Saturday, September 01, 2007

Book-Related Events

Sept. 3, 9.05-9.30pm: I will be on CQHR (World Tonight)

Sept. 4, 8.45am: Stuart Taylor and I will be on ABC Good Morning America, preceded by 8 AM GMA radio interview.

Sept 4, 11.15am: Stuart Taylor will be on the Laura Ingraham Show

Sept. 4, 12.45pm: Stuart Taylor will be on Court TV (Jami Floyd, “Best Defense”).

Sept. 4, 6.45pm: Stuart Taylor will be on MSNBC’s Tucker Carlson Show.

Sept. 7, 9.30am: I will be on WCCO (Minnesota).

Sept. 7, 10.10am: I will be on KMED (Oregon).

Sept 7, 1:30pm: Dino Costa, Radio Colo. Network, Denver, interviews Stuart Taylor.

Sept. 8: I will be on WNBC-NY Weekend Today, 9.30am.

Sept. 11, 8:30 AM: Stuart Taylor will be on Morning Show with Ray Dunaway and Diane Smith, CBS Radio's Affiliate WTIC News/Talk 1080, Hartford, Connecticut.

Sept 11, noon: Book forum at Cato Institute with Stuart Taylor, Victoria Toensing, former prosecutor.

Sept 11, 7pm: I will be speaking at Duke’s Page auditorium about the case.

Sept 28, 10.50am: I will be part of a panel at Duke Law School’s Court of Public Opinion” conference.

Sept. 29, 7.00pm: I will be speaking (with a book signing) at The Regulator Bookstore (Durham).

Oct 2, 5.30pm: I will speak at the Harvard Club of Boston. Open to the public.

Oct 4 (time not available yet): I will be part of a panel at the Society of Professional Journalists Conference in Washington, DC.


Duke Alum said...

Thank you for posting these appearances. Along with the book, they will go a long way in convincing the unconvinced.

Anonymous said...

Do you mean CHQR, rather than CQHR?

Anonymous said...

Does no one else see the irony of using the media across the nation to further the agenda and increase book sales? I'm not saying it is necessarily wrong, but haven't several people in this case complained about any number of people using this case to make a name for themselves, make money, etc. through exploiting the media? And yes, I understand many commenters will say this is different because K.C. is espousing the truth rather than an academic or political agenda, but where do y'all draw the line?

Debrah said...

TO 9:14PM--

I will tell you where I draw the line.

When the horrific cancer of political correctness, which has metasticized into a beast that can successfully harm innocent people just because they might have a different background or be of the wrong color, is brought down.

This journey is far from over.

KC started his journey because he saw what was happening with the Gang of 88, Duke's faculty, and people of his own profession.

Since then, he has worked endless hours with a wondrous creativity on this blog that has enriched us all and helped everyone who came here understand the intricacies of what has occurred at Duke and in Durham.

Some things can be a calling and you just know its the right thing to do.

KC has spent thousands of his own personal funds on constant travel and this blog...etc.....not to mention the hours around the clock it has taken to keep this place running....and at the same time, he has a day job.

There is no line to draw here.

This is one of those times I wish I were Warren Buffet or Bill Gates. I would hand KC a blank check and tell him to do what he needs to do.

His contribution goes beyond dollars; however, I hope to high heaven that he makes a mint on his book.

inman said...

Dear 9:14:

I draw no lines.

KC Johnson has written for roughly a year and a half on this blog. He is one of those (among others) whose critical eye led to the exoneration of the innocent.

Reviewing early posts, I find it difficult to believe that KC Johnson was motivated by mercenary interests. My sense and my judgment is that he was motivated by the practiced eye of an historian and the historical spectacle playing before that eye.

His work was and is good. His work helped good to prevail. Both good and justice are the result of his work.

Thank God that our economic system rewards those who devote themselves to an effort for which no reward is promised but which, by virtue of the outcome, reward is bestowed.

KC Johnson deserves his reward and the respect of all those who hail an heroic act. For he is certainly one hero in this singular tragedy.


God bless those like KC Johnson who stand for principle. I pray that He bless the lives of the victims. May he also forgive those whose transgressions are only of a nature forgivable by God, for mortal man struggles to find forgiveness. And may He also bless the lives of all those afflicted with the disease of Durham. Amen.

Anonymous said...

Please get a gig with Lee Rodgers at KSFO 560 AM in San Francisco. I'm sure he would love to have you, and I'm sure his audience would love to hear you.

Anonymous said...

Totally appropriate for KC to use the media to push his book. It gives me hope that the media and internet can be used for the forces of good, also.

starkdawgs said...

Have you taken a look at where the lessons learned in this case can apply in other prosecutorial abuse cases such as US v Stein and others?

north said...

The press's job is to report the news and KC Johnson and his book are news.

The press has no business reporting lies and manufacturing news.

This whole Durham mess is because of stupid people who couldn't fathom that essential difference.

IBRL said...

The Institute of Bill of Rights Law is sponsoring
the William & Mary Constitution Day 2007 event,"Prosecutorial Abuse and the Duke Lacrosse Case" on Friday, September 14, 2007, 2:00 - 3:30 pm.

Stuart Taylor of the National Journal and author of the new book about the Duke Lacrosse case, Until Proven Innocent, will discuss prosecutorial abuse and the “presumption of guilt.” in parts of
the Duke community.
Tickets are required and may be reserved at
Stuart Taylor will be signing his new book in the lobby of the William & Mary Law School following the program.
Books will be available for sale at the Law School from 3:30 - 6:00 pm. Credit cards will be accepted for book purchases. For more information see IBRl.ORG.

Anonymous said...


How about an event at Harvard Club of NYC. I am sure many people will show up.

Anonymous said...

To 9:14,

The truth really is the line and the whole point. The book is a most important historical record that clarifies in a most thorough fashion what happened in this shocking case where total disregard for plain honesty, professional integrity, and legal process led to devastating consequences. It was clear when Roy Cooper proclaimed the innocence of the former LAX defendants that a number of people held onto their incorrect beliefs about wrongdoing despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary and official exoneration. Because of the careful, exhaustive, and professional efforts of its authors, Until Proven Innocent stands as powerful, unimpeachable testimony illuminating for all time the travesty that was the Duke Lacrosse Case. For anyone who cares deeply about the integrity of the US justice system (and justice systems everywhere), this is a cautionary tale that demands worldwide dissemination through all available channels.


Anonymous said...

I have read this book and find the latter chapters about false accusations in rape cases to be extremely in accurate. There are in fact factual inaccuracies in Taylor and Johnsons' book, and I write that as someone who has worked closely in the criminal justice system for years. Whatever one may say about Mike Nifong, whose conduct was indeed repellent and illegal, the idea that women are falsely accusing men of rape in record numbers (and that prosecutors all over the country are taking on these cases) is inaccurate and not supported by data or fact. I am surpised that this book has not been more harshly critqued, because whatever good it does in addressing the problems at Duke it undoes by leaving readers with the sense that false reporting is a bigger problem than the fact that by most estimates, hundreds of thousands of women are raped every year who never report to police. This book paints a very different picture and an inaccurate one at that. Because I work in the system I will not post my name here but I challenge others to read this book more critically. I applaud the authors for taking on issues that matter, but I am appalled that they have left such an impression about the larger issue of rape.

Anonymous said...

anonymous @10/20 8:51 PM

Yours is an interesting critique, anon. I'm not involved in the criminal justice system, so no matter how critically I re-read the latter chapters of the book, I'm not going to detect the innaccurate and unsupported claims by Taylor and Johnson. Can you cite what they have said about false rape accusations and prosectutions that is false; and can you supply the data, or source for the data, that contradicts their statements? That would be enormously helpful-- possibly including to the authors themselves.

It probably is the case that many more women are raped every year than report it, and even that unreported real rapes outnumber false accusations of rape. But given that this case, and this book, resulted from a false accusation of rape, isn't that the proper focus of the book? Some might be puzzled by the inclusion of a latter chapter devoted to the subject of unreported rapes, and consider it somewhat extraneous since the rest of the book is about the events triggered by report of a rape that never happend.

It's not that the problem of unreported rapes are unimportant and not a serious problem, it's that that problem has nothing to do with the case that is the subject of the book. Unless the authors are falsifying or inaccurately presenting the problem they do discuss, it may not be fair to accuse them of falsely reporting what they don't discuss.

Rape, after all, is a broader subject than just the unreported ones. Are the authors faulted also for not raising the integral topics of incest, domestic violence, correlation of rape with alcohol and drug abuse, incidence of rape in Muslim vs. western countries, pedophilia, prostitution, civilian rape by soldiers in wartime, date rape, honor rapes, revenge rapes, homosexual prison rape, abortion, suicide, murder, serial rapists, and higher incidences of rape in lower income areas? Why stop at unreported ones? It had to be because the authors chose to focus on what was relevant to the the Duke case. If you show them how unreported rapes are relevant to the Duke case also, maybe your suggestions will make the second edition.