Bannon opens: clear that none of the three accused students gave racial comments--and clear that in the end, likely that only one racial comment made in the entire affair--despite what Witt testimony would have.
Bannon--brings up heretofore unrevealed April 5 letter from Cheshire demanding immediate test results under NTO, as required by law.
[Nifong, of course, never complied with the law regarding NTO; as to the day of his recusal, he never supplied these results.]
April 6: Bob Ekstrand makes similar request of Mike Nifong, on behalf of people he was representing. None of these people were ultimately indicted; Nifong never supplied them with NTO test results.
Neither he nor any other defense attorney ever received results of NTO tests other than Meehan report.
April 7: Cheshire sends letter to Nifng offering to bring Dave Evans in for any questioning.
April 10: Defense attorneys decided to hold DNA press conference, as way of beating back effects of Nifong improper press responses.
Nifong responds to Cheshire NTO letter: says he will furnish reports "immediately" from Dr. Meehan, aware of his obligations under the NTO statute.
Cheshire follows up with additional letter to Nifong: April 28, one week after second Nifong-Meehan letter. Meehan says that he was ready to offer report, Nifong said he didn't have to at that time--even though, under NTO law, Nifong was required to turn over results immediately. Cheshire: wants results "as soon as you are provided with them, as are provided by law."
Never receive anything from Nifong about oral reports he had received from Meehan.
April 28 Cheshire letter: offer to give Nifong evidence that Evans had no mustache; offer evidence of Evans passing lie detector test, administered by top-flight former FBI agent from Charlotte.
[The Bannon testimony makes clear that Nifong, by consistently declining offers to meet with Evans and his attorneys, violated the Bar's ethical obligations against prosecutors not pursuing evidence that they think will hurt their case.]
May 12 report: concedes that he didn't understand much of DNA Security/Meehan report.
Understanding of all defense attorneys was that DNA matches were found three and three only--Evans, Coleman, Murchison.
Didn't understand Meehan's "non-probative" statement--especially when coupled with following sentence, which specifically laid out DNA found on three evidence items.
Notes pattern: tended to get discovery information whenever there was a court date; rarely if ever at any other time.
Along with discovery on May 18, Cheshire receives letter from Nifong saying that the State is unaware of any additional material that could be exculpatory to the defendant. Nifong had the Meehan material for more than a month.
Form that Nifong turned over had section allowing for checking-off if anything withheld, and if the DA has requested a protective order. Nifong did not have the item checked off.
Form also had Brian Meehan listed as a likely expert witness--says that included in discovery file are all reports of expert witnesses.
Defense discovery motions made clear they wanted all material regarding meetings of Nifong.
June 15: Everything in the discovery file produced by Nifong: nothing in the file to suggest that Mangum ever claimed the use of condoms. Absolutely the opposite: everything from Mangum suggested no condom use. Defense asked for supplementary discovery on the issue because of Nifong's speculation about the issue in public.
June 19 letter from Cheshire: "report of the meeting of April 10" of Nifong-Meehan meeting.
At that point (June)--only knew that Nifong had attended one meeting (4-10) with Meehan.
June 22 hearing before Stephens: Nifong asserts that on 4-10, he had received a report from Meehan. Everything else non-discoverable, since discussed how would be using the Meehan report at trial.
Nifong: "that's pretty much correct" when Cheshire says 6-22 that it sounds as if Nifong is saying there was nothing discoverable at the meeting.
Nifong had been supplied with criminal record check from Crystal Mangum on 4-11. Yet defense, before July 18, had never been supplied this information by Nifong, even though had requested this information. Bannon discovers it in lawyers' investigation of police files, as authorized by Judge Titus.
Defense, as a result, files joint motion to compel discovery.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
29 comments:
Playing the race card here really is despicable. Bannon was smart to deal with the issue. We don't convict people because of their associates.
Comment from poster on LS:
If you can be considered guilty because of what someone else said, out of your presence (when you were miles away at the time), then you are truly being considered guilty by (non)association.
The guys are considered guilty because they are part of a group, not because of anything they may have individually done.
It was never Evans, Finnerty, and Seligmann who were charged; it was three rich white male preppie athletes. They were never individuals.
Have to head into the office now. Looking forward to the cross examination.
I am so glad for Brad to dispel this information that many, such as Cash Michaels ~just yesterday during a Court TV interview, have happily blathered about.
Nofing got something right -- his profanity-laced comment to Himan.
Cheshire has him dead-to-rights with all of the letters, motions, etc. I'll bet Nofing would really love to flip all of these people off...
Is he still making his son attend?
someone please tell me what Nifong could possibly say on the stand or present in his case that will help him.
Its almost like someone is setting him up. No one can be as dumb as he is being shown to be.
I don't think it's a matter of being dumb ... he's going to argue that he acted appropriately to an allegation of a serious crime.
He won't admit it's because he like the exposure, his 80 interviews on TV, the boost to his campaign to be elected (in a very Black community), etc.
He should be disbarred, he should be ordered to pay restitution for the $1M each spent by the 3 Lacrosse players, and he should do time or community service.
Some Police should lose their jobs and pensions, for their blatent disregard of proper procedure, including that putz who loved to bust Duke students and was put in charge of harrassing the team to try to convict three innocent men.
If he deliberately tried to convict three defendants whom he knew to be innocent, he should be made to serve the time they would have served.
So Nifong and Meehan see nothing wrong with lying by omission. I hope the bar does and that it is not acceptable from a legal standpoint.
So, the 'interim report' was a lie and an attempt by Meehan to save his own reputation and that of Mike Nifong as I suspected yesterday.
But, it won't work because Nifong repeatedly told the defense and the cour that there was no other discovery or exculpatory information that had not been given.
I guess the bar felt it was okay to let Meehan lie his a** off yesterday since his lies can't save Nifong. I am still disguested by Brian Meehan's behavior, hopefully he will get fired and end up broke over this.
Nifong I think will take a two pronged approach 1) the interim report was released and he always planned to release the final report and he did in fact release all the data 2) he didn't think the other male DNA on Mangum was exculpatory.
No one will believe this but that's going to be his defense.
Can someone tell me or give a link to what that racist Cash Michael said yesterday?
I knew he was a fraud all along and he would keep on with the 'something happened' mantra. I have to say, its these kinds of people that cause prejudice.
KC, yesterday or the day before, Meehan slipped and said "my company" (meaning DSI) and then corrected himself saying "the company I work for."
It was my understanding last year that he was part owner of DSI. Has that changed? When? Thx.
The windmills of the gods grind incredibly slow, but they grind incredibly fine.
As horrible as this saga has been, it makes me proud that the corruption of the system is being exposed.
Freedman has a hell of a job digging himself out of this! Go Brad!!
"I guess the bar felt it was okay to let Meehan lie his a** off yesterday"
On the stand. Under oath. In ways that may soon be contradicted by documentary evidence.... They're letting the dope set himself up for a perjury charge.
Big, bad Mikey is being taken down by youthful Brad Bannon. Talk about David v Goliath! (of course Goliath only in Mikey's fevered mind)
In the best of all worlds, that would be correct, but I doubt it. However, I wonder, everyone on here has been so sure of DUMC being sued, but isn't the negligence and malfeasance of Meehan's company A LOT more serious than that of Levicy?
Meehan knew he was doing something that had never been done before, he knew he wasn't following the standard protocols of reporting ALL test results, period. He knew what he was writing about the burdens/privacy stuff in the transparent attempt to stall on all the results was a lie, he knew the defense didn't have the exculpatory DNA evidence and yesterday, he lied about it all.
To me, Levicy is a dumb nurse trainee who saw a hysterical woman and assumed she was a rape victim and not a crazy person 'acting out'.
Meehn on the other hand purposefully violated the rules and guidelines of his industry and now he lies for Nifong.
One, is a subjective opinion, Levicy was wrong and stupid, but believed she had a rape victim on her hands.
The other, is pure greed and lying.
Maybe Meehan's company is going to get named in a civil suit, they've surely got deep pockets and loads of insurance as well.
YOu shouldn't even make something like that up it isn't funny.
I saw Collin Finnerty and his parents in the audience. If I were Collin's mom (I have a 11 year old son) I would have such great difficulty restraining myself from driving a stake through Nifong's heart RIGHT NOW. Except I wouldn't want to get my hands dirty.
I reread KC's posts on the ethics charges last night - the original at http://durhamwonderland.blogspot.com/2006/12/analyzing-complaint.html
and the amended, which said:
Shortly after Nifong removed himself from the case, the Bar amended its ethics complaint against him. Focused on his decision to enter into an intentional agreement with Dr. Meehan to withhold exculpatory evidence, the Bar accused Nifong of not only massive ethics violations, but also of repeatedly lying to the court, breaking three state laws, and violating the Constitution.
I would say the prosecutors have proved their case already.
"To me, Levicy is a dumb nurse trainee who saw a hysterical woman and assumed she was a rape victim and not a crazy person 'acting out'."
I'm a bit curious about the nature of "evidence" we have as to what Levicy said when and to who.
Is there anyone here who has sufficiently detailed case knowledge to tell me: What items are things she wrote and signed? What items are things that honest people claim they heard her say?
And how much of it is stuff Nifong or the DPD claims she said?
If she's been villified all over the net for stuff Nifong made up that she never actually said, can she sue him for defamation?
Got this from LS: Crystal was the complainant regarding the child.
Still unclear what this means. Did the child do something or was there a third party involved? Why would this be in her record?
I think Levicy has some culpability here, she wouldn't have been offering Nifong a bone about the condoms as late as January 2007, as they say in for a penny in for a pound.
I believe its true that Levicy is the author of the statements about blunt force trauma and actions and findings consistent with rape. I think, given her lack of training and her more than likely orientation it is not surprising that when a hysterical, crying shaking woman shows up and is disoriented and rambling, with brusies on her legs, who 'appears' to feel pain when examed that Levicy would conclude she was a rape victim.
What I am NOT prepared to give Levicy a pass for is if she was the one who offered the suggestion that maybe when Mangun said her 'attackers' wore no condoms that what she 'really mean't was that she wasn't sure...OR how or if Levicy was going to explain away 'ejaculated in my mouth/thats why my breath smells bad' as really meaning 'I don't know'
For this, if true, and if not suggested by Nifong, then Levicy becomes an active part of the conspiracy to change the evidence and facts to fit Nifong's case and not an innocent nurse who made an honest mistake.
By January 2007 Levicy had to be aware of Mangum's psych history and history of substance abuse, for her to still try and throw Nifong a bone--if she did--is inexcusable.
I get the feeling that all along this was the major league all start team against a pretty bad high school squad.
These lawyers were simply far superior to Nifong and were way ahead of him at every step in preparation for trial. Now the motions these guys made and the actions and inactions of Nifong look at the more devious.
10:27
No doubt, if the judges had not been so prosecution friendly all along the debacle might have been stopped sooner. The first judge totally ignored everything the defense said, and it took SEVERAL letters and motions on the DNA evidence to get, finally in October an order that was so specific Nifong couldn't find a way out of evading it, he was allowed by the judges to get away w/hiding this evidence for almost SEVEN MONTHS!
I think though that after this is all over the second judge is going to sanction him if only for appearances sake.
"...in for a penny in for a pound."
That pretty much sums it up for the whole nasty filthy bunch.
Just as I thought would happen you have DPD, the lab, Nifong, everyone circling the wagons - because there is no excuse for ANY of them to do what they were doing, attempting to railroad three men they knew were innocent.
This case is about far more than Nifong. Its about a *system* run amok. It is Gestapo crap when police are running down and jailing your alibi witness. Nifong shmifong.
I just looked through a bunch of old KC postings:
"In her report, she described the accuser’s injuries as non-bleeding scratches on the heel and knee...Gottlieb claimed that a week later, Levicy told him that the accuser’s injuries included “blunt force trauma” that was consistent with rape."
So, "blunt force trauma" comes via Gottlieb. She may not have said it.
"In a later interview with defense attorneys, Levicy confirmed that she had, in fact, passed along to Himan this diagnosis—based, she said, on her subjective evaluation of the hysterical Mangum’s pain."
Oops. She confirms it.
"On January 10, Wilson and Himan interviewed the SANE nurse—her seventh contact with either the DPD or Nifong’s office since March 16, 2006. At this meeting, Levicy provided three startling new details, each of which propped up Nifong’s new theory of the crime, conformed to her stated view that she had never encountered a woman who lied about being raped, and had passed unmentioned in her March 14 report..."
Like I believe anything Wilson or Himan say.
"In a subsequent interview with defense attorneys, Levicy said that Wilson’s memorandum summarizing her comments “looks right.”"
Oops.
Ok, she's part of the lynch mob too.
To 10:20 a.m.:
I was an auxiliary police officer for several years, and I can confirm that in at least some cases the fact that someone was a complainant may show up in the record.
ralph phelan,
It'll all unravel, soon enough.
Good work on the review of the
"X-File."
Post a Comment