Yesterday’s N&O, coincidentally, had an item on another dubious death-penalty prosecution involving
The article served as a timely reminder of the journalistic work the N&O has done in exposing prosecutorial misconduct. The paper’s coverage broke the Gell story, and the detail of its reporting was extraordinary; likewise, the N&O appears to have been the only
Anyone who has followed this case has come to expect pro-Nifong puffery from the Herald-Sun; or a slightly more sophisticated race/class/gender interpretation from the New York Times. But the single most disappointing aspect of the media’s recent role came when the N&O’s editorial board ignored their paper’s own reporting on the Nifong case—not to mention legacy of exposing past prosecutorial misconduct—and praised the plurality of Durham voters who gave Nifong a pass on November 7.
Fortunately, there’s no reason to believe the news division will abandon its interest in the issue of unethical behavior by prosecutors.
I think you’re wrong on what the Gell case means for what will happen when the state bar considers the inevitable complaints against Nifong. The NC State Bar was EXTREMELY embarrassed by the Gell case. Major components of the state bar were, and remain, up in arms over what happened and no one was willing to defend what happened, not even prosecutors. Alice Mine, the executive director of the State Bar, was removed from disciplinary duties over this . . . My best guess as an NC attorney is that the State Bar will be quite ready to throw the proverbial book at Nifong.
I hope he’s right.
Finally, I should have made clear in the post below that the Bar and Disciplinary Hearings Committee, though linked, are separate entities.