Housekeeping matters: I tweet all my posts (both here and from Minding the Campus) on my twitter feed; follow me here.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Comments and analysis about the Duke/Nifong case (2006-2014).
Blog Awards
About Me
DIW in the News
- New York Magazine (Kurt Andersen)
- cnnsi (Richard Deitsch)
- Slate (Stuart Taylor)
- National Post (Mary Vallis)
- Chicago Sports Review
- Worcester Telegram(Paul Jarvey)
- New York Sun (John Leo)
- North Adams Transcript (Adam Bloch)
- New Criterion
- New York Observer (Anna Schneider-Mayerson)
- Towerview/Chronicle (Rob Copeland)
- New York Post (John Podhoretz)
- Volokh Conspiracy (Jim Lindgren)
- USNews.com (Michael Barone)
- Crime and Federalism
- Chicago Sports Review (Matt Wood)
- Seton Hall Sports Blog
- Wall Street Journal (Randy Barnett)
- N&O (Eric Ferreri)
- Blogger News Network (Jefferson Flanders)
- Slate (Jack Shafer)
- New York Sun (Eliana Johnson)
- Infodder
- Duke Chronicle (Saidi Chen)
Comments Policy
(1) Comments are moderated, but with the lightest of touches, to exclude only off-topic comments or obviously racist or similar remarks.
(2) My clearing a comment implies neither that I agree nor that I disagree with the comment. My opinion is expressed in my words and my words only. Since this blog has more than 1500 posts, and since I at least occasionally comment myself, the blog provides more than enough material for readers to discern my opinions.
(3) If a reader finds an offensive comment, I urge the reader to e-mail me; if the comment is offensive, I will gladly delete it.
(4) Commenters who either misrepresent their identity or who engage in obvious troll behavior will not have their comments cleared. Troll-like behavior includes, but is not limited to: repeatedly linking to off-topic sites; repeatedly asking questions that already have been answered; offering unsubstantiated remarks whose sole purpose appears to be inflaming other commenters.
- "From the Scottsboro Boys to Clarence Gideon, some of the most memorable legal narratives have been tales of the wrongly accused. Now “Until Proven Innocent,” a new book about the false allegations of rape against three Duke lacrosse players, can join these galvanizing cautionary tales . . , Taylor and Johnson have made a gripping contribution to the literature of the wrongly accused. They remind us of the importance of constitutional checks on prosecutorial abuse. And they emphasize the lesson that Duke callously advised its own students to ignore: if you’re unjustly suspected of any crime, immediately call the best lawyer you can afford."--Jeffrey Rosen, New York Times Book Review
Links
Motions and Documents
- Attorney General's Report
- DNA motion
- Lineup motion
- Supplementary lineup motion
- Change of venue motion
- Bar amended complaint/Nifong response
- December 15 hearing
- State Bar v. Nifong
- Brewer removal motion
- Nifong December 28 letter to Bar
- Nifong January 16 letter to Bar
- Group of 88 statement (removed from Duke website)
- Group of 88 membership
- Transcript of relevant sections, April 4 "identification" "procedure"
15 comments:
I voted for everyone's -- and Durham's -- favorite.
I really wish the competition weren't so stiff. I find it difficult to figure out which is the worst.
After reading the dossiers of each of these people who defile their office every time they go to work, I had to go with John Bradley. That said, each and every one of them should be richly rewarded with permanent disbarment and time in a state corrections facility of their victims' choosing.
I just can't make the leap to Twitter. Everyone must have their limits. Mine is Twitter. That and fast food will be the death of us all. Happy New Year KC.
There is a problem with the poll. No "all of the above" button"! What a sorry list........yuck.
K.C.,
I want DIW readers to know that, in the finest of political traditions, I am doing my best to stuff the ballot box so that Tracey can win this "prestigious" award.
I have suggested to Radley that he rename it The Nifong Award or just The Nifong, but he has not yet done so. Nonetheless, Tracey Cline has upheld the proudest of traditions of not just prosecutorial abuse (heck, ANY prosecutor can lie and cheat, and most do), but to go beyond the Call of Duty and be as outrageous as possible.
Go Tracey!!
I see that at the present time, our efforts are paying off an TRACEY IS IN THE LEAD!! These are exciting times I tell you.
Iowa? New Hampshire? What's that? THIS is the election that counts!
Tracey line is farther ahead of the pack than Mitt Romney was in Iowa :-).
She has some pretty tough competition when one of the nominees are like this:
Ebert’s incredible justification for withholding exculpatory evidence: He feared that it would have allowed Wolfe’s attorneys to “fabricate a defense around what is provided.”
OOPS! John Bradley has surged.
C'mon folks - let's give Tracey all the support she deserves. :-)
I voted for Tracey but Bradley is some pretty stiff comp. This may come down to the wire!!
Tracey may have a new one to prosecute.
http://www.newsobserver.com/2012/01/05/1753671/durham-dss-boards-move-likely.html
But maybe she won't be able to bollix this one in time to effect the results. Darn.
Have also been doing my best but late last night when I tried to vote (in the best Chicago style, yet again) I received a message that I had already voted. However, today is a new day so will once again be trying to help Tracey win this most coveted award.
cks
I'm really sorry, but I had to vote for Switzer. Please forgive me.
As much as I appreciate the antics of Tracey Cline, Lynn Switzer got my vote. I have looked over the mitochondrial DNA results briefly in the Hank Skinner case, and they lean toward being exculpatory rather than inculpatory. To attempt to execute someone without testing obvious items of evidence is plain-vanilla wrong.
Post a Comment