In a brutal cross-examination, Doug Brocker reviewed Mike Nifong's March 27 calendar. Just after he finished his initial briefing with police--when he remarked, "You know, we're fucked"--Nifong had an array of pre-scheduled appointments with members of the local and national media. But Nifong denied a political motive for his pre-primary publicity barrage: publicity, he claimed, was irrelevant to success in Durham politics.
In a hearing where Nifong repeatedly claimed he couldn't remember events that had occurred in court, the DA did remember that while he had spoken to Good Morning America, he hadn't actually appeared on the program. Nifong had his priorities, I suppose.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
66 comments:
Whew! Mikey be a big celebrity. Bet he was feelin' good back then. All shiney and ready for the cameras.
JLS says...,
I guess I could post my long post from yesterday about Mr. Nifong's infamous post. I certainly is germane here.
Did Hardin praise Nifong?
I find the period of March 23 to March 31 2006 to be absolutely fascinating. A time line of those days can be none too detailed. Nifong, the media, the Duke administration, faculty, students, and chaplain, the citizens of Durham, the false accuser, and the DPD were all busy getting it wrong.
Jim Hardin would praise his own butt hole if he could. He's the same kind of sleaze as Nifong. Just not as apparent.
Remember this idiot's mother making down home food for everybody in the courthouse?
"Mama Hardin"
Barf bag time!
KC is having a ball here!
Why does KC refuse to get copies online of the final "character" letters introduced into evidence by Fried man? We need to know who was so foolish to support the Fong to the end.
8:49
Why don't you get copies, post them online, and post a link. Maybe KC would like to sleep more than 4 hours a night
http://www.thebulletin.us/site/news.cfm?newsid=18491943&BRD=2737&PAG=461&dept_id=576361&rfi=6
great article
looks like a slug that mutated into a person.
JLS says...,
The fabulous Ann Coulter wrote on Nifong and his "case" in her colum this week. Notice she knows the key details of the case. She cuts deep with some great lines like:
"Crystal Gail Mangum, had the DNA of four different men in or on her person, including the driver who took her to stripping gigs and enough other men to bring a class-action suit against her."
and
"None of the DNA matched any Duke lacrosse players, who are starting to look like the only adult males in the Durham area who haven't had sex with Mangum."
Here is the entire column:
DUKE AND MARMADUKE
Maybe KC hasn't mentioned the letters of support that were submitted for Nifong at the end of the hearing b/c they are not publicly available. These kinds of documents may go into a file about the case but may not ever become open to public view.
I'm not a lawyer but I play one on the internet.
KC has more patience than I do, that's for sure. I had surgery last week so was stuck in bed and watched Court TV all day Thurs and Fri and wral.com all day Saturday. I cannot bring myself to watch all these episodes again. Ugh! All the prevaricating and obfuscating is too much to view a second time.
re: the letters of support.
The names have been changed and the files have been deleted (burned) in order to protect the foolish. (or worse)
They obviously didn't do much good for Nifong.
as to Mr. Freind's article in the Philadelphia Bulletin--
loved the Clodhead reference. Perfectly correct that he was as guilty as CGM in railroading the kids. Right to call for a new president. Missed one thing though--house cleaning for the Gang88. Bleeding needs to be stopped but it won't happen as long as ButtHead & the 88's remain at Duke.
Easley needs a reality check too. He should have offered enough money to either Lane Williamson or Marsha Goodenow to go and clean up the Durham DA's office. Then go after DPD.
Rep. Jones has been on this case for some time. Not just for political gain.
To stonewalling--don't you realize that anyone with a modicum of sense would have written a letter of reference for Nifong using only INVISIBLE INK!
Lord, after admitting the morning of 3/27 that he had no case, he gave interviews to a total of 11 media outlets on 3/27 and 3/28, breathlessly insisting he had a solid case. Disbarment seems like a minimal punishment for this man. But the media onslaught really began on 3/24 and there was no going back for Nifong at that point.
It's amazing how fixated some people are on the so-called Group of 88. Right-wing conservatives have hypocritically taken advantage of one group's mistakes (signing an ill-conceived ad) for their own political ends with the same eagerness that PC liberals jumped on this case to take advantage of another group's mistakes (hiring sleazy Durham strippers/whores).
At the end of this case, I'm about as disappointed with the people who are consumed with hate for the so-called Group of 88 as I am with the liberals who are consumed with hate for the lacrosse players.
anncoulter.com has Ann's latest gem about NiFungus. Spot on and hilarious, she's a national treasure.
anon 9:48
If you do not see a difference, then you are dumb.
Enough said.
Jared, stop right there. Damn your soul. Don't you ever forget who are the victims here.
Your statements are the kind of irrational bull**** that allow the left fringe their cancerous moral highground, when they are the equivalent of a bunch of third world Idi Amins.
Just stop right there. Don't bring in left wing and right wing. The fact that Brodhead and his disgusting Faculty88 are liberal leftists is beside the point. They are VICTIMIZERS for their own personal agendas.
But those criminals have now been neutered, though we all must watch them like hawks and put them down if they even think about doing such a thing again.
Regarding the person that keeps asking KC for some documentation: we are all adults here and should have the ability and resources to find documents ourselves and that's what some here have done (especially Bill Anderson).
On Liestoppers, members routinely go digging for information themselves instead of asking someone else to do it.
I think that KC is exceptional in the amount of labor that he has put into this case (can you imagine having to listen to Meehan in court half a day and type about it?) and bugging him about it has to be annoying.
Hey Jared, my man. Don't disassociate yourself with your comments now. Put your name back up on the post I just responded to.
No one will bite you. We don't know any "Jared" from Adam or Eve.
For the record, Jared is 9:47 and 9:48. I responded to the one he erased and put up again at 9:48.
I don't blame you Jared. It's a ridiculous post and comment.
At the end of this case, I'm about as disappointed with the people who are consumed with hate for the so-called Group of 88 as I am with the liberals who are consumed with hate for the lacrosse players.
In other words, there really are no bad people, are there?
I don't blame poor Jared. If he is comparing the defenders of the lacrosse players to the slimey Faculty88, then he is sick.
It's probably Orin Starn trying to be a mitigator of his previously scummy words.
Whatever. Nifong claiming to not know the details or remember is so disingenous it's obviously a bald face lie. The guy was a prosecutor. It's a claim he didn't prepare for the most important hearing/trial of his 28.6 year career. It's just NOT plausible, unless he knew the outcome in advance (he'd have to be rather delusion to not realize he was going down) or was so convinced of his own suaveness to believe he could finesse his way through this process.
Someone has probably already posted this, but in case they have not (I am behind on my reading today), there is a terrific article on today's WSJ op/ed page by John Steele Gordon about the case. It's called "Racial Role Reversal," and it takes the bold but extremely logical step of placing the Duke LAX case in historical context of the Scottsboro case. A must read.
Observer
Coulter
John-Steele-Gordon
Sorry: I deleted the first comment to remove a typo without even realizing that I had (inadvertently) left my name on it. That said, I'm perfectly happy and proud to associate my name with what I've written. This is more than I can say about the cowards who anonymously criticize me.
Unlike many of you, I actually go to Duke and know lacrosse players, so my indignation at the false accusations (and disappointment with the "listening" ad) likely exceeds yours.
However I've also taken classes with "Group of 88" professors, some of whom are wonderful teachers, so I'm not going to demonize all of them for signing on to a poorly considered ad.
No question about it: all 88 made a big mistake. Some professors (like Houston Baker, Grant Farred, Peter Wood, etc.) made vile public statements and deserve continuing condemnation.
But I've made worse mistakes than signing on to dumb ad in my life, so I can't muster the fury (or hypocrisy) to write off ALL 88 professors as human beings for making that sort of error.
Best wishes. I mean this honestly: I really hope some of you can muster your indignation for constructive aims. Being filled with blinding hate is no way to go through life.
Jared
Sheesh, Ann Coulter sounds just like Debrah. Both of them are BITCHES!
Observer, thank you. The Gordon column is a very good one and draws a great comparison to the injustices of both cases.
It is imperative that we keep this focused. That means in a Christian way we have to assure that such havoc is not repeated. We owe this to Mike Nifong himself, as he is a destructive individual who will if not guided, continue to hurt even his own family.
Off topic but anyway
Rate the funniest one-liners from Nifong's hearing.
Mine are:
1.Brad Bannon's response to Lane Williamson's question if Linwood Wilson was a law enforcement officer. "No" but he has a badge.
2. Micke Nifong's declaration that the party wan not an "ejaculatory" event.
10:32
Stuff it, you little self-righteous turd. Maybe when you get out into the real world for about a decade, you'll understand the irreparable damage your 88 professors do to students everyday.
I have no doubt that some of them do nice things and they don't beat their children, but what they have done and what they continue to do is leave a cancer inside the young minds that are being molded for the future.
Signing onto that ad and not also being a human turd would require those nice ones whom you admire to also plead stupidity, for that's what they are. Stupid on all matters of life that count.
Best of luck, Jared. You'll need it.
Didn't Nifong just make Brocker's point when he said that campaigns in Durham are won or lost based on endorsements. In trying to say that Freda wouldn't win without those endorsements, simply to not give her any credit, he's basically saying he was using the media attention to garner such endorsements.
When is KC leaving and when is this blog going to be shut down? How long will he be in Israel?
Inquiring minds, and all that.
11:05, exactly. Nifong has told so many lies that he can't keep up with them all. As you pointed out, he even wound up admitting that the accusations made against him are true, but too confused to know it.
10:38, you're in hot water now!
I thought I had been watching this case closely from inception, however, I only stumbled on this blog a few months ago. Thank god for that. A few thoughts to share if you all have the time.
My son graduates from a New Jersey High School tomorrow. He was one of the captains of his school's soccer team. He could not get into Duke if he tried; he is going to a community college to repair his grades and hopefully catch onto a college soccer team after.
He also has had a brush with the law; he was in the wrong place at the wrong time and made an uncharactaristic decision. In my day the cop would have laughed it off if he was "hip" or driven him home to his parents with no record if he was a "hard ass". It is 2007 in a much softer place than I was reared; we have dealt with the legal aspect.
The point: good Christ, if my son goes to a party like that (knowingly or unknowingly) and gets swept up, what would I do? What would I do? A no drop policy? What would I do? Good Christ my divorce lawyer cost me $300 per hour (a fortune to me; do computers) and as time has gone by it appears I might be able to sue him for incompetence (my savings were gone after the divorce). Even money is not total protection; the high priced defense attorneys said "they got lucky".
"No drop". I judge, I sentence you to hardship. Because I can.
How can this be??????
Are you goodlooking? You might be able to get a hot new babe, younger than the former wife, if you are.
If not, you're doomed since you're now broke.
Stay away from lawyers unless there is no other alternative.
That son of yours sounds as if he needs to get off his ass and do something for himself. If he hasn't put much effort into his studies, the heck with him. He sounds like a fuck-up to me.
Think about yourself for a damned change. You're not getting any younger.
Anne Coulter is brillant and beautiful - smarter and more articulate than most men. She has supported the team and defendents since Day 1. The article connected to this blog is excellent, What is the beef?
Anne also notes his "My reading of the emergency nurse/s report of a sexual assault was a lie. He made this statement on 3/27 - right after Ruthie's We Know essay and the report was not picked up until 4/5. So much for fueling the hoax.
Anne Coulter?? Her "fag" comment about John Edwards really showed some class..... she's an embarrasment to the GOP..... I guess getting the Duke story right absolves her of all other sins, including rampant bigotry, right? Jeesh!! At least now we know what we're really dealing with here....
To Jared:
Thoughtful post, and the charming guy who called you a self-righteous turd is way out of line.
But I don't think defending the 88 (or some of them) on the grounds that they "made a big mistake" -- and we've all made mistakes -- really cuts it. When the "mistake" (1) involves deliberately seeking publicity and (2) hurts people, atoning for that mistake requires a public apology or explanation. Otherwise people are entitled to assume that the actor doesn't accept that it was a mistake at all. The "clarification" letter, the subsequent defiant statements from the worst of the 88, and the silence of the others, make it difficult to believe that any of them regard signing the ad as a mistake or have any regret whatever.
I don't hate the 88. But I have a son in college, and if a threatening mob had assembled outside his house banging drums, calling him a rapist, displaying "Castrate!!" and "Confess" signs, passing out vigilante posters etc., and if 88 of his teachers (salaries paid for by my tuition payments) had placed an ad thanking the mob for its zeal, and never apologized even after events proved them wrong, I'd have a hard time just "moving on."
Duke 1965
Yes we do know. You are an old leftist who has had his day. Try that bile on someone else. John Edwards is a fag. OK? And a huge phony.
Jared--
Thanks for a voice of reason and moderation (even if you did get a little snippy in the second paragraph--not enough to make you a "self-righteous little turd," though). How convenient that 11:01 has seen fit to jump right in and prove your point.
12:00,
Your comment says it all.
Duke JD--
Fair enough--if any of the posters here that Jared is talking about (the ones whose indiscriminate vituperation of the 88 does, indeed, seem to reflect blind hatred rather than reasoned analysis) actually do have sons on the Duke lacrosse team, they're entitled. Those who are merely followers of the case, without a personal connection to it or to Duke University, don't have that excuse and might be able to find more constructive channels for their energy, as Jared suggests.
Duke 1965, don't you think that if John Edwards were a decent man, running for president no less, that he would have tried to do something about this obvious injustice in his own state?
You are blind if you don't see that this man is going nowhere except under his big fat wife's skirt tail. He's even using her illness to score political points.
JLS says....,
re: duke1965
Too bad you are so misinformed that you think Coulter made a "fag comment about John Edwards." One thing this case MIGHT have taught someone is that they should inform themselves before they criticize someone else. Alas you seemed to have learned nothing and only are able to spout something you vaguely remember reading someplace.
Not trying to defend Nifong at all here, but . . .
Officer Himan testified that Nifong said the memorable F-word quote.
This is the same Officer Himan who went to the grand jury to get indictments against all of the Duke 3.
Can Officer Himan be trusted?
JLS,
I'm misinformed? Is the video good enough?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYFijV9pOsE
Her exact quote:
"I was going to say a few words about the other Democratic candidate, John Edwards, but I understand you have to go into rehab if you use the word 'faggot'"
Now, what was that about being uninformed?
JLS says...,
Glad you are smart enough to quote Coulter this time. To bad you are apparently not smart enough to understand what she said.
Coulter was laughing at people like you and the 88 Gangsters for being PC. She did not call Edwards ANYTHING. Now that you have had a professor explain Coulter's comment to you, go back and think about it a long time and see if you can understand this. And if you are able to then we will know by you issuing your apology publically to Ms. Coulter for maligning her due to your failure to read and understand what she was saying.
JLS,
Your "interpretation" defies common sense. In any event, we can at least agree on what she said... amazing that you can take a very specific comment about a specific public figure and somehow reinterpret it as a joke about being PC. And of course, you make the ultimate argument, that anyone who disagrees with you must have low intelligence.......... nice.
Duke1965 didn't say that the cadaverous Coulter called Edwards a fag. He said she made a "fag comment about John Edwards." And that's exactly what she did, as the video shows.
JLS says...,
re: Duke1965
You are not done with your homework. You are still failing. You need to work on being smarter and understanding words better. No need for you to comment further until you issue your apology to Ms. Couter, here.
JLS,
Her comment speaks for itself. As to further posting on this board, are you the moderator? I must have missed that........... unbelievable.
Coulter JLS? You really brought that marginalized shemale into the discourse?
She's the Wahneema Lubiano of the Bush front, willing to whore herself out to the mouth-breathers who still believe the our ever-ridiculous President is doing a good job.
Really JLS, I'm taken aback, I had you pegged as a reasonable individual, but to quote Coulter as some sort of voice to be listened to, to be given attention on this blog, after all the hard work KC has done, well, it truly boggles the mind, and serves as an insult to those who supported three innconent men as they were railroaded.
What's next? A lesson in ethics from Gingrich? A symposium on heroism from Hannity?
You should be ashamed of yourself for bringing that harpy into the conversation. Next you're going to argue that Malkin is a historian os some standing.
JLS says...,
re: Duke1965
You homework is not done yet. I know Duke was easier to get into in 1961, but you can get this if you work hard.
JLS,
I would hope we could agree that at the very least, Ms. Coulter's remark was tasteless and inappropriate in the context of a national political debate, but apparently not. Sen. John McCain, not exactly a member of the PC police, termed the comment "wildly inappropriate". I guess he needs some additional schooling as well.
People are really quoting what showbiz type talking heads are saying.
You are still being played by the media.
John Edwards' doesn't give two craps about the N.C. legal system. His only concern has always been how much money can I make by lying to a gullible, dumbass jury. JE is the biggest phony ever. He is about his wealth first and foremmost, and has the sheer audacity to preach to the poor about how they are being left behind, blah, blah ,blah. Being kind here, John Edwards is a sorry piece of sh*t, and even candyass liberals like the ones at Cal-Berkeley recognize it. They are the ones he charged $55K to talk about poverty. Priceless. Or how about the b.j. he gave communist actor Danny Glover last week?
And Ann Coulter could personally kick his girly ass!
Do not speak ill of the silky pony. There are two Americas, his, and the other one, which could live in his house.
Post a Comment