tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post6798639552109588446..comments2024-02-24T05:19:10.949-05:00Comments on Durham-in-Wonderland: Cohan's Trialskcjohnson9http://www.blogger.com/profile/09625813296986996867noreply@blogger.comBlogger39125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-60697071637433093402014-07-06T22:03:43.437-04:002014-07-06T22:03:43.437-04:00"One factual matter that rings very unsatisfa...<i>"One factual matter that rings very unsatisfactorily to me is the accuser's school status"</i><br /><br />IIRC, the defense attorneys were never able to ascertain that she was attending any classes at NCCU.<br /><br />I don't know if she received any funds for attending.<br /><br />NCCU should know; then Chancellor Amons should have known (did he tell Brodhead?); but none of these stalwarts for truth has spoken up yet...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-47617308820975817192014-07-06T18:41:21.679-04:002014-07-06T18:41:21.679-04:00Still working my way through the Cohan book, I am ...Still working my way through the Cohan book, I am to the point where he turns over the open mic to Nifong.<br /><br />One factual matter that rings very unsatisfactorily to me is the accuser's school status (the book depersonalizes her as well). Is she a 3.75 student, or hoping to go back to school, or moving all around as her parent says? Perhaps that status changed during the prosecution time covered by the book.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-85942588746990842722014-07-04T21:40:38.103-04:002014-07-04T21:40:38.103-04:00It was Neufeld who may have responded to the wrong...It was Neufeld who may have responded to the wrong drummer, not Halkides.<br /><br />AnonymousAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-39926561656500675452014-07-04T05:39:52.957-04:002014-07-04T05:39:52.957-04:00Re: 7/2/14, 7:52 AM
Cohan's UnGripping, Un...Re: 7/2/14, 7:52 AM<br /><br />Cohan's UnGripping, UnMagisterial, UnAuthoritative, UnSeductively Engrossing Book Tour will be at the 1300 seat Mayo Performing Arts Center in September. $20 gets you a seat for this. <br /><br />Cohan will be introduced by Bryan Burrough, a fellow Vanity Fair contributor.<br /><br />The rest of the Morristown Festival of Books that weekend is free, courtesy of Morgan Stanley Private Wealth Management.<br /><br />A Duke Dadnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-33575861624263417542014-07-03T23:01:01.764-04:002014-07-03T23:01:01.764-04:00@Chris, 8:57
Cohan has just got his facts wrong, ...@Chris, 8:57<br /><br />Cohan has just got his facts wrong, again. On Mar 21, 2006 Crystal had not recognized him at all.<br /><br />Her first ID of Evans was at the improper all-Lacross player lineup, where she said, "He looks like one of the guys who assaulted me, sort of"; then, "he looks like him without the mustache".<br /><br />So Cohan, the lazy researcher, got his facts flat wrong, again. <br /><br />(correct facts from UPI, p. 158)<br /><br />Jim PetersonJim In San Diegohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06959286127760699852noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-42798445213040734452014-07-03T21:45:19.146-04:002014-07-03T21:45:19.146-04:00I appreciate Chris Halkides' caution about not...I appreciate Chris Halkides' caution about not assuming beyond the evidence, and implicit in that, giving the benefit of the doubt until certain the negative is true. However, I agree with Moo and Jim, there is a strong possibility that Halkides responded to the wrong drummer, as did Durham's Innocence Project rep. when the spotlight was shining on her. <br /><br />This makes me want to go out and celebrate on behalf of all the people with courage who can see clearly and stick to their callings, stand on their principles, and as such keep societies moving along in spite of the people who disappoint. It is possible that what Neufeld wants more than justice is approval from the powers that be. There might be other explanations for his seeming failure to assist in establishing the innocence of the innocent back then.....maybe not.<br /><br />MariaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-32341685543296086872014-07-03T20:57:13.429-04:002014-07-03T20:57:13.429-04:00To change the subject a bit, I have a question abo...To change the subject a bit, I have a question about something that appears on p. 279 of POS. "When Mangum first identified David Evans as one of her attackers, she said she thought that he had a mustache, and when she saw his picture again during the photographic lineup without the mustache, she said she still recognized him as one of her attackers but noted he not longer had a mustache." What is Cohan talking about? This sentence make it sound as if Mangum identified Evans twice.Chris Halkideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-43644288652254381522014-07-03T20:54:31.336-04:002014-07-03T20:54:31.336-04:00@MOO:
Agree that Peter Neufeld's behavior in ...@MOO:<br /><br />Agree that Peter Neufeld's behavior in the rape hoax is hard to understand, since the whole mission of the Innocence Project is to win exoneration for the innocent. <br /><br />And,the Project depends upon the reliability of DNA tests as their primary weapon to win exonerations.<br /><br />unless...<br /><br />....unless he and his firm had some engagement or had already been in consultation with, one of the sides in the case.<br /><br />In that case, Neufeld as a potential expert witness in an ongoing case, and who had already been consulted by either side, would be unable to comment publicly on the case.<br /><br />Jim PetersonJim In San Diegohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06959286127760699852noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-51440266429758030752014-07-03T19:11:10.051-04:002014-07-03T19:11:10.051-04:00Bottom line: When Nifong's prosecution was abo...Bottom line: When Nifong's prosecution was about to be derailed by the DNA test results, and he needed a break, Neufeld gave it to him.<br /><br />And he repeated his remarks on two additional occasions, weeks apart.<br /><br />He had ample reason by then to have acquainted himself with the facts of the Duke case.<br /><br />And even if not, he must certainly have realized, at some point, that the players were innocent. And that his words and reputation--as "the expert" on DNA--had been used to railroad innocent defendants.<br /><br />Was silence his only possible response?<br /><br />Why not have flown down to Durham and sat in on a hearing, at the defense table, and then taken questions from the media outside?<br /><br />He could have come out swinging on behalf of both the innocent defendants--to whom imho he had a moral obligation--and on behalf of the reliability of DNA tests to prove innocence in a case like the lax case.<br /><br />Personally I don't regard silence under those circumstances to be an appropriate response--especially when the danger of the conviction of innocent persons was at stake.<br /><br />(MOO)<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-90108404758612695942014-07-03T17:41:41.187-04:002014-07-03T17:41:41.187-04:00On the “weak no” side, Dan Krane wrote: “It is wor...On the “weak no” side, Dan Krane wrote: “It is worth noting that DNA tests are amazingly sensitive (DNA profiles can be generated from as little material as that left behind in a fingerprint) and Y-STR tests have the potential of determining a male’s DNA profile even when a female’s DNA is present in hundreds or thousands of times greater quantities. Scientists are always wary of asserting that the absence of evidence is not proof of absence but it certainly is reasonable to expect to find a rapist’s DNA associated with a victim when the victim presents herself to investigators within hours of an attack and when she has not bathed, the rapist did not use a condom and ejaculation occurred.”<br /><br />http://amptoons.com/blog/2006/04/14/experts-answer-what-does-dna-evidence-prove/Chris Halkideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-6397919623444946242014-07-03T17:26:33.818-04:002014-07-03T17:26:33.818-04:00@4:40
Innocence Project spokesmen in the past hav...@4:40<br /><br />Innocence Project spokesmen in the past have publicly argued that DNA is found in only a small number of cases.<br /><br />However, my recollection is these spokesmen were speaking of criminal cases in general, and bemoaning the fact that virtually the only way the Project has been able to have more than 300 convicted felons exonerated is thru DNA testing.<br /><br />My knowledge of the sensitivity of modern DNA testing, which is not expert but is that of an informed layman, is that DNA is highly likely to be left behind in a rape. If condoms are not used, this probability arises to near certainty.<br /><br />If Peter Neufeld actually intended to communicate that many rapes without condoms leave no DNA traces, I would be astonished.<br /><br />However, I am still puzzled and resentful of how Peter Neufeld assisted in the prostitution of DNA science during the O.J. Simpson trial.<br /><br />Jim PetersonJim In San Diegohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06959286127760699852noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-52623562470389924852014-07-03T17:04:30.004-04:002014-07-03T17:04:30.004-04:00I have not fact-checked this particular statistic....I have not fact-checked this particular statistic. However, it might be true if a significant fraction of alleged rape victims wait for days before reporting the attack. I posted a set of guidelines for alleged victims of sexual assault, which noted that showering and changing clothes should be avoided prior to a rape exam. I am surprised that Mr. Neufeld did not mention this specifically. Or perhaps he did and the article truncated his list (he did say "several"). It is important to keep in mind the particulars of the DL case make the absence of DNA evidence more compelling than it would otherwise be. For example, Ms. Mangum was taken into custody before she could have showered.Chris Halkideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-46836803229379285262014-07-03T16:40:05.643-04:002014-07-03T16:40:05.643-04:00Thanks, Chris. Do you believe this statement by Pe...Thanks, Chris. Do you believe this statement by Peter Neufeld is true: "The truth is, if you speak to crime lab directors, they will tell you that in only a small number of cases is there DNA evidence." I don't see how that could be true but I have no expertise in any related field though I do read crime novels whose authors seem to dispute his claim. In addition, Nifong and his gang seemed to put great stock in DNA results. That is, until the actual DNA results did not support their claims :)<br /><br /><br />MariaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-61861767970187540282014-07-03T16:04:32.218-04:002014-07-03T16:04:32.218-04:00Let me add that I don't think Mr. Neufeld hand...Let me add that I don't think Mr. Neufeld handled the DL situation perfectly, but I would make allowances for the fact that he probably gets called upon to make comments on many cases and prefers to keep his comments very general. I am unaware of evidence of conscious bias against the players.Chris Halkideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-72845991623102834452014-07-03T15:36:38.880-04:002014-07-03T15:36:38.880-04:00“The truth is if you speak to crime lab directors,...“The truth is if you speak to crime lab directors, they will tell you that in only a relatively small number of cases is there any DNA evidence,” said Peter Neufeld, co-founder of the Innocence Project (11 April 2006). I believe his statement about the absence of evidence were reported in the Washington Post on 23 April 2006. With respect to the quote I previously gave, I found it reposted without a date. Just now I found a portion of the same quote from a story that first appeared on 17 April 2006 and was later reposted. <a href="http://www.bet.com/news/news/2008/02/11/newsarticledukerapecasegrandjury.html" rel="nofollow">link</a><br /><br />UPI notes (p. 164) that Neufeld later said that Duff WIlson had not told him any of the details of the case. I am unaware of any comments from Mr. Neufeld after the information came out in December of 2006. My view of Mr. Neufeld's comments is also colored by the information in a link I provided several months ago. A blogger had interviewed some of the top DNA experts in the country at roughly the same time as these articles. Their answers tended to be couched in cautious language, but the blogger who solicited their comments was clearly leaning pro-guilt and interpreted their words through that lens.Chris Halkideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-31895797685388088502014-07-03T15:03:41.493-04:002014-07-03T15:03:41.493-04:00Translation: when were statements by Neufeld made,...Translation: when were statements by Neufeld made, according to Whitmire's reporting?<br /><br />This iPad has a mind of its own.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-70407789720452375292014-07-03T14:57:25.346-04:002014-07-03T14:57:25.346-04:00Chris, when were those statements by Neufeld made ...Chris, when were those statements by Neufeld made by Peter Neufeld?<br /><br />TXS.,<br /><br />MariaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-58031160201740586752014-07-03T14:38:37.494-04:002014-07-03T14:38:37.494-04:00I found several of Peter Neufeld's comments ab...I found several of Peter Neufeld's comments about this case, including this one from Tim Whitmire's reporting: "There could be several reasons why the tests didn't find any DNA evidence, said Peter Neufeld, co-founder and co-director of the Innocence Project, a nonprofit legal clinic. "Obviously, if people sexually assaulted her and wore condoms, you would not expect to see any semen left behind. That's No. 1," he said. "No. 2, in most sexual assault cases, the perpetrator does not transfer his own pubic hairs to that of the victim ... so there can certainly be a rape even in the absence of semen being recovered."<br /><br />Nothing he said about the case was wrong, but it was very general and at times incomplete. For example, if you grab someone and hold them very tightly, there may be DNA transferred. I don't think that Mr. Neufeld was trying to help the prosecution's case so much as he was trying to answer Wilson's and other reporters' questions. Some people who covered this case asked slanted questions and ignoree the nuances in the answer.Chris Halkideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-86153308529246945272014-07-03T10:46:58.359-04:002014-07-03T10:46:58.359-04:00"But in William D. Cohan’s 'trial,' J..."But in William D. Cohan’s 'trial,' Judge Cohan never asked the defense attorneys to speak."<br /><br />Pragmatism has a description for this: "dis-ease." On this view, one is justified in ignoring and evading any obstacle, argument or fact that hinders the satisfaction of a desire. <br /><br />As KC has clearly demonstrated, Cohan's desire is to resuscitate Nifong/Duke and impugn the lacrosse players. Interviewing the defense attorneys would have caused him "dis-ease," so he ignored him. <br /><br />KC: Thank you for the truly excellent dissection of Cohan's fantasies. <br /><br />Duke Prof <br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-40830445954084162852014-07-03T09:29:01.463-04:002014-07-03T09:29:01.463-04:00The twisting of the knife is the part I like best....The twisting of the knife is the part I like best. Symbolically, of course. Twist, KC, Twist!skwillihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17216150339054413310noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-41272204009865855072014-07-02T19:20:53.533-04:002014-07-02T19:20:53.533-04:00To 7/2/14, 5:27 and 7:52 AM:
To me there is no ot...To 7/2/14, 5:27 and 7:52 AM:<br /><br />To me there is no other explanation for such publicly written nonsense except that some people reside in a parallel universe, especially those involved with the Morristown Festival of Books. I would seriously doubt if those putting on this affair have read "Until Proven Innocent" (UPI) by Johnson and Taylor. Are they even aware UPI was written and, unlike "The Price of Silence", impeccably sourced?<br /> <br />Agree with 10:01 re Amazon, and I include other fora, especially Durham-in-Wonderland. This case seems to be one that people will always tend to want to revise and reinterpret. Depressing, I tell you! Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-52039538897034215682014-07-02T19:08:25.252-04:002014-07-02T19:08:25.252-04:00@4:53
Barnes & Noble reviewers rate the book ...@4:53<br /><br />Barnes & Noble reviewers rate the book lower even than Amazon (which has a certain number of obvious shill 5 star reviews).<br /><br />In fact, there is not one word of praise for "Price" anywhere amongst any of the reviews. (there is 1 x 5 star review, submitted without any text).<br /><br />Favorite quote from B&N reviewers: "Something happened in the making of this book....something none of us would be proud of"<br /><br />Jim PetersonJim In San Diegohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06959286127760699852noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-9309626895149599322014-07-02T16:53:37.632-04:002014-07-02T16:53:37.632-04:00Amazon buyers rate the book at 2 stars, B&N 1....Amazon buyers rate the book at 2 stars, B&N 1.5.<br /><br />I am no fan of Jon Steward, but even he tries to tell Mr. Cohan he picked the wrong case. <br />However,Cohan understands that history is bunk and and clearly wants to leave rationalizations for future history professors.<br />http://thedailyshow.cc.com/video-playlists/yam3x7/the-daily-show-19096-highlights/69gtli<br />NoDAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-91334798933251527232014-07-02T11:20:44.732-04:002014-07-02T11:20:44.732-04:00@DM, 5:14
I understand clearly where you are comi...@DM, 5:14<br /><br />I understand clearly where you are coming from. We both want to get to the same place. <br /><br />I just disagree, somewhat, from the point of view of persuasive argument, about how to get there.<br /><br />My argument is this:<br /><br />1. There is, sometimes, demonstrably a right and a wrong.<br /><br />2. When there is demonstrably a right and wrong, it is best to make the argument, again and again, and in all its forms. But, without applying labels to those who disagree.<br /><br />3. The reason is that labels get in the way of persuasion. Labels energize identity politics and prevent us from listening carefully to argument, especially argument which conflicts with what we have come to believe is true. <br /><br />Some years ago I wrote a blog for a while (title:"aworriedcitizen"). The theme of the blog was the immorality of our leaving so much debt for our children and grandchildren to pay. This is a highly political issue. <br /><br />Many readers wanted to argue the debt problem was caused by one party, or the other. I made the following challenge on my blog, which I repeat here:<br /><br />"Anyone who believes the larger issues are partisan issues, and the fault of the Democrats/Republicans, please take your side, and make your argument. <br /><br />I will take the other side, and demonstrate why the problem is really the fault of the Republicans/Democrats."<br /><br />I never had any takers.<br /><br />(BTW, on several occasions over the years I have contributed to DIW, I have chastised KC Johnson, whom I respect enormously, for using labels (left, right, or whatever). It is in the record.)<br /><br />Jim PetersonJim In San Diegohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06959286127760699852noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-82203446664440749262014-07-02T10:01:52.324-04:002014-07-02T10:01:52.324-04:00The only testament to the truth available to a bro...The only testament to the truth available to a broad swath of potential readers, resides on Amazon. Where would we be, where would the innocent and essentially decent young men who were falsely accused, be without Amazon? And where would they be now without Durham-in-Wonderland, Until Proven Innocent, and those high-minded defense attorneys?...And without the Amazon reviewers who are hanging in there, insistent that the truth be known. <br /><br />I suppose there has always been a struggle between the truth-tellers and opportunistic predators. And there have been times when greater clarity was achieved vs. times when distortion prevailed (such as with Salem witch hunts, McCarthy communist paranoia, Nazi projections concerning non-Aryans...the Duke 88 professors and Duke president Brodhead's apparent abandonment of fidelity to the truth.) Perhaps there will always be Us moving society forward on solid ground vs. Them taking advantage of the moment without concern for foundations.<br /><br />MariaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com