Monday, September 17, 2007

Civil Suit Watch, III

Today’s primary post discusses the transparent biases of some critics of the civil suit settlement. It also raises an obvious, if largely overlooked, point: it’s fanciful to believe that everything bad about the DPD’s performance has already come to light.

For instance, Cpl. David Addison has yet to be deposed. This is the same David Addison who, in his capacity as official spokesperson of the DPD, stated:

  • You are looking at one victim brutally raped. If that was someone else’s daughter, child, I don’t think 46 (tests) would be a large enough number to figure out exactly who did it.” (WRAL, March 24)
  • Addison said police approached the lacrosse team with the five-page search warrant on March 16, but that all of the members refused to cooperate with the investigation.” (Herald-Sun, March 25)
  • We’re asking someone from the lacrosse team to step forward . . . We will be relentless in finding out who committed this crime.” (N&O, March 25)
  • Addison said police can’t force samples from anyone they believe to be implicated in a crime. But he said that, in this situation, there was ‘really, really strong physical evidence.’” (Herald-Sun, March 25)
  • “We’re not saying that all 46 were involved. But we do know that some of the players inside that house on that evening knew what transpired and we need them to come forward.” (ABC, March 26)

As we know now, all of those statements were either outright false or misleading.

Only two explanations exist for Addison’s actions: (1) in the highest-profile case in the city’s history, he allowed fellow officers to mislead him, causing him to mislead the public—calling into question his competence; or (2) he willfully misled the public—calling into question his ethics.

Under oath, what explanation would Addison provide?

58 comments:

Anonymous said...

Despite Nifong's gem of a statement about only guilty folks needing lawyers, more seriously, all these idiots (Addison, Hodge, Baker, etc.) need lawyers, and need them real quick. They are all exposed.

Anonymous said...

KC's post highlights why the city WILL settle in concert with an agreement to clean its own house and with a deal with the Federal Govt. to avoid an inquiry. Unfortunately for the citizens of Durham, they will pay the tab and it will be business as usual.

Ralph Phelan said...

"Only two explanations exist for Addison’s actions: (1) in the highest-profile case in the city’s history, he allowed fellow officers to mislead him, causing him to mislead the public—calling into question his competence; or (2) he willfully misled the public—calling into question his ethics.

Under oath, what explanation would Addison provide?"

If you thnk, based on prior performance, I'm going to gues he'll say:
"I refuse to answer on the grounds that I may incriminate myself...."
you're wrong.

This guy's low enough in the food chain that (1) might work pretty well for him. "I'm just the PR guy. The bosses tell me what's going on, and I tell it to the press. How am I supposed to check on whether the chief's telling me the truth?"

He may have some personal libaility for not having the good sense to say "alleged," but most of the liability he generated will fall onto those who employed him.

Ralph Phelan said...

"KC's post highlights why the city WILL settle in concert with an agreement to clean its own house "

Baker can't afford to settle until after election day.

But the clock on the current settlement offer runs out in less than a month, when the lawyers officially file their suit(s).

At which point I suspect the settlement price will go up quite a bit.

Debrah said...

To Ralph--

Go to the Sunday Roundup thread for my last two posts.

A turnabout.

Seems Chem has weaseled his way into the job after all.

Debrah said...

I just love how KC has used the same format to present each player in the Civil Suit series.

So clever!

no justice, no peace said...

“Should, hereafter, those incited by the lust of power and prompted by the Supineness or venality of their Constituents, overleap the known barriers of this Constitution and violate the unalienable rights of humanity: it will only serve to shew, that no compact among men (however provident in its construction and sacred in its ratification) can be pronounced everlasting an inviolable.” —George Washington, First Inaugural Address

Anonymous said...

Hope tells the arrogant Barry and Sullivan to stick it in their ears.

Anonymous said...

Hope Durham offical tell......

Anonymous said...

So, after all these guys get lawyers, and all the lawyers start billing them, how the heck are they going to pay the bills? After all, we're talking about a pretty low-rent bunch of guys here, with no hope of recovering their legal fees via subsequent legal action. Or is Durham on the hook for their legal fees?

Michael said...

Addison could use Nifong's defense in that he wasn't really paying attention to what was going on and was just following orders.

If he tries to blame his superiors (Lamb I think), then they will be on the hotseat next. I would expect them to try to throw everything back on Addison.

Michael said...

re: 3:22

Wouldn't their union pick up their legal fees?

Anonymous said...

Rave on K.C. !

Keep running down the list of Hoaxsmen. Bet you can do this with everyone of them.

Be gentle on Tara though, one of the commenters here really gets bent outta shape when you point the finger at her!

Anonymous said...

KC can point all the fingers he wants, but her governing bodies made the final decision.

Anonymous said...

so the NCBON is gonna provide Tara with a lawyer for the depositions, vegas?

LOL

Anonymous said...

These are great! How many more do you have in line waiting to add?

Anonymous said...

yhere will be no Tara depositions. BTW, I am in the OJ jury pool. No, Mac - I do not drink alcohol. Vegas

Anonymous said...

the lawyers can find Tara in N.H., vegas. hell, the LS posters found her without much problem. consider taking up drinkin', vegas. gonna need it when Tara's subpoena hits the doorstep.

Anonymous said...

So here's my question....

If one of the biggest risks previously faced by the players was that a Durham jury would find them guilty at Nifong's request no matter what the defense came up with to discredit the charges, isn't there an equal risk now that a Durham jury will find for the city no matter what the plaintiffs come up with? In fact, isn't that risk increased by the fact (probably inadmissible but universally known anyway) that the players have already achieved several measures of justice elsewhere?

Dave

Anonymous said...

THere was no deposition from Levicy at Nifong's bar trial.

Anonymous said...

Trial would be in Greensboro, not Durham. No love lost between those two cities, either.

Anonymous said...

civil cases won't be heard in Durm, Dave

There was no deposition from Amelia Earhart at Nifong's bar hearing either. difference is, we know where we can find and get one now from Tara.

Anonymous said...

No one in authority is interested in a depositon from Levicy. Just like the Bar hearing. they knew where she was then - in Durham, working at DUMC.

Anonymous said...

Sooner or later someone is going to throw Levicy under the bus...she had better get a lawyer and start saving for her airfare.

Anonymous said...

OJ is in my jail. Here is a tip - Whatever is going on in your life -drinking will not make it better. We shall see - all the other predictions were wrong and these will be too.

Anonymous said...

Addison will be a soft nut to crack.

It is my guess that he was taking his orders from Gottlieb.

Gottlieb will take the 5th, but Addison will sing like a bird.

Anonymous said...

please tell us about the "other wrong predictions", vegas. Seems to me you are the one batting around .150

mac said...

My guess is, Addison will say:

"Tara ate first,
and then I ate of the fruit."

Bedass will say:
"No. But the oubo oin rtini, and there wud no heering."

Levicy is toast, along with Addison.

Anonymous said...

Can ANYONE actually 'plead the 5th' in a fed investigation? civil rights suit?

One Spook said...

Anon, The "Old Nurse," @ 3:34 writes:

"KC can point all the fingers he wants, but her governing bodies made the final decision."

Having again read your same tired, useless comment, I've gone beyond feeling sorry for you because you're biased and mistakenly defend someone in your profession, to believing you are colossally stupid, to now believing your problem is pathological.

You're wasting your time and ours on this comment board. Here's what you need to do: When Levicy gets a lawyer, write to that person. Explain to the lawyer that all that needs to be done in Levicy's defense is to tell the court that her NC Board didn't suspend her license. Be sure to add your words that this is the "final decision" in this matter.

Let us know what Levicy's lawyer replies.

One Spook

AF said...

3:03 & 3:04
Durham officials may tell Barry & Sullivan to stick it in their ears. However, I think at the end of the day, Barry & Sullivan will have stuck it up the proverbial wahoo and broken it off rather neatly.
You're not in Wonderland, you're Somewhere over the rainbow!!

Anonymous said...

5.02 asks: "Can ANYONE actually 'plead the 5th' in a fed investigation? civil rights suit?"

No.

Anonymous said...

She is not in jail - She had no discipline action taken against her - she did not lose her license and there is no lawsuit against her. No deposition was taken before or now. Thats the facts. BTW, that is why we have scroll to by pass the stuff we do not like. I quess I am not a kndly old nurse but an Emergency Department battle axe.

Anonymous said...

yo battle Ax- talked to Kathleen over at LS and she knows nothing about "a backhanded apology" seems Kethra isn't defending against a libel suit either. What's up with that? You told us those things as the gospel truth here a few days ago.

be gone, begas

Anonymous said...

Levicy shill at 5:44 says..No deposition was taken before

Neither one for Baker, either. Both will see one soon enough. The lawyers will be ready too. New Hampshire isn't that far away, unfortunately for her.

Anonymous said...

Re the invocation of the 5th amendment in a civil case, I believe the prevailing law is that a defendant can, indeed, invoke the privilege; but there will be an inference drawn as a matter of law that that if the witness had answered the question truthfully, the answer would have been adverse to his/her interests. Then, why would a defendant invoke the 5th in a civil case? Because an inference is not an admission that could be used effectively in a subsequent criminal prosecution. In civil RICO cases, for example, it is not uncommon for defendants to invoke the 5th to avoid an evidentiary trail that could lead to criminal charges.

I expect that if the Duke case goes to the discovery stage, you will see a number of witnesses counting to five!

Mike Lee said...

Perhaps even more pathetic, Addison has failed to apologize or admit error, instead he wrote an asinine editorial comparing the DPD to an opponent of Mike Tyson's.

What the hell ever happened to saying "I was wrong and I'm sorry?" To me the failure to admit error or apologize in any way is the most unforgivable aspect of the actions of Addison and the 88.

Anonymous said...

Madam Axe at 5:44pm:


"Thats the facts"

Actually, dear lady, those are SOME of the facts. Another fact, widely believed although it may not be posted on the BON web site, is that there is a bloody spectacular legal shitstorm currently starting up in Durham. Some have gone so far as to suggest that Durham might be on the lookout for someone to point a finger at. How do you think our Tara might fit in that frame?

Of course, that's all just speculation - not fact.

Anonymous said...

One wonders if Addison has invested in some soap on a rope? He's going to be the belle in the showers.

Anonymous said...

Read Kathleen's article - about a week ago on Forensics Talk - See what you think. Its with an article about Nifong and a certain nurse.

Anonymous said...

Ketha has posted that Ward Churchill is getting millions from CU because of the violation of his first ammendment rights. You can find that at LS - shows the caliber of her information.

hman said...

I read Kethras latests comments re: Levicy. It seeems pretty clear to me that she is trying to distance herself from any extra-legal, free-lance vigilante type justice that might be inflicted.
However, if you pay attention to the text, she only objects to "frivalous" actions. Deadly serious actions conducted under the color of law are fine with her. And of course we all agree with her sentiment. People with a gender-feminist mindset are always on the edge of lapsing into a frenzy of victimhood anyway. The slightest harassment would make her into some kind of sainted martyr in her world.
No. It is far better to do this out in the open, with her under oath, with a camera going. Just one question after another, always polite, let her finish.
And just for fun, every now and then have her read from the SANE manual in regard to what it says about changing your story to fit the changing requirements of the prosecution team.

Anonymous said...

Dependable Erection, the Durham townie blog, just announced the endorsing of Victoria Peterson for City Council, without the slightest criticism of the endorsement. Yet another Durham blogger who sits silently by, ignoring the big civil suit elephant in the room, and then acts surprised that Durham is getting sued at all.

Anonymous said...

My apologies for the "ER Nurse" who is so brilliantly informed about all the legal aspects of this case.

I'm a nurse too. But I didn't leave my brains or my ethics on the exam table.

Tara had an agenda, like most of the other suspects in this case. She believed that the ends justified the means.

So did some folks at Duke.

So did Nifong.

So did the DPD.

Well, there are opinions, and there are laws.

Let's see how well those people who were willing to let the innocent suffer so the PC fruitcakes could have their "victim" .. let's see how well they explain to the courts about the racist/ sexist agenda they believe in.

Hopefully, the laws of the land will hold.

If they don't we are sunk and the inmates are going to be running the asylum for a long time.

Lot more at stake here than Ms Levicy and her advocates. They are just lightweights. When the gavel of justice comes down, it is law, not opinion that MUST prevail. If Ms Levicy did nothing illegal, then she has no worries, right?

Or am I wrong?

dsl

Anonymous said...

The people of Durham are acting as children would behave when faced with potentially severe punishment for bad behavior. As with children, they variously try to deny the charges (exemplified by the soon-to-be costly Baker/Chalmers whitewash), to play down their errors (led by the newspapers and the likes of the sniveling Barry Saunders), and to hope for a light flick of the rod on their behinds (where the wallet is, hoping the three plaintiffs-to-be will simply take the insurance money and run).

Most telling, however, is the fervent efforts of the dense Durham denizens to belittle the possible money damages sought through the favorite trick of liberals, the application of moral relativism. They try to point out payments or settlements for other wrongs to individuals, and somehow instantly establish a formula for the “right” amount of damages to make the pain go away.

The children do not get it. They either do not understand just how much trouble they are in (see below), or they do understand, and they realize the eventual cost could be a lot more than just $30 million. The eventual outcome could be much more, especially counting interest, and a lot of guilty parties.

The key is the discovery process. Given the amount of wrongdoing we know about, what are the odds that a lot more will be uncovered (and just as bad, that other documents will have been destroyed)? This would give the plaintiffs the chance to amend, and expand, their complaint. We all have skeletons in our files, and lawyers make their fortunes placing those skeletons in the worst possible light. When the discovery process gets in full gear, enough should come out that the feds will have no choice but to enter the case.

The politicians in Durham may be feeling local pressure not to settle, but I have to believe their attorneys AND the state politicians (very few people have mentioned this input) will bring extreme pressure on the city to seek a settlement before discovery at any price. The children of Durham may not like the punishment, but these are the same people who thought Mike Nifong was the best choice for prosecutor. Attitude adjustment will either come now, or it will come in a bigger way later.

Joe T. said...

anon 9:42 : "..the children of Durham.." how true how true. (It's just a shame some of the "adults" of Durham, like John in Carolina and LaShawn Barber will have to be in the midst of it, but...I guess they'll be better off in the long run, too, once the "children" are set straight).

Gary Packwood said...

dsl 9:22 PM said...
....Lot more at stake here than Ms Levicy and her advocates. They are just lightweights. When the gavel of justice comes down, it is law, not opinion that MUST prevail. If Ms Levicy did nothing illegal, then she has no worries, right?

Or am I wrong?
::
Actually I think you forgot to read the comment from 6:15...the part about the shitstorm brewing in Durham USA.

That's the facts
:::
...Anonymous 6:15 said...
....Madam Axe at 5:44pm:
..."Thats the facts"
....Actually, dear lady, those are SOME of the facts. Another fact, widely believed although it may not be posted on the BON web site, is that there is a bloody spectacular legal shitstorm currently starting up in Durham. Some have gone so far as to suggest that Durham might be on the lookout for someone to point a finger at. How do you think our Tara might fit in that frame?
....Of course, that's all just speculation - not fact.
::
GP

Anonymous said...

"Addison said police approached the lacrosse team with the five-page search warrant on March 16, but that all of the members refused to cooperate with the investigation."

Which "search warrant" was this?

Anonymous said...

And.........

If poor, pitiful Durham can put Levicy in the frame, haven't they also put Duke in the same frame - and all those lovely billions.

Anonymous said...

Re Packwood 11:07

I guess it is hard to see my tongue in cheek stance, eh.


Levicy, IMO, is in trouble with the rest of them.

It's just that the ER nurse doesn't get it.

Anonymous said...

Durm hasn't been smart enuf to try to put anyone else in the Frame. They are to busy trying to deny all the things that they said when they were flying high. The rats will soon start feeding on each other in Durm. Duke has already "paid" for their sins, I don't think the Durm homeboys are gonna be able to shake them down this time.

LarryD said...

Mike Lee (@6:04 PM) What the hell ever happened to saying "I was wrong and I'm sorry?" To me the failure to admit error or apologize in any way is the most unforgivable aspect of the actions of Addison and the 88.

It tells us that they won't learn, and that this bad behavior will continue. Which is why they need to be hammered with the law, to try and get through to them.

There's a lot of narcissim on the Left, and people whose's status isn't based on merit, but on PC, have reason to be prone to it.

Anonymous said...

You bet she is distancing herself from her witch hunt -

Anonymous said...

I doubt that there is a SANE manual for this 84 hour certification course given at the YWCA. This Registered Nurse "gets" it - to date no legal action has been taken against Levicy - Eighteen months later. So where is the trouble?

mac said...

Hi, Bigas!

As David Bowie would say:
"Chchchchchanges
Turn and face the strain..."

Yup, changes. Nurse Levity's many stories, as varied as Sybil's personalities. Which Nurse Levity will show up this time?

Chchchchchanges!

Anonymous said...

Is David Bowie a communist? 5'3 and 122 pounds ?

Debrah said...

TO 5:39 PM--

How silly.

David Bowie might be kind of old, but he's not short.

He's tall and very thin....kind of androgynous.

He's married to the Ethiopian former model, Iman.

You must be thinking of Danny DeVito. LOL!

Anonymous said...

Addison is the perfect example of affirmative action running on all cylinders