This a common-sense decision that serves the best interests of both sides. For the three players and their families, the move continues the process of putting behind them the events of the last 15 months; for Duke, the settlement prevents litigation that could have posed serious public relations problems, even if the University had eventually prevailed in court.
Below are the statements of both sides:
STATEMENT OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES AND THE PRESIDENT OF DUKE UNIVERSITY:
This has been an extraordinary year for Duke students David Evans, Collin Finnerty and Reade Seligmann, who were accused of serious crimes they did not commit. In April, after a thorough review, the North Carolina Attorney General declared that they were innocent of all charges and that the charges never should have been brought. We welcomed their exoneration and deeply regret the difficult year they and their families have had to endure. They conducted themselves with great dignity during their long ordeal.
These young men and their families have been the subject of intense scrutiny that has taken a heavy toll. The Board of Trustees and the President have also determined that it is in the best interests of the Duke community to eliminate the possibility of future litigation and move forward. For these reasons, and after considerable deliberation, the trustees have agreed to a settlement with each student. Beyond this statement, the resolution is a private matter among the students, their families and Duke.
This past year has been hard for many people who care about Duke -– for students, faculty, staff, alumni, families and friends –- and for the three students and their families most of all. We resolve to bring the Duke family together again, and to work to protect others from similar injustices in the criminal justice system in the future.
STATEMENT OF DAVID EVANS, COLLIN FINNERTY AND READE SELIGMANN:
Today, we are pleased to announce that we have reached an agreement with Duke University to resolve any differences between us.
Years ago, each of us made a decision to attend Duke because it is one of the greatest universities in the nation. We chose to represent the University on the athletic field and in the classroom as student athletes. We were honored to be admitted and proud to wear the Duke uniform and to compete against the best lacrosse teams in the nation. Duke is a very special place. It balances top-notch academics and athletics, and it offers unparalleled opportunities to its students. We were drawn to Duke because of its sense of community.
The events of the last year tore the Duke community apart, and forcibly separated us from the University we love. It is impossible to fully describe what we, our families and team endured. As we said from day one, we are innocent. But it took three hundred and ninety-four days, and the intervention of the North Carolina Attorney General, before our innocence was formally declared. We were the victims of a rogue prosecutor concerned only with winning an election, and others determined to railroad three Duke lacrosse players and to diminish the reputation of Duke University. Throughout our ordeal, however, we never forgot the lessons we learned, both on and off the field, about character, integrity, and honor. Those lessons, and the love and support of our wonderful families, friends, lawyers and supporters across the country helped us to prevail against those who refused to seek the truth and to protect all citizens from injustice.
We hope that today’s resolution will begin to bring the Duke family back together again, and we look forward to working with the University to develop and implement initiatives that will prevent similar injustices and ensure that the lessons of the last year are never forgotten.
305 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 305 of 305Steven Horwitz said...
Some of these people appear to have PhDs themselves in anger studies. Just their targets are different.
Best. Comment on this blog. Ever.
Polanski/Hussein and those just to their left are just as angry as those they call the partisans of "Angry Studies."
And when Polanski/Hussein represent the public face of American academia, we will be concerned. Do wake us when people like them head up humanities departments at major universities and have hundreds of Polanski/Husseiniacs as tenured professors.
Polanski/Hussein and those just to their left are just as angry as those they call the partisans of "Angry Studies." And their anger is almost as misdirected.
Yeah. I bet you said the same about those who were angry about some german activists in the 1940's. Every decent human is angry about the far-left anti-white/anti-male/anti/christian/anti-jew activists who controls academia (and frequently do things like gang88 did). Gang88 is the shining example of that cancer. It should be removed. Would you trust that these people are honest election workers?
Damn. It is expensive to maintain the academically sub-standard activists.
While I am happy for the three players and their families I am saddened that this seems to put an end to any possibility that the G88 will be held accountable in any way. One of the things I have found refreshing is KC's continually pressing forward to call the cards of political correctness. I don't think I have ever seen any person do as much to bring attention to the PC machine as KC has done here. For that I am deeply grateful. Thank you KC. I fear that with the settlement this affair will melt into the background. Perhaps that is how it should be. A part of me yearns to see the G88 held accountable in some way or another. I suppose the effort continues in other avenues. And so it goes.
Boys and the Boy Crisis
6:21
DUMC is separate from Duke U. It is a hospital, and has its own administration. If Brodhead was running it I would be running the opposite direction. As it is, the hospital does some good things. Sure, bad things happen there, like transplanting a heart of the wrong blood type into the chest of an indigent 3rd world child, and setting a patient on fire during surgery, but hey, accidents happen, eh? I still trust the world class doctors there more than the crackpots on campus.
It is unfortunate that Duke community cannot analyse the historic settlement in the context of race, gender, and class.
This would be an ideal topic for Lubiano's next class or her "forthcoming" book (to be published in 2077)
Kilgore & KC..
KC has done justice a great service. Like Brad Bannon pressing on with DNA discovery, KC pressed on to help find justice.
I mention you Kilgore, because (KC, correct me if I am wrong please) I beleive Professor Johnson started this blog in response to the G88, I beleive he felt their actions so maligned academics, he had to set the record straight. The blog of course blossomed into the standard for the coverage of this whole case.
So, I am in agreement with you on the G88, they seem to survived despite themselves and I can only hope Duke U. sees them for the liability they are are takes steps to reign them in.
BDay
Duke '65, 5:49
AT&T would be sued because that's where the money is. Doesn't mean the that the case would be a winner, but lawyers know what they are doing.
I had a friend who started at Duke in Sept. '62 - he described Durham as a sleepy little southern town in those days, and Duke as a fairly low key place. Hope your time here in Durham was a good one. It has changed a lot since then...
My WAG is $12 million each, plus some promises about policy changes which would be made at Duke at a later time (so they weren't obviously connected to the settlement).
An important point to remember is that there may be a lot of other dirty stuff which Duke is responsible for which (a) the families knew about but haven't discussed publicly, and/or (b) that Duke knew about and didn't dare allow come out during Discovery. We all know that there's enough to have produced an on-going public relations nightmare for Duke in the event of lawsuits; but what we don't know is likely a lot worse than what we do know.
The fact that a settlement was announced so quickly suggests that Duke paid a premium to instantly get it out of the way, and that Duke has been in negotiations to do so for a long time. After all, the families had no particular incentive to settle quickly, unless they were given an incentive by Duke.
The rumored Pressler settlement is just further evidence that this wasn't accomplished for peanuts. Nobody settles big high-profile lawsuits these days for a measely million or two dollars, not when the potential is so much higher.
I would add one point to what Cedarford (3:54) mentioned as Duke problems and that is the inital actions by Dean Sue and Broadhead to coax the lacrosse team not to talk to counsel and to immediately cooperate with the D.A. and police. I believe that had the Duke team been advised by legal counsel it may have short circuited this fiasco.
I also agree with Kilgore (7:16) that this Gang of 88 will get off without so much as a wrist slap. These people committed slander and defamation of character in the name of their own personal biases. They also violated the faculty code of conduct, which they should have been terminated for.
But I am sure that these families just want to get back to some kind of normal life and put this behind them.
rhamilton:
And when Polanski/Hussein represent the public face of American academia, we will be concerned.
While I can't speak for Polanski, I can guarantee that I would end the funding for Angry Studies and dismantle race quotas/privileges. I would also fire all those who commit grade retaliation or bring their own political bias and agendas into classroom. If you are concerned with that, it just tells that you are another far-left activist with an agenda. Remember, first they came for X, then Y.. Gang88 will eventually hunt down moderate leftists as well.
minority enrollment for Duke class of 2011: 44%
over subscribed for admission
yield in excess of expectations
say what you want, but the kids just keep coming.
minority enrollment for Duke class of 2011: 44%
over subscribed for admission
yield in excess of expectations
Yeah, they are probably hoping to be falsely accused of rape by Mangum so they can get a big payout from Duke too.
The following are facts:
Duke is self-insured through a captive insurance company based in the Bahamas. This structure is similar to that of many corporations. Payments made now will be reimbursed through "premiums" paid by current and future parents, by gifts from alumni and others, and by earnings from the endowment.
Duke University, the Duke Medical Center, and the DUHS are parts of one corporation. There are of course many administrative subdivisions within the overall structure. All are responsible to the DU Board of Trustees, no matter how many sub-boards are in between.
Unless Duke is willing to settle with every member of the LAX team, discovery will nor be avoided. After all, it will not be difficult for a Duke Lacrosse player to find a lawyer who will take the case on a contingency basis - just to get discovery started. As the recent hearing demonstrated, before the three were indicted, all members of the LAX team were slimed.
Anon 5:33 - I am still disgusted with the rampant racism and ugly sentiments toward all African-Americans expressed here. Yes, a handful of them did not handle themselves well in this particular affair. But the same applies for Caucasian Americans - Brodhead being a shining example.
More than a handful. Blacks elected Michael Nifong by an 85 to 15 plurality LONG AFTER the hoax was obvious to any rational thinker.
Pervasive black racism is a fact of life.
2 months after the accused were declared innocent, the NC State NAACP still had 22 points up on their Website listing why whitey was guilty. (Another institution that started well, then became cancerous).
And few if any blacks are denouncing their Whore Sistah and demanding she pay time in jail for her many lies and false accusations.
Collective behavior like NC blacks did in the Lacrosse case (with few exceptions), reinforces many whites, Asians, and hispanics that blacks in general (with a few exceptions) are a few rungs lower on the ladder.
This is exceptionally disappointing, though understandable. All three players had sufficient cover from the liability of Durham and the State to pay their legal bills such taht they should have been able to pursue a vengeance suit against Duke.
Given what was said and done by various parts of Duke, I would not have settled for anything less than 9 digits.
The idea that they wouldn't have gotten more than $1M is simply ludicrous. It looks like they each spent at least $1M in legal expenses and suffered extreme damage to reputations, interruption of education, violation of numerous civil rights, career sabotage (as an investment banker). Actual damages could easily be $5M, not to mention rather severe punitive damages, which get tied to the size of the institution (with a large 10 figure endowment, millions and tens of millions are immaterial). Not to mention the huge access to tell their stories in the media who are desperate to absolve their own guilt in this fiasco. I really hope that they got at least middle 8 figures and serious conduct remedies to settle this quickly.
"Here's the deal Brodhead"..
"Settle NOW, for $xx million , before the NC Atty General decision and the NC Bar Ethics Trial ---- or settle after those decisions for 10x $xx million.."
I'd bet granny's rum bearing cow that Duke screwed up that offer.....big time.
Please remove the 8:19//Racist and sexist.
German activists in the 1940s? I don't think so. Not only off topic, perhaps, inaccurate. V. odd.
Some of you boys didn't learn how to play well in the sandbox. Maybe, your mothers were feminists and that's your excuse? Why mar this blog with angry racist and sexist comments? Anger Studies, indeed! You lose credibility.
Hussein writes:
I would also fire all those who commit grade retaliation or bring their own political bias and agendas into classroom. If you are concerned with that, it just tells that you are another far-left activist with an agenda.
Note the slurring from "grade retaliation," which presumably includes grading those faculty disagree with harder and bringing "their own political bias and agendas into the classroom" which NEED NOT lead to bias in grading. The latter is no sin, the former is one of the worst faculty can commit.
I'm a libertarian and have no hesitation in saying that students have a general sense of what my politics are when they are in my classroom. It bothers me NOT A WHIT that my liberal and conservative colleagues do the same. I think it's important for professors to "profess" as long as it is relevant to the course.
The key is not grading your students on the basis of their agreement with your own views. I know plenty of faculty who "profess" in the classroom but are capable of recognizing and rewarding a well-written paper that takes up an opposite view.
The problems with the G88 (it would seem) are that they cannot keep *irrelevant* politics out of the classroom and, more important, that they allow it to influence their ability to be fair with students.
Any chance the remaining 88 will quit in protest? Hoping to keep their jobs - I would quess.
Well, I mostly agree with Steven but I would prefer not to involve politics in class. Professor's (or students') political affiliations are totally irrelevant in class.
Today the conservatives who are "outed" (e.g. quote Bible or founding fathers) are fired immediately.
Last year we heard about that lunatic geography teacher having "Bush trials" in class. He was paid (by taxpayers) to teach geography to 4rd (or 5th?) graders. Instead, he spent all lessons ranting against Bush. Once he was caught (student taped him), the student was transferred to another school and the teacher was defending himself for "free speech". This is now going on everywhere.
There is no free speech right to indoctrinate students. People like Gang88 are cancerous and they must be removed.
Any reactions from the group of 88. It's areal stick in their eye>
I still don't see where everyone seems to think that Duke alone is responsible to make the boys whole. Did the school make some mistakes? absolutely! But Duke did not indict those boys. Nifong and Durham are much more culpable IMO. I think they could have a go at some media sources, too, although places like the NYT (who richly deserve it) are probably protected.
The Duke "statement:
"... after considerable deliberation, the trustees have agreed to a settlement with each student."
Considerable deliberation, my ass. When Cooper came out with his "innocent" statement 2 months ago, Duke knew it was toast and it didn't take any considerable deliberation to figure it out. But they decided to see what would happen with Nifong's Bar Hearing last week just to make sure they weren't panicking too soon.
On Saturday when Williamson echoed Cooper re: innocence and added to it by calling the process a "fiasco", Duke knew thay had to rethink the amount they'd already figured they'd have to cough up and move it north.
The BofT and Brodhead couldn't pull out the Duke checkbook fast enough today.
Then Brodhead left the room to go change his shorts.
Where was this geography teacher? Cite your sources unless this is another urban legend. That being said, when my son's teacher rails against Bush, I want to give him a raise. At least my child understands the war in Iraq is a fiasco.
Where was this geography teacher? Cite your sources unless this is another urban legend.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/03/03/politics/main1364883.shtml
"Another student, Derek Belloni, tells CBS News Station KCNC-TV reporter Rick Sallinger that Bennish is out of line."
"He's supposed to be teaching geography," says Belloni, "and yet he's pushing a liberal agenda trying to convert kids to his side of the spectrum."
hat being said, when my son's teacher rails against Bush,
I pray that people like you will never get to "teach" anybody.
Perhaps someone will write a gossipy book on the G88. Embarrass them by picking apart personal lives. Analyze the published works of weaker members with a focus on ridicule - and how AA worked in enfranchising these cretins. There may be enough garbage for a series. Like Harry Potter.
The war in Iraq is a spectacular success. Best expenditure of 3,500 soldiers in the history of warfare. If you doubt that, it's only because you know too little of history.
Btw, I have no children of military age, but I have a nephew who's a machinegunner with the 82nd Airborne in Ramadi. He's already been wounded once; after being patched up in the U.S. he returned to his unit and is there right now. And I served in an overseas combat unit myself (during peacetime) when I was a soldier. So, please, at least spare me the "chickenhawk" bullshit. Anyway, better a chickenhawk than just a chicken.
And the rest of the team is due a major settlement for the harrassment they received. All these kids suffered so much. I am sick and tired of my child being referred to by Duke and the media as a lacrosse player. He is much more than that. Now that the three families most impacted are taken care of, it's time for the rest of us to put the pressure on. Duke treated all of the members of this team terribly and everyone deserves an apology, payment of their law fees (app. $20,000) and damages.
9:12- are you a LAX parent? What were your legal and other cost associated with this fiasco, really? Was there grade retaliation or prejudice in the classroom? Did your son have to move out of his dorm/ housing? I think you should be compensated, too.
jamil hussein said at 7:46 PM...
[quoting my earlier post] "And when Polanski/Hussein represent the public face of American academia, we will be concerned."
[And then responding:] While I can't speak for Polanski, I can guarantee that I would end the funding for Angry Studies and dismantle race quotas/privileges. I would also fire all those who commit grade retaliation or bring their own political bias and agendas into classroom. If you are concerned with that, it just tells that you are another far-left activist with an agenda....
Actually, Jamil, I was responding to Steven Horwitz who I think was using you and Polanski as avatars for what he would foist on our imaginations as the only alternative to Gang of 88 control of academia. I used your names in the same way -- as avatars -- to point out that in the haystack of American university professors and deans, people like you and Polanski (the counterpoises of the 88) are as hard to find as needles.
Great day today! After Dec 15 hearing, local intel (call it "rumors") had it that the trio's attys made an offer to Duke to settle for $10M - total. Duke said "stuff it". Attys said $20M, no less if we have to come back later. Today is "later", and the number is likely bigger than $20M, and guessing that the settlement agreement was finished in April, right after the exoneration. Antother "rumor" that other law firms from around the country (NE) threatened to become involved, two big law firms (Duke grads, imagine that) banded together could not wait to do a pro-bono if Duke would not ante up big $. Case of the century, high profile with lots of sub-lawsuits to attach to earn fees later. Duke could not allow its reputation to continue to be dragged through the mud. They have too much damage control with the 88 faculty to focus on, and if a microscope was put on the 88 through an invasive lawsuit, it would be even more devastating to Duke than the lacrosse case has already been. Duke got smart, fast. So goes the local rumors.
9:32
I like that rumor. Wonder if it can be fleshed out in any real sense, or is it just so much loose talk...
Could the remaining 44 lacrosse players constitute a "class" for purposes of a class action lawsuit against Duke?
Post of the Day!
Anonymous said...
What does an academic disaster sound like?
People are shouting and whispering about what these Professors did to their own students.
To the lawyers who made themselves heard and the lacrosse team receiving collective paychecks, thank you for not waiting and for cashing in on the foolishness of these 88 Professors.
I had suggested a $10 million per settlement above because if I were looking at a 500k check less this and that, I'd rather play a game of chance and watch the fallout of discovery then settle for what Duke is capable of calling pocket change. If my life had been ruined by the actions and inactions of the Duke faculty and staff, I would want to take as many as possible with me. The 3 young men are better men then I and I am honestly sure this was not their motivation, but I'm sure the lawyers sure saw that. Another point to consider is that if it did go to court, I might still get something and possibly more with a floor show to boot. In todays economy, a million is nothing.
9:09 pm: Bravo! Well said and thank YOU for your service, too!
Thanks 9:45.
Btw, I sent $5,000 to my nephew in Iraq. I told him to spread $2,500 around to those who deserve it, and that he could keep the other $2,500 or give part or all of that away as well.
Even though I have lived in the US for most of my life, I still cannot understand the hatred some of you have for the Prez. If you ask many of us, we are so grateful to many American Presidents and certainly the military for helping us that lived under dictators. Both my parents were born in communist countries. Dad in Cuba and Mom in China. Both are gone, but acheived the American dream. My mom was a professor and my dad an accountant. My sister and I worked hard and both became professors like my mom. Only in America would that have happened. Have opinions, but stop the hatred.
7:05
A lot of wildly unrealistic people here.
DL '00
10:37
As you know, one of the things about the US is that you don't have to like elected--or in Bush's case, selected--officials. It's not hatred to disagree with someone. That sounds like the communists stifling dissent. I'm wonderling if you told people the same thing when/if they criticized Clinton?
More generally, one of many interesting elements of this blog is that some contributorsare extremely conservative, even reactionary. It has never been clear to me that the LAX 3 were poster children for the right.
6:57
Give me a break.
How much was the financial settlement? $1MM on the low end. $10MM on the high end .... each. Depends on how many piles of manure the Administration knew of and didn't want revealed. Depends on how broad the agreement was - Duke, all administrators, faculty, employees, medical personnel, agents, etc.
Also (IMO) the real thing to watch for is the nugget at the end of the Player's statement.
"... we look forward to working with the University to develop and implement initiatives that will prevent similar injustices and ensure that the lessons of the last year are never forgotten."
10:56
It could be that it was legal fees, which if estimates are accurate, was around $3M collectively.
That strikes me as about right. I don't think these guys would be asking for a windfall from Duke.
DL '00
10:37, the president is not America. One does not have to agree with the president or like the president to love one's country. Even conservatives would agree with this statement during the Clinton years.
Do you think they will really work with the university? I wonder if Chauncy Naurty will also be on any committee to develop and implement initiatives...? Ditto Kim, the spousal hire.
10:58
I think 10:37's point is that given imperfect knowledge and the only certainly being that these guys were (wrongly) accused and indicted, Broadhead probably HAD to take some of the actions he did. He was in a tough position. If he and the university had acted more neutrally and the allegations turned out to be true, he would have been accused of covering for/turning a blind eye to the allegations and not protecting the Duke campus from dangerous students. I think it is the venom that 10:37 objects to. Some people here are just not very reasonable.
DL '00
10:58
Never mind. I guess 10:37 is talking about Bush. Why are we discussing Bush here? Now I'm confused. I thought he was referring to Broadhead (against whom there IS a lot of venom directed).
DL '00
DL '00
Duh!
DL'00 @10:56 and Anon #11:00
I'm guessing the settlement is toward the lower end. Maybe $1.5MM to $2.5MM each to cover legal fees and grief and suffering. Probably covers Duke as an institution and all parties individually.
I strongly suspect that the "Agreement" contains some type of consent on Duke's part to fix their broken system and some type of timetable.
No inside knowledge ... but that's what the language of the Player's statement suggests.
But even with language, Duke really doesn't have to do anything. Sadly.
wegl wegl
I think that's probably about right.
Probably some proactive, "fix the system" promise.
DL '00
Polanski:
I seriously doubt that.
DL '00
Not liking the President is not the same as hating him and accusing him of being a terrorist.I'm retired, but I've seen hate first hand at my college. When I had a bumper sticker supporting ROTC on campus, I was told by campus police to remove it or my windshield would be shattered. I'd love to see how some of you would survive in Cuba. I mean it is so bad that people will travel in anything that floats for 90 miles to reach Florida. My Dad left Cuba with the clothes on his back. He left a house, a car, and an apartment building. All he had was his education. He made it because he worked hard and was able to keep the fruits of his labor. Go to south Florida-- see what first generation Cubans have accomplished--their homes and businesses, with no welfare or handouts. I know many of you hate America. Burn the flag, and admire dictators. It's okay, we love America, worts and all--unlike immigrants from certain other countries.
We need more Americans like your dad 11:22.
Anon @11:08
Given the caliber of the lawyers I'd suspect that the restriction on "Non-disclosure" is eliminated if certain specific systemic changes are not made within a certain timetable. Without that I'd move my guesstimate of the payout amounts up.
Are the terms of the agreement with the lax families subject to discovery if another suit is filed?
11:22
I have always maintained, based on conversations with people who fled Communism, that people here who glorify Cuba or the USSR do not know the truth of what goes on in those hell holes.
Thank you for your family's contribution to making this a great country.
Possibly. It would be an issue of contribution. It is possible that Nifong could argue that any judgment against him is partially satisfied by the Duke settlement. He might be entitled to the amount (which may only be disclosed pursuant to perhaps a protective order).
DL '00
A HUGE disappointment that these 3 guys fell at the last hurdle. They closed ranks behind the good 'ol institution and were bought off with alumni money. Dishonorable. Their supporters backed them through thick and thin. Now, at the last minute, they cut a sordid deal with Duke and let the institution (especially Brodhead) off the hook. A real pity. Now I feel really let down by them. They fought this on principle, but now they take the money and run. They deserve to be compensated (no doubt), but there IS a principle at stake and they should have stood by it. Shame.
11:38
I don't think these guys share your perspective about Duke's culpability. Which should tell everyone here who wants to burn Duke and Broadhead something.
DL '00
Btw KC, great blog. Many thanks.
DL '00
DL '00
Are you really a Duke grad? Do you know the name of the current President of Duke?
Richard H. Brodhead.
DL '00
11:47 What else you got for me?
I'm not sure why it matters. Brodhead really doesn't have that much to do with the law school. He's pretty immaterial to us. I think most grad schools are like that.
DL '00
So 11:47 what is your issue with me?
DL '00
Always easy for a certain percentage of the population to hate a president during a war, no matter what the party.
Guess the libs wanna keep blogging here, but can't refer to the nifong case anymore. So it's back to the war.
Well, I ask myself, "Self, what would be my minimum to settle with Duke in this case."
My list would be:
1) Fully make me whole for all legal expenses incurred in defending myself in the criminal trial...Duke is deep pockets and the last thing I want to be is waiting on the Sovereign to be paying up (we have folks in Texas who have been waiting years for their private appropriation bills to pay awarded settlements);
2) Full recovery of all direct costs to me, including a year of lost wages;
3) Full payment to me of all monies paid by me for my Duke degree;
4) A reasonable amount to cover my expenses for a couple of years in the future while the rest of the civil messes sort themselves out;
5) The Board of Trustees to make all efforts in helping me find a professional position of the highest caliber.
The total for that, I would guess, is somewhere in the range of $2.5 to $3 million.
11:22 Inre:
"I have always maintained, based on conversations with people who fled Communism, that people here who glorify Cuba or the USSR do not know the truth of what goes on in those hell holes."
It's much worse. Not only do they know the truth, they actively promote the -ism. They knowingly buy-in regardless of the truth. Nifong is no different he knew exactly what he is doing.
That is what makes these "thinkers" so dangerous, especially the ones in which we entrust our children's education. They know exactly what they are doing, obfuscate meaning as a defense, and are very, very mean when they get power.
That's why they need to be fired, de-funded, and outed as frauds based on their teachings, publications (or lack thereof). Those that abet them, like Brodhead need to be fired as well.
It ain't diversity, it's dangerous.
sorry, not a penny less than 5 mill. after you pay all my legal fees.
12:01
May I analyze?
1) Agree.
2) No one has lost wages except for D. Evans, prob. $100K.
3) Can't. You got what you paid for for years 1-2 or 3. Last year I'm sure was refunded.
4) Dicey. Maybe a little goodwill money.
5) Fair enough.
I think IMHO you are in the $1M to $1.5M range in actuality.
But your analysis is fairly reasonable I think.
DL '00
12:03
In a perfect world who would pay the $5 M (in descending order)?
Just curious.
DL '00
DL' 00 I hope that you are opposing council in the future. Such an easy mark! Or else, as is more likely, you're just shilling for the 88.
hey:
I don't get it. I haven't said anything in favor of the 88. I don't like what they did.
And it's "counsel."
DL '00
(This is Anon 12:02)
I dunno, whether I "got what I paid for" for or not, basically I'd still want a refund.
As far as lost wages, two students have a "lost year" in which they were unable to earn an income or to attend school. I'd bill that as my expected first year salary that I had to forgo for a year while I dealt with the damn case.
Now, maybe they decided to go for Duke's balls on this and demand a lot...not having lived their experience, I can't say what emotions I might be feeling.
But, basically, as long as Duke made me whole and helped me get my life going again, I think I would settle.
hey:
Can you be more specific with what you have a problem? That way I can respond appropriately.
DL '00
12:06
Ok, call me out for being dumb.
Who would I get it from, I do not know.
Sort of looking at it as not a money person.
I would just as soon(maybe incorrectly) take it to court on principal.
Assuming they made the first offer, I would counter with 5 mill. or see you in court.
12:11
Fair enough. I mean I understand what you're saying. My counter would be, look as a freshman and sophomore (and junior) you paid tuition and went to classes and got credit. That doesn't change because you feel you were betrayed in your third or fourth year. But fair enough if you want a full refeund, it's still $140K max.
Even if you assume these guys were going to top ibanking jobs right out of Duke they are making maybe $150K.
That's my only point, even assuming your claimed damages, those aren't big money categories.
DL '00
12:13
I apologize, had no intent of calling you out as dumb.
I was curious for your personal feeling as for who you would seek the money from in terms of who is most to blame? It seems a lot of folks here think it is OK to get all the money from Duke U. or the NYT or whomever and ignore the primary people at fault (accuser/Nifong). I was just wondering who you thought should pay most of the $5M.
DL '00
Anonymous at 10:37 said...
Even though I have lived in the US for most of my life, I still cannot understand the hatred some of you have for the Prez. If you ask many of us, we are so grateful to many American Presidents and certainly the military for helping us that lived under dictators. Both my parents were born in communist countries. Dad in Cuba and Mom in China. Both are gone, but acheived the American dream. My mom was a professor and my dad an accountant. My sister and I worked hard and both became professors like my mom. Only in America would that have happened. Have opinions, but stop the hatred.
What you have to understand is that the last bastions of Marxism outside of Havana and Pyongyang are in the faculty lounges of Western universities. In other words, the enemies of humanity from whom your parents fled are right here in America, and they are what caused this blog to be born.
Btw, congratulations on your success in America. My spouse is also an immigrant.
Jun 18, 2007 10:37:00 PM
DL '00 said...
May I analyze?
1) Agree.
2) No one has lost wages except for D. Evans, prob. $100K.
3) Can't. You got what you paid for for years 1-2 or 3. Last year I'm sure was refunded.
4) Dicey. Maybe a little goodwill money.
5) Fair enough.
I think IMHO you are in the $1M to $1.5M range in actuality.
But your analysis is fairly reasonable I think.
May I be of co-counsel?
(6) you have here the perfect plaintiffs -- certified innocent by the highest LE authority in NC.
(7) Duke told them not to hire lawyers or even talk to their parents.
(8) Duke employees promoted a climate of EXTRAORDINARY hostility to a group of students when those students were VEHEMENTLY (and ... whadayaknow TRUTHFULLY) proclaiming thieir innocence.
(9) A Duke employee apparently asked CGM "Were you raped?" when that is apparently INCORRECT procedure -- correct: "Did something happen? Do you want to tell me about it?"
(10) I could go on and on about Duke's culpable acts, but the BIG DOLLARS are found in the question: "How much will Duke pay not to have to see Richard Brodhead, Karla Holloway, Grant Farred, and Wahneema Lubiano on the witness stand under oath?"
The answer is "millions and millions". The likely amount paid by Duke was about $30 million.
Oh yes, and not to forget: "How much is it going to cost Duke in attorneys fees to fight this? Fighting against the motion to turn over all faculty e'mails ALONE might be $1 million."
At the end of the trial, the a question would likely come from the juryroom, "Just how much is 'every last penny Duke has?'". You think not? I know a soon-to-be-former-DA who might agree with me. Let's ask him.
R.R. Hamilton
R.R.
I respectfully disagree.
DL '00
R.R.
6: Maybe. Some might be put off by their allegedly boorish behavior. Personally I don't see it.
7: I think that's factually incorrect. And immaterial.
8: Some professors at Duke did that. Duke as an instituion did not.
9: Doesn't really matter.
10: Really don't care.
I think the whole, Duke doesn't want discovery, is a little blown out of proportion. You'd think the answer to who shot JFK was in Duke's e-mail system or something.
And, yes, I think not. Duke didn't cause this "fiasco." And a jury would be smart enough to figure that out.
DL '00
DL '00
Many juries cannot be accused of "being smart enough." I remember the hot coffee at McD's jury that gave the woman a multimillion$ award. It took a judge to lower the award. She still got 6 figures. A burglar won a big settlement because he feel from a roof that was unsafe. Not reversed. Not all juries have all the oars in the water. I saw a poll that shows citizens have done a 180 and now support the Dukies. They will see deep pockets and open up the Duke safe.
1:22
I don't see it happening. Most juries get it right (as shocking as that may be). It's not a hard concept to understand who was really wrong here (and it wasn't Duke).
DL '00
DL '00 at 1:02 said...
And, yes, I think not. Duke didn't cause this "fiasco." And a jury would be smart enough to figure that out.
By the time I was finished, the jury would hate Duke more than Nifong -- who was really just a victim of the metanarrative that Duke has peddled for years, and a victim of the negligent nurse's report from DUMC. Duke is JUST as guilty in this as Nifong, and it wouldn't be hard to show that Duke is supporting "88 Nifongs" and that it doesn't intend to change.
Do you remember the McDonald's "hot coffee" case? Do you remember what REALLY caused the high punitive damages? It wasn't that McD had sold SUPER-hot coffee (hot enough to cause massive tissue damage); it was that McD said at trial that it wasn't going to change the temperature of its coffee. Sound a bit like Duke? "We're not going to change the 88 -- In fact, we're not even gonna fire the prof who flunked the lacrosse player!"
Juries are forgiving when defendants are contrite, but where is the contrition at Duke? Nowhere. Thus: $30 million. Bet me that my figure is closer than your ~$2 million.
R.R. Hamilton
P.S. after the trial, McDonald's quietly reduced the temperature of its coffee.
Anonymous said at 1:22 AM ...
Many juries cannot be accused of "being smart enough." I remember the hot coffee at McD's jury that gave the woman a multimillion$ award. It took a judge to lower the award. She still got 6 figures.
Ironic that I just responded to a 1:02 posting and mentioned this same case. In the McD coffee case, the jury did right. Stop. Think. The woman had suffered about $60,000 in ACTUAL MEDICAL DAMAGES as a result of McD's SUPER-HOT coffee. McD said that it didn't care. McD said that it wasn't even going to change the temp of its coffee. The jury said, "Ok, how about $2 million in punitive damages -- Does that help to convince you to change your mind?" True, the award was reduced on appeal to about $650K -- about 10-TIMES the woman's ACTUAL damages. And McD CHANGED the temperature of its coffee. The system WORKED as it SHOULD in that case.
If the woman bought coffee, which is in a cardboard cup and puts it between her legs--I mean what a bafoon. I saw pictures of the injury. Incredible. I had drunk coffee at McD for years, I like it hot, but because of this fool, their coffee is not that hot. Of couse there are people in line now trying to get in their pockets because they serve fattening food. Why get a job?
I just finished poring over the posts here. I was one of the primary persons jousting with you intellectually on Saturday. I will accept your congratulations, though not expressed, for my having predicted that Duke would not be able to get to the settlement table fast enough. That said, I would say that you are fairly spot on as to the philosophy of what the settlements are, if not for the amounts. I agree...no windfall. Where we depart on this is what constitutes a windfall. I would say that a conservative amount for current and future legal fees and other expenses associated directly with this fiasco would be $1.5-2M per player. Add to that about a half million in lost wages, pain/suffering, and family disruption per player. Treble that to acknowledge the "punitive" nature of settling with silence assured and the promise not to sue the G88 or any other Duke associate down the road. You come ot about $6-8M per player. Amazingly, about the $20M total predicted by some others here who have been fairly spot on in the past. I wish you nothing but the best in your career, but re-state my previous assertion that the bright lights of the real world and you idealistic youthfulness are keeping you blind to the realities of how civil torts really work (not just the "book" stuff taught in your classes a few years ago). I have had somebody settle with me for a $50,000 check cash to avoid one day of depositions. The realistic settlement after depositions would have been about $15,000, but they would have easily spent another $75,000 on discovery if we had forced the issue. They settled, and both of us were happy beyond our wildest dreams. We both benefited from not feeding "the monster" that is the trial court.
oops...above post was directed to DL '00
Having lived in a communist country--both before and after 1989--I can say that some things changed for the worse after 1989. And, I can say that when Eastern Europeans looked for a democratic model, it wasn't necessarily the United States.
People who blog here and who conflate "liberal," ie, centrist, with "left," may not understand that communism was bad, but that their proposed solutions were not necessarily good.
I wonder why so many of you appear to be so frightened of American academics. I liked those who taught me. Their politics weren't so important to me--sometimes, I didn't know what they were--as their minds.
What I learned in university was much of what has enabled me to have a good life.
Some of you seem to love to hate. I just wonder what has got so many of your knickers in such a twist.
10:37
Just because you can make outlandish accusations doesn't mean you should. I don't think academics and other Marxists are what caused this blog to be born. Silly me. I thought it was the LAX case...and last I checked, Nyfong was neither an academic nor a Marxist.
Yes, American academics are the cause of all of the ills in the world. That's really easy. Always blame someone else. Is this another element of Anger Studies?
R.R.
Any time you have to use "metanarrative" to make your point, I think it's fair to say you are reaching.
"minority enrollment for Duke class of 2011: 44%
over subscribed for admission
yield in excess of expectations"
Looks like they're going after Spellman's niche.
The over-subscribed/high yield indicates to me that they panicked and dropped their standards even further than they had to.
Makes me think they might have panicked yesterday, and worte an even bigger check than they had to.
Kudos to the buys' lawyers for striking while the spotlight was on Durham and the iron was hot.
Duke '00
I agree that Nifong caused more of the harm than Duke. But Duke and its employees did cause some, both by action and inaction, leading to two thoughts to consider.
(1)In American law as actually practiced, who you sue is usually determined less by the distribution of fault than by the distribution of money to pay a judgement.
(2) Even if Brodhead, Levicy, the Gang of 88, other professors who segregated lacrosse players in class, Dean Sue, Duke Campus Security for not removing the NBP, Duke maintenance for not removing the Wanted poseters, whoever leaked student emails ... what else have I forgotten?... only contributed 1% of the damage -
How much do you think it's worth to Brodhead *not* to see Evans Sr. testifying against Duke with the same eloquence he used aginst Nifong.
You know the 44 percent might include lots of Asians. Last time I checked, their scores in math & science were way above those of the white boys beloved of some of the bloggers...
9:15
Who the freakin' hell are you?
Creep.
10:27
Not Asian and not an angry white guy. Creep?!! What is this? Third grade? You're so cute.
9:15
Of course, it includes a lot of Asians; it is the ONLY way Duke could even come close to keeping their minority academic standards looking at all respectable.
My white kid stacked up fine against them, thanks. I am sure the 800 scored on the Math SAT was at least comparable to their top scores. Add excelling in a rigorous dual engineering major and this parent is quite satisfied. Asian kids do well because of good parenting and I admire them for it.
BTW, what on earth would a degree in Angry Studies be good for?
Teaching the next generation of haters, that's what.
anon 9:50 said "Teaching the next generation of haters, that's what."
Amen.
Boys and the Boy Crisis
9:07,
Some Asian kids do well because of good parenting. So, too, do kids of a variety of backgrounds, including black & hispanic. Surely you don't think the black & hispanic kids at the Ivies are less than bright? Wake up call!!!
What you should really be impressed by are the kids who do well w/o good parenting. Of any racial/ethnic background.
Post a Comment