Friday, October 11, 2013

Reflections on the Supreme Court Move

As I noted Monday, the Supreme Court has declined to hear the falsely accused players’ appeal of the 4th circuit’s dismissal of most of their case. On the one hand, the decision wasn’t surprising: (1) the Court doesn’t take many appeals; and (2) the politics of this appeal were particularly difficult, since judicial liberals tend to be more favorably inclined to civil rights claims—but as Judge Gregory demonstrated at the 4thCircuit, it appears that at least some judicial liberals are extremely hostile to this particular group’s civil rights claims.

On the other hand, however, the decision was extremely disappointing and at least a little bit surprising, in two respects. First, it’s not as if the Court is overflowing with critical cases this term—its first week of the session featured two cases (Madigan and Burt) that never should have reached the Court in the first place.

Second, it’s worth reiterating the breathtaking precedent that the Court allowed to stand. From here on out in the 4th Circuit, there’s no federal cause of action against a town or city when the municipality’s police department: (a) turns over a police investigation to a local prosecutor; and (b) stands aside as that prosecutor and police officers manufacture evidence with which to indict innocent people for a crime that never occurred—provided that (a) the police are perfectly candid with their co-conspirator (the prosecutor) that there’s no evidence on which to base the indictment; and (b) a grand jury returns indictments, even if, as occurred in the lacrosse case, the indictment resulted from misleading or outright false testimony from one of the police officers.

The dismissal means that a host of questions are likely to remain permanently unanswered. That list includes the following:

(1) Who in the police department (or city government) allowed Mike Nifong to assume personal command of the police investigation?

(2) What precise interactions occurred between the Durham and Duke police departments?

(3) What precise interactions occurred between Nifong, the DPD, and former SANE-nurse-in-training Tara Levicy? (Levicy, by the way, is currently working in my home state of Maine, where she notes her particular interest in “women’s health.”)

(4) Who gave Cpl. David Addison the information that he used for his fact-free, race-baiting March 2006 public statements? Why was he not subsequently disciplined for his statement?

(5) Who in the DPD made the decision to involve Sgt. Gottlieb in the investigation?

(6) Why was Sgt. Shelton removed from any involvement in the investigation?

(7) Did any backchannel discussions occur between Durham authorities and the Duke administration?


Anonymous said...

Here's another question that needs an answer:

What is the right way to hold the people accountable who were actually involved in the execution of the duke lacrosse case so that no similar type malfeance of justice is perpetuated on others?

From what I just read that you wrote KC, the ruling in the 4th district doesn't actually say that doing those things individually or in concert are actions that others cannot be held accountable for - just the city or town itself in which the event took place that cannot be held federally accountable. So - how do you hold all who were involved in the case accountable for their actions in others ways than federally suing the city? Why would the actual city be responsible for all that anyway? How do you pose the problem to the court so that the answers can be determined that will pinpoint who actually needs to be held responsible? Isn't that what this case is about anyway, individual people making decisions to act in ways that harm others and go against the law or statutes of the land, and/or do not stop the individual decisions and actions of others as needed for justice to prevail if it is their power and knowledge to do so?

Duke was operating throughout NC and elsewhere in this same fashion for years on end and still does probably. It is how they do what they do, and they do it well, and as sport don't you know. It has become who they are.

Anonymous said...

What really sticks sometimes when people consider duke who actually have to deal with it in other than story book bb espn land - is that they actually hate to death anyone who stands in their way of looking 'great'. They are brainwashed by the culture of that. It is who they are.

If you ever look straight into their eyes and don't blink - all you see is evil - and hatred - and greed - and a mockery of all that is hard to describe - how to describe the evil that is duke to adequately convey the reality of their sneer that is conveyed bodly for all on in mocking jest on their blue devil emblazened flag - that could be another question for the day.

skwilli said...

" appears that at least some judicial liberals are extremely hostile to this particular group’s civil rights claims."

Really says it all. Some people are way more equal than others.

Anonymous said...

Great. More commentary from the obviously irrational commentator. Please get help-- you are in desparate need of it.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous @11:50am:

Instead of relying exclusively on ad hominem attacks, it might be helpful if you could explain why you find the commentary irrational.

Do you believe that a prosecutor and police should face no consequences if they deliberately frame innocent defendants? Do you believe that a grand jury indictment, even if obtained with misleading or perjured testimony, should eliminate all responsibility for misconduct? Do you really believe that the system worked, albeit after almost a year and several million dollars?

Anonymous said...

It is irrational to post numerous posts containing spelling and grammatical errors, run on sentences, mis used phrases-- I particularly enjoyed perpetuated on others rather than perpetrated on others-- when absolutely no one in the thinking world could give a shit about what you say. You are a fool ranting into a hurricane-- no one can hear you, but, if they could, they would totally ignore you.

Anonymous said...


You surely have seen this monster through from the Original Two Year Hoax/Ordeal (a time of mere "inconvenience" according to Mr. Burns) to the Glory Days of Exoneration to the court system's Pitiful Response.

And the end of the story for now is: the 4th Cir. acts to protect the powerful police and a pernicious prosecutor as they work together to deprive citizens of what most consider to be constitutional protections; the SC declines to hear the case.

It is a despicable result.

So, who enjoyed the protection of the justice system? Not the innocent citizen. LE, et al, which apparently requires protection from frivolous lawsuits (even as they commit crimes against the innocent in their official capacity!!) and (2) the accuser, Ms. Mangum.

Sadly, race relations take yet another hit with more reminders that some want justice--but only for me and mine...not for thee and thine.

Not many have the fortitude to take a case like this through all the jumps and hoops. It's discouraging, but very instructive, to get whole the post-exoneration story. Thank you for continuing to follow and relay the unvarnished tale.


jim2 said...

Was Duke ever held accountable for illegally giving student key card info to the police, then telling the parents that Duke had not done so, but would unless the parents protested? Then, when the parents protested and won in court, Duke denying that it had happened, only to have it come out later?

Anonymous said...

Duke has not been held accountable to the public yet for causing so much distress to many from that case which continues to harm others many years later by Duke's design and plan.

They knew the entire time exactly what they were and are doing and why - and it isn't because they actually give 2 cents worth of thought to actual justice or concern for anything or anyone - other than winning the ability to mastermind billions for their coffers if Obama and Obamacare were put in place, and health services were privitized in large part - as they also attacked in reform and take over mode that system at the same time as they instigated the lacrosse false flag get the black vote out one way or the other hoax.

They also knew they would be able to later claim victimhood for themselves after time found the actions of DA Nifong and the Durham PD to be a point of contention against Duke and Ms. Mangum - thus securing their own woe is me victimization badge of donor worthiness as well as securing Obama in their pocket, and keeping the racebaiting politics open to debate. They have not stopped playing the game since it started, and actually get upset if anyone even so much as mentions that most people see through their lies and deception - in hopes of keeping their donors dumb and dumber so they can continue to get rich and richer.

They owe every USA citizen a meaningful apology for what they have done and will continue to do if left to their own destructive plans and power control mongering. They need to stop their destructive and deadly ways and they need to be held accountable for what they have done and will do if they do not stop.

Anonymous said...

They have been told to stop since IT started - repeatedly and by many.

Ask them - have they?
The answer will be nothing - although it will mean NO.

Ask them if they plan to stop.
They will show you that they don't.
Then you will see.

Anonymous said...

This poster is the same wingnut who haunts the Harr Whine with the same babble. Don't bother trying to find an actual sentence.

Anonymous said...


Have you clerked for a SC judge? Or did you just sleep at a Holiday Inn Express recently?

Anonymous said...

Is Harr a Communist?

Anonymous said...

Civil Rights in NC is being run by black power groups who want retaliation against whites. If Obama had a second son, would it look like Jonathan Ferrell?
Big Al

*** start of article***

White officer charged for fatal shooting of black man:

In an eerie reminder of the 2012 Trayvon Martin case in Florida, North Carolina authorities last month rushed to charge a white police officer who fatally shot an unarmed young black man acting threateningly.
But evidence suggests as in the Martin case, authorities may have overcharged the shooter, who claims self defense.
Also mirroring the Martin case, authorities came under intense pressure from civil rights groups to make an arrest. In this case, the shooter, officer Randall Kerrick, was jailed within hours of the Sept. 14 death of 24-year-old Jonathan Ferrell in Charlotte, N.C.
But now, legal experts agree the swiftly filed voluntary manslaughter charges against the officer ultimately won’t hold up against mounting evidence supporting self defense; and an expected reduction in charges, or eventual acquittal, may only reignite racial tensions.
The case has police organizations worried racial politics is swaying internal decisions in cities across the country. They warn if street cops don’t feel the brass have their back in cases where they have to use lethal force, cops may feel inhibited in violent situations, putting their own lives in danger as well as those of citizens they’re sworn to protect.

Art Deco said...

Perhaps the disreputable Mr. Sailer is correct. Who? Whom? is the only question that matters in most of these disputes.

And you can see the irony in that, recalling Southern justice of two generations ago.