Wednesday, July 06, 2011

A Few Items

Duke has just announced a new batch of trustees, including a judge on the 4th circuit--Allyson Duncan (Duke Law '75). The appointment presumably will require a double recusal--not only will Duncan need to recuse herself from any and all lacrosse case appeals, but I would assume she'd have to recuse herself, within the BOT itself, from any and all discussions of the lacrosse case. She was a Bush nominee.

Commenting on the DSK case in the Washington Post, Paul Farhi notes how the mainstream media has refused to name his accuser--even as she files a lawsuit against the New York Post. Alan Dershowitz (correctly) comments on the unfairness of this approach, and the article also (correctly) observes how, in an internet era, accusers' names can generally be easily found, making the anonymity policy even less defensible.

And then there's this absurd analysis from June Cross, in The Root: "Even in 2011, it seems, black women who accuse powerful men of rape have to lead lives above reproach. The Duke University lacrosse-team rape case from 2006, and the St. John's College case before that, bear witness to what happens when a young black woman of questionable repute charges rape against privileged men. But the life circumstances of marginalized women force them to make different life choices.

Crystal Mangum's problem wasn't her "marginalized" status--it was the fact that the physical evidence, in myriad ways, contradicted each and every one of her various tall tales.

Finally, the incomparable Dorothy Rabinowitz in the Wall Street Journal praises Manhattan DA Cyrus Vance for his willingness to reconsider the DSK case in light of the accuser's credibility falling apart. She correctly notes that Vance's open-mindedness came as "no small shock in a society accustomed to prosecutors whose instant response to the discovery of facts that undermine their case is to dig in all the more aggressively—recall the Duke University lacrosse case, or the notorious child abuse cases of the 1980s—with assurances that the case against the accused is stronger than ever."


B├╝nzli said...

"[...]praises Manhattan DA Cyrus Vance for his willingness to reconsider the DSK case in light of the accuser's credibility falling apart."

Good for Vance.
Of course in this case the prosecution faced a defendant whose resources matched their own. Strauss-Kahn was in the position to spend millions on lawyers, private investigators etc. The prosecution knew that any damaging information about the accuser would almost certainly have been discovered by DSKs defense team.

Somehow i doubt the state would have been as diligent with its duties under Brady if the defendant was some working stiff with a public defender.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps DSK's greatest contribution will be that prosecutors will think long and hard about the use of the perp walk in the future.


Anonymous said...

but byadding a local grauate judge who would have decided on the case, HASNT DUKE bot advice that she might pass along to them...simply being able to avoid VOTING on anything related to the students barbacue doesnt prevent her from offering advice that the students are prevented from receiving ?

just another way that the BIG CORPORATION and Foundations at Duke seek ways to gain an unfair advantage...

but the truth cant be supressed forever...the law isnt the ass that Duke mocks

Anonymous said...

There is another case in the news, two New York City police officers accused of and then acquitted of raping a woman they were supposed to be helping. They were convicted of misdemeanor charges which amounted to conduct totally unbecoming of police officers(my words). Google "NY Police acquitted of rape" to get the story. These men did disgrace the NYC Police department.

The issue in the rape case was, the crime scene was examined for forensic evidence and there was no forensic evidence of any intimate sexual contact between the accused and the alleged victim. I would say, the feminist attitude was, forensic evidence, or the lack thereof be d----d, the only thing that should have been considered was the word of the alleged victim.

Unfortunately, the word of the victim has been shown to be unreliable. I am not referring to people like Tawana Brawley or Crystal Mangum. I refer to cases like that of Timothy Cole or Darrell Hunt who were convicted on the word of the victim. Unfortunately the victim in each case mistakenly identified an innocent man as a rapist.

In addition we have the woman who falsely accused Michael Flatley of rape, the woman who falsely accused David Copperfield of rape. Feminists have asked, why would a woman falsely accuse a man of rape. In ieach of those cases, the motive was money. Each of the alleged "victims" hoped to get a big settlement by filing civil charges.

The Justice system really needs to examine itself as to how it deals with rape allegations.

Jamal Matsuzaka said...

FYI, "NPR Topics: Story of the Day Podcast" for today is on the "Science of the Lineup". Here's the description.

"Psychologists have long worried that traditional police procedures for photo lineups land many innocent people in jail. Last month, Texas joined nine other states that have passed measures requiring police departments to review and reform their eyewitnes..."

jay said...

Nothing to do with this post, but NYT has an article partially about the Duke/Potti scandal.

Anonymous said...

The June Cross reference to "the St. John's College case" is mistaken. St. John's College, as opposed to St. John's University, where the case to which Cross alludes arose, is an intellectually rigorous school with campuses in Annapolis, MD and Santa Fe, NM, and with no such history.

Anonymous said...

OT -- I'm looking for a good site on the Casey Anthony trial. I.e., a site by someone who approaches that case as thoughtfully and carefully as KC approached the Duke lacrosse case. TIA

Anonymous said...

Is Cross a Communist?

Anonymous said...

Several columnists in recent days have been calling for DSK to be brought to trial.

Chris Halkides said...


I agree, but I wonder why the DL case did not give everyone food for thought with respect to perp walks.

Anonymous said...

Dorothy Rabinowitz the journalist is truly incomparable. I have read quite a few of her investigative stories over the years. I have lamented (and continue to lament) the failure of so many of her journalistic colleagues to emulate her reverence for the facts and the rigor of her analysis of the facts. Of course, most could not match her intellectual firepower or her skill with language. But she stands out as a shining example of how journalists should do their jobs.

Gus W.

Anonymous said...

feminist attitude was, forensic evidence, or the lack thereof be d----d, the only thing that should have been considered was the word of the alleged victim even if that victim is a notorious liar like Brwanley, Mangum, Hill or Diallo.

Latest news from Europe is that the 32 year old journalist who did not press charges on the advice of her mother who is .... a former DSK lover.