Asked about the dismissal of his client, former DA investigator Linwood Wilson, Wilson's attorney, Fred Battaglia, said "he didn't have enough information(!) to discuss the situation."
(Bill Thomas did: "Considering his conduct in the Duke lacrosse case, in my opinion he should leave. His interview [with Crystal Mangum] was very disturbing. It demonstrated they were not trying to seek the truth but wanted to conform their evidence against the defendants. Because of that, Linwood Wilson should be gone. As this case is investigated further, I would predict he will be the subject of future civil and criminal inquiry.")
From John Stevenson's article:
Superior Court Judge Orlando F. Hudson said a deputy sheriff attempted to serve the hearing notice at Nifong's November Drive home Monday evening, but Nifong's wife -- Cy Gurney -- would not accept it.
The deputy then posted the notice on Nifong's door, according to Hudson.
"That's proper service as far as I'm concerned," the judge added.
Cy Gurney must be stupid -- I mean, beyond the stupidity of marrying a criminal asshole.
Beyond her stupidity, and her ignorance of the law, it's plain immature for a professional like Gurney to say "You can't give me that piece of paper, I will pretend it just doesn't exist".
Meanwhile, of course, you know that Mikey was at home, hiding behind her skirts while sucking on his bottle of bourbon.
Gurney's reacion is appropriate considering that she was the driving force behind his reelection campaign and seems to do what passes for thinking in that marriage. In the same way that Nifong simply refused to consider evidence that did not support his world view, Gurney did the same with the notice. What a family!
The more I hear about Cy, the more I realize she may have played a large role in the hoax. At minimum, Jackie Brown made it clear Cy plays a large role in Mike's decisions, especially as part of his campaign.
The question is does Mike show up on Thursday? If he doesn't, does Hudson do a Paris Hilton call to court for Nifong? In cuffs? I hope the media would turn out for that as big as it did in LA.
If/when Nifong is in court in a civil suit filed by the lacrosse players, can his wife Cy Gurney be subpoenaed to testify against him? I think it's likely he told her things about the players' prosecution that could be used against him, such as telling her he knew they were innocent all along.
After reading the Pressler book (I am 3/4 of the way through) it is clear that Cy Gurney orchestrated the decision for Nifong to run for DA in the first place.
Nifong deserves to spend substantial time behind bars.
There would be a big fight on the spousal privilege, I suspect.
I'm not sure it is that unusual for someone to refuse to be served with papers. That is definitely not an only in Durham moment.
Is Cy an attorney? Otherwise I wouldn't expect her to know about "nail and mail" service and wouldn't blame her for refusing it.
But if she's a litigator in North Carolina, then there's no excuse for not knowing the basic service of process rules for your state.
No, she cannot be called to testify against her husband. No spouse can be forced to do that.
There would be no more just resolution to this whole fiasco than seeing Mike Nifong in handcuffs on the cover of Newsweek and the NY Times.
Yes... it is an "only in Durham" moment.
Most people who refuse to be served with papers, intended for others, do not expect to make headlines the next morning.
For Cy Gurney, the "social/victims rights (read... feminist rights) activist", who likely first recognized the political opportunities in pursuing a racially inflammatory case against the Duke students, to deny service of papers against her husband, is rich poetic justice.
Throughout his torment, Mike Nifong has blamed almost everyone else around him for his problems. It would not surprise me if the next person to be blamed, as Nifong faces jail time, would be his wife, Cy Gurney.
Mikey, "Your honor... she made me do it!" Just wait.
As I've said so many times, this is "Macbeth" in Durham (but at leat no one died).
"As I've said so many times, this is "Macbeth" in Durham (but at leat no one died)."
Only because the New Black Panthers didn't follow through with their threats.
I can't speak to serving with a hearing notice, but where I grew up you couldn't refuse a subpoena service. If a deputy or whoever came to serve the papers, if they spoke to you that qualified as service.
I know someone who got a subpoena, they opened the front door, realized what was going on and closed the door. Too late - they'd spoken to the server and had thus legally been served.
Nifong will not show on Thu, he will be removed. As far as the court goes Nifong did not challenge the removal process. Done deal.
He shows up and gets embrassed on TV again.
Either way, he loses.
I would not show up, and I definately would not spend money on more lawyers.
gotc 12:07 and 12:16
Mikey, the gift that keeps giving.
I have no problem with Battaglia's statement. He certainly doesn't have enough information yet to speak without risking making things worse for his client. Of course that day may never come ... but isn't a lawyer who *doesn't* want to try his case in the media a bit of a relief?
broadrot on the barbie
this series of posts is about an effort to publish tom sowells article on the anti american value duke faculty group 88 manifesto in the duke chronicle sent to parents
This week Duke University reached a “non-disclosed settlement” with the three lacrosse players who were savaged by the District Attorney in Durham, Mike Nifong. He wanted to hoodwink black voters into putting him back in office. That succeeded, but he has now been removed from office, and disbarred.
These three students were also slandered by the Duke administration and by 87 bigoted professors. (88 professors signed a newspaper ad that, in effect, found the students guilty before trial. One of the 88 admitted he was wrong, and apologized.) The apparently-fat settlement released the University and all its assorted minions from further liability to the students and their families.
Is Duke now off the hook? I hope not. I’m doing my part to keep them on the hook.
For those who’ve been out of the country, or under a rock, here’s a quick recap: A year ago, a stripper who’d been hired by members of the Duke lacrosse team claimed that she had been raped at a team party where she and a friend were hired to perform. DA Nifong then held the first of a series of press conferences, saying that there was definitely a rape and he expected to charge some students. He set up a line-up with only Duke players in it and charged three players with rape.
The President of Duke then cancelled the lacrosse season and fired the coach. A group of 88 professors jointly signed a full-page ad in the campus newspaper, the Chronicle, saying that what the students did was part of the climate of racism at Duke, and presuming that the students were guilty.
In time, the stripper’s story changed, her companion denied her version, and DNA evidence showed the stripper’d had sex with several men recently, but not any Duke players. In time, the NC Attorney General took over the case and did his own review. He dismissed the charges, apologized to the students, and started the investigation of Nifong which led to his dismissal and disbarment. From the President and 87 faculty members at Duke, however, there was no retraction, no apology.
Dr. Thomas Sowell is one of the great minds in understanding American society and politics. Anyone unfamiliar with his work and books should go here to see what he has to offer. [http://www.tsowell.com/] I suggest you begin with Sowell’s Basic Economics. His latest column is about Duke, “Unfinished Business,”
That is a scathing indictment of the University. You can find it here: [http://www.townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/] I decided that Sowell’s words should appear in front of the whole Duke community. So, I called the Chronicle, the campus newspaper.
I found out that none of three Duke students I talked with had ever heard of Dr. Sowell. They have black professors who fill their students’ heads with the sort of bigoted claptrap that appeared in the infamous newspaper ad. The students know lesser professors, but not the nation’s best.
I also learned was that it would cost almost a thousand dollars to reprint Dr. Sowell’s column full-page in the Duke newspaper. The last issue of the paper is not only circulated on campus, it is also mailed to the homes of all students. There, the students’ parents, who are paying upwards of $30,000 a year to put their children in the care of this faculty and administration, have a right to see what is happening to their children and their money.
So, I got in touch with my friends. As this is written, it looks like we’ll make the target, and Dr. Sowell’s column will appear in front of, and be read by, almost every member of the Duke community. If that happens, it may be that some people who deserve to be fired, will be fired. It may be that some who stay might learn what it means to seek the truth, rather than biased political advantage, and change their ways.
As Dr. Sowell notes, the correction of the bias in the Duke community is far more important than the millions which the students and their families have received from the coffers of a university that has lost its way. I write as well as I can, but I do not hold a candle to my colleague, Dr. Thomas Sowell. So here are his closing words. I’ll see to it these are read by the people at Duke.
“...be aware of how wide and how deep the moral dry rot goes.
“That such people are teaching students at an elite university is a chilling thought. That they promote a campus atmosphere where political correctness trumps the search for truth is painful.
“That such attitudes and such atmospheres are not peculiar to Duke University, but are common on elite college campuses from coast to coast is a time bomb with the potential to destroy individuals and ultimately undermine the whole society.”
- 30 -
About the Author: John Armor practiced in the US Supreme Court for 33 years. John_Armor@aya.yale.edu He lives in the 11th District of North Carolina.
I had a chat about exactly that with the very articulate lady from their business office. She has extended the non-profit, one-time rate for a full page. She agrees that this Sowell column ought to run.
She said that all discussion ads will be vetted by the newspapers’ legal counsel. I said, “You realize how much free publicity, all of it bad, the newspaper will get if it refuses this ad?” She laughed, and said, “I understand what you mean.”
If for no other reason, I think the Chronicle will run the Sowell column because of the embarrassment they will suffer if they don’t run it. Fair enough. The right decision for the wrong reason by the newspaper will suit me fine.
Long ago, I commented on the demeanor of a woman like Cy Gurney. Her behavior after all that has gone down is further proof that she was right in there digging along with Mikey.
I have no doubt that she is the same kind of out-of-touch loon as the sotti-lotti-councilwoman-Catotti.
Most revealing were the comments by Jackie Brown, Nifong's former campaign manager-turned-Nifong-exposer.
She said they met at a downtown hotel. Probably the dimestore-style Marriot. While Mikey sat wolfing down a sandwich, Cy did all the talking about his planned run for DA.
Her (big, bad Cy) full name is listed as "Cy Elkins Gurney". In Durham, there is a family with a long history in the car business. They are kind of redneck, but have some money. There used to be an "Elkins Chrysler"...or something....in a prime location downtown. In recent years, the business was sold and the land it was on went for millions. It was a prime location now that city leaders are spending so much on revitalization.
Gurney might be from that family. I'm sure old Mikey would try to cop a wife with some money, and judging from her decision to keep her last name, both thought of themselves as the "modern high-powered couple".
LOL!!! What a joke.
Suffice it to say, anyone who could marry someone like Mike Nifong and stick by him through his criminality .....while passing herself off as an "independent woman"......is on the same level of sleaze as he is.
I hope Nifong ends up behind bars. Then his Gurney can visit him in the slammer.
Nifong has pressed too far,
as it's pretty clear that Judge
Orlando Hudson's patience is
gone; he won't be played
for a fool like Judge Stephens,
who ought to be presiding over
a Sharia court.
The cue for Hudson likely came
from Judge Smith, who is an unsung
hero in all of this:
KC's June 7 (2007) post about Judge Smith
shows how precipitous it was -
the Hoax going to trial, or
Nifong going to trial.
Cy Gurney seems like a combination of Pharoah's wife and Ahab's wife.
OK, K.C., come clean!! No one can make up this kind of a story, so we know that you were able to create this entire web of fiction. Yes, all of us are living in The Truman Show. That is the ONLY possible explanation for this madness. K.C. actually is a screenwriter who made up this thing. (Watch out for lights falling to the floor!)
I mean, real people don't act like this, do they????
Mikey, 29 years as a lawyer.
I'll hid in my room and they can not serve me.
What a joke?
More from Dennis Prager:
Ahab's wife - Jezebel - could be a
better match than Pharoah's:
Naboth was set up (and was murdered)
as a result of her false testimony.
She set up the (false) accusation
(BTW, if you want another modern parallel
between that period of time and now:
Naboth's vineyard and the Kelo vs.
Connecticut decision fits fairly well.)
Maybe Ms. Ahab will avoid the dogs
The hearing on Thursday is for Criminal Contempt I think; not his removal.
Can you get cited for Criminal Contempt for not showing up at your Criminal Contempt hearing?
I must have missed Newsweek's coverage of the 'Fong's disbarment and suspension. Can anyone enlighten me? I'm certain they gave it as much play as they did when the Duke Lax3 were featured on the cover;)
Judge Hudson is the judge for removal process
Too bad it's not Smith...
but maybe Hudson will come through?
If it's true his wife has money> I really hope the guys pursue damages in a civil court.
No punishment he gets going forward is enough.
Thank you KC for keeping the light shining, your blog and others who follow are keeping outside pressure. Otherwise, 3 young men would be going to prison, promotions all around.
Duke should be actively and openly pursuing a clean up of the police in Durham, and the courts. It would renew some level of confidence that their students would get a fair shake.
Every time you post, I can't believe what I am reading.
I wish The VIew would you on.
Sade's Jezebel seems more like
Debrah - when's Poodlanski gonna
Thank you for linking the Praeger article. To my mind, it's the most important article yet written on the case.
Will you please contact FODU so they can post a link as well?
That was very nice!
Unless...it's Debrah posing as Polanski!
Ah, the irony!
Sorry to tell you, I know nothing about the schedule--( with the British pronunciation!)--of Polanski.
1: 04 said:
"must have missed Newsweek's coverage of the 'Fong's disbarment and suspension. Can anyone enlighten me? I'm certain they gave it as much play as they did when the Duke Lax3 were featured on the cover;)"
You're at least the second person here, to spread false and unfair innuendo about this.
I just got the new "Newsweek" (as a subscriber) 2 days ago, and there was a potent, anti-Nifong quote in the "Perspectives" section. But, it referred to the ethics proceedings as pending. So, obviously, when Newsweek went to press, Nifong wasn't yet disbarred.
Give them a chance. I frankly don't expect front-page coverage -- the timing was wrong, as it will be "old news" when the next issue comes out (those are the breaks) -- but, I think "Newsweek" will be fair.
Yeah, it was way out-of-line for "Newsweek" to post pictures of innocent men on the front page with a headline like "Sex, Lies and Duke". But the truth is, "Newsweek" later grasped the truth and spoke it loudly, much as the "News & Observer" and "60 Minutes" did.
Now I think I'm gonnin' to sit in the corner and bang my pot, er . . . pot my bang . . . er pot and bang . . . . bang . . . bang and some good . . . are we in Durham yet? No, but we're almost there. Will you stop smokin' that pot. No, I'm bangin' the pot . . . . Where's Chong? He's joined the Durham Police Force, and he is over in the corner trainin' to be a policeman. What's he doin' He's interviewin'.
Nancy Grace Expecting Twins
FROM STAFF REPORTS
Published on: 06/26/07
CNN crime-talk maven Nancy Grace was secretly married in April and is expecting twins, according to a report in the New York Post on Tuesday.
The Post said Grace plans to announce her status on her CNN Headline News show Tuesday evening.
"I'm finally not keeping it a secret anymore," she told The Post.
According to the report, Grace is married to David Linch, an Atlanta investment banker. The two attended Mercer together in the 1970s and have stayed in touch, the Post story said.
Grace told the Post their marriage was a "spur of the moment decision" and that the pair had a simple ceremony in Macon, Grace's hometown.
The Post said Grace declined to say if she'd had fertility treatments in order to become pregnant at age 47.
"But you tell women out there that there is hope," she told the tabloid.
Grace is a one-time Fulton County prosecutor known for her tough tactics and impassioned arguments. She hosted a show on Court TV before joining CNN.
He just seems to regularly show up, soon after you post...
it's like a feeding schedule - (British accent, aussi) - with
an infant possessing a normal digestive system: you feed 'em,
I agree. He shows up like clockwork. Perhaps he's one of those people who keeps his computer on 24/7 and when he sees an opportunity for mischief, he strikes.
Indeed, very uncanny.
Thursday's hearing is not criminal nor contempt. It is a civil hearing to remove him from his position of DA prior to his effective resignation of July 13.
Nancy Grace. Ah, yes.
She recently stated that she was a "murder victim."
(She really said it.)
You could see all of the
whites of her eyes - (they were bulging) - something that
happens frequently when someone has
taken a leap from reality.
Her eyes looked like those of a
horse with a cougar on its back.
If Nancy Grace is having twins, then she has pulled the same (later-in-life.....quick-before-the train-leaves-the-station) move that some other women have pulled.
No doubt, she was put on a regimen of fertility pills. Hence, twins.
Nancy Grace having babies is about as gross as Elizabeth Edwards using some of the many millions that Beauty Shop John got from "channeling fetuses" in the courtroom and running so many OBGYN's out of business.
The rest of us are paying for Eliabeth Edwards and so many others who feed at the plaintiff's bar to have the ultimate that health care has to offer with increased costs handed down by those doctors who are sued by people like "Beauty Shop John".
Well, I guess someone in the Edwards family has to be cute.
"Grace is a one-time Fulton County prosecutor known for her tough tactics and impassioned arguments."
"Tough Tactics." The Supreme Court of Georgia used the phrase "inappropriate and illegal conduct in the course of the trial" when they overturned one of her convictions.
You aren't KP, by any chance?
Hopefully, the twins will cause her to retire.
"Impassioned." Yeah, that was the look she gave when she claimed that she was a murder victim.
No, but I like most of her work. Saw her on some news show recently. Looks a lot older than her photo, although very attractive.
Well, the subpoena was directed to Nifong, not his wife, so she may be entitled to refuse to accept it on his behalf. Generally, state law will set forth the manner in which such a document can be served. Legally, regardless of your distaste for Cy or her husband, there's no reason she should accept the subpoena on Nifong's behalf. Why make it easier for their opponents to claim service was procedurally proper? She would be doing the party serving the papers a favor by accepting it on behalf of her husband, and I doubt she is in the mood to do that.
Your writing style is sometimes similar to KP;
the links you've proferred are
what I'd expect from her.
I like most of what she writes, too;
she does very good research, is
well-organized, perceptive and
Debrah, I have agreed with most of your comments about the Nifong hoax, so now I am disappointed to find that you are such a hateful ignoramus about medical malpractice and its catastrophic consequences.
Let's see how you feel after, God forbid, some obnoxious, self-worshipping (and yes, I will dare to say, Nifong-like) doctor ruins your life, or kills one of your loved ones. You'll go running and blubbering like a baby to a John Edwards-type lawyer, and you will be shocked and outraged when you are informed of the colossal legal barriers that prevent or impede such lawsuits.
Edwards made his mint off a junk-medicine case.
She's right about people like him,
a classic race/class baiter who makes (made)
his living off of the genuine suffering of others.
I work in a profession where I see
malpractice all the time: I agree with
you that it is sometimes warranted,
and that a good attorney is often
On the other hand, I see a lot of people - (mostly like CGM) - who play
the "medical lotto," hoping to reap unjust rewards; I see
attorneys who advertise/incite
such fraudulent cases.
No, I won't be crying to anyone. We all will be sick. We are all going to die.
Meanwhile, let's take care of our bodies as best we can, and when illness strikes, we all have to contend with out-of-this-universe catastrophic prices to even be seen by a doctor.
Yes, there are bad doctors just as there are bad lawyers. There are doctors who overcharge while pretending to give you the world just as there are lawyers who overcharge while getting down in the gutter like a filthy rat and raping doctors in a courtroom, so consequently, the rest of us must incur exorbitant health care costs and insurance premiums or go without health insurance all together.
NO ONE deserves the knid of fees Edwards got by suing insurance companies and running doctors out of business.
John Edwards still has the stench of his "millworker daddy" all over him. He is indecent and a fraud.
He actually put on a show in the courtroom as if he were talking to a dead fetus.."channeling". How's that bullshit to make you throw up?
Then after the OBGYN was run out of business, it was discovered that a prior condition was the cause of the baby not coming to term. So that dead fetus would have been a dead fetus no matter which doctor the mother used.
(Maybe Edwards was just whining in the courtroom....trying to make an appointment to get his hair done.) LIS!
His wife is also horrendous. After what she did to Lynn Cheney and the Cheney's gay daughter, I have no respect for her at all. That sick saccharin smile doesn't fool me.
(I do wish for her good health. With all those millions made suing doctors, I just know she will have the best of care!)
Now, just to make myself perfectly clear: The Edwards are frauds. They nauseate me to the hilt. If I ever need an attorney for such a hypothetical situation as you offered, it will not be one like John Edwards.
John Edwrads is going nowhere...except back to his (plain, lackluster, milquetoast, and tasteless as hell) 6 million dollar "compound" outside of Chapel Hill.
Lastly, I will give him credit for one thing: This time around on the campaign trail, at least he had that creepy wart removed from his lip that was such a strange distraction.
The plaintiff's bar has ruined this country.
Re: Nancy Grace
She belongs is jail just like any other crook.
She as been reprimanded 3 times by the 11th Circuit Court
During a very sad time for the Elizabeth Smart family, she stated on her show that Richard Ricci was guilty. He died sometime later. She never apologized. You would think someone from Geogia would remember Richard Jewel. Anyway I have never heard if the Ricci family ever got a settlement the way Richard Jewel finally did.
She is just scum.Evil.
She brags about her conviction rate, but does not mention all the cases that have been overturned.
Have to second that..nice post Debrah. Edwards is a disgusting human being, and a hypocritical fraud. If you read his book he's proud of his success at enriching himself by extorting money from insurance companies and destroying the reputation of physicians. His first big case that he won involved a man who was an alcoholic who was given a drug that can help you to stop drinking (Antabuse), but causes a severe reaction if you do drink alcohol while taking it. The man was thoroughly informed of the risks by his Physician and agreed to the treatment. What did he then do? He went out and drank huge amounts of alcohol while taking the drug, went into a coma and died. And then his family sued the Doctor because they claimed he didn't know he could die. And Edwards won this POS case. Don't believe me?
Read his book. This man earned his money by destroying other people and no one deserves to earn the kind of money he did off the misery of others. I can't wait to see his health care plan...I'm sure it insures a rich future for malpractice attorneys and not much for patients or doctors. Luckily he has no chance of getting anywhere in the primaries, as Americans see through his scam.
"Then after the OBGYN was run out of business, it was discovered that a prior condition was the cause of the baby not coming to term. So that dead fetus would have been a dead fetus no matter which doctor the mother used."
Yeah, that revelation eventually "came out" like any other turd. And how much do you think the insurance company paid their "expert physician" to come up with that "opinion"?
You're fooling yourself, Debrah. I hope you never find out, the hard way, what the insurance industry is really like, particularly when it's in cahoots with an evil, self-obsessed physician. You'll be howling a different tune, guaranteed, and you won't even recognize any irony or contradiction -- "Oh, this is DIFFERENT!"
Yeah, different because it's you who's been victimized. Other victims don't matter, because "they" are always frauds, right?
I don't hope to convince you. I can only hope that you don't find out the truth first-hand, by having your life destroyed by "Dr. Nifong" and then finding out how "tort reform" leaves you SOL.
Stay healthy, Debrah.
It's entirely possible that honest physicians are sometimes ruined by "junk science" suits and that people who have been wronged by incompetent physicians often get nothing. The existence of one kind of error does not disprove the existence of another.
There are 2 factors to consider here - to what extent is the legal system biased one way or the other, and to what extent is it trying to decide issues it doesn't have the knowledge or structure to address, and is therefore just plain random.
A note about spousal privilege against testifying. The privilege only precludes questions and testimony about communications between spouses. Like all communication privileges, it does not apply if there is a third party present to hear the conversation. So Cy can be compelled to testify about any admissions Mike made to her when someone else was present. Also, Cy can be compelled to testify about any observations she made or any statements Mikey made which were not intended to be communications to her.
As I said, there are good lawyers and bad lawyers.....good doctors and bad doctors.
In no way am I defending the bloodsucking that insurance companies engage in as a rule. Like banks, they are in business to suck the proceeds out of anything they can.
But, unlike you and some others who see no usefulness in tort reform, I see it as a Catch-22. The more false claims and frivolous cases are brought against doctors, and consequently, insurance companies, the more bloodsucking they perform on the public.
One cannot regulate the unworldly salaries of their CEO's when you have unscrupulous lawyers like Edwards who keep the scam going by sucking them dry.
When those millions are paid by the insurance companies, who do you think makes up for their loss?
There should be sufficient financial compensation for those who have really suffered from malpractice, but not the kind of money they extract just to please the plaintiff's bar.
You tell me how on earth John Edwards sleeps at night while taking home 30 million dollars after winning a case for a little girl who had her intestines...down to her rectum....sucked out by a malfunctioning pool drain?
That girl will need very special care for the rest of her life and Edwards certainly deserves to be compensated well for winning the case--(although, who couldn't have won such an open and shut case?)--but how he sleeps at night after taking such an exorbitant fee is a little perplexing......since he tells us he's for the "common man"......"those who have no place at the table"...yada....yada....yada.
Indeed, there are "two Americas": 1) The America who sucks life's blood from others; and 2) Those who are left to pay for it.
I run on very different batteries.
Nifong isn't the only one with NPD:
lots of attorneys and physicians -
(and clergy) - possess that particular variety of evil.
I don't trust either profession
absolutely, though both have some
useful things to offer.
I don't understand the rationalization that
you have to choose one or the
other; Edwards is as bad as any
doctor practicing narcissistic,
He's a poster-boy for legal reform,
as much as my Mom's doctor was a
poster-boy for medical reform.
(I wish we'd sued when we had the
That's a realistic way of looking at the whole issue.
Post a Comment