Tuesday, June 19, 2007

A Wild Day

Even for a case known for breaking news on the least expected occasions, yesterday was unusually hectic.

The day began with Reade Seligmann’s appearance on the Today show. Seligmann confirmed that the three players’ attorneys would file a sanctions motion against Mike Nifong. He went out of his way to praise the State Bar and the North Carolina Disciplinary Hearing Commission, whose actions “provided all of our family with a lot of closure.” Seligmann noted that while the affair was “probably something you’ll never get over . . . the state bar really did an incredible job. They showed courage by intervening in our case, and they did do the right thing by disbarring Mr. Nifong.”

A few hours later, Nifong arrived at his Durham office, ready to begin the workweek as if nothing at all had happened at the State Bar. In his teary-eyed testimony last Friday, he strongly implied that he would resign immediately as district attorney. Instead, in a resignation letter that was publicly released just after noon, Nifong said that he planned to stay on for four more weeks, collecting more than $10,000 in salary and fortifying his pension.

The disgraced DA informed Governor Mike Easley, “Should the person you appoint to succeed me wish to speak with me during the remainder of my term of service about facilitating transition to a new administration, I would be more than happy to attempt to accommodate his or her needs.”

Senior resident judge Orlando Hudson, apparently oblivious that Nifong could use his remaining time in office to obstruct a possible criminal inquiry, declared that he would not act on Beth Brewer’s motion that Nifong be suspended or removed.

Durham City Councilman Eugene Brown, on the other hand, was appropriately outraged: “What is he trying to prove? This is like rubbing salt into the community’s wound. He has resigned and been disbarred. Does he not get it?”

In the media world, CNN and Washington Post critic Howie Kurtz ran a 12.00pm-1.00pm on-line chat, fielding several questions about the lacrosse case. Kurtz, appropriately, criticized the media’s spring 2006 rush to judgment, singling out Nancy Grace and Newsweek’s decision to place Seligmann’s and Collin Finnerty’s mugshots on the cover, under the guilt-presuming headline of “Sex, Lies, and Duke.”

Then, however, he was asked a seeming softball: The New York Times coverage of the Nifong hearing has been remarkably biased towards Nifong, in both choices of excerpts to use and in the slant of the articles. Do you know why this is the case?

Kurtz’s response? “I have no clue what you’re talking about.”

He cited the only reasonably fair story on the hearing penned by Duff Wilson, in the Saturday paper. Kurtz apparently missed everything else Wilson wrote about the hearing, or the remarkable event of Brad Bannon publicly calling out the Times reporter from the witness stand.

At a 2.30pm press conference, Easley expressed outrage at Nifong’s decision to hang on for an additional 28 days. The normally taciturn governor told reporters that Nifong “should have left and not gone back,” except to clean out his office. “I don’t think he ought to be in the district attorney’s office, having been disbarred,” Easley continued. “As a prosecutor . . . constitutionally, you’re given an awful lot of power. You can destroy a reputation within moments.” Yet under North Carolina’s arcane procedures, neither the governor nor any other statewide official has the power to remove a sitting DA.

At 3.00pm, Duke—an institution known for its hard-ball tactics in dealing with lawsuits—announced a settlement with the three falsely accused players and their families. Per customary university policy, no terms were released, and both sides issued gracious statements about the dangers of false prosecution. That said, the follow-up on the previous settlements (with the Dowds and with former coach Mike Pressler) was difficult to miss.

Shortly thereafter, Paul Haagen, outgoing chair of the Academic Council, e-mailed other Council members to explain the settlement. The critical sentence: “As a result of the settlement, all faculty have been released from any claims of liability related to the lacrosse matter up through the date of the settlement (June 18, 2007).” While the Duke administration has been unwilling to hold a segment of its faculty to minimal standards of the profession, it seems that it was willing to use University funds to protect those same faculty members from legal action. From a tactical standpoint, the decision was a wise one by the Brodhead/Steel team—any lawsuit by the three families would have been a public relations nightmare for Duke.

Meanwhile, criticism of Nifong’s recalcitrance mounted. City Councilman Thomas Stith termed it “a disservice to the community for him to continue to hold onto office. I don't understand why he’d want to continue to drag this out for another 30 days. It is again making us all suffer for his decisions.” City Councilman Mike Woodard and Durham County Commissioners Chairwoman Ellen Reckhow expressed similar sentiments.

Then, just after 8.00pm, the N&O reported that Judge Orlando Hudson, chief resident Superior Court judge in Durham County, had reversed his earlier position and would suspend Mike Nifong from office today. Hudson also announced that he would appoint a special prosecutor to consider a criminal case against Nifong, although his authority for doing so is unclear.

Hudson told WRAL, “There is some concern that a resignation effective at a later date could cause complications as far as legal proceedings go.” In comments to the Herald-Sun, Hudson added, “All you need to suspend him is probable cause. You have much more than probable cause with a clear and cogent finding by the State Bar.” He didn’t say why he had not reached that conclusion immediately.

Meanwhile, U.S. Representative Walter Jones renewed his call for a Justice Department inquiry, which increasingly seems the only way to get to the root of Durham’s problems. He promised to have another letter to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales out this week.

So Nifong is out. Presumably Linwood Wilson will follow. Can a criminal inquiry be far behind?

191 comments:

Anonymous said...

KC I think you are right. They are going to open a criminal investigation. Himan's testimony left the door wide open.

DL '00

Anonymous said...

DL 00
The Feds will not open a criminal investigation if the State opens one first.

The Feds will only act if all else fails.

Are you the one yesterday saying no cause to sue Duke and Duke wiil not settle?

Anonymous said...

Ahhhh....satisfaction. Along with everything else, still hoping to see the 40 players' civil suits agsinst the Wanted Poster culprits.

Anonymous said...

Once again, the NC judiciary (excluding the NC state bar) fails to get it right the first time and appears reactionary. Why did Hudson not immediately suspend Nifong? I hope Judge Smith acts more prudently.

I also sincerely hope the Duke families received an 8 figure settlement from Duke. The Duke faculty and admin is getting off too easy.

I wonder when settlement negotiations really started.

Anonymous said...

Fongster is in deep doo-doo. Everyone is turning on him now.

He must be wondering why he did this now.

Anonymous said...

UNFINISHED BUSINESS

tom sowell

The disbarment of Durham District Attorney Michael Nifong should be just the first step in remedying the gross and cynical fraud of last year's "rape" case against Duke University lacrosse players.

Not only is Nifong still liable to civil lawsuits from the three young men whose lives he tried to ruin, and criminal prosecution for his obstruction of justice and making false statements to a judge, there are many other people who disgraced themselves in hyping a lynch mob atmosphere when this case first broke last year.

The New York Times, which splashed these Duke students' pictures on the front page, along with inflammatory charges against them, and went ballistic on its editorial page, carried the story of Nifong's disbarment for prosecuting them on page 16.

The 88 Duke University faculty members who took out a hysterical ad, supporting those local loudmouths who were denouncing and threatening the Duke students, have apparently had nothing at all to say now.

Not only did many Duke University professors join the lynch mob atmosphere, so did the Duke University administration, which got rid of the lacrosse coach and cancelled the team's season, without a speck of evidence that anybody was guilty of anything.

This is one of the few times when Jesse Jackson is speechless, even though he was loudly supporting the bogus "rape" charges last year.

A local civil rights activist even had the gall to accost the mother of one of the accused students at Nifong's disbarment hearings to say that she still believes they were guilty.

The sad and tragic fact is that the civil rights movement, despite its honorable and courageous past, has over the years degenerated into a demagogic hustle, promoting the mindless racism they once fought against.

Although the committee that disbarred Michael Nifong said many things that needed to be said, they muddied the waters by saying that Nifong may have deceived himself before he deceived others.

Nothing that District Attorney Nifong did suggests that he ever thought these players were guilty or that he ever intended to bring them to trial.

The photo lineup presented to the stripper was so completely different from standard procedure that it was virtually an invitation for a judge to throw out any identification resulting from it -- and without that identification, there was no case.

This was not about winning a case. It was about winning an election.

Nifong could not allow a standard lineup to be used to have the accuser identify her alleged attackers, or else her unreliability would have been exposed early on, depriving him of a case to use to get the black vote in his election.

There is not the slightest reason to believe that Nifong was deceived or mistaken. He was not some kid fresh out of law school. He had decades of experience as a prosecutor. He knew exactly what he was doing.

Nor was the New York Times a naive ingenue in these matters. It had backed Al Sharpton's fraudulent accusations of rape in the Tawana Brawley case, which had the same politically correct elements of a black woman accusing white men of rape.

Nor were the 88 Duke faculty members who promoted a lynch mob atmosphere naive. Most were from departments promoting the "race, class, and gender" vision of victimhood.

This case served their purposes. That trumped any question about whether the charges were true or not.

Don't expect any of these people to recant or apologize. But be aware of how wide and how deep the moral dry rot goes.

That such people are teaching students at an elite university is a chilling thought. That they promote a campus atmosphere where political correctness trumps the search for truth is painful.

That such attitudes and such atmospheres are not peculiar to Duke University, but are common on elite college campuses from coast to coast is a time bomb with the potential to destroy individuals and ultimately undermine the whole society.

Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and author of Basic Economics: A Citizen's Guide to the Economy.

becket03 said...

The danger is that Hudson hand picks a hack to perform a whitewash. I don't trust Hudson's judgment or motives.

beckett

Anonymous said...

JLS says....,

A couple of flies in the ointment:

1. If Nifong is suspended, is that suspended with pay and will that keep him nominally the DA even longer building that pension.

2. Could Judge Hudson be trying to preempt a real criminal investigation by appointing a white-wash investigation? If the Judge's "investigation" decides there is no reason to file charges against Nifong or Wilson or Gottlieb, then will anyone else look at this?

Anonymous said...

I don't think hacks get appointed to investigate this POS. Why would anyone go easy on this turd? He's got a target on his back. Plus, let's not forget that this pariah has to deal with civil suits, and that means depositions. More crap is bound to come out. Durham is going to writing a big f'in check.

Gary Packwood said...

KC Said...Paul Haagen, outgoing chair of the Academic Council,
“As a result of the settlement, all faculty have been released from any claims of liability related to the lacrosse matter up through the date of the settlement (June 18, 2007).”
::
Now there is the 'shut up and teach' statement and the faculty are on their own for any deviation from that statement starting today ...June 19, 2007

Good!

I'll bet the ThugNiggerIntellectual will not be able to keep his mouth shut about privileged white folks and lacrosse fans past Thanksgiving.
::
GP

Anonymous said...

this seems to violate the confidentiality agreement

As a result of the settlement, all faculty have been released from any claims of liability related to the lacrosse matter up through the date of the settlement (June 18, 2007).”

Anonymous said...

JLS says...,

Actually the e-mail was a private communication with people who were parties of the settlement, ie the right to sue them was waived. So while leaking it violated the confidentiality, sending it did not.

Anonymous said...

That to be expect, if anyone sued Duke, named the group of 88 also. They would, and probably did ask Duke to protect them.

Additionally Duke know that putting them thru discovery would be a disaster for the school.

Michael said...

When Linwood goes on trial, I just might make
the long trek to NC to watch that one live.

I can't wait for that jerk to go down.

Anonymous said...

Duke got ahead of the problem and did the best thing by approaching the students with an offer.

On Fox they estimated at least a million apiece.

Anonymous said...

12:07

Yep and I stand by that. The settlement wasn't a "we're scared of a successful lawsuit" it was "man we really didn't stand by our students very well." Still no cause to sue Duke. Haven't heard a cause of action that would survive a MTD yet. But I think Duke did the right think by settling early and (probably) paying the legal fees.

DL '00

Anonymous said...

well we NOW KNOW that duke and the group of 88 were fearing being SUED...this is proof of their trepidation....

Anonymous said...

A good point was made a few minutes ago. What guarantee is there that Judge Hudson won't appoint a party hack? Someone reported that the appointee is a longtime buddy of John Edwards — not exactly a confidence-builder.

Anonymous said...

Do the other 43 (or 44) players have any cause of action here or is the G88 now officially off the hook? What about the leading light of the G88 who is now at Vanderbilt?


I'd really like to see an admission that they were mistaken and an apology. If there is no longer any legal reason not to do so, this would only help them to rehabilitate themselves (at least their public perception). This could even have been part of the terms of settlement -- to be released at a later point in time as drafted for them (many don't write well and seem only to be able to make things worse) before today's announcement.


Really, at least some of these should be out of work and all should have a huge red, career-ending flag on their file. We have seen nothing but appeasment, promotion, and advancement of their interests by the administration -- any chance this big bill will have helped them see more clearly?

Anonymous said...

JLS:

I have no reason to think Judge Hudson is trying to whitewash this. He is supposedly appointing Robert Zaytoun, a civil rights lawyer. This guy will be gunning for Nifong who violated the Duke3's civil rights.

DL '00

Anonymous said...

I noticed nothing was mentioned on the hospital side of the settlement..... Nurse Tara Levicy, the one who got this whole hoax started! I have it on good and trusted authority from a poster on another blog, a nurse too, and KC here, that Levicy is guilty as can be. When are they going to sue her ass?

Right KC?

Anonymous said...

DL 00
The group of 88 fear of being sued works to the lax players benefit.

Anonymous said...

Nurse Tara Levicy

Saw her testify, she did not say anything to sue for. Maybe other people made things up?

Anonymous said...

12:35

OK. I mean I can see one of those leaders (like Lubiano) being nervous. But there isn't a whole lot there legally IMHO.

DL '00

Anonymous said...

The reason for the appointment could be to stall the feds. The judges in Durham fear the feds.

Anonymous said...

the group of 88 can possibly be actioned for denial of civil rights of the players in a federal action...they encouraged mob action without facts...much like their poor attempts at scholarship

they put the team at risk

Mike Lee said...

So, being convicted of 20 something ethical offenses, being disbarred, trying to frame 3 innocent guys and send them to jail for 30 years etc. Now we know what it takes to get fired from your job as a prosecutor in Durham.

So, let's see...accusing your own students of rape or covering it up in writing, signing on to the Group of 88 ad, attending protests calling for the player's castration, grade retaliation, being named as a defendent along with your University in a court case in which you commit the worst ethical violation possible......I wonder what exactly it takes to get fired from your job as a Professor in Durham.

Anonymous said...

12:40

I don't disagree that the 88's ad was poorly conceived (and wrong and obviously leftist biased). But it is not actionable. It is free speech. It's not even a close question IMHO.

Dl '00

luke said...

"Ahhhh....satisfaction. Along with everything else, still hoping to see the 40 players' civil suits agsinst the Wanted Poster culprits."

I guess it depends on the claim contemplated. At first blush, it would appear if any of the players entertained a defamation suit, the statute of limitations has probably expired -- the NC limitation period for defamation is one year. There is, like everything with the law, a twist however. IF the players and the University had voluntarily agreed to toll the clicking of the limitations period pending negotiations, that would keep the claim alive. I'm assuming none of the players was under 18.

Anonymous said...

it led to mob violence and that assault...you must have been asleep in torts and criminal civil rights

Anonymous said...

Nifong is well on his way to getting what he deserves, jail time. But there are a number of others who need to face the bar of justice as well. Here is a partial list:

1) Kim Curtis
2) Linwood Wilson
3) David Addison

Anonymous said...

JLS says....,

re: DL00

I have no reason to think Judge Hudson is not trying to whitewash this. Given the history of this case who do you think is adopting the more rational attitude?

As for appointing a Democrat to investigate a Democrat who used a criminal case to steal and election, lets just say I am not really all the impressed. BTW, his website does not mention civil rights law, but he is a tort guy and seems to have all of 4 years of prescutorial experience a quarter of a century ago.

Anonymous said...

Whether or not it is actionable, the players were damaged and including the group of 88 would get your clients money.

Anonymous said...

12:45

That is the most tenuous connection I've ever heard. You are trying to link the Black Panther assault at the fast food place to the 88's ad? C'mon. That's weak. It was in reaction to the case itself.

I'm also not familiar with "criminal civil rights" (as it's not a class at Duke).

I'm pretty sure about torts though. The ad isn't one.

DL '00

Anonymous said...

12:48

The problem with most of the posts here is the belief that you can just sue without any basis and someone will write you a check.

If it is not actionable, it will be thrown out.

Now maybe there are individual statements that are slanderous. But the ad is not one of them. It wouldn't get you anywhere legally IMHO.

DL '00

Anonymous said...

I think that it will be very difficult for a prosecutor to sweep any of this under the rug. I think all wrong doers will get theirs in time. You now have the attention of such people as Dr. Sowell. Sunlight is the great disinfectant.

Anonymous said...

JLS:

I don't see it frankly. Just more conspiracy theories. The bar got it right. The judge reversed himself to get Nifong out earlier. They are not going to whitewash this. It is kick ass time. I think.

DL '00

gs said...

Unless the judge moves quickly with a hearing, Nifong will just stay at home and collect his salary.

Anonymous said...

Nifong's letter saying he will leave office on July 13th takes the cake. This just reaffirms all we have been shown over the last 16 months. This man has no shame. Was he sitting in on the same hearing?

This move proves conclusively that Mike Nifong is a sick sick man. He has something very wrong with him. I am serious I think he has some serious mental problems.

Did he think people would just let that decision stand? This man is absolutely nuts.

Anonymous said...

Oooooh,another letter to Alberto "I can't recall" Gonzalez. A man who in repeated testimony before Congress has demonstrated not only a lack of ethics, morality and common decency, but a lack of memory.

Maybe if you told ol' Abu that the three exonerated young men were really enemy combatants, we could then toss them in Guantanamo, or better yet, one of his flunkies could investigate Cheshire and Bannon for election fraud.

Otherwise, you're just barking up a tree, because carrying water for drunken fool of a master is just about all he's good for.

Anonymous said...

JLS says...,

re: DL00

It is NOT a conspiracy theory at all. Just what we economist call rational expectations.

I had no doubt the bar would get it right. That was clear from the breaking precident and filing ethics charges against a DA in an ongoing case.

On the other hand, Judges in Durham have been consistently disappointing and doing the wrong things in this case. I understand they are not some gatekeeper trier of facts and could not dismiss the case immediately but they could have understood the case, held Nifong's feet to the fire more and generally not behaved as enablers. Hudson could have removed Nifong or at least followed the law when the first petition to remove Nifong was filed. He didn't. Why should I expect more of him now?

Anonymous said...

JLS:

Maybe you are right, although with everything that has now transpired, I expect he will not hesitate to go after Nifong (in part to exonerate his earlier actions).

If you are an economist I would expect you to stand up and debunk some of this "Duke paid $100M" nonsense!

DL '00

Michael said...

I don't watch the Nancy Grace show, so
I never saw the show she ran the day the
indictments were handed down -- I just
saw it on YouTube.

Oh my gosh, she look really bad -- she
had them already hung. Lane Williamson
was definitely referring to her when he said
"and some still look foolish" What an
embarrassing display of unabashed stupidity.

Anonymous said...

I used to like Nancy Grace. I can never respect her after her performance in this case.

DL '00

Mike said...

The problem with most of the posts here is the belief that you can just sue without any basis and someone will write you a check.


I disagree. Duke could have prevailed on a MTD, and scored a (justified) legal victory. But they would have suffered EVEN GREATER in the Court of Public Opinion. You know, the place from whence springs their future students.

Everyone knows the Duke Profs JUMPED at the chance to attack the lax guys. Beating them in a lawsuit would have cost them more than cutting the checks they did today.

Anonymous said...

mike:

I guess I disagree because I don't think Duke should be viewed as a primarily responsible party. So it would be perfectly OK for them to file the MTD and dodge flak. Maybe it's because I'm an alum. Also, I have been confused by some folks' belief that Duke is automatically responsible for everything the profs (i.e. 88) do, which is not the law.

Anyway.

DL '00

Anonymous said...

Okay, okay, I'm no legal expert, and don't know who can be sued, but here are the people I'd LIKE to see sued: Sam Hummell, Selena Sebring, Manju, Lubiano, Clown Proffitt, and anyone else behind the Vigilante Posters; the New Black Panthers for death threats; Amanda Marcotte, for calling the Duke guys rapists as late as December of '06. Nancy Grace and Wendy Murphy, too, though I don't think they can be gotten on anything. Alan Gurganis needs to be punished with contempt from now onward.

Legal Eagle said...

Today's settlement only shields Duke from the three boys.

That leaves at least forty more lacrosse players to go, and there's ample cause for action, beginning with Breach of Contract.

Aside from Duke, even the normally complicit judges are running for cover - now that the scope of judicial corruption (Hudson, for example) becomes more apparent.

If the DoJ wasn't looking closely before, recent events have garnered their full attention.

Anonymous said...

1:15

Fair enough if we are talking non-legally.

DL '00

Anonymous said...

Legal eagle:

Not so sure about that IMHO.

DL '00

Duke1965 said...

DL '00,

Like you, I don't think there ever was a viable cause of action against Duke or the G88..... the settlement was made to head off a public relations nightmare.... in any other context, it would be called a "nuisance settlement".... the deep pockets are always vulnerable in this kind of situation. In hindsight, should the Duke administration have handled things differently? Of course, and I sincerely hope they and many others have learned from this fiasco, but I'm not entirely optimistic. The overarching issue here is due process, especially for the most despised of defendants.... now that Nifong is a truly despised (potential) defendant, the attitude of many posters seems to be, "Let's hang him, who needs a trial!!" Due process doesn't mean anything unless it applies to the most despised defendants. That's where it's truly tested, as the LAX3 found out. And Reade Seligmann had it right when he observed that the issue is particularly important in cases where the defendant doesn't have the resources he had....... there are so many agendas surrounding this case, it's easy to lose sight of the real meaning in terms of the justice system.

dave in boca said...

Kurtz at the Washington Post used to be a good reporter, and I was interviewed by him in the eighties and he was eminently fair, unlike many other reporters from the NYT, and other big national outlets.

Now he is covering for the NYT because he has arrived at the Big League status where they all scratch each others' backs. Ditto with Chris Matthews, who was a decent guy when I knew him back in the day. Ditto, George Tenet and a half-dozen other people I knew who got the big head once they arrived at the top of the DC slippery pole.

Anonymous said...

Amen duke 1965. Well said.

Dl '00

dave in boca said...

I wish there was some way to get at the tenured Duke faculty idiots who signed the infamous letter about the lax team all but accusing them of guilt.

Nancy Grace is ridiculous, but she fits right in at CNN.

Duke was pilloried in Tom Wolfe's book I am Charlotte Simmons [?] a couple of years before the scandal, and this saga was an example of life imitating art.

Anonymous said...

Nurse Tara Levicy 12:36:00 AM
"Saw her testify, she did not say anything to sue for. Maybe other people made things up?"

Oh no! No way! This nurse at liestoppers, Kethra, is an expert SANE nurse, and Bill Anderson (he always says he has information on good authority) and here on KC's blog - they all say that Levicy was no good, not even qualified to do her job and that nurse Tara falsified documents and lied at Nifong's hearing. There was another nurse too, Kathy, who backed it all up on her own web site. When is Tara gonna git hers? The good people at Liestoppers never lie!!!!

Anonymous said...

JLS says....,

re: DL00

The more you say things like:

"I used to like Nancy Grace."

the less I believe you are an Duke law grad. I find it very hard to believe ANY lawyers would find her hang them all approach to law acceptable. She does not seem to like nor respect the American legal system. I find it hard to believe those who make their living in it would have any respect for her.

TaterCon said...

Just trying to recall, but didn't AG Cooper indicate he wasn't looking into criminal charges against Nifong because he hadn't officially been asked to do so? If so, doesn't Judge Hudson have the authority to petition Cooper to initiate such an investigation now against the DA of his district that just won't go away?

Unless I'm missing something, a salaried staff at the AG's office is already in place within the tax funded budget of the citizens of North Carolina. A "special prosecutor" would not come cheap ... has Judge Hudson secured the funding?

I'm afraid I don't know the answer to KC's discussion begging statement that the judge's authority to appoint a special prosecutor is "unclear." Seems the prudent thing to do, though, would be to get the AG's office involved again, and if Cooper finds merit (and authority) in seeking the independent assistance of a special prosecutor, let him be the one to push the button.

Derek O'Connor said...

So, Mr Nifong has been properly chastised, and probably faces further chastisement, by members of his own profession.

But what will happen to the academic Nifongs at Duke? Nothing, I suspect. There will be no Academic Bar or Disciplinary Hearing Commission.

As an academic, I find this to be the most troubling aspect of this case.

Yan Ilkensord said...

Nice. Would it be wrong to hope that Mike Nifong experiences in reality the fiction that he so pathetically paraded in front of us last year at least twice a day while he's serving out an appropriate sentence in a NC state peniteniary?

Anonymous said...

How about some props for those two gals responsible for the motion that empowered Judge Huson to give the boot to Nifong?

Beth Brewer & Betty Lawrence! I didn't see one mention in your article KC. They were very busy today! Durham owes them a big thank you!

Anonymous said...

AG Cooper said he lacked "statutory authority" - which in lay terms means "political authority."

Anonymous said...

JLS says....,

My view of potential law suits was:

1. Mangum can and should be sued.

2. Nifong can and should be sued.

3. Duke was at great risk which is why they settled and are settling every case very quickly. I expect them to settle with the rest of the 2006 Duke lacross players very soon too. Duks agents including the 88 could have been sued too which is why they were covered in the settlement.

4. Durham can be sued for the actions of the DPD and their agent Gottlieb if he made up evidence can be sued.

5. Durham County can be sued for the actions of their agent Nifong.

That is it in my view. I have yet to see a cause of action against:

6. Anyone in the media.

7. Other than Gottlieb for making up evidence, I dont see any suits against individuals in the DPD. The spokesman is not liable. He repeated the DPD line. He could not read every case file before commenting. Like any spokes person he says what he is told.

8. Anyone at DUMC including Levicy. First of all I doubt Duke settled without a global settlement. So I think there will be no suits against DUMC. Secondly, DUMC gathered the evidence which Nifong hid. An employee, Levicy, offered an opinion when asked by the police that turned out to be wrong, but it was clearly an opinion and the DUMC staff did their jobs and gathered the evidence.


So there are plenty of potential suits out there. But clearly some people here do not understand that people with no duty toward the indicted, the media, a hospital nurse, DPD's spokesman can offer their opinion or their organization's official view with no fear of personal law suits.

Anonymous said...

Have to agree with JLS 1:27: I used to like Nancy Grace?!

Even if you firmly believe every person accused is utterly guilty, every single one, afraid that's still no excuse for having ever been able to stomach Nancy Grace. If she didn't give you the creeps within ten seconds of your first sight of her, well...

Surely to goodness those people who watch her do so because she's a freak, and her stories are the most lurid she can dig up?

Anonymous said...

Bottom line: Duke settled on behalf of the university and the faculty members because Richard Brodhead's worst nightmare is having half the staff and a bunch of students deposed and every bad thing said about the lax'ers read into the public record and commentary under oath extracted from every person involved. And yes, despite the wishful thinking from DL '00, I think there was sufficient cause of action to get to trial, if not win one.

I wonder if Houston Baker is covered under the terms of the settlement? Probably.

I think somebody got to Hudson; basically told him to either start playing on the right team or else. I don't know how judges are appointed or elected in NC but either way I doubt being labeled as Mike Nifong's BFF will be good for the career. Even if Hudson can't be forced out, his career can certainly be stalled. Not that I'm criticizing, I think Hudson is somebody who needed getting to.

billposer said...

I am wondering to what extent suits by the three accused would be against Nifong personally as opposed to the District Attorney's office. On the one hand, he presumably has qualified immunity. What does it take to get past that in North Carolina? On the other hand, he was acting in his official capacity, so isn't this a case of respondeat superior?

Anonymous said...

JLS...
you forgot Linwood Wilson !!

BDay

Cedarford said...

JLS - That is it in my view. I have yet to see a cause of action against:*snip"

6. Anyone in the media. Grace's reputation is in tatters. She is hated by many in the legal system. She was an unethical prosecutor. Most importantly, she HAS been successfully sued for defamation and libelous remarks in recent years.
Yeah, you have to give the mighty NY Times it's customary pass on being sued, but that doesn't mean you cant sue low-hanging turds on the sh*t tree of reckless journalists like Grace.
Even better might be Wendy Murphy who has the status as a media contractor not an employee. Few in the producers lofts would back her
legally.


7. Other than Gottlieb for making up evidence, I dont see any suits against individuals in the DPD. The spokesman is not liable. He repeated the DPD line. He could not read every case file before commenting. Like any spokes person he says what he is told.

Disagree if Addison and Michaels were part of a conspiracy - an orchestrated media campaign run by Nifong to slander and defame players. Also disagree about Gottlieb and Himan if they were part of a conspiracy to suppress evidence. There are other matters like either Gottlieb or Levicy lied under oath about meetings. My suspicions are Himan turned state's evidence and has been cooperating since the SPs came into town.

8. Anyone at DUMC including Levicy. First of all I doubt Duke settled without a global settlement. So I think there will be no suits against DUMC. Secondly, DUMC gathered the evidence which Nifong hid. An employee, Levicy, offered an opinion when asked by the police that turned out to be wrong, but it was clearly an opinion and the DUMC staff did their jobs and gathered the evidence.

Disagree. I think Duke settled mainly because of how critical Levicy was to sustaining the hoax. When a medical professional gives an opinion on the facts of work they didn't do, falsely documented, and made a formal patient diagnosis when as a new nurse they were totally unqualified to stand in for an MD in doing so -----and all those actions caused tremendous harm ---you have a considerable malpractice/misrepresentation tort committed.
She is in the clear with the Settlement Duke made, except for the remaining 43 which Duke will also settle soon. However, Good Nurse Tara may have criminal exposure for conspiracy with Nifong and Arico, and for her statements under oath.
In any case, she public, notorious as the feminist behind the "certainty of rape", is a liability to DUMC and I expect she will be shed off. Encouraged to seek other employment.

laxhooligan88 said...

DL '00

I just finished poring over the posts here. I was one of the primary persons jousting with you intellectually on Saturday. I will accept your congratulations, though not expressed, for my having predicted that Duke would not be able to get to the settlement table fast enough. That said, I would say that you are fairly spot on as to the philosophy of what the settlements are, if not for the amounts. I agree...no windfall. Where we depart on this is what constitutes a windfall. I would say that a conservative amount for current and future legal fees and other expenses associated directly with this fiasco would be $1.5-2M per player. Add to that about a half million in lost wages, pain/suffering, and family disruption per player. Treble that to acknowledge the "punitive" nature of settling with silence assured and the promise not to sue the G88 or any other Duke associate down the road. You come ot about $6-8M per player. Amazingly, about the $20M total predicted by some others here who have been fairly spot on in the past. I wish you nothing but the best in your career, but re-state my previous assertion that the bright lights of the real world and you idealistic youthfulness are keeping you blind to the realities of how civil torts really work (not just the "book" stuff taught in your classes a few years ago). I have had somebody settle with me for a $50,000 check cash to avoid one day of depositions. The realistic settlement after depositions would have been about $15,000, but they would have easily spent another $75,000 on discovery if we had forced the issue. They settled, and both of us were happy beyond our wildest dreams. We both benefited from not feeding "the monster" that is the trial court.

As to Nancy (complete lack of) Grace. I think your previous love for those of her ilk falls under the old idiom of "If you aren't a liberal for most of your life before age 30 you have no heart...If you aren't a conservative by the time you reach age 60, you have no brain."

Continue to follow, and learn from this very public display of what really happens in the legal system, as opposed to what TV puts forth and what we in the system hope most people never have to see.

Anonymous said...

With the outcome known, it's easy to be right.

I missed Levicy's testimony, but if she merely testified that there was evidence consistent with a sexual assault, she might not have any exposure. After all, it seems pretty clear that Man-gum humped her way to the party. With DNA in the mouth, vagina, rectum, pubic area, and panties, she was a busy girl.

One wonders if she had a plan, if she just has that many Johns in a given day or short period of days, or if the stars aligned for her.

I certainly hope that if Nifong attempted to "rearrange" his files in his one day back, that the feds stopped by while he was out and wired or set up video to see what he did. I think Nifong has to know he's so f'd he'll be lucky to avoid some time in jail.

Downsteam, there's still big public money to be spent reviewing cases where old Mikey might have performed a similar rush to judgment. If the times, guilty leftists, and black activist/instigators want to get involved, now would be a good time. The stereotype of the Old South, in a predominately black tobacco city works. How many people are in jail or labelled felons until death due to shoddy police or crooked prosecutorial efforts?

Anonymous said...

Hope you're right about the settlements ... it'd be sweet to be a college guy and have my retirement fully funded. I'm pretty sure those types of payments aren't subject to taxation either.

Anonymous said...

Wow. My prediction that the courts would let him remain in office till July 13 was totally wrong. Ouch! And my sincere apologies.

Brand

Anonymous said...

5:17
I missed Levicy's testimony...


She just testified that on the forms the info "NO CONDOMS USED" it was checked and or indicated at least 3 times.

No where did it say they used condoms.

Anonymous said...

I wonder what Duke learned about bad publicity when Matthew Dowd filed his lawsuit? To my knowledge that's the only suit that was actually filed. I don't see how Duke could have defended itself, even in presenting a motion to dismiss, without appearing to be renewing attacks against the 3 players. That would be a PR nightmare.

In year ending July 2006, Duke received a record $342 million in charitable gifts. Losing even 5% of this amount over a period of years due to the negative publicity stemming from a lawsuit is far greater than whatever Duke settled for. For this reason alone it was in Duke's best interest to settle, and settle quickly.

Anonymous said...

Will the BOT flush Brodhead?

GS said...

Staying on an extra month does little for Nifong's state pension. If he resigned Monday, Nifong would collect a monthly pension of $5,365.20 , according to the State Treasurer's Office. Staying in office for four more weeks would add $27.90 to his monthly pension.

Quote from Coleman also:
"Even if he believed that, it just showed such a lack of grace in the circumstances," Coleman said. "It's just as inexplicable as his other conduct in the case. It was like he was not only trying to slime the three students but all the other members of the team."

Judge to suspend dallying Nifong today

Anonymous said...

Brodhead will always be assosiated with this diaster. He failed to protect Duke rep, and made the school look like it hung the students out to dry. Granted that a DA made very public condemnations, but he failed to pick up the lead from Prof Coleman that something was wrong.

Had Brodhead issue a statement saying do not rush to convictions he would have been okay.

Now Every time his name is mentioned it is linked with the scandal.

He has basically destroyed his reputation and usefulness as head of a University. Watch a few months go by and a new head is found.

Anonymous said...

Nifong is pulling this delaying crap knowing he will be in court this week facing possible contempt charges. The defense has said it would ask the case judge to hold Nifong in contempt. Nifong must have read this in the papers and is still playing games.

Anonymous said...

I would imagine a special prosecutor will interview G88 persons and assistant DA's in the course of any investigation.

jamil hussein said...

'm pretty sure those types of payments aren't subject to taxation either.

Settlement payments are taxed.

Now Every time his name [Brodhead] is mentioned it is linked with the scandal.

Brodhead framed a white guy back in his Yale years in a similar fashion (false rape claim, B. harassed and fired him). For that he was fully rewarded. Brodhead will do this again, if given a chance.

If he does this once again against whitey, he is eligible for Harvard top job.

scott said...

As to Hudson changing his mind about removing Nifong immediately...

The only logical explanation is that he received a visit or phone call from someone who promised him that if he didn't take care of this problem RIGHT NOW, Nifong wouldn't be the only one out of a job soon.

I don't know who the someone was, but let's not kid ourselves that Hudson had some kind of moral epiphany between the afternoon and evening of the same day. Someone put his balls in a vise and started cranking.

Anonymous said...

7:17
group 88 no, ADAs yes.

The group is only important to themselves.

The 3 players have settled, however that does not mean that the remaining Lax players can not sue. In fact with 5 lawsuits settled, I would sue if I was one of the players. The 2nd player who claimed his marks were affected should sue right away.

Anonymous said...

Hopefully one of the other 40 players has the guts to get this to discovery.

Anonymous said...

Tort settlements are NOT subject to taxation.

Alberto Gonzales would only get interested in this case if the wrongly accused were illegal aliens. Then he (and the ACLU)would be in Durham in a heartbeat -- demanding that everyone respect the illegals' "rights."

A couple of centuries ago, my ancestors(& lots of my fellow citizens' ancestors as well) fought against taxation without representation. Today in this country, we have millions of foreigners getting representation without taxation. It's a world gone mad.

Anonymous said...

re: Hudson's ephiphany, absolutely. No way he had a change of heart like that without a lot of pressure. Up until then, he was happy with the good ol' Durham County "screw procedure" way of doing things.

jamil hussein said...

The site is up and running:

http://thehoaxmovie.net/

This case needs only minor alignment (by writers from al-AP, al-NYT) but I'm sure Hollywood can fit this into the agenda. Starring Angeline Jolie (Durham Community Activist) bans Fox News and invites Nancy Grace and New York al-Times editors to the premiere. World's leading climate scientists and intellectuals from Leonardo diCaprio to Matt Damon are also starring.


In the movie, Nifong is a republican appointee and a christian conservative harassing black democrat. Klu Klux Klan is the local hate group, and bible-toting conservative professors on campus harass black students.

Anonymous said...

I think it's probably naively optimistic to expect Brodhead to be ousted. The board of trustees will hang on to him for precisely the reason that so many are mad at him: He ruthlessly acted to protect the Duke brand. That it didn't work so well in an extraordinary case will be set aside so long as he keeps side-stepping criticism.

Duke has a multi-billion dollar endowment. Even the most extravagant settlement will be just a drop in the bucket out of that. Small change to protect the Duke name. People will be paid off for their silence and Duke will "move forward." And you can bet that the R/C/G agitators whose liability for slander and/or harassment has been bought off will be told in no uncertain terms to STFU and teach.

Alex said...

Wouldn't it be interesting if, in a final act of bravado, Mr. Nifong (before being suspended as D.A.) charged himself and then tried (as D.A.) to enter a plea bargain with no jail time to protect himself from (state) criminal prosecution (on double jeopardy principles)?

Just a thought.

Anonymous said...

a Judge must approve all plea bargains. They are entered in courtn in front of a judge.

May not be able to find that friendly of a Judge (lol).

Anonymous said...

If you aren't a liberal in your 20's you have no heart. If you aren't a conservative in your 40's you have no head. Winston Churchhill> pretty sure.

Anonymous said...

Paul Haagen:
As a result of the settlement, all faculty have been released from any claims of liability related to the lacrosse matter up through the date of the settlement (June 18, 2007).

Wouldn't Haagen's statement only be true with respect to the 3 falsely indicted players? "The lacrosse matter" involves more than just these 3 players.

Anonymous said...

DL 00 said: "I have no reason to think Judge Hudson is trying to whitewash this. He is supposedly appointing Robert Zaytoun, a civil rights lawyer. This guy will be gunning for Nifong who violated the Duke3's civil rights."

Pardon my skepticism, but the term "civil rights" lawyer (or anything else)in recent years has meant bigotry to whites (especially eceonomically blessed males). It has meant, almost exclusively, civil rights for minorities.

We'll see...

Ed

xutag77 said...

Duke's trials with the three lacrosse players are not over. Does anyone think the Gang of 88 will remain silent on this matter?

Anonymous said...

The settlements ARE taxable (above the expenses reimbursed, if any) since they are not for damage to the body (that's not the way it's written but gives the correct way to look at it, IOW, not for physical pain, although there are those who would argue that it really was).

Brodhead is not only toast, but burned toast. The scraping process will take a while: "On the cash method, he's here; on the accrual method, he's gone." He won't be gone this month or even next month, but he's toast and he knows it. His problem: After Duke it will be hard to go up the University food chain instead of down. The BOT will find a way to get a change of direction and move him on (with a nice settlement)and he may head to a non-profit for a resting period if he cannot go up the food chain. There are alums out there who will not rest until he's gone. Staying where he is requires either neutral or positive alumni support. He cannot survive long with the residual anger that will remain as long as he is there. The customary joke "Why is University politics so vicious? Because the stakes are so small" does not apply here. The stakes are large for Duke financially and in reputation damage and they will have to clean house, but over time. Most all the faculty suspects who gained notoriety will face cracking pressure to move on. It's musical chairs in these situations. Some will survive and stay but they will not be the majority. And for them not a morning will start for a long time where it is the same as it was in February, 2006. Their lives have changed and not for the better. Have patience, the 87 of the 88 have just started their own personal version of Hell.

Anonymous said...

DL '00 is all over the place - spells Brodhead "Broadhead", says Duke won't settle - his predictions are as good as his spelling.

For those of you who think Duke is a good school, or that a Duke law degree means anything, look no further than DL '00.

CGP said...

I urge everyone to fax, call, or write Governor Easley and urge the appointment of Freda M. Black, former Assistant District Attorney, to the post being vacated by Mr. Nifong.

This presents Easely with a rare opportunity in politics -- the chance for a re-do. Let us all hope he gets it right this time.

Anonymous said...

Freda is not necessarily an improvement - she is just someone who was fired by Nifong. The enemy of our enemy is not necessarily our friend. There are many rumors around town about her, which I won't go into here, but if you read the archives of the comments here, you will see what some have said of her performance.

I think we need someone new, someone honest. Oh, right, it will be a career democrat good ol' boy approved hack. Hopefully they will either fail to behave as badly as Nifong or will fail more rapidly and be found out sooner.

But I have been wrong before - perhaps there is a ray of hope here. Go ahead Easley, surprise me.

cgp said...

Jim Hardin picked her to work on the Peterson case. That's good enough for me.

I know there are a lot of naysayers about Freda. I try to consider the source.

GS said...

The whole state is watching the appointment of Nifong's replacement. It will not be business as usual. The Gov will pick a person of well known character and not just a political hack.

Anonymous said...

Can someone provide a link or point me to a video on-line of the Nifong "something happened" comment? Thanks very much.


BGM

Anonymous said...

"As a result of the settlement, all faculty have been released from any claims of liability related to the lacrosse matter up through the date of the settlement (June 18, 2007).

Wouldn't Haagen's statement only be true with respect to the 3 falsely indicted players? "The lacrosse matter" involves more than just these 3 players."

Interesting. Perhaps the University is so skeptical that any other individuals have a causable action that they're willing to indemnify them at this point for past statements.

I also wonder if they've been given any guidelines on how to talk about these matters in the future to avoid opening themselves to any liability.

Still, its kind of funny to see the folks who would invoke academic freedom in a second to spout this nonsense continue to hide and refuse to take any responsibility for their words and actions.

Anonymous said...

Nifong would collect a monthly pension of $5,365.20

WOW

These government hacks make too much money.

Ralph Phelan said...

"all should have a huge red, career-ending flag on their file"

I think they finally do. It's called "Judgement for an undisclosed amount."

another.anon said...

Jamil;

"Brodhead framed a white guy back in his Yale years in a similar fashion (false rape claim, B. harassed and fired him). For that he was fully rewarded. Brodhead will do this again, if given a chance."

It was a murder. Brodhead apparently learned that there are no downsides to sacrificing others:

http://www.yaledailynews.com/articles/view/7791

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzanne_Jovin_case

Ralph Phelan said...

"I don't disagree that the 88's ad was poorly conceived (and wrong and obviously leftist biased). But it is not actionable. It is free speech. It's not even a close question IMHO.

Dl '00"

Yeah, but why should parents pay $50K/yr for this quality of "free speech?" This is a job qualification issue - college professors aren't suppopsed to morons.

Anonymous said...

Will the civil suits take care of his pension, holdings, etc.?

Ralph Phelan said...

"Did he think people would just let that decision stand?"

Judge Hudson almost did.

"This man is absolutely nuts. "

No, he's just having trouble getting used to the fact that the rules have changed because of outside attention. Under Durham standard procedure, he would have gotten away with it. Remember the judges at the bar hearing testifying under oath that Nifong still enjoys a reputation as a truthful man.

Anonymous said...

re: additional guidelines as to how avoid future liability: STFU!!!!

(at all times and all places)

Anonymous said...

The other lax player who said his marks were affected, so be calling a lawyer right now. Duke is settling.

Anonymous said...

A little tiny part of me feels a bit sorry for Nifong at this point. Nifong had reason to look like a deer in the headlights all last week. He had no reason to think anyone was going to call him on this.

What Nifong did is little more than business as usual and there were and are a host of people with a stake in making him the alpha and omega of the problem. Nifong is now the tree enabling everyone to avoid looking at the forrest.

Didn't the NC DA's try to sneak in the Nifong protection act even while this was going on? Why do you think they did that?

He just didn't see that they were going to use him to protect themselves. Just look at the posts on this board from people invested in this system saying they don't care about the ADAs or the DPD.

Required reading from Reason Mag for folks that are interested in how Nifong got where he is: Nifong Nifonged - Will one bad man take the fall?

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

And this from Williamson has been bugging me since I read it:

"The prosecutor, as any defense lawyer will tell you, is imbued with an aura that if he says its so it must be so. And even with all the constitutional rights that are afforded criminal defendants, the prosecutor merely by asserting a charge against defendants already has a leg up."

Heck of an admission from the head of this commision - it gives the lie to 'innocent until proven guilty'.

Prosecutors have too much unchecked power in this country and must be reined in. Nifong is the tree, not the forrest.

rod allison, detroit said...

Kurtz is a media critic, and he's not aware of the NYT's failed attempt to prop up Nifong's faltering case in the court of public opinion with that contrived, front page "body of evidence" piece?

Kurtz said it best, he doesn't have a clue.

Anonymous said...

Bob Trenkle,criminal trial lawyer in Durham might be an interesting choice for DA. Not political enough and too honest, though, I guess.`

Anonymous said...

Any chance Duke also settled with the other lax players quietly? Most, if not all, of them have attorney fees also, and ALL of them had to fight the campus atmosphere even more than the accused three.

Anonymous said...

Have to agree with those here who see no viable lawsuit against Tara Levicy (although I also suspect that, as a Duke employee, she would be covered by the settlement in any event).

Her conclusion that Mangum's examination was "consistent with a sexual assault" is actually pretty carefully stated, however inadequate it proved to be. It doesn't say there WAS an assault. It just says, in essence, it looks like there might have been an assault. One could quibble about whether this professional assessment was sufficiently supported, as well as whether Levicy had sufficient experience to make it, but it's hard to call it a lie or an outright misrepresentation of the facts before her, and it would be very hard to prove that she knew, or should have known, that what she saw was NOT consistent with a sexual assault. And as a medical professional, her duty is to her patient, not to third parties who may suffer because of the way other people misuse her findings.

All the other statements or actions of Levicy that have been described as "lies" by other posters were not done under oath or in the course of any official duties, and there is no evidence whatsoever of an actual conspiracy involving Levicy and law enforcement officials. Her testimony in the hearing was limited and straightforward, clearly no evidence of perjury there.

Gary Packwood said...

BGM 8:58 said...
...Can someone provide a link or point me to a video on-line of the Nifong "something happened" comment? Thanks very much.
::
You don't need anyone to search this blog.
Just got to the front page of the blog and find SEARCH THIS BLOG and type in 'something happened' in the little window.

Search engines are your friends.
::
GP

Anonymous said...

Brodhead is guilty of crimes against individuals and our beloved institution. Does he just get a pass for the role he personally played in this fiasco? I believe not. The grounds for his dismissal are compelling.

Anonymous said...

While everyone is basking in what Mr. Nifong did to himself, let us not forget the underlying cause of this whole disaster: drunk (and probably high) college athletes, in collusion with their coach, had a stripper performing for them and expected to keep it "hush-hush" like most "damaging" and "immoral" and "uncivilized" behavior is among the two-faced hypocritical "conservative" crowd in this country. This is the type of exploitation of the "poor and willing" (by all involved-including the young lady who was dumb enough to take her clothes off or whatever she was doing) that further perpetuates a sense of invincibility and a "have fun at any cost" mentality that exists among college students across this country.

Mr. Nifong got what he deserved. He did several illegal and stupdid things that not even a first-year law student would even try. But let's not focus all the "blame" on Mr. Nifong. Let's talk about the root cause of this whole thing. Before doing that, let's take a look at this "great coach."

Regardless of Mr. Nifong's fate, the coach in this case should have been dismissed and should not have a cause for legal action. Regardless of whether he was on campus or off campus, he is an authority figure over these students and should not have even been involved...yet he chose to "correspond with" and give "underhanded" advice to the students before and after the incident. In my opinion, he should start applying at McDonald's because he shouldn't get into any legitimate university in this country. Regardless of how much money he "won", whatever "lifestyle" he was used to will be no more...and it's his fault. He'll never shake this. The media won't let him. :)

In terms of the lacrosse players, they are not entirely "innocent victims" here. Let's run through the list:

1. They solicited a stripper to "entertain" them...or whatever they paid for. You would think that what the university referred to as "intelligent and well-rounded" students would be able to make better judgments and fulfill their adolescent fantasies in other ways; however, I guess their desire to look at some strumpet take her clothes off and shake her rump superseded their "conservative" values, their ability to think things through, and their regard for their "esteemed" university. LOL @ "esteemed".

2. The Lacrosse team, and I'm sure it's not limited to that sport, had a "history of problems stemming from alcohol." They are alcoholics in the making.

3. One of the players referred to the strippers as "B*ITCHES" and wanted to "skin" them. How will he explain that one to his "future wife" and "daughters" if anyone will marry him?

4. After all of this came out in the open, everyone "suddenly" realized that this was wrong and stupid. These were honor students; they were not the typical stupid jocks you find on "Animal House" and the like. My instincts and knowledge of similar incidents while in college, tell me that this wasn't the first "party" the team had under their belt.

Regardless of what Mr. Nifong did or didn't do in this case, as a society we have to learn to look at the root cause of a situation and place just as much blame there as we do on what happens afterward. The root cause of this whole mess was two-fold: 1). the decision of duke Lacrosse players to invite a stripper to a party they held; 2) the decision of the “stripper” to take her butt to that house. Since what happened in the house boils down to a "he said she said" situation, all involved are equally responsible and should bare the burden of the sequence of events that have transpired since that night. That's the truth. You can deal with it or you can pull the wool back over your "sympathetic" eyes for the rest of your life.

scott said...

laxhooligan88 at 4:10 AM said a lot of things to DL'00 that I was thinking. DL '00 must be 30-33 and hasn't had enough life experiences yet to become cynical about the worthlessness of some of his academic studies. His insistence that there is no legal cause of action so Duke has no reason to pay is naive. People settle lawsuits they have a decent chance to win all the time because of the damage that can accrue through the discovery process.

What does DL'00 think would have happened to the value of his degree if Duke had decided to fight this. As it stands, there could already be some tarnish, but even if Duke had prevailed based on the law, they were wrong in the court of public opinion. They would have ended up paying far more than they settled for due to a damaged reputation. Duke has been trying for many years to be seen as a major player in academia. How would their legacy be enhanced by becoming embroiled in a legal battle even if they were right on the technical points of the law?

As to the amount of damages people are speculating about in the comments on a couple of threads since yesterday, I've seen the range from $500,000 to 100M.

Neither of these extremes are remotely possible for a number of reasons. But again, after all the legal back and forth, you get down to what's fair and logical. I have a lot more faith in the fairness of the Evans, Finnertys, and Seligmanns than I do in Bob Steel and Richard Brodhead. Dave Evans Sr. is in his element here, so let's use him as the person who is taking the lead for all 3 families. I'm not saying he is acting as the attorney, but he is the logical spokesman for the families in working with their attorneys to bring this to conclusion with Duke.

He would never accept a paltry $500,000 or even $1M (his supposed out of pocket legal expenses). These days, people can pick up that kind of settlement in a slip and fall at a tourist resort. Even though he doesn't need the money to know where his next meal is coming from, he's going to insist that the figure exceed expenses for all the terrible things the families went through. He knows Duke can pay it and Duke knows he knows. So he'll insist on it and Duke will pay it. But because Evans is also a decent person, he's not going to be ridiculous and try for something like $100M.

When it gets down to it, Duke is dealing with ethical people in the 3 families. They settled on a figure that was more than the actual out of pocket expenses, but less than it would have cost Duke had they decided to duke it out in court in terms of standing in the academic community.

In other words, it was fair, given the circumstances.

Anonymous said...

Here's a link to the Nancy Grace vignett from the day of the indictments, referenced by Mike at 1:06am above:

Nancy Grace day of the indictments clip

Better yet is this one from Jon Stewartmocking her:

The Daily Show clip

Boy does she look stupid now. Man if I were her I'd do a show where I cleaned this up. I'd feel like I HAD to do that.

Anonymous said...

Nifong's attempt to defer his resignation for almost a month is yet another indication of his "tin ear " . Remaining in the DA's office any longer than necessary to pack the banker's box of personal items would only serve to increase the irritation of his existence . What would be his daily routine for the next for weeks as disbarred , discredited , dishonest DA ? To think he could have influenced any the inevitable legal actions ( criminal , contempt and/or civil ) is a stretch even for him and would, unless masterfully accomplished, worsen his situation . Local government in Durham has to isolate Nifong or further risk the spread of his slime .

Jimpithecus said...

One need only look at the books coming out of the Duke University Press to see how the climate at Duke encouraged the gang of 88 to exist in the first place.

http://www.dukeupress.edu/books/bk_subjects.php

Anonymous said...

9:54
Never heard of a liberal watching a stripper huh?
Root cause? I lying, self medicated prostitute decided to accuse others so that she could try and stay out of trouble.
Result? Self-righteous pea-minds such as yourself having more worthless ammunition to spray shotgun-style at "conservatives".

Anonymous said...

Liestoppers has a copy of Hudson order suspending Nifong posted. Its offical

Steven Horwitz said...

Since what happened in the house boils down to a "he said she said" situation, all involved are equally responsible and should bare the burden of the sequence of events that have transpired since that night.

He said, she said? The utter lack of physical evidence would suggest that what "she said" was totally and completely bogus.

NOTHING HAPPENED other than a boring unfinished strip show.

Anonymous said...

To: 9:54

You are delusional. These athletes did what all students do in college. Have a party and a few drinks. They were having fun and harming no one. Grow up.

Michael said...

re: 10:16

If you want to use the arguments of what was said, it would be they said, she said. 40+ lacrosse players and the other stripper disagree with CGM. By numbers alone, her account is around 2% weight. When you take into consideration her history, the facts, her mental condition and motivations for lying, you get down to 0%.

I can't believe that there still exists a "something happened" crowd out there. But that's the nice thing about this blog - we have a board with a better-than-average analytical capacity to deal with the loons that wander in and out.

Anonymous said...

She said vs
photos
atm receipts
cell records
taxi drivers
other stripper story
dna
43 party guest stories
mental health history
drug abuse history
criminal history
medical evidence
etc

GS said...

Durham judge suspends Nifong

Anonymous said...

9:54 AM --

I've talked to several people (I include myself) who have been to parties that included drinking and strippers. Not once was anyone ever accused of rape or sexual assault against the strippers.

This fiasco was not caused by the lax party, but was the result of the actions of this particular stripper and a whole host of other disreputable characters who got on board to satisfy their own fantasies.

I've got you pegged as someone who would have loved to have been there in March 2006 holding one end of the "Castrate" banner.

Anonymous said...

Unfinished business.

Sowell

Debrah

Anonymous said...

Students at Duke need to perk ears of any hints of slander by the 88 post 6/18/07 and record/report it to the families for legal action.

I expect they won't just shut up and teach. Clearly they aren't that smart.

Dan S

Anonymous said...

954...get a life

the players HAVE EVERY RIGHT to hire a stripper and in the privacy of their home, as long as they arent boisterous, be immune from the police

in fact the police never came UNTIL the slime alleged hooker cried rape

you are a judgemental liberal who will be happy with any political movement that debases american whites

youre a loser because your envious..i love success and those who have earned it...you think success is a lottery

im happy you have lost and hope your luck at losing continues

Anonymous said...

He is still getting paid. What an insult to justice.

Anonymous said...

Judge Hudson and Nifong must be have some pretty good secrets together.

Anonymous said...

Did Duff Wilson come around, or is this ghostwritten?

NYT on Nifong suspension

Anonymous said...

9:54 - Funny how you advocate group punishment and stereotypes based on group traits. Prejudice is unbecoming.

Have we really learned so little?

Your other points are laughable. Yes, shockingly, men in college pay for strippers, your moral outrage notwithstanding. Telling us all that because men pay for strippers on occassion makes them rapists facing 30 years in prison is absurd. The Coleman Report found that the team as a whole exhibited the same alcohol use problems as the college population as a whole, had a high GPA, and a 100% graduation rate. The "comment" you refer to was a rather poorly timed reference to the book "American Psycho," required reading for Duke students.

The "root of the problem" in this case is feminist jurisprudence. The "stripper" who took her "butt" to the house is a mental case. I do not think there is any doubt that stripping as an industry will suffer as a result (no problem here). The lesson learned is that if you lay down with dogs, you get fleas. The players opened themselves up in an environment that favors female allegations to a false charge. Thus, in the interest of self-preservation, males in American society should have as little to do with mentally imbalanced females as possible. The problem is that even though the woman may be mentally imbalanced, with a psychological history, and lying through her teeth, there is an element of diehard Leftists who will believe her notwithstanding common sense and a total lack of evidence. Normal males deal with mentally imbalanced females at their own risk, and must understand that they are despised by a segment of the population who will grasp at any allegation, no matter how outrageous, to make a political agenda in which they are the primary target, and the female a victim.

We also learned that a crooked prosecutor, who just lost his license in case you missed it, will run with a case to gain glory despite a complete lack of evidence. He will hide evidence to gain a conviction, make outrageous comments to the community, and place lives in danger for his own selfish ends.

I would say, in closing, that if anyone has deluded themselves, it would be you at this point. Like Nifong, your commentary avoids truth and harps a discredited line that has been trumped at this point in time by this neat thing called "fact."

-Esquire-
-Maryland-

Anonymous said...

9:54 said: ""have fun at any cost" mentality..." including being falsley charged with rape and being vilified and race-mongered by Duke faculty, enabled by the school president? Right.

Let's apply that reasoning:

The girl was attractive, chose to dress attractively, went to the bar on her on volition, voluntarily drank alcohol, volunteered that the stranger was good looking, voluntarily let him walk he to her car where she was assualted. Yes, let's not forget she did all these things (for years maybe)voluntarily and is a root cause of the assault. Oh yeah, and he was "partly" to blame for taking his butt out there and attacking her.

Reminds me of the "Stupid and Stupider" movie...

Ed

Anonymous said...

"The sad and tragic fact is that the civil rights movement, despite its honorable and courageous past, has over the years degenerated into a demagogic hustle, promoting the mindless racism they once fought against."

Amen, Mr. Sowell.

"Mindless racism," classism, and sexism and acceptance and advocacy of the same by elite members of our society are exactly the reasons for this "fiasco." Those highly gifted and educated souls who should have been at the forefront, insisting loudly on the observance of due process guarantees were, sadly, the first in line to "spit on the Constitution" when those accused and suffering were part of a demographic group they despised. How critical it is to guard vigilantly against personal prejudice, even (and especially, perhaps) for those whose race, ethnicity, or sex has been the basis for poor treatment in the past or those who have been outraged on behalf of those poorly treated.

As for Mr. Nifong's due process rights--I believe they are being observed assiduously. His transgressions have played out in front of millions of witnesses. And as of Saturday and Mr. Williamson's rendering of judgment, the evidence against Mr. Nifong has been presented, cross examined, and found convincing. When criminal charges are filed, there will be another opportunity for the prosecutor to prove the case against Mr. Nifong, this time beyond a reasonable doubt. Again Mr. Sowell pinpoints the issue--Mr. Nifong, as a prosecutor with some twenty-eight years experience, will be hard pressed to demonstrate his lack of criminal intent and establish reasonable doubt as to his culpability in face of the damning publicly available evidence.

Duke '00,
There were several potential causes of action against Duke for the three former defendants, including all those outlined in the Dowd filings, minus, I assume, the grade retaliation. We will never know whether the judicial process would have held Duke to account. I am happy that Duke has chosen--at least to the tune of the settlement--to hold itself to account. I hope that whoever has advised us to "watch and wait" for quiet results regarding the G88 and certain Duke administrators is correct. The BOT aligned itself completely with Mr. Brodhead--yet another lesson in how abysmally wrong highly gifted people can be in matters requiring moral judgment. A full apology would have benefited their reputations tremendously; as it is, they came pretty far yesterday in the Duke statement.

Observer

Anonymous said...

I'd like to see Larry Summers (formerly Harvard's president) replace Brodhead.

I'd also like see the alumni clean out Duke's slop-jar of trustees, before we become Antioch.

Anonymous said...

"He didn’t say why he had not reached that conclusion immediately."


I think maybe he didn't think he had to. Who would not be affected by that type of public humiliation? I guess if there's one thing to be said about Nifong, he's got enormously huge brass ones.

Anonymous said...

Let's see if I can get the gist of the previous "conservative" bashing poster's argument --

A bunch of college boys, many of whom are excellent students, have a party, drink (some too much so that they, following PSA advice, take a cab home), hire a stripper to entertain them (and likely never touch her), hoot and holler.

For that, they get the following:

--False criminal accusations
--Unjustifiable criminal indictments
--The entire weight of town's police department and DA's office bearing down on them
--Vicious and slimy national media coverage from "organs of respectability" such as The New York Times
--Ostracism and contempt from fellow students and the educational community
--Defamatory statements and displays from faculty who rant about the "holy trinity" of lefty academe: race, class, gender
--18 months of mental torture wondering whether the will be throw into jail for up to 30 years for crimes they did not commit
--Millions in legal fees

Hmmm...boisterous behavior versus....all of THAT??

You slam conservatives...well let me slam YOU as, presumably, a liberal/leftist.

In your preposterously absurd universe of moral relativism and moral equivalence, you, and those like you, are bereft of any ability to make useful distinctions, precision judgments, and careful analysis.

Like the enablers of the Group of 88, and Duff Wilson of The New York Times, and Nancy Grace of Court TV, you, and those like you, are, in the end, just not very bright. Not very bright at all.

Anonymous said...

Re:

"5. Durham County can be sued for the actions of their agent Nifong."

That is not correct. Nifong is neither an employee nor an agent of Durham County. He, like all NC D.A.'s, is a State employee. His paycheck comes from Raleigh. If any governement agency is successfully sued for HIS actions, it will be all the taxpayers of NC who pay the judgment, not just the people of Durham. All the more reason to establish a system by which rogue prosecutors can be removed before they drive the whole state into a ditch.

Ken Duke

Anonymous said...

"you think success is a lottery"

Nice.

Anonymous said...

Esquire @ 10:46

Excellent power post!!!!

Anonymous said...

11:01, Radical/Right Wing/Crazy,

Why do you think name calling is ok? Do you like it when people do it to you?

Are you a white guy who couldn't cut it? Is that why you're so scared? And so mean?

Liberal is not Left. Liberal is center.

Anonymous said...

Dear 11:01,

One presumes you think your morals are epitome of the right and good. How can you be so certain? Ick.

Michael said...

re: 9:54

> While everyone is basking in what Mr. Nifong did to himself, let us
> not forget the underlying cause of this whole disaster: drunk (and
> probably high) college athletes,

If you bothered to look at the picture of the room at the time, what
you'd see is pure boredom. So much so that Finnerty and Seligmann left
early.

If you have some evidence that they were high, please present it.
Otherwise you're just spouting innuendo. These students are among the
best in their sports and maintain high GPAs in an academically
challenging school. To me, that is inconsistent with excessive alcohol
and drug use.

> in collusion with their coach,

Pressler was aware of this? I haven't seen any documentation of your
assertion. Could you provide a source?

> had a stripper performing for them and expected to keep it "hush-hush"

A ridiculous assertion. How do you keep something quiet when there are
so many people involved and when you know that the neighbors are around
watching?

> like most "damaging" and "immoral" and "uncivilized" behavior is among
> the two-faced hypocritical "conservative" crowd in this country.

I think that liberals and conservatives have come together on the
issue of the Duke Lacrosse case as to who the guilty partys were. And
who the victims are. If you want to make a case that the behaviour was
damaging, immoral and uncivilized, then present a case. Your say-so
does not make it so. We've already had this argument several times and
the immoral crowd doesn't have a leg to stand on.

> This is the type of exploitation of the "poor and willing" (by all

$800 for two for 5 minutes of work is a lot more than I make. There
have been discussions about how lucrative CGM's line of work can be
here in the past. Of course how you manage your money is just as
important as how much you can make. If anything, CGM looks more like
the person running the exploitation game here given her comments to
Kim.

> involved-including the young lady who was dumb enough to take her
> clothes off or whatever she was doing) that further perpetuates a

Why do you consider her stupid? She's earning a living and feeding
her children and putting herself through college. She clearly has
mental problems but she seems to be a pretty shrewd operator in that
she has gotten herself out of numerous scrapes with the authorities
and the law that would have landed most in jail.

> sense of invincibility and a "have fun at any cost" mentality that
> exists among college students across this country.

Did you watch Reade's testimony on Friday morning? They went through a
list of his accomplishments and they were very impressive to me. This
team put in a ton of volunteer hours before and after the lacrosse
hoax started and maintained impressive GPAs. This is contraindicated
by the have fun at any cost mentality.

> Mr. Nifong got what he deserved. He did several illegal and stupdid
> things that not even a first-year law student would even try.

You can't even get this one right.

Take a look at the cases resolved by the Actual Innocense project if
you think that prosecutorial abuse is rare.

> Regardless of Mr. Nifong's fate, the coach in this case should have
> been dismissed and should not have a cause for legal action.

If what you say is true, why did Duke University settle with him?

> Regardless of whether he was on campus or off campus, he is an
> authority figure over these students and should not have even been
> involved...yet he chose to "correspond with" and give "underhanded"
> advice to the students before and after the incident.

I see no evidence of this. Sources please.

> In my opinion, he should start applying at McDonald's because he
> shouldn't get into any legitimate university in this country.

1) He's working at Bryant.
2) He's viewed as one of the good guys in this mess
3) His book is ranked #156 at Amazon.
4) He's an accomplished leader
5) His writing is a lot better than yours as he's actually concerned
with facts instead of fantasy.

> Regardless of how much money he "won", whatever "lifestyle" he was
> used to will be no more...and it's his fault. He'll never shake
> this. The media won't let him. :)

I'd say that he's better off financially now than he was when he was
at Duke. Of course there may be less prestige at Bryant but I bet that
he's working just as hard to do as much as he can with their team as
he did at Duke. A person of character makes the most of what they have
to work with in any circumstance.

He's been on the media a number of times in the last month. Seems to
me that the media has been treating him quite well.

> In terms of the lacrosse players, they are not entirely "innocent
> victims" here. Let's run through the list:

This is incorrect even before getting to your point. College teams,
and even unaffiliated groups of people hire strippers all the time.
If what you said is true, then we would have lots of people in the
category of [not entirely innocent victims]. That we don't have a lot
of these cases implies that there is something different here than
there is in all of those other cases of hiring strippers for
parties. If you think, really, really hard, perhaps you can determine
what that different characteristic is. Of course just about everyone
else here figured that out last year.

> 1. They solicited a stripper to "entertain" them...or whatever they
> paid for. You would think that what the university referred to as
> "intelligent and well-rounded" students would be able to make better
> judgments and fulfill their adolescent fantasies in other ways;

1 COURSE SYLLABUS Dating and Mating: Hookup Culture at Duke House ...
http://housecrs.trinity.duke.edu/documents/DatingandMatingSyllabus.pdf

I was over at one of the universities where our son is taking courses
this summer and there was a student union display as we walked
in. There were a few literature packages on the table so I opened one
up and had a look at it. It was literature for Gardasil which is an
HPV vaccine. Many states have considered making it a mandatory vaccine
for girls as young as nine years old.

Where do you think college women get their birth-control pills? There
was a change in either some law or policy recently that resulted in
much higher birth-control costs to colleges and universities that
resulted in complaints from universities and students.

I think that you're pretty naive about what happens at college
univerisities.

> however, I guess their desire to look at some strumpet take her
> clothes off and shake her rump superseded their "conservative" values,
> their ability to think things through, and their regard for their
> "esteemed" university. LOL @ "esteemed".

Not sure why you think that the lacrosse players are conservative.
Their accomplishments and history indicate that they are valuable
members of society.

> 2. The Lacrosse team, and I'm sure it's not limited to that sport, had
> a "history of problems stemming from alcohol." They are alcoholics in
> the making.

As I mentioned before, alcoholism is inconsistent with their past and
present accomplishments.

> 3. One of the players referred to the strippers as "B*ITCHES" and
> wanted to "skin" them. How will he explain that one to his "future
> wife" and "daughters" if anyone will marry him?

http://www.cstv.com/sports/m-lacros/stories/062906aab.html

[Duke's vice president for student affairs Larry Moneta said McFadyen
could return to the lacrosse team in the fall, according to the June 7
letter to university President Richard Brodhead.

The student's e-mail, which Moneta said was sent "in jest," was among
various factors that led Duke to cancel the season of its highly
ranked lacrosse team even before three players were charged with rape,
kidnapping and sexual offense. McFadyen is not charged in the rape
case.

In his letter, Moneta said McFadyen was suspended because there were
concerns whether his presence on campus posed a risk to him or others.
But Stephen Bryan, Duke's associate dean for judicial affairs,
reviewed the case and decided that McFadyen did not violate university
policies regarding abuse, endangerment and disorderly conduct,
according to Moneta's letter.

According to Moneta, McFadyen said the e-mail used language from the
book "American Psycho," a novel by Bret Easton Ellis - later made into
a movie - about a serial killer.

"He acknowledged the joke, especially given the context of the time,
was not funny," Moneta wrote.

Moneta said McFadyen accepted responsibility for an error in judgment.

"I think he learned a valuable lesson in how words can be interpreted
and misinterpreted," Moneta told the AP Thursday evening.]

> 4. After all of this came out in the open, everyone "suddenly" realized
> that this was wrong and stupid. These were honor students; they were
> not the typical stupid jocks you find on "Animal House" and the
> like. My instincts and knowledge of similar incidents while in
> college, tell me that this wasn't the first "party" the team had
> under their belt.

1) I don't recall the folks in Animal House as jocks.
2) It's not clear as to what you consider wrong and stupid.
3) This was an annual celebratio so no, it wasn't the first party
that they've thrown.

> Regardless of what Mr. Nifong did or didn't do in this case, as a
> society we have to learn to look at the root cause of a situation
> and place just as much blame there as we do on what happens
> afterward.

Obviously untrue.

The issue of justice and fairness far outweigh any small party
thrown. Parties are thrown all over the country and the world without
incident. The important matters here are the laws which tip the scales
of justice and power unchecked that can lead to abuse by police and
prosecutors. Without the apparance and reality of legal fairness, we
decend into dictatorship, facism or total disrespect for the law. This
goes to the root of any government constitution.

> The root cause of this whole mess was two-fold: 1). the decision of
> duke Lacrosse players to invite a stripper to a party they held;

Obviously false unless you can show that this cause is common in
stripper parties.

> 2) the decision of the “stripper” to take her butt to that
> house.

Only thing you have gotten right. One can clearly lay the blame of
the start on her.

> Since what happened in the house boils down to a "he said she said"

There are over 40 he's that agree on what happened, one she that said
that nothing happened, and one drunk, drugged and psychotic stripper
with a histore of rape claims and other strange behaviour that claims
that she can levitate in bathrooms that is the only dissenter. I take
it that you are in the camp that believe that people can levitate in
bathrooms.

> situation, all involved are equally responsible and should bare the
> burden of the sequence of events that have transpired since that
> night. That's the truth. You can deal with it or you can pull the wool
> back over your "sympathetic" eyes for the rest of your life.

Go back and take Composition 101 again.

Anonymous said...

Liberal in center?
When did that happen?

Anonymous said...

I consider myself a realist as opposed to a conservative or a liberal/leftist. I don't really care for either. It just so happens that this is my week to piss off conservatives. I'll get to the liberals next week. Be patient!

Anonymous said...

11:47

Hasn't liberal always been center? Left is Communist, left of center is socialist, center is liberal. Then, is US terms, there are right wing Republicans and radical right wingers.

jamil hussein said...

Durham can be sued. Nifong was lead investigator in Durham (in charge of DPD).

I'd like to see Larry Summers (formerly Harvard's president) replace Brodhead.

It is more likely that Brodhead is appointed new Harvard president. Having railroaded 4 innocent white males (at Yale, Duke) makes him eligible for Harvard.

Anonymous said...

WOW!!! It worked! Thanks to your comments, I just won $20 from a bet that I made with a co-worker. This whole blog posting thing was just to prove how "predictable" and "trivial" our society has become. By the way...I won't be sharing the $20 with any of you. :)

-Anonymous guy @ 9:54

Insufficiently Sensitive said...

Liberal used to be, give a citizen maximum freedom to make his or her own choices, and keep intrusive gummint to a minimum.

Since the 60s, 'liberal' has turned to believing that life is like 'Queen for a Day' where the biggest sob story gets the biggest shower of goodies, and that said gummint becomes arbiter of the sob story contest and dispenser of the goodies. In its ultimate extension, liberals would preside over a society which has become a game where no one is permitted to lose, and no one is permitted to win either.

Michael said...

re: 12:14

Much of what is posted here could be considered an academic exercise, useful for training minds and squaring our own thinking.

Skills far more useful than a quick $20.

I made $25K in about three hours last week. Doesn't happen that often but it's nice when it does.

Anonymous said...

Re: 9:54

You statements are incredible, and you are obviously from Wonderland (or another planet--only possible explanation for being totally unaware of what has occurred over the past year). You have NOT read or listened to anything that has occurred since Nifong quit talking to the press!

I am not going to elaborate on all of your faulty reasonings, since that as already been eloquently done by previous posters. But I do have a question/comment about the following statement:

"My instincts and knowledge of similar incidents while in college, tell me that this wasn't the first "party" the team had under their belt."

What college did you attend and/or were graduated from and during what decade? (Me, U of Wisconsin, years ago--yes, I'm old but am not telling how old). I am sure that there were not a lot of frats, sororities, athletic teams, parties, or intellectual discussions at barber/beauty schools. If, by some freakish event of nature, you did attend a reputable college or university, I will understand if you do not respond for fear that a representative of that institution will come knocking at your door, demanding the return of your degree!

Anonymous said...

I am afraid that it is too late for Duke to have this matter settled sufficiently. It is like trying to block an broken dam. The other players can still sue Duke, on the one side; the segment of the faculty KC refers to can also sue, on the other hand.

The media shall pay also for blowing the wild fire out of control.

Anonymous said...

12:14pm

Thanks for admitting that you are an idle, low class, moronic troll.

No matter. What was posted to your filth was fact. Joke about the justice system all you want. Next time, maybe your ass will be drawn and quartered by a criminal DA.

You take that $20 and put it in a safe place. You might not make another 20 that easily any time soon, as you are obviously a gov't office lackey.

Michael said...

re: 12:35

Duke has been pretty aggressive about resolving financial claims outside of court so I would expect settlements with the non-indicted players and their families later this summer.

And it might even happen without any publicity. It's clear that Duke had to issue statements for their settlements with Dowd, Pressler and the three indicted players as there was so much in the press about these three groups that some kind of statement was warranted.

All of the players could go after the other groups but they have lives to live too and at some point, additional money for the time and aggravation may not be worth it. Of course I support the players right to go after the other bad actors and I would like to see it happen but I know that it's not my life on hold that's at issue.

One can talk about those who wanted a trial to settle things. Well, that works if you're the one not paying the bills and the time out of your life.

Anonymous said...

To 9:54, Since the Lacrosse team members are the victims of a false accusation and the victims of a rogue prosecution aren't you "blaming the victims"?

In your opinion should people look at the root causes of why a woman was raped? Should she be scrutinized because of the way she was dressed, or the people she was with, or where she was? Do those things mitigate the actions of the rapist? The answer is no, of course not.

I've heard people say that rape is not about sex, it is about power. Prosecutorial misconduct is also about power. The abuse of power. A prosecutor has huge power. And a prosecutor who abuses that power can cause tremendous damage.

Consider what it would mean if Nifong had gotten away with it. Three innocent people would have gone to jail for up to 30 years each. Assuming they actually survived prison they would have spent the remainder of their lives as sex offenders.

How does that compare to your silly root causes argument? Whatever the lacrosse team did may be immoral and even reprehensible but it was legal, and certainly doesn't come anywhere near the level of improper behavior of Mike Nifong.

Anonymous said...

Delight in the patent cowardice of the Group of 88.

It must have been so delicious--the pot banging solidarity in ignoring the constitutional rights of those truly oppressed.

Sneering at the pedantic small thinkers that insisted on mere formalities like presumption of innocence. So middle class! So uninspired!

Like bookish intellectuals enamored from afar with Stalinism, they had no patience with procedures designed by dead western men.

Now they are revealed as posturing frauds. Complete hypocrites. None say "I'm sorry." None learned a thing.

They scuttle away from the sunlight, hiding behind a settlement purchased by middle class tuition payments. Sanctioned by the judicial system they despise.

I hope this case inspires a probe of tenured appointments at universities. THESE people presume to educate my kids? Unbelievable.

Anonymous said...

Thanks 9:54, I understand completely now.

Looking back I see that all of those bachelor parties I went to and everytime my college buddies and I hired strippers (we used to have great Super Bowl parties where we had strippers come and dance at halftime!!!) we were really deserving of what the lacrosse team faced.

It was their fault all along. I see it now as clear as day. Thanks for straightening the situation out for me.

I hope you realize how ridiculous your post is, but I am 100% confident you are so mentally challenged that you do not.

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

Hi Polanski: Whether that's true or not, it's another reminder of how dorky the potbangers were about the Duke case: trying to equate rape with power and the white power paternal capitalist structure demonstrating its power over minority females, blah blah blah. Silly theoretical fantasies they hoped had become actuality with this case. Malicious dorks.

Mike Lee said...

I love it ...the sheriff visited Nifong at home today to serve him the judge's immediate suspension order:

Durham County Sheriff Worth Hill went to Nifong's house with a deputy to serve the order Tuesday morning.

"We took his keys and his badge that gave him access to the building," Hill said. "We'll make arrangements to help him get his personal belongings later."

No justice, no peace said...

8:31 Inre: "Duke's trials with the three lacrosse players are not over. Does anyone think the Gang of 88 will remain silent on this matter?"

That of course, assumes they publish something in a professional journal that anyone reads.

Now for oral remarks, you may be on to something. Which one was the one that sent the horrendous email to one of the lacrosse mother's after he'd been liquoured-up? Oh my...at least I hope he was liquored-up, there cannot be any that write like that sober.

no justice, no peace said...

One wonders if the publishers of the periodicals will try to recall their publications. The one's with the players faces on the cover...

I was in my Dentist's office this morning and noticed numerous dated magazines in the waiting room. I'd imagine that there are plenty of those magazines floating around similar offices.

For that matter it won't be long before they begin to show up on eBay.

And some here question a Duke settlement north of $10 million...

No justice, no peace said...

9:54 inre: to that post.

One wonders if the Gang of 88 just violated the settlement terms...

No justice, no peace said...

10:46 Inre Esquire's comment" "The "root of the problem" in this case is feminist jurisprudence"

An interesting point...that exposes, again, the fraudulent nature of gender studies. Their actions abetting this fraud will likely hurt those that espouse protecting - single, un-wed, minority strippers.

Who's going to hire one now?

Anonymous said...

The 88 weren't (at least anywhere I read) a party to the settlement, which was between Duke and the 3 families.

jim2 said...

2:42 -

The Duke letter used the term "faculty". Thus, it may or may not include Tara L, but it would certainly include the 88.

jim2 said...

2:42 -

I would amend my statement slighlty.

The Duke settlement - if consistent with the letter - does cover the Duke Faculty, hence the 88. However, it covers them only up to June 18, 2007.

Thus, if any of them state anything like what Nifong did at the trial (e.g., "something happened") in print or on tape after yesterday, they would make themselves fair game to lawsuits.

Charlie H said...

I love this ending. For all the difficult times this case caused it appears that this fairy tale ending will continue with many more smakdowns of those cretins in the Durham justice dept. Possible jail time and penalties for Nifong and hopefully something nasty for the dope Linwood Wilson.

Why doesn't someone go find Jesse Jackson under a rock and collect CGM college tuition that he promised he whether she was telling the truth or not.

Anonymous said...

AN INVITATION

"STRIPPER PARTY AT A HOUSE NEAR CAMPUS TONIGHT"

FREE ADMISSION

FREE ALCOHOL (DEFINIETLY WOULDN'T BE "AMERICAN" IF WE DIDN'T HAVE THIS; WE DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO WITHOUT BOOZE, CIGARETTES, AND MARIJUANA)

FREE DRUGS (MAYBE...IF I FEEL LIKE IT)

FREE COACH-SANCTIONED STRIPPER B*ITHCES (WILL BE SKINNED AFTER MIDNIGHT)

FREE SCRIPT TO USE DURING POLICE QUESTIONING (IF IT COMES TO THAT)

FREE CARD TO GET YOU OUT OF JAIL

BRING THE DUMB BLONDES, WEAR YOUR RAGGIDY-RIMMED BASEBALL CAPS, AMERICAN EAGLE SHIRTS AND JEANS, YOUR SOUTHERN DRAWL, AND WE'LL HAVE A "HOOT."

WARNING: YOU CAN CHOOSE TO PARTICIPATE OR NOT TO PARTICIPATE. IF YOU ARE NOT PREPARED TO DEAL WITH OR TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY OF THE POTENTIAL OUTCOMES, DON'T SHOW UP! THOUGHT I'D ADD THAT TO KEEP THE MEDIA OFF MY BACK.

P.S. PARK IN FRONT OF THE NEIGHBORS' HOUSES BUT NOT MINE. I DON'T WANT TO GIVE THE WRONG IMPRESSION HERE.

Anonymous said...

Nicely done - the all caps typing, the horrible misspellings lead me to believe that only a member of the gang of 88 could write such stuff. Your mother must be very proud. Now back away from the keyboard, junior...

Anonymous said...

Poster 3:25> If your point is these 3 college students,attended for some period of time, a party where underage drinking occurred, I'll give you that. I wasn't aware one could go to prison for 30 years over this, I guess I missed the day we became a total police state.

It is not illegal to hire strippers, though as a woman, I am opposed to the practice and have no respect for woman who put themselves in that position, that goes for Chippendales too. It has been confirmed that nothing untoward happened to the two strippers.

You obviously did not go to college and do not have kids in college or high school for that matter. FYI this is real life on any college campus in America.> underage drinking.

Part of growing up is learning from mistakes made, I'm sure the entire team will refer to this event as an epiphany of sorts in their own lives.
Some of them will have distinguished careers as defense attorney's and help others. I have no doubt.
You are pretty pathetic if you want to rehash the party. Parties will continue in colleges across the country in the fall. 99.9% of the participants will not be punished for underage drinking, the .1% who are will be unlucky and unfairly caught. The whole underage law is a joke that has done nothing to change behaviour that has continued for a long time.
Anyone with any common sense knows the unfairness that was unleashed and is smiling silently at the justice being meted out, with hopes of more to come.
It would be really a pivotal event if important African American leaders showed support for these recent events, as they will directly effect future wrongly accused both black and white.

I have before and will now say> God speed to Dave, Reade and Collin. A terrible wrong has been somewhat righted. I hope they and their families move on to happier and calmer waters.

Anonymous said...

PS3:25>
Since you have lived a life without fault, you are singularly the only person on the planet to do so.
You should spend more time praying in church for the rest of us if you are so self-righteous. We could all use the help.

Anonymous said...

3:23> If correct, I look forward to one or many of them misspeaking in the near future. The students who sign up for the classes in the fall should bring tape recorders in case it comes up in class.
Or do you think that this letter is a subtle notice that they cannot use their position in their teaching in class?
Will anyone sign up? I thought that was a great suggestion, not to.
It isn't likely to happen though, so I hope their are some smart dukies ready to catch these professors, if they slip up, in this specific limitation now set by the agreement.
Also wondering if this applies to articles, speeches or future books they had in mind?
The shameful visting talks at Williams should never happen again.
I was shocked at Williams for allowing it.

Anonymous said...

Carolyn says:

"Hudson told WRAL, "There is some concern that a resignation effective at a later date could cause complications as far as legal proceedings go." "

Oh, gee! You THINK????

(By the way, what in hell made Hudson do the right thing for once? It can't be justice - so what is it?)

Anonymous said...

Hey 3:25 spoken like a follower of Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson. Do you feel morally superior now?

Anonymous said...

robertson and falwell are saints by comparison to the slimy bullyfag lesbians who have the morals of rats

Anonymous said...

3:25
Sounds like you just had a brain fart and violated the conditions of the Duke settlement -- thereby placing you in jeopardy of suffering the consequences of your ignorant mouth.

Hopefully, the rest of the Ignorant 88, will likewise re-demonstrate their lack of control and inability to think rationally...

Anonymous said...

No one has mentioned the real party that deserves scrutiny: the AA fraternity house where an actual rape did occur. Plus, drugs were found all over the place in addition to alcohol. Actual crimes were commited in this house and yet ... nothing happens in the Durham Criminal Justice system.
If you're going to get all self righteous over underage drinking in college- this is what you should be focused on!

Gary said...

call for a Justice Department inquiry, which increasingly seems the only way to get to the root of Durham’s problems.

You've been staying up too late lately KC. Yeah right, Alberto Gonzales is going to right the justice system in Durham. Alberto is worse than Nifong -- Nifong only wanted to increase his pension over the incarcerated bodies of 3 young men. Not even, he knew he'd never win a trial on that, it was just a cynical election ploy that he figured would peter out in the court system.

Alberto undermines due process for all US Citizens, he doesn't even accept that there is a right to Habeas Corpus -- you could make a case that democracy itself was built out of this principle that wrenched away this most terrifying power from the King. He is terrible on many other issues and has shown very little care/attention in the past such as his non-reaction to guards having sex with minors in the Texas Youth Commission. Yeah, he's a real knight in shinning armor for Durham. He probably admires Nifong.

Anonymous said...

This event at Duke, and the revelation of how shallow, incompetent and despicable the President and at least 88 members of faculty demonstrated themselves to be -- initiated a display of "aggressive reaction" I have NEVER seen before in my sainted wife of 47 years...

She made calls to all grandchildren, nephews, nieces and other extended family members of high school age -- advising them that "Granny/Auntie Dollars" would NOT be available to anyone electing to attend Duke. This is NOT a threat of minor significance! "Granny dollars" have financed some pretty damned luxurious student scenarios!

It was her position that she would not contribute to the support of a university where the administration and a large number of faculty demonstrated such despicable, cowardly, lynch mob mentality and pandered to the worst sort of prejudicial and racist bigot behavior...

Duke has a lot to answer for and correct to regain its former reputation as a place of "Higher Learning".....

Anonymous said...

Ok, I'll bite - Mr. Gonzalez doesn't even accept that there is a right to habeas corpus? Explain.

But I hear ya - we need a real man on the job - I hear Janet Reno is unemployed.

Anonymous said...

God bless granny and others like her.

Anonymous said...

She has already been blessed in so many ways....
And I for having her near for so many years.....

This Duke mess struck a cord and initiated a rage I have NEVER witnessed in her for the 53 years I've known her!

The INSTANT she saw the boys, their parents and the campus protesters - she KNEW this was a horrible hoax.
Her hero is the mother who promised that Nifong would regret FOREVER attacking her family.... That was the kind of woman and mother she respects....they don't raise sons who commit rape.

She is now actively encouraging family members to consider her schools --- Wake Forest in Winston Salem, North Carolina and CalTech Pasadena here in California which continue to do fine jobs in EDUCATING - not indoctrinating....or filling their heads with PC ethnic mush.

I fear there are too many formerly fine universities that have been overrun by incompetent feckless imbeciles who should be kept far away from our best and brightest..

Professors like the "88" should be treated with contempt and kept isolated to prevent contamination..

Anonymous said...

2:09

You are dismissive of university faculty. Are you smart enough/good enough/ambitious enough to get a university position? Or do you just take pot shots? Why are you so threatened?

Anonymous said...

11:37
Is your name Nifong?

3:25
What planet are you from? Liberal is center. I guess that makes you number 44 in the gang of 88. That's about the only way liberal can be center.

on the 87 left (notice the pun)
It is my hope that every student who walks into your classes is armed with a video camera. Your true colors may be "encouraged" to lie low for a while but you won't be able to keep your mouths shut for very long. Vitriolic rants will return to the classroom if you are allowed to remain. Then again, alumni may have sense enough to elect a BOT with some semblance of morals. The CYA settlement was designed to hide the other rants of the Duke inner-city gang.

To the remaining LAX players:
Go for it--get what you can from the Dookies (not to be confused with the Dukies). The settlement was to "preserve the image", although why in heaven's name ANYONE would want to preserve the image of the academia (oxymoron) at DU.

Some people have book sense and no common sense. Some people are blind (even though they have 20/20 vision). Some people are so self-righteous (of course I would not be thinking of Broad--head or the 88 employees of DU (to call them educators is an insult to ALL educators).

It is now time to realize that there are too many self-aggrandizing people in the world. Nifong is gone. Once the other criminals have been removed (DPD liars, ADA's, crooked judges, 88 escaped mental patients, Brodhead, etc), there can be healing.

For those who want everything wrong in the world to be rooted in race or class, get over it. The Robin Hood mentality is just that--the mentality of a hood. Most of you really don't give a flying f about the "victims", you just look to put another feather in your cap (or buck in the bank--which is FAR more likely). As Rodney King said, "Can't we all just get along?"

To Thomas Sowell:
You have been identified as an economist. Many true economists recognize you as one of the greatest professors of economics EVER. However, they miss your true gift. That would be the ability to read people--to see through superficial statements and judge the book by the pages inside rather than the cover. Thanks for your wonderful insight.

To KC
Outstanding work. Thank you for identifying injustice (88 times over) and telling the true story. Without your work and three families with the resources and faith that they have, the truth might never have been known. As a resident of NC, I can only say thanks.

To Lane Williamson
Are you interested in being the DA in Durham? You would be one who could restore honesty and integrity to that office.

To Brad Bannon
You have made the Campbell Law School VERY proud. Good job!!

Anonymous said...

Liberal used to be center until the thugs or the right moved the discourse to far right. You know, the loonie right that's an international embarassment?

Anonymous said...

11:48, sorry to have to correct you, but it's the loony leftist fringe you seem to know about who are our national embarrassment, as well as international embarrassment.
People like you railroaded three innocent men on the word of a filthy, unhygenic, and criminal whore. And those people are still spewing the same insane PC lies.

Anonymous said...

1:49, darling,

I didn't railroad anybody. I've never even set foot in North Carolina.

You just can't stand it when people disagree with you, can you?

And trust me, cutie pie, it's not the left that scares the rest of the world. It's you & your ilk.

On second thought, I don't want you trusting me. But, it's true just the same.