Wednesday, December 27, 2006

Dead on Arrival

Over the past nine months, Mike Nifong has distinguished himself as a figure incapable of thinking much about the long-term consequences of his actions:

  • Need publicity for a cash-starved primary campaign? Make inflammatory, misleading public statements about the case, and worry about violating Rule 3.8(f) later.
  • Need to find someone to indict—any player would do—before the primary? Order the police to violate their own procedures by constructing a lineup with no wrong answers, and worry about explaining the setup later.
  • Don’t want to reveal what the accuser said in the April 11 meeting? Claim repeatedly in open court that the case was never discussed, without anticipating the p.r. damage from stating that indictments were brought without the prosecutor ever speaking to the accuser about events of the “crime.”
  • Don’t want to turn over DNA results casting enormous doubt upon the accuser’s veracity? Enter into an agreement with the lab director to intentionally withhold the evidence, without thinking about possible allegations of obstruction of justice down the road.

Nifong’s recent decision to offer a new theory of the crime—rape didn’t occur, but sexual assault did—fits into this pattern of the D.A.’s short-term approach consistently working to his long-term harm. As the N&O pointed out, the accuser told a different story to every single police officer or medical personnel that interviewed her. Sometimes twenty people raped her, sometimes five did, sometimes three, sometimes two. But the accuser, at least, fairly consistently portrayed rape as an element of any attack that occurred. Now, nine months later, she’s abandoned even that shred of consistency.

It wouldn’t have taken much brainpower to have figured out that the latest manipulation of evidence would backfire. But, as the Herald-Sun revealed, even such obvious consultants as Mayor Bill Bell, Police Chief Steven Chalmers, and Deputy Chief Ron Hodge all learned of Nifong’s decision to drop the rape charges from the media.

It appears as if the D.A.’s circle of advisors has shrunk to the troika of wife Cy Gurney, “investigator” Linwood Wilson, and citizens’ committee co-chair Victoria Peterson. Each has reasons unrelated to the pursuit of justice to prop up Nifong’s crumbling career: Gurney to maximize her husband’s pension; Wilson because no other D.A. would possibly keep such as a figure as a chief investigator; Peterson because no other D.A. would even think of allowing Durham’s resident homophobe access to the city’s levers of power.

The Troika’s thinking isn’t hard to discern: now that the Nifong-Meehan conspiracy to withhold the exculpatory DNA evidence has unraveled, the rape charge no longer is tenable. So drop the rape charge and claim instead that the assault occurred with a foreign object—even though the accuser had never previously made such an allegation.

A few of the most shameless sycophants—Wendy Murphy (could she actually have prosecuted people?) and Durham attorneys John Bourlon and Woody Vann—gave the expected responses, suggesting that Nifong’s retooling the charges would make his case easier to prove, by taking the DNA evidence out of play. But Nifong and the Troika appear to have overlooked even the hapless Dr. Meehan conceding that a cell of his own, perhaps from dandruff, was found in the accuser’s rape kit—and so a claim that a lengthy, violent assault occurred without leaving any trace of the attackers’ DNA is absurd.

Arthur Caplan, chairman of the Department of Medical Ethics at the University of Pennsylvania, termed it “next to impossible” for the accuser’s story to be true if no DNA from her alleged attackers was left behind. He said, “The odds are tiny to zero that you’re not going to find any sample from anybody. It gets hard to imagine that some kind of forced or unwanted activity took place.” Nifong’s decision to drop the rape charges, in short, will not resolve his DNA dilemma, nor help him address obstruction-of-justice charges in the long term.

Moreover, by manipulating the charges to cover his tracks on DNA, Nifong has found himself contradicted by two other critical pieces of evidence in his file. The first item: the video of the April 4 “identification” “procedure.” In that “no-wrong-answers” event, the accuser not only made her selections, but described what each of her alleged attackers did to her. So by dropping the rape charges, Nifong is now in the unenviable position of asking the court to accept the identifications resulting from that “procedure,” but to ignore what the accuser said about her alleged attackers.

The second item: the SANE nurse’s report, which detected no injuries beyond “diffuse vaginal edema” and a scratched heel. Kathleen Eckelt immediately detected Nifong’s problem, and correctly reasoned that the D.A.’s new theory seemed to “insult our intelligence.”

Real rape victims, Eckelt notes, are traumatized, and as a result “can have some trouble with memory, especially if they were under the influence of drugs or alcohol.” But radically shifting stories can often suggest a fraudulent claim, and “it’s a huge leap to go from explicitly saying she was penetrated orally, vaginally, and rectally to suddenly not being sure what body part actually penetrated her.”

In her experience as a SANE nurse, Eckelt observes that patients can have problems with small details, since in “any traumatic event, most people are often so overwhelmed with emotion that they can’t remember all the details all at once.” But in this case, the “recovered-memory” issues are huge—whether the accuser was raped, and how many people raped her. According to Eckelt, “most patients are able to tell me that right up front. And if they’re not sure, they tell me so. Right away. They will say something like, ‘I’m not sure if I was even raped.’ I’ve had patients actually express surprise when I’ve found injuries because they were so unsure.”

In addition to the accuser’s remarkably changing memory patterns, Eckelt notes that sexual assault with an object in stranger rapes is rare—and that the injuries reported in this event are inconsistent with assault with an object.

While “rape does not always leave genital injuries . . . objects used in assaults cause immediate damage. It’s hard to get around that fact. Objects injure skin and tissue . . . They damage the epithelial lining of the outer skin or inner tissue, and break fragile blood vessels, causing redness, swelling, bruising, lacerations (tears), and abrasions. Large injuries, like lacerations, can usually be seen with the naked eye. Tiny, micro-abrasions can be seen with the culposcope. Abrasions will ooze and often bleed.”

Meanwhile, anal penetration by an object “can cause a great deal of injury. Not only will we see redness and swelling but the tears and abrasions are usually larger, encircling the rectal opening, very visible to the naked eye. The anal sphincter is often affected too and we can see delayed sphincter closing.”

Where, Eckelt wonders, are the “significant number of injuries” that would be expected from the latest version of events offered by Nifong? Eckelt’s conclusion is blunt: “Personally, like everything else that has come out about this case, I seriously question this type of hypothesis. Sexual assault by objects tends to leave far more injuries than rape alone.”

Upon hearing of Nifong's latest maneuver, Jackie Brown, one of the most astute observers of Durham politics around, concluded about the D.A.: "He's dead. Put a fork in him, he's done." Between now and February 5, perhaps Nifong and the Troika will come up with another way to manipulate the evidence so as to keep the case alive. But Brown is right--the “no-rape” theory is dead on arrival.


Anonymous said...

Speaking of dead.

Gerald Ford just died.

Anonymous said...

As I understand it, if the case is still going on at the time, there will be a hearing at which the accuser will be asked to identify the men who she says sexually assaulted her.

Of course, if the three defendants are sitting at the defense table, I would think that the accuser would be able to figure out who she is supposed to say.

But would the defense be allowed to have the defendants sitting in the courtroom gallery, surrounded by a group of men of similar type (say, other Duke lacrosse players, ex-players, and/or athletes from other sports or other schools)? There's a good chance the accuser would get the identification wrong in that case.

Of course, the "fillers" would run the risk that Nifong would immediately indict them if the accuser identified them instead of the defendants.

Anonymous said...

Nifong knows the case is over. His NYT interview laid out his roadmad to the inevitable. Right now he's publically proclaiming his intent to put the AV on the stand, because he knows the AV will either refuse to testify or the judge will listen to her testimony and throw out the ID. Either way, its game over.

Anonymous said...

I agree that it is game over. And remember that Judge Smith is not beholden to Nifong as were the other judges. Furthermore, other prosecutors in North Carolina are wanting to rid themselves of the Fong albatross, so there is not going to be the usual pressure to keep a case going.

It is not a matter of "if," but "when." Then the next step in this sorry affair is to bring Nifong to justice.

Anonymous said...

Each and every poster, kibitzer, observer, or curious onlooker who has given an opinion on this hoax will mention without fail just how bizarre the whole thing is.

Even cannot be reiterated enough.

What Mike Nifong has been allowed to get away with for months is really grotesque. Inconceivable in a civilized world.

I love that KC has mentioned the three people on the face of the earth who might still be in Nifong's corner.

This is so hilarious because it's true. Each of those pathetic souls is still with Mikey for reasons other than actually supporting this case.

1) Poor Cy. How desperate to get married must she have been?

2) Hapless Linwood Wilson could double as an extra if they ever do a sequel to the film "Deliverance".

3) Fruitcake Victoria Peterson is probably as mentally ill as Mikey. They speak the same language.

Beyond this comedy is the reality that Nifong is still walking around and has yet to be fitted for his orange jumpsuit.

There are many players who either stayed silent or who forcefully helped Nifong.

Over on "John in Carolina" Bob Wilson, the wonderful former chief editorial page editor of the Herald Sun outlined well the main players who participated and enabled such an injustice......and how each has shredded their credibility.

"Moral cowardice doesn't come cheap".

Debrah Correll

Anonymous said...

As a last ditch effort at enablement, I listened to Wendy on FOX news trying to say that maybe there are pictures of an actual crime and/or some LAX guys have given testimony about observing a crime.
But, how could that be true since nifong basically admitted the other day that his case rests entirely on the AVs statements? I mean, if he had such gold plated evidence he would never say that he would toss it all overboard if the AV had trouble with the ID of the perps if he had photos/witnesses to a crime.
If this case were a patient it would be at room temperature - no need to look for a pulse.

Anonymous said...

Greta Van Susteren on Fox News tonight said repeatedly that Nifong's NY Times article absolutely laid out his "exit strategy" for the February hearing when he said words to the effect of, "this case is over is she can't identify these men in court".

She surmised that either the witness will faltern in some way (like how she can't remember if she was raped or not) or the judge will throw out the line up setting the stage for the relunctant yet ever determined D.A. to dismiss the charges at the hands of the court thus freeing him from admitting he was wrong, did anything improper, etc.

Should be interesting.

Matt Walker said...

It appears the that KC's "very reliable source" was himself. He's the coauthor of the WSJ editorial today. It's very good, IMHO. Check it out here

Anonymous said...

In the core of this Comment an interesting side question was raised regarding Wendy Murphy. Is it possible that she actually tried cases? If she was as fixated and obsessed on the guilt of all men and the innocence of all women as she has been in this case and the Kobe Bryant case, then counsel for defendant's convicted in trials with her should review cases carefully for possible misconduct. It is clear that she is incapable of seeing it if it serves her ends. She' Mike Nifong in a skirt and scary makeup.

Anonymous said...

Boy, you are good. This latest is dead on, and nails all the issues. Why can't you get on Greta? Does she have something against bow ties? I hear she desperately needs replacements for the dundering idiots she has on the current panel.

Do you really tie those things or are they clip ons?

Anonymous said...

USA Today editorial pans Nifong, but a opposing opion by Wendy Murphy is full of half truths, unproven charges such as $2 million dollar payment offer to accuser. She skips the 4th guy picked at the line up. The withheld DNA evidence, andmore.

Anonymous said...

IMHO Wendy Murphy is a disgrace just as is the Fong. She lobbies for the guilt of the defendents using half truths and flat out lies. Luckily she was pretty much shredded tonight on Fox, however there is a segment of the population that doesn't know the facts and may actually believe that the Fong has "pictures" or that "some of the players that saw what happened will come forward". That Wendy would adopt these idiotic ideas and constantly spew them in a public forum, is almost reason enough to let this thing go to trial(not)so the Fong and his conspirators can be fully and totally discreditied in front of the entire nation.

Anonymous said...

I agree with 1:09. Nifong has to get out of this case. Every move he makes is a disaster for him.
Lucky for Nifong he's in NC. In another state he probably ends up in prison. In NC he'll probably end up a judge.

Anonymous said...

Not wanting to take anything away from K.C.'s argument here, but I have a quibble with the evident absence of anal lesions on the "honor student" complainant. This woman's anus is, technically, either one of the tools of her trade or capital equipment, (depending on how you do your accounting), and sees so much action that it has to be rotated every 5,000 miles. It's unlikely that a few more penetrations wouldn't have much effect one way or the other. Not that I'd ever want to perform the inepsection.

Beautiful WSJ op-ed this morning, K.C. Mad props to the homie, if that's at all appropriate.

Anonymous said...

6:10 AM

Wendy Murphy is a raving lunatic and a liar as well. Every time one of her arguments goes up in smoke she produces an even more ludicrous one that is more of a lie. The things she said on Fox (the only reason I watched was to see the real MM, O"Rielly needs to retire and make Michelle the permanent replacement) were outrageous and certainly brings into question any cases she may have handled. Makes one concerned that she also could make up things to suit herself, the evidence bedamned.

Anonymous said...

Too funny!
" Guy in Durham said...

Not wanting to take anything away from K.C.'s argument here, but I have a quibble with the evident absence of anal lesions on the "honor student" complainant. This woman's anus is, technically, either one of the tools of her trade or capital equipment, (depending on how you do your accounting), and sees so much action that it has to be rotated every 5,000 miles."

Anonymous said...

Bow Tie= Sophistication.

This an anouncement is paid for by the Bow Tie appreciation society

Anonymous said...

Wendy Murphy needs help and quickly.

One sick puppy!

Anonymous said...

So extremely happy to see the WSJ finally publish on this case and to read the beautifully done piece by the most able authors, KC and Stuart Taylor. Three cheers for another important development in this relentless saga.

In sharp contrast, someone should put a bag over Wendy Murphy's head. I just regret that some readers will latch onto her list of canard considerations and continue to believe there may be some merit in this shambles of a case.

On the subject of actual protesters making the trip to Durham...any thoughts on this? While I do not like the idea of further inflaming an already inflamed Durham population, marchers draw a lot of national attention to an issue.


Anonymous said...

I hope this is not out of line, but you can find the text of the WSJ editorial on the Liestoppers discussion board for those who do not subscribe to the online WSJ.


Anonymous said...

Wendy Murphy is beyond help. Everytime she opens her mouth she shows us just why Nifong needs all of the dishonest lawyers around him.

Wendy is just another rat that won't jump ship until it's to late.

Anonymous said...

We need to have a huge potbanging march in Durham, and stop at Waheema's office. People like Waheema are constantly screaming about "justice." Now we have seen what happens when these "lovers of justice" hold to the levers of power, or can influence those who hold the levers of power.

Also, K.C., I think that you must really have had a good source to have received the word that the WSJ was going to publish something! That was the same WSJ editorial page that gave Dorothy Rabinowitz a forum to take apart the faux "child molestation" cases of the 1990s.

One case was the Fells Acre hoax in Massachusetts. A player in that hoax was none other than Wendy Murphy.

Anonymous said...

Cy gets the powerful wife award. Wonder if she will bring cookies to the NC Penitentiary when she visits Mikey?

Can you give me more detail on how a North Carolina pension works? The fongs operate at a level of bureaucratic mentality that I thought only existed in socialist states.

Jackie if you are reading...I have some really long screwers that I would like to use at the fong bake.

Anonymous said...

Sadly and frighteningly Wendy Murphy is a very dangerous tutor at large!

The teaching position she has in New England is exposing her continual and one sided twisted ideology to very impressionable and some what vulnerable students!

Will these brainwashed "Murphites" then go out into the legal jungle to spread the man hating world of Murphy to the masses?

We must hope and pray that there are going to be a lot more KC, Liestoppers, etc out there to counter this hateful doctrine?

Anonymous said...

Lets hope Cy was given a Tom Tom GPS for Christmas and Butner was already programmed in for her to locate Nifong in his cell?

Anonymous said...

Good stuff as always, KC. But there are other Nifong supporters -- most of the city's black community who at the very least want to see this go to trial so that the alleged victim can have her day in court.

Since Nifong owes his career to them, I'm sure he's not going to drop the charges on his own. If the court throws out the ID process and the case falls apart, he can still say to the black community that he took it as far as he could and was bested not by evidence but by procedural roadblocks set up by high-price attorneys that no young black male defendant would ever have access to.

That way Nifong and the victim will be martyrs in the eyes of the community. Then all he has to worry about is any disciplinary action, which given the NC history is unlikely to produce any real sanction.

Anonymous said...

Procedural question: Nifong sent his investigator to interview the accuser last week about the DNA discrepancies.

Doesn't he now have to turn over to the defense the investigator's notes of that conversation? Now THAT would be very interesting reading.

The Dude said...

Wendy Murphy is possibly "less intelligent" than the Fong. She can't even keep her lies stright in the same sentence. Where was she a Prosecutor? They should check her record because she is a hate filled idiot.

Murphy says on Fox that the DEFENSE has been spinning and withholding evidence! Nifong hasn't even produced his "allegation" or set of circumstances to which they must defend themselves. Until Nifong produces all evidence, timeline, witnesses, etc... the Defense doesn't have to play their hand. That is the entire meaning behind the Discovery statues. Murphy would have us believe that the defense must provide all its witnesses and evidence to Nifong so he can then make up his own scenario of the crime. She has it 100% wrong. In truth, Nifong had the camera pictures from the Lax crowd. He got them by court order. He had the opportunity to obtain information from defense lawyers but REFUSED same. This Murphy woman is a real POS.
By the way, Ted Washington was clearly insisting the DNA on the fingernail was evidence of a sexual assault. Murphy was clearly using the fingernail evidence as "victim scratched accused" during the assault. These people should know their facts before they speak. In this case they can't because NIFONG hasn't presented the facts yet!

Anonymous said...

KC could you possibly please answer?

The sad saga is now hopefully going to reach it's conclusion favorable to our 3 financially depleted boys/families;

*I notice some in NC legal circles are indicating that they do not wish to make changes to the current NC legal doctrines for what ever reasons only known to themselves.

*The case has shown how cavalier the rules are that the NC justice system operates under; No record of the GJ. Police tapes detroyed soon after they were recorded in this case etc!

*IF the NC justice system/NC bar will not make changes to its legal protocols and not punish Mr Mike Nifong[by not allowing him to practice his form of law in NC]!

With all of the senior systems quiet USAG/DOJ.NCAG, leadership in NC!

What avenues are then left open for these families to find satisfaction and justice for out of pocket expenses and be compensated for defamation, etc?

texasyank said...

Nifong has been dishonest, crooked and, at times, just plain weird.

But his dropping of the rape charge is the first action I would describe as "cute."

Drop the one charge--the central charge--on account of its being completely disproven, in the hope of proving the ancillary charges by a preponderence of the evidence?

Drop the rape charge and then say with a straight face that the DNA is "out of play," when the absence of of LAX players' DNA is perhaps even more exculpatory in the ancillary charges?

Cute. Real cute.

Anonymous said...

OK, don't judge me but is there any possible way the three defendants or others at the party could have possibly detained the alleged victim on that night? If not, what eveidence is there to the contrary other than the constant changing story of the woman?

texasyank said...

10:37: Given the state of the DNA, the young men could have detained her by wearing body condoms.

Anonymous said...

That is just it. There is NO "evidence" except what Crystal has been saying. But there is nothing else, no pictures, no nothing.

Nifong, Georgia Goslee, and Wendy Murphy declare that what I have given you constitutes "proof" of the charges, and Goslee and Murphy go farther and say it also proves rape.

Anonymous said...

Goslee and Murphy are well respected attorneys in the legal community. There legal opinions should also be respected. Why does everyone seem to want to throw dirt on them?

Anonymous said...

To 10:37, Nifong had told NYT he would drop the charges if the accuser is not a 100 % sure of who her alleged "attackers" were. Use your head once in while. Why would Nifong state that if there was any evidence other than her word?

Anonymous said...

Cy will be bringing those cookies to the Fed prison, not the state prison and Mikey's husband is going to love them. Maybe he'll give Mikey a night off.

Anonymous said...

To 10:59am. Please refrain from condescension. The question asked was legitimate. With this kind of national coverage a jury may wonder what her motive could have been if she is willing to go forward and take the stand with her testimony and the timeline could possibly allow for some type of physical detention. At that point no one can assume money was her motivation and her word against their word may mean something.

Anonymous said...

The question was legitimate? Why don't you try and come up with a legitimate answer then? Why would Nifong state he would drop the charges if the accuser says she is not a 100 % sure of who her "attackers" are if Nifong had evidence other than her word?

Anonymous said...

Chicago writes:

To the man:

The Herald-Sun is hiring, you would fit right in there.

Anonymous said...

Chicago writes:

Actually, I should correct myself, they are firing, not hiring, try the Ny Times.

Anonymous said...

Again, we have someone demanding that innocence be "proven" by "proving a negative." For example, I cannot "prove" that I did not kill JFK. I can demonstrate that I was in my fifth-grade classroom at the time, but someone always can challenge that statement, the witnesses, and the like.

That is what this person is doing. Remember, the charges not only are "detaining" someone, but also performing sexual assault, i.e. forced oral sex, and the sticking of foreign objects into her vagina and rectum.

The medical evidence does not show that, so the questioner then will say something like "Just because there is no medical evidence does not mean it DID NOT happen. Therefore, it happened."

That is the Wendy Murphy standard of proof, and it is the standard of proof demanded by the Herald-Sun. Under such a standard of proof, EVERYONE is guilty as charged. Is that what you want?

Anonymous said...

As a retired prosecutor in Florida, I followed this with great interest. I was appalled at the lack of investigation and initial preparation of the case before it went to the grand jury. Note from the actual Indictment itself that only 2 witnesses testified in the case:

I also recall that numerous other cases were presented to the grand jury that day, so the presentation itself couldn't have taken long. Also inexcusable was not presenting exculpatory evidence at the request of the defense attorneys; I always did so to give the grand jury a look at the big picture and test my case for later. I never worried about not getting an Indictment; if you can't indict on probable cause, you certainly will never be able to convict based on the BRD standard.

Anonymous said...

I agree with Bill Anderson. The suggestion that if a time frame possibly allows for some sort of physical detention a jury could find accuser's claims credible is terryfing to me.
There should be proof beyond a reasonable doubt, not mere possibility that something might have happened because a time frame could have allowed for something to happen. The defendants are not required by law to prove their innocence beyond any doubt, although reading some of the comments it seems some think they will have to do just that.

Anonymous said...

To 11:20
You must be new here. As for the motivation of the accuser, that has been covered pretty thoroughly. Actual, there were several:
1. Get out of involuntary lock up. Screaming rape works every time.
2. At the rape exam she tried to back out because she had no real facts and was too wasted to make one up.
3. Then she realized that no rape meant she would go back into confinement, so she sputtered out whatever version(s) of a rape narrative that came into her addled imagination.
4. Later on M. Nifong explained to her that she had to cooperate in naming 3 defendants or he would revoke her pre-existing parole and take away her kids.
5. Now that Nifong has been torpedoed in public and when he sinks entirely - what will her motivation be? My guess; sell her (latest)story to the highest bidding tabloid. Only this time, her attackers were really aliens and her latest luvchild has Martian DNA. Which the Government is desperate to keep underwraps. I could go on but I will stop.

Anonymous said...

Kathleen Parker has an excellent column today about Nifong and this case at JewishWorldReview.Com.


Anonymous said...

Also, check out the numerous letters-to-the-editor today and yesterday in the Herald Sun. LOL!.

Durham will be obliterated before this is over.


Anonymous said...

Some posters were recently discussing the photo of Wahneema Lubiano--one of the affirmative action hires at Duke who possesses little intellectual gravitas---witness her academic "discipline".

I was astounded by the raw unattractiveness of this woman. In fact, she resembles a man--think Stanley Crouch with dark-rimmed glasses.

It sounds shallow; however, this is real life and people really do associate radical feminism and radical pan-Africanism with some of the scariest looking women on the planet.

Wahneema Lubiano does nothing to disprove this widely-held opinion.


Anonymous said...

Is this what "happened"?

1. a troubled, immoral whore gets apprehended by the police for public intoxication--whatever

2. whore finds way to get sympathy/avoid arrest, ie, claim rape (btw, she didn't choose the lacrosse players, they just happened to b the most obvious patsies)

3. given the racial aspect of the case, a desperate, sleazy prosecutor "comes to the whore's rescue"

4. a feckless college president stands idly by while unintelligent, tenured black demagogues call for the lacrosse players' heads

5. facts don't support the sleazeballs; sleazeballs lose

Sorry, fellas, that's only the backstory

Let's revisit the screenplay from another perspective--let's call it the taboo POV

1. on average, caucasian males find dark-skinned black women sexually unattractive--even in ultraliberal hollyhood it is rare to find this

2. (thanks to the Crystal Mess) Crystal Gail Mangum's high school portrait was recently posted--i would venture that most caucasian males would find her as appetizing as rotten eggs, but thanks to "rape shield" laws her ugly visage could not be shown to the public, "obscuring" an important piece of evidence: her unattractiveness--this played into nifong's scenario

3. black women good,white men bad: yes, it's taboo in the 88's world to dispute this

4. The Wahneema Problem: It's taboo to talk about a black, female, tenured professor as stupid, so society gives her its props--her "input" is "valued" as much as, say, Laurance Tribe, a brilliant constitutional scholar

5. What Is Richard Brodhead Afraid Of? easy answer: see 1--4

6. What's more important--protecting the innocent, or reinforcing the prejudices of the black community? the latter, of course

7. Why r people afraid to address the issue of making it a sex crime to file false charges against men? women good, men bad

8. y is it taking so long for the DOJ to stop this travesty of disgusting racial politics? the taboo problem, of course-- Gonzales would have filed immediately if all the racial dynamics were reversed

9. Here's the funny thing--the sanctions dilemma

anyone think CGM will be prosecuted, nifong imprisoned, brodhead removed? this is what this case is all about now--case is over

do we not live in a society that can effectively punish evildoers?

time will tell, but we have to start addressing the taboo aspects this case highlights


Anonymous said...

I think Judge Smith will dismiss the case this friday. Even the folk from Durham would not want the town burning to intefere with a New Years Eve celebration.

Anonymous said...

12:44 I am in agreement on your number7. Being a victim of this kind of crime I have no respect for an female that files any fales charge.

Rape being the most serious of them all.

There needs to be a fales charege filer law, just like the sex offender law. Put her name photo address and what ever else you for all to know and see.

Also make the punishment fit that crime, I remcommend the sentence as what the defendant gets.

Anonymous said...

To 10:37:

I just read 10:37 and Bill Andersen's reply to the idea that "how do we know that they did not do anything." I will assume that this is meant seriously, and if a single additional person understands the outrage it is a step forward. So, here goes.

The False Accuser described a scenario that involved, as an inherent aspect of her allegations, the transfer of massive amounts of DNA in the form of semen flesh scrapes on her body and on her clothes and on the floor. So, as a starting point, if the accuser is believed, she was covered with the alleged attackers DNA. We further know that the DNA testing is super-sensitive, so sensitive that it can detect a single cell of a tester. We also know that it can detect DNA from sex partners from a day, a week or more.

Okay, knowing all that, and knowing that the DNA testing found NO DNA of the accused on her, on her clothes, or in the room where she said the attack happened, we know the attack did not happen, that there is literally no scenario where she can be telling the truth. If you want to posit such a scenario, you have to explain how the DNA vanished from the false accuser, her clothes, and the room, without removing the DNA of all the other people she had sex with.

And, of course, if you managed to explain this away, you would then have to ask--what about her injuries. She had none!!

And, of course, if you explained the magical disappaering DNA, and the lack of injuries, you would have to explain away the digitized photos showing Reade Seligman elswehere and the phone calls of both Reade and the false accuser demonstrating that the attack could not have ocurred.

And, if you got over the magical disappearing DNA, and the missing injuries, and explained away the unimpeachable third party records such as bank photos and cell phone records, you would still have to show that dozens and dozens of people were lying, including all the lacrosse players, the other dancer and the neighbors.

How is this possible?

Anonymous said...

But that is what Wendy Murphy and her ilk want you to believe. There are no standards of innocence in the world of Murphy, Nancy Grace, and Georgia Goslee. There is only guilt, and the game is over when you admit you are guilty.

Anonymous said...

The initial accusation was a brutal 30 minute gang rape. Nifong had demonstrated a choke hold on national TV, Nifong had stated he believes this woman was raped. And what is left of that story now? A five minute non-rape? Yet the accused are still facing basically the same amount of time behind bars. It boggles my mind.

Gregory said...

The cadaverous reverse-vampire Wendy Murphy "teaches" at a law school which provides a degree (they actually call it a "Certificate of Completion") which entitles the named "Completer" to extoll about legal issues on the internet, but it does not allow the practice of law in the traditional sense, i.e., representing clients, appearing in courts, etc.

The scary assumption is that people like Wendy Murphy and Nancy Grace, who affirmatively attempt to conceal, from the public, the illegal and unconstitutional practices of Mike Nifong, probably did the same as prosecutors themselves.

If I had any cojones, I would wear bow ties. They are cool! So are you K.C.! Keep up the pressure....

Anonymous said...

good points, 12:50


Anonymous said...

The more Nifong pushes the fiction, the deeper he digs the grave. If even he were to succeed in getting this crap into a court of law, it is clear that his "evidence" would make the very weak case against William Kennedy Smith seem like a slam dunk.

Because of people like K.C. and Stuart Taylor, not to mention the other bloggers, this case has managed to get so much attention put on Nifong's misdeeds that literally EVERY step he takes in this case will be absolutely scrutinized.

Think that he is taking a pounding now? Just wait until Crystal went through a few days of cross from the defense. Gottlieb? Himan? The SANE nurse-in-training?

Right now, Liefong has been able to play the speculation game, but once he has to enter actual "evidence," he would be even worse off. Right now, even some doubters are saying "let this be heard in a court of law."

Well, once he presented the "evidence," and once it was taken apart, it would be game over. Moreover, if you think his misdeeds are exposed now, what do you think a few days of presenting pure garbage would bring?

No, even Liefong understands this, and he is going to have a successful exit strategy beforehand. Crystal waffles on the IDs, and it is over.

Here is the issue. If Crystal craps out now, at least there is a "what if" scenario. But if she craps out in an actual courtroom, then the lie is exposed in a way that almost no one (except Wendy Murphy) can say that "maybe there was something to this case."

Right now, Liefong's "the dog ate my homework, I was trying to protect privacy, no harm - no foul" defense gives him a veneer of cover. Once he gets this junk into a courtroom however, everything is exposed and then he is in even bigger trouble.

That is why I firmly believe this case does not even make it to February 5.

Anonymous said...

I was just faxed the cover art for KC's book

title : "Extremely Ugly: The Duke Rape Hoax"

the lettering is beautiful

the cover image is a full bleed picture of Precious--

isn't that sppppppppppecccialllllllll


Anonymous said...

Bill, i agree, it is not about standards but about where you fit in the spectrum of "goodness" in their own subjective standard. I think it is worth repeating the basic facts to anyone and everyone because most people will come around.

As you know, the facts that are cited in the various op-ed articles are really no different now then before. Yes, Nifong's wrongdoing is apparent, or should I say more apparent, but the absence of DNA, the third party records, the many witnesses, and so forth are and have been around. People, I believe, have an excuse to take sides and not buy into the--well let's have a trial--nonsense.

The sheer hatred against the defendants by the remaining enablers is stunning. At least two of them are not even remotely culpable of the minimal crime of bad judgment, even if evans is and all three of them are the type of young man that would normally be the subject of a fawning profile in a home town newspaper. The hatred seems to justify everything else, with the hate spewers unaware of how they are directly demonstrating what really happened here.

Anonymous said...

12:24 pm Debrah:

Thanks for the heads up, Debrah!

Here's the Jewish World Review column that Debrah mentioned:

Parody at Duke - By Kathleen Parker

Anonymous said...

10:37, the lying false accuser was photographed trying to get back *into* the house! They did not detain this pathetic wreck of a woman for even ONE second...they probably breathed a HUGE,collective sigh of relief when she was finally deposited into Kim's car and road off into the's insanity to think that *any* one of these guys wanted ANYTHING to do with her...

Anonymous said...


I'm still trying to play catchup after being away over the holidays - has anyone mentioned Kristin Butler's column from yesterday (12/16)?:

The Duke Chronicle - The Gathering Storm

I like the way this young lady writes:

"And they are up against an embattled prosecutor whose behavior is growing more erratic, not less. Last spring, Nifong was making inflammatory, deceptive and even demonstrably false statements on national television. This month, he was forced to admit his role in a decision to conceal exculpatory evidence from defense counsel. What new outrages will 2007 bring? How much more damage will he be allowed to do?"

Anonymous said...

can't parody this case?

not to brag, but that's my specialty



Anonymous said...

So what happens if Nifong is called in front of the bar in January? Does that create a conflict of intrest?

Cedarford said...

Toot! Toot! Toot! Toot!

Stated because KC Johnson is to modest to toot his own horn.

But co-authoring an opinion piece on the Wall Street Journal on a matter of injustice is a tribute to his work. The perception of the editorial board at the WSJ like has to be that KC's work is of the highest quality. The WSJ has a longtime, well-guarded reputation for being careful and accurate and RIGHT when they take on a case of legal misconduct.

I like how KC Johnson and Stuart Taylor start the article. This case, at it's kernel, is about the poison (cancer) of identity politics and class hatreds.

Too many have fixated on Nifong as the "source".

But Nifong is one of many deeply dishonest or cynical opportunists that hopped on the bandwagon that was already well underway when he made his power part of the equation of injustice.

He became the most significant party later through his inept machinations, but without Nifong ever being born, this would still have been a major shitstorm with the same attitudes, same events, and same other maligant people involved.

Over the weekend, another cabal began to unravel...over at the N&O. This one the feminist reporters and editors cabal that groomed Precious as a victim honor student and mother kinda victim. Their identity politics precluded them from reporting facts about the accuser that were widely known and would have discredited parts of her story early - criminal record, false accusations, bipolar disorder, drug abuse, long-time work as a stripper and prostitute. To report on that would have been to sabotage the images the N&O women were trying to use to whip up the community.
This weekend, they finally admitted they suppressed a major part of the accusers interview they did in March "It WAS NOT suppression! Lots ends up being cut from interviews. The portion cut was what the accuser said about Kim Roberts - we found what she said about the 2nd dancer not credible and libelous and made an editorial decision not to report it." Readers though, are demanding to know what the N&O suppressed. Was it yet another detailed, different version of "the rape" with Kim holding Precious down? Was it a variant of the Kim stole 2,000 in cash that the poor, honor roll student and nurturing mother of two somehow had in her pocketbook? Readers are now demanding N&O come clean.

If anyone has free time, foray over to the N&O blog. The posters are being absolutely merciless on the feminist reporter/editor cabal there. (Wonder how many are PC-imbued Duke journalism graduates).

My fondest wish is the next phase is Federal investigators sweeping into the Durham PD "We'll be with you shortly SGT Gottlieb..just getting a few facts straight with all your associates 1st" and to arrive with a court order reconvening the Duke rape grand jury for in camera interviews.

Anonymous said...

Using Wendy Murhpy's theory of what is real and what isn't....if you can make up a lie to fit the scenario, then that lie must be true. Wendy takes twisting the truth one step further, she outright makes things up. There has to be a liability suit against slanderding and outright lying to the public.

Anonymous said...


Your overall coverage of the Duke case has been terrific, but I've been especially taken with your posts on the Duke faculty.

This morning it was reported on a Duke Chronicle board that Duke faculty members were verbally abused for not signing the listening statement. Has that been reported before?

If non-tenured faculty were pressured to sign by people who controlled hiring and tenure statements in their departments, surely that would violate some standard of conduct.

If this has already been discussed, I missed it. At any rate, I'd like to hear your take.

The Chronicle Thread

Anonymous said...

I would not be surprised at all if people faced verbal abuse for not signing the document. Unless you have been on a college faculty, you cannot realize the madness of political correctness, and just how these PC faculty behave.

It is difficult to stand up them, so most faculty members just move quietly around them.

Anonymous said...

My 2:23 post should have read:

"If non-tenured faculty were pressured to sign by people who controlled hiring and tenure decisions in their departments, surely that would violate some standard of conduct."

Here is the direct quote from the Chronicle thread:

"Although you may disagree with this, do keep in mind that 90% of the faculty DID NOT sign the statement. And trust me, there was ample opportunity to do so. Some members of the Arts and Sciences faculty faced verbal abuse for NOT SIGNING in the early days of the scandal. Non-action showed more courage than I think many are giving the majority of the Duke faculty credit for."

Anonymous said...

I agree with you 100%. Nifong seems capable of thinking short-term only and lacks any ability to see the long term consequences of his actions.

He just says or does whatever is necessary at that moment even if it directly contradicts the evidence or his previous statements. It's like he's repeatedly sticking band-aids on a gunshot wound hoping that will stop the bleeding momentarily while ignoring the actual cause of the problem.

It seems to all be catching up with him now and I think things will come to a head in Feb. if not before.

P.S. Like others have said, I would love to see you and Stuart Taylor on Greta's show. Would be awesome.

Anonymous said...


your post was ridiculous; the one with the numbers and the lie you state that most cuacasian men dislike black women. That is a historically disproved lie. The black population in the Us and the caribbean and south america is full of racial mixed black; very few blacks are raciallly pure african types. the white man raped the black woman wholesale during slavery and also in the Jim crow period afterward. Maybe you need to look at all the different complexions that black people have and realize the truth: white men conttributed a lot of dna in the years and that is just a fact. Thomas Jefferson was not an isolated incident. Please look at Strom Thurmond, staunch segregationist and who statutorialy raped a 15 year old black maid and she gave birth to a daughter who Strom supported in secret for years--her story is in local bookstores and guess what? She took a DNA test and she passed! You are a historically challendged idiot to allege that. It is also not true in the modern day as black women are used to advertise rap videos and swinsuit magazines and the biggest audience for rap and those magazines is white males and that has been published many times in articles about Mtv'sdemographics,Soundscan, etc. Black women are also popular in Europe and the British Isles--last time I checked those places were full of caucasian men.

Besides, rape is not about sexualy attrativeness it is about power and degradation and raping and humilating an ugly woman and then running away sounds right up the alley of the drunken cowardly LAX team.

Anonymous said...

Debrah Correll can pitch thunderbolts with the precision of Thor. Duke, like other major universities, hires some "ethnic" professors for reasons of political correctness. Wahneema Lubiano's real role is to help deflect accusations that Duke isn't doing enough for minorities. The fact that she is a court jester is irrelevant.

More important in all this is the damage to Duke's hot-college reputation. Dick Brodhead watched idly as the Gang of 88 all but erected a guillotine on the West Quad. He had a responsibility, at the least, to challenge the Gang of 88's shoot-and-ask-questions-later denunciation of the lacrosse players.

The lacrosse hoax is one of the major media and criminal justice transgressions of our time, fully equal to the Scottsboro Boys case and likely to surpass it ithe severity of its consequences.

Anonymous said...

God help us! Wendy is posting. Yes, yes, yes, there MUST have been a rape because Strom did it.

Lady, I'll bet half the lacrosse team does not even know who the heck Strom Thurmond is. And if there is a rape, from what the woman described, there would be physical evidence.

Instead, we get these comments from you, and then you jump to the conclusion that the "cowardly" LAX team raped the ugly woman. Can you explain your chain of logic, or are you angry because Nifong, Crystal, and the rest have been lying these past nine months?

Or, are you going to say these guys magically left no trace? Do you think you have the forensic knowledge of Kathleen Eckelt? If so, would you challenge her testimony in a court of law?

You enablers make me sick. You spout all sorts of accusations, and then when they cannot be demonstrated as remotely true, you switch to insults and more lies.

Anonymous said...

To 3:07. Funny you should bring up a DNA test. This woman had DNA from multiple men on her, none from the accused. And the rape charge has been dropped because she just isn't sure if she was raped.
Do you really think this makes for a credible accusation?

Anonymous said...

To anony 3:07, you are an absolute idiot. You really think that the three were drunk and raped an ugly black woman. There is actually no proof of a rape, in fact the charges have been droped in case you haven't been paying attention. Now you seem to believe that they were drunk, where is your proof or are you just making more asumptions. Maybe you could call Linwood Wilson, since he is a Chief investigator and get a job in the Durham DA's office.

Anonymous said...


Good to have you aboard. Some people at your old place of employment should have been asking you for advice.

Was everyone at the H-S on board with this story, or did some have their doubts, but could not speak them, as Bob Ashley was insisting there was a rape, since his good friend Michael Nifong would never lie....?

Anonymous said...

To 3:07
If you bothered to look up FBI crime statistics you would learn that white on black rape is less than one half of one percent of total incidence, both in terms of accusations and convictions. This means that people who love to talk about white males ravishing black females have to wait a very long time between actual, verifiable examples of it happening. And when one considers realistically the sexual options in a place like Duke for some elite athletes, such a crime happens in real life hardly ever. That is one big reason why the PC crowd grabbed onto this story and refuses to let go. They know that another scenariolike this (even false) may not come around again in their lifetimes.
If rape is not about sex, then why are the victims in real life overwhelmingly young adult fertile women rather than older ones? The older ones, who could not run away, would be easier, no doubt.

Anonymous said...

Anon 3:07,

Rape IS about power, degradation, and sexual perversion. Hence the reason why the black on white rape stats are through the roof and the white on black rape stats are non-existent. It is the black man getting back at the white man for past wrongs, real or imaginary. (Funny how this info is buried by the MSM) The black man's hatred of the white man is constantly reinforced and we saw a little glimpse of it coming to the surface during this rape Hoax where blacks in Durham (and other areas as documented by anecdotal comments) wanted a conviction "no matter what".

The slavery rape issue no doubt did occur. However, I am not entirely sure that it occurred with such frequency and uniformity that you would like all to believe. Slaves were property and were treated as such. This was the norm of the times and we cannot undo what was done, period. We DID do away with slavery however, though that does not seem to be enough for the black community. Blacks were enslaved by their own kinsmen centuries ago and they continue to be enslaved by their kinsmen in Africa to this very day. It is wholly unfair to continually blame the white man for something that is happening to black BY blacks today. With that said, some slave owners raped their slaves and some had sex with them. The question of whether it was entirely consensual is valid because of the circumstances. However, SOME HAD to be consensual because not all slave owners and I am sure most were not the evil white devils they are portrayed to be in our current PC milieu.

Lastly, the boys did not rape anyone, especially CGM. We all know this to be true. Get used to it.

Anonymous said...

Bill glad to see you got on Wendy at 3:07, you did just before me. I still think that whoever posted that could get a job in the Durham DA's office.

Anonymous said...


Thanks so much for your thoroughly considered, well-constructed African-American perspective. I can't decide whether I'm more impressed by your acumen as a debater or by your scintillating prose style.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I feel compelled to fulfill my destiny as an "Evil Whitey" by seeking out a black wench and forcing myself upon her. After all, that's what we all do, right? Just as you are driven by forces beyond your understanding to spend thousands of dollars on rims for your automobile while ignoring your utility bills.

You really think you somehow profit from prejudice and bigotry? Does anyone?

Anonymous said...

I notice that some here are attorneys. I am curious about one thing, now that the rape charges have been dropped, is can Crystal still hide behind the rape shield laws, as Wendy Murphy seems to think. Can all her sexual exploits be brought up, because sexual assault charges are still pending, but not rape charges. From where this DNA was found, she was not having normal sex, but abnormal sex, closer to sodomy, that the state did not consider rape. NC has some anitquated laws and a legal system that needs to be rebuilt from the ground up.

Anonymous said...

It seems to me that all of the evidence remains in play. She lied repeatedly to police about her sexual activities in the previous week, so when they found semen in her, they figured they had hit paydirt. That is one reason that Liefong was so confident and shot off his mouth before the tests came back.

That also was why he went to Meehan's lab. He figured that the state was sloppy and that Meehan could do him one better. Got more than he wanted in THAT bargain, I'm afraid.

Rape shield laws do not cover lying to investigators, filing false reports, and the like. Wendy Murphy was being Wendy Murphy, trying to keep the lies alive.

Cedarford said...

3:07 post. You both hit and miss the mark.
YES, some black women are attractive to whites. I know. I dated two. Both from upper middle class backgrounds with no "attitude" or ghetto skank act. (One is now a very rich lawyer worth lots more than miserable old MBA-touting me) And while a sailor in African ports I found that for two packs of Marboros...well, no need to elaborate...except that the prevailing attitude was it was better than no sex at all, and one in 20 were actually presentable and attractive.


That while some whites may find some black gals attractive, the underlying truth is that (1)white and Asian rape of black females is extraordinarily rare in contemporary America but the opposite raping of whites and Asians by blacks is quite common and from this: (2) More often than not, the average black women is not attractive to the average white or Asian. Many whites and Asians admit to being repulsed by black women for appearances, behavior, etc. (3)Despite what feminists say about rape having nothing to do with sexual attraction, and it all being about power and vulnerability...we all know that is nonsense. And not just in the USA. An attractive Asian women whose car breaks down in a dangerous French E Euro immigrant, Muslim, or African neighborhood is in high danger of being gang-banged. An ugly black women, equally vulnerable, can at least rest easy about the odds the rough Euros, Muslims, or all but the most desperate black will rape her.

With the Accuser, the fact that she is very black and very unattractive has bearing. Likelihood of well-groomed, upperclass people being sexually attracted to her and willing to risk their lives just to have Precious? Slim to none based on just the attraction issue - which rape shield laws and reporters wall of silence about specific disparaging comments on how repulsive she was compared to "Kim" have been blocked from public knowledge.

There is also the factor of even if a Dukie was gripped by jungle fever and too drunk to see how nasty she was, that ANYONE who has been to a party like that is the thing an audience member who wants a dancer does is offer her money for a shot...

Or consider the factor of WTF your peers would think if you were so lonely and desperate you did a potentially diseased skank, let alone raped her and asked 43 of your peers to risk their lives covering for that fact.

That wasn't done.

The physical nature of Precious, her revolting hygiene (supposedly she stank), and her drugged, stumbling stupor made her tremendously off-putting and made the men there determined to get rid of her while yelling they were scammed of their money for a shit job.

The Dukies were no more likely to want to rape her than violate a neighbor's dog.

All of that quite relevant in determining the likelihood of rape, all suppressed by the media and feminist victim's advocates.

Anonymous said...

ec @ 3:33
You said:
"Blacks were enslaved by their own kinsmen centuries ago and they continue to be enslaved by their kinsmen in Africa to this very day"
You should have included that this is not only true in Africa but alos here in the US. The JJ, Al S, and naacps of the world do a very fine job of a different, but no less crippling, form of enslavement.

Anonymous said...

Come on, you people here should just face the facts. All these three had to do was detain this poor girl for 5 minutes and that is kidnapping. Nifong will drop the sex assault charges if they plea guilty to kidnapping and request 5 years or less and it's bye, bye guys.

Anonymous said...

Naomi Cambell is one of the most beautiful women on earth - Tyra Banks not far behind. Neither have african features - nor does Beyance. It is ten years from the HS picture. I have read that the guys asked Kim and Precious to leave the house and were putting money under the bathroom door to encourage their departure. Anyone else read this in the beginning?

Anonymous said...

Actually, a 5 min detention wouldn't be kidnapping, and certainly wouldn't be prosecuted by a honest DA. The SA & kidnapping were ancilliary to the alleged rape - once the rape allegation is gone, so are the other 2 charges. Except in Wonderland...

Well, I for one wouldn't be offended if KC posted his WSJ Op-ed! Wonder why he hasn't, other than by agreement for a day or two delay w/ WSJ? No one here would consider it to be tooting his own horn.

Anonymous said...

gprestonian, if you go to this link someone post the article. Hopefully the link will work:

You can join this site if you want too.

Anonymous said...

pgrestonian, when you get there you need to scrool down to 9:07, sorry about that.

Anonymous said...

According to NC law keeping someone confined for any lenght of time is kidnapping.

Anonymous said...

According to NC law keeping someone confined for any lenght of time is kidnapping.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 1:27 said:

The initial accusation was a brutal 30 minute gang rape. Nifong had demonstrated a choke hold on national TV, Nifong had stated he believes this woman was raped. And what is left of that story now? A five minute non-rape? Yet the accused are still facing basically the same amount of time behind bars. It boggles my mind.

The choke hold that Nifong demonstrated on national TV is called a "bare naked choke" in ultimate fighting. The highly trained and conditioned athletes that participate in that sport go down within seconds of it being applied by their opponent. They are generally unable to break the hold and quit fighting almost immediately. If the referee does not stop the fight quick enough the fighter will lapse into semi-conciousness.

This being said, a five minute rape with the false accuser being choked as described would have resulted in murder charges. She would be dead. A thirty second choke applied in the manner described by the DA would have likely resulted in brain damage. As soon as I saw that demonstration on TV, I knew someone was lying.

Anonymous said...


I keep coming back to the same point--and this is to the 3:07 poster. Unless you can explain how somebody could ejaculate in the mouth and anus (I guess we are no longer sure about the vagina) and choke and scratch someone without leaving any DNA evidence even though the testing is so sensitive it picks up days or weeks of sexual history and the testers dandruff, the the whole thing is a hoax, a fraud, and the people perpetrating the hoax should go to jail.

If this is all a hoax, then why is the lacrosse team cowardly or evil or misguided. Absent the false allegations, the lacrosse team matches up well with any other fifty college students in the country by grades, demeanor, and charitable work. How do we know? Because Duke University commissioned an entire study on what type of people they were and printed the results. Do you want to pick out fifty students at NCCU or wherever you went to school and have a team of hostile professors pick apart their life--how would you do?

I think you are sick wishing such harm and evil on people you know are totally innocent (unless you can explain why the DNA is not present--not one person has ever offered an explanation).

Anonymous said...

Cedarford said...

"The Dukies were no more likely to want to rape her than violate a neighbor's dog."

Actually, Bissey's dog was probably in a lot more danger than either one of the two strippers that night.

Anonymous said...

gprestonian, did you find the article???

Anonymous said...

On top of that, I strongly suspect that the numbers the university used to "study" the behavior of the lacrosse players were cooked. I already have discussed this business with some statisticians who are better than I am with numbers, but even I could see that the results of the report smelled to high heaven.

The university used small samples and then was selective about which numbers to use when. Someone sent me some information about how the numbers were done, and I will say that even though I am not an expert in statistics, I teach it on the college level and use it in my papers, and I could see that there were some serious problems.

If the university did what I think it did, we are now in the area of fraud. That is why what I am saying is very serious. I'm not trying to throw this stuff around loosely. I really think that the numbers need to be better investigated.

As for "theman," he now is saying the following:

1. Crystal did not tell the truth about the rape and sexual assault;
2. The lineup procedure used was a farce;
3. Therefore, the three young men are guilty of kidnapping.

Only a resident of Durham could come up with a syllogism like that. I'll bet he is an honor student somewhere.

Anonymous said...

The article is posted on the Liestoppers discussion board. The actual WSJ link is restricted to subscribers.

Anonymous said...

3.07 ...Is That you Wendy?

Anonymous said...

I agree with Bill Anderson. The current Herald Sun staff should have called up Bob Wilson for help long ago.

It's been harrowing dealing with Landfried---a Dennis Kicinich type of fellow with such a self-righteous, clueless demeanor that real conversation with such a person is a joke.

Childress---who put on a show of objectivity and dispassion about this case early on.....and who I am quite sure wrote the ridiculous "60 Minutes" petty editorial, has been very disappointing. After Nifong pulled off the election, thanks to the pot bangers, Childress grew a set and his real "attitude" came to the surface. Unfortunate for someone who is ostensibly paid to be objective.

Forget about Bob Ashley. He follows the lead of whatever city "leader" or Durham booster club has invited him to a party any given week. Then readers are treated to a weekend column of Ashley talking about himself ad nauseum and giving wide-eyed, girly-girl "insights". He's with the black community IMO because he's afraid.

People who are afraid to be truthful in such circumstances are usually hiding the fact that they harbor thoughts of black inferiority.

Liberals have patronized blacks for decades......precisely because they feel they are incapable and inferior. Just listen to a Liberal in a social situation while a little drunk.

The utter mendacity of such an unholy alliance----between white Liberals and blacks----is puke-inducing.

I really don't think that a majority of the black community even wish to let go of this "woe is me" mentality. It has been too much of a financial windfall for them.

It will be up to all of America to take away the training wheels. This lacrosse case has that one positive outcome.......a powerful catalyst for change.

Debrah Correll

Anonymous said...

I started the ugly debate on this thread, so allow me to address a few of the posters

N.B. i have criticized KC Johnson and Jason T, so don't accuse me of being some kind of lacrosse fan--ok?

3:07: do u think it brings me joy to comment on CGM's ugliness?

I'm a former fashion photographer, so let me tell u what the real deal is:

Tyra Banks is a fat cow--the only reason she has a career is because she has caucasian features--look at the catalogs of any top agency--the best runway models r never black--a famous lingerie designer once told me that he couldn't use black models because they couldn't b undressed--cedarford brought up another un-PC issue: "she stank": i don't know if this is a hygiene issue, but i do know that white and asian men do not like the "sweet" smell of black women

an honest prosecutor would have looked at Precious and the boys and thought: u've gotta b kidding me--i wouldn't touch that skank, y would they?

bottom line: because of the rape shield laws, this ugly, immoral accuser couldn't b vetted by MSM

to KC Johnson and Stuart Taylor: congratulations on your book deal, but if you think for a second that your book will have any merit by averring that this case is about "identity politics", you're wrong--that's only the surface

the real issue here is blacks' antipathy toward whites, and whites' realization that they do not value blacks' "intellectual" labor

To wit:

1. durham blacks hate whites

2. the 88 hate whites

3. high-IQ posters on this board, eg, criticizing affirmative action:

what they're really saying is that blacks at duke r not needed--worse, they r a burden

that includes the PC references to James Coleman: can anyone tell me what Professor Coleman has contributed to constitutional law?


Anonymous said...

to: JC

I really take offense at your statements about blacks, and I am totally one hundred percent in support of the sentiments on this board. The black community is split generally but many blacks, african-americans, or whatever term is pc, are horrified by the identify politics involved here. If you look at the hoax, at virtually every turn, a black american did the right thing, the cab driver, Professor Coleman, the various posters, the black lacrosse player, black people who vouched for Reade's character. Generally speaking, despite virtually no reason to do so, african-americans have served loyally in the armed forces and generally been strong and determined citizens with a historic connection pre-dating virtually everybody else on the continent. My own experience as a white person has been that virtually every black person I have known well, as a friend, as a colleague, has been generous and honest and friendly.

I agree wholeheatedly that this frenzy was driven in significant part by racial politics and pc mania, but it does a disservice to the principles we are fighting for to tie it to race and not culture.

Anonymous said...

Have to agree with jc on Coleman. He's a lightweight but he is being deified because he told the truth about Duke and Nifungu..
If he were really serious about doing something to help these men get justice he would have taken on Brodhead. There would never be any retaliation against him. Brodhead would wet his pants rather than piss off one of his ethnics.
Colemen could have been a lot more vocal. But he doesn't want to go out on a limb too much for whitey. If you want to see what a true racist is just scratch a black person.
Most of them in this country are a bunch of lazy m-effers.

Anonymous said...

Yes, Bill I am an honor student at NCCU, pursuing a career in law.

Anonymous said...

1:35 Gregory - Are you serious about the certificate or is it a joke. I would believe anything about Wendy's law school.

Anonymous said...

No wonder I love the blogs -Bissey's dog.

Anonymous said...

Blacks telling the truth about this case are deities to me. They are the only people likely to bridge the gap of understanding in the black community. It is surely indisputable that James Coleman has risked more and done more than any other single individual at Duke to rectify this situation. If we are grading on a curve, he gets an A++. Criticize his credentials after the case is over if you like; I do not see the point of doing so now. Besides, his status as a hero of this case is neither advanced nor compromised by the criteria Duke used for awarding him tenure.


Anonymous said...

It's good to see racists call other people racists. A fool would recognize a fool any day, huh? What I don't understand is the passion surrounding this issue. Why is this continually played out in the media - the national media at that? Why are the defense attorneys continually whining to the media about this case? Do your job and have your defense ready instead of wasting money filing motions and speaking to the media. Why is it emphasized that the players continue to proclaim their innocence - like they would proclaim guilt?? I am not one taking any side of this issue. I have seen mistakes made all around regarding this issue and the so-called witness continues to change her story as well. I just say, why can't this just go to court and play out there? Their lawyers are high-powered enough - the system might actually work in their favor. If Nifong has really played this to his detriment as many people say, this will mark him for the rest of his career. On other notes, I have taken enough statistics courses to realize they can say what the researcher wants them to say. Also, historically many cases of rape go unreported, especially on college campuses, particularly when dealing with student-athletes. OJ proclaims his innocence and many people have believed in his guilt from day one. These boys proclaim their innocence and many continue to defend them regardless of the shady history of the Lacrosse team and their parties (hence the first coach's resignation or firing depending on who the source is). This girl does not seem as innocent as originally portrayed but has continued to stay out of the spotlight (and would likely receive threats to her life and those around her if she was outed now). I don't get the motive behind her lying - she couldn't have possibly known this case would be viewed across the nation or world. Whoever is guilty in this case (the players or the stripper) is very sick - it's a shame how many lives have been affected by these lies and will continue to be for a long time.

Anonymous said...

I don't know what Professor Coleman contributed to constitutional law. Why does he have to contribute something to constitutional law anyway?
Professor Coleman, however, have critisized Nifong's conduct very early on. There are many other tenured faculty at Duke. Did they critisize Nifong's conduct? Professor Coleman was on 60 Minutes talking about Nifong's misconduct. How is that not being vocal?

Anonymous said...

If you don't understand passion surrounding the issue, why exactly are you posting? Did somebody made you to get on the net, find this blog, make this long post? If you don't understand passion surrounding this issue, please find something that is of interest to you. No one makes you to post here.

Anonymous said...

To 9:50
I believe you when you say that you do not understand why this case is so important.
I suppose a lot depends on whether you care about the value of anglo saxon notions of jurisprudence - like due process and innocent until proven guilty.
If Nifong gets away with his novel approach to doing justice he can proceed to torture and destroy anyone in Durham who dares to cross him.

Anonymous said...

"The girl doesn't seem as innocent as originally portrayed....."

You get the award for grotesque understatement.


Anonymous said...

I am really getting tired of the commenter who is going on about black women and particularly the false accuser being unattractive. That has virtually nothing to do with the evidence or lack of evidence in this case.

While a woman doesn't have to be a "10" to be a stripper, the fact is that the accuser was able to have some kind of a career as a stripper, so there must be some men who find her attractive.

Anonymous said...

What does not understanding the passion behind this case have to do with my posting on this board?? No one forced you to read my post. I figured - I have questions, some of you might be able to provide answers.

I thought due process (when there are accusations but innocence proclaimed) had to do with going to trial and letting our justice system do its work. Lawyers providing arguments, witnesses testifying, a jury rendering a verdict - those sorts of processes. If there is guilt to prove, then let it be proven or unproven in court versus in the media or by the public who really doesn't know the full story or evidence of either side. Everyone's a judge or lawyer all of a sudden.

Maybe because this sort of thing is nothing new limits my understanding. So many people are innocently prosecuted - why get behind this particular case? Regardless of the innocence or guilt of these young people, I doubt they will be found guilty.

Anonymous said...

Regardless of the innocence or guilt of these young people, I doubt they will be found guilty.

10:41 PM

What a comfort these words will be to the parents of the innocent, wrongly indicted young men...somehow I doubt you'd be so level-headed and open-minded about a trial if it was your son or someone you loved who was so obviously wrongly indicted by an opportunistic DA...on the word of an obviously unstable, lying prostitute...

Anonymous said...

( "so there must be some men who find her attractive" )

Yea maybe. Roseanne Barr and Whoopie Goldberg got laid so anything is possible.

btw, Crystal Gail Mangum--the stripper ho' who caused all this trouble with her lies is one ugly skank!

Anonymous said...

Again, if this travesty of American justice is so important to the posters, then why have you not gotten behind other injustices?? This happens all the time to ordinary Americans. People are going so far to request that laws be changed so that the NC Attorney General could step in and investigate Nifong. Why - no one has cared before about injustice before?

I just don't see Nifong's motive. Contrary to popular belief, Durham is not majority Black and likely becoming less so in this time of "revitalization"... Duke is a prominent member of the Durham community - the largest employer in the area... if this was really about politics, it would seem as though he was digging himself a hole to lose his career and anything he's worked for more, nevermind the danger he would be putting himself and his family in. For him to take the story of a Black stripper who was in a precarious state of mind anyway without any evidence just to prosecute a few students at Duke - it makes no sense to me.

Anonymous said...

How do you know if posters get or did not get behind other injustices? I also suggest you go and read some of KC's earlier blogs to see if perhaps you could figure out Nifong's motive.
Maybe you really did not follow the case in the beginning, but did you not see Nifong giving interviews on TV when the story broke? Media was highly supportive of him and the accuser back then. Nifong even demonstrated a choke hold on national TV. Maybe you will figure it out eventually if you go back and start reading some archives.

Anonymous said...

Please, try to understand me. I am a scholar of (at best) mediocre value. Were Shakespeare alive, he would whip my worthless butt for having dared to comment on his immortal works.

All of a sudden, out of the blue, I've got the best gig of my life. I was the PRESIDENT of a university which, in better times, would not have hired me to wash its restrooms.

Please don't judge me. People expected me to care about some sucker Lacrosse students, falsely accused. What are you people, nuts?? As long as I keep getting my $300,000 salary, why should I care whether HALF of my students would get beaten up, or raped by my best buddy Mike My-fong, or anything?

I believe that there is no truth, no values, no ethical foundation to anything. All I care is keeping my own - if you will - butt safe. If you believe I have different responsibilities, you are certifiable lunatics, and I gently invite you to look up a different university in which to get indoctrinated in Marxism. If you don't like me, tough cookie. I'll always find some other sh!tty students to pay taxes out of which my huge salary is being paid.

Thanks for reading my honest thoughts to the end.

Anonymous said...

Please, try to understand me. I am a scholar of (at best) mediocre value. Were Shakespeare alive, he would whip my worthless butt for having dared to comment on his immortal works.

All of a sudden, out of the blue, I've got the best gig of my life. I was the PRESIDENT of a university which, in better times, would not have hired me to wash its restrooms.

Please don't judge me. People expected me to care about some sucker Lacrosse students, falsely accused. What are you people, nuts?? As long as I keep getting my $300,000 salary, why should I care whether HALF of my students would get beaten up, or raped by my best buddy Mike My-fong, or anything?

I believe that there is no truth, no values, no ethical foundation to anything. All I care is keeping my own - if you will - butt safe. If you believe I have different responsibilities, you are certifiable lunatics, and I gently invite you to look up a different university in which to get indoctrinated in Marxism. If you don't like me, tough cookie. I'll always find some other sh!tty students to pay taxes out of which my huge salary is being paid.

Thanks for reading my honest thoughts to the end.

Anonymous said...

I'm at a loss to understand how you can allege Nifong is unable to understand the long-term consequences of his actions. He has a plum legal position, makes a lot more money, with more power and more job security than most, all without perceptible legal skills. He would never have got that post without prosecuting the Duke case as he did, and his personal liability is virtually nil. Furthermore, his staunch defence of Mangum probably make him a hero to woman and black political groups, who will give him some kind of a soft landing in the very unlikely event he is forced to step down.

Anonymous said...

To 1:33 am
As to Nifongs motivation, that is hard to discern in its entirity.
But the fact that he has repeatedly refused to investigate or even listen to evidence which might destoy or alter this case is a major hint, I think. It also indicates that "due process" went completly off the rails a long time ago.
In other words, if this case should not have gone this far, why should it go farther?
Ponder this thought: The rape/DNA exam found the semen/skin cells of about five guys in and on thios woman who claims she was gang raped at the party. There were several guys at the party that Nifong has never bothered to gt DNA samples from. All of the LAX guys were tested and none matched. So, why were the others not tested if nifong actually believed the accusers story? He did not, of course, even from an early point in this saga.
So, there it is. This case is being relentlessly pursued by a DA who knows it is based on nothing but lies.
Motivation to do that? How about pure evil. Now we have to decide whether or not to remain neutral in the face of such evil and let the destruction continue.

Anonymous said...

I take exception to a lot of the statement on this thread but I think it is good as it exposes the racist scum that supports the Dukies for the world to see. The comments about blacks not being used for lingerie models--I guess that is why Naomi Cambpell and Tyra Banks are on Victoria's secret on nationwide tv! You are so fat off base. Some of the really famous designers like Yves St Laurent even PREFERRED black models as he said their skin tones made his colors look better. The person who posted the bs about Tyra, etc, you should go and wash out your KU Klux Klan sheet because I am sure you got the s---t that you are full of all over it. As to black women smelling to white and asian men, I guess people who have married black women like Roger Ebert and Robert De Niro didn't get the memo nor did the slave owners who contributed 10-15% white genes to the average US black person in genetics studies. In states like NC, where there were lots of slaves, the percentage of mixed blacks is even higher as in the case of places like Brazil, which has a higher percentage of blacks than anywhere outside of Africa and they are all mixed racially! You are ignorant and in denial about what white people are really capable of. Let me tell you white people made picnics out of lynchings and had their kids there and everything; the sobs even made postcards of those photos. They lived through segregated water fountains, etc and got a good nights sleep everynight. They sold 8 year old children--sometimes their own children--away from their mothers. Whites slept good and counted their money and were sure they were going to heaven despite the crimes they committed on a routine basis. If Black people are racists, then they learned from the masters of racism, the creators of chattel slavery, Aparthied, Jim Crow, The Tuskegee Experiment, THE WHITE MAN ! And saying you are tired of hearing it does not change the real history. White on black rape statistics only prove that white men do not have access to the black woman now like they did in slavery and Jim crow so they cannot do what they did wholesale during those periods when no one could complain about it legally. Rape is about hate, revenge and ager and not sexual attractiveness. Often, after a lynching, the black women were raped for good measure. And they were verbally tormented first. Thatis why the allegations were so explosive as they tapped into the very ugly and real history of the south.

Anonymous said...

Anon 8:01 (or Wendy),

Your tirade reads like a Black propaganda piece, probably because it is.

The only problem with it is that Blacks continue to physically enslave other Blacks in the continent of Africa in this very day and age. Your points are worthless and moot bearing this highly embarrassing fact in mind. Deal with your fellow African brothers who are enslaving others right under your nose first before you continue to spew propagandist drivel. Thank you so much.

Anonymous said...

Well,anyone can see that the real problem is that whitey caused all the problems for the black man.So now it is o,kay for the black man to lie and spew hate because the white man made him do it.This country is so divided.Nifong,the scumbag even won the confidence of the black community by promising to prosecute,just vote me in.Now we all understand how the white Kennedys,schumers and all the scum democrat political leaders so easily manipulate a black community.Look at Tawana Brawley----a huge lie.This nappy headed ho who accused the white boys of raping her,with the black panthers hero worshiping her,jesse the jew hater giving her free schooling,Sharpton the racist pig praising her,the naacp once again backing a loser.Man come on let us be real.Blacks just do not trust whites,probably never will.Remember that I am generalising here, who will never be able to get it right.I hate North Carolina because it seems that every white person is bending over backward while getting raped just to appease the black community.When a little black kid screams,you never experienced racism,we were enslaved and hung and beaten,it makes me want to slap the color off of them.When did they ever experience this.NEVER.They were taught this hate.Just like the white supremict losers teach their kids hate.I lived in Afria and the people there blame colonialism and America for their problems.So I for on am not going to try to placate any race.If people black or white have a problem with me or my race,kiss my sweet ass and go F%$# yourselves cause I do not care about your adopted pain from a past you never knew.Stop whining and do the right thing.