Anonymous said...

DOES ANYONE KNOW what the avenue of appeal is from this disciplinary hearing? Does Nifong go to a normal trial-level state court or to a ct of appeals?

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

10:53 Likely appealing is not part of the deal the bar likely offered him.

I think punishment has already been determined. We are only seeing the formality of closure. The bar doesn't want to project an image that this was a quickie.

Anonymous said...

I must be too dumb.
This seems to be a slam dunk for disbarrment to me.
The world is watching and NC will look so bad if they give him a little slap on the hands.
I say they make an example of nifong and slap him back to civilianship.

Anonymous said...

there is a difference between "knowingly" and "intentional"??

Walter Cronanty said...

It will be interesting to see what the panel says about Nifong's credibility - may not say until penalty phase. I don't know about NC, but in Ohio, even if it's the pettiest of violations of the rules deserving of, say, a public reprimand, if you lie to disciplinary counsel, you're toast for at least a year or two. Given that Nifong apparently lied on several occasions to the panel itself, let alone in his depositions, if they don't buy his stories, he could be gone. If they buy some of his whoppers, 5 years.

Anonymous said...

This doesn't go to a regular trial court or an appeals court because this is a Bar action, not an action of the statutory legal system per se. Hard as it may be to believe, the Bar Associations around the country are mostly independant of that system. (intentionally so) Generally, an appeal from a Bar disciplinary hearing goes to a special Bar Appeals board which rehears the evidence (and very rarely, if ever overturns the original finding)

There are generally no other appeals available except a civil suit against the Bar.

This is also why it doesn't matter whether or not they proved that Nifong violated any statutory provisions, as Williamson pointed out. As long as he violated the Bar's private rules of ethics (private = non-statutory) then they can (and should) find him guilty of the charges. Whether or not he violated a statute goes only as to how severe the punishment should be.

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

He will be disbarred. It isnt even close. He did the wrong thing at the wrong time to the wrong people.

The only debatable issue is whether he will be charged criminally and serve jail time.

This Bar trial is just a dog and pony show to make the good ole boys in NC shift attention from their corrupt legal system.