Monday, February 19, 2007


Among the broadcast media, three people stand out as the worst: Wendy Murphy, with her penchant for factual inaccuracies; Georgia Goslee, with her preposterous theories of the “crime”; and Nancy Grace.

Grace, who regularly mocked principles of due process, allowed guests (such as the ubiquitous Wendy Murphy) to say virtually anything denouncing the players, while challenging even the mildest assertion suggesting the players’ innocence. And, when the case imploded, this television bully, who takes such joy in shouting down guests who challenge her views, was silent.


Grace turned to events in Durham amidst Mike Nifong’s pre-primary publicity barrage. Her March 31 broadcast set the tone for subsequent coverage.

Upon hearing from a local reporter that the team played two games after the accuser made her allegation, she mocked, “I’m so glad they didn’t miss a lacrosse game over a little thing like gang rape!”

When another guest cited Nifong’s charges of non-cooperation, Grace fumed, “Why did they have to have a court order for 46 or 47 lacrosse members to give DNA? . . . Because there’s really no good reason why, if you’re innocent, you won’t go forward and go, ‘Hey, you want my DNA? Take it. I insist.’”

Grace seems never to have encountered ideas such as a right to privacy or probable cause.

Grace then previewed a regular theme—her incorrect forecasts. Placing herself in the minds of the defense attorneys, she suggested what would occur: “The first line of defense is, ‘I didn’t do it.’ The second line of defense is, ‘I did it, but it was consensual.’ The third line of defense is, ‘She’s a hooker.’ Now, let’s just say we get DNA back. They’ll immediately claim consensual.”

This prediction, like virtually every other one Grace made about the case, was wrong.

Grace also was a master of the within-broadcast inconsistencies. Around twenty minutes into the March 31 show, the host proclaimed that police “actually found the girl’s fake nails torn off in the bathroom where she said the rape occurred.” (Grace generally called the 27-year-old accuser a “girl.”) But around ten minutes later, Grace hypothesized, “If there had been evidence, I’m sure it was flushed down the commode or gotten rid of, innocently or not.”

So how did police find the nails if she was “sure” all evidence had been flushed down the toilet by the guilty parties? Grace never said.

Finally, this initial broadcast introduced a pattern of extremist guests offering outlandish theories. Viewers heard from Kelly Addington, director of Let’s Talk Solutions, an organization that operates under the philosophy that “it is almost impossible for today’s student to avoid being affected by sexual violence on campus.” Addington affirmed “it’s so important, as a community, for us to embrace this woman. And let me say that I respect and admire her for coming forward immediately and for having the strength and the courage to speak out.”

Shortly thereafter, Grace chatted with potbanger Serena Sebring, who criticized the Duke administration for “not addressing the things that have been admitted,” such as “the clear evidence of some sort of an assault having happened.” The Duke graduate student never shared exactly what constituted this “clear evidence.” But she nonetheless demanded “more accountability from the administration for the sexual and racial nature of this crime.”

The accusation, for both Addington and Sebring, implied guilt.


Over the next 35 editions of her show, Grace would devote portions of 24 to the Duke case. These broadcasts exhibited some common characteristics.


Grace was a mistress of innuendo.

  • “Are DNA results being held back while the controversy, hopefully, subsides?” (April 5)
  • The grand jury was “where the real evidence will come out.” (April 11)
  • “Tonight, police try to enter students’ dorm rooms to question witnesses, and they refuse to cooperate with police. Why? I want to know why.” (April 14)
  • Those following the case needed to become “familiar with the charge called terroristic threats.” (April 14)
  • “It’s hard for me to believe not one person came forward to say what happened.” (April 17)
  • “There’s something else. The DA has got an ace up his sleeve.” (May 11)

Non-Existent Evidence

When innuendo didn’t suffice, Grace would cite non-existent evidence. Here, for example, is how she said the case would be won even without DNA (April 5):

Physical trauma. You’ve got possible vaginal, anal bruising and tearing. Torn clothing. Torn clothing indicates an attack. Contusions, which is a big word for bruises. Tears, broken nails, which we know we have in this case. She also said in the affidavit that she scratched one of the perpetrators’ on the arm. Look for DNA under that nail, people! Emotional trauma, change in her demeanor, the outcry she makes to the first person. That would be in the Kroeger parking lot.

The only accurate item of the those she referenced above was the broken nails. (Indeed, two nights before, the police had released a 911 tape in which Grace’s “outcry” witness, the Kroeger security guard, said, “There ain't no way she was raped--ain't no way, no way that happened.”) Grace never addressed the discrepancy.

On April 18, meanwhile, she wondered whether Reade Seligmann and Collin Finnerty were “two housemates in the home where the alleged rape took place.” After a few minutes of discussion, she settled on a theory that “they lived together at another time,” in a different house, and “they’re very familiar with each other.” The location of this house has never been revealed.

On May 11, Grace announced that “the allegations that this young lady changed her story were completely false.” In fact, members of the Durham Police Department had the accuser telling them there were zero, two, and five rapists, or three rapists plus three accomplices. Grace never mentioned any of these police documents.

On the same day, she cited the “breaking news” of “human tissue found under the nails of the 27-year-old student-turned-stripper reported a match to a Duke lacrosse player at the party where she was allegedly raped.” Human tissue? A match to a lacrosse player? As we all learned from Dr. Brian Meehan’s December 15 testimony, this assertion was so wrong as to be laughable.

Grace also liked to cite non-existent eyewitness evidence.

On April 5, she anticipated “some brave young man who could be a friend of the alleged rapists to come forward and say, ‘I heard her screaming. I heard them in the bathroom. I saw her come out. They said one, two, and three when they came out of the room. That’s what this case will take to be cracked.’”

A few weeks later, Grace developed a theory as to why her prediction had turned out wrong: “You’ve got to keep into account that a lot of the guys were probably downstairs.” But 610 N. Buchanan was a one-level house.

Factual Problems

Grace seemed unaware of basic facts about the case. For instance, after playing a clip of Nifong at the April 11 NCCU forum, she observed, “There you see the alleged district attorney there in Raleigh-Durham speaking out.”

In fact, Nifong was the “district attorney,” not the “alleged district attorney.” (What would an “alleged district attorney” even be?) And his jurisdiction was Durham, not Raleigh-Durham, a mistake that Grace frequently made. (She often had the Herald-Sun being published in Raleigh.) It’s almost as if Grace believed that because the name of the Triangle’s airport is Raleigh-Durham, a city exists named Raleigh-Durham as well.

Grace also seemed unfamiliar with the key players in the case. When a guest commented about Keith Bishop, she wondered, “Isn’t he one of the defense in this?”

In fact, Bishop was the black challenger to Nifong in the primary. He had no connection to the defense.

Indeed, Grace struggled with the political angle as a whole. In what might be the strangest piece of analysis of the entire case, she dismissed allegations of Nifong’s political motivations by announcing that no evidence existed “that this young lady planned the whole thing in order to help Nifong get reelected.” (April 14) To my knowledge, no one except for Grace had ever suggested that the accuser made her charge to help Nifong politically--or that, on March 14, the accuser even knew who Mike Nifong was.

The April 14 broadcast also featured a trio of high-profile wrong predictions.

  • “Was this woman drunk? How come the medical records don’t say that?” [Of course, the UNC medical records did say the accuser was drunk.]
  • “You know, along with that, that’s not to say that the alleged perpetrators, the alleged rapists, didn’t go ‘CSI’ and use condoms.” [Of course, the accuser claimed her “assailants” didn’t use condoms.]
  • When told that defense attorneys possessed exculpatory evidence, “Well, if you want to ward off a grand jury investigation, if you want to ward off an indictment, if you want to go, ‘Look, this isn’t true; hey, look at her,’ wouldn’t you show it [to Nifong]?” [Of course, defense attorneys had tried to show the evidence to Nifong, only to be rebuffed.]

Denigrating Skeptics

The contempt that Grace demonstrated for those who cited defendants’ constitutional protections becomes clearer when keeping in mind her own record of prosecutorial misconduct.

  • When a former FBI investigator charged Nifong with rushing to obtain indictments, Grace ridiculed him: “Wait a minute. Wait a minute. It’s all fitting together to me. You weren’t on the Duke lacrosse team a couple of years ago, were you?” (April 14)
  • When a defense lawyer suggested (prophetically) that the accuser might suffer from mental instability, Grace pounced: “Isn’t that something they call—what is that? Slander, yeah.” (April 10)
  • After Dave Evans’ press conference proclaiming his innocence, Grace brought on a person described as a “body language expert” to contend that Evans was untruthful.
  • On June 9, after a defense attorney noted that Kim Roberts’ police statement contradicted the accuser’s claims, Grace shouted, “I’m glad you have already decided the outcome of the case, based on all of the defense filings. Why don’t we just all move to Nazi Germany, where we don’t have a justice system and a jury of one’s peers?”

When all else failed, Grace’s guests could offer ludicrous assertions:

  • April 10, Wendy Murphy: “Apparently, at least a couple of the players are cooperating and have provided [inculpatory] statements there.”
  • April 17, Travis Mangum (the accuser’s father): “I could see the bruises on her face. She had a scratch on her arm . . . A lot of things I learned later . . . like the broom they used on her and stuff like that.” (All of these assertions were unsubstantiated.)
  • April 18, psychologist Dale Atkins: “So often, these kids who really bond together feel entitled and privileged and really kind of above the rules. They don’t think they apply to them, so they want to stay together and they want to be a group, and they’re not going to talk about one another.”
  • April 18, Group of 88 member Charlotte Pierce-Baker: “I worry for this victim survivor that we’re talking about.”

But when Nifong’s case went south, so too did Grace. The day the D.A. dropped the rape charges, Grace gave way to a guest host. Meanwhile, her show never mentioned:

  • the December 15 hearing (Nifong-Meehan DNA conspiracy);
  • the filing of either round of ethics charges against Nifong;
  • Nifong’s recusal from the case.

To paraphrase psychologist Dale Atkins, so often, it appears, these TV hosts on primetime Headline News feel entitled and privileged and really kind of above the rules.

--Unfortunately, the very funny SNL portrayal of Grace and the case no longer is up on youtube. [Update, 1.13am: A commenter found the clip here.]


Anonymous said...

Will Grace be sued for libel?

Anonymous said...


Typo in paragraph 1. "payers = players"

Better change it before it gets airplay. Feel free to erase this comment.

Good article.


Anonymous said...

I don't know enough about the law, but I sure HOPE Nancy Grace can be sued (when the time is right). At least the publicity over the lawsuit will make it clear to the public how little character she has.

Anonymous said...

Tomorrow night Nancy will open her show with this statement on the case, "D'OH!"

Anonymous said...

I found the SNL clip here:

Anonymous said...

At least give Nancy credit for doing what Wendy Murphy can't...shutting up. I choose to look on the bright side and commend her for being silent.

Anonymous said...

I gotta say that I was surprised to see SNL take such a risk with material. Nancy Grace is a great target for mocking, but I was shocked that Amy Proeler's dialog went as far as it did.

As for Nancy Grace, she needs to take a close look at her method. As you've pointed out, many of her shows seem to be ignorant of most key facts.

Anonymous said...

Nancy Grace SNL

Anonymous said...

Nancy Grace is an odious scag. I can't even look at her.

Gary Packwood said...

And all those victims at all those universities across the USA...never did come forward and present their stories...even on the INTERNET!

That must have been a terrible disappointment for all the Anger Studies people in the country who hooked their rapidly fading star to this one case in little 'ole ...Durham, NC.

You ran that one up the flagpole Grace and absolutely nobody ...saluted.

Where is the Outrage?

Anonymous said...

Maybe saying alleged DA was Grace's way of mocking the phrase "alleged victim" -- i.e., trying to register the point that CGM's victimhood was no more alleged than Nifong's title?

Naw, take it back: Nancy Grace is not even that smart.

Man, even way before the LAX case, I could not watch that creepy, creepy woman for more'n a few seconds.

Anonymous said...

Tomorrow night Nancy is reporting that that the District Attoney is telling her in an EXCLUSIVE interview, that the lacrosse team has been under, "Double secret probation for months."

Gary Packwood said...

Thanks for the Link

Nancy looks like Tammy Fay Baker in drag.

Anonymous said...

JLS says...

Well could tommorrow be the day? Is this the week? When will the AG start doing his job?

Anonymous said...

The SNL skit was on again last night...classic. She's an idiot. I hope those families sue her for everything she's worth.

Anonymous said...

Why wait to sue? Why not now?

Joe said...

Amy Poehler, besides being the hottest woman on TV, does a hilarious Nancy Grace.

That piece literally made me laugh till I cried when it first aired.

Anonymous said...




Anonymous said...

Nancy Grace never lets a little thing called FACTS, get in the way of her smart-mouthed "predictions." The fact that she still has a show, is disturbing.

Anonymous said...

Isn't the thing to do in cases like this is email/write Grace's show and email/write the sponsors of the show? She needs to take account for her earlier statements.

Anonymous said...

From Polanski

Johnson writes (again) about the buffoons du jour of this case, and then labels them the worst whatever in the MSM.

Professor, you need to watch the pitcher's eyes and stance to anticipate fastballs--and 1 just came crashing past your post.



Answer: Not asking the right questions. If you don't ask the right questions, what good is any stupid answer?

1. Why is no ad hoc committee being formed by Brodhead to investigate institutional bigotry in Angry Studies?

2. Why are no MSM legal reporters and jurists discussing how to punish false reporters?

3. Why is the MSM concentrating on Duke, as these black racists are all over the place?

4. Why does the MSM ignore the obvious question of the cost/benefit analysis of studies that foster bigotry?

5. Why doesn't the MSM report on just how stupid a lot of the "professors" in Angry Studies are.

6. MSM ignores the financial cost of these programs, and never questions the need for expensive, in-house diversity pimps

7. MSM ignores the devastating emotional damage false reports have on the falsely accused

8. MSM censors any scientific information that questions the validity of quotas. "Diversity" is only the most recent euphemism for giving preference to the black middle class

9. MSM never reports on the success of affirmative action at elite institutions. Where's the black Bill Gates, Michael Dell? What we get for our investment is lightweights like Barack Obama and Brent Staples, both of whom are diversity pimps.

10. MSM never reports on black-on-white rape, which has become quite common all over Europe and the US

11. MSM never seriously questions why elite institutions are "enhanced" by the descendants of sub-Saharan Africa

12. It's Black History Month. Isn't it curious that no one poits out how whites have helped blacks over the last 40 years? Nope, the agenda is to keep blacks angry so they can demand--and receive--scarce goods and services that should rightfully go to the worthy, who, at least recently, happen to be Asian

13. MSM educational reporters NEVER report on the woeful resources Chinese and Japanese receive rom universities like Duke, despite the fact that their civilizations make sub-Saharan Africa look like a joke. This is a national disgrace.

Enable the vicious mediocrities at your own expense, my friends.

Caveat emptor

Anonymous said...

I have emailed CourtTV for over a year. Starting with the Michael Jackson trial. Grace and Diane Diamond lied on a regular basis about the trial. They let Diamond go but not Grace. She is a disgrace. I boycott her shows - Gooslee is plain stupid -The funniest was the other lawyers trying to look like she had something valuable to say. Murphy is pure evil. Why any show uses her is a mystery and I boycott her also. Thanks KC for exposing these women again.

Anonymous said...

Here's hoping Grace's TV bosses act ethically and reasonably, in view of the harm she's done to CourtTV's credibility, and end her undeserved televsion career.


craigcw said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Norm Pattis at the Crime & Federalism Blog summarizes:
"Grace's conduct as a prosecutor has gleaned the following commentary by reviewing courts. She has "demonstrated disregard of the notions of due process and fairness;" her conduct was "inexcusable," wrote the Georgia Supreme Court in Carr v. State, 267 Ga. 701 (1997).
Her closing argument in another case "exceeded the wide latitude" afforded counsel. She argued the heinousness of drug-related murders and serial rape in a heroin trafficking conviction. Bell v. State, 263 Ga. 776 (1994).
And most recently, she "played fast and loose with her disclosure obligations" as regards excuplatory evidence, a third court found in a habeas case. Stephens v. Hall, (N.D.Ga. Sept. 11, 2003)"
May 4, 2005 Crime & Federalism Blog

From Law.Com, Jonathan Ringel summarizes the 11th Circuit ruling: "The three-judge panel on Monday criticized Grace for not following her obligations to disclose to the defendant's lawyer information about other possible suspects. The 11th Circuit also agreed with a magistrate who found it hard to believe that Grace did not knowingly use a detective's false testimony that there were no other suspects." May 4, 2005 Article on Law.Com

craigcw said...

What else would we expect from CNN(Comedy News Network) but a hag like Nancy Grace?

Anonymous said...

For the lawyers - Why has Nancy Grace not being repremanded by the Georgia courts for her behavior? Or do. what ever the courts do to let you know, you have been a bad girl.

Anonymous said...

Dan Abrams - If you are reading this blog, please get rid of the long dangeling haired women who rittle the netwook - like Ron Kuby and Jack Ford. We need a replacement for you - an attorney who can speak to the evidence, et 0 Yale Gardiner. I like Tucker, but once a day is enough. We needd something to compete with CourtTV

Anonymous said...

KC's biting commentary on Nancy Grace's scurrilous excesses should be sent to every person associated with CNN and CourtTV, whether employer, associate or sponsor.

All people associated with Grace should know of her vile abuses.

Anonymous said...

Wikipedia's Nancy grace entry is not flattering. Her behavior and commentary on the Duke LAX players fits a long pattern of wrecklessness with regard to due process.

Anonymous said...

you all are just mad at Nancy Grace because she is pro victim and as a former prosecutor, recognizes defense spin when she sees it.

Anonymous said...

Nancy Grace is not pro victim. If she were, she would be standing up for the Duke LAX players. She's pro alleged victim.

Anonymous said...

Nancy Grace is a man hating feminist with an agenda to push, no matter what the circumstances.

Anonymous said...

One more demonstration of the intellectual rigor of feminism.

Anonymous said...

One thing that cable news shows have taught us is that if we want serious legal analysis of stories in the news, we won't find it on television. People like Nancy Grace, Georgia Goslee, and Wendy Murphy are not hired for their legal credentials or expertise -- they are hired for their ability to get ratings. They get ratings by shrieking and ranting and raving. T.V. executives believe that a sober and reasoned analysis of the facts and law is too boring to present, and that t.v. viewers are too stupid to understand it anyway.

Anonymous said...

I stopped watching Nancy Disgrace a long time ago, before the Duke case. She has always been a nightmare. I wrote to CNN and told them as much. I suggest that you all forward info from this piece to CNN and tell them you will no longer watch Nancy Disgrace OR CNN until they address her inaccuracies. Many voices have more power.

Anonymous said...

Nancy Grace can be sued, but whether or not it is successful is another matter. The standard that we know as "Times Malice" from the 1964 Times v. Sullivan case (and subsequent SCOTUS rulings) is applied to public officials, some government employees, and public figures.

Grace would claim that the lacrosse players are "public figures," but that would be a stretch. A Duke athlete like Grant Hill or J.J. Reddick would be a public figure, but lacrosse is more obscure across the country. (I am not denigrating lacrosse, just saying that it is not as well-known.)

If the "public figure" threshold is not reached, then Grace would be subject to state standards. The question would be where the suit could be filed. Since CNN is everywhere, I could see the possibility of the lacrosse players filing in their home counties.

Even if the "public figure" threshold were put into place, we still would have the announcing of "facts" that were so far off base that they could fall into the "reckless disregard" for the truth category. As K.C. has pointed out, Grace got it wrong, really wrong, and she got it wrong often.

One of my dissertation chapters dealt with libel law, and I have a revise-and-resubmit paper on the subject. (It is one of the many projects I have put on hold during the Duke affair.) I may write a Lew Rockwell piece on this, as a post like this gets too long fast! Sorry for thinking out loud, and taking a long time to do it....

Anonymous said...

Broken nails? I know of no broken nails found anywhere. There were some discarded nails found, but no broken ones as far as I know.


Anonymous said...

Nancy Grace seems to have some synapses misfiring. Her presence in the media reflects our silly entertainment-based news media culture. Just as Jerry Springer (among others) seeks out the most ridiculous people to populate his show, so those who hire Nancy Grace do so to create foolish, baseless controversy, not for serious discussion. The irony here is the SNL skit actually makes serious points about her, but Nancy Grace herself must be taken with a grain of salt.

A little OT

"In Cold Blood" is riveting and a great reminder of what honest, good-hearted LE looks like, with all the questions of fairness that can come up in investigating and prosecuting a heinous crime. Numerous issues of due process surface, including the jailhouse snitch, lack of search warrants, confessions made before lawyers were appointed, change of venue questions, competence of appointed counsel and the trial judge, evidence of mental illness, and capital punishment. Also mixed in are family instability, parental alcoholism, child abuse, devastating foster home arrangements, brain injury, and prison life (some of which echoes the story of Karla Holloway's son). It's no wonder Mr. Capote was never really well again after writing that book.


Anonymous said...

I watch almost no TV "news" (limit to presidential speeches and election coverage) because most of the broadcasters and their guests on all the channels appear to be as biased in the subject matter being discussed as these 3 assclowns. I've also found that a lot of the so-called experts on a variety of topics are anything but and not only don't tell the truth, but distort with impunity.

Unfortunately, I think a great number of people spend time watching TV "news" on a regular basis and most of them believe that so-called experts in the fields of medicine, law, etc. are knowledgable about what they are talking about. There's a certain assumption made by many that any lawyer that's on TV "news" would be providing truthful information or the station wouldn't have them on. The public isn't reading DIW, JinC, Liestoppers, etc. They are relying on the Graces, Goslees, and Murphys to provide them the information and why wouldn't they accept that what they are saying is true?

These 3 are disgusting in their ignorance of the law as it applies in the Nifong Scandal case or their willingness to tell a distorted version or whatever combination of the 2 of these applies to each of them. They never should have been given a forum to spread their BS. Incompetence such as these 3 have demonstrated should never be condoned. I'd like to see all 3 of them publicly humiliated as the frauds that they are.

Anonymous said...

Many of these media outlets allow these idiots on in an effort to be "fair and balanced".

"Fair and balanced" is bullshit. To present anything other than the truth is irresponsible. If they don't have the truth, they should go get it.

Anonymous said...

Nancy Grace never lets a little thing called FACTS, get in the way of her smart-mouthed "predictions."

Nancy is excellent candidate for any MSM job (replacing Katie Couric?) and leading candidate for Pulitzer and Dan Rather Award of Activist Journalism.

Seriously, New York Times, CBS "News" and other left leaning news organisations are not any better than Nancy.

NYT is still trying to link Bush to Nifong (I think they will find at least a remote connection so they can have a front page news)

Anonymous said...

Just FYI KC, there is a possibility that Crystal and Nifong knew each other before this sordid tale. Apparently he prosecuted a case involving the murder of one of her relatives (I think it was her uncle.) Someone posted the details at the Liestoppers discussion forum.

To the best of my memory, it was sometime this year and the poster might have been maggief.

Gary Packwood said...

12:56 AM ...Said... Has there been a pattern of racketeering activity by an “enterprise” in the Duke case?


Thanks for your comment. I think people missed your research what you had to say.


Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act (RICO).

Yesterday, I spent several hours reading about RICO and thinking about the applicability of RICO to the many issues surrounding the Lacrosse case and Duke and ... Durham.

This person has done the research where I was just fumbling around being curious.

I highly recommend this comment and research to everyone.

Anonymous said...

Something that is bothersome, in a minor way, came to light today. I think those that tee'd off on the Professor at the "Shut up and Teach" meeting for not releasing his soon to be published material may be a bit out of line.

I don't know the standard of care required of the publication his work is under consideration. Regardless, it shameful that all published articles are not linked to their web sites.

The following are submission guideline for one IT publication and my experience has been that the following is typical:

"The submission of a paper will imply that, if accepted for publication, it will not be published elsewhere in the same form, in any language, without the consent of the Publisher. Before publication, authors are requested to assign Copyright to Elsevier B.V. to sanction reprints and photocopies and to authorize the reprinting of complete issues or volumes according to demand. Author's traditional rights will not be jeopardized by assigning Copyright in this manner, as they will retain the right to reuse and veto third-party publications.

It is the author's responsibility to obtain written permission to quote material that has appeared in another journal. All submissions should be accompanied by a written declaration that the paper has not been submitted for consideration elsewhere."

Anonymous said...

This blog is becoming so repetitious. And now we're seeing free speech muzzled. Can a takeover by leftists from the school of the Duke88 be far behind?
I am saddened that KC is now limiting free speech in favor of PC-speak. No excuse.

Anonymous said...

I have serious issues with the "public figure" thing. We already have just about everything out there being "illegal" enough for a DA to get some level of indictment once they start looking at *you*. And now everyone can be "famous" for 15 minutes thanks to Andy Warhol and the information revolution.

Given how much information is out there on most people, I suspect that you could even have a letter t the editor you wrote when you were 12 qualify you as a "public" to Nancy.

If the Duke 3 are public figures who declined publicity but due to police disclosure became public, then Nancy and Friends could easily find an obscure police report in Mayberry and blow it totally out of proportion for the benefit of the bete noir du jour. Look! their public figures, I got their phone number in the Google White Pages! Charge! And d@mn the libel laws.

Anonymous said...

CNN and CourtTV should be ashamed of themselves for employing this woman(she's also the daughter of Gloria Aldred).Her show should be entitled "Nancy Grace:Above The Law".
I didn't become interested in this case until I saw Catherine Crier on CourtTV reporting the Nifong-Meehan conspiracy.

Anonymous said...

And of course there is this Graceless parody of Graceless:


Anonymous said...

Contrary to what most people think, presumption of innocence exists only inside a courtroom. It applies nowhere else. I saw Grace say this on her show. She said that she has the first amendment right to say someone is guilty before the trial.

She is being currently sued by the family of Trenton Duckett's mother, who killed herself after a TV grilling from Nancy Grace.

Anonymous said...

KC opines, "As Marcotte discovered, it's difficult to airbrush the internet.", over on the More Airbrushing post.

But he just proved that it's not difficult at all. He not only airbrushed the entire page of comments, but he deleted them hook, line, and sinker.
No matter how anyone wants to spin this, it's hypocrisy and shows that he has his own agenda. Reality is secondary.
Why have a blog?
Why write a book?
Why set your5self up as some arbiter of justice and truth if you can't deal with the whole truth?
And now you see the fascist cowards from academia weighing in here. Ordering others off the blog.
I hope those reading all of this see what is happening here.

Anonymous said...


Nancy Grace is NOT the daughter of Gloria Aldred. Lisa Bloom is (also Court TV).

What relevance that has to Nancy Grace (even if she were Gloria Aldred's daughter), I don't know.

Anonymous said...

Gayle Miller said...

Why does this ignorant bimbo (Grace) STILL have a job?

Oh, yeah, right - she works at CNN where HARDLY ANYONE bothers with FACTS.

Anonymous said...

Polanski pass the crack pipe please.

Anonymous said...


I agree. Is Nancy Grace the only thing anyone can come up with as a topic?
Proof positive that KC has run out of things to write about.
Why not write about the core issues of the lacrosse case rather than deleting comments that finally get to the heart of the matter?
I think we already know the answer to that one.

Anonymous said...

Re:Fake lawsuit
Good start, but first, Durham is in the MIDDLE district of NC Federal Court, NOT Eastern. That meets in Greensboro.

RICO is a stretch, violation of civil rights, to wit Brady violation, withholding evidence from the Defense is the best charge. Nifungu has ADMITTED guilt. Slam dunk here.

Why try the stretch? Convict him and get him to Butner with Speaker Jim Black, who just pleaded guilty to bribery. Two NC Democrats in the cell together. Who's going to be the husband?

craig said...

Anyone can start a blog to write about the "core issues of the lacrosee case."

Of course, that is much harder than whining in someone else's comment thread.

Anonymous said...

Gregory at 3:09: "Celebrattorney"
Grace might have been an attorney once, but she is selling soap and dust mops and titillation, and what ever else they sell on TV. She is just a TV personality with her own show, a star. KC Johnson's revelations help to expose her.

Anon at 9:30
Spot on. When the "new and improved Fairness Doctrine" gets into play do you really think it will have any meaning? Will Cedarford and B Anderson and KC have to give equal time to Grace, Murphy, and Lubiano. Gees!

Anon 10:54
This is my position: KC Johnson is the owner of this blog. It is perfectly acceptable that he might delete a post or an entire raft of them if they do not suit the purpose of his blog. He did not delete his own post. KC gives the direction in which his purpose lies every morning. On the other hand, Marcotte deleted what she said and what others posted, and said it was an accident.

Anonymous said...

Kemp 11:35

When nifong is convicted I might go back to NC and reprise my role in medical services. Prisoner nifong requests: Annusol - Denied! Tucks - Denied! Olive oil-Denied! Slacks 4 sizes too big-Approved!

Anonymous said...

KC Has the right to set the tone in this blog however he wants.

Anonymous said...

Kemp Greensboro is west of Durham are you certain that it is the Eastern Court?

Anonymous said...

Kemp, I think you meant Greenville and not Greensobo inre: Eastern Court

Anonymous said...

Lose the "e" in Kroger, KC.

Anonymous said...

Please stop repeating yourself. You've posted all that before.
A blogger is either honest or he is not. He is either for free speech or he is not. He is either courageous or he is not.
KC has been using the people of this area pretending to be objective and pretending to be so interested in what exactly occurred in this case.
KC is an opportunist. Pure and simple.
Who cares whose blog it is? Everyone who comments here and people of NC have helped him enormously. NC doesn't need some second-rate professor to get justice in this matter. Where were the NC Democrats and liberal onlookers? They were nowhere to be found.
Don't start dictating to others at this stage of the game. KC and everyone else who seeks to make money off the three lacrosse players are in no positions to lecture anyone.
They need us more than anyone needs them.
That the liberal academia hounds are coming to this blog now and asking others to be banned is all anyone needs to know about where things are going.
This is just a liberal fraud designed to make some money. In the end, all allegiances will be to the liberal agenda where honest opinion and fairness are prohibited.
We have just seen that much.
At least Amanda Marcotte admits what she is.

Anonymous said...

If any of the lacrosse families sue Nancy Grace, she will try to have them established as "public figures." If the court holds to the standard set by Gertz v. Welch (1974), she will have a hard time making that claim. Furthermore, if the players were to file suit in their home counties, which would be possible, given that CNN is everywhere, a hometown judge might be less likely to permit the "public figure" defense.

However, even under the "public figure," "Times Malice" standards, I think there is a case for "reckless disregard for the truth," which falls under Times v. Sullivan (1964). Grace and Murphy consistently said things that were not true, and were contradicted by things in the written police records.

Furthermore, both women consistently went even beyond Nifong and the police, so they cannot use the "privileged information" defense. This contrasts with the NAACP, which at least uses information from the Gottlieb report and other documents that actually have legal basis. Yes, the Gottlieb report is a fraud, but it still is "official," and the NAACP did its legal homework.

Grace, however, was out of control, and I think she and her show are vulnerable for lawsuits. I doubt seriously that she and Murphy come through this episode unscathed.

Anonymous said...

It always give me a chill when everytime she says "I have never lost a case..."

Anonymous said...

Grace has already played a heavy hand in the suicide of one young woman, for which she's being sued.

Funny thing about the "agenda-driven" (e.g. the Nancy Graces, Wendy Murphys, the Group of 88, the Al Sharptons, the "Reverend" Jesses, and the Mike Nifongs of the world): they are never swayed by irrefutable facts that destroy their argument. They slander their victims mercilessly, and when proven wrong, either rewrite history or go into hiding from the truth. They're all on a one-way street to nowhere...

Hopefully, for those of us on the "other side" of this dastardly Brawley-like hoax, we'll actually see some real justice done, but let's not hold our collective breath!.

Anonymous said...

12:32, playing victimology; poor oppressed one.

Anonymous said...

Ok, all you blowhards can shut up now. KC has restored the comments back on the More Airbrushing post.
Now stop yelling at him. OK!!!!!

Anonymous said...

Amanda Marcotte on Michelle Malkin:

The question, coming from a false premise, is utterly meaningless. But I do want to address this false premise that someone like Malkin is a “strong woman”. Women who kow-tow to male dominance by aggressively attacking women who actually do rebel against oppression can expect to have sexist men blow this particular “strong woman” smoke up their ass all the time. It means nothing. To the degree that these men mean it, they are mistaking assholery for strength.

Ahhh, not only does Malkin have to contend with the epithet race traitor she is also a closet oppressor.

A pat on the head does not equal respect

Anonymous said...

12:32 KC of Harvard and Chicago is hardly second rate. Do you know nothing about education? Amanda is a fraud - She blames Donahue and the "right Wing for" her demise with Edwards. When in fact, it was her lack of integrity in presenting her view of the Duke hoax. Of course, her disgusting languague did not help her. North Carolina has a joke of a justice system and needs all the help it can get. This liberal Democrat has been here from the beginning. This hoax has moved me to a Rudy G Democrat.

Anonymous said...

Nancy disgrace is an attorney who has been censored by the Georgia courts for misconduct. She is being sued for persecuting a 21 year old grief stricken women in the lost of her son (hope the family wins) and is a uncouth bully. How does she keep a job?

Anonymous said...

Amanda Marcotte is basically an angry fool.

If she has ever had a physical relationship with a man, I'm sure he had to endure her screaming directions during sex and threats of bodily harm if he failed to perform correctly.

This woman has serious issues. There's an angry man inside her crying to come out.


Anonymous said...

I can't bear to listen to Nancy Grace talk any more than I can bear to listen to Freda Black's voice.

They are equally base and grating.

Both need speech lessons desperately.


Anonymous said...

KC you missed the point. Nancy Grace is a comedy show. You are not supposed to take it seriously but rather laugh at it. Nancy Grace is far more akin to Stephen Colbert then real journalism.

Anonymous said...

To 12:32 #1 (Anon)

Yes dear, Auntie has heard everything she has to say already too. Let's meet at
Old Krakow on West Portal and share a nice obiad.
*Destroy before reading*

Anonymous said...


Newton Minnow,Chairman,Federal Communications Commission

..."I invite you to sit down in front of your television set when your station goes on the air and stay there without a book, magazine, newspaper, profit and-loss sheet or rating book to distract you--and keep your eyes glued to that set until the station signs off. I can assure you that you will observe a vast wasteland."

2007-television - still a vast wasteland.

Why KC, or anyone, for that matter, cares what Grace, Murphy, Goslee thinks or says is beyond rational thought.

Anonymous said...

11:33 AM: Why not write about the core issues of the lacrosse case rather than deleting comments that finally get to the heart of the matter?

Core issues? That stuff about the cranial capacities of Ashkenazim, the speculation on the opportunistic compliance of female slaves, etc.? Great stuff, really...but to this average-IQ Whitey, the venom spewed by sea-hags like Nancy Grace seems more directly related to how the LAX case has unfolded, and why it remains alive now.

Anonymous said...

Observer @ 8:23

re Capote never being "well" after "In Cold Blood." As you probably know, he started off as a 1st-rate short story writer--ed, "Miriam." ICB was his masterpiece, and influential on James Ellroy, who is a better writer than Capote.

I met Capote a bunch of times and he was drunk each time. His books got worse and worse. It was sad, really ad. Even Andy "Drella" Warhol tried to help him, but I don't think his demise related to ICB, which, of course, he was very proud of.

Alcoholism can be a career killer--even to writers:

Hemingway...the list is endless


Gary Packwood said...

2:25 PM said..the venom spewed by sea-hags like Nancy Grace seems more directly related to how the LAX case has unfolded, and why it remains alive now.


Anonymous said...

Three points:

1) I disagree that the Duke 3 were public figures at the time Grace crucified them with a host of slanderous inaccuracies.

2) Rae Evans strikes me as the kind of person who's not afraid of a lawsuit, and she has the connections to make life hell for the miscreants who slandered and libeled her son, from Nifong to Murphy to Goslee to Grace.

3) KC did the blog a huge favor by deleting all the (mostly) inane race talk from the commentary on an earlier post. One particular poster, who I'll leave unnamed since I don't want to get into a shouting match with him, but I think most here can figure it out, should be banned from the forum. He's a distraction and a nuisance.


Anonymous said...

One particular poster, who I'll leave unnamed since I don't want to get into a shouting match with him, but I think most here can figure it out, should be banned from the forum. He's a distraction and a nuisance.

Yes, distracting from the basic theme of this blog is a pity. I guess I have allowed myself to be distracted as well.

Anonymous said...

Correction: I see the comments have been restored to the "airbrushing" post.

I still maintain that a lot of the stuff on that thread is inane.


Chicago said...

Suspect arrested in most recent rape case.

Anonymous said...

Hemingway was in three plane crashes and suffered numerous injuries, including to his head. To say that alcoholism killed him might be partially correct, but does not take into account brain damage due to trauma.

Douglas Adams drank himself to death before he was 50. More's the pity, but like most addictions, it is more powerful in a person's life than the will to live.

Anonymous said...

alleged rapist is black.

Will President BroadHead suspend all black fraternities because of this?

Where is Marcotte?
CNN, al-NYT? al-AP?

Anonymous said...


Thanks for the posting, and let me be the first to say "He's guilty - he has black privilege!"

Oh, that's right - KC has taught me to rise above the kneejerk reaction of the 88. Hope he gets a trial, hope I a called to serve on the jury.

Anonymous said...

Will Nifong handle this?
Isn't he still the DA?

I'm afraid that the dream team is investigating and prosecuting this (Nifong, Gottlieb, various citizen's committees)

Anonymous said...


Have to defend the professor here. While I was furious he deleted the posts, sepecially my satire, he's entitled to a temper tantrum here and there. He's working on a book, probably returning lots of emails, fielding interview requests, and writing his blog every day. I don't know if he's got a full load as a teacher now--so if he does, add that in.

Give the guy a break on this one.


Chicago said...

I am very curious to find out what evidence warranted an arrest in this case. One would think the process of bringing someone to trial for rape would be a similiar process in all cases. Whether guilty or innocent, I bet the process in this case was 180 degrees different than in the Duke hoax.

Anonymous said...

Ok, next Newsweek should have this nice fella on the coverpage?

Or is this different because he is not white?

Anonymous said...

Ok, next Newsweek should have this nice fella on the coverpage?

Or is this different because he is not white?

The more out of the ordinary, and unbelievable, and item is, the more news-worthy it is.

Don't look for much attention to this case.

Anonymous said...

Newsweek does not publish stories that are true.

Anonymous said...


You need commas after "Polanski" and "pipe."

You inquired about passing the crack pipe. Whom shall I pass it to?

Polanski wins again--LOL

Anonymous said...

Get out your magnifying glasses, it's time to compare and contrast the handling of this latest alleged rape with the Duke 3.

--Lumpy Gravy

Anonymous said...

Group statement for immediate release:

Burch's guilt would mean white innocence which indicates black guilt so it cannot be true.

Hence, we at African American Studies department have proved that Burch is innocent and this is yet another conspiracy and part of white privilege and capitalist racist culture.

End of Group Statement
Pres. Brodhead
Mike Nifong

Anonymous said...

Paging Dr Holloway, Dr Lubiano, Dr Curtis, Dr Surin, Dr Allison, Dr Piot, Dr Thug, Dr. Lasch, Dr Nelson, Dr Barber, Dr Pepper, DIW is on line 1 requesting a hearing, are you listening?

Anonymous said...

Uh, 10:54-- looks like "More Airbrushing," all 296 Comments - is up there.

Maybe there was a bug in the software, and the posts were temporarily gone.

Nice righteous indignation, though.

Anonymous said...


Instead of criticizing the professor, who indeed has an agenda (but don't we all?), suggest a topic--a good one.

We're fast approaching the best part of the case:

1. boys' complete exoneration
2. examination of proper punishment for Crystal Mangum
3. well-placed civil suits that may reap concessions from Duke's diversity pimps
4. serious examination of Brodhead's agenda--eg, why he has yet to form an ad hoc committee on antimale and antiwhite bigotry among the Angry Studies faculty
5. publication of a manifesto calling for the defunding of Point 4 crap

Babe, there are lots of possibilities

We need not rely on Johnson for post topics. Sometimes his posts are great, sometimes not. I know I'd fail occasionally if I had to post every day. Use his posts as a jaz motif, and then pivot off them. You might be surprised what blossoms.

What makes me so sure Nancy Grace loves anal?

See, that's a pivot for you.

Get the drift, McGriff?


Unknown said...

Retrograde Politician: "The more out of the ordinary, and unbelievable, and item is, the more news-worthy it is."

Out of the ordinary, I agree with. Unbelievable - not so much. When the Lacrosse rape allegations broke they presented a very satisfying and believable narrative to those who have negative views of college athletes. I must confess I initially believed them myself.

As to the reporting of crimes where the suspects are black: black people are understandably sensitive about seeing yet another black face attached to yet another offense. I think the (white) media generally defer to that sensitivity out of a sense of (possibly misguided) sympathy.

Anonymous said...

Out of the ordinary, I agree with. Unbelievable - not so much. When the Lacrosse rape allegations broke they presented a very satisfying and believable narrative to those who have negative views of college athletes. I must confess I initially believed them myself.

Oh come now. We rarely bat an eyelid, nor hear about crimes committed by the lower classes. Who cares that theft is rampant among the ill-educated?

However, when it is a serial killing, or some highly-paid executive who tried to make millions rigging shares, or a bunch of over-achieving college boys ellegedly engaged in a most improbable rape (when they could get any number of women to act dirty for them), many of us readily believe that it could be true.

The news providors know this and they pander to our predelictions.

Anonymous said...


"It always gives me a chill when someone claims they never lost a case"

Brilliant. That comment applies to any field.

The author of that comment (was it Grace?) obviously never assumed a very difficult case. I'm not a lawyer, but I know how to hire them.

Eg, I know Ron Kuby. He's smart as hell, knowledgeable--but uncreative.

His "black rage defense" in the Colin Ferguson trial was laughable.

Look at a lawyer's briefs, transcripts of difficult cases.

I'd hire a brilliant "loser" over a mediocre "winner" any day of the week.


Anonymous said...

Nancy Grace is a shrill shrew of a commentator. Some of the stuff she says, I sit back and think, even a first year law student is smarter than that!

It has gotten to the point that I turn on her show to see what crazy drivel she is spewing- and she never fails to disappoint.

-J. Kaiser

Anonymous said...

3:44 asks a great question about how the boys got arrested based solely on the testimony of a sociopath.

Yep, there is no grand jury transcript, and it's the 21st century--this, IMO, is more outrageous than the conspiracy between Nifong and Meehan. I hope a conspiracy charge can be made, because that'll be serious jail time.


Anonymous said...

3:25 brother Brooklyn Prep alumnus, Beckett

I hope you're not referring to my wee-wee studies post. I can make the argument--and I plan to--that it's the male equivalent of women's studies--you's all about power


Anonymous said...


@3:15--you're advocating someone be banned from the forum?

That can only be 2 people you're referring to--Polanski or M Simon

Simon knows a lot about group differences, which is part of the issue in the Angry Studies departments. I highly suggest you read Charles Murray's essay in "Commentary" entitled "The Inequality Taboo." IT TOTALLY RELATES TO THIS CASE.

If your problem is with me, just let me have it--the good, old-fashioned Jesuitical dialogue


Anonymous said...

What is all the airbrushing carrying on. There was nothing on either the essay or the comments to airbrush. KC will tell us shat happened to the comment section. I have total trust in KC. What ever he wants to write about is fine with me.

Anonymous said...

No banning unless their is foul language. At this point in my life, I can handle all comments except I do not need to be subjected to coarse language. I spent fifty years working in the Emergency Department and jail as a Rn - I have heard it all X thousands of times from low class clowns.

Anonymous said...

wee-wee - Are you people in pre school using your parents computer? Please......

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Gary Packwood said...

Late Afternoon Break Opportunity

Jump over to the Duke Chronicle where the students are debating whether they should bring the Rapper COMMON to campus after he insulted the Lacrosse team. Apparently, the kids have a contract with COMMON.

I get the impression that very few students voted to bring COMMON to campus.

We can call this The Tragedy of the Common-s


PS: Does it cost $8.00 for a movie now? Goodness

Anonymous said...

3:25 "I still maintain that a lot of the stuff on that thread is inane.", is an inance comment.

Anonymous said...

3:25 "I still maintain that a lot of the stuff on that thread is inane.", is an inane comment.

Anonymous said...

"Don't look for much attention to this case."

Unfortunately it will likely be used at every step as a benchmark, as it already has, against the Duke case.

Was the woman confirmed as a student of either Duke or NCCU?

Anonymous said...

Satire is satire and wee-wee ain't it.

M. Simon said...


Sartre is not satire.

M. Simon said...

beckett 3:15PPM,

Per your request, I'm back.

A review of Charles Murray's Inequality Taboo by Steve Sailer. Who like Murray is an expert in populatiion cognitive differences.

There is a link to Commentary Magazine where the article was posted. That link works. The link to the actual article does not work.

You probably have to buy the article from Commentary Magazine.

There are numerous reviews of the Murray article. Search.

Anonymous said...


I mistakenly referred to the Gauss Prize as being the most cognitively demanding award in mathematics. While the Gauss is most prestigious, the Nobel prize in pure, abstract mathematics is the Fields Medal.

Sorry 'bout that.


Anonymous said...

re Inequality Taboo

It's all over the 'Net--Commentary, Wall Street Journal

Just Google "Inequality Taboo Murray." There are 2 versions--the Com version contains all the annotations


M. Simon said...

Polanski suggested the Wall Street Journal, so here it is:
The Inequality Taboo

Anonymous said...

I think NBC/SNL is making a mistake wiping these clips off the air when they catch them. I understand it's their right and they want to get paid. Still, I gave up watching SNL years ago. Seeing a clip like this though makes me think the show might just be funny and topical (as opposed to assine) again and I'll make a point to check out the show again when I get the chance. Really "stolen" clips like this are their best advertisment.

M. Simon said...

Discussion of "Inequality Taboo" at:


Para Pundit

Anonymous said...

Nancy Grace portrait.

M. Simon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
M. Simon said...

That Nancy Grace Portrait was too ugly for me so I deleted the clickable link.

Anonymous said...

First 12:32 PM

At least Amanda Marcotte admits what she is.

Yes, Amanda admits she's a cum-guzzling boozehound and of that I have no doubt. But as it relates to her obliterating past postings, which seems to be what has your panties in a wad here, she hasn't admitted a damn thing. Her explanation about things getting screwed up and they couldn't figure out how to fix them so she just blasted them off the site doesn't pass the smell test.

Anonymous said...

I just figured out what LAX means... I thought you all were talking about an airport in L.A.

Anonymous said...

8:00 pm,
THAT is about the funniest comment I've read in a long time.

Anonymous said...

Not being familiar with Nancy Grace, I looked her up on wikipedia

Wow! She was a prosecutor.Just like Nifong, apparently. Being cited several times by courts for ethical lapses prepared her well for a career in media

Anonymous said...

Amanda herself wrote " Because of people making hay of my quick post. I am erasing it." She also said she had server problems. In any event, the woman takes no responsibility for her words or foul language in losing her job. Who cares? The only reason most of us even know her name is because of her stupid post on Duke Lax. She had her fifteen seconds.

Gary Packwood said...

Re: The 12:56 AM Comment

Several people here were dismissive this morning of the 12:56 AM comment concerning the feasibility of RICO changes being considered.

Is it not possible that representatives from the groups listed below know each other; have been communicating with each other for years and manufactured their response BEFORE the big 'Lacrosse Party' last year?

Escort Service / Nifong / G88 / Durham PD / NAACP / potbangers / media / left wing blogosphere

Is it so out of the question that a small number of faculty and staff created a corrupt organization right in the middle of Duke?

The response from many of the members of the press mentioned here today sound practiced and more consistent with people who are racketeers.

The Lacrosse guys just happened to walk into their web.

Several of the Angry Studies people desperately need someone to support their work. They needed a big win.

Anyone understand RICO...The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations both the State and Federal level?

Anonymous said...

One thing that overly biased commentators forget is that viewers are not their only judges. always makes the point that they will also answer to a higher power, and that judgment will be no more forgiving to them than they were to others.
"The crime is not that they are blind, but that they say they see."

Anonymous said...

Nancy Grace still has a show????

r brodhead is still president of Duke?????

Sweet Jesus!!!!!!!!!

Except for morbid curiousity, who still watches the supercilious sow?


Anonymous said...

Polanski, M. Simon: I read the Murray's Commentary piece way back when, and Sailor's review also. I have long admired Charles Murray, even going to the extreme of actually reading his books.

Look guys, I'm a nobody here. I shouldn't have suggested anybody get banned or any other nonsense like that. Call it a brief epilectic-like episode, a fit of aberrational inanity. At least I hope it was aberrational.

It's just that I see this blog as beautifully tailored to a single mission -- getting the boys out from behind the eight ball. Longwinded and complex discussions about race seem not only distracting, but also, in the hands of a skilled race baiter, might provide the boys' enemies with ammo to be used against them.


Anonymous said...

Polanski and M. Simon: I found a link that works for the Inequality Taboo at the American Enterprise Institute.


Anonymous said...

Other than being a bit more offensive personally, Nancy Grace seems the typical prosecutor.

Just ask the Innocence Project.

Meanwhile, in an ideal world, the law school responsible would invalidate her (et al) degree.

Yet, it's a crooked system through and through. Only by the graceful luck of the flowing dollar do even I walk free.

Anonymous said...


I agree. It's unfortunate unpleasant facts must be addressed because of political agendas. This is a lament Murray shares.

This case is valuable because it has highlighted so many things that are wrong with society--the law, procedure, grand juries, academia, MSM--the list goes on and on. In reality, the boys are minor players. The important thing, from their standpoint, is they all get rich from the lawsuits--and their lawyers file suit agaist Mangum, which trial (unless she defaults) will prove their innocence, and, if there is a God, get her indicted for filing a false police report. Duke, Brodhead, and the G88 should also be sued. Those lawsuits should prove to be fascinating, because if I were their attorney, I'd want cash and public humiliation of these monsters. Yes, I think Brodhead is a monster (one who inspires horror and disgust). The boys' lawyers must publicly humiliate their tormentors to exact the revenge that will help make them whole again. I can't be more emphatic on this point.

I'm trying to decide whom I should hire to direct a documentary on the Duke-specific aspect of the case.

I'll be sure to hire a real talented bastard.


I would urge the boys and their families to lecture on the devastating experience.

M. Simon said...


So looking at the origins of race baiting in order to counter the race baiters is taboo because it might agitate the race baiters?

A novel thesis.

Anonymous said...


We all know the real deal.


Anonymous said...

Another lie from Nancy Grace.
Nancy Grace claims to be the father of Anna Nichol’s baby.
Nancy Grace is now claiming to be the father of Anna Nicole's baby. When will Nancy Grace stop lying? It is highly suspected that Nancy is simply just stating yet another lie, and her recent claim is probably not even close to being true, as much of what she states already proves incorrect. Perhaps, it may be time again for another “stay” in her Psych Ward. One of sound-mind might conclude that Nancy might be busy enough trying to generate up some type of a defense to some of her current lawsuits against Nancy to keep her busy enough to help eliminate Nancy from making such a fool of herself again. But, it does not appear Nancy is capable from not acting like a fool.

Anonymous said...

This is very funny...

Quite the expression on Nancy Dis.

Anonymous said...

Nancy dis-Grace on video by Jon Stewart regarding the misconduct of Nancy Grace. She will soon be facing more lawsuits against her to be filed by the non-convicted Duke Lacrosse players, as well as by Howrd Stern of the Anna Nichol Smith case and by Joran VanderSloot of the Natalee Holloway case, according to their attorneys.

Anonymous said...

Nancy Grace was proven wrong again on all of her assertions on the Winkler case on Thursday April 19th. Doesn’t CNN management ever watch Nancy’s shows anymore?

Nancy Grace has documented herself to be incorrect, in some fashion, on just about every single case Nancy has attempted to cover over the recent months. While Nancy continues to rack up more potential lawsuit cases against herself and CNN for her continued defamation, slander, libel, and even the wrongful death Nancy is currently linked to by Nancy’s own possible illegal actions, it is well documented that Nancy Grace is not un-willing to commit even more such crimes against even more and more victims.

Some Courts have already reprimanded Nancy Grace for some of her documented misconduct. But, Nancy continues to rack up more and more violations of Civil Law, and possibly even Criminal Law too, and it is hard to keep up with the continued violations-count, and her seemingly constant violations Nancy has been committing against victim after victim after victim.

The Lawsuits that are soon to be coming from VanderSloot, Howard Stern of the Anna Nichol Smith case, and others against Nancy infractions (according to the attorneys) and the upcoming Lawsuits from all the Duke defendants, as well as possibly from Winkler herself according to her attorney Ferese, Nancy’s continued law violations appear to be occurring on nearly every single day Nancy is on television.

My goodness, Don Imus just lost his job for stating something that could, in-fact, may have been a factual and accurate statement by his derogatory statements towards the women’s basketball team. How CNN can allow Nancy to document even more violations against even more and more victims is just senseless and a total shame for CNN to just stand by and allow this irreprehensible behavior to continue against more and more victims from Nancy Grace. It is truly just ridiculous. Perhaps it is time to change from CNN to broadcasting Nancy Grace on something like comedy central where her conduct more appropriates is representative.

Has CNN already forgotten that Nancy Grace has current lawsuits filed against her for Nancy’s role in the death of a non-convicted victim who Nancy Grace had called on the telephone? Wake up CNN, Imus had to apparently be removed from the airways, and he wasn’t even directly involved in connection of someone’s death. Nor was Imus continuing to victimize more victims as Nancy has documented that she is continuing.

Maybe you, CNN, can provide the public with the “magic number” CNN feels is the appropriate-limit that Nancy has to achieve with her slanderous, libelous, her connections to a possible wrongful death actions Nancy has documented against another victim(s), and her defamational statements against victims before CNN will take similar actions as MSNBC had to do towards Don Imus.

Everyone will be anxious to hear what the “magic number” CNN will tolerate as the group of victims of Nancy Grace grows and grows from her illegal, immoral, and illicit conduct towards so many victims.

And, how can CNN allow a person like Nancy Grace to be around any true victim at Virginia Tech while Nancy has current lawsuits filed against her for Nancy’s alleged involvement in an early death of a emotionally distraught young mother. The management of CNN needs some serious investigation-measures to be implemented immediately, for the safety of current and potential future victims of the unprofessional conduct of Nancy Grace.

How CNN can allow Nancy Grace to have any access to victims at Virginia Tech is a matter that should, perhaps, be investigated by the authorities and by attorneys for the potential victims of her unprofessional conduct. There is a reason Nancy Grace has lawsuits pending against her, with more lawsuits expected in the near future. For CNN to allow Nancy Grace to have contact with any victim is a crime in and of itself, and needs further consideration by the authorities and by attorneys for the victims sake and safety. Allowing Nancy Grace to have access to any victim is like placing a Predator
near a schoolyard while the trial is ongoing for the alleged Predator. It should just not happen.

Anonymous said...

Nancy Grace forgot to mention on her Thursday May 10th show that she was kicked off COURT-TV for the rest of the season and will not return anymore. Oops, guess Nancy forgot to mention the facts of things again.

Instead, Nancy made assertions that Paris Hilton may need a sentence like a death sentence for committing a couple of minor driving offenses. Wait a minute, Nancy committed crimes far more severe than that of Paris before the city of Atlanta threw Nancy out on her butt and took away her ability to ever practice Law anymore anywhere in the 50 states of the United States. Almost sounds hypocritical, doesn’t it?

Ohh wells, at least Nancy got booted off the air, at least on that show. It’s a start, and perhaps after all the lawsuits that numerous defense attorneys are claiming will be slammed against Nancy Grace, maybe then Nancy will be totally off the air to the welcomed relief of all the victims both still alive and those that Nancy has had a part in their demise.

Nancy Grace has defamed, slandered, libeled, twisted facts, harassed, and so on and so on towards non-convicted victims. Nancy actually may be eligible for some incarceration time by the end of all of this, according to some attorneys. But, at least the “process” has finally materialized.

Her downfall truly began earlier this year after Court-TV removed Nancy from several days of coverage and limited her involvement in and with Court-TV. Plus, CNN has contractually, since last year, mandated that Nancy Grace can never be on any CNN broadcast without at least one of her Psychologists, Psychiatrists, or other doctors present on the set. Good for them.

At least they are beginning to recognize the dangers of Nancy’s victimizations that have already cost more than one victim their life. Finally CNN, go get ‘er. No more victims deserve to be victimized by Nancy Grace, and no more people need to lose their life as a direct result of any involvement with Nancy Grace.

Anonymous said...

Pat Lalama had to, again, fill in for Nancy Grace on her Tuesday July 17th show while Nancy was again treated “in-patient” in one of her three frequented Psych-Wards. Too bad CNN is not yet required to post the lawsuit-loses against people like Pat and Nancy as a footnote to their credibility. They have collectively been successfully sued for millions and millions of dollars in just the past several years, not counting all the lawsuits against them both that they lost before the more recent years. Even Pat appeared as Nancy often does, on some type of medications, drugs, or alcohol, and Pat was so influenced (or under the influence) tonight that she often had to use her hands to help hold her head up tonight. And, both Pat and Nancy are expecting even more lawsuits to be filed against them both from more non-convicted victims, especially Nancy, for the crimes they documented against themselves, including defamation, slander, and libel, as well as for Nancy other crimes like being a contributing factor in the death of more non-convicted people. My goodness, that is four known visits for Nancy back to one of her Psych Wards in just the last six weeks. Sounds like Nancy is nervous again because of the pending lawsuits against her in both state and federal courts. Perhaps it might just be easier if Nancy were to change her approach and stop victimizing non-convicted victims. That approach alone might help save more lives, and Predator Nancy Grace should continue with her court-ordered psychological treatment plans as directed by her CNN required psychologists and her CNN required psychiatrists. Simply put, no more victims should be harmed by Nancy Grace as a direct or indirect result of Predator Nancy Grace’s documented un-professionalism.

Anonymous said...

Nancy Grace was caught lying again on her Monday July 23rd show, and several of her guests seemed quite annoyed because Nancy appeared so un-professional in the way she tried to cover the case regarding the Liberian national suspect. One of those guests even included Wendy Murphy, who is a proven idiot in her own suit, just like Predator Grace herself. Both have them have been sued successfully multiple time over the years totaling hundreds of thousands of dollars won against both. Nancy even claimed the Judge handling the Liberian case was “in-contempt,“ which is another documented lie. Nancy even claimed “every trial lawyer has tried a case that was three years old.” Which, according to legal documents, is also incorrect. That judge overseeing that case is not “in-contempt” as Nancy also claims, and, there is no pending charge of “in-contempt” pending against that Judge in any court anywhere within the United States. No wonder Nancy cannot practice Law anymore. Well, “un-professional” is all that Predator Grace knows. That is part of the reasons why she has lawsuits pending against her right now in both State and Federal Courts, let alone all those cases she lost over the recent years while she has been an employee of Court-TV and CNN. It is no wonder why Court-TV fired her butt. And, it is no wonder why Nancy Grace was thrown out of Atlanta years ago, and why she can no longer ever practice Law anymore anywhere within any of the 50 states of the United States. Perhaps a better approach for this fat idiot might be to simply stop victimizing more victims. With more lawsuits expected against Predator Grace in the near future, it is clear why she does not possess the mental capacity to even host a show of any kind. Her CNN-mandated psychological treatment does not appear to be working.

Anonymous said...

On Nancy Grace’s Wednesday show, she had Glenn Beck of CNN on as a guest to try to explain some of the problems both Nancy and Glen face as being alcoholics, and the issues of the alleged drug-usage by Predator Grace. Nancy tried to show some similarities of her problems to the problems facing LOHAN right now. It did not end up helping Nancy to point out more of the problems Nancy has faced for years. It only served to confirm some of the many incompetencies Nancy has documented against herself. Hopefully, the lesser-informed viewers, and the true supporters of Predator Grace, may begin to finally put the pieces together as they begin to realize why Nancy needs to continue to attend professional treatment facilities from places like “Promises Treatment Facility,” where Nancy stated just last night that she needs to go to a place like this to get more treatment for her dysfunctional and un-professional actions against victims that Nancy has documented against herself. Her repeated recognition of her continued need for treatment is a good sign. Pack a big suitcase Nancy, you appear that you need quite a lengthy stay, and probably a re-fill on most of your psychotropic medications as well. Victims need some definite protection against Predator Grace. Too many victims have suffered, and some have even lost their life as a direct-correlation to Predator Nancy Grace. Enough is enough!

Anonymous said...

Utah mine has medics dispatched to retrieve more victims Thursday late evening. A simple solution to this dilemma. Have CNN mandate Nancy Grace out of her in-patient psych-hospital right now, and place Nancy down in the Utah mine with a lengthy written-script to read. Direct her mouth towards the areas where they need removal of coal and timbers, and by having Nancy speak, it will generate enough hot air to help cause the coal to incinerate and disappear, and will then allow passage by some rescue-miners to help finally locate some of the missing miners. Get a court-order if necessary to get Nancy back out of her psych-hospital in an effort to have Nancy released from her Houston psych-hospital and get her mouth finally working for victims for a change. While it would truly be the first time Nancy Grace has ever affected a positive change for any victim, but at least it is a start.

Anonymous said...

I’ve been a HUGE fan of Nancy Grace for as long as I can remember. If I am ever suspected of committing a felonious offense, I hope Nancy personal gives me the business. I wish I had a show so I could wear lots of mascara and make people that I don’t like feel bad about themselves and commit suicide! Nancy Grace is awesome!

Anonymous said...

loved las vegas? spear the all leftover [url=]casino[/url] las vegas at with during 75 exhibitionist unstinting [url=]online casino[/url] games like slots, roulette, baccarat, craps and more and liquidate unequivocal notes with our $400 cost-free bonus.
we from unvaried safer games then the superannuated online [url=]casino[/url]!

Anonymous said...

Wanna Get HIGH? Running out of Supply? Then Check Out My Shit!
>>>>> <<<<
If you have questions, you can email my boy at online.mentor [at]

[size=1] IGNORE THIS----------------------------
savlia divonorum medical ecstasy [url=] legal herbs [/url] wild mushroom guide salgia diivinorum [url=] smoking legal herbs[/url] meth before after nufo alvariuus [url=HTTP://BUYINGMARIJUANASALE.INFO] Marijuana Sale [/url] magnolia bark marijuana [url=HTTP://BUYLEGALBUDSCOMREVIEWS.INFO] buy legalbuds [/url] salvka divinourm aminita muscaria [url=HTTP://CANNABISHIGH-PILLSHIGH.INFO] High Quality Cannabis[/url] drug abuse test start a rose from a cutting [url=HTTP://HOWTOBUYWEED-BUYINGWEED.INFO] purchasing marijuana[/url] manita muscarai amanita mushroom poisoning [url=] legal bud [/url]

Legal Bud Review savlia divinorim [url=] legal weed [/url] salviia ddivinorum ssalvia divinoruum [url=] order salvia divinorum[/url] Salvia Divinorum Extract salbia dovinorum
[url=] order legal weeds [/url]
sallvia divinorrum amainta muscari [url=] legal weeds [/url] Where Can You Buy Salvia Divinorum Locally aslvia divinlrum [url=] purchase salvia divinorum[/url] meth states legal buuds
[url=]height improvement[/url] -
height increase -
[url=]proven penis lengthening[/url] -
proven penis growth -
[url=]skin care tips[/url] -
skin care tips -
[url=]get riches gambling[/url] -
get riches gambling -
[url=]herpes outbreaks[/url] -
herpes outbreak -
stop premature ejaculation - http://STOP-PREMATURE-EJACULATION-SOLUTIONS.INFO
[url=http://3GMOBILEPHONESFORSALE.INFO]mobile cellphones on sale[/url] - http://3GMOBILEPHONESFORSALE.INFO
used mobile phones on sale - http://3GMOBILEPHONESFORSALE.INFO
[url=] internationaloddities[/url]
international oddities scams
[url=]reviews of dro bud [/url]
dro bud
[url=] acne treatment review[/url]
acne treatment reviews
[url=HTTP://LEARN-HYPNOSIS-ONLINE.INFO]learn hypnosis online[/url]
learn hypnotism online

Anonymous said...

When i was scouting around at this page and find it to be unquestionably practical. I would greatly treasure all help.

Recently, Louisville has came about as a major center for the health care and professional medical sciences industrial sectors. Louisville has been core to enhancements in heart and hand surgery treatment as well as cancer cure. Some of the earliest man made coronary heart transplants were practiced in Louisville. Louisville's thriving downtown medical research campus consists of a fresh $88 thousand rehabilitation gathering place, and a wellness sciences exploration and commercialization park which, in partnership with the University of Louisville, has lured nearly 75 main researchers and objective. Louisville is also residence to Humana, one particular of the nation's premier health insurance cover businesses.

Louisville is residence to various major businesses and institutions.

Anonymous said...


I'm here online for the kids of Haiti.

I'm here for a non-profit group that spends their time to
building oppurtunities for the children in haiti. If anybody wants to donate then this is the place:

[url=]Donate to Haiti[/url] or Help Haiti

They give kids in Haiti books and teach them.

Please check them out, they're a real cause.

Anything would be appreciated