In yesterday’s N&O, Joe Neff completed a brilliant, five-part series on Mike Nifong’s rush to judgment. Here are the links to parts One, Two, Three, Four, and Five, plus an appendix on Linwood Wilson’s role. The series contained at least 20 new revelations about the case:
1.) Nifong first heard about the case when he saw the March 23 NTO order. His reaction: “Holy crap, what is going on?” Yet for reasons that remain unclear, he took over the handling of all matters related to the case less than 24 hours later.
2.) At a March 27 meeting with Bob Ekstrand, a blustering Nifong threatened all the players with prosecution: “If you’ve come here to ask me questions instead of telling me what you know about who did it, then we don’t have anything to talk about. You’re wasting my time. You tell all of your clients I will remember their lack of cooperation at sentencing. I hope you know if they didn’t do it, they are all aiders and abettors, and that carries the same punishment as rape.”
3.) Nifong’s motives for running, according to Jackie Brown: “He said, ‘I really don’t want this job; I was the last one on the list. I just need three years and seven months for retirement. You won’t have to worry about running another campaign for me.’”
4.) If Nifong served a full term as elected D.A., his annual pension would have increased by at least $15,000.
5.) In a conversation with Brown, Nifong justified his pre-primary publicity barrage in the following way: “I’m getting a million dollars of free advertisements.”
6.) In early April, Nifong told defense attorney Bill Thomas “that he had personally interviewed her and had spoke with her at length about this case, and that he fully believed every word she said about this incident, and that he knew a lot more about this case than I did, and that he was going to proceed as he saw fit . . . He said he had interviewed her, he discussed the details of the case, he believed her and that my view of her as perhaps being a call girl working for an escort service, running around making things up for financial gain, was absolutely false. ... He went on to say what a wonderful person she was. He said she was fully believable, she was intelligent, articulate ... and telling a convincing story about what happened.” (Nifong subsequently would claim that he never discussed the details of the case with Crystal Mangum.)
7.) Jackie Brown spoke by phone with Nifong on April 10, just after his first meeting with DNA lab director Brian Meehan. (At this meeting, of which Nifong claimed he had no memory, Meehan told Nifong not only of no DNA matches to the two players he wanted to indict, but that unidentified males’ DNA was on Mangum’s rape kit.) Brown had spoken with Nifong before the meeting about a campaign ad, and he was in a good mood. Her recollection of the call after the meeting: “His whole demeanor had changed. He was kind of ill and said, ‘I really don’t want to talk about the ad.’ Whatever happened, he wasn’t happy with it.”
8.) Jim Cooney had a previously undisclosed meeting with Mike Nifong on December 5, at which he withdrew the motion requesting Nifong’s recusal and said that the DA should drop the charges against Reade Seligmann. Nifong’s response: “There is no such thing as an airtight alibi.” Cooney offered to open his whole file to Nifong. Nifong’s response: “There is nothing you can show me that will change my mind. Only her and her story. As long as she’s willing, we’re going forward.”
9.) Brad Bannon used a textbook, Forensic DNA Typing: Biology, Technology, and Genetics of STR Markers, to help him understand the DNA evidence.
9.) At the December 15 hearing, Nifong “looked ashen, resting his face in his hands or staring down at the table.” (At the hearing, Neff was sitting almost head-on to Nifong, and so had a direct view of the DA.)
10.) In May 2006, when he started working on the lacrosse case, Linwood Wilson received a 66-percent raise, from $23,453 to $39,000.
11.) At his December 21 interview with the accuser,
12.) Nifong and Wilson didn’t tell Durham Police that the December 21 interview would occur; Officer Himan proposed re-interviewing Mangum after he found out about the interview, but this re-interview never took place.
13.) In a January conversation with Finnerty attorney Bill Cotter, Nifong admitted that he had never read Mangum’s psychological medical file.
14.) On January 10, Linwood Wilson met with SANE nurse-in-training Tara Levicy. In her report from the night of the “attack,” Levicy wrote that Mangum said no condoms were used. On January 10, according to
15.) Levicy then offered an item more appropriate for a women’s studies paper than a medical exam to explain the lack of DNA evidence in this particular case: “I wasn’t surprised when I heard no DNA was found because rape is not about passion or ejaculation but about power.” [Items 14 and 15 raise serious questions as to how Duke University Hospital could continue to employ Levicy.]
16.) Neither Nifong nor the Durham Police ever interviewed Dr. Julie Manly, the doctor who conducted the rape exam.
17.) Manly saw what Neff called “whitish discharge” in the rape exam that she thought could be semen. Later, she realized it was more likely associated with a yeast infection—but by then, Nifong had seized control of the case.
18.) Strip club manager Yolanda Haynes signed a statement suggesting that Linwood Wilson pressured her to lie about Mangum’s erratic behavior on March 11, 2006, at the strip club.
19.) Nifong is now up to 13 different explanations for his failure to turn over the exculpatory DNA evidence.
20.) At the Dec. 15 hearing, Nifong publicly stated that the first he heard of the DNA non-reporting was a defense motion two days before. Neff reveals that Nifong had made the same claim in a closed-door session with Judge Smith and defense lawyers.
All told, a phenomenal job of reporting by Neff—capping off a phenomenal performance throughout the case.
80 comments:
Nifong will have his day.
Lets just wait for it. No need to agitate.
Talk about the dog ate my homework...he's got every excuse in the book and he's not afraid to use them.
No need to agitate? I'm sorry, he publicly condemned these guys and charged them with crimes he knew they didn't commit. A reporter pointing out his crimes and others talking about it is mild in comparison, not to mention fully deserved.
Wow. Just wow. I get the feeling most of us interested onlookers have a better understanding of all the intricacies of the case than Nifong.
I simply don't understand KC's attack of Levicy. She has done absolutely nothing wrong and she is just some low level worker. Yet, without any evidence of any impropriety on her part, KC is essentially calling for her to be fired and he is trashing her name in public.
Isn't this exactly the same type of behavior that KC called out the Group of 88 for? Maybe KC can call himself the Group of 1.
KC's reporting on this case has been nothing short of brilliant. But, it doesn't excuse his unfounded attack on this young woman. Shame on him.
dk
kC I don"t believe anything Wilson or Gottleib say or write. They have been liars all through this whole year -Wilson is not even a Cop. How does he get off interviewing anyone - let alone with no other witness. Only in Durham. Bissey said "they picked up his statement, but no one interviewed him - including the SPs." Nifong must be nuts!!!
Revelation new to me from #4 in the series....Defense lawyers met with Nifong and Judge in chambers before Dec 15 hearing and Nifong told Judge and defense attorney's that he did not know about the DNA from unknown men found on FA.
In addition to the sidebar on Wilson, a report of an officer who dealt with things on the night in question was posted as part of the piece. This hasn't been seen as widely as it should be seen. Anyone who read this would have to see that there was every reason to suspect that there had been no crime, or at the very least to proceed with caution.
This all just makes Nofing look worse and worse -- he has changed his story as many times as CGM and has been caught in multiple lies! Zero credibility.
If we take him at his word, he learned of the "case" on the 23rd and went totally off -- does he expect anyone to believe that he didn't read the initial report?
The exact role of student SANE nurse T. Levicy is now much more clear. It does seem likely that she did tell a police officer outside of proper channels that Mangum showed findings "consistent with sexual assault". This was apparently the interpretation she placed on the finding of diffuse vaginal edema. The problem is, if she had had more medical training and less ideological committment to "women never lie about rape" she would have never said that to a cop. But she apparently did so and this may well have been a significant, highly malignant turning point in this case.
Shame on her. Telling cops something that is not in a written report is insanely bad practice for someone in her line of work. It is hard to avoid believing that she approached her role as a sexual assault exam nurse in a spirit that was quite foreign to following due process.
I do not know how things work in her place of employment but it ought to constitute a career-ending transgression.
I'm still no closer to understanding Nifong's behavior, although there are several factors obviously involved: 1) the election, 2) his pension, 3) he knew the family, and 4) the free publicity for his allegations. Yet even then I don't quite understand the rush to judgment and all the holes he left in the case. It seems clear that following the meeting with Sheehan, he crossed a line from confusion or incompetence to outright lying, but why all the bluster and agression against the defense attorneys and the players? I guess I will leave that to the psychologists in the audience. At least there is one irony in all this: I remember that at one point someone overheard Nifong say that the two words he never wanted to hear again were Duke and lacrosse. Needless to say, they will follow him the rest of his life, and will appear in the lead sentence in his obituary.
Well I do not completely subscribe to your list. Remember everyone involved in this case has an incentive to blame shift and remember things to their best advantage now. So I think a couple of these "scoops" are suspect.
My view of which "scoops" are suspect order are:
1. Nifong is not a go to the copy machine and do his own copying type guy. This whole story of him not knowing about this case earlier is highly suspect to me. And Neff ignors the most interesting part of this story to me now, how did things go from the DPD not believing Mangum the morning of her complaint to Nifong running the investigation. I am pretty confident this copy machine story is bs.
5. I don't believe Brown's story about Nifong and this case too. She is busy trying to distance herself because she rightly does not want to be a political consultant who was involved in this. She wants the understanding that this publicity was good for the campaign to be soley Nifong's. I doubt that. She is savy enough to know her candidate was behind and this case could only help him. But I certainly understand her relationship to Nifong could ruin her ability to get campaign jobs, so I understand her reasons. And of course while she likely knew it was good for the campaign she would not have known it was a hoax and she is to be praised for changing sides and working to defeat him when it became clear what she had been working for.
13. I would say claimed rather than admitted. Nifong my well have read Mangums psych history but it is so bad he lies about it. I would never take anything Nifong says as true. He has lied throughout.
To annonymous 12:17
If you read part 5 of the N&O story I think you will understand KC's comments on Levicy. Hospital staff in suspected rape cases apparently are not supposed to go around stating opinions, but just report on their medical findings. Yet it appears from Neff's article that Levicy formed opinions early and often, none of which panned out, which forced her to go back and invent new explanations. She would hardly have been a star witness for the prosectution.
I suspect Nifong was involved earlier than the 23rd -- if you look at all of the documentation available from the initial investigation, it seems highly unlikely anyone objective (that is, without a strong personal motive) would have applied for the NTO.
Further, granting the NTO could be seen as something that is highly suspect -- what exactly was presented to justify this? Was this some sort of personal favor?
I agree that we need to be careful in condemning Levicy. KC is citing a report of her statement about rape and power that comes to us via Linwood Wilson, a man with absolutely no credibility. I don't think it makes sense to doubt all his other statements and selectively believe this one.
Joe Neff has been terrific. He deserves all the applause he gets. Ben Niolet has also contributed several very good stories. That's about it. The rest of the North Carolina press has been pathetic.
N&O - 13 explainations. I'm glad someone is keeping track, it getting hard to remember all the reasons for framing the players.
And he's still DA.
Guess the standards are rather low these days. That's a mighty powerful position for the ethically challenged.
Linwood Wilson is a thug hired by the state to do it's dirty work.
To the 12.38:
It is my understanding that Levicy expressed similar sentiments in an interview with defense attorneys.
I simply don't understand KC's attack of Levicy. She has done absolutely nothing wrong and she is just some low level worker.
A worker in a position where she simply MUST rein in her opinion. If she is EVER going to be worth a damn at the job she needs to get a Sergeant Joe Friday attitude,....Just the facts, m'am. You are not allowed to opine unless you are an expert witness, which she clearly was not. Opining IS evidence of impropriety.
Isn't this exactly the same type of behavior that KC called out the Group of 88 for?
No...not even close. Have you been paying ANY attention at all?
The best two reporters on the hoax, by far, have been Professor KC Johnson and Joe Neff.
12"17 I agree with you completely -DUMC Records are at variance with DPD oral and written statements. As Nifong and DPD have lied all along, why believe them on this small point over a low level employee - who did not even do the SANE exam. The Doctor did it. Terrible things have been written about this nurse. Rape is a crime of hate and control - Raping old ladies, falling down drunks, and fat women is not a crime of lust or passion.
KC - BTW, I never read where Nurse Tara was interviewed by the defense - when, where and by whom? Dr Manley, who in fact did the exam, was interviewed. Duke Hospital records prevale over Linwood and Gottlieb. Duke had and has no dog in this fight.
Tracy Levicy is very guilty in this.
Crystal's bipolar delusions would have carried very little weight were it not for the comments of a very inexperienced and agenda driven SANE nurse that started the whole ball rolling
I have been a board certified emergency physician practicing over 31 years and have seen more than 150,000 emergency patients, including a substantial number of "alleged" sexual assault victims, including many real victims, but also not an insignificant number of sexual “situations” that don’t make a lot of sense.
We always say "alleged" because "rape" is a diagnosis made in the courtroom not in the exam room.
It appears that Ms. Levicy may have misrepresented herself and overstated any findings with her inappropriate comments. The state nursing board should investigate. Duke University Medical Center could be liable for her actions.
We have 19 board certified emergency physicians in our current group, including many female physicians, with an average of over 16 years of practice. I really doubt this would have gone any further if Crystal were examined at our facility.
The Duke 3 were extremely unlucky in that this particular sexual assault exam was done at a typical medical center where everybody is inexperienced and in “training.” Where was the senior attending physician in all of this?
My understanding is there was a physician at DUMC who examined the alleged victim. Diagnosis, doctor?
The SANE-in-training:
She was a licensed registered nurse, before she could be a SANE in training. the NC Board of Nursing is where professional licensing issues would be dealt with. Did she act outside her scope of practice? You can check with the Board. Also, you may write to the Board if you want them to investigate someone about something.
Registered Nurses do not make diagnoses:
Nurse: No pulse, no respirations, pupils fixed, cold to the touch.
Doctor: Dead
I would not nit pick the nurse's comment that rape is about power. When I was a student nurse they taught us that rape was about violence. Power or violence, violence or power? I can tell you rape is more than a vigorous hand shake.
Paging Dr Manly, Dr Lucky Lubiano, Dr Houston Baker, Dr Pepper
NC Board of Nursing
http://www.ncbon.com/
er 31 yrs,
What data did you use to determine, to your satisfaction, "Tracy Levicy is very guilty in this?"
John in Carolina
Carolyn says:
Levicy lied.
And in lying, she set up Duke University Hospital for the most staggering lawsuit in its history. It was bad enough the Gang of 88 and Brodhead stabbed the players in the back - Levicy was one of the first to unsheath her knife the moment she twisted the tale of a drunken, mentally deranged prostitute to suit Levicy's own feminist purposes.
After this, the only hospital that should hire Levicy will be the kind that examines your household pets.
So, regarding #6 -- Nifong did/did not talk to Mangum at the beginning of the Hoax:
When did he say he hadn't talked to her until December? Was that in court? Is it possible he perjured himself? Could the defense attorney Nifong talked to in April be a witness in that perjury trial, as proof that Nifong lied in court?
Oh, the happy thought of that, however far-fetched....
Crystal was examined by Dr Manly, she collected the specime and made all the physical observations, Nurse Tara assisted her. Dr Many was a fourth year residenct in Emergency medicine and graduated to months later to private prace, Nurse Tara was an Rn taking the SANE certification course - 40 hours of instruction and 44 of clinical - this is not heart surgery, Wheres the beef?
JOE deserves the POLK AWARD and a pultizer...i hope his newspaper understands the marketing and consulting necessary to win this awards...the editors need to be prompted
i wonder if joes paper has ever won such an award
er31:
Can't agree with you more. I have also been in practice for more than 30 years, (ER and now Psychiatry). Nifong and Co. just took the info from a babbling, inexperienced nurse that should have remembered that you don't talk about what you may not be able to back with evidence.
As for the old canard about rape being a "power" thing, etc, that's just another feminist opinion based on zero evidence. Let's just keep in mind that most rapes are committed by virile, young males, very few by senescent gentlemen and most of the time the victims are young females.
KC, keep up the good work.
kiwitex
I agree with er 32 years. I am a gynecologist of 40 years. Levicy performed poorly and deserves the criticism. A thorough exam by an experienced physcian should have stopped this case in its tracks. Diffuse edema of the vaginal walls in the absence of edema or injury to the introitus just doesn't compute. The vagina contains folds or rugae that vary from woman to woman. Edema would cause flattening of the folds and thickening of the walls. I doubt this finding. Remember this is a woman who had two babies and more coitus than I have. The edema was a non specific finding if it was even present which I question. Why wasn't a smear done of the discharge by Dr. Manly. It would have shown sperm and yeast. This would have ended the confusion about the discharge reported on liestoppers yesterday. At any rate a SANE nurse with no experience looking over the shoulder of the ER physcian who conducted only a limited exam. (no blood testing for drugs or alcohol) shouldn't have opened her mouth about anything. I agree completely with "I doubt this would have gone any further if she had been examined in our facility" I feel this is a key point in this whole case. The findings of a properly conducted rape exam properly documented should have changed this case. Adding this information to the first police reports of the unreliability of the witness should have stopped the case. Oh, I forgot this was Durham!
404 days of durham being held hostage by nifong.
there is stuff not stacking up right about this medical information in part 5 of Neff's article. This says that it is Dr Manly that wrote down "diffuse oedema".
"Manly had seen discharge she assumed could be semen..." this is superficial, and it deserves more attention. It is surprising that the presence of semen was just assumed. Yeast infections are not unknown.
Manly is meant to be an experienced medic. There is some strange stuff about what is reported that seems wrong.
"(Levicy) would have been Nifong's chief witness in corroborating Mangum's claim that a rape had occurred."
not in your wildest dreams. This is overstatement.
per
I'm a RN and
1.) Levicy is NOT a low level worker.
2.) In any professional situation, the nurse has to report the medical facts. Speculating, assuming guilt or innocence etc is not part of the package. On our daily documentation of patient-just facts-other comments can and will get you sued and cause you to lose your license.
This is not all there is; it's merely part of what we know so far. Does anyone doubt that there are 20, 40, 60 more unrevealed items/facts/details about the case that would be equally as appalling?
Neff's series was outstanding. So nice to see that real journalism still exists in some places.
Contrast him with the NYT, who gave us no revelations other than Gottleibs after the fact notes. And the Times was only being used by Gottleib and Nifong when they treated these phony notes as as if they were something other than an alarming fraud.
The New York Times' coverage was already a clear disgrace, but when contrasted to the work of a true professional like Neff, it looks even worse.
To the physician posting at 1:42:00 am, thank you for your post. I too am a physician but not with you expertise of being an emergency room physician.
I have been asking in the blogosphere who is the supervisor. As residents and trainees Manly and Levicy are supposed to be learning. Going along with that fact is that they should be supervised by someone with more expertise than them. Without that how does the education get imparted. Without that you have experience but not necessarily education. As far as I know we never know who the supervisors are. Whenever I supervise someone under me in providing medical care and sign off on it it is as if I had done the exam myself. The work may even be billed in my name.
It is not Manly's or Levicy's fault if they had inadequate supervision. It is DUMC's fault if inadequate supervision and hence inadequate care was provided.
That being said, if what is being alleged here is correct, Ms Levicy did more than participate in what may have been an inadequate exam. She documented that she did parts of the exam that she did not. She put herself out as an expert when she was a trainee with little experience or expertise, qualifications or credentials to do so. This nurse in SANE training was at most a fact witness that should not have been offering any opinions. She, the prosecutor and Duke University allowed her to be called an expert when she apparently was not.
Without Levicy's role in this, the hoax may never have occurred. Levicy is responsible for putting herself out as an expert when she was not. If the above is correct. Someone should be held responsible for the damage that was done.
No need to agitate? Right now, Nifong is the DA, and among other things he has the power to ask for the death penalty. But of course, what is the rush?
I think the role of Livicy is important in this case. Here is one explanation of what happened.
The lacrosse players hired two strippers for their party. They show up with one too high on drugs and pills to perform. The players, most of whom are bored and probably never really wanted to hire them in the first place are pissed off about wasting the $800. There is some arguing about paying the money and Crystal locks herself in the bathroom. She comes out and the students encourage the strippers to leave. By this time Seligman and Finnerty, embarassed and disgusted with the situation have long since left.
The players decide that the people who arrange the performances might be armed so they are better off paying the strippers and sending them out as soon as possible.
After they leave and the security guard discovers CGM passed out in a car in a parking lot, she is sent on her way to detox. Someone asks if she has been raped. Knowing that she is headed to detox (she's been there before), answers yes and instead gets sent to Duke medical center for a rape exam.
At this point, the street smart second stripper and the equally street smart policeman on scene recognize the obvious which is that Chrystal's lie "is a crock". They can see that there is obviously something bizarre about her behavior.
The nurse in training Livicy whose education has been in feminist ideology rather than forensic medicine, decides that since rape is a crime of power and control ignores the evidence that an experienced rape nurse would have immediately identified as indicating a false accusation, and embellishes Chrystal's lie.
The campus ideologues get hold of the information and blow the story up into a vicious gang rape by privileged white males of a single mother struggling to take care of her children and put herself through school at the same time. Emboldened by their sense of self-righteousness they stage noisy demonstrations outside the buchanan house and confront the lacrosse players on campus.
The identity studies faculty seize the event as validation of their theories of pervasive institutional racism and endemic white male sexual violence. They make statements condemning the students and make demands on the school to do something immediately to show that they are not part enablers of the racial and sexual violence.
They put together an ad condemning the students that is signed by 88 professors and endorsed by 15 departments. The university sets up a Campus Cultural Initiative to deal with larger implications of the case and puts members of the group of 88 in charge of the various committees to make recommendations about reforming the campus culture.
The national media descends on the campus to pass on whatever sensational details people have invented. The networks and the major newspapers bring on feature a seemingly endless parade of pundits eagerly joining the chorus of condemnation of the lacrosse players.
The local NAACP, the students at NCCU and local activists from the Durham black community are happily joined by Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and the New Black Panther Party in demanding the players be put in jail for eternity.
The DA seeing the opportunity for political gain in all this takes charge of the investigation and issues more than fifty public statements condemning the players, confirming the occurrence of a horrible crime and ensuring that justice will be meted out to the guilty players.
This story is so filled with the insanity of political correctness run amok that if written as a novel it would be criticized as a contrived piece of right wing propaganda. Unfortunately, it seems awfully close to a description of what actually happened. It would all be very funny if it weren't for the real life horror that befell three decent college students and their families.
There is a line from the movie "A Thousand Clowns" that goes something like "the most you can hope for in life is a really good apology". With the exception of Ms. Hale's moving and honest reflection on how she let her own preconceptions lead to her unfair prejudgment of the case, there have been no sincere apologies. And I don't forsee any forthcoming any time in the near future.
It was not the fault of the senior attending physician being available or not. Though you have a valid point.
The physician who actually administered the rape kit did her job well. She gave nothing but the facts.
It was the SANE nurse-in-training who ran her mouth when it should have been closed. The grand total of words from her to the officer should have been "here is the report."
And yes, this is enough to get her fired. Her position is one of exacting standards. Every job has a line that must not be crossed. She jumped head first over that line. In her heart, she may have felt justified. But in reality she was one of the first enablers of a terrible injustice.
Levicy was a nurse IN TRAINING. Since when is it appropriate for anyone in training to be giving a statement of any kind about an incident? She should not have been asked any questions nor should she have responded to any that were asked. The appropriate response for her should have been "speak to my supervisor." She was completely unprofessional in her conduct in this case.
I simply don't understand KC's attack of Levicy. She has done absolutely nothing wrong and she is just some low level worker. Yet, without any evidence of any impropriety on her part, KC is essentially calling for her to be fired and he is trashing her name in public.
Isn't this exactly the same type of behavior that KC called out the Group of 88 for? Maybe KC can call himself the Group of 1.
KC's reporting on this case has been nothing short of brilliant. But, it doesn't excuse his unfounded attack on this young woman. Shame on him.
dk
Apr 19, 2007 12:17:00 AM
Levicy's conduct actually bordered on criminal behavior. Look at the notes, and look at her statements. They do not jibe. She was trying to enable the prosecution with after-the-fact statements that did not have a basis in the exam, but were made in order to bolster a non-existent case.
This was not a weak case; this was a case that did not have any basis at all. Talk to an experienced SANE nurse, and she will tell you that Mangum's behavior in the ER that night was NOT the behavior of a rape victim, but rather someone putting on a show.
Believe me, Tara Levicy IS a villain in this case. She did not have to credentials to present herself as an "expert" witness, and she was trying to change the story in the light of the fact that there clearly was no rape.
In other words, Levicy was willing to compromise her employer and the ethics of her profession in order to help a rogue prosecutor railroad three innocent men for rape. This is serious, very, very serious.
If anything, K.C. has been very gentle with Levicy. Believe me, K.C. Johnson cannot get Levicy fired, but Levicy seems to have been trying to accomplish that on her own.
The inappropriate opining of SANE Levicy is crucial to understanding not only how this fiasco snowballed out of control, but also to the culture in the DA's office and law enforcement in general. Feminists trained in women's studies departments across the U.S. now have regular access to law enforcement personnel, prosecutors and judges in order to "train" them in the feminist dogma that "women never lie about rape" and therefore accused men must be prosecuted even if, e.g., the accuser recants and admits that no rape occurred.
The culture that exists in women's studies departments, and which is seen permeating throughout the landscape of the G88, is central to understanding this obscene travesty of justice and should be a central issue when we reach the stage of holding people and institutions accountable. Like Nifong, Levicy is a product of the system - a very dysfunctional system in desperate need of radical change, if not outright elimination.
Without Levicy's findings there is no case. NO CASE. Levicy should be mortally ashamed of herself. She is another example of the "experimenter effect""----the overwhelming tendency of the researcher to bias data in the direction of that researcher's intensely held beliefs. Levicy has the mindset of a women's studies professor---agenda driven with many strongly held prejudices. Remember--these are the types that talk about male power and that EVERY SEX ACT between a man and woman is RAPE!Levicy's quoted statement about "power" sounds exactly like a radical handbook. For the sake of Duke Hospital's reputation and the criminal justice system(in protecting those innocent accused as well as effectively prosecuting those guilty of rape) she should be terminated immediately!I used to think Duke had a competitive advantage in brains and good judgment. After Brodhead, Moneta, Burness, Alleva, and the Group of 88, I think Duke has lost its mind as well as its moral compass!
I would add, this, which I am quite sure was a "new" revelation from Neff:
(21) Nifong already knew the Mangum family, including Crystal, because he previously prosecuted the murderer of Cystal's uncle. The investigation dragged on for years, so Nifong had time to get to know them pretty well.
Joe Neff richly deserves a Pulitzer prize, for his hard-nosed, dogged reporting, that managed to completely turn a story 180 degrees around, under extreme politically adverse conditions.
I would even give secondary kudos to his boss, Melanie Sills, for being flexible enough to abandon her knee-jerk, sob-sister liberalism, once faced with the facts, and to let Joe Neff tell the truth to the world, even though it showed her paper's earlier coverage to be hideously wrong-headed.
So Nifong was right about Mangum not being sure if they used condoms or not.
Interesting.
In our praise of Neff, let us not forget the proper condemnation of the rest of the N&O's reporting including Writers Samiha Khanna and Anne Blythe as well as Editors Melanie Sill and John Dresher and including Columnist Ruth Sheehan.
Second only to the Herald Sun, and perhaps more important because of its wider circulation, the N&O's early one-sided and biased reporting threw fuel on the fire and gave Mike Nifong his first hint that the media would line up in his corner.
It's amazing that so much more continues to come out on this case. Thanks for the summary on Neff's findings. It saves me a lot of time getting my daily fix on this case.
Fellow hooligans -
This morning's discussion has been thoughtful, civil, informed, on topic, persuasive, even grammatical.
What a difference it makes when the topic isn't race.
In the spirit of asking for "just the facts," is it valid to point out that there is no mention of how the interchange between the nurse and the policeman went?
What if the policeman asked, "Are these findings consistent with rape?"
Anonymous 1:28 said...
...KC - BTW, I never read where Nurse Tara was interviewed by the defense - when, where and by whom? Dr Manley, who in fact did the exam, was interviewed. Duke Hospital records prevale over Linwood and Gottlieb. Duke had and has no dog in this fight.
::
BTW, a nurse at the Duke Medical Center is a member of the G88.
No dog you say?
::
GP
Do you understand that only a MINORITY of rapes result in ANY INJURY to the woman? In other words, the majority of rape victims suffer NO injury.
Your idea that the SANE nurse finding vaginal redness was a mistake is ridiculous or that if it had been diagnosed as part of a yeast infection that would have ended the case is equally ridiculous.
Where the nurse may have gone wrong is not documenting the yelling and acting out of Crystal which is NOT typical of rape victims and should have been a red flag on her mental illness.
It is NOT TRUE that lack of vaginal injury means no rape took place.
The wrong that occured here was in Mike Nifong grossly exxaggerating the 'injury' to her especially after he found out that she had lied about her recent sexual activiites.
On the stand the nurse would have been asked if the 'injury' could have come from consensual sex and she would have said YES.
She is not the villan here and the people who are saying her exam should have stopped the case right there do not know what they are talking about.
9:27 That is incorrect - The 88 are Professors at Duke University -not duke University Medical Center. You can't make this stuff up.
Nifong's response when he read the motion from the defense about DNA evidence from 4 unidentified males being found on Mangum, which had not previously been disclosed as required by law:
Nifong said he didn't know about the withheld results. "I just, in terms of the discovery issues, frankly, you know, I got the [motion] and I was like, 'whoa.' So I immediately faxed a copy to Dr. Meehan and said, 'Read this, and I'll call you in the morning and get your opinions about this.' And we discussed it, and I said, 'This is a major issue for the defense. They're entitled to hear about it, and I think it needs to be addressed right away.' "
Right after that Nifong proceeded to the men's room to change his shorts.
It had to be about then that Nifong knew for sure he was in for a major beating. How could he even think a dunce like Wilson was going to pull a rabbit out of the hat with his interview of Mangum on 12/21 after the testimony of Meehan on 12/15?
Desperate men do desperate things. And at that point, Nifong was nothing but desperate.
Neff did a fantastic job writing five articles about a case so well publicized that I didn't think there was anything left to report. I really don't see how Nifong can survive his June hearing. I don't worry about it. I am concerned that others who enabled the hoax will not be held accountable including the SANE nurse, DPD, Wilson (!). I hope that authorities will focus on them as well. Neff can be very proud of his work in this case. He must just like living in Raleigh. Surely, he has opportunities at other papers/mags. Congrats to Neff!
To 9:44
Do you understand that Precious said she was brutally raped by at least 3 men and maybe other things for 30 min., kicked and beaten. That is why swelling should not be the only physical symptom.
Wow. Send this list to the prosecuting attorneys in the disciplinary proceedings. They will want to interview, and perhaps subpoena, some of the witnesses to those items.
Brand
Liestoppers has a petition to the NYT for an apology - Thanks Liestoppers. There are no complaints or discipline action against Nurse Tara at the NC BOARD.
BTW, a nurse at the Duke Medical Center is a member of the G88.
No dog you say?
::
GP Apr 19, 2007 9:27:00 AM
Are you telling us that all of the nurses or some of the nurses at DUMC signed on to the listening statement? That DUMC is a hot bed of political correctness which clouds nursing staff's judgment and ability to act professionally?
GP, can you provide a clarifying statement?
Can someone with actual legal training explain to me why this isn't subornation of perjury, conspiracy to suborn perjury, and witness tampering?
To Anon posted at Apr 19, 2007 9:44:00 AM
The issue is not whether or not there is injury in rape cases. Frankly, most of the time there is NONE. However, in stranger rape there usually IS as all the studies and my personal experience show. The fact that Dr. Manly states that now she thinks it was "a yeast infection" which is incredibly easy to diagnose tells you more about that night than anything.
Tara Levicy was a SANE nurse, she was waiting for her cert in the mail. BUT she had only been a nurse for a year at that time which translates into "I have no clue what I am doing yet."
Tara Levicy put herself forward to the police as an expert. She was not an expert in anything with a whopping one year in the industry. No where does she say, Hey guys I just assisted you really need to talk to Dr. Manly about HER findings. Instead she nods her head wisely and says (paraphrased) Yes there are signs and symptoms consistant with rape, oh yes looks like blunt force trauma...
This is NOT within our scope of practice and most certainly is NOT within the scope of practice for a SANE. We are dispassionate, compassionate, impartial collectors of forensic evidence. It is NOT my place to say "yes she was raped" that is for a court to decide. It is my place to report ONLY the facts which Ms. Levicy failed repeatedly to do in this case as is evidenced by not only her comments but her own charting.
Another fact is this, if Ms. Levicy indeed told the police the truth ie oh I didn't do the exam, Dr. Manly did and that was all, then why had the DPD never ever spoken to Dr. Manly but yet kept talking to Ms. Levicy. That dog don't hunt.
When all this first came out I was frankly shocked at the comments attributed to her and disbelieving of their accuracy. That disbelief has now been reconciled and I indeed believe the notes taken on her comments.
Shame on her for interjecting her personal world view onto a case.
Kethra
OT, but Shadee Malaklou has written her final piece in the Chronicle: here.
Read it and weep...
To 9:44
You seriously don't get it. A SANE nurse should make NO speculative comments to the cops,either for or against the notion that a crime occurred.
Keep in mind that no results of a SANE exam can rule out that rape occurred. Therefore, any examiner could say that "The findings are not inconsistent with rape" regardless of what the facts are. That is why they should never offer an opinion to the cops in the hallway, especially if they go beyond the exact written findings recorded in the report. Great mischeif can result.
Somebody earlier wondered what could possibly be Nifong's motivation. Before the DNA tests came back, I think that he was sure that he would find the semen of one or more of the LAX players on Magnum. Then the players would be claiming that it was consensual (and that she was a hooker) while she was claiming rape. So he could dismiss the charges claiming insufficient evidence, and politically this would fly because they "got off on a technicality." Or if he got lucky, he could convince them to plead out. Magnum's IDs might turn out to be worthless, but it wouldn't matter because the DNA doesn't lie, so they would just indict any player who left semen on her.
I think that if Nifong ever considered the possibility that they was no sex at all, he thought it was a pretty low probability. Rape is a crime which can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, but never beyond all doubt. As long as sex happened there is plenty of ambiguity there to drive a witch hunt through.
I do not think that Nifong was misled by the nurse but, rather, that Nifong realized he had a natural ally to support going forward in what he had already identified as his political "perfect storm" case.
Re: Malaklou's op ed
We've gone from a CERTAINTY of rape, to SOMETHING happened, to it COULD happen. Insanity rules.
The nurse is a bit player in all this, ALL she said was the vaginal swelling was consistent with blunt force trauma, consistent with a sexual assault, which is TRUE. It's also consistent with consensual sex, a yeast infection or using a dildo on yourself.
Do you really think that Mike Nifong, who ignored exculpatory DNA evidence, ignored alibi evidence, ignored 12 different mutally exclusive stories would have been stopped or even slowed down if this nurse had refused to make any comment?
To the other poster, yes, I believe there is a STRONG case against Wilson for witness tampering.
They will get off on harassing the cab driver because technically, the warrant was active and we can't know their intent with taking him to trial unless someone rolls over and admits it was to intimidate him into changing his story and/or to discredit him by getting a robbery conviction.
The intimidation of the two strip club employees will be harder to excuse away.
11:01 A voice of sanity and reason - Thank you.
Great mischef is occurring
You have two #9's in your list. So Neff actually had 21 scoops! :D
Is T. Levicy an african american ?
One lesson learned...
Let's be careful not to Nifong anyone. Pursue information and let logic and time prevail. Until all the evidence, documents, statements, etc. are available, we can really only refer to what someone said or did - not to what they didn't say or didn't do. It's all to easy to make hasty conclusions based on limited information.
A case in point involving info that actually is public: While KC's summary of Neff's reports are helpful, he didn't include that Levicy told Wilson in a second conversation that another possible reason why semen was not found in the victim was that "It didn't happen." (part five)
Check out journal Blacks in Higher Education. Click on "recent news"
They comment on the Duke lacrosse case.
To the other poster, yes, I believe there is a STRONG case against Wilson for witness tampering.
They will get off on harassing the cab driver because technically, the warrant was active and we can't know their intent with taking him to trial unless someone rolls over and admits it was to intimidate him into changing his story and/or to discredit him by getting a robbery conviction.
The intimidation of the two strip club employees will be harder to excuse away.
Apr 19, 2007 11:01:00 AM
I believe that Linwood Wilson is the "soft underbelly" of the criminal investigation. There is a paper trail with him, and it is clear that he drew up false affidavits. While the warrant on Elmostafa was active, it is clear that:
1. The case presented was fraudulent, as we saw in his trial;
2. The police and Wilson tried to use it as leverage to get him to change his testimony;
3. Ashley Cannon lied when she said that Nifong was not interested in this case.
We are looking at felonies, felonies, felonies. One reason I continue to blog and write even though this case is over is that I do not want the authorities for a second to be able to rest. Crimes were committed during this "investigation" and they need to be exposed, and the criminals punished.
The fact that Nifong is still the DA makes my head swim! I sure hope that he is overly scrutinized at the metal detector. This guy knows that he is going to lose everything, and his going postal is a distinct possibility. Plus, God only knows the kind of deals that he may be willing to cut with dudes who have nothing to lose. Scary stuff. He may decide that if he's going down, others are too. Take away his pass card and office keys, change the locks, and post his picture at the security desk.
One has to wonder if Nifong isn't busy right this very minute shredding er "losing" files from previous cases where he broke the law to get a conviction, threatening people to keep quiet or he will take them down too, who knows what.
Yes, Linwood Wilson is next in line. What a doofus. He isn't a cop so he has no protection. Unfortunately I think Gottleib and Himan will skate on this, they can blame it all Wilson and Nifong. Gottleib might, I stress might get a reprimand about composing reports months after the fact that don't match contemporaneous notes.
Really though, this stuff was so blatant...writing that her description fit Finnerty when the other cops notes directly contradicted them...its amazing.
Joe Neff certainly did a wonderful job with the five part series.
His work has helped mitigate the horrendous and sensational coverage by the N & O when this case began.
Ultimately, the N & O provided the best and most comprehensive coverage of any local paper.....and perhaps any national paper as well.
Now.....if we could just do something about their slanted editorial pages.
Debrah
Neff emailed a bloger who questioned the reporting of the medical exam facts, after the third article. Neff's reply - "Kerta was wrong/"
I'm unclear on the concept here.
Why would a yeast infection be an explanation of anything (after the fact) when it is clear that semen was found in CGM's tender parts?
What is the purpose of the proposed yeast infection in the narative? What does it explain?
"During the exam of Mangum, Manly had seen discharge she assumed could be semen. After learning the rape kit turned up none, Manly came up with another possibility:"
But the rape kit did turn up semen. Just not the semen of the accused.
I do not get this point at all.
Post a Comment