In the N&O, Coleman suggested that the time might have come to open a criminal inquiry into Nifong's behavior, and asked, "Who would believe that a witness, nine months later, suddenly recalls facts that coincidentally negate evidence produced by the defense?"
Quite correctly, he added, "These people are almost criminal. It's making a mockery of the system. It's like Nifong is mooning the system. It's contemptuous."
In the Chronicle, Coleman noted, "It's extraordinary that a witness testimony changed so drastically nine months after the incident. A jury would find it hard to believe her. That's just not credible. It's like the end of a bad mystery novel where all the ends are tied up."
Other members of the law faculty appear to agree. In his strongest comments on the case to date, Paul Haagen asked, "Does this case look like it's moving toward an implosion?" His answer: "Yes, it is moving toward that." And Thomas Metzloff added that the dropping of the rape charge seems like a tactical move, rather than one based on pursuit of justice. "Did something really change two weeks ago, or was [Nifong] feeling the heat from the DNA hearing?" Metzloff's answer: "He did it to protect himself."