Dudley Witt is delivering the statement.
Brocker's closing was tightly worded and very well organized; Witt is more rambling.
Witt seems to be laying out an argument that Nifong's behavior was negligent and perhaps knowing but not intentional.
On the media: had never dealt with the media before this time, even though he was a career prosecutor.
"Made some serious mistakes" in how he handled the pretrial statements, but not intentional.
Wm'son: "You're not saying because he was unschooled in media relations, that's a defense?"
And how to avoid an inference that there was a relationship between statements and the political motivations. Nifong's statements were "inherently incredible."
"Defies believe that there's not a connection" between how Nifong handled the case and the election.
Nifong is "a very truthful guy."
Wm'son to Witt: his explanation might be one, it's not a "logical" one.
Witt is now [preposterously] concluding that Nifong admitted that he knew the items weren't included in the report.
Wm'son: Nifong's behavior "consistent with somebody who's feigning ignorance."
Wm'son: The issue is Nifong knew that there was exculpatory evidence and didn't do anything about it. The issue isn't whether there was a conspiracy with Dr. Meehan. The purpose of this hearing isn't to try Dr. Meehan.
"How can you possibly explain away" Nifong's failure to look at the report between 9-22 and 12-15?
Wm'son: Nifong's statement "is just damning."
Witt: says that this is just like Gell case--unintentional negligence.
Witt is now blaming the Bar--says there wasn't sufficient guidance from the Bar.
Wm'son is openly skeptical in his questions--strongly implying that Nifong was being willfully negligent.
[This is one of the least effective closing arguments that I have ever encountered.]
Wm'son: could just as easily say that Nifong's approach to Meehan was: I'm going to hang you out to try.
Witt: Since Bar can't establish that there was an agreement between Nifong and Meehan to limit test results, the rest of the Bar's argument falls apart.
Witt: Since Nifong never directly told Meehan to conceal evidence, Nifong should be considered innocent of not disclosing evidence.
Witt: Meehan's fault that he didn't supply a complete report; didn't think about what was not contained in the DNA report.
Wm'son: seems throughout that all Nifong was looking for was evidence connecting lacrosse players to a crime, while ignoring all evidence that there was no connection.
Witt: Not so. Did take additional samples (the boyfriend, etc.)
Wm'son: What evidence is there that Nifong's attitude (only looking for evidence associated with lacrosse players) that this approach ever changed?
Witt: Concedes that Nifong's attitude probably never changed.
Wm'son: What good is an open-file policy if the information doesn't get into the file?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
108 comments:
HANG ON TO YOUR SEATBELTS AND TAKE YOUR PROZAC -- This is going to be painful to hear what Witt argues.
Is this man capable of speaking in a complete sentence?
here comes the 'blame the media' defense
Wow - KC is right that Witt is rambling. I thought Brocker was very good and very organized (but not superb). This guy is far more difficult to follow.
DNA "stuff"????
Come on, you're a lawyer!!
ditto ... this guy is no where near as professional in his approach, phrasing, and overall demeanor.
Big nistake going with Witt. Already disorganized.
Already conceding points on DNA
Whoa, he just admitted negligence! He's trying to salvage intent.
Here comes the "Mr. Nifong was an inexperienced lazy prosecutor" defense.
Almost as bad as Tysons' "Of course everyone should know I am an animal" defense.
Bull. He saw his rival garner national attention and become a known quantity. He parlayed this case onto the national spotlight, gave unquestionably damning statements that they were rapists, and used the case to get reelected.
That is his ulterior motive.
As an attorney, I am embarassed by Witt's poor presentation.
LOL. "Not a neophyte defense". Williamson is great.
Witt rambling. Not doing much good. Williamson going after him.
This guy is unprepared, and clearly blown away by the morning's closing arguments.
Now Williamson is pulling out his stops!
"It's an explanation; I'm not sure it's logical."
YAY!
Witt arguing that if politically motivated, then why dismiss charges later? WHat a silly thing to argue. THE PRIMARY WAS ALREADY WON. This is not a defense to the charges. This lawyer is not even addressing the charges.
In the immortal words of Jed Clampett, "Pitiful... PITIFULLLL..."
It is way too late for the "He is a very truthful guy" defense.
Hey dudley , you are supposed to be helping nifong, not hanging him.
"Very truthful guy".
how funny was that line.
...guess it's about trying to delete that argument because it would show malicious intent.
Is this the best lawyer Nifong could find? This is BEYOND BELIEF. LOL. Nifong may argue incompetent counsel on his appeal!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"very truthful guy"
Hahahaha
"feigning in ignorance" hee-hee
I loved Willismason's mouth twitch just then.
He can't believe this.
"Nifong knew and didn't do anything about it."
LOVE IT!!
Like a little league pitcher trying to get it past Derek Jeter.
BDay
Now I feel sorry for nifong. (not really)
Even his own lawyer is against him.
I can well believe that Nifong is a truthful guy, because he sucks at lying. He got caught with his drawers down and he's been scrambling ever since.
If Williamson truly said that Nifong's statements were "inherently incredible" re: link between political aspirations and public statements on case, Nifong is in deep doo-doo. Can't have the head of the ethics panel finding your under-oath statements "inherently incredible", especially on that point.
I can’t really blame the defense attorneys that really don’t have much to work with. Witt is definitely rambling but even Brad Bannon would have a tough time with this stinker of a case.
You know you are in deep Sh** when you are arguing negligence as opposed to intentional wrongdoing.
dude... easy on the caffiene!
This is a bit like "Macbeth." I'm willing to believe (perhaps naively) that up to now Nifong was a good guy, but "vaulting ambition" had been his undoing.
He is a lawyer, Right?
Williamson is an absolute jewel! Last night he kept covering his face as if he just couldn't believe the crap he was hearing. And today the bulldog attack in Witt! I'm in love!
Witt looks worse than a 1st year in his first mock court.
Williamson sounds like he is still trying to give Nifong every consideration. He will not be punished as much as everyone is hoping on this blog.
In the end this is a local problem and they are all peers.
Nifongs shenanigans yesterday worked, at the expense of his son.
Narcisissitic sociopath to the end.
Wiliamson is having Witt for lunch.
Witt is making Brocker look like Clarence Darrow.
Williamson has had it, his face shows it.
"I don't have a magic way of explaining it." "He's from the old school." Grasping at straws is an understatement.
To the fact that nifong won't be punished as much as some here hope-true, true. But we outlawed tar and feathering long, long ago.
"If I remember correctly"
He should have chapter and verse in front of him if that's his defense.
The last exchange - Witt's reference to Gell and unintentional negligence - shows that the defense is hanging every hope on avoiding a finding that Nifong acted intentionally, because a finding of intention means Nifong is toast.
My 8th grade studetns are more articlate than this guy.
I don't let them get away with using "stuff" and "things" instead of specifics.
I've been a lawyer for 25 years. I do not recall using the word "stuff" to describe evidence in all that time -- much less to a tribunal.
Really, the only issue here is prolonged suspension vs disbarment. Mr. Witt if he has any wit, would realize this. Given that, the best approach for Mr. Nifong, would be to be contrite and admit rather extensive wrongdoing, apologize wholeheartedy (which means abandon the "something happend"), and ask for leneiency from the board. Why they are not doing that is beyond me.
BDay
Of course, the ultimate irony is that the best professional license defense firm in the estate is headed by J.C. the Vth.
Man's defending Nifong, what can he say? Most people's minds would go competely blank, or else they'd start laughing hysterically.
Williamson is getting ticked.
If I was Nifong, I'd be telling my "defence" to sit down. This is the most rambling, scrambling for words, stream of consciousness (with no punctuation) I've ever heard.
JLS says...,
So we have come to the Mike Nifong is retarded defense.
Extra point for Brad Bannon. Wow Williamson is having none of this.
beck said: tar and feathers was always an extrajudicial punishment, just the way folks took care of things when the the justice of the peace wasn't around. And, it was quite often fatal...
Witt is drowning. It's embarrassing.
This is soooo good.
Nifongs lawyer trying to explain nifongs actions, and doing a very bad job of it.
I say he calls his client a bold face liar before this is over.
This is killing me. Why don't they just say to Witt: "Every time exculatory DNA evidence came out, defense lawyers had a press conference. Mr. Nifong always had snide remarks about them. If Mr. Nifong thought that the defense had this evidence, why did Mr. Nifong think that they didn't call another one?"
Bet he wishes he could have hired Joe to defend him. Ha!!!
Bday
I have spent my entire career as a lawyer overpreparing and overpreparing. I have nothing but comtempt for Witt. It appears he was hoping to "wing it" today.
They're looking past disbarment to civil litigation. Sloppy lawyering is still protected by Nifong's immunity but intent opens him to liability. Can't have those book and movie royalties being seized in a civil settlement, since that's the only income he'll have from now on.
Witt is using the hypothetical-land defense: "it could be that..."
11:18--Fifty cents says Freeman saw the light and dumped closing on Witt at the last minute.
This is truly a sad spectacle...
Nifong is looking like he wishes he had that .38 with him right now. I think the high blink rate is him blinking back tears. This is tame compared to when he will be in a criminal court with closing statements that can't be interrupted, guided, or coached.
As to him being a prophet...
HE IS TRULY F****D!!!
11:19: that's disgusting and unworthy of this blog.
I have worked in the legal arena for years and have watched lots of trials. Witt has nothing to work with--don't know if he'd be any good if he had facts on his side or not.
This is like watching a cat toy with a mouse before dinner!
So funny.
This guy is asking for the benefit of the doubt for his client.
But nifong refused to give the benefit of the doubt, in any way, to any of the lacrosse players.
That's absurd ... he had a burden to provide the excupulpatory materials. Instead, he willfully didn't disclose what he knew, because his desire was to "win".
"You could have tooken it that way if you wanted to?"
"I think you heard testimony..."
What an idiot.
"How could he not know?"
"How does not knowing put him in any better position" [while laboring under an affirmative duty to investigate and disclose].
- Wmson.
STOP THE FIGHT! STOP THE FIGHT!
It seems the defense thinks that
Meehan's testimony is the law or something. I found Meehan as credible as Nifong.
... generally on my mind ... this should be good.
it's "Reasonable" to be incompetent... hee-hee
11:21...
That is exactly what this is like...Chef doing the Chewbaka defense
WOW!!!
"..blinders on to whether there was a crime."
"...Looking for links to LAX players...
KC says: [This is one of the least effective closing arguments that I have ever encountered.]
Partially because he is arguing a lousy case. Tough arguing when when your client is obviously guilty.
Wow.
I think williamson just won all the civil cases for the lacrosse players, by just specifically mentioning them.
Excuse me, did he just refer to CM as "the victim?"
... so if anyone's wondering what's on Wm'son's mind ... I think he's rather perturbed by the absurd reasoning this hack is trying to present.
11:26 At least he (Witt) could be organized and articulate.
Nifong never kept his lies consistent or coherent, so it's unlikely Witt will be able to do so either.
Only interested in positive matches to LAX players. Not interested unless it incriminated the LAX players...
Witt is now contradicting the character witnesses from yesterday!
Bring back Meehan to tell the truth now and show Nifong for the liar he is. Meehan's testimony the other day was still deferential to Nifong, that was a big mistake.
This guy is killing his private law practice
"what good is an open file policy, if information does not get in the file?"
Trying to say that Nifong is "old school" and behaves accordingly. Williamson isn't buying it.
This "old school guy" defense is just saddening. It seems like Witt is using the attempt that "Yes, my client is a sucky lawyer, and I don't practice the way he practice, but we can't hold it against him because he's an "old school guy". Sickening.
Oh Christ, my 13 y/o daughter would know that male DNA from someone else would be exculpatory.
Please.......
Is there any doubt in anyone's mind why the public holds the legal profession and the Bar in such low regard? We are listening to hour after hour of justification why a career prosecutor and lawyer with over 28 years of experience isn't responsible for his obligations as a member of the legal profession. Laymen are convicted every day of the week with less evidence than has been presented in this trial. Why do we have to consider the possibility that Nifong may not have intended to deny the players due process? The extant information is simply unequivocal that Nifong was intent on screwing the Duke three over.
would it be ok for a doctor not to use recent technology, because he does it the old fashioned way?
Witt is completely glossing over the fact that the Brady case had required disclosure of exculpatory evidence since well before NC discovery rules changed. Nifong would've been bound by Brady even if he weren't bound by the new rules. Witt is dissembling or he doesn't know much about Criminal Procedure. Not sure which.
Old School Guy, his friends said yesterday, that he was new school,
practiced 'open file' before it was required, but now his defense is he is from the 'Old School"
Williamson IS old school, so this guy is insulting him and all the old schoolers by his repeatedly trying to use that. Old School was loose with the rules, because there was honor and professionalism that went above and beyond the rules.
The only merit to arguing the good old days is to argue that your client was just too stupid to know the new rules.
11:26, "a lousy case" is quite an understatement. Bet N's lawyers would love to trade this one for a lousy case.
WiTT just stated CGM had sex with two more people - what is that 13 partners in a few days? Nifong knew this, and staked his reputation on her?
Now it 100% Crystal Clear to me that Nifong only did this to win the election, and the only reason - as he has stated to win the election is to increase his pension. If he does not lose his pension over this he needs to lose his freedom to spend his pension.
Tom E.
New thread.
Williamson: "Clueless" love it. And I love that Witt just admitted that yes that does go beyond negligence.
How could they have indicted when the DNA was negative? He had to have known about the other DNA in the April 10th meeting.
Jesus, Wittless is getting burned.
"Clearly we have more than that [isolated incidents] here."
-Wmson
Unintentional negligence defense meets "intentionally false representations."
The problem is that in trying to do that, Nifong and his defense team appeared to introduce even more "intentionally false representations" to the Bar. On top of his lies in court, to legal counsel, to the media..
I don't see how the Bar can justify his ever being allowed to practice law again when they are confronted with an array of deliberate lies told at his Bar trial, as well to the Court on record and to defense counsel in a major felony case.
If anything, as Witts foundering in the quagmire of his client's testimony and deeds represents, Nifong damaged himself even more in his Trial.
(Even his "throwing himself on the mercy of the court with his apology and resignation appears duplicitous. It was followed by 2 hours later with Nifong back to asserting CGM was "a victim" and that "something happened". I don't know how the Bar will rule, but to many observors like me, that made his apology yet another duplicitous lie.)
I wasn't at the hearing, so I can't judge Witt's performance, but in his defense he's got quite a dog of a case to work with. I don't know how anyone could defend a man with 13-14 different alibis and sound coherent.
Post a Comment