Saturday, January 13, 2007

The Path from Here

Yesterday’s long overdue announcement that Mike Nifong has bowed to overpowering pressure—as well as legal realities—and recused himself from the case poses three sets of questions.

What’s Next for the Case?

The Special Prosecutions Division of the AG’s office will consider Nifong’s request. The office could do one of three things:

1.) Reject Nifong’s request, which would effectively kill the case. In theory, the Durham court system could prevail upon another district attorney’s office to undertake the prosecution, but the chances of that occurring are slim and none.

2.) Accept Nifong’s request, and prosecute the case. To win in North Carolina, Democrats need an overwhelming black vote. And there’s been no indication that the eagerness for a trial among the state’s African-American leadership has diminished. Indeed, NAACP “case monitor” Irving Joyner was quoted in yesterday’s Times rationalizing the continued prosecution of Reade Seligmann, while the Wilmington Journal (Cash Michaels’ newspaper) just published an op-ed filled with misrepresentations or outright factual inaccuracies from the ready-to-slander Wendy Murphy.

The chances of Special Prosecutions taking the case to trial were never high, but were not insignificant. And the attorney general of North Carolina, Democrat Roy Cooper, pondered a run for governor in 2008 and might still run in 2012. Presumably, he will be under some political pressure from a vital constituency to move forward, despite the transparent miscarriage of justice.

3.) Accept Nifong’s request, and dismiss all charges. This option always seemed the likeliest, which is why Nifong has so bitterly resisted handing the case over to a special prosecutor.

At this stage, it is virtually inevitable. With his decision to dismiss the rape charges but retain sexual assault and kidnapping, Nifong has now based his entire case on the accuser’s December 21st tale—a version of events that defies laws of time, space, and motion; relies on the “magic white towel” that can make some people’s DNA vanish while leaving retaining others’; and contradicts virtually every piece of evidence in the file.

Pursuing a case based on this version of events would amount of suborning perjury. It seems inconceivable that any ethical prosecutor would do so. As Jim Cooney, Reade Seligmann’s lawyer, remarked, “I think we’re all delighted that we’re going to have objective and competent prosecutors reviewing this case. We look forward to cooperating with those prosecutors fully and completely in bringing this prosecution to an end.”

That could take some time, however. As Jim Coleman informed the N&O, "The new prosecutor should do the kind of thorough investigation Nifong should have done to determine whether there is any basis to go forward," rather than engage in a rush to drop the charges.

Had Nifong turned the case over to a special prosecutor on November 8, it might have had a chance of moving forward. In the post-Linwood Wilson world, it has no such chance.

Why Now?

Many factors appear to have come together to explain Nifong’s decision.

1.) The Official Version. According to an article by Duff Wilson, who has served as Nifong’s unofficial propaganda minister for the last several months, Nifong “decided he had no choice but to hand off the case because he faces a conflict of interest with ethics charges pending against him for his public comments on the case.”

Of course, Nifong has known for more than two weeks that the State Bar will try him for ethics charges. His claim that he waited to make the request until he could have a sit-down with an accuser with whom he claims never to have discussed the case doesn’t pass the laugh test.

That said, the ethics filing probably did have one effect—it forced Nifong to hire an attorney, David Freedman, thus expanding his circle of advisors beyond the Troika (Cy Gurney, Linwood Wilson, and Victoria Peterson) whose guidance has proved so disastrous in recent months.

2.) The Real Version. Thursday’s defense motion exposed this case, once and for all, as a fraud. As Jim Coleman observed yesterday, the new version of events suggested that “These people are almost criminal. It’s making a mockery of the system. It’s like Nifong is mooning the system. It’s contemptuous.”

3.) The State Bar’s Next Meeting. The Bar meets next week, where it could consider filing additional ethics charges against Nifong, presumably for entering into an intentional agreement with Dr. Brian Meehan to violate North Carolina’s Open Discovery law by withholding exculpatory DNA material. According to a press release from 60 Minutes, this issue will be front and center on its Sunday evening broadcast.

With Nifong off the case, the Bar surely will feel less pressure to move ahead with these allegations, at least right away.

4.) Other District Attorneys [updated, 12.01]. Additional reporting, apparently by David Barstow, has added considerable detail to the originally posted Duff Wilson account. According to the Times, several district attorneys met with Nifong on December 19 and urged him to recuse himself from the case, leaving him "stunned and subdued," according to friends.

The concern of his colleagues? That state legislators were looking at this case of an example of why the power of prosecutors needed to be regulated more closely.

5.) Timing. Nifong has exhibited a consistent pattern of releasing unfavorable news late on Friday. The first DNA tests? Handed over to defense attorneys after 5pm on a Friday. The decision to drop the rape charges? The Friday before Christmas. This decision? The Friday before a three-day weekend.

6.) Fear. This week came the first significant discussion of behind-the-scenes events when Nifong was making these unethical decisions, when his former campaign manager, Jackie Brown, spoke publicly to ABC’s Law&Justice Unit.

At the time, Brown called for appointment as special prosecutor, prompting Nifong to fume, “I think I can assure you if I did anything that happened to be what Jackie suggested, that would not be the reason I was doing it.” The vehemence of Nifong’s denial suggested that Brown had touched a nerve. Could he have feared what else she might reveal?

What’s Next for Nifong?

Professionally, the State Bar holds his fate. The idea that Nifong could supervise Durham County’s prosecutions for the next 47 months should repel anyone who values justice. But there appears to be no way of getting him out of office at least until the summer, when the Discipline Hearings Committee could recommend suspending his license or disbarring him.

Personally, I suspect that in coming weeks and months, the DHC trial will not be the only occasion in which Nifong gets to experience sitting on the other side of the table in a judicial setting. Lead investigators—the role that Nifong improperly assumed on March 24—do not enjoy absolute immunity. Police department spokespersons—the role that Nifong improperly assumed between March 27 and April 11—do not enjoy absolute immunity. And Nifong could also be a prominent witness in any civil suits filed against the city of Durham.

Meanwhile, as Coleman suggested in yesterday’s N&O, the idea of criminal prosecution—once the remotest of remote possibilities—no longer is so, in part because the attempted frame with the Wilson notes was so blatant.

One final point: As UNC law professor Joseph Kennedy correctly told the Herald-Sun, Jim Coleman—the first prominent figure to call for a special prosecutor—“is looking pretty prescient right now.” Imagine if Nifong had followed Coleman’s advice months ago, rather than desperately trying to cling to a dying case.


Anonymous said...

Dang KC, where you posting from. It's 8:33 pm Friday where I am on E coast. Appreciate all your work !!

Anonymous said...

"Many people on the prosecution side - not just Mike Nifong - participated in the decision to bring charges and not one of them - no police officer, no medical professional and none of the attorneys working with Mr. Nifong have backed down even one iota or raised any concerns about whether the case should proceed to trial."

Yup, DNA lab man Meehan sure is standing tall next to Nifong. This woman is scary

Anonymous said...

Yeah, where are you that it's already Saturday? Iceland?

Anonymous said...

KC, what are options for the police investigators and the cab driver??? There seemed to be some intimidation going on. Cheers!

Anonymous said...

Coleman's a hero, so are you KC...long live your blog!

Anonymous said...

Sheesh ..

"I don’t know all the prosecutor’s evidence but I’m certain the victim, like any human being, deserves her day in court and I’m certain the public has right to know the WHOLE truth before deciding whether justice has been served. Let the jury, not the pollsters, render judgment."

Why does this woman deserve a day in court? Are we now at the point where if all you do is level a bogus charge at someone else you deserve a day in court? No wonder I ran away from a law career.

Anonymous said...

Why step down now, he has people in the DPD that he has falsly promised to protect. Gottlieb and Himan come to mind. Nifong is through and his case against Dave, Colin and Reade is over. He should be disbarred and put in jail. He is more of a criminal then a pick pocket, why, hecause he used his power in office to railroad these young men.

Anonymous said...

Chill- KC's experimenting with the AV's timetable.

He wrote this post on the 13th. And he was only wearing one shoe.

Anonymous said...

Wendy Murphy by using the word "victim" is really saying:

1 - The Accuser is telling the truth

2 - They lax players are all lying

What is Wendy going to say when the new DA can't find any evidence?

Anonymous said...

Now we know how KC Johnson make so timely and insightful posts on this blog. HE IS FROM THE FUTURE! He has already made a post for Saturday, but it is only Friday! Oh, my GOD!!

Is anyone reading this blog from the future? Are there any other blogs that are written from the future? Wow, google sure has some good technology. Can someone post how to do a google search in the future? I'd just like to look up some stock prices.

Anonymous said...

Wendy Murphy truly is evil, and I find it interesting that Cash used her to push this rape propaganda. Murphy has been shilling for some of the worst prosecution abuse in this country's history -- long before she became the face of the Duke persecution.

At least I am glad to know that in the end, Cash Michaels was nothing more than a shill for Wendy Murphy. Guess all that NAACP stuff about DNA and false identifications and the like was a bunch of nonsense.

Anonymous said...

I am from the future, I'll give ya some good tips, for a fat fee of course.

Jerri Lynn Ward, J.D. said...

Humboldtblue found this quote:

"I don’t know all the prosecutor’s evidence but I’m certain the victim, like any human being, deserves her day in court and I’m certain the public has right to know the WHOLE truth before deciding whether justice has been served. Let the jury, not the pollsters, render judgment."

This quote found by HumBoldt is so absurd. Under present day criminal law, it is not the victim who has his or her day in court. It is the State. In olden times, as documented by Dr. Bruce Benson in his book "The Enterprise of Law", criminal cases focused on providing restitution to victims. This is also a feature of Biblical Law.

As Dr. Benson pointed out in his book, the King--or in our case the sovereign civil government--took over the proceedings in order to receive the "restitution" in the form of fines to itself.

Under the original system (as provided under Biblical law) a false accuser was subjected to the same punishment as the person whom she falsely accused would have been if convicted.

Imagine that.

Anonymous said...

Wendy Murphy.....please God, strike her with lightning...

Anonymous said...

Is anyone reading this blog from the future?

I used to be.

Anonymous said...

I find it refreshing that everyone has figured out Wendy Murphy's little game. Self righteous, rude, and deceptive IMHO, I have always had to control myself from throwing something at the television whenever she appeared to voice her dribbling diatribe of victimization nonsense. An idealogue definitely belongs in the "former" Federal Prosecutor category.

Interesting angle about the AG's office rejecting his request, which would be well within their rights (I certainly would not touch this case with a barge pole). They definitely have some political pressures that would argue against taking it.

However, from where I sit, I think they dismiss the charges and throw Nifong under the bus. That's the easiest exit from this mess, with a perfect scapegoat to boot.

What a wretched little man he has become, and to put himself in this position due to being power hungry is really pathetic.

As Douglass Adams would say, my vision of Nifong in later years is as a sad, borken and lonely man, sitting on his back porch, feeding his cats in Durham, keeping them company, wondering why they do not answer to his calls.

This whole case is terribly sad on so many levels, mainly because the main character, Michael Nifong, has ruined not only other's lives, but his own in the end as well.


Anonymous said...

If Nifung had any frickin evidence he would not have filed a dismissal saying he had none other than the id. And, if had other witnesses they would have to be on the WITNESS LISTS WHICH ARE PUBLIC.

Anonymous said...

I have a feeling David Freedman is going to be a prominent new focus of this blog. Freedman is Nifong's attorney, and he's about as clueless as Nifong, judging from this early statement.

Now, he's positioning the accuser as being on trial.

"He (Nifong) feels, as a result of the accusations against him, that he would be a distraction and he wants to make sure the accuser receives a fair trial."

Yo, Freedman. The accuser's not on trial. The defendants are.

For now, anyway.

RattlerGator said...

One of the great casualties arising from this false prosecution is the slow but sure death of the espousal (and acceptance) of the glib assertion that person "X" deserves their day in court.

This was and is a bastardization of the actual reality. In truth, the criminally ACCUSED "deserve" their day in court to *face* their accusers.

But the ACCUSER? A blatantly false accuser does not "deserve" a day in court on a blatantly false accusation and it is the prosecutor who is supposed to enforce this truism.

It may be that our increasingly victimized culture is to blame for confusing this concept. Whatever the case, high time this particularly bastardized concept, as applied to an alleged victim, dies a timely death.

Anonymous said...

JLS says...

I would guess a fair prosecutor could in less than a week:

1. Read the various conflicting acounts Mangum has given.

2. Read that Pittman [aka Roberts] did not believe the claim and Bissey's statement.

3. Read that the DNA results.

4. Look at Seligmann's alibi and any statements from all lacrosse players and guests at the party.

5. Read the photo array transcipt and watch the tape.

And make the foregone conclusion that there is no evidence of a crime. I really don't see this taking a month to examine.

Anonymous said...

JLS says...

Rattlergator your are so right. BTW, good to see you here. You were always a voice of reason on Nuttin But Nets and other Gator boards when I have seen you there.

Anonymous said...

I would hope that any person appointed to handle the case would not be so unprincipled as to worry about votes in any coming election. Haven't we had enough of that?

The accuser has shown a remarkable ability to adjust her story to protect herself and nobody else. It seems likely that the original accusation was only part of an attempt to avoid being thrown in jail (again) the night of the party.

Now her best option might be to trade Nifong for a deal. Does anybody think she is loyal to anyone?

It will be fun if in a few weeks Nifong is yelling that this woman isn't believable.

Anonymous said...

One more point about the despicable Wendy Murphy, and one that KC should highlight. She is correct that courts are the right forum for legal disputes. She is intentionally wrong when she accuses the defense attorneys of random slander. The defense attorneys have filed many motions, perfectly cited, and signed under penalty of law. The leaked facts come from these documents which make the signers accountable. By contrast, the traffic court doofus has not filed a single response. So, it is the defense attorneys who have sought to use the court system and obeyed its dictates and it was the tcd (traffic court doofus) who refused to do so. That reporters read the motions, again properly cited, and relied upon them is entirely proper. If any of the motions had any infirmity, it was well within the tcd's ability to file a response refuting its position. She is a despicable liar.

Anonymous said...

Meehan is spilling his guts on 60 Minutes. How long before the DPD,& Wilson who have no immunity, are seeking deals.

Notes from memory, lineups, trips with Nifong to see Meehan.

They all know Nifong going to throw them to the wolves. He will soon be out of a job.

Michael said...

I think that the FA wants a conviction so that she can file a civil suit against the parents or the kids.

Mental health issues like bipolar can involve other conditions like conduct disorder or the lack of a conscience to regulate behaviour.

The amount of stress and pressure that she was under last spring (outside of all of those dancing activities) could push someone with bipolar/schiz/depression into psychosis where you have to deal with hallucinations and/or intrusive thoughts that you might actually believe.

I assume that she has a psychiatrist and a psychologist to help her with problems. At the very least, the prosecution should have had her evaluated.

Her bipolar might have helped her get out of those other legal problems with a slap on the wrist. Spending a few weekends house arrest for trying to run down an officer seems unusually light.

Anonymous said...

A blatantly false accuser does not "deserve" a day in court on a blatantly false accusation and it is the prosecutor who is supposed to enforce this truism.

I would disagree. A blatantly false accuser does deserve a day in court

-- at the defense table.

Anonymous said...

HumboldtBlue said...

I thank whatever fairies that have been watching over me for the past 41 years that I haven't had to deal with the justice system.

Anonymous said...

HumboldtBlue said ...


the reason that quote lept off the page at me is becasue I have been banging my head on other sites to get people to stop using it as some sort of legal truism ... maybe I shoulda gone to law school ... nah, too white, too privileged for that

Anonymous said...

This Wendy Murphy is the anti-christ or something. I'm reading her piece and every paragraph I'm saying out loud "well, THAT'S b*****t!" or "well, THAT's just an out and out lie!" If the accused parents want to follow a scorched-earth campaing of vengeance, they ought to hound this bitch to the ends of the earth for the next 10 years. More power to them.

Chicago said...

I wonder if Victoria Peterson will waltz up to the new special prosecutor and try to make sure he/she knows about her agenda and involvement. I would love to see the reaction by the new prosecutor when Victoria tries to step in. Rest assured she will try. I think Victoria's 15 minutes of fame just ended.

Anonymous said...

As Douglass Adams would say, my vision of Nifong in later years is as a sad, borken and lonely man, sitting on his back porch, feeding his cats in

More likely scenario: Congressman Nifong. He is a loyal democrat in heavily african-american district and he went after white males. He is still a hero in Durham.

Peter said...

Nifong is doomed. There are too many people with no immunity and pensions, as well as their freedom, to protect. When the civil and criminal cases start rolling every one of these people will be fighting for the privilege to roll over on Nifong. I think that only Nifong and Gottlieb are in too deep.
Everyone else will dump on them.

Anonymous said...

Wendy Murphy was on O'Reilly tonight on another matter. She had a chance to back peddle a bit on the Duke case, but passed on the opportunity. She said all we are hearing is defense spin. We've not heard the other side of the case. Is she really that stupid, or is she just hard headed?

Anonymous said...

from a non-attorney/retired professor: a question for the lawyers: Under NC's open discovery law, will Nifong then have to provide a summary or notes of his meeting with the alleged victim this week to the defense?

Anonymous said...

"More likely scenario: Congressman Nifong. He is a loyal democrat in heavily african-american district and he went after white males. He is still a hero in Durham."

Just think Marion Barry, Ray Nagin, and William Jefferson.

Anonymous said...

To 9:15 PM:

It seems that Murphy is offended that someone actually tries to defend himself when charged with a crime. To her, to be charged is the same as being guilty, and that trials exist only to "prove" guilt.

That Cash would use her brings me to ask another question: Do blacks believe that all blacks who are indicted are necessarily guilty? If no, then why use someone like Wendy Murphy?

Jerri Lynn brings up a very interesting point about law. I heard Bruce Benson lecture about the origins of criminal law while at a conference last year. His book, The Enterprise of Law, is well worth reading.

Of course, Benson is an economist, too. (Just had to stick that one in.)

Anonymous said...

Everyone else will dump on [Nifong and Gottlieb]

Dr. Meehan was the first to dump at the Dec. 15 hearing. He realized he made a mistake in acquiescing to Nifong's request for a modified, limited hangout of the final report. He was only trying to save his business by telling the truth, but it proved to Nifong's undoing. Nifong has been reeling since Meehan's revelations to the court.

Anonymous said...

Please help keep Wendy Murphy off of my TV, I paid good money for this thing.

Contact Bill O'Reilly at as apparently he is just about the last person on earth with whom she has any credibility.

Anonymous said...

sorry that is (e before the i)

Anonymous said...

Contact Bill O'Reilly at as apparently he is just about the last person on earth with whom she has any credibility.

That made mespit my Pabst allover the keyboard... does O'Reilly have any credibility left?

Anonymous said...

That made mespit my Pabst allover the keyboard... does O'Reilly have any credibility left?

The poster's contention did not involve the credibility of O'Reilly. It was about the credibility of Murphy.

Pretending to spit out your beer in shock was thus goofy.

Anonymous said...

Damn,now I have to pretend to wipe it off ... O'reilly is a fool Murphy is a fool ... but Professor Coleman on the other hand, with this brilliant gem, is no fool

“These people are almost criminal. It’s making a mockery of the system. It’s like Nifong is mooning the system. It’s contemptuous.”

Anonymous said...

Important Question for you legal aces. Will Nifong be required to turn over any notes from his conversations with AV in the last 36 hours?

My guess is that information is probably protected by client-attorney relationship, but my god, can you imagine the conversation they've been having?

Mike: "Listen, CMG, you're now saying you entered the house with one shoe on and your fingernails see where I'm going with this here Crissy?"

CMG: "BrettMattCollin did it, I swear".

Anonymous said...

Pretending to spit out your beer in shock was thus goofy.

Pabst is beer? That's like calling Nifong an officer of the court.

Anonymous said...

Pabst is beer? That's like calling Nifong an officer of the court.

Ouch, I knew I shoulda gone to law school, then maybe I could afford some good stuff,like Miller, or Schlitz, or Piels, or Iron City, Red White and Blue?

Anonymous said...

10:22 - Privileged, but they get turned over the AG's office.

Ask yourself this question - Can privilege be overcome if the notes reflect the commission of a crime? Were the two conspiring together?

I would say no, and they could be reviewed by a Judge in-camera. If they are relevant, he can force them to be produced.

Are they "privileged" if they were made in the course of an investigation? Was Nifong acting as counselor, or as lead investigator?

I don't this answer, honestly, because no DA I have ever seen has set himself up in this regard. You do understand that as lead investigator, Mike Nifong would have waived absolute immunity, and would fall under qualified immunity if he was acting in a police officer's capacity? Section 1983 should take on a whole new meaning now.

Chances are high he took no notes, or they already met Mr. Shredder, BTW. This case gets freakier by the minute.


Anonymous said...

"More likely scenario: Congressman Nifong. He is a loyal democrat in heavily african-american district and he went after white males. He is still a hero in Durham."

9:38 PM

This case is no longer about justice. It's about saving the Fongs sorry ass so he can be resurrected at a later date. Unfortunately, Congressman probably isn't too far off the mark. I believe he cut some type of deal and the case will end up being dismissed. Then he will face ethics charges on the lesser offenses and the hiding of exculpatory evidence will never be brought before the NC Bar. In a few years the Fong will be resurrected like a Jesus figure by the left wing academics and the huddled masses in Durham. This is the South after all and backroom politics are king.

Anonymous said...

This N crap is a nonissue.

As I see it, this case is now about punishing Mangum, G88, and Brodhead.

Does anyone really think that the Duke case had anything to do with Nifong?

Anonymous said...

Nifong's notes will have to be surrendered to the new prosecutor. Nifong has no attorney/client relationship with the accuser. It is hard to see it from his actions, but his 'client' is the State of North Carolina, not the accuser.

Anonymous said...

I say down ... 89 to go. The job ain't over.


Anonymous said...

What next for Nifong?

It is up to Durham people (and NAACP).

Nifong2008 campaign will be launched in the coming months. Unfortunately, he wins easily with 96% support ftom black community and 100% support from white liberals.

Anonymous said...

JLS says....

Peter, I agree. I always thought the young investigator Himan could roll on the others saying he was just doing what the DA and the more experience investigator told him to do and as a rookie six months on the job he did not have the exprience to know better.

Now you throw Meehan and probably Mangum into the mix and I would think Nifong, Gottlieb and Linwood are in real danger. Their real hope may be that Mangum will say some clear lie and muddy the waters.

PS Gloria Alred just said that she was happy the NC DAs passed a resolution about Nifong. Yes that Gloria Alred.

Anonymous said...

I better be fast..

Anonymous said...

Started thinking about CGM. Seems like I remember that the 'Fong had her incognito [i.e. she was being supported by the Durham taxpayers]. Didn't Cousin Jack/Jackee say the family couldn't get to her expect through the DA?

Wonder if CGM's going to start freaking out without her sugar daddy to watch out for her. Think she'll bolt for "parts unknown"?

Anonymous said...

To knowingly pursue the complete ruination of three innocent men is nothing less than Satanic. May God have mercy on this POS because nobody else will.

Anonymous said...

I know that parents of Duke students read and comment on this blog.

I think it's likely Duke LAX parents read and comment on this blog.

I hope the parents of the three boys read and comment on this blog.

I (and so many people) have so much empathy for them.

I was the "victim" of a frivolous civil lawsuit and where my four year nightmare in no way compares to the misery and anguish of dealing with criminal charges of a child - I just can't help but identify with them - if only because I know now that what I empathize with from afar on a dime can be my reality tomorrow.

My mother - in a moments of disappear - has always said "everything - good and bad - happens for a reason". It's really not a constructive concept in the midst and actually pretty sucky to deal with but strangely after you make through it rings true.

Well, if I could find one silver-lining for these families right now, it would be to thank them for fighting, because it really has exposed how corrupt institutions, that proclaim truths and rights aren't so and as long as the festering nests of "ends justify the means" hypocrisy are allowed to go unchallenged than NO truth matters.

Contrary to all the false cries of civil rights abuses we keep hearing, the Duke case - a crystal clear example of creeping fascism- evolves right under our noses and the very group that SHOULD rail against it --supports it --with wide open eyes!

There are hundreds of Nifongs. There are even MORE Crystals. They are both products of the Group of 88.

If you parents are reading...THANK YOU and another thing my dingbat but brilliant mom says -- what goes around comes around.

Sue the crap out of every single one, so this travesty doesn't happen ever again.

Guaunyu said...

If someone has already mentioned this, forgive me, but I missed it...

As noted in paragraph 40 of the the Bar's Complaint against him, early on in the development of this fiasco, Nifong said, "And one would wonder why one needs an attorney if one was not charged and had not done anything wrong."

I wonder if Freedman appreciated the delicious irony as Mike signed the fee agreement retaining his services.

Yeah, probably not. But, I sure am enjoying it.

Anonymous said...

10:53 said:

"Nifong2008 campaign will be launched in the coming months. Unfortunately, he wins easily with 96% support ftom black community and 100% support from white liberals."

Please enough from the right wing wackos. Nifong is over, the only question is how deep will his pain be. And please, although the right has worked hard to claim credit in this case, the fight is being won because the facts appalled people of good faith across the political spectrum, except perhaps the loony left. And the loony left does not equate to white liberals.

Let's not forget that some of the key heroes of this battle have been Democrats/liberals e.g. KC and Coleman. (KC is a centrist New York Democrat, like me) and that despite pleas and emails from many of us, our right wing Federal Department of Justice has refused to intervene, perhaps from lack of courage, but more likely from a states rights ideology that like the loony left gets in the way of justice.

To reiterate the progress to date does not emanate from any political perspective, but from individuals of good faith across the political spectrum.

Anonymous said...

Dear 11:16

Watch us go! Today is a giant leap for our 3. We rejoice that the charges will unravel soon and Collin, Reade and David will be exonerated.

We will not rest until all the injustice in this horrible hoax is resolved.

fong, narrowhead and others chose to "pick on" a very resolute group who have courage and staying power. It is going to get ugly from another side.

KC, you have been the beacon of truth and we are most grateful.

Anonymous said...

Wilmington Journal falls to new low - just proves that every bottom has a trap door. Wendy Murphy is beyond words - Cash was bad enough, but to print these lies is the true definition of Yellow Journalism.

Anonymous said...

Nifong said he recused himself so that the FA could have a fair trial? I thought that's what his goal was all along? Why does he think she won't get a fair trial if he remains on the case?

Guaunyu said...


Thank you!

Anonymous said...

What was I thinking, it's not HER trial! It's the 3 LAX players...that must be what Nifong meant that the 3 LAX players won't get a fair trial if he stays

Anonymous said...


Very well said. I concur with everything you said. Thank you families and thank you bloggers.

Anonymous said...

The point is that the accused gets a fair trial.

Nifong even got that wrong.

Anonymous said...

Maybe the NC AG will step in and try the case himself...when he fall flat on his well fed ass, then we can rid the world of two horses--t prosecutors.


A Professor of history that wastes
space discussing Prosecutor Nifong leaves me befuddled.

Our two-page 'History' post deals with current grim realities.

The Madhi Prophesy (the 12th Imam) should concern most serious students.

Comments welcome. reb

Anonymous said...

Duff's pro-prosecution pays off for him today where he gets an insider (read: Linwood) to tell the scam that Nifong tried to pull off (pinning the blame on CGM by getting her to withdraw)

Nifong and Linwood get on their knees before CGM in his office

Reminds of Kissinger-Nixon praying in the oval office

Also a curious quote from Nifong's lawyer who refers to CGM as "the witness".

Witness to what?

Anonymous said...

Let's not forget that some of the key heroes of this battle have been Democrats/liberals e.g. KC and Coleman. (KC is a centrist New York Democrat, like me) and that despite pleas and emails from many of us, our right wing Federal Department of Justice has refused to intervene, perhaps from lack of courage, but more likely from a states rights ideology that like the loony left gets in the way of justice.

Sorry, but in a way it DOES touch the ideological...Democrat Presidential runners Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton pimped this and while unsung heros of like KC and Coleman may buck the party, they have proven their buck is lonely and going against a strong tide.

As far as the DOJ getting involved...out of lack of courage. That's a knee slapper, coming from someone ready to ignore the strong liberal 88's spineless abandonment.

Anonymous said...

11:58pm Guaunyu:

Guaunyu, to be fair (don't know why I keep doing that! :), he left himself some wiggle room in that comment. Defendant Nifong has been charged, in the form of the NC State Bar complaint. An administrative charge, to be sure, but one with some teeth and potential to do real harm to the DA.

Anonymous said...

Also a curious quote from Nifong's lawyer who refers to CGM as "the witness".

Without CGM...this would not be. Remember it.

She's done more harm to REAL victims of rape and the Murphy's of the world have abetted it.

Nifong may be an idiot, negligent, unqualified, but CGM is the one that started it. Nifong knows the "witness" is looking for a new perpetrator.

Anonymous said...

On FOX tonight when asked what she thought about Nifong removing himself from the case, Jackie, the accuser's cousin stated, "I think it’s the best thing he could have possibly done. [...] Unfortunately, now, I truly believe that he used this [case] for political reasons to get reelected." When the accuser's cousin who has staunchly (although frequently inarticulately) supported Nifong and her cousin in the past is saying that Nifong did this for political reasons, you know it's bad news for the DA. Hopefully, I'm not repeating something that was already said, but I thought it was interesting.

Anonymous said...

BTW, I just can't stop enjoying the sound of the phrase,

Nifong's lawyer

Anonymous said...

This case was a result of the lies we tell ourselves about white racism. The fact of the matter is that white-on-black rape (or any other type of crime) is low today and has ALWAYS been low. There was no "historical time" when there was widespread rapes of blacks by whites. The truth is the opposite.

A well-known national correspondent asked me to do some research on this matter for an article s/he was considering writing for publication. It was easy to find the number of black-on-white rapes: about 20,000 a year -- that's only the reported rapes.

However, reported white-on-black rapes are consistently reported as an "asterisk" in government data -- with an explanation that the sample size is too small for extrapolation. From other sources, I found reported numbers of annual white-on-black rapes to range from a low of 100 to a high of 900. I think it would be fair to say that the true number is about 500.

This means that for every black woman raped by a white, there are 40 white women raped by blacks. But it gets worse.

If we look at "multiple-offender" interracial rapes -- the type that was alleged in the Duke case -- there are about 3,000 such reported gangrapes of white women by blacks each year. But, so far as my many hours of research could find, the only other cases of the reverse, EVER, were the Tawana Brawley and Duke Hoaxes.

Get a calculator and do a quick calculation please: Divide 20,000 and 3,000 by 365 days, to see how many white women are daily victims of black rapists. Heck, further divide by 24 to find the number of HOURLY victims. Then remember: the myth of the white-man as a sex-crazed beast hunting black women is a deliberate falsehood, perpetrated for purely socio-political ends.

Anonymous said...


I agree with you.

G88 is main culprit, imo


Anonymous said...

to 11:31 PM

Who said: enough with the Please enough from the right wing wackos.

In the NYT's article linked says

At a court hearing on Dec. 15, a DNA laboratory director admitted that he and Mr. Nifong had deliberately withheld exculpatory information from a report. Mr. Nifong prided himself on integrity, having been a conscientious objector during the Vietnam War, yet the laboratory director’s testimony and his acknowledgment of the error undercut his reputation.

WHAT exactly, does that have to do not only with this case, but his integrity OR the integrity with ANY prosecutor?

Zip. Zero. Nadda.

OH, the privileged white boys who aren't in Iraq but at privileged college instead?

But it's right wing wackos who "claim credit in this case". And SO, since the most MAJOR newspaper that telegraphs Nifong's verbatim views, thinks his conscientious objection during the Vietnam War is a universal eraser for his current criminal actions, tell ME there is no political jockeying form one side here. Conscientious objector's have integrity. Volunteers, volunteers who believe? Privileged white boys who aren't in Iraq? Not so much.

Please. Who you jiving?

Anonymous said...

1:07 I think you may be having a stroke.

I wonder how long it will be before Nifong's letter to his draft board is released.

Also, we need an update on Nifong's dog. This can't have been an easy month for the pooch.

Anonymous said...

JLS says...

re: 12:42

I mentioned what "Cousin Jackie" said on FreeRepublic and maybe on the reaction thread here, but it can not be mentioned too often in my view.

Certainly many Nifong voters and maybe all except those who want some retribtution for perceived past slights probably understand now that they got played.

Anonymous said...

JLS says....

re: 12:41

Nifong is more than an "idiot, negligent, unqualified." Mangum only wanted not to be involuntarily committed that night. Sure she is a vulture and when Nifong grabbed on to this she saw some dollar signs.

But Nifong is the one who ran with this. Nifong is the one who avoided the evidence including the evidence that Seligmann could not have done what Mangum claimed. Nifong is the one who organized a conspiracy to hide exculpatory evidence. Nifong is the one who lied in open court. Nifong is the one who mocked innocent people in the press. Nifong is the one who lied to the sorry Ruth Sheehan's of the world and without his lies their columns would not have been written. Nifong is the one who ordered the DPD to violate its own lineup policies. Nifong is the one who refused to drop this case when it came apart.

And he did all this for the most base reasons, to win an election!

Anonymous said...

But Nifong is the one who ran with this.

Yes, that's true...but Mangum claimed she was raped. If you go back and look at her statements the night of, she recanted then recanted again and the Policemen, like Nifong, couldn't question her claims. The policeman was only able to report she claimed she was raped, wait a minute she claims she wasn't...oh wait a minute she claims she was.

I am NOT a Nifong defender, I think he's just as selfish and opportunistic as she, but had she not LIED about something that has become so sacred and PC ONLY to the accuser, no one would be here today.

It really has to end where it starts, I think.

Anonymous said...

I am not a lawyer, but maybe someone who is could provide some insight into Wendy Murphy's op ed wherein she states that "....the defense has refused to release a thousand pages of the investigation. Reasonable people want to know what they're hiding."

Is this just Murphy once again misrepresenting what happens in criminal trials? Is she referring to the investigation by defense investigators? If so, I don't believe that the defense is under any obligation, unlike the prosecutor, to release case notes to the other side...

Is her quote nothing more than a blatant lie?

Anonymous said...

JLS says...

re: 2:45

Actually all evidence the night of the claim the DPD, while treating Mangum's claim seriously, did not believe her. The DPD told the Duke police as much. They did not go back to the house and tape it off as a crime scene. They did not rush to seek a warrant to search the property before evidence could have been removed or destroyed. Nothing would have come of Mangum's claim had Nifong not run with it.

Now I am not trying to absolve Mangum. She deserves her blame. But the majority of the blame goes to Nifong. In addition Nifong has a higher standard to live up to. We should and do expect more of prosecutors than hookers.

Anonymous said...

In typically understated fashion, KC has pointed out that Nifong's colleagues urged him to recuse himself from the case because state legislators are using this case to argue the need for oversight of district attorneys.

Unbelieable! The other DAs could care less about ethics, civil rights abuses, evidence tampering, etc. They just want to continue to operate without being constrained by "inconvenient" legal restraint.

Isn't this precisely why so many have been mesmerized by this case? I have lost all respect for the profession and its so-called ministers of justice.

Anonymous said...

3:47: I don't know what Murphy is referring to (and she probably doesn't know either -- she frequently just makes things up). I'm sure the defense has plenty of interesting papers in their files, and they have no obligation to turn them over to the prosecution. The discovery obligation in criminal cases is not reciprocal.


Anonymous said...

to Whyterain

You failed to add the most powerful factor to your math. Consider the number of crimes based upon underlying population. If there are 7 (or 10 or whatever the actual number is) times as many white males as there re black males in the overall population you would statistically expect the number of incidents for whites to be 7 (or 10 or whatever the actual number is) times higher given the same propensity to commit the crime.

QUESTION for the lawyers:

Who, if anyone, acts as the prosecutor against Nifong is th May hearing? Will the defense attorneys have a means to provide evidence for the proceedings?

Anonymous said...

3:57 AM

I think Wendy M relies on the inability of 99.999 % of her audience to keep track of all the details of this complex and long running hoax. I recall that some media was given access to the complete case files as early as June. Dan Abrams is a name I recall being discussed. She also relies on most peoples lack of contact with the judicial system and criminal procedure specifically.


Anonymous said...

well, maybe now the NAACP and the african american community can focus on why african americans are killing each other. The honor student with a bright future at NCCU comes to mind.

Anonymous said...

The only winner in all of this is the FA. A paid college education from Jesse Jackson.

Anonymous said...

9:55 - it is my strong guess (but not a North Carolina lawyer but a New York one) that an assigned member of the Bar Ethics committee would present the State Bar's claim. But I don't think the Fong gets that far. It is a certainty that separate complaints will be filed against him for the DNA incident and line-up instructions, and those will be lethal. And while those claims will be heard later, lawyers facing serious claims like those that will be brought most often resign.

As KC relates, it is a frightening thought that Nifong may continue in theory to be in office for four more years. But his reputation and credibility is so tarnished I just don't know how he can personally prosecute any cases.

Anonymous said...

"....the defense has refused to release a thousand pages of the investigation. Reasonable people want to know what they're hiding."

First of all it's my understanding that no defense is under no obligation to release anything and in fact may not be allowed to.

Second of all it's unclear if she is referring to pages given to them by the prosecutor himself.

And 3rd of all, it is also my understanding that at some scheduled time right before trial they are to hand over info they have to the prosecutor.

Murphy misrepresents many things to avoid the embarrassment of having been wrong about so much. It's her typical hyperbolic BS style.

Anonymous said...

11:31pm is so damned stupid it's unreal.
Sure, we're supposed to believe that the yellowback liberals are behind all things positive that have turned this case around.
Go buy a bridge in the desert if you believe that one. On the national scene and locally the blacks who are always looking for a way to complain and white liberals were the ones who did the most harm to Reade, Collin, and Dave.
It has taken a long time for you nuts to wake up.
The only thing the democrat liberals did in this case was yap about a po' black ho'.You need to just shut up and hide in shame.

AMac said...

Wendy Murphy's Wilmington Journal Op-Ed is clearly written for people who haven't followed the case. Sombody who can concoct such a mix of reasonable statements, misrepresentations, and lies has glowing career prospects with the Korean Central News Agency. Long live Dear Leader, Comrade Wendy!

With last month's promised mind-blowing revelations turned to dust, Cash Michaels now avers that the most important facet of the case is that "Duke Three Supporters" leave anonymous and pseudonymous anti-black comments on message boards and at blogs. Therefore... the case must go to trial?

The least-worst of the current crop of anti-Due Process position papers is by Duff Wilson and David Barstow in today's NYT. They (almost) wrote,

"Saturday's article marked a stinging professional defeat for Mr. Wilson, who has faced accusations of incompetence, journalistic misconduct and ethical violations for his reporting of the case. At the web-log D-i-W, commenters said the accusations of misrepresentation, which were brought over the past few months by bloggers, highlighted the conflict of interest between the NYT's defense of its own conduct and the reporting of the facts of this case."

Anonymous said...

I think it really had to have been Freedman.

Nifong knew all this stuff about "my victim" since December, so it wasnt those facts that we just found out about that jogged him.

It must have been advice from his attorney that things would go much better with the bar if this his involvement with the case was over. Then his involvment in the main issue becomes moot, and consquently the bar is less likely to take any serious action.

Now all we have to do is wait for the editorial from the NYT praising his actions. And from Broadhead saying that now we can really focus on the main issues at hand now that these perhipheral felonies have been dellt with- economic justice.

Anonymous said...

Michael (9:21)
I remember a PG Wodehouse book where one of the characteres commented."Man must be an ass."You're skating dnagerously close.First,the diagnosis of BPDb isn't something to be made lightly.It sems to be a hot diagnosis by the "para professionals" as an explanation for behavioral difficulties.I wouldn't make the diagnosis myself,although I did "unmake " the diagnosis on a patient this week;i.e.tell him he wasn't and in any case the meds he was on would have been disatrous if the diagnosis was correct.
The diagnosis seems to be used by you as a negation of the accuser's free will.

Anonymous said...

9:55 - NC Bar Counsel acts as counsel against Nifong, or someone designated by the head of the Bar.


Anonymous said...

Great stuff, KC. As a non-lawyer, I was hoping somebody could please lay out the potential for lawsuits by Seligmann, Finnerty, and Evans against the university, apart from possible additional grade manipulation?

Also, now that Nifong has asked to be, and hopefully will be, recused, does this make him safe from prosecutorial misconduct charges?

Anonymous said...

Now that Nifong has hired a lawyer to represent him in the misconduct charges filed by the Bar, this reminds me of words spoken by an infamous person in Durham.
1. One has to wonder why he (Mr. Nifong) would need a lawyer if he is innocent of the charges.
2. In Durham, your considered guilty until proven innocent.
3. I am absolutely convinced that something (misconduct) occurred, yes sir.

Anonymous said...

Bar friend said nifungu's lawyer Freedman is behind this, give it up NOW, cut your loses, I may get you only 3 years in jail.

Mikey is just another UNC graduate with no clue. ha ha