Scott Michels of ABC's Law & Justice Unit has a well-done piece just up on the possibility that the unindicted players and their families could file a lawsuit against Duke. [In my quote for the piece, I should have stated "almost" all of the administration, to take account for the behavior of Provost Peter Lange.]
Offering the administration's view, John Burness said, "The university established its position fairly early. First, if what was alleged had occurred, it was not something that was acceptable. Second, in our system you are presumed innocent. And third, the way to settle these issues is through the legal process. We held that position consistently."
I invite readers to examine the 2,395 words in President Brodhead's April 5, 2006 letter--his last public statement on the case before the first two indictments--to determine whether it reflected the policies that Burness laid out.
I also invite readers to consider whether Brodhead's statement to the Durham Chamber of Commerce just after the arrests of Reade Seligmann and Collin Finnerty (“If our students did what is alleged, it is appalling to the worst degree. If they didn’t do it, whatever they did is bad enough") reflected the policies that Burness laid out.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
65 comments:
Any attempt to defend or mitigate the Listening Statement as "not about the lacrosse players" just recently got a whole lot harder. That alone should be making Duke a bit more nervous than they were a week ago - I wonder if it was a factor in the timing of this announcement?
If so - Thanks KC!
H-S letters keep coming:
Durham residents are responsible for Nifong
In her Sept. 22 letter, Cindy Wrenn stated, "They (the Duke three) should be suing Mike Nifong and the woman who falsely accused them of rape" and she also asserts, "They (Durham's citizens) had nothing to do with what happened." That is completely illogical.
The citizens of Durham elected Mike Nifong as their DA last November, long after it was abundantly clear (multiple DNA results, solid alibi documentation, lie detractor examinations, non-corroborative testimony from the second "dancer," ever-changing accusations from the accuser, bogus photographic-array lineups, Nifong's outrageous prosecutorial misconduct, and so much more), that the lacrosse case was without merit and no criminal charges were warranted.
This is not my opinion. It is the factual conclusion reached by North Carolina Attorney General Cooper and his professional, unbiased investigators. Durham's citizens had the opportunity to evaluate all this information and to deny Nifong election. They did not do so. Therefore, Durham's citizens are accountable for their miserable electoral decisions. Further, Durham's citizens are financial responsible for the criminal misdeeds of their police force and their prosecutor.
R.W. KIEFER
Springfield, Va
September 26, 2007
I really hope this happens.
Wonder who the attorneys will be for this lawsuit?
Perhaps Scheck should get David Rudolf to play a more significant role, locally.
Debrah asks:
"Wonder who the attorneys will be for this lawsuit?"
Read the ABC story & Liestoppers thread.
Wikipedia on Charles Cooper:
"Charles J. "Chuck" Cooper is an appellate attorney and litigator in Washington, D.C. and a founding member and chairman of the law firm Cooper & Kirk, PLLC. He was named by The National Law Journal as one of the 10 best civil litigators in Washington, he has over 25 years of legal experience in government and private practice, with numerous cases in trial and appellate court as well as several appearances before the United States Supreme Court."
From his firm's website:
"Recent Victories
Winning 3 week trial allowing Tennessee to generate savings of more than $200 million a year from Medicaid reforms
Winning a trial verdict of $109 million against the United States for American Capital Corporation in complex banking litigation arising out of a breach of contract
Securing a settlement resulting in payment of more than $40 million to a qui tam whistleblower
Winning a trial verdict of more than $18 million against the United States for Bank of America in complex banking litigation
Successfully defending Florida's felon disenfranchisement law at the district court and before the en banc Eleventh Circuit
Successfully litigating, after a three week trial in federal district court, a constitutional challenge to Puerto Rico's 2004 gubernatorial election
Successfully defending Michigan's Medicaid reforms in the D.C. District Court and the D.C. Circuit
Successfully defending Puerto Rico's imposition of a beer excise tax in the D.C. District Court and the D.C. Circuit
Acting as appellate counsel, successfully overturned adverse trial verdict and convinced court of appeals to enter judgment of more than $10 million for Ford Motor Company "
You're the one always with the YouTube videos, I think this news calls for a little Warren Zevon.
Duke Med's lovely gift from billionaire David Murdock, 84:
Much of the research will take place on the site in Kannapolis of the former Pillowtex textile plant, which closed in 2003, putting 4,000 people out of work. The new N. C. Research Campus will be a welcome boost to the Kannapolis economy. Murdock has pledged to spend more than $1 billion to renovate the plant for multiple uses -- one being a massive research facility where experts from the UNC System will work.
Duke, North Carolina and the rest of the world are lucky to have a benefactor like Murdock, who knows first-hand the pain of losing a loved one to an illness. His wife, Gabriella, died of cancer in 1985.
"I swore to myself that I would take whatever funds that it cost -- never dreaming that it would take this much funds -- but that I would do something somewhere," Murdock said. "I did not know at the time [it would be] here in North Carolina."
Murdock, a commercial and residential property developer and owner of Dole Food Co., also considered giving money to California and several other states before deciding on North Carolina and Duke.
It speaks well of Duke University Health System President and CEO Victor Dzau and his excellent team that Murdock chose them to entrust with his dream -- and his millions.
11:48 - Its Charles Cooper.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_J._Cooper
1. once again, notice how the person promoting punishment of durham and supporting the Lax players IS FROM OUT OF TOWN. this is a constant.
2.I hope duke does not settle and goes to court this time and rakes the team over the fire with their disciplinary records, police files, etc. ie, the actual facts of the team behavior, not the pr campaign they have been waging
3.compared to the duke 3, the rest of the team has no grounds to sue duke and this is just more greed. The duke 3 had no grounds to sue either as it is perfectly reasonable to suspend students charged with a FELONY from a college campus. duke settled because they were cowardly and routinely settle lawsuits to avoid publicity but had they gone to court, duke would have won as the grounds for suit were shaky.
Perhaps university administrators are starting to realize that angry studies constitute an enormous unfunded liability.
Clearly the Duke administration still doesn't get it.
They cancelled the lacrosse season, they slandered the players and they have never publicly apologized for any of their behavior.
The defense that they were simply responding to the fact that they hired strippers and there was some underage drinking is laughable. They have never disciplined the twenty other Duke entities that hired strippers and in fact have never made public statements criticizing them.
The only plausible explanation of the Duke administration's singling out of the lacrosse team was the presumption of guilt, a belief that the accusations of rape were valid.
The failure to come to grips with what happened indicates they are still dominated by the hard core of faculty militants who filter things through their lens of gender/race/class oppression.
Until Duke comes to grips with the privileged group of faculty bullies and their administrative enablers, the mess will continue.
A simple apology might well have avoided a law suit. The fact that the administration could not publicly acknowledge the unfair harm they had done to the lacrosse players is a testament to the power of the gang of 88 and its supporters. The school may well shell out millions more in settlements to avoid saying "I'm sorry."
The ABC piece included this sentence:
"The ad did not mention the lacrosse team, but it was viewed by some as a condemnation of the players and became a focal point for accusations that faculty members were biased against the players."
The ABC article should have also had this statement:
"In soliciting signatories for the ad, Duke Professor Wahneema Lubiano wrote an e-mail to faculty members stating, "African & African-American Studies is placing an ad in The Chronicle about the lacrosse team incident." and asking if they (faculty recipients of her e-mail) were " ... willing to spam [send unsolicited] this [Lubiano's solicitation letter] to other individual faculty or to your chairs to see if they're interested in supporting the ad and so that as many faculty as possible have a chance to see it and sign on ..."
Thus it is obvious that both the authors of the ad and all faculty who read Lubiano's solicitation e-mail were quite clear that the ad was about the lacrosse team incident."
One Spook
Debrah's posting @11:45 AM of an H-S letter written by R.W. Kiefer states:
" ... lie detractor examinations ..."
Damn ... that examination sounds painful ...
One Spook
AN OPEN APOLOGY?
KC, In checking out the link you provided for Jay Bilas’ letter calling for Brodhead’s resignation, there were also letters posted from Wahneema Lubiano and Michael Gustafson.
http://dukemagazine.duke.edu/dukemag/issues/091007/depfor.html
Lubiano's letter documents that she has been consistently misquoted. Michael Gustafson's letter explicitly states that he misquoted Lubiano when saying she called the lax players “Perfect offenders”, and misqoted Hollowayfor saying white innocence equals black guilt and vice versa. His letter is a public apology for these incorrect statements. These letters came as a huge surprise to me.
I cannot say if your blog was the original source of these misquotations, but therecan be no doubt you have repeatedly attributed these quotations to Lubiano and Holloway over the past year (inaccurately, it turns out). Are you willing to follow Gustafson’s lead and publicly apologize for these errors?
p.s. For those who will no doubt attack me for having the temerity to suggest that KC apologize, no, I am not a member of the Group of 88 or part of the Duke administration. But I do want to see responsibility taken for demonstrably false assertions that are now widely accepted as fact.
One can only hope that this lawsuit is about more than just compensation, and will not be settled secretly. It would be fascinating to see the results of a Federal Court discovery hanging out all of the dirty laundry.
And President Brodhead being cross-examined: I suspect that he would make Dr. Meehan sound like a model of precision, clarity, and honesty.
Post-modern deconstruction, meet perjury and contempt of court.
To the 12.38:
Do you have a specific reference in the blog where I have made "demonstrably false assertions" about either Lubiano or Holloway?
Anonymous at 12:38 PM
If Gustafson has publicly admitted to misquoting Lubiano and Holloway, then how could this blog possibly the be original source of the misquotations? Doesn't that make Gustafson the original source of the misquotations - by his own admission?
I am not insulting you personally, because we are both anonymous and I think anonymous attacks are reprehensible. However, the logic you employed is worthy of the 88 at their best. Are you certain you are not a member of the Duke administration?
Presumably the discovery process for this lawsuit will involve scrutiny of pretty much every piece of email sent or received by Duke faculty and administration since the initial incident. I can't wait.
To 12:38,
Thats it, muddy the waters with false accusations about false accusations. Do you really think that defending these paedogogical terrorists is wise?
You'll never be able to find a pony in all of that manure.
What, the beloved Dean Sue abrogating students' rights by allowing the wanted posters to fly all over the campus? No way! And yet it happened. Was she aware that Gottlieb picked on Duke students more so than regular Durham residents of the same age?
For those who claim that Until Proven Innocent will be remaindered by Thanksgiving (I think that was the prediction from a Gang of 88 sycophant), it is currently #120 on Amazon.
I think that makes KC a much more productive and useful scholar than all of the Gang of 88.
Anonymous 9/26/07 12:24 PM said...
"notice how the person promoting punishment of durham and supporting the Lax players IS FROM OUT OF TOWN. this is a constant."
Well duh. The folks who need punishing aren't exactly jumping up and down asking for it. Like this is a surprise?
Don't tase me, bro, but check out the Bull City-in-Wonderland blog . . .
12:38PM
Perhaps if Wahneema Lubiano could clearly say what she means or mean what she actually says she would not be complaining that she has been misquoted again.
I recall that she also complained about an ESPN article misquoting her. She denied that she ever said "to drive a stake through the collective heart of the lacrosse team" but she never told readers exactly what she did say to the reporter that was misinterpreted.
If Brian Meehan is Mr. Obfuscation, Wahneema Lubiano certainly deserves to be called Ms. Obfuscation.
Did you actually read the entire five and a half pages of her essay? It is almost unreadable and should've been submitted with a shovel.
"Further, this group has been responsible for extended social violence against the neighborhood in which they reside. In short, by a combination of their behaviors and what they represent in terms of social facts, and by virtue of their relation to the alleged victim, for those who are defenders of the victim, the members of the team are almost perfect offenders..."
W. Lubiano
"How do we measure, value, assess, and document the energy of spirit, body, and intellect expended by those who endure the problems caused by cultures of both masculine and white racial disrespect? In its forms of verbal violence as well as physical, in its presumption that there are some bodies available for taunt and tirade, whim and whisper, the "event" is phased back into the subaltern spaces of university life and culture. Their sporting behaviors, on and off the courts, endure.
At the conclusion of spring semester the lacrosse team, minus three indicted (and one suspended) member, gathered to celebrate their reinstatement on Duke's campus. Their reinstatement was accompanied by a code of conduct they inexplicably wrote for themselves. At this gathering, their interim coach (who had been, just three years prior, their former team member) vigorously professed his blanket judgment that those who stood indicted for the rape of a student from North Carolina Central University were innocent. As the day drew to a close, every indication was that the remaining team members' athletic careers would continue nearly uninterrupted except for the scrutiny of the administration and their self-authored code.
The interim coach's pronouncement was critical in weighing the significance of this event. In nearly every social context that emerged following the team's crude conduct, innocence and guilt have been assessed through a metric of race and gender. White innocence means black guilt. Men's innocence means women's guilt. These capacious categories, which were in absolute play the night of the team's drunken debacle, continue their hold on the campus and the Durham community."
K. Holloway
I doubt there would be much new in any discovery process. I think the team is going for the bucks and not the discovery. I think they do deserve compensation for the money spent on lawyers and some inconvenience. Sleeping in a car is not it, particularly as a motel in the Durham area is cheap. That was a personal choice - but reads pretty good.
TO Spook--
(12:37 PM)
That's the quality of "editing" at the current H-S.
LIS!
To 12:38: Let's look at some of what Lubiano did in context. Then, let's look at Lubiano's actual words. Then, perhaps others will add their interpretations. Here is a small part of the context:
FIRST, she authored the "Listening ad" during a period of high tension in Durham. She apparently knew it would be perceived as a "stake in the heart" of the Lacrosse players. The "Listening ad" was published on April 6, 2006.
SECOND, on April 10, 2006, local and national media reported that:
1. Scientific testing found no DNA on or in the false accuser from any Lacrosse player. This, after allegations of a three-man, 30-minute violent gang rape involving ejaculation.
2. Time-stamped photographs showed the rape could not have occurred as alleged.
THIRD, on April 13, 2006, Lubiano posts her piece entitled: "A Social Disaster: Voices from Durham." The subheading used by Lubiano was "PERFECT OFFENDERS, Perfect Victim: The Limitations of Spectacularity in the Aftermath of the Lacrosse Team Incident." (emphasis added). Lubiano wrote in her article:
"Within the terms of the responses to the [Duke] incident, I understand the impulse of those outraged and who see the alleged offenders as the exemplars of the upper end of the class hierarchy, the politically dominant race and ethnicity, the dominant gender, the dominant sexuality, and the dominant social group on campus. Further, this group has been responsible for extended social violence against the neighborhood in which they reside. In short, by a combination of their behaviors and what they represent in terms of social facts, and by virtue of their relation to the alleged victim, for those who are defenders of the victim, the members of the team are almost perfect offenders in the sense that Crenshaw writes about. As more information circulates and the stakes are raised by virtue of considerations of Duke’s and the nation’s long-standing class, race, and gender disparities, they are increasingly “perfected” as offenders."
INTERPRETATION: Lubiano is stating that the boys look like "perfect offenders," but she also knows that the evidence isn't shaping up to be "perfect," so she argues that the universtiy doesn't need perfect offenders, perfect victims or perfect evidence to demand change at Duke.
My opinions only! Gregory
12:24,
You should have nothing to fear.
Let me suggest, however, that when the Yankees come to town and you throw a hanging curve ball, you'll need to... DUCK.
Regarding Burness' comments with respect to Duke's position (qualified as being adopted "fairly early") including emphasis on the presumption of innocence... it is dispiriting to see senior members of the Duke administration LIE so blantantly.
Burness... have you no shame?
I am not sure if you can open this link if you are not registered with the Wall Street Journal, but it was a very interesting editorial:
WSJ
2:25 says..I doubt there would be much new in any discovery process. I think the team is going for the bucks and not the discovery.
No new discovery, then no "big bucks". My guess is they'll get both the big bucks and the discovery information. You can't argue with that kind of result, can you 2:25? Wouldn't you love to see the truth come out, big fella?
Although each of the remaining 43 present slightly different factual postures, my sense is that, *on average*, each should expect--at bare minumum--$250K from Duke, plus out-of-pocket defense costs.
"2.I hope duke does not settle and goes to court this time and rakes the team over the fire with their disciplinary records, police files, etc. ie, the actual facts of the team behavior, not the pr campaign they have been waging"
You must be a teaching assistant for the group of you-know-what. The team's behavior has been well-documented, including by Duke, which found the team's only real indiscretion was drinking too much. (good grades, good community service record). This is all public information - how is the team going to get raked?
I honestly don't understand what motivates these people who are so hateful of college students yet give a pass to the most craven and evil of people who will sell innocent citizens down the river for their own careers.
"3.compared to the duke 3, the rest of the team has no grounds to sue duke and this is just more greed. The duke 3 had no grounds to sue either as it is perfectly reasonable to suspend students charged with a FELONY from a college campus. duke settled because they were cowardly and routinely settle lawsuits to avoid publicity but had they gone to court, duke would have won as the grounds for suit were shaky."
The entire team was a victim of defamation of character by Duke employees, and had its civil rights violated by a willing University administration.
After the Seligmann alibi came out (which followed the DNA that showed no link), the suspensions were clearly bogus as the case was clearly null. Probable cause was falsely established. If Duke is going to claim they suspended them "for their own safety," what does that say about the kind of people Duke brings onto its campus if it fears its students, staff or faculty might physically harm other members of the community?
Anonymous 12:30 said...
...Clearly the Duke administration still doesn't get it.
::
I would not be to sure about that.
Maintaining, encouraging and continuing an environment of hostile workplace harassment does not allow for apologies insofar as there are certain behaviors you can't apologize for.
Knowingly fostering an environment of hostile workplace harassment is way up there towards the top of that list, in my opinion.
::
GP
"I doubt there would be much new in any discovery process"
Are you serious? I can't wait for discovery. it will be more interesting than this blog - if that is possible.
Anon 2:25 PM said...
"I doubt there would be much new in any discovery process. I think the team is going for the bucks and not the discovery."
----
Hmm...Don't underestimate the potential embarrassment [to the City] of discovery in this case. See, just for starters, KC's previous posts on "unanswered questions".
Herr Gottlieb, for example, in my opinion, could go to prison for giving either truthful or false testimony in his depositions, or at trial. Which would destroy not only Herr Gottlieb, but also whatever is left of the Durham PD's reputation, and the City that employs it.
"Going for the bucks"? Certainly, and why not. But, the prospect of discovery creating a generation-long scandal is very real here, I think, and is important for the plaintiffs to use, both as a satisfying goal in itself and, true, as a tool to boost the cash value of settling the case. And of course, for potential use at trial.
The emails between the group of 88 about the hoax will be priceless.
Did Univ funds pay for the AD?
Did someone at Duke give the police the McFadden email?
Did Duke give key card info to the police without a warrant?
Who let the Police search students rooms without a warrant?
What was the admin response to Woods unfounded attacks on the Lax players about Indian genocide?
What was the admin response to the grade retaliation against lax players?
What was the admin response to Lax players being criticized in class by profs?
Discovery, good times....
3:11 notes: "Are you serious? I can't wait for discovery. it will be more interesting than this blog - if that is possible."
Absolutely correct. I, as well, cannot wait for discovery to extract the Brodhead/Burress/Steele/G88 sludge for a full, open, and incredibly public airing. God knows what else the cowardly Duke "leaders" are hiding. This will be fun, trust me.
To the person with the erratic cap lock key at 12:24:
Yes, I for one am from "OUT OF TOWN" and I think Durham must be punished and I support the lax players. I live in Maine to be exact.
The outside agitators ploy is so shamefully threadbare that you reveal your quality in using it. It was once a staple of the segregationist South and such worthies as George Wallace. I'm sure it is on the lips of many Durhamites at the moment. Though I'm also sure it was not on those same lips when the Reverends Jackson and Sharpton put in their oar.
But now here this: There was a monstrous injustice perpetrated in a place called the United States of America and which was abetted by a group of benighted academics who wanted to swell its meaning into a universal condemnation of that place and people like myself. They pushed it beyond the borders of "duke"(sic) and Durham.
With the steady accretion of facts in this and several other blogs, what began as the lie of a vicious and disturbed young black woman has become a case study of what is wrong with several important American institutions. She was a local problem, what she stirred up is not.
The parallels between Duke and Columbia can be summed up in the last paragraph in this letter to the NY Times from a Columbia Med School faculty member;
To the Editor:
The visit to Columbia University by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was a theater of the absurd. The eloquent and on-target attack on the Iranian president by Lee C. Bollinger, the president of Columbia, lacked the impact that similar words would have had when courageously voiced by Iranian academics in Iran, where they would face imprisonment.
Moreover, Columbia’s Middle East studies faculty invited the wrong guy! It is well known that Ayatollah Ali Khamenei runs Iran, not Mr. Ahmadinejad, who is given more credibility at Columbia University than in his own country.
In repeated e-mail discussions I had with Mr. Bollinger and other administrators, they justified inviting Mr. Ahmadinejad to speak at our campus because he would be engaged in “debate” and asked hard questions. Yet Mr. Bollinger admitted at the conclusion of his remarks that he did not expect Mr. Ahmadinejad to answer any of his “hard” questions.
Columbia’s Middle East studies faculty owes it to the students to invite more credible representatives of Iranian culture and politics. In my field of biomedical sciences, a scholar of such low repute would not be invited to speak at Columbia University. This theater of the absurd was staged by a tiny minority of faculty whose political agenda supersedes the academic standards that Columbia University should stand for.
Andrew R. Marks, M.D.
New York, Sept. 25, 2007
The writer is professor and chairman, department of physiology and cellular biophysics at Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons.
Weak president, jaundiced faculty members... etc, etc, etc... social justice for few.
KC:
Re: Charles Cooper - lawsuit
Duke will be able to prove their innocence in a court of law.
Ken
Dallas
anonymous at 12:42 PM said: "1. once again, notice how the person promoting punishment of durham and supporting the Lax players IS FROM OUT OF TOWN. this is a constant." I am from Durham and I am not opposed to the LAX3 getting compensation, nor am I opposed to the other aims of their proposed litigation. I am not alone. People in Durham are capable of seeing that we have a problem with the supervision of the Police Department.
2.I hope duke does not settle and goes to court this time and rakes the team over the fire with their disciplinary records, police files, etc. ie, the actual facts of the team behavior, not the pr campaign they have been waging It is a convenient talking point to claim a PR campaign. Unfortunately, the facts of the lacrosse case are fairly well established. There was no DNA from any of the defendants or any other person at the party, other than Ms. Mangum's. There was no rape. No physical evidence corroborated Mangum's numerous stories. Even Mike Nifong dropped the rape charges and tried, if briefly, to proceed on kidnapping and sexual assault. However, there was no evidence to support a charge of sexual assault as Ms. Mangum could not reliably identify anyone who assaulted her. Further, there was no evidence of an actual assault, sexual or otherwise. "Difuse adema" is not evidence of an assault given Mangum's prior activities. Finally, there is no evidence of a kidnapping, no matter how brief. She could not identify any potential kidnappers, and at least one of the people she did identify had an alibi for the time of the alleged kidnapping. As for the students records, it is supposition as to what they contain. But, a revealation of those records will be balanced against the record of Duke University and its employees.
3. The duke 3 had no grounds to sue either as it is perfectly reasonable to suspend students charged with a FELONY from a college campus. duke settled because they were cowardly and routinely settle lawsuits to avoid publicity but had they gone to court, duke would have won as the grounds for suit were shaky. Suspension for being charged with a felony is, on its face, reasonable. But, once it became clear, no later than May, 2006, that the felony charges were bogus, the suspensions were no longer reasonable. But, it was not reasonable to suspend the lacrosse season. The other players were not indicted. It was not reasonable to fire Coach Pressler as it appears to any disinterested observer that he exercised reasonable institutional oversight of the program. It was not reasonable to circulate a poster accusing the team of a "wall of silence". Especially so when the team was, according to initial police reports, cooperating with the police. Telling the truth, when it is not what the police want to hear is not being uncooperative. Using class time to denigrate the lacrosse team was certainly not unreasonable.
Walt in Durham.
As the learned counsel over at LS notes, a lawsuit by the remaining Lax 43--under the astute stewardship of their lead attorney (Cooper)--will almost assuredly survive Duke's inevitable motion to dismiss. If the lawsuit does survive the motion, as expected, from Duke's perspective, quite literally, all Hell breaks loose. From this point forward ample and onerous discovery commences and it's "game on." And it is also at the motion to dismiss denial--at that precise moment--that Duke's fate is sealed. At that moment, Brodhead resigns, Steele resigns (if their sorry butts are still around by then), and the G88 begin to wake up in the middle of the night in a cold, uncomfortable sweat.
Only those who have been on the wrong side of a potentially personally bankrupting lawsuit can even begin to understand the pain these bastards will confront.
To 12:24:
If local Durhamites are incapable of, or too stupid to - clean their own town of corruption, incompetence and bigotry, you cannot cry foul when people from "out of town" have to do it for you!
A major part of the problem is that morons like yourself cannot understand that Durham is not an independent republic - it is part of a state and that state is part of a nation.
Realise just for once that Durham is an embarassment to the whole country.
3:29
Good points, and were my thoughts exactly. Duke will settle, they have already shown how easily they roll over, and want in a bad way for this to be over. The discovery process would be very embarrasing for them, epsecially when the behavior of their professors comes to the forefront.
BDay
Nancy Grace was "out of town"; The NY Times was "out of town"; the battle was / is being fought for some fundamental rights and safety measures of a free society and academic freedom ( TO LEARN.... that is what parents pay for! Not indoctrination, but knowledge).
This is not a merely local issue. Anybody with three brain cells to rub together knows that.
A simple but sincere admission of wrong-doing and an APPROPRIATE apology from Duke, Durham, the idiot 88ers, and the DPD would have saved these groups MILLIONS of dollars.
But their pride and PC agenda are now going to cost, and cost big.
The people who COULD have turned Durham around, and voted Nifong out, just turned their heads instead. NOW it is their turn to see what it looks like when the truth begins to come out and they learn they have been complicit by passivity.
The lesson is huge... not just for Durham.
In a free society, everybody suffers when the laws are spurned.
School is in session in Durham. Let the books be opened and the lessons begin.
dsl
3:57 Shhhhh... don't tell them. I am YEARNING for the discovery to begin. Unless it does, there will always be a spin on it all and the truth will continue to be the biggest victim.
Don't warn them. Let them enter this hall of mirrors, and let them learn what it is like to have the shoe on the other foot.
Please don't scare them away. Feed their pore little ole martyred and misunderstood egos. Let them think that no reasonable court will find them guilty.
Just let it happen.
We NEED the rooms to be cleared of the snakes. If you alert them that we are coming, they will coil and strike. Just be quiet and watch it happen.
Yeahhhhh !!!!!!!!!!!!
FWIW, I posted a long time ago (I'm not in the mood to find it) that WL's "perfect offenders" statement had been misunderstood. She was offering an analysis of the way they were being treated, not saying that she, herself, saw them that way. She even used the word "alleged" in the extracts quoted above.
The LS email gives away her game. No need to misread her, uh, challenging prose for bonus points.
I am still simply dumbfounded as to how the Feds have not gotten involved in this case. The number of wrongs done in this case is almost too numerous to count, and I am sure the discovery process would lead to many more. We the people should demand or justice system do better. If the Feds don't act on this one, the people (voters) should make themselves heard.
BDay
"This theater of the absurd was staged by a tiny minority of faculty whose political agenda supersedes the academic standards that Columbia University should stand for."
As with Duke, the majority let it happen, and have been letting similar things happen for a long time. The academy is supposedly self-governing, so they are responsible.
BDay
Anna Mills Wagoner, the US Attorney for the district Duke is in, is a former North Carolina judge.
Need I say more?
4:06pm, you're forgetting that, while they're snakes, they possess an intentional, selective blindness. Besides, there's really nothing they can do to defend themselves anyway.
BDay, I think the feds are still waiting to see when/if the state clears house, and they're undergoing a big change at the top. Give it time, and if the NC AG doesn't get involved and soon, expect a redux of General Sherman arriving at Atlanta.
In response to the various pending legal actions, perhaps Duke should cancel the African-American Studies Department's semester, so the department can focus on proving its innocence in court. Maybe set up a few committees, too.
Anon @ 4:45 writes:
"In response to the various pending legal actions, perhaps Duke should cancel the African-American Studies Department's semester, so the department can focus on proving its innocence in court. Maybe set up a few committees, too."
Excellent idea ... best seen to date! Whatever the Angry Studies Department did was bad enough! I also think firing the department head would be a good idea too, so Duke can "move forward in a new direction."
One Spook
These lawsuits involving the remaining lax players are civil lawsuits. The Feds would bring criminal charges. We can still have both--it's not either/or.
Discovery won't happen. They'll wimp out and settle. If for no other reason, Brodhead should be fired for costing the University millions in settlements.
12:24 --
"I hope duke does not settle and goes to court this time and rakes the team over the fire with their disciplinary records, police files, etc. ie, the actual facts of the team behavior, not the pr campaign they have been waging"
You know, that's the second time this week I've seen someone allege a "PR campaign" being waged by the players. I am assuming that you do not mean ordinary people, like the ones on this blog, who are of their own free will and without pay standing up for what is right -- because then you would have to admit that the same label of "a PR campaign" applies to every single person who banged pots, who wrote letters to the editors condemning the players (frequently based wholly on the lies told by the police or the prosecutor), who shot off their mouths about "silent whiteness", and yes, it would certainly include the New Black Panther Party, who came in FROM OUT OF TOWN declaring that they had already found the players "guilty" (before, it seems, so much as speaking to a single one of them, courtroom death threats excepted.)
So let's give you the benefit of the doubt that you are not engaged in hypocritical one-sided name-calling when you use the term "PR campaign". Please, then, name for us one person or firm who is part of this "PR campaign". Just one. That's all you need. Just one. Just demonstrate for us that the allegation you are making is not a slander made up entirely by you to conform to your own bigoted view. All you need is one. Just make the public statement, which will be legally actionable if you are lying or speaking with reckless disregard for the truth, "X is being paid money for the primary purpose of orchestrating public opinion regarding the players."
Regarding AN OPEN APOLOGY (12:38):
Gustafson did not say at all that he misquoted Holloway for writing that white innocence means black guilt. Holloway in fact wrote that.
Here's a link to Gustafson's letter: http://dukemagazine.duke.edu/dukemag/issues/091007/depfor.html#lacro
Gustafson *did* say that he that he was unclear or had implied a statement not made by Holloway. He corrected his record to state:
<< Dr. Holloway, in her article, "Coda: Bodies of Evidence," did not herself set forth the equations above but discussed how many in society viewed the case, stating that "… innocence and guilt have been assessed through a metric of race and gender." >>
I brought up essentially this point to KC in his top 32 countdown (see: http://durhamwonderland.blogspot.com/2007/09/top-32-countdown-iv.html) -- I suggested that Holloway's equation was a lament describing how attitudes were in Durham at the time, not necessarily how they should be.
KC stated clearly that he doesn't see the remark as a lament. I disagree with him on that note, but I do agree with him that the document was polarizing and suggested that racial solidarity could trump pursuit of truth.
Even in our disagreement, I see KC's line as a different interpretation of a difficult/confusing line of text to parse. There's nothing demonstrably false in what he's said.
- jamegumb
12:24
I'm with you. I hope they do go to court. There is absolutely NO WAY that the Duke administration can defend their admitted FERPA violations. That puts them in Federal court. Violation of the privacy act times at least 46 players.mmmmm....sounds like either big bucks or big lock-ups. Take your pick. Question is how many in the administration will be forced to go to the bank or to the booking room.
Now, let's talk civil rights violations. Yep. No defense here either.
And this is just Duke and just on two points.
The DPD. There isn't even enough time to go into all of that. Rights violated at the voluntary DNA testing. Abuses by Gotlies, Add-a-sin, Will-sin, and the list goes on.
Do all 46 deserve money from Duhhh? Probably not. At least not big bucks. Reade, Collin, and Dave------definitely.
Duke--pay up is coming.
TO Ralph Phelan--
(12:05 PM)
Sorry for the late reply. I am usually going to different websites while I'm posting here and I missed your comment.
I should say "Duh" to my question since the answer was contained inside KC's link. I didn't read it then...with the plan to come back later.
Like right now. LIS!
So, it's Charles Cooper.
Well....I don't know anything about him except what the article says. His statements seem too tentative.
Anyway, you asked for Warren Zevon...and since tonight there is a full moon.....voila!
Werewolves
$260,000K each. Is it to late to join the team and get part of the payoff? Even Gottlieb is presumed innocent until proven quilty. Or does that just apply to the "boys?" The FEds are not coming, there will be no new discovery - as titillating as it would be and once KC goes to Israel, the event is over.
3:59 Other than Nifong, who got himself in to deep, even Durham could not save him, the rest of the Durham officals and PD are safe. "Out of towners changing the town" - not in our lifetime. i do not live in NC and care not at all about Durham or NC.
"...once KC goes to Israel, the event is over."
In your dreams.
Besides, Israel is not Mars.
I wish I could remember exactly where I said it. But when John "they're not choirboys" Burness was quoted in a story saying this was "a teachable moment", I wrote a letter to the publication saying that I expected, when the dust settled, that it would be Mr. "apologize, for what?" Burness who would be having "a teachable moment" all his own.
It's good to be right. :D
Re: 4;45 PM. and ONE SPOOK
Absolutely fabulous idea! Poetic justice! "Suspend" the 88ers classes, and fire the Wahneeennaaa etc. who captained the team.
Yes! Best idea ever.
What? Throw these dear "innocents" under the bus?
Of course. Duke's system of justice.
Welcome to "turn around's fair play" friends and neighbors.
Revenge is SWEET.
"The FEds are not coming, there will be no new discovery"
Yeah, right. Just like Nifong will never be disbarred, and never be convicted.
TIme will tell - just as it has with many aspects of this case. I do not remember anyone writing Nifong would not be disbarred or never convicted.
Post a Comment