Did know Himan before this case. Had some dealings with Gottlieb before the case, including "encounters in this same neighborhood." Didn't know him that well, though, had never tried a case where he was the witness.
Photo arrays: was aware these had occurred on March 27 and March 28.
[Nifong lawyer Dudley Witt keeps calling Mangum "the victim."]
Officers claimed that the Duke lacrosse photos--tough to tell people apart, March 16-21 photo arrays were under bad conditions (bad lighting in her home, she was in pain.)
[Yet the March 21 array occurred in the police station.]
Had been hoping during week of March 27th that someone would come forward, but that didn't happen. Purpose of 4-4 lineup was to try to go directly to people she identified, through his attorney, to ask if they knew what had gone on.
Videotaping of the 4-4 lineup was solely because of media attention--knew they would have to be able to justify what happened later on, and wanted to be able to see her face as she looked at the photos. Gottlieb sets up basic approach.
Points out that Mangum correctly ID's Dan Flannery as the person who gave her the money, suggested she was reliable.
[Coincidentally . . . this is the same point that Duff Wilson had made in his Aug. 25th article.]
Nifong: Both Himan and Gottlieb considered Mangum very believable to them. Tara Levicy indicated the same thing to him.
Concedes that he received oral reports from SBI on March 30, but his practice always had been to provide written report after NTO's, not oral reports.
After SBI lab completed its work, police looked for other labs that did YSTR testing. Nifong notes that he contacted a couple of the labs himself. [Why is he involved in this process?]
Why on earth did Nifong take the stand? He's not helping his case. He just looks stupid and incompetent.
ReplyDeleteThe "victim"... not according to nifongs boss... no rape occurred... NO VICTIM.. well, except for the falsely accused lacrosse players... and Justice... nifong put a black eye on the Lady who holds the scales of Justice
ReplyDeleteIts amazing how people get themselves in trouble and make it worse by trying to get out of it.
ReplyDeleteJust curious, but how did he come to get his lawyers and why would they agree to defend him.
Can't someone object to calling Magnum "victim" since it has been declared that no crime occurred?
ReplyDeleteNifong *still* speaks about the "victim" and the "attack" in the present tense--as if he thinks it still actually happened.
ReplyDeleteI guess he hasn't realized yet who the true victims of this case were. It certainly wasn't the hooker (even "dancer" was a ludicrous term).
ReplyDeleteIf you had no suspects... why the NTO for DNA of 46 lacrosse players? I get so annoyed whenever I hear him say "we had no suspects."
ReplyDeleteStop calling her the "VICTIM"
ReplyDeleteThe bar needs to object!
I think that (so far at least) he is helping himself by taking the stand. He is trying to make himself appeat human and hopefully somewhat sympathetic. It is harder to see a person as the devil if you hear the person tell his side of the story. Still, it's hard to buy his "I-was-just-stupid" defense.
ReplyDelete"EXOTIC" dancer. :)
ReplyDeleteIt's ok, the panel is not stupid. They know the liar is and was not a victim, and trying to paint her in that light only goes against Nifong.
ReplyDeleteBDay
Nifong = revisionist history
ReplyDeleteI would love to cross examine this putz.
CJ
11:28:
ReplyDeleteSimple, he's spinning things as much as he can. He's making some admissions as a way of giving the panel an "out", a way to give him a slap on the wrist. For everything else, he seems to be trying to portray a picture of, "Given the information that I was given at the time, the results were a nature consequence."
I'm sure the prosecution is going to attack those "givens", and with vigor.
He's delusional. He still talks about this as though it actually happened!! And Crusty is not a VICTIM!
ReplyDeleteI wonder if the board can make a finding of fact, that by preponderance of the evidence, MR. Nifong was in fact running the investigation. This would open the door to major civil liability.
ReplyDeleteI imagine the State has practiced the cross for weeks, so I hope they are to FRY him....
Do you think Tara and Gottlieb did not want to testify because of their liability coming up in civil cases ??
BDay
Either he is stupid or thinks the whole world is stupid. If he thinks the whole world is stupid and would be believe this stuff(or at least the panel), he must really be stupid.
ReplyDeleteHow did he get a law degree? Was it from a diploma mill? How did he pass the bar exam ?
urpose of 4-4 lineup was to try to go directly to people she identified, through his attorney, to ask if they knew what had gone on.
ReplyDeleteOh, so... he wanted to talk to defense attorneys? Hm.
This cross-exam is going to be a slaughter.
It was interesting to see that Duff did not mention his public embarrasment in his article today.
ReplyDeleteSPIN
ReplyDelete"How did he get a law degree?"
ReplyDeleteThey all can't be Brad Bannon. I'm a lawyer and I am constantly amazed at the stupidity that some fellow members of the bar demonstrate.
Is anyone missing the irony that links Nifraud, clearly a revisionist historian, to the Group of 88, who rewrite and unwrite history as part of their liberal stock and trade?
ReplyDeleteThere is no way this is going to finish today - if there is anything like a reasonable cross.
ReplyDelete11:42
ReplyDeleteI noticed that too, also noticed nowhere in Duff's article does he remind the reader that the boys have been declared innocent. What a snake.
Add the biased agenda driven MSM that rewrites history at will too.
ReplyDeleteThe NYT's being one of the worst.
Anyone who has known a few lawyers has found a couple who appear to be too dumb to breathe, let alone graduate law school and pass the bar.
ReplyDeleteI guess they just have a singular ability that doesn't function in normal human areas.
And, of course, all lawyers are taught that are second in intelligence only to God, if to even Him, so the really dumb ones tend to get an inflated idea of their own abilities.
"They all can't be Brad Bannon. I'm a lawyer and I am constantly amazed at the stupidity that some fellow members of the bar demonstrate.
ReplyDeleteJun 15, 2007 11:45:00 AM"
So, what is YOUR opinion of nifomg, and what do YOU think should and will occur? Should he also face criminal charges, and possible jail time?
Someone has to finish last, at the bottom of the class. I think we're getting a good look at what the bottom looks like.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
ReplyDelete"How did he get a law degree?"
They all can't be Brad Bannon. I'm a lawyer and I am constantly amazed at the stupidity that some fellow members of the bar demonstrate.
I have a Computer Science Degree and not a law degree. I was exposed to a lot of legal jargon etc because my mom worked as a legal secretary and then as a certified paralegal.
His jargon is just insulting and logic is just insulting. I do not have all of the domain legal knowledge, but this is just garbage.
Good thing this is not a competency hearing, because he is failing with flying colors.
ReplyDeleteNifong's defense would work fine if we can stop time in mid March 2006.
ReplyDeleteBefore he knew of her mental illness.
Before he knew of her substance abuse.
Before he knew of her prior rape complaint.
Before he knew of her crminal record.
Before he knew of 10 men's DNA on her.
Before he knew she was back stripping 2 weeks later.
Before he knew of Seligman's alibi
Before he knew she IDd a man as her attacker who was out of town.
Before he knew Evans had no mustache.
Before he knew of her 10-12 different accounts.
------------------------
Let us never forget that right up until he recused himself he was planning to take the case to trial, saying as long as Mangum could ID her 'attackers' he was going forward.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteMy question is WHY he's so primarily concerned with the fingernails. Could it be because there's a good chance DNA from an individual might show up on fingernails of a person he didn't sexually assault (particularly if said false fingernails were thrown in the same wastepaper basket the individual throws his dental floss?) His DNA being in her vagina or her rectum or in her pubic hair would not be likely found if he had no sexual contact with her. So suddenly, what's on her false fingernails are *much* more important than what's in her vagina or rectum or pubic hair. To me, the very fact he was so focused on those damn fingernails was he *knew* Dave Evans was innocent but was trying to make him look guilty.
ReplyDeleteHe is interested in fingernails because that is the closest he came to any evidence.
ReplyDeleteOf course Meehan didn't really explain that the 98% 'match' really meant that 2% of the population COULD NOT BE EXCLUDED.
In other words, there are millions of people whose DNA could not be excluded as a match, including Dave Evans.
or, to say it the most simple way, the fingernail DNA wasn't evidence at all.
So now he's a DNA expert?
ReplyDeleteHe is but he isn't. Some days hes a crack prosecutor and some days he's a bumbling fool. One day, hes a DNA expert, the next day, he don't know nuthin bout no DNA.
ReplyDeleteClassic sociopathic behavior...cause and effect have no relationship in his mind.
The live feed of the hearing is so freaking awesome..I CANNOT BELIEVE WHAT I AM HEARING.....If not before, he just hung himself in the last 5 minutes.
ReplyDeleteAnd they say that doctors do not police themselves, so we need lawyers like Nifong and Edwards to help society!
ReplyDeleteHow about some LEGAL malpractice suits!!!!!!!
Mangum correctly ID's Dan Flannery [as the one who paid her]
ReplyDeleteHow would this bolster her credibility?? She can correctly ID the person who paid her (an event that did happen), but she can't ID the people who she claimed raped her? This establishes that her memory wasn't impaired, but she nevertheless could not ID her alleged attackers. Seems to give less, not more credibility to her assertions.
KC--know you are busy but please review 11:55 post..don't mind an opinion that lawyers can also be "cognitive non superstars" but there is a racist statement that is clearly there to offend.
ReplyDeleteby the way, I have never been more convinced of the NPD diagnosis than right now watching the complete lack of humility, the smarmy arrogance and the absence of any real empathy for the innocent young men he attempted to sacrifice, destroy and railroad while pandering to the Durham voters.
He talks also as if his decisions were intelligent and thoughtful and high-minded instead of just deluded grandstanding Bozo blunder after Bozo blunder that expose him as not only narcissistic but also extremely stupid.
You know, narcissistic people are often pretty bright, but there are always exceptions.
He does lie with complete conviction which is a hallmark.
Gary,
ReplyDeleteYeah, weird isn't it. Nifong is soo selective.
She also ID'd a guy who was NOT AT THE PARTY, but apparently that doesn't affect her credibilty.