Says that he first learns about the case on March 23, when he sees copy of the Himan affidavit for an NTO. Had never seen anything that looked like this before, with an NTO for so many people. Picked up NTO and read it.
Had never encountered an NTO order of more than one person.
Had people in the office who handled sexual assault cases usually (Tracey Cline). David Saacks was chief ass't DA, supervisory authority within the office, but not a sexual assault specialist (non-sexual assault crimes of violence and drug cases).
Then had conversation with Saacks that afternoon--Saacks says that Gottlieb and Himan had originally come to Cline; she was unavailable, but he assisted it.
Didn't speak with Cline about the NTO document, but did speak with her about the case itself. But probably spoke with her about it first on the 27th of March.
Q: NTO document said that DNA evidence would immediately rule out the innocent.
A: He would not have included such language had he drafted the order himself.
Briefed by Himan and Gottlieb mid-morning, March 27. Nifong says that he had called Capt. Lamb on the 24th, says that he had learned of the case, wanted to be briefed, and if they had any further requests for court orders, to bring them to his attention. Concedes he hadn't done that on any other cases as Durham DA.
Q: Why?
A: Knew that NTO was a public record, would be seen by the media, and expected that their reaction would be similar to his--that it was unprecedented. They would read the allegations about assault and react strongly. "Felt that it would garner a significant amount of media attention."
The allegations are "rather sordid."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
This guy is going to lose his license and be ruined financially but somehow it will not seem like justice will be served unless he serves the time he was trying to get those kids to face.
Call me dense, but what is the NTO document?
Am I wrong, or didn't Nifong say himself that DNA would exonerate the innocent in one of his interviews?
Non Testimonial Order
lets not forget he did not "think" this case would draw so much attention...that was why he went public so he could get information from people.. but yet he contradicts himself on the stand and says he knew this case would draw strong attention.. he has lost his mind!
KC - why is this SOB still allowed to call the lying whore "victim"
So is this going to work? I'm sorry, I shouldn't have said that, yes I was inappropriate? Is the panel going to buy this s**t?
Honestly?
Yes, apparently in Durham, false accusations are unprecedented!
Am I wrong, or didn't Nifong say himself that DNA would exonerate the innocent in one of his interviews?
I dont know if he did or not, but I am pretty sure a statement to that effect was in the request for the order that all 46 players give their DNA. Later when asked why he was acting in a manner contrary to that written declaration, Nifong said he couldnt control what his underlings did and wasnt bound by it. Apparently the request had been signed by someone else in his office (I think Mr. Sacks) so he could deny that he expressed such a sentiment.
However if he actually said it verbally, that's another story. Maybe someone else knows if he did. I am sure KC does
10:53 --
The "NTO" that is referred to is the non-testimonial order that allowed the police to collect DNA from the 46 white lacrosse players.
Post a Comment